format: text

text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

The Yang-Baxter (YB) equation is one of cornerstones in the investigations of quantum integrable systems. The most important solutions to the YB equation were found by Yang, Baxter \[B\] and Zamolodchikovs \[Z\]. The mathematical background to the application of the YB equation was established in the theory of quantum groups by Drinfeld \[D1\] and Jimbo \[J\], based on the quantum inverse scattering method developed by Leningrad school \[F\].

The main object in this theory is a quantum group which is a Hopf algebra deformation of the universal enveloping algebra of contragredient Lie algebra. This Hopf algebra comes together with the universal $`R`$-matrix which acts in a tensor category of representations of quantum group and any such a specialization of the universal $`R`$-matrix provides a solution of the YB equation. The deformations of affine Lie algebras : Yangians, quantum affine algebras and their elliptic analogs are especially important: they produce $`R`$-matrices depending on a spectral parameter, in particular the main solutions of the YB equation listed above.

However, $`R`$-matrices and fundamental $`L`$-operators appear in quite different manner in physical and mathematical literature. In the works, written by physicists, we have their expressions written as ordered exponential integrals like a series of iterated integrals \[BLZ\], while in the mathematical literature all the known expressions can be reduced to products of certain $`q`$-exponential factors \[KT\]. This reflects the structure of quantum affine algebras: they deform the structure of contragredient Lie algebra for affine Lie algebras and do not touch actually their functional realization.

Drinfeld suggested another (’new’) realization of quantum affine algebras and of Yangians \[D\], which, together with naturally attached coproduct structure, can be regarded as a Hopf algebra deformation of affine Lie algebras in a sense that it deforms their functional realization. This approach was successfully exploited for the study of finite-dimensional representations of quantum affine algebras and of Yangians (see \[CP\] and references therein) and for bosonization of their infinite-dimensional representations \[FJ\].

In \[DK\] a functional version of braid group technique was developed for quantum affine algebras and for the doubles of the Yangians. In particular, the currents corresponding to nonsimple roots of underlying Lie algebras were defined and a presentation of the universal $`R`$-matrix which uses multiple contour integrals was given.

In this note we develop further the ideas of \[DK\]. The first main result is a geometric reformulation of the properties of the universal $`R`$-matrix for quantum affine algebras equipped with so called Drinfeld comultiplication. Namely, we attach to any simple Lie algebra $`𝐠`$ a system of configuration spaces, which are complex linear spaces without shifted diagonals and coordinate hyperplanes. We claim that the defining properties of the universal $`R`$-matrix can be reduced to certain factorization properties for the homology classes of the cycles in configuration space. The cycles are actually relative: we are interested in their pairing with the forms satisfying certain zero residues conditions. In algebra, these vanishing conditions come from the Serre relations. Thus we have a purely homological problem which resembles the constructions of factorizable sheaves \[BFS\] and of factorizable $`D`$-modules \[KS\]. In general case we do not give here a construction of factorizable system of cycles, just formulate a conjecture of its existence.

Second result is the explicit calculation of the $`R`$-matrix for $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$. We suggest in this case the factorizable system of cycles in configuration space, generalizing the ideas of \[DK\] where it was done for $`|q|>1`$ and calculate the corresponding integrals. The calculations go as follows: we take some residues to derive the recurrence relations for $`n`$-th fold integral, which lead to a simple linear differential equation for the $`R`$-matrix. Its solution has a form of vertex operator over total integrals of residue currents. These currents appeared already in the study of integrable representations of $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ \[DM\]: the annihilator of level $`k`$ integrable representations is described in their terms. As a consequence, the $`R`$-matrix in this case contains only finitely many currents which contribute into vertex operator, for level one it is just an exponent of total integral of the first one. An application of these results to quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ with traditional comultiplication is given in \[DKP\].

## 2 Quantized current algebras

By quantized current algebra we mean a completion of quantum affine algebra in Drinfeld ”new” realization equipped with coproduct structure, introduced by Drinfeld in the deriving of this realization \[D\]. The completion is done with respect to a minimal topology, in which the action in the graded modules with bounded from above degree is continuous.

### 2.1 ”New” realization of quantum affine algebras

Let $`𝐠`$ be a simple Lie algebra. Following Drinfeld \[D\], we can describe quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ as an algebra generated by the central element $`c`$, gradation operator $`d`$ and by the modes of the currents $`e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z)`$ and $`\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)`$,

$$\begin{array}{c}e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z)=_{kZ}e_{\pm \alpha _i,k}z^k,\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)=k_{\alpha _i}^{\pm 1}\mathrm{exp}\left(\pm (qq^1)_{n>0}a_{i,\pm n}z^n\right),\end{array}$$
(2.1)
where $`\alpha _i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$ are positive simple roots of the algebra $`𝐠`$ of the rank $`r`$, and $`(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)`$ is symmetrized Cartan matrix.

The generating functions of the quantum current algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ satisfy the following defining relations:

$$\begin{array}{c}q^dx(z)q^d=x(qz),\text{for}x=e_{\pm \alpha _i},\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm ,\end{array}$$
(2.2)
$$\begin{array}{c}(zq^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}w)e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z)e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)=e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z)(q^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}zw),\end{array}$$
(2.3)
$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{(q^{\pm c/2}zq^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}w)}{(q^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)\pm c/2}zw)}\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(z)e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)=e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(z),\end{array}$$
(2.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}\psi _{\alpha _i}^{}(z)e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)=\frac{(q^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)c/2}zw)}{(q^{c/2}zq^{\pm (\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}w)}e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)\psi _{\alpha _i}^{}(z),\end{array}$$
(2.5)
$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{(zq^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)c}w)(zq^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)+c}w)}{(q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)+c}zw)(q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)c}zw)}\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(z)\psi _{\alpha _j}^{}(w)=\psi _{\alpha _j}^{}(w)\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(z),\end{array}$$
(2.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)\psi _{\alpha _j}^\pm (w)=\psi _{\alpha _j}^\pm (w)\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z),\end{array}$$
(2.7)
$$\begin{array}{c}[e_{\alpha _i}(z),e_{\alpha _j}(w)]=\frac{\delta _{\alpha _i,\alpha _j}}{qq^1}\left(\delta (z/q^cw)\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(zq^{c/2})\delta (zq^c/w)\psi _{\alpha _i}^{}(wq^{c/2})\right)\end{array}$$
(2.8)
and the Serre relations:

$$\begin{array}{c}_{r=0}^{n_{ij}}(1)^r\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_{ij}}{r}\right]_{q_{\alpha _i}}\mathrm{Sym}_{z_1,\mathrm{},z_{n_{ij}}}e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z_1)\mathrm{}e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z_r)e_{\pm \alpha _j}(w)e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z_{r+1})\mathrm{}e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z_{n_{ij}})=0\end{array}$$
(2.9)
for any simple roots $`\alpha _i\alpha _j`$. Here $`\delta (z)=_{kZ}z^k`$, $`n_{ij}=1a_{ij}`$, where $`a_{ij}`$ is $`(i,j)`$ entry of Cartan matrix of $`𝐠`$, $`\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right]_q=\frac{[n]_q!}{[k]_q![nk]_q!}`$, $`[n]_q!=[1]_q[2]_q\mathrm{}[n]_q`$, $`[n]_q=\frac{q^nq^n}{qq^1}`$, $`q_\alpha =q^{\frac{(\alpha ,\alpha )}{2}}`$.

The formulas (2.4)–(2.6) can be rewritten also using the generators $`a_{i,n}`$ introduced by (2.1):

$$\begin{array}{c}[a_{i,n},e_{\pm \alpha _j}(z)]=\pm \frac{[(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)n]_q}{n}q^{c|n|/2}z^ne_{\pm \alpha _j}(z),\end{array}$$
(2.10)
$$\begin{array}{c}[a_{i,n},a_{j,m}]=\delta _{n+m,0}\frac{[(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)n]_q[cn]_q}{n}.\end{array}$$
(2.11)
We assign to this algebra two Drinfeld type Hopf structures:

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}e_{\alpha _i}(z)=e_{\alpha _i}(z)1+\psi _{\alpha _i}^{}(zq^{c_1/2})e_{\alpha _i}(zq^{c_1}),\end{array}$$
(2.12a)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}e_{\alpha _i}(z)=1e_{\alpha _i}(z)+e_{\alpha _i}(zq^{c_2})\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(zq^{c_2/2}),\end{array}$$
(2.12b)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}e_{\alpha _i}(z)=e_{\alpha _i}(z)1+\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(zq^{c_1/2})e_{\alpha _i}(zq^{c_1}),\end{array}$$
(2.13a)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}e_{\alpha _i}(z)=1e_{\alpha _i}(z)+e_{\alpha _i}(zq^{c_2})\psi _{\alpha _i}^{}(zq^{c_2/2}),\end{array}$$
(2.13b)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)=\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)=\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (zq^{\pm c_2/2})\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (zq^{c_1/2}),\end{array}$$
(2.14)
with corresponding expressions for counit and antipode maps. One can see that the comultiplication operators map an algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ to a completed tensor product $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})\widehat{}U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$. One possibility to describe it is to use in the right hand side the Taylor extension of $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$, defined in \[KT1\]. Below we define instead a completion in a weaker topology, adapted for the action on highest degree representations.

### 2.2 The completion

Let $`U=U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$. For any $`xU`$, we denote $`|x|<k`$ if $`x`$ can be presented as a noncommutative polynomial of degree less then $`k`$ over the generators of the algebra, which are listed above.

The grading element $`d`$ defines a gradation on $`U`$: $`\mathrm{deg}x=r`$, if $`[d,x]=rx`$. Let $`U_r`$ be a linear subspace of $`U`$, generated by the elements of degree $`r`$ and $`U^k`$ be a linear subspace of $`U`$ generated by all $`xU`$, such that $`|x|+|\mathrm{deg}x|<k`$. It is clear, that $`C1=U^1U^2U^3\mathrm{}`$ and $`U_k=U`$.

Define $`U_r^k`$ as

$$U_r^k=U^k\underset{sr}{}UU_s.$$

We denote by $`U^<`$ a topological vector space $`U`$ with $`U_r^k`$ being basic open neighborhoods of zero, and by $`\overline{U}^<`$ the corresponding completion.

One can note, that this topology can be defined in equivalent way by the system of open sets

$${}_{r}{}^{}U_{}^{k}=U^k\underset{sr}{}U_sU_.$$

Let $`W=UU`$. It is bigraded algebra, where $`\mathrm{deg}_1`$ is defined by the action of $`d1`$, and $`\mathrm{deg}_2`$ is defined by the action of $`1d`$. We consider $`x_k1`$ and $`1x_k`$ as generators of $`W`$, where $`x_k`$ are generators of $`U`$. In this setting we define $`W^k`$ as linear span of all $`xW`$ such that $`|\mathrm{deg}_1x|+|\mathrm{deg}_2x|+|x|<k`$ and

$$\begin{array}{c}W_r^k=W^k\left(U_r^kU+UU_r^k\right).\end{array}$$
(2.15)
We denote by $`W^<`$ the corresponding topological vector space and by $`\overline{W}^<`$ its completion. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}`$ (2.1) and (2.1) be two types of Drinfeld comultiplications in $`U_q(\widehat{g})`$.

###### Proposition 2.1

(ı) The multiplication

$$m:W^<U^<$$

is continuous map;

(ıı) The comultiplications

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)},\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}:U^<\overline{W}^<$$

are continuous maps;

(ııı) The completed algebra $`\overline{U}^<`$ acts on the highest degree modules over $`U`$;

(ıv) The completed algebra $`\overline{W}^<`$ acts on the tensor products of highest degree modules over $`U`$.

Here by the highest degree representation we mean graded (over operator $`d`$) representation $`V`$, such that the graded components of $`V`$ vanish for big enough degree:

$$V=\underset{k<N}{}V_k.$$

For instance, all highest weight representations of $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ are of highest degree.

Actually, ‘$`<`$’ is the smallest topology, in which the action on any highest degree representation is continuous. We will use this property further checking the assertions on highest degree modules. Moreover, as we see from the proposition, the completion $`\overline{U}^<`$ is well defined topological Hopf algebra in the category of highest degree representations.

