text:
# 𝐵→ϕ𝐾 and 𝐵→ϕ𝑋_𝑠 in the Heavy Quark Limit

## Abstract

We study $`B\varphi K`$ and $`B\varphi X_s`$ decays in the heavy quark limit using perturbative QCD. The next leading order corrections introduce substantial modifications to the naive factorization results (more than 50%). The branching ratio $`Br(B\varphi K)`$ is predicted to be in the range $`(F_1^{BK}(m_\varphi ^2)/0.33)^2(3.54.2)\times 10^6`$ which is within the one $`\sigma `$ allowed region from the central value of $`6.2\times 10^6`$ measured by CLEO, but outside the one $`\sigma `$ allowed region from the central value of $`17.2\times 10^6`$ measured by BELLE for reasonable $`F_1^{BK}`$. For the semi-inclusive decay $`B\varphi X_s`$ we also include initial bound state effect in the heavy quark limit which decreases the branching ratio by about 10%. $`Br(B\varphi X_s)`$ is predicted to be in the range $`(5.16.3)\times 10^5`$.

preprint:  preprint:

Recently CLEO and BELLE have measured the penguin induced $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=1`$ hadronic B decays with $`Br(B^{}\varphi K)=(6.4_{2.12.0}^{+2.5+0.5}\times 10^6)`$, $`Br(\overline{B}^0\varphi \overline{K}^0)=(5.9_{2.90.9}^{+4.0+1.1}\times 10^6)`$ from CLEO, and $`Br(B^{}\varphi K^{})=(1.72_{0.540.18}^{+0.67+0.18}\times 10^5)`$ from BELLE. Although the central values do not agree with each other, they are consistent at $`2\sigma `$ level. The branching ratios will soon be determined with better precisions at CLEO, BABAR and BELLE. These decay modes are particularly interesting in the Standard Model that they are purely due to penguins to the leading order and therefore are sensitive to new physics at loop level. The neutral decay mode also provides a model independent measurement for one of the KM unitarity triangle parameter $`\mathrm{sin}2\beta `$. The related semi-inclusive decay mode $`B\varphi X_s`$ is also purely due to penguin and is sensitive to new physics at loop level. The branching ratio for this decay although not measured at present, it will be measured in the near future at B factories. The above exclusive and semi-inclusive decays have been studied theoretically before with large errors that both the CLEO and BELLE measurements can be accommodated.

Previous calculations for the branching ratios $`Br(B\varphi K)`$ and $`Br(B\varphi X_s)`$ are based on naive factorization calculations. In these calculations, non-factorization effects can not be calculated and are usually parameterized by an effective color number and treated as a free parameter. There are also uncertainties related to gluon virtuality in the penguin diagrams and dependence of the renormalization scale. To have a better understanding of these decays, it is necessary to carried out calculations in such a way that the problems mentioned and others potential problems can be dealt with. It has recently been shown that it is indeed possible in the heavy quark limit to handle most of the problems mentioned in related B to two light mesons from QCD calculations. Several decays have been studied with interesting results. In this paper we will follow the method developed in Ref. to carry out calculations for the branching ratios for $`B\varphi K`$ and $`B\varphi X_s`$.

The effective Hamiltonian for charmless B decays with $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=1`$ is given by

$`H_{eff}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}\left\{V_{ub}V_{us}^{}(c_1O_1+c_2O_2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=3}{\overset{11}{}}}c_iO_i)+V_{cb}V_{cs}^{}{\displaystyle \underset{i=3}{\overset{11}{}}}c_iO_i\right\}.`$ (1)
Here $`O_i`$ are quark and gluon operators and are given by

$`O_1=(\overline{s}_\alpha u_\beta )_{VA}(\overline{u}_\beta b_\alpha )_{VA},O_2=(\overline{s}_\alpha u_\alpha )_{VA}(\overline{u}_\beta b_\beta )_{VA},`$ (2)
$`O_{3(5)}=(\overline{s}_\alpha b_\alpha )_{VA}{\displaystyle \underset{q^{}}{}}(\overline{q}_\beta ^{}q_\beta ^{})_{V(+)A},O_{4(6)}=(\overline{s}_\alpha b_\beta )_{VA}{\displaystyle \underset{q^{}}{}}(\overline{q}_\beta ^{}q_\alpha ^{})_{V(+)A},`$ (3)
$`O_{7(9)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\overline{s}_\alpha b_\alpha )_{VA}{\displaystyle \underset{q^{}}{}}e_q^{}(\overline{q}_\beta ^{}q_\beta ^{})_{V+()A},O_{8(10)}={\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(\overline{s}_\alpha b_\beta )_{VA}{\displaystyle \underset{q^{}}{}}e_q^{}(\overline{q}_\beta ^{}q_\alpha ^{})_{V+()A},`$ (4)
$`O_{11}={\displaystyle \frac{g_s}{8\pi ^2}}m_b\overline{s}_\alpha \sigma ^{\mu \nu }G_{\mu \nu }^a{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda _a^{\alpha \beta }}{2}}(1+\gamma _5)b_\beta ,`$ (5)
where $`(V\pm A)(V\pm A)=\gamma ^\mu (1\pm \gamma _5)\gamma _\mu (1\pm \gamma _5)`$, $`q^{}=u,d,s,c,b`$, $`e_q^{}`$ is the electric charge number of $`q^{}`$ quark, $`\lambda _a`$ is the color SU(3) Gell-Mann matrix, $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are color indices, and $`G_{\mu \nu }`$ is the gluon field strength.