In quite analogous manner, we can define the topological Hopf algebra $`U^>`$ by means of open sets

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{U}_r^k=U^k_{sr}UU_s.\end{array}$$
(2.16)
Then its completion $`\overline{U}^>`$ is well defined topological Hopf algebra in the category of lowest degree representations. Denote further the completed algebra $`\overline{U}^<`$ equipped with comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}`$ as $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$.

The described completion $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$ of the algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ changes its algebraical properties. In particular, it cannot be any more treated as a double of its Hopf subalgebra, generated by $`e_{\alpha _i,n}`$, $`nZ`$ and $`a_{i,k}`$, $`k0`$, since in the dual subalgebra the topology should be reversed. In this point we change the ideology of \[DK\]. However, unlike the known examples, the Hopf algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$ possesses the universal $`R`$-matrix, which acts in tensor category of its representations.

## 3 Universal $``$-matrices

The theory of Cartan-Weyl basis for quantum affine algebras, developed in \[TK\], \[KT1\], \[KT\], \[Be\] gives possibility to write down the universal $`R`$-matrix for quantum affine algebras equipped with Drinfeld’s comultiplication, in a form of infinite product over Cartan-Weyl generators. It was done in \[KT\]. This formula is quite effective for $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ but does not look nice for higher rank. We remind it below. Next, we analyze the integral form of the $`R`$-matrix for the completed algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$, presented in \[DK\] and observe the geometric properties of the cycles in certain configuration space, responsible for the properties of the universal $`R`$-matrix. As a corollary, we suggest the generalization of the formula in \[DK\] for other $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$. The next section is devoted to explicit calculations in $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$.

### 3.1 The multiplicative formula \[KT\]

In the study of twistings of quantum affine algebra by means of the elements of the braid group the multiplicative formula for the universal $`R`$-matrix for Drinfeld comultiplications was suggested in \[KT\]. It was written by means of Cartan-Weyl generators and can be described as follows.

Let $`e_{\pm \alpha _i},k_{\alpha _i}^{\pm 1}`$, $`i=0,1,\mathrm{},r`$ be Chevalley generators of $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$, where $`r=\mathrm{rank}𝐠`$. For their connection to current generators $`e_{\pm \alpha _i,n}`$, $`a_{i,n}`$ see \[D\]. Let $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ be a system of positive roots of affine Lie algebra $`\widehat{𝐠}`$. Let $`\alpha _0`$ be an affine root and $`\delta `$ be a minimal imaginary root. By a normal ordering of the root system $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ we mean a total linear order $`<`$ of all the roots satisfying the condition: for any two roots $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, such that at least one of them is real and $`\alpha +\beta `$ is a root only two possibility of mutual position of $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\alpha +\beta `$ can occur: $`\alpha <\alpha +\beta <\beta `$ or $`\beta <\alpha +\beta <\alpha `$. Let $`<`$ be arbitrary normal ordering of the root system $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$, satisfying additional restriction $`\alpha _k<\delta <\alpha _0`$ for any $`k=1,\mathrm{},r`$. The Cartan-Weyl generators are constructed as successive $`q`$-commutators by induction on the normal order. An induction step looks as follows. We put

$$\begin{array}{c}e_{\alpha +\beta }=[e_\alpha ,e_\beta ]_q,e_{\alpha \beta }=[e_\beta ,e_\alpha ]_{q^1}\end{array}$$
(3.1)
if $`e_\alpha `$, $`e_\alpha `$, $`e_\beta `$, $`e_\beta `$ are already defined, $`\alpha <\alpha +\beta <\beta `$ and $`[\alpha ,\beta ]`$ is a minimal segment, including $`\alpha +\beta `$, that is if there are other roots $`\alpha ^{}`$, $`\beta ^{}`$, such that $`\alpha ^{}+\beta ^{}=\alpha +\beta `$ and $`\alpha ^{}<\alpha +\beta <\beta ^{}`$ then either $`\alpha ^{}<\alpha `$ or $`\beta <\beta ^{}`$. The $`q`$-commutators $`[e_\alpha ,e_\beta ]_q`$ and $`[e_\beta ,e_\alpha ]_{q^1}`$ mean

$$[e_\alpha ,e_\beta ]_q=e_\alpha e_\beta q^{(\alpha ,\beta )}e_\beta e_\alpha ,[e_\beta ,e_\alpha ]_{q^1}=e_\beta e_\alpha q^{(\alpha ,\beta )}e_\alpha e_\beta .$$

More precisely, we start from the simple roots and use the induction procedure (3.1) for the construction of new real roots until we get the root vectors $`e_{\pm (\delta \alpha _i)}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Then we put

$$e_\delta ^{(i)}=[e_{\alpha _i},e_{\delta \alpha _i}]_q,e_\delta ^{(i)}=[e_{\delta \alpha _i},e_{\alpha _i}]_{q^1},$$

$$e_{n\delta +\alpha _i}=(1)^n([(\alpha _i,\alpha _i)]_q)^n(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{ad}}e_\delta ^{(i)})^ne_{\alpha _i},e_{n\delta \alpha _i}=([(\alpha _i,\alpha _i)]_q)^n(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{ad}}e_\delta ^{(i)})^ne_{\alpha _i},$$

$$e_{(n+1)\delta \alpha _i}=([(\alpha _i,\alpha _i)]_q)^n(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{ad}}e_\delta ^{(i)})^ne_{\delta \alpha _i},e_{(n+1)\delta +\alpha _i}=(1)^n([(\alpha _i,\alpha _i)]_q)^n(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{ad}}e_\delta ^{(i)})^ne_{\delta +\alpha _i},$$

$$e_{}^{}{}_{(n+1)\delta }{}^{(i)}=[e_{n\delta +\alpha _i},e_{\delta \alpha _i}]_q,e_{}^{}{}_{(n+1)\delta }{}^{(i)}=[e_{\delta +\alpha _i},e_{n\delta \alpha _i}]_{q^1}$$

(for $`n>0`$), where $`(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{ad}}x)y=[x,y]`$ is a usual commutator.

The imaginary root vectors $`e_{\pm n\delta }^{(i)}`$, which coincide with $`a_{i,\pm n}`$ up to central factors, are related to $`e_{}^{}{}_{n\delta }{}^{(i)}`$ via Schur polynomials, namely

$$E_{\pm i}(z)=\mathrm{ln}(1+E_{\pm i}^{}(z)),$$

where

$$E_{\pm i}(z)=\pm (qq^1)\underset{m1}{}e_{\pm m\delta }^{(i)}z^m,E_{\pm i}^{}(z)=\pm (qq^1)\underset{m1}{}e_{}^{}{}_{\pm m\delta }{}^{(i)}z^m.$$

The rest of the real root vectors we construct in accordance with the induction procedure (3.1) using the root vectors $`e_{n\delta +\alpha _i}`$, $`e_{(n+1)\delta \alpha _i}`$, $`e_{(n+1)\delta }^{(i)}`$, ($`i=1,2,\mathrm{},r`$; $`nZ_+`$). In this procedure the dependence on the choice of the last vector, that is on the choice of an index $`i`$ is only in the normalization of the root vectors.

For any real root $`\gamma `$ denote by $`R_\gamma `$ the formal series

$$R_\gamma =\mathrm{exp}_{q^{(\gamma ,\gamma )}}\left(C_\gamma ^1e_\gamma e_\gamma \right)$$

where $`C_\gamma `$ is the normalization constant given from the relation $`[e_\gamma ,e_\gamma ]=C_\gamma \left(k_\gamma k_\gamma ^1\right)`$ and

$$\mathrm{exp}_p(x)=1+\underset{n>0}{}\frac{x^n}{(n)_p!},(n)_p=\frac{p^n1}{p1}.$$

Put also

$$\begin{array}{c}𝒦=q^tq^{\frac{cddc}{2}}_{n>0}\mathrm{exp}\left(n(qq^1)_{i,j=1}^rd_{i,j}^{(n)}a_{i,n}a_{j,n}\right)q^{\frac{cddc}{2}},\end{array}$$
(3.2)
where $`t=h_ih^i`$ is an invariant element in tensor square of Cartan subalgebra $`𝐡𝐡`$ of $`𝐠`$; $`d_{i,j}^{(n)}`$ is an inverse matrix to symmetrized Cartan matrix of $`𝐠`$

$$b_{i,j}^{(n)}=[n(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)]_q,i,j=1,\mathrm{},r.$$

The universal $`R`$-matrix $`^{CW}`$ for quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ with Drinfeld comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}`$ was identified in \[KT\] with formal ordered infinite product

$$\begin{array}{c}^{CW}=𝒦_{}^{CW}_+^{CW},\end{array}$$
(3.3)
where

$$_{}^{CW}=\underset{\gamma \underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{re},\gamma >\delta }{\overset{}{}}R_\gamma ,_+^{CW}=\left(\underset{\gamma \underset{¯}{\mathrm{\Delta }}^{re},\gamma >\delta }{\overset{}{}}R_\gamma \right)^{21}.$$

For instance, in the case of $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ the general expression (3.3) looks as

$$\begin{array}{c}^{CW}=q^{\frac{hh}{2}}q^{cddc}\mathrm{exp}((q^1q)_{k>0}\frac{n}{[2n]_q}q^{\frac{cn}{2}}a_nq^{\frac{cn}{2}}a_n)\stackrel{}{_{nZ}}\mathrm{exp}_{q^2}((q^1q)f_ne_n)\end{array}$$
(3.4)
where we drop for simplicity the index of simple root and put $`e_ne_{\alpha ,n}`$, $`f_ne_{\alpha ,n}`$.

###### Proposition 3.1

The tensor $`^{CW}`$ from (3.3) defines correctly determined operator in tensor product $`WV`$ of $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$-modules if either $`W`$ is a lowest weight representation or $`V`$ is a highest weight representation.

Let us consider a case when $`V`$ is highest weight representation. Take two weight vectors $`vV`$ and $`\xi V^{}`$. Consider the matrix coefficient $`\xi ,\overline{}^{CW}v`$. We claim that only finitely many terms of formal series (3.3) contribute into this matrix coefficient. Indeed, let $`\rho \widehat{𝐡}^{}`$, where $`\widehat{𝐡}`$ is Cartan subalgebra of $`\widehat{𝐠}`$, satisfy the conditions $`(\alpha _i,\rho )=1`$, $`i=0,1,..,r`$. Then, by definition of highest weight representation, there exists some big positive $`N`$ such that $`xv=0`$ for any $`xU_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$, such that $`(\lambda (x),\rho )>N`$, where $`\lambda (x)`$ is a weight of $`x`$. All the entries from $`_+^{CW}`$ have positive weight with respect to right tensor factor and there are only finitely many terms that satisfy to condition $`(\lambda (x),\rho )<N`$. Let us fix one such term $`x`$. We are restricted now to the summands of the type $`yx`$, where $`y𝒦_{}^{CW}`$, so for the $`y`$ we have opposite restriction $`(\lambda (y),\rho )>M`$ for some positive $`M`$ because $`\xi V^{}`$. But the weights of the terms from $`𝒦_{}^{CW}`$ have negative weights with respect to the right tensor factor, so by the same arguments we have only finitely many choices for $`y`$.

This shows that any matrix coefficient $`\eta \xi ,Rwv`$, $`vV,\xi V^{},wW,\eta W^{}`$ is well define finite sum if $`V`$ is of highest weight. Analogous arguments are valid when $`W`$ is of lowest weight.

Proposition 3.1 allows to check the identities for $`^{CW}`$ by their application onto highest weight or lowest weight representation. For instance, the equalities

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{op}(a)=^{CW}\mathrm{\Delta }(a)\left(^{CW}\right)^1,$$

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{id})^{CW}=\left(^{CW}\right)_{13}\left(^{CW}\right)_{23},(\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Delta })^{CW}=\left(^{CW}\right)_{13}\left(^{CW}\right)_{12}.$$

are correct at least when we apply them to tensor products of highest (or lowest) weight representations.

### 3.2 Analytical properties of matrix coefficients \[E\]

Our considerations are strongly based on the analytical properties of the matrix coefficients of the products of the generating functions for $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ \[E\]. In the most general form they can be formulated as follows. Let $`a_k(z)`$ stands for any of the generating functions of the type $`e_{\pm \alpha _i}(z)`$, $`\psi _{\alpha _i}^\pm (z)`$, $`V`$ be a highest degree representation in a sense of the previous section, $`vV`$ and $`\xi V^{}`$ be two homogeneous vectors. Consider the matrix coefficient

$$\xi ,a_{k_1}(z_1)\mathrm{}a_{k_m}(z_m)v$$

as a formal power series over $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_m`$.

Then, first, this formal power series belongs to a space

$$\begin{array}{c}C[z_1,z_1^1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_m^1][[\frac{z_2}{z_1},\frac{z_3}{z_2},\mathrm{},\frac{z_m}{z_{m1}}]],\end{array}$$
(3.5)
that is, can be presented as Taylor series over the variables $`z_2/z_1,\mathrm{},z_{m1}/z_m`$ with coefficients being polynomials over $`z_1,z_1^1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_m^1`$.

Second, this formal power series converges in the region $`|z_1||z_2|\mathrm{}|z_m|`$ to a rational function which poles in $`\left(C^{}\right)^m`$ are dictated by the quadratic relations (2.3)–(2.8).

The proof of the first statement is based on the observation that under the conditions on the vectors $`v`$ and $`\xi `$ for some $`N`$ big enough the coefficient at $`z_1^{n_1}z_2^{n_2}\mathrm{}z_m^{n_m}`$ vanishes if $`n_m>N`$, or $`n_{m1}+n_m>N`$, or $`n_{m2}+n_{m1}+n_m>N`$ and so on due to the definition of highest degree representation.

Once (3.5) is established, we can repeat the arguments of \[E\] in order to show that the formal power series converges to a meromorphic function.

Consider, for instance, the matrix coefficient $`\xi ,e_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1)\mathrm{}e_{\alpha _{i_m}}(z_m)v`$. We know from commutation relations that

$$\begin{array}{c}_{k<l}(z_kq^{(\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l)e_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1)\mathrm{}e_{\alpha _{i_m}}(z_m)=_{k<l}(q^{(\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_kz_l)e_{\alpha _{i_m}}(z_m)\mathrm{}e_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1),\end{array}$$
(3.6)
so the matrix coefficient

$$\xi ,\underset{k<l}{}(z_kq^{(\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l)e_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1)\mathrm{}e_{\alpha _{i_m}}(z_m)v$$

belongs to $`C[z_1,z_1^1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_m^1][[\frac{z_2}{z_1},\frac{z_3}{z_2},\mathrm{},\frac{z_m}{z_{m1}}]]`$; but due to the form of the r.h.s. of (3.6), it belongs also to $`C[z_1,z_1^1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_m^1][[\frac{z_1}{z_2},\frac{z_2}{z_3},\mathrm{},\frac{z_{m1}}{z_m}]]`$, so lies in their intersection, $`C[z_1,z_1^1,\mathrm{},z_m,z_m^1]`$ It means that the series $`\xi ,e_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1)\mathrm{}e_{\alpha _{i_m}}(z_m)v`$. converges in the region $`|z_k|>|q^{(\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l|`$ to a meromorphic in $`\left(C^{}\right)^m`$ function with simple poles at $`z_k=q^{(\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l`$.

These properties of matrix coefficients allow to treat in the highest weight representation the generating functions $`a_{k_1}(z_1)\mathrm{}a_{k_m}(z_m)`$ as operator valued functions, analytical in the region $`|z_1||z_2|\mathrm{}|z_m|`$, where it coincides with the products $`\left(a_{k_1}(z_1)\mathrm{}a_{k_l}(z_l)\right)\left(a_{k_{l+1}}(z_{l+1})\mathrm{}a_{k_m}(z_m)\right)`$ for any $`l:1lm`$. This is because the multiplication of Taylor series is well defined. Moreover, the relations (2.3)–(2.8) describe the analytical continuations of these functions to other regions. For instance, the analytical continuation of the function $`e_{\alpha _i}(z)e_{\alpha _j}(w)`$ from the region $`|z|>|q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}w|`$ to the region $`|z|<|q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}w|`$ is defined, due to (2.3), by formal power series in the completed algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$

$$\frac{q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}\frac{z}{w}}{1q^{(\alpha _i,\alpha _j)}\frac{z}{w}}e_{\alpha _j}(w)e_{\alpha _i}(z).$$

### 3.3 The configuration spaces

We are interested now in the operator valued analytical functions, given as products (in the above sense) of the currents

$$t_{\alpha _i}(z)=(q^1q)e_{\alpha _i}(z)e_{\alpha _i}(z).$$

We have, due to the relations (2.3):

The function $`t_{\alpha _{i_1}}(z_1)\mathrm{}t_{\alpha _{i_n}}(z_n)`$ is analytical in the region $`|z_k|>\mathrm{max}(|q^{\pm (\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l|`$, $`k<l`$, admits symmetric meromorphic analytical continuation to $`\left(C^{}\right)^n`$ with simple poles at shifted diagonals $`z_k=q^{\pm (\alpha _{i_k},\alpha _{i_l})}z_l`$. Here symmetric group exchanges simultaneously the variables and their root labels. For instance, for $`n=2`$ it means that the function $`t_\alpha (z)t_\beta (w)`$ has two simple poles at $`z=q^{(\alpha ,\beta )}w`$ if $`(\alpha ,\beta )0`$ and is commutative

$$t_\alpha (z)t_\beta (w)=t_\beta (w)t_\alpha (z)$$

in a sense of analytical continuation.

Let now $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ be a set of simple positive roots of $`𝐠`$ and $`I`$ be a finite set $`k_1,k_2,\mathrm{},k_n`$ of integers equipped with labels of simple roots, that is, $`I`$ is a finite subset $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\{k_1,k_2,\mathrm{},k_n\}N`$ of a set of positive integers together with a map $`\iota :\stackrel{ˇ}{I}\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Let $`X_I`$ be the following stratified space. As a total space, $`X_I`$ is isomorphic to $`C^n`$ with coordinates $`z_k,k\stackrel{ˇ}{I}`$. The closures of the strata are given by the intersections of hyperplanes $`H_{k,l}=\{z_k=q^{(\iota (k),\iota (l))}z_l\}`$ for any $`k,l\stackrel{ˇ}{I}`$ such that $`(\iota (k),\iota (l))0`$ and $`H_i=\{z_i=0,i\stackrel{ˇ}{I}\}`$. By $`U_I`$ we denote an open stratum: the complement to the union of hyperplanes.

Among all the strata there are the distinguished ones, which we call Serre strata. Let $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ be two simple adjacent roots, $`a_{\alpha ,\beta }`$ be corresponding element of Cartan matrix, $`m_{\alpha ,\beta }=1a_{\alpha ,\beta }`$. Let $`z_{l_1},\mathrm{},z_{l_m}`$ be the coordinates of $`X_I`$, labeled by $`\alpha `$, that is $`\iota (l_i)=\alpha ,i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ and $`z_{l_0}`$ be a coordinate labeled by $`\beta `$: $`\iota (l_0)=\beta `$. Then the stratum

$$\begin{array}{c}z_{l_0}=q^{\frac{m(\alpha ,\alpha )}{2}}z_{l_1}=q^{\frac{(m2)(\alpha ,\alpha )}{2}}z_{l_2}=\mathrm{}=q^{\frac{(m2)(\alpha ,\alpha )}{2}}z_{l_{m1}}=q^{\frac{m(\alpha ,\alpha )}{2}}z_{l_m}\end{array}$$
(3.7)
is called Serre stratum. Another type of Serre strata appear due to the vanishing of the squares of the same fields in the same point. They have a form

$$\begin{array}{c}z_{m_1}=z_{m_2}=q^{\pm (\iota (m_1),\iota (m_3))}z_{m_3}\end{array}$$
(3.8)
for any $`m_1,m_2,m_3`$ such that $`\iota (m_1)=\iota (m_2)`$.

We are interested in the integrals of the $`n`$-forms witch have simple poles at the hyperplanes $`H_{k,l}`$ and meromorphic singularities at hyperplanes $`H_k`$ over certain $`n`$-cycles in $`U_I`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\omega =\frac{P(z,z^1)}{(2\pi i)^n_{lm}(z_{k_l}q^{(\iota (k_l),\iota (k_m))}z_{k_m})}\frac{dz_{k_1}}{z_{k_1}}\frac{dz_{k_2}}{z_{k_2}}\mathrm{}\frac{dz_{k_n}}{z_{k_n}}\end{array}$$
(3.9)
where $`P(z,z^1)`$ is a polynomial over $`z_{k_i}`$ and $`z_{k_i}^1`$, $`n=|\stackrel{ˇ}{I}|`$.

The description of the homologies of the complement to the arrangement of hyperplanes is well known, see, e.g. \[SV\]. It looks as follows. Suppose we have a collection of hyperplahes $`H_i`$ in a space $`X=C^N`$. Hyperplanes define on $`X`$ the structure of stratified space; the (closed) strata are all possible intersections of hyperplanes. A sequence

$$L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0$$

of strata is called a (full) flag of length $`n`$, if $`\mathrm{codim}(L_k)=k`$

Let $`U`$ be a complement to the union of hyperplanes. The space $`H_n(U,C)`$ is isomorphic to a factor of vectorspace, generated by all flags of length $`n`$ modulo the Orlik-Solomon relations, attached to any incomplete flag $`L_n\mathrm{}L_{k+1}L_{k1}\mathrm{}L_0,`$ $`\mathrm{codim}(L_i)=i`$. The relation is

$$\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{L_k:L_{k+1}L_kL_{k1}}{\mathrm{codim}L_k=k}}{}L_n\mathrm{}L_{k+1}L_kL_{k1}\mathrm{}L_0=0.$$

The cycle, corresponding to a flag $`L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0`$ is $`n`$-dimensional torus, which is described as follows: first we take a small circle with a center in a generic point of $`L_n`$, surrounding $`L_n`$ inside $`L_{n1}`$, then for any point of this circle we draw a circle surrounding $`L_{n1}`$ inside $`L_{n2}`$ such that it does not intersect other strata inside $`L_{n1}`$ and so on. Note that in this procedure the next circle is much smaller then the previous one. The resulting torus lies in $`U`$ and its orientation is given by the order in the procedure above.

For any cycle $`L=\{L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0\}`$ and for any $`m`$-form $`\omega `$, regular in $`U`$ we denote by $`\mathrm{Res}_L\omega `$ the integral of the form $`\omega `$ over the cycles, defined by $`L`$ (we take into account their dependence over generic point of $`L_n`$). It is an $`(mn)`$-form on the open part of $`L_n`$.

Return now to stratified space $`X_I`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ the space of such forms (3.9), for which any repeated residue to any Serre stratum (3.7), (3.8) is zero. Namely, we say that $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ if $`\mathrm{Res}_L\omega =0`$ for any $`L=\{L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0\}`$, such that $`L_n`$ is a Serre stratum (3.7), (3.8). We call such forms admissible.

The main goal of this subsection is the definition of factorizable system of antisymmetric cycles for any quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$ . This definition means an assignment to any labeled set $`I`$ a symmetric $`n`$-cycle $`D_IH_n(U_I)`$, where $`n=|I|`$, with certain factorization properties. Let us first explain symmetricity condition.

Any permutation $`\sigma S_n`$ where $`n=|I|`$ defines a new ordered set $`\sigma (I)`$ with induced labeling. Moreover, $`\sigma `$ defines a diffeomorphism of configuration spaces: $`\sigma :X_IX_{\sigma (I)}`$. We demand that:

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{D_{\sigma (I)}}{}\omega =\underset{D_I}{}\sigma ^{}(\omega )\end{array}$$
(3.10)
for any $`\sigma S_{|I|}`$ and $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_{\sigma (I)}`$. Equivalently,

$$\underset{D_{\sigma (I)}}{}\omega =(1)^{l(\sigma )}\underset{\sigma (D_I)}{}\omega ,$$

which means that the cycle $`D_I`$ is defined on the factor of $`U_I`$ over the action of the product $`S_{i_1}\times S_{i_2}\times \mathrm{}\times S_{i_r}`$ of symmetric groups, where $`i_k=\mathrm{\#}k\stackrel{ˇ}{I},\iota (k)=\alpha _k`$ and can be labeled by an element of the lattice of positive roots of $`𝐠`$.