The coefficients $`c_i`$ are the Wilson Coefficients which have been calculated in different schemes. In this paper we will use consistently the NDR scheme. The values of $`c_i`$ at $`\mu m_b`$ GeV with the next-to-leading order (NLO) QCD corrections are given by

$`c_1=0.185,c_2=1.082,c_3=0.014,c_4=0.035,c_5=0.009,c_6=0.041,`$ (6)
$`c_7=0.002/\alpha _{em},c_8=0.054/\alpha _{em},c_9=1.292/\alpha _{em},c_{10}=0.263/\alpha _{em},c_{11}=0.143.`$ (7)
Here $`\alpha _{em}=1/137`$ is the electromagnetic fine structure constant.

The exclusive $`B\varphi K`$ decay

In the heavy quark limit, the decay amplitude due to a particular operator can be represented in the form

$`<\varphi K|O|B>=<\varphi K|O|B>_{fact}[1+{\displaystyle r_n\alpha _s^n}+O(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}/m_b)],`$ (8)
where $`<\varphi K|O|B>_{fact}`$ indicates the naive factorization result. The parameter $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}0.3`$GeV is the strong interaction scale. The second and third terms in the square bracket indicate higher order $`\alpha _s`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{QCD}/m_b`$ corrections to the matrix elements. Including the next-leading order corrections and use information from Ref., we have the decay amplitude for $`B\varphi K`$ in the heavy quark limit

$`A(B\varphi K)={\displaystyle \frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}}C<\varphi |\overline{s}\gamma _\mu s|0><K|\overline{s}\gamma ^\mu b|B>,`$ (9)
$`C=V_{ub}V_{us}^{}[a_3^u+a_4^u+a_5^u{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(a_7^u+a_9^u+a_{10}^u)+a_{10a}^u]`$ (10)
$`V_{cb}V_{cs}^{}[a_3^c+a_4^c+a_5^c{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(a_7^c+a_9^c+a_{10}^c)+a_{10a}^c)].`$ (11)
We will use the notation $`<\varphi |\overline{s}\gamma _\mu b|B>=m_\varphi f_\varphi ϵ_\mu ^\varphi `$ and $`<K|\overline{s}\gamma ^\mu b|B>=F_1^{BK}(q^2)(p_B^\mu +p_K^\mu )+(F_0^{BK}(q^2)F_1^{BK}(q^2))(m_B^2m_K^2)q^\mu /q^2`$.

The coefficients $`a_i^{u,c}`$ are given by

$`a_3^u=a_3^c=c_3+{\displaystyle \frac{c_4}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}c_4F_\varphi ,`$ (12)
$`a_4^p=c_4+{\displaystyle \frac{c_3}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}[c_3(F_\varphi +G_\varphi (s_s)+G_\varphi (s_b))+c_1G_\varphi (s_p)`$ (13)
$`+(c_4+c_6){\displaystyle \underset{f=u}{\overset{b}{}}}G_\varphi (s_f)+c_{11}G_{\varphi ,11}],`$ (14)
$`a_5^u=a_5^c=c_5+{\displaystyle \frac{c_6}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}c_6(F_\varphi 12),`$ (15)
$`a_7^u=a_7^c=c_7+{\displaystyle \frac{c_8}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}c_8(F_\varphi 12),`$ (16)
$`a_9^u=a_9^c=c_9+{\displaystyle \frac{c_{10}}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}c_{10}F_\varphi ,`$ (17)
$`a_{10}^u=a_{10}^c=c_{10}+{\displaystyle \frac{c_9}{N}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}c_9F_\varphi ,`$ (18)
$`a_{10a}^p={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{C_F}{N}}\left[(c_8+c_{10}){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{f=u}{\overset{b}{}}}e_fG_\varphi (s_f)+c_9{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}(e_sG_\varphi (s_s)+e_bG_\varphi (s_b))\right],`$ (19)
where $`p`$ takes the values $`u`$ and $`c`$, $`N=3`$ is the number of color, $`C_F=(N^21)/2N`$, and $`s_f=m_f^2/m_b^2`$. The other items are given by