Suppose now that finite labeled set $`I`$, $`|I|=n+m`$ is presented as a disjoint union of its labeled subsets $`I=I^1I^2`$, $`|I^1|=n,|I^2|=m`$. Then for any $`D_{I^1}H_n(U_{I^1},C)`$ and for any $`D_{I_2}H_m(U_{I^2},C)`$ we can attach the cycle $`D_{I^1}\times D_{I^2}H_{n+m}(U_I,𝐂)`$ as follows. There is a natural map $`\varphi :X_{I^1}\times X_{I^2}X_I`$. The cycle $`D_{I^2}`$ is $`m`$-dimensional compact manifold, and we can apply to it arbitrary dilatation $`z_l\epsilon z_l,l\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^2,\epsilon >0`$ without changing homology class. We choose such small $`\epsilon `$ that all the points of the direct product of dilated $`D_{I^1}`$ and of $`D_{I^2}`$ belong to $`U_I`$ under the image of $`\varphi `$. It is possible by the following reasons: on every $`D_{I^j}`$ absolute values $`|z_k|`$ of the coordinates are restricted from both sides, which follows from the compactness of the cycles and from the observations that coordinate hyperplanes $`z_k=0`$ should not intersect the cycles by their definition. Then it is clear that for small enough $`\epsilon `$ a direct product of dilated $`D_{I^1}`$ and of $`D_{I^2}`$ does not intersect hyperplanes $`z_k=q^{\pm (\iota (k),\iota (l))}z_l`$ , where $`k\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^1`$ and $`l\stackrel{ˇ}{I}^2`$. But this is the only thing we are checking. This construction defines invariantly the cycle $`D_{I^1}\times D_{I^2}H_{n+m}(U_I,C)`$ equipped with natural orientation.

Let us choose any form $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_I`$ satisfying additional property: it has no singularities at hyperplanes $`\{z_k=q^{(\iota (k),\iota (l))}z_l\}`$ for all $`kI^1`$ and $`lI^2`$. Denote the space of such $`\omega `$ by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{I^1,I^2}`$. We demand that the integral of any $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_{I^1,I^2}`$ over $`D_I`$ coincides with the integral over $`D_{I^1}\times D_{I^2}`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{D_I}{}\omega =\underset{D_{I^1}\times D_{I^2}}{}\omega \end{array}$$
(3.11)
The factorization conditions mean that, first, the relation (3.11) holds for any decompositions $`I=I^1I^2`$ and for any $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_{I^1,I^2}`$ and, second, the initial conditions

$$\begin{array}{c}D_{\{k\}}=\{|z_k|=1\}\end{array}$$
(3.12)
take place for any one point set $`I`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\{k\}`$.

Let $`q^n1`$ for any natural $`n`$. We suggest the following

Conjecture For any $`U_q(\widehat{𝐠})`$, where $`𝐠`$ is simple Lie algebra, there exists a factorizable system $`D_I`$ of antisymmetric cycles with initial conditions (3.12).

Moreover, we suppose that the cycles are unique as the functionals over admissible forms. Also, we suppose that they are uniquely defined by factorization conditions; the symmetricity should follow from the factorization properties.

We can describe precisely such a system for the algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$. In this case we have no Serre restrictions (3.7) and, since there is only one simple root for Lie algebra $`𝐠`$, the cycles $`D_I`$ are parameterized by positive integers $`n`$, so we denote them as $`D_n`$. They look as follows. Fix some order of the variables $`z_{k_1},z_{k_2},\mathrm{},z_{k_n}`$. Then in the flag description the cycle $`D_n`$ consists of all $`n`$\- flags $`L=\{L_nL_{n1}\mathrm{}L_0\}`$ in $`X_n=C^n`$, all with multiplicity one, such that $`L_1`$ is one of the hyperplanes

$$z_{k_1}=0,z_{k_1}=q^2z_{k_j},j1,$$

$`L_2`$ is codimension two stratum, which can be obtained as an intersection of one of hyperplanes $`L_1`$, listed above, with hyperplanes

$$z_{k_2}=0,z_{k_2}=q^2z_{k_j},j2$$

and so on. Clear, that in the last stage $`L_n`$ coincides with an origin in $`C^n`$.

###### Proposition 3.2

The cycles $`D_n`$ form factorizable system of antisymmetric cycles for $`U_q(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$, if $`q`$ is not root of $`1`$.

There are two short proofs of the proposition. Note first that it is sufficient to prove the symmetricity condition only. Then the factorization property follows from the definition of the cycles $`D_I`$.

For the first proof, it sufficient to check that for $`|q|>1`$, the cycles $`D_n`$ for $`I=\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ are homotopic to the product of unit circles, which are clearly antisymmetric and the factorization property is also clear. For another proof, one can note that the integral of $`\omega `$ over $`D_n`$ coincides with Grothendick residue \[GH\] of $`\omega `$ with respect to the system of divisors

$$\begin{array}{c}f_i(z)=z_i_{ji}(z_iq^2z_j)=0,i=1,2,\mathrm{},n.\end{array}$$
(3.13)
The Grothendique residue is correctly defined for a system of divisors $`f_i(z)=0`$ with common intersection being a point $`\{z_i=0\}`$ and can be written in this case as an integral $`\underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\omega `$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{z:|f_i(z)|=\epsilon \}`$. The system (3.13) satisfy these conditions. By the definition of the residue, it is antisymmetric. The factorization property follows then from the form of $`f_i(z)`$.

Note that the vanishing conditions on ’diagonal’ Serre strata (3.8) were not used in the proof.

### 3.4 The properties of the universal $`R`$-matrix and factorization of the cycles

The universal $`R`$-matrix $`R`$ for a quasitriangular Hopf algebra $`𝒜`$ is characterized by the properties

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{op}(a)=R\mathrm{\Delta }(a)R^1\end{array}$$
(3.14)
for any $`a𝒜`$ and

$$\begin{array}{c}(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{id})R=R_{13}R_{23},(\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Delta })R=R_{13}R_{12}.\end{array}$$
(3.15)
Let now $`𝒜=U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$ where $`g`$ has rank $`r`$ and $`D_I`$ be a factorizable system of antisymmetric cycles. Put

$$\begin{array}{c}=𝒦\overline{}\end{array}$$
(3.16)
where $`𝒦`$ is given in (3.2) and

$$\overline{}=𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}t_{\alpha _i}(z)=$$

$$\begin{array}{c}1+_{n>0}\frac{1}{n!}_{I:\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\{1,2,\mathrm{},n\}}\underset{D_I}{}t_{\iota (1)}(z_1)t_{\iota (2)}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\iota (n)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}\end{array}$$
(3.17)
Here and below $`\underset{¯}{dz_k}`$ means $`\frac{dz_k}{2\pi iz_k}`$.

###### Theorem 1

For any factorizable system $`\{D_I\}`$ of antisymmetric cycles the tensor (3.16) satisfy the properties (3.14) and (3.15) of the universal $`R`$-matrix for topological Hopf algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$ with comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}`$.

Note first that the form $`t_{\iota (1)}(z_1)t_{\iota (2)}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\iota (n)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}`$ satisfy vanishing conditions on the Serre strata. It can be deduced from the Serre relations in a form, presented in \[E\]. We omit corresponding calculations. By antisymmetricity of the cycles we can rewrite then the series (3.17) in the form

$$\overline{}=\underset{n_1,\mathrm{},n_r0}{}\frac{1}{n_1!\mathrm{}n_r!}_{D_{n_1,\mathrm{},n_r}}t_{\iota (1)}(z_1)t_{\iota (2)}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\iota (n)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}$$

where $`D_{\{n_i\}}`$ is the cycle, corresponding to labeled set $`I`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\{1,\mathrm{},n_1+\mathrm{}+n_r\}`$ and $`\iota (k)=\alpha _i`$ if $`n_1+\mathrm{}+n_{i1}<kn_1+\mathrm{}+n_i`$ for any order $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r`$ of simple roots of $`g`$.

Let us prove an equality (3.14) for $`x=e_{\alpha _1}(z)`$. The basic property of the tensor $`𝒦`$, which we use here, is

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1),op}(x)=𝒦\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}(x)𝒦^1\end{array}$$
(3.18)
for all $`xU_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$. We have ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ means $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1)}`$):

$$\mathrm{\Delta }e_{\alpha _1}(z)^1=𝒦\overline{}(e_{\alpha _1}(z)1)(\overline{})^1𝒦^1+𝒦\overline{}(\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{c_1}{2}})e_{\alpha _1}(zq^{c_1}))(\overline{})^1𝒦^1.$$

Denote the summands of r.h.s. as $`X_1=𝒦\overline{}(e_{\alpha _1}(z)1)(\overline{})^1𝒦^1`$ and $`X_2=𝒦\overline{}(\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{c_1}{2}})e_{\alpha _1}(zq^{c_1}))(\overline{})^1𝒦^1`$. We see from (2.5) and (2.8) that $`(n=n_1+\mathrm{}+n_r)`$

$$X_1𝒦(e_{\alpha _1}(z)1)𝒦^1=𝒦\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_2,\mathrm{},n_r0}{n_1k>0}}{}\frac{1}{n_1!\mathrm{}n_r!}\underset{D_{\{n_i\}}}{}\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}t_{\alpha _1}(z_1)\mathrm{}t_{\alpha _1}(z_{k1})$$

$$\left(\left(\delta (\frac{z}{z_k}q^c)\psi _{\alpha _1}^+(z_kq^{\frac{1}{2}c})\delta (\frac{z}{z_k}q^c)\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{1}{2}c})\right)e_{\alpha _1}(z_i)\right)t_{\alpha _1}(z_{k+1})\mathrm{}t_{\alpha _1}(z_{n_1})\underset{\iota (j)>1}{}t_{\iota (j)}(z_j)\overline{}^1𝒦^1=$$

$$𝒦\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_2,\mathrm{},n_r0}{n_1>0}}{}\frac{n_1}{n_1!\mathrm{}n_r!}\underset{D_{\{n_i\}}}{}\delta (\frac{z}{z_1q^c})\psi _{\alpha _1}^+(z_1q^{\frac{1}{2}c})e_{\alpha _1}(z_1)t_{\alpha _1}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\alpha _1}(z_{n_1})\underset{\iota (j)>1}{}t_{\iota (j)}(z_j)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}\overline{}^1𝒦^1$$

$$𝒦\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_2,\mathrm{},n_r0}{n_1>0}}{}\frac{n_1}{n_1!\mathrm{}n_r!}\underset{D_{\{n_i\}}}{}t_{\alpha _1}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\alpha _1}(z_{n_1})\underset{\iota (j)>1}{}t_{\iota (j)}(z_j)\delta (\frac{zq^c}{z_1})\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{1}{2}c})e_{\alpha _1}(z_1)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}\overline{}^1𝒦^1$$

due to antisymmetricity of the cycle $`D_{\{n_i\}}`$. From the commutation relations (2.3), (2.4), (2.5) it follows that the integrands belong to a class $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{I_{\{n_i\}}}`$ and, moreover, the first integrand has no singularities at $`z_j=q^{(\alpha _1,\iota (j))}z_1`$ for all $`j1`$ and the second integrand has no singularities at $`z_1=q^{(\alpha _1,\iota (j))}z_j`$ for all $`j1`$. From factorization condition and from the definition of the multiplication of the currents together with initial condition (3.12) we see that

$$X_1𝒦(e_{\alpha _1}(z)1)𝒦^1=$$

$$𝒦\underset{¯}{dz_1}\delta (\frac{z}{z_1q^c})\psi _{\alpha _1}^+(z_iq^{\frac{1}{2}c})e_{\alpha _1}(z_1)\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_2,\mathrm{},n_r0}{n_1>0}}{}\frac{1}{(n_11)!\mathrm{}n_r!}\underset{D_{n_11,n_2,\mathrm{},n_r}}{}\underset{i>1}{}t_{\iota (i)}(z_i)\underset{¯}{dz_2}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}\overline{}^1𝒦^1$$

$$𝒦\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n_2,\mathrm{},n_r0}{n_1>0}}{}\frac{1}{(n_11)!\mathrm{}n_r!}\underset{D_{n_11,n_2,\mathrm{},n_r}}{}\underset{i>1}{}t_{\iota (i)}(z_i)\underset{¯}{dz_2}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}\underset{¯}{dz_1}\delta (\frac{zq^c}{z_1})\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{1}{2}c})e_{\alpha _1}(z_1)\overline{}^1𝒦^1$$

$$=𝒦\psi _{\alpha _1}^+(zq^{\frac{c_1}{2}})e_{\alpha _1}(zq^{c_1})𝒦^1𝒦\overline{}\psi _{\alpha _1}^{}(zq^{\frac{c_1}{2}})e_{\alpha _1}(zq^{c_1})\overline{}^1𝒦^1$$

after a change of the index of summation over $`n_1`$. The last summand cancels $`X_2`$ so

$$\mathrm{\Delta }e_{\alpha _1}(z)=𝒦(e_{\alpha _1}(z)1)𝒦^1+𝒦\psi _{\alpha _1}^+(zq^{\frac{c_1}{2}})e_{\alpha _1}(zq^{c_1})𝒦^1=𝒦\mathrm{\Delta }^{(2)}(e_{\alpha _1}(z))𝒦^1=\mathrm{\Delta }^{(1),op}(e_{\alpha _1}(z))$$

which finishes the proof.

Let us prove one of the relations (3.15). The left hand side equals to

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }1)𝒦\overline{}=𝒦_{13}𝒦_{23}(\mathrm{\Delta }1)\overline{}=𝒦_{13}𝒦_{23}𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}\left(t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)+t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)\right),$$

where

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)=(q^1q)e_{\alpha _i}(zq^{c_2})\psi _{\alpha _i}^+(zq^{c_2/2})e_{\alpha _i}(z)\end{array}$$
(3.19)
and

$$\begin{array}{c}t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)=(q^1q)1e_{\alpha _i}(z)e_{\alpha _i}(z)\end{array}$$
(3.20)
On the other side,

$$_{13}_{23}=𝒦_{13}\overline{}_{13}𝒦_{23}\overline{}_{23}=𝒦_{13}𝒦_{23}\left(𝒦_{23}^1\overline{}_{13}𝒦_{23}\right)\overline{}_{23}=$$

$$𝒦_{13}𝒦_{23}𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)$$

due to the properties of $`𝒦`$. So we have to prove an equality

$$\begin{array}{c}𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}\left(t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)+t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)\right)=𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)𝒫\stackrel{}{\mathrm{exp}}_{\{D_I\}}\underset{¯}{dz}\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},r}{}t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)\end{array}$$
(3.21)
where $`t_{\alpha _i}^1(z)`$ and $`t_{\alpha _i}^2(z)`$ are given by (3.19) and (3.20). An equality (3.21) is equivalent to following equalities of integrals. Let $`I`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{I}=\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ be a labeled set and $`j(1),\mathrm{},j(n)`$ be arbitrary sequence of numbers $`1`$ and $`2`$, $`j(k)=1,2`$. Then we should have:

$$\underset{D_I}{}t_{\iota (1)}^{j(1)}(z_1)t_{\iota (2)}^{j(2)}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\iota (n)}^{j(n)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}=$$

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{D_I^1}{}t_{\iota (k_1)}^1(z_{k_1})\mathrm{}t_{\iota (k_m)}^1(z_{k_m})\underset{¯}{dz_{k_1}}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_{k_m}}\underset{D_I^2}{}t_{\iota (k_{m+1})}^2(z_{k_{m+1}})\mathrm{}t_{\iota (k_n)}^2(z_{k_n})\underset{¯}{dz_{k_{m+1}}}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_{k_n}}\end{array}$$
(3.22)
where $`I^1=\{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m;j(k_i)=1\}`$ and $`I^2=\{k_{m+1},\mathrm{},k_n;j(k_i)=2\}`$. Again, we see from commutation relations (2.6), that the form $`\omega =t_{\iota (1)}^{j(1)}(z_1)t_{\iota (2)}^{j(2)}(z_2)\mathrm{}t_{\iota (n)}^{j(n)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}\underset{¯}{dz_n}`$ belongs to a class $`\mathrm{\Omega }_I`$, and, moreover, has no singularities at hyperplanes $`\{z_k=q^{(\iota (k),\iota (l))}z_l\}`$ for all $`kI^2`$ and $`lI^1`$ and the equality (3.22) holds due to factorization conditions on the cycles.

The two natural questions immediately appear for the $`R`$-matrix (3.16). First, to which representations it can be applied, and second, how it is connected to the $`R`$-matrix (3.3), constructed by means of Cartan-Weyl generators. Let us first try to apply (3.16) to a tensor product $`WV`$ of the graded representations with highest degree. Then there is a correct action of $`𝒦`$ and of each term in the series (3.17) (for instance, because the integral can be calculated by taking multiple residues which belong to completed algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$). We can conclude now that this action is well defined in a formal sense, that is, if we consider $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{𝐠})`$ as an algebra over $`C[[q1]]`$ as well as the representations.

Let now $`W`$ and $`V`$ be highest weight representations. In particular, it means that they are graded modules of highest degree. In this case we know from Proposition 3.1 that the $`R`$-matrix (3.3) is well defined operator in $`WV`$. In particular, it means that $`^{CW}`$ is also well defined operator in a formal sense, that is, over the ring $`C[[q1]]`$. By uniqueness argument we conclude that in a formal sense the actions of $`^{CW}`$ and of $``$ coincide. So they coincide as formal power series over $`(q1)`$, and the series (3.17) converge and its action coincide with the action of $`^{CW}`$. We summarize it in the following proposition.

###### Proposition 3.3

The action of $`R`$-matrix $``$ (3.16) on tensor product of highest weight representations is well defined and coincides with the action of $`^{CW}`$ (3.3).

## 4 Calculations for $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$

In this section we drop everywhere an index of a simple root of $`sl_2`$ and denote $`e(z)e_\alpha (z)`$ and $`f(z)e_\alpha (z)`$. Following \[DK\] and general receipt of vertex operator algebras, we study first the fields, appearing as the poles in the products of generating functions. Surprisingly, we will see in the first subsection, that the algebra, generated by the descenders of the tensor field $`f(z)e(z)`$, has simple closed form (4.13). Next, we derive from the contour integral description the recurrence relations on the terms of the universal $`R`$-matrix for $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$, which can be written as simple differential equation. Its solution has a structure of certain vertex operator due to the simple structure of tensor fields. Finally, we present some application of the derived expression for the $`R`$-matrix.

### 4.1 Algebra of tensor fields

Let us first look to the relation (2.3), which now reads as $`(z_1q^2z_2)e(z_1)e(z_2)=(q^2z_1z_2)e(z_2)e(z_1)`$. It shows that the function $`e(z_1)e(z_2)`$ has the only pole at the point $`z_1=q^2z_2`$. The residue could be calculated in two ways. Since the product $`e(z_1)e(z_2)`$ is well defined in completed algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$, the contour of integration can be replaced by two circles and, how it is explained in \[DK\], it gives the residue as a difference of formal integrals:

$$\underset{z_1=q^2z_2}{\text{res}}e(z_1)e(z_2)\frac{dz_1}{z_1}=e(z_1)e(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\frac{q^2z_1/z_2}{1q^2z_1/z_2}e(z_2)e(z_1)\underset{¯}{dz_1}$$

which gives

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{z=q^2w}{\text{res}}e(z)e(w)\frac{dz}{z}=_{nZ}w^{2n}q^{2n}\left\{(1q^2)e_n^2+(q^2q^2)_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}q^{2k}e_{nk}e_{n+k}\right\}+\\ +(q^2q^2)_{nZ}w^{2n1}q^{2n2}_{k=0}^{\mathrm{}}q^{2k}e_{nk}e_{n+k+1}\end{array}$$
(4.1)
which is well defined series in completed algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$. We can use also the rule for the calculation of poles of the first order:

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{z=q^2w}{\text{res}}e(z)e(w)\frac{dz}{z}=\underset{zq^2w}{\text{lim}}(1q^2w/z)e(z)e(w)=(q^2q^2)e(w)e(q^2w)\end{array}$$
(4.2)
Again, we can see from commutation relations that the product $`e(z)e(w)e(q^2w)`$ has unique pole, which equals, up to a constant, to $`e(w)e(q^2w)e(q^4w)`$. Let us define the following generating functions from $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ $`e^{(n)}(z)`$ and $`f^{(n)}(z)`$ by induction as

$$e^{(n)}(z)=\underset{z_1=q^{2(n1)}z}{\text{res}}e(z_1)e^{(n1)}(z)\frac{dz_1}{z_1},f^{(n)}(z)=\underset{z_1=q^{2(n1)}z}{\text{res}}f^{(n1)}(z)f(z_1)\frac{dz_1}{z_1},$$

Put also

$$\begin{array}{c}t^{(n)}(z)=\underset{z_1=q^{2(n1)}z}{\text{res}}t(z_1)t^{(n1)}(z)\frac{dz_1}{z_1},\end{array}$$
(4.3)
where, as before, $`t(z)=(q^1q)f(z)e(z)`$. and $`e^{(1)}(z)`$ stands for $`e(z)`$, $`f^{(1)}(z)`$ for $`f(z)`$, $`t^{(1)}(z)`$ for $`t(z)`$. Then, analogously to (4.2),

$$\begin{array}{c}e^{(n)}(z)=(q^1q)^{n1}[n1]_q![n]_q!\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z),f^{(n)}(z)=(q^1q)^{n1}[n1]_q![n]_q!\stackrel{~}{f}^{(n)}(z),\end{array}$$
(4.4)
$$\begin{array}{c}t^{(n)}(z)=(q^1q)^{2n1}[n1]_q![n]_q!\stackrel{~}{f}^{(n)}(z)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z),\end{array}$$
(4.5)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z)=e(z)e(q^2z)\mathrm{}e(q^{2(n1)}z),\stackrel{~}{f}^{(n)}(z)=f(q^{2(n1)}z)\mathrm{}f(q^2z)f(z).$$

Iterating the calculations (4.1), one can describe these fields in a component form:

$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z)=_{mZ}\left(zq^{2n}\right)^m_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\lambda _1\mathrm{}\lambda _n,}{\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+\lambda _n=m}}\frac{q^{2(\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+k\lambda _k+\mathrm{}n\lambda _n)}}{_{jZ}(\lambda _j^{}\lambda _{j+1}^{})_{q^2}!}e_{\lambda _n}e_{\lambda _{n1}}\mathrm{}e_{\lambda _1}\end{array}$$
(4.6)
$$\begin{array}{c}\stackrel{~}{f}^{(n)}(z)=_{mZ}\left(zq^2\right)^m_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\lambda _1\mathrm{}\lambda _n,}{\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+\lambda _n=m}}\frac{q^{2(\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+k\lambda _k+\mathrm{}n\lambda _n)}}{_{jZ}(\lambda _j^{}\lambda _{j+1}^{})_{q^2}!}f_{\lambda _n}f_{\lambda _{n1}}\mathrm{}f_{\lambda _1}\end{array}$$
(4.7)
Here $`\lambda _j^{}=\mathrm{\#}k`$, such that $`\lambda _kj`$, $`jZ`$. The product in denominator is finite, since there are only finitely many distinct $`\lambda _j^{}`$ for a given choice of $`\lambda _k`$.

###### Lemma 4.1

The product $`e^{(n)}(z_1)e^{(m)}(z_2)`$ has poles at the points

$$\begin{array}{c}z=\frac{z_1}{z_2}=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^2,q^4,\mathrm{},q^{2m},nm\hfill & \\ q^{2m2n+2},q^{2m2n+4},\mathrm{},q^{2m},n<m,\hfill & \end{array}\end{array}$$
(4.8a)
and zeroes at the points

$$\begin{array}{c}z=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^{2n+2},q^{2n+4},\mathrm{},q^{2n+2m},nm\hfill & \\ q^{2n+2},q^{2n+4},\mathrm{},1,n<m.\hfill & \end{array}\end{array}$$
(4.8b)
Analogously, the product $`f^{(n)}(z_1)f^{(m)}(z_2)`$ has zeroes at the points

$$\begin{array}{c}z=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,q^2,\mathrm{},q^{2m2)},nm\hfill & \\ q^{2m2n},q^{2m2n+2},\mathrm{},q^{2m2},n<m,\hfill & \end{array}\end{array}$$
(4.8c)
and simple poles at

$$\begin{array}{c}z=\{\begin{array}{cc}q^{2n},q^{2n+2},\mathrm{},q^{2n+2m2},nm\hfill & \\ q^{2n},q^{2n+2},\mathrm{},q^2,n<m.\hfill & \end{array}\end{array}$$
(4.8d)
Proof. Let us prove the part of the lemma concerning the composed current $`e^{(n)}(z)`$. The rest can be proved analogously. From the fact that the product $`e(z_1)e(z_2)`$ has simple pole at the point $`z_1=q^2z_2`$ and simple zero at $`z_1=z_2`$ it is clear that the product $`e(q^{2k}z_1)e^{(m)}(z_2)`$ has one simple pole at $`z_1=q^{2(mk)}z_2`$ and one simple zero at $`z_1=q^{2k}z_2`$, for $`k=0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$. The rest poles and zeros cancel each others. When $`n<m`$ this is the structure of poles and zeros given in (4.8a) and (4.8b). When $`n>m`$ there is an additional poles/zeros cancellation. Namely, the poles at the points $`z_1=q^{2k}z_2`$, $`k=0,1,\mathrm{},nm1`$ cancel with the zeros at the same points.

Put $`g^{}(z)=\frac{q^2z}{1q^2z}`$. Then we have for all $`k`$, such that $`\mathrm{max}(1,mn+1)km`$:

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{z_1=q^{2k}z_2}{\text{res}}\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z_1)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(m)}(z_2)\frac{dz_1}{z_1}=\underset{z_1q^{2k}z_2}{\text{lim}}(1q^{2k}z_2/z_1)_{i=0}^{k1}_{j=0}^{n1}g^{}(q^{2(ji)}z_1/z_2)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(k)}(z_2)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z_1)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(mk)}(q^{2k}z_2)=\\ =\underset{z_1q^{2k}z_2}{lim}(q^2q^{2(k1)}z_2/z_1)\underset{i=0}{\overset{k2}{}}\underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}g^{}(q^{2j2i}z)\underset{j=1}{\overset{n1}{}}g^{}(q^{2j2k+2}z)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(k)}(z_2)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n)}(z_1)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(mk)}(q^{2k}z_2)=\\ =(qq^1)\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\frac{[n+j]_q[n+j+1]_q}{[j]_q[j+1]_q}\stackrel{~}{e}^{(n+k)}(z_2)\stackrel{~}{e}^{(mk)}(q^{2k}z_2),\end{array}$$
(4.9)
since $`g^{}(q^{2k})=\frac{[k+1]_q}{[k1]_q}`$ for $`k=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ .

Analogously, for all $`k`$, such that $`\mathrm{max}(1,nm+1)kn`$

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{z_1=q^{2k}z_2}{\text{res}}\stackrel{~}{f}^{(n)}(z_1)\stackrel{~}{f}^{(m)}(z_2)\frac{dz_1}{z_1}=(q^1q)\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\frac{[m+j]_q[m+j+1]_q}{[j]_q[j+1]_q}\stackrel{~}{f}^{(nk)}(z_2)\stackrel{~}{f}^{(m+k)}(q^{2k}z_2).\end{array}$$
(4.10)
These calculations together with (4.4) give the following commutation relations:

$$\begin{array}{c}e^{(n)}(z_1)e^{(m)}(z_2)=_{k=0}^{m1}_{l=0}^{n1}g^{}(q^{2(kl)}z)e^{(m)}(z_2)e^{(n)}(z_1)+\\ +\underset{k=1}{\overset{m}{}}[m]_q\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{k}\right]_q\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1}{k1}\right]_q\delta \left(\frac{z_1}{q^{2k}z_2}\right)e^{(n+k)}(z_2)e^{(mk)}(z_1)\end{array}$$
(4.11)
Analogously, we can derive the relations

$$\begin{array}{c}f^{(n)}(z_1)f^{(m)}(z_2)=_{k=0}^{m1}_{l=0}^{n1}g(q^{2(kl)}z)f^{(m)}(z_2)f^{(n)}(z_1)\\ \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}[n]_q\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{k}\right]_q\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{k1}\right]_q\delta \left(\frac{q^{2k}z_1}{z_2}\right)f^{(nk)}(z_2)f^{(m+k)}(z_1)\end{array}$$
(4.12)
where $`g(z)=\frac{q^2z}{1q^2z}`$. Note first, that the coefficients before delta functions are the new fields, and second, that some of these fields in r.h.s. of (4.11), (4.12) equal zero according to the structure of zeroes (4.1).

Lemma 4.1 shows also that the only (simple) poles of the product $`t^{(n)}(z_1)t^{(m)}(z_2)`$ are $`z_1=q^{2m}z_2`$ and $`z_1=q^{2n}z_2`$ and from (4.9) and (4.10) we deduce that

$$\begin{array}{c}[t^{(n)}(z_1),t^{(m)}(z_2)]=\delta (q^{2n}z_1/z_2)t^{(n+m)}(z_1)\delta (q^{2m}z_1/z_2)t^{(n+m)}(z_2).\end{array}$$
(4.13)
so the tensor fields $`t^{(n)}(z)`$ form a closed algebra. In particular, from (4.13) we have the following

###### Proposition 4.1

The total integrals of the fields $`t^{(n)}(z)`$ around infinity

$$I^{(n)}=t^{(n)}(z)\underset{¯}{dz}$$

commute between themselves:

$$\begin{array}{c}[I^{(n)},I^{(m)}]=0.\end{array}$$
(4.14)
### 4.2 Calculation of the contour integrals

We want to calculate the integral

$$\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n!}\underset{D_n}{}t^{(1)}(z_1)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}$$

over the cycles described in the previous section. It was noted in the proof of Proposition (3.2), that for $`|q|>1`$ the cycle $`D_n`$ is homotopic to a product of unit circles.

We can also deform it slightly to a torus $`C_i=\{|z_i|=r_i\}`$ in such a way, that it has no intersections with diagonals. Let us consider it as the multiple integral

$$\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n!}\underset{C_n}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_1}{}t^{(1)}(z_1)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}$$

and integrate first over $`z_1`$ for fixed other $`z_j`$. We can move the contour $`C_1`$ to infinity crossing the poles $`z_1=q^2z_j`$, $`j=2,\mathrm{},n`$. The residue at the pole $`z_1=q^2z_2`$ is equal, due to (4.9), to <sup>4</sup><sup>4</sup>4Expanding the contour to infinity we should pick up minus residue. The minus sign in the formula (4.15) results that in all calculations below we avoid the appearing of the alternating signs.

$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{C_2}{}t^{(2)}(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_2}t^{(1)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}.\end{array}$$
(4.15)
For the calculation of the residues at $`z_1=z_3`$ we first use the commutativity of analytical continuations of $`t^{(k_i)}(z_i)`$, which mean, in particular, that they commute on the contour which does not cross their singularities and then repeat the same calculation as for $`z_1=q^2z_2`$. As a result, we will have $`(n1)`$ integrals with different contours, obtained by permutations of each other, but due to the absence of the poles near diagonal (see (4.13)), all they are equivalent.

So, we have,

$$\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n!}(\underset{C_1}{}t^{(1)}(z_1)\underset{¯}{dz_1}\underset{C_n}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_2}{}t^{(1)}(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_2}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}+$$

$$+(n1)\underset{C_{n1}}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_2}{}t^{(2)}(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_2}t^{(1)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n})$$

or

$$\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n}I^{(1)}\overline{}^{(n1)}+\frac{n1}{n!}\underset{C_n}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_2}{}t^{(2)}(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_2}t^{(1)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}).$$

Again, integrate the second integral over $`z_2`$ for fixed others. We see, that this integral has singularities for $`z_2=q^{\pm 4}z_j`$. It is clear, that when we move the contour to infinity, we cross the poles $`z_2=q^4z_j`$, $`j=3,\mathrm{},n`$. By the same trick we have now

$$\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n}I^{(1)}\overline{}^{(n1)}+\frac{n1}{n!}\underset{C_2}{}t^{(2)}(z_2)\underset{¯}{dz_2}\underset{C_{n1}}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_3}{}t^{(1)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n})+$$

$$+\frac{(n1)(n2)}{n!}\underset{C_n}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_3}{}t^{(3)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}t^{(1)}(z_4)\underset{¯}{dz_4}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n})=$$

$$=\frac{1}{n}\left(I^{(1)}\overline{}^{(n1)}+I^{(2)}\overline{}^{(n2)}+\frac{(n1)(n2)}{n!}\underset{C_n}{}\mathrm{}\underset{C_3}{}t^{(3)}(z_3)\underset{¯}{dz_3}t^{(1)}(z_4)\underset{¯}{dz_4}\mathrm{}t^{(1)}(z_n)\underset{¯}{dz_n}\right).$$

The inductive calculation give the following recurrence relation:

$$\begin{array}{c}\overline{}^{(n)}=\frac{1}{n}\left(I^{(1)}\overline{}^{(n1)}+I^{(2)}\overline{}^{(n2)}+\mathrm{}+I^{(n)}\overline{}^{(0)}\right)\end{array}$$
(4.16)
with initial condition $`\overline{}^{(0)}=11`$. For the solution of this recurrence relation let us introduce generating functions

$$\overline{}(u)=\underset{n0}{}\overline{}^{(n)}u^n,I(u)=\underset{n1}{}I^{(n)}u^n.$$

Then the relation (4.16) means the following differential equation:

$$\begin{array}{c}u\frac{d}{du}\overline{}(u)=I(u)\overline{}(u)\end{array}$$
(4.17)
with initial condition $`\overline{}(0)=11`$. Its solution for the commutative variable $`I(u)`$ is

$$\overline{}(u)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{0}{\overset{u}{}}\frac{I(v)}{v}𝑑v\right),$$

This proves the following

###### Theorem 2

For the algebra $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ the factor $`\overline{}`$ of the universal $`R`$-matrix (3.16) can be written in the form

$$\begin{array}{c}\overline{}=\overline{}(1)=\mathrm{exp}\left(_{n1}\frac{I^{(n)}}{n}\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left(_{n1}\frac{dz}{2\pi iz}\frac{t^{(n)}(z)}{n}\right).\end{array}$$
(4.18)
### 4.3 Some applications

Let us first apply the formula (4.18) to the integrable representations of $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$. It is known \[DM\], that in integrable representation of $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ of level $`k`$ all the currents $`e^{(n)}(z)`$ and $`f^{(n)}(z)`$ vanish for $`n>k`$. It gives immediately the following statement:

###### Proposition 4.2

The action of the universal $`R`$-matrix for $`U_q^{(D)}(\widehat{\mathrm{𝐬𝐥}}_2)`$ in tensor product $`VW`$ of highest weight representations, where one of them is integrable of level $`k`$, coincides with the action of

$$𝒦\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{n=1}{\overset{k}{}}\frac{dz}{2\pi iz}\frac{t^{(n)}(z)}{n}\right).$$

In particular, for $`k=1`$, it is

$$𝒦\mathrm{exp}\left((q^1q)\frac{dz}{2\pi iz}f(z)e(z)\right).$$

Here $`𝒦`$ is given by (3.4).

We can deduce from (4.18) the formula for the universal $`R`$-matrix of $`U_q(sl_2)`$, which is well known \[D1\]. To do this, we suppose that we act by $``$ on a tensor product of highest weight representations of zero level with zero top degree and calculate the matrix coefficient between tensor products of the vectors of zero degree. Then in the expression of the $`R`$-matrix only the terms composed from the elements from $`U_q(sl_2)`$ $`e_0`$, $`f_0`$, $`q^h`$ and $`q^h`$ survive. What is left, is to count the coefficients before $`e_0^n`$ and $`f_0^n`$ in the fields $`e^{(n)}`$ and $`f^{(n)}`$. They are given in (4.6), (4.7) and (4.4). Finally, we get

$$R=q^{\frac{hh}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{n1}{}\frac{(q^1q)^{2n1}}{n[n]_q}f^ne^n\right).$$

One can check that it coincides with the usual presentation of the universal $`R`$-matrix via $`q^2`$-exponential function using, for instance, presentation of $`q`$-exponent in a form of infinite product.

Finally, we can use factorized expression of \[DK\] for the universal $`R`$-matrix and substitute there (4.18) in every factor. As a result, we get an expression of the form, which depends on a fixed normal ordering $`>`$ of the system $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ of positive roots (or, equivalently, on the reduced decomposition of the longest element of the Weyl group) of simple Lie algebra $`𝐠`$ of simple laced type:

$$=𝒦\stackrel{}{\underset{\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }_+}{}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{n1}{}\frac{dz}{2\pi iz}\frac{t_\gamma ^{(n)}(z)}{n}\right)$$

where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ is the system of positive roots of simple Lie algebra $`𝐠`$, the currents $`e_\gamma (z)`$ and $`e_\gamma (z)`$ are built as in \[DK\], $`t_\gamma (z)=(q^1q)e_\gamma (z)e_\gamma (z)`$ and the currents $`t_\gamma ^{(n)}(z)`$ and are constructed from $`e_\gamma (z)`$ and $`e_\gamma (z)`$ according to the rules (4.4). Again, we can restrict ourselves to zero level matrix coefficients and recover precisely multiplicative formula for the $`R`$-matrix of $`U_q(𝐠)`$, see, e.g., \[KT1\].

We can also repeat our considerations for Yangians and elliptic algebras, as it was done in \[DK\] and in \[DKKP\]. Another applications are given in \[DKP\]

## Acknowledgment

S. Khoroshkin is grateful to B.Feigin and Yu.Nerertin for the discussions and thanks especially A.Rosly for the explanations in the theory of residues. He also thanks the University of Chicago and the University of Cincinnati for hospitality. Part of the work was done there. S. Pakuliak thanks the Physikalisches Institut, Universität Bonn; CERN Theory Division and Universite d’Angers for hospitality.

The work of S.Kh. and of S.P. was supported in part by the grants INTAS OPEN 97-01312, RFBR-CNRS grant PICS N 608/RFBR 98-01-22033. S.Kh. was supported also by RFBR grant 98-01-00303 and S.P. by grants RFBR 97-01–1041 and grant of Heisenberg-Landau program HL-99-12.


text:
# KIAS-P00054hep-th/0008103 5 D Actions for 6 D Self-Dual Tensor Field Theory

## I. Introduction and Conclusion

One of the challenging problems in quantum field theories at present is to construct the action for chiral $`p`$-forms, i.e. anti-symmetric boson fields whose field strength is self-dual, especially with non-Abelian group structure implemented. Self-duality condition requires the spacetime to be Euclidean for odd $`p`$ and Minkowskian for even $`p`$. In particular, $`p=2`$ case has been of much attention related to the formulation of the world-volume action for M-theory five-brane .

Concerning Abelian theories of chiral $`p`$-forms there have been various types of proposals. Floreanini and Jackiw first proposed a non-manifestly covariant action for chiral scalars in two-dimensions by adopting somewhat unusual commutation relations among the field variables . McClain, Wu and Yu proposed a formulation for chiral scalars by introducing an infinite number of auxiliary fields which do not carry any physical degree of freedom . Each treatment was extended to higher order $`p`$-forms in Refs.  and  respectively.

Two other formulations are also available. Pasti, Sorokin and Tonin introduced a Lorentz covariant formulation with only one auxiliary scalar field entering a chiral $`p`$-form action in a non-polynomial way . Schwarz et al. studied a non-covariant formulation for self-dual two-form tensor in six-dimensions, where only five-dimensional Lorentz symmetry is manifest as one spacetime dimension is treated differently from the others . However, it turned out that the PST formulation for $`p=2`$ case contains local symmetries and a non-covariant gauge fixing of the local symmetries reduces to the non-manifestly Lorentz invariant formulation by Schwarz et al. (see also ). Each formulation further developed to construct a kappa symmetric world-volume action for M-theory five-brane in an eleven-dimensional superspace background .

The bosonic PST formulation was supersymmetrized in six-dimensions incorporating the self-dual tensor-multiplets. Dall’Agata et al. and Claus et al. presented the $`(1,0)`$ and $`(2,0)`$ supersymmetric extensions separately . On the other hand, the non-manifestly Lorentz invariant action by Schwarz et al. has not been supersymmetrized in the literature yet.

In the context of M-theory, five-dimensional maximally supersymmetric gauge theory at strong coupling limit is supposed to have description by a six-dimensional $`(2,0)`$ fixed point, as the four-brane of type IIA theory is the M-theory five-brane wrapped around the eleventh direction and at strong coupling the eleventh dimension decompactifies developing an extra dimension . In fact, there is no interacting fixed point of the renormalization group in five-dimensions . Nevertheless, direct field theoretic understanding of the relationship between the five and six dimensional theories for non-Abelian interactions is still lacking.

In this paper, we present two different but equivalent five-dimensional supersymmetric actions for the Kaluza-Klein modes of the six-dimensional $`(N,0)`$, $`N=1,2`$ self-dual tensor-multiplets compactified on a circle. The Kaluza-Klein tower consists of a massless vector and infinite number of massive self-dual tensor multiplets living in five-dimensions. The self-duality follows from the equation of motion rather than a constraint imposed by hand. When lifted back to six-dimensions, one of our formulations gives a supersymmetric extension of the bosonic action for the chiral two-form tensor by Perry and Schwarz . As there appears a five-dimensional vector multiplet after compactifying the $`6`$ D tensor-multiplet on a circle, one may try to implement the non-Abelian group structure by taking the vector field as the usual Yang-Mills gauge field.111In this approach, one needs to ensure the six-dimensional covariance of the non-Abelian gauge symmetry in the five-dimensional action. This would give a five-dimensional super Yang-Mills theory coupled with massive tensor-multiplets in an adjoint representation, realizing the M-theory picture on $`5`$D and $`6`$D theories. This scenario is the main motivation of the work in the present paper. The proposed formulations deal with Abelian case. Supersymmetry is provided, and non-Abelian generalization is to be done.

In the following section II., we first compactify the $`6`$ D tensor-multiplets on a circle. The self-duality is expressed in terms of the Kaluza-Klein modes in five-dimensional language. The resulting Kaluza-Klein modes are massless vector and massive tensor multiplets which are identified by the analysis on five-dimensional supersymmetry algebra. In section III. and IV. we write our two proposed actions for the Kaluza-Klein modes of the $`(1,0)`$ and $`(2,0)`$ tensor-multiplets respectively. In section V. we lift the actions to six-dimensions and discuss the symmetries.

## II. Tensor-multiplets Compactified on a Circle

Using the $`4\times 4`$ gamma matrices, $`\gamma ^\mu ,\mu =0,1,\mathrm{},4`$, in five-dimensional Minkowskian spacetime with the metric, $`\eta _{\mu \nu }=\text{diag}(+1,1,\mathrm{},1)`$, the six-dimensional gamma matrices, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\widehat{\mu }},\widehat{\mu }=\mu ,5`$, are taken here as

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{\widehat{\mu }}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \gamma ^{\widehat{\mu }}\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{\widehat{\mu }}\hfill & 0\hfill \end{array}\right),& \gamma ^\mu =\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^\mu ,\gamma ^5=\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^5=1.& \end{array}$$
(II.1)
This choice of gamma matrices gives a diagonalized $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^7`$ matrix so that the non-vanishing components of the six-dimensional chiral spinors are upper four, $`\psi `$, only and the pseudo-Majorana or symplectic $`\text{sp}(N)`$-Majorana condition for $`6`$ D $`(N,0)`$ chiral spinors is readily translated into the five-dimensional pseudo-Majorana condition

$$\begin{array}{cc}\overline{\psi }_i=\psi ^i{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{}^{0}=\psi ^j{}_{}{}^{t}CJ_{ji},& J_{ij}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& \hfill 1\\ 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right),\end{array}$$
(II.2)
where $`1i,j2N`$ and $`C`$ is the five-dimensional charge conjugate matrix satisfying $`\gamma ^\mu {}_{}{}^{t}=C\gamma ^\mu C^1,C^t=C`$.

$`6`$D $`(N,0),N=1,2`$ tensor-multiplet consists of a two-form tensor, $`B_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}`$, pseudo-Majorana chiral spinors, $`\psi ^i`$, and one for $`N=1`$/five for $`N=2`$ real scalar(s), $`\varphi `$ .

Compactifying the fifth spatial dimension on a circle of radius $`R`$ gives a Kaluza-Klein tower of the tensor-multiplets

$$\begin{array}{cc}B_{\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}=\underset{m\text{}}{}B_{m\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{2\pi }{R}}mx^5},\hfill & \varphi =\underset{m\text{}}{}\varphi _me^{i{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{2\pi }{R}}mx^5},\hfill \\ & \\ \psi ^i=\underset{m\text{}}{}\psi _m^ie^{i{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{2\pi }{R}}mx^5},\hfill & \overline{\psi }_i=\underset{m\text{}}{}\overline{\psi }_{mi}e^{i{\scriptscriptstyle \frac{2\pi }{R}}mx^5}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(II.3)
Reality and Pseudo-Majorana conditions imply

$$\begin{array}{ccc}B_{m\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }}^{}=B_{m\widehat{\mu }\widehat{\nu }},& \varphi _m^{}=\varphi _m,& \overline{\psi }_{mi}=\psi _m^i\gamma ^0=\psi _m^j{}_{}{}^{t}CJ_{ji}.\end{array}$$
(II.4)
The self-duality of the $`6`$ D two-form tensor, $`H=H`$, is now expressed in terms of the five-dimensional Kaluza-Klein modes

$$F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{6}ϵ_{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{\lambda \rho \sigma }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma }^{},$$
(II.5)
where $`F_{m\mu \nu }`$ is the field strength of $`B_{m\mu 5}A_{m\mu }`$.

Taking a curl of eq.(II.5) eliminates $`A_{m\mu }`$ leaving a second order differential equation that involves $`B_{m\mu \nu }`$ only

$$_\lambda H_m^{\lambda \mu \nu }=i\frac{\pi }{3R}mϵ^{\mu \nu }{}_{\lambda \rho \sigma }{}^{}H_{m}^{\lambda \rho \sigma }.$$
(II.6)
Reversely, taking off the curl, eq.(II.6) implies $`\frac{1}{6}ϵ_{\mu \nu }{}_{}{}^{\lambda \rho \sigma }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma }^{}i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu }=F_{m\mu \nu }^{}`$ for a certain $`F_{m\mu \nu }^{}=_\mu A_{m\nu }^{}_\nu A_{m\mu }^{}`$. In $`m0`$ cases one can fix the gauge for the two-form tensor such that $`F_{m\mu \nu }^{}=F_{m\mu \nu }`$, while $`m=0`$ case in eqs.(II.5,II.6) shows the hodge dual relation between the five-dimensional free Maxwell theory and a massless free two-form field theory. Thus, eq.(II.6) is equivalent to eq.(II.5) upto gauge transformations.

Six-dimensional $`(N,0)`$ supersymmetry algebra naturally descends to five-dimensions

$$\{Q^i,\overline{Q}_j\}=\delta ^i{}_{j}{}^{}\gamma _{}^{\widehat{\mu }}P_{\widehat{\mu }}=\delta ^i{}_{j}{}^{}(\gamma ^\mu P_\mu +M),$$
(II.7)
where the supercharges, $`Q^i,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}i2N`$, satisfy the pseudo-Majorana condition (II.2) resulting in $`8N`$ real components, and $`M=P_5`$ is a real central charge. In particular, since the $`6`$ D tensor-multiplet is massless, $`p^{\widehat{\mu }}p_{\widehat{\mu }}=0`$, each Kaluza-Klein mode must satisfy

$$p^\mu p_\mu =(\frac{2\pi }{R}m)^2,$$
(II.8)
so that $`M`$ acts as a “mass” operator on $`m`$th Kaluza-Klein mode with eigenvalue $`\frac{2\pi }{R}m`$. Massless modes, $`m=0`$, and massive modes, $`m0`$, fit into the representations of the little groups, $`\text{SO}(3)\times \text{Sp}(N)`$ and $`\text{Spin}(4)\times \text{Sp}(N)\text{SU}(2)\times \text{SU}(2)\times \text{Sp}(N)`$, separately. From  (see also ) the relevant representations of the massless and massive modes are for $`N=1`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}(2,1)\times 2^2=(3,1)+(1,1)+(2,2)& \text{:\hspace{0.17em}massless tensor, Maxwell,}\hfill \\ & \\ (2,1,1)\times 2^2=(3,1,1)+(1,1,1)+(2,1,2)& \text{:\hspace{0.17em}massive tensor},\hfill \end{array}$$
(II.9)
and for $`N=2`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}(1,1)\times 2^4=(3,1)+(1,5)+(2,4)& \text{:\hspace{0.17em}massless tensor, Maxwell,}\hfill \\ & \\ (1,1,1)\times 2^4=(3,1,1)+(1,1,5)+(2,1,4)& \text{:\hspace{0.17em}massive tensor},\hfill \end{array}$$
(II.10)
where for the massless representations the tensor and Maxwell multiplets are hodge dual to each other.

## III. $`(1,0)`$ Theory

Our two proposed five-dimensional Lagrangians for the Kaluza-Klein tower of the $`6`$ D $`(1,0)`$ tensor-multiplet compactified on a circle are

$$\begin{array}{cc}_1=\underset{m\text{}}{}\hfill & \frac{1}{4}(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })(F_m^{\mu \nu }i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_m^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{6}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma })\hfill \\ & \\ & +\overline{\psi }_{mi}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\psi _m^i+_\mu \varphi _m^\mu \varphi _m(\frac{2\pi }{R}m)^2\varphi _m\varphi _m,\hfill \end{array}$$
(III.1)
and

$$\begin{array}{cc}_2=\underset{m\text{}}{}\hfill & \frac{1}{12}H_{m\lambda \mu \nu }H_m^{\lambda \mu \nu }i\frac{\pi }{12R}mϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }B_{m\mu \nu }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma }\hfill \\ & \\ & +\overline{\psi }_{mi}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\psi _m^i+_\mu \varphi _m^\mu \varphi _m(\frac{2\pi }{R}m)^2\varphi _m\varphi _m,\hfill \end{array}$$
(III.2)
of which the supersymmetry transformation rules are

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\delta B_{m\mu \nu }=i\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _{\mu \nu }\psi _m^i,& \delta \varphi _m=i\overline{\psi }_{mi}\epsilon ^i,& \delta A_{m\mu }=i\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _\mu \psi _m^i,\\ & & \\ \multicolumn{3}{c}{\delta \psi _m^i=\{\begin{array}{cc}\left((\gamma ^\mu _\mu +i\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\varphi _m+\frac{1}{4}(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })\gamma ^{\mu \nu }\right)\epsilon ^i\hfill & \text{for }_1\hfill \\ & \\ \left((\gamma ^\mu _\mu +i\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\varphi _m+\frac{1}{12}H_{m\lambda \mu \nu }\gamma ^{\lambda \mu \nu }\right)\epsilon ^i\hfill & \text{for }_2\hfill \end{array}.}\end{array}$$
(III.3)
Note that these are compatible with the reality and pseudo-Majorana conditions (II.4) and the invariance of the action can be shown using $`\gamma ^{\lambda \mu \nu }=\frac{1}{2}ϵ^{\lambda \mu \nu \rho \sigma }\gamma _{\rho \sigma }`$ and

$$\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _{\mu _1}\gamma _{\mu _2}\mathrm{}\gamma _{\mu _n}\psi _m^i=\overline{\psi }_{mi}\gamma _{\mu _n}\mathrm{}\gamma _{\mu _2}\gamma _{\mu _1}\epsilon ^i=(\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _{\mu _1}\gamma _{\mu _2}\mathrm{}\gamma _{\mu _n}\psi _m^i)^{}.$$
(III.4)
The summation of the modes can be just over $`|m|`$ and $`|m|`$ for any given $`m\text{}`$, as this pair alone forms an irreducible representation of the supersymmetry transformations. Hence, we may mix $`_1`$ and $`_2`$. For example, we may replace the zero mode in $`_2`$ by the zero mode in $`_1`$ which will give the kinetic terms for both the vector and the tensor fields.

For $`_1`$, the equations of motion for $`B_{m\mu \nu },m0`$ and $`A_{0\mu }`$ alone give the self-duality formula (II.5) for $`m0,m=0`$ respectively. On the other hand, $`B_{0\mu \nu }`$ appears only as a total derivative in $`_1`$ not contributing the action, and the equation of motion for $`A_{m\mu },m0`$ is nothing but the divergence of the self-duality formula, and hence not a new field equation. Note also that the zero modes correspond to a five-dimensional super Maxwell theory.

For $`_2`$, the equation of motion for $`B_{m\mu \nu }`$ is the curl of the self-duality (II.6) and the gauge freedom recovers the self-duality as we discussed in section II.

Our two Lagrangians, $`_1`$ and $`_2`$, are dual to each other through the following intermediate Lagrangian containing auxiliary two-form fields, $`J_{m\mu \nu }=J_{m\nu \mu }`$,

$$_{12}=\underset{m\text{}}{}\frac{1}{4}J_{m\mu \nu }J_m^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{2}(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })(J_m^{\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{12}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma }).$$
(III.5)
The equations of motion for $`J_{m\mu \nu }`$, $`B_{m\mu \nu }`$ are $`J_{m\mu \nu }=(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })`$, $`J_{m\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{6}ϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }H_m^{\lambda \rho \sigma }`$ respectively. Depending on which expression of the auxiliary fields we choose to substitute, $`_{12}`$ gives either $`_1`$ or $`_2`$. This equivalence has an analogue in three-dimensions: the free theory of Maxwell and Chern-Simons terms is equivalent to the theory of Chern-Simons and Higgs terms.

## IV. $`(2,0)`$ Theory

The $`(2,0)`$ tensor-multiplet contains five real scalars, $`\varphi ^{ij},\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}i,j4`$, satisfying

$$\begin{array}{cc}\varphi ^{ij}=\varphi ^{ji},& \varphi ^{ij}J_{ij}=0.\end{array}$$
(IV.1)
With $`\varphi _{ij}=\varphi ^{kl}J_{ki}J_{lj}`$ our proposed Lagrangians are

$$\begin{array}{cc}_1=\underset{m\text{}}{}\hfill & \frac{1}{4}(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })(F_m^{\mu \nu }i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_m^{\mu \nu }\frac{1}{6}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma })\hfill \\ & \\ & +\overline{\psi }_{mi}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\psi _m^i+_\mu \varphi _m^{ij}^\mu \varphi _{mij}(\frac{2\pi }{R}m)^2\varphi _m^{ij}\varphi _{mij},\hfill \end{array}$$
(IV.2)
and

$$\begin{array}{cc}_2=\underset{m\text{}}{}\hfill & \frac{1}{12}H_{m\lambda \mu \nu }H_m^{\lambda \mu \nu }i\frac{\pi }{12R}mϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }B_{m\mu \nu }H_{m\lambda \rho \sigma }\hfill \\ & \\ & +\overline{\psi }_{mi}(i\gamma ^\mu _\mu +\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\psi _m^i+_\mu \varphi _m^{ij}^\mu \varphi _{mij}(\frac{2\pi }{R}m)^2\varphi _m^{ij}\varphi _{mij},\hfill \end{array}$$
(IV.3)
and the supersymmetry transformation rules are

$$\begin{array}{cc}\delta B_{m\mu \nu }=i\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _{\mu \nu }\psi _m^i,& \delta A_{m\mu }=i\overline{\epsilon }_i\gamma _\mu \psi _m^i,\\ & \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\delta \varphi _m^{ij}=i\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\psi }_m^i\epsilon ^j\overline{\psi }_m^j\epsilon ^i+\frac{1}{2}J^{1ij}\overline{\psi }_{mk}\epsilon ^k),}\\ & \\ \multicolumn{2}{c}{\delta \psi _m^i=\{\begin{array}{cc}(\gamma ^\mu _\mu +i\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\varphi _m^i{}_{j}{}^{}\epsilon _{}^{j}+\frac{1}{4}(F_{m\mu \nu }+i\frac{2\pi }{R}mB_{m\mu \nu })\gamma ^{\mu \nu }\epsilon ^i\hfill & \text{for }_1\hfill \\ & \\ (\gamma ^\mu _\mu +i\frac{2\pi }{R}m)\varphi _m^i{}_{j}{}^{}\epsilon _{}^{j}+\frac{1}{12}H_{m\lambda \mu \nu }\gamma ^{\lambda \mu \nu }\epsilon ^i\hfill & \text{for }_2\hfill \end{array}.}\end{array}$$
(IV.4)
## V. Lift to $`6`$D

It is straightforward to lift our proposed actions to six-dimensions. The scalar and spinor parts are the standard ones

$$\frac{1}{2\pi R}\mathrm{d}^6xi\overline{\psi }_i\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^{\widehat{\mu }}_{\widehat{\mu }}\psi ^i+_{\widehat{\mu }}\varphi ^{\widehat{\mu }}\varphi .$$
(V.1)
The two-form tensor part leads for $`_1`$

$$\frac{1}{2\pi R}\mathrm{d}^6x\frac{1}{4}H_{5\mu \nu }H^{5\mu \nu }+\frac{1}{24}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }_5B_{\mu \nu }H_{\lambda \rho \sigma },$$
(V.2)
and for $`_2`$

$$\frac{1}{2\pi R}\mathrm{d}^6x\frac{1}{12}H_{\lambda \mu \nu }H^{\lambda \mu \nu }\frac{1}{24}ϵ^{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }_5B_{\mu \nu }H_{\lambda \rho \sigma }.$$
(V.3)
The latter is identical to the action by Perry and Schwarz . Hence, our work on $`_2`$ can be regarded as its $`(N,0),N=1,2`$ supersymmetric extensions. The supersymmetry transformation rules can be easily read from eqs.(III.3,IV.4). Some analysis on the canonical dimensions of the fields show $`R=g_{\mathrm{YM}}^2`$, where $`g_{\mathrm{YM}}`$ is the five-dimensional coupling constant .

Both actions in eqs.(V.2,V.3) are manifestly invariant under the five-dimensional Lorentz transformations

$$\delta _{5\mathrm{D}}B_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu {}_{}{}^{\lambda }B_{\lambda \nu }^{}+\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu {}_{}{}^{\lambda }B_{\mu \lambda }^{}+\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\lambda \rho }x_\lambda _\rho B_{\mu \nu }.$$
(V.4)
On the other hand, it is not clear whether the actions are invariant under the rotations mixing the sixth direction and the other five, $`\mu `$, directions. In  the authors found a transformation with five-dimensional vector parameters, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mu `$,

$$\delta B_{\mu \nu }=\frac{1}{6}\mathrm{\Lambda }xϵ_{\mu \nu \lambda \rho \sigma }H^{\lambda \rho \sigma }+x^5\mathrm{\Lambda }B_{\mu \nu },$$
(V.5)
which leaves the action (V.3) invariant upto surface terms, and it was argued that this is the remaining Lorentz symmetry so that the action possesses the full six-dimensional Lorentz symmetry. However, in this case the transformation in eq.(V.5) lacks the usual distinction of “spin” and “orbital” parts of the Lorentz transformations as in eq.(V.4). Furthermore, the anticommutator of the transformations reads

$$[\delta _2,\delta _1]B_{\mu \nu }=(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1x\mathrm{\Lambda }_2^\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }_2x\mathrm{\Lambda }_1^\lambda )(H_{\lambda \mu \nu }+_\lambda B_{\mu \nu }).$$
(V.6)
For the transformation in eq.(V.5) to be identified with the remaining Lorentz transformations, this must be interpreted as the five-dimensional Lorentz transformations (V.4) upto any possible gauge transformation. However, direct calculation shows that this is not the case, since with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{1\mu }\mathrm{\Lambda }_{2\nu }(12)`$

$$[\delta _2,\delta _1]H_{\lambda \mu \nu }=\delta _{5\mathrm{D}}H_{\lambda \mu \nu }+\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\tau \kappa }x_\tau _\kappa H_{\lambda \mu \nu }3\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\kappa [\lambda }^\kappa B_{\mu \nu ]}.$$
(V.7)
and the right hand side can not be rescaled into222This is also impossible on shell contrary to the claim in Ref. . $`\delta _{5\mathrm{D}}H_{\lambda \mu \nu }`$. Therefore, eq.(V.5) is a symmetry of the action which is not Lorentz symmetry even upto gauge transformations. Nevertheless, the formulation by Schwarz et al. is a certain non-covariant gauge fixing of the PST formulation , and the latter possesses the full $`6\text{D}`$ Lorentz symmetry. Furthermore it was shown that the PST action for the two-form tensor supermultiplet enjoys the six-dimensional superconformal symmetry  as well as some nontrivial local symmetries . These results suggest that there is a hidden big symmetry in the action which combines those two symmetries and contains the transformation found by Perry and Schwarz (V.5). Note that Coleman-Mandula theorem on possible symmetries of field theories applies only for massive point-like particles  and $`6\text{D}`$ two-form tensor theory is not the case, since it is massless conformal theory and the self-duality makes the distinction between the electric and the magnetic particles meaningless.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Dmitrij Sorokin for helpful e-mail correspondence clarifying the equivalence on PST and Schwarz et al. formulations. K.L. is supported in part by KOSEF 1998 Interdisciplinary Research Grant 98-07-02-07-01-5.