$`G_\varphi (s)={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{m_b}}+4{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x\varphi _\varphi (x){\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑uu(1u)\mathrm{ln}[su(1u)(1x)],`$ (20)
$`G_{\varphi ,11}={\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{2}{1x}}\varphi _\varphi (x),`$ (21)
$`F_\varphi =12\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu }{m_b}}18+f_\varphi ^I+f_\varphi ^{II},`$ (22)
$`f_\varphi ^I={\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑xg(x)\varphi _\varphi (x),g(x)=3{\displaystyle \frac{12x}{1x}}\mathrm{ln}x3i\pi ,`$ (23)
$`f_\varphi ^{II}={\displaystyle \frac{4\pi ^2}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{f_Kf_B}{F_1^{BK}(0)m_B^2}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑z{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _B(z)}{z}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑x{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _K(x)}{x}}{\displaystyle _0^1}𝑑y{\displaystyle \frac{\varphi _\varphi (y)}{y}}.`$ (24)
Here $`\varphi _i(x)`$ are meson wave functions. In this paper we will take the following forms for them,

$`\varphi _B(x)=N_Bx^2(1x)^2Exp[{\displaystyle \frac{m_B^2x^2}{2\omega _B^2}}],`$ (25)
$`\varphi _{K,\varphi }(x)=6x(1x),`$ (26)
where $`N_B`$ is a normalization factor satisfying $`_0^1𝑑x\varphi _B(x)=1`$. Fitting various B decay data, $`\omega _B`$ is determined to be 0.4 GeV.

The above results are from genuine leading QCD calculation in the heavy quark limit. The number of color should not be treated as an effective number, but has to be 3 from QCD. The results are renormalization scale independent. The problem associated with the gluon virtuality $`k^2=(1x)m_B^2`$ in the naive factorization calculation is also meaningfully treated by convoluting the $`x`$-dependence with the meson wave functions in the functions $`G(s,x)`$. Also leading non-factorizable is included (by the term proportional to $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$). There are still uncertainties in the calculation, such as the form of the wave functions and the unknown $`BK`$ transition form factor $`F_1^{BK}(q^2)`$. However using wave functions obtained by fitting other data, the errors can be reduced. In any case calculations based on the method used here is on more solid ground compared with previous calculations.

The decay rate can be easily obtained and is given by

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B\varphi K)={\displaystyle \frac{G_F^2}{32\pi }}|C|^2f_\varphi ^2F_1^{BK}(m_\varphi ^2)^2m_B^3\lambda _{K\varphi }^{3/2},`$ (27)
where $`\lambda _{ij}=(1m_i^2/m_B^2m_j^2/m_B^2)^24m_i^2m_j^2/m_B^4`$.

In our numerical calculations we will use the following values for the relevant parameters: $`m_b=4.8`$ GeV, $`m_c=1.4`$ GeV, $`V_{us}=0.2196`$, $`V_{cb}=0.0395`$, $`V_{ub}/V_{cb}=0.085`$, $`f_\varphi =0.233`$ GeV, $`f_K=0.158`$ GeV, and $`f_B=(180\pm 20)`$ MeV. We keep the phase $`\gamma `$ to be a free parameter. The results on the branching ratios are not sensitive to light quark masses. We obtain the branching ratios for $`B\varphi K`$ to be

$`Br(B^{}\varphi K^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_1^{BK}(m_\varphi ^2)}{0.33}}\right)^2(3.74.2)\times 10^6,`$ (28)
$`Br(\overline{B}^0\varphi \overline{K}^0)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{F_1^{BK(m_\varphi ^2)}}{0.33}}\right)^2(3.54.1)\times 10^6.`$ (29)
We have checked sensitivities on some of the parameters. The branching ratios are insensitive to the phase angle $`\gamma `$ because terms proportional to $`e^{i\gamma }`$ are suppressed by $`|V_{ub}V_{us}^{}/V_{cb}V_{cs}^{}|`$ which is about 1/50. The error associated with $`V_{cb}`$ is about 5%. The ranges given for the branching ratios have taken the dependence on $`\gamma `$ and the uncertainty in $`V_{cb}`$ into account. We find that the NLO corrections to the matrix elements (terms proportional to $`\alpha _s`$ in $`a_i`$) to be significant. Without such NLO corrections, the branching ratios are in the range of $`(F_1^{BK}(m_\varphi ^2)/0.33)^2(2.32.5)\times 10^6`$. The non-factorizable contributions (terms proportional to $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$) tend to reduce the branching ratios at a few percent level. The from factor $`F_1^{BK}`$ is the least known parameter in the calculations. There are several calculations for this parameter. Lattice calculation gives $`0.27\pm 0.11`$, BSW model gives $`0.38`$, while light-cone calculation gives $`0.35\pm 0.05`$. Using the average central value from these calculations, $`F_1^{BK}(0)=0.33`$, one finds that the predicted branching ratios are closer to the averaged central value of the measurements from CLEO than that from BELLE. To reach the CLEO central values, $`F_1^{BK}`$ needs to be around $`0.42`$ which is on the high value side from theoretical calculations, while to reach BELLE central value a unreasonably large value $`0.72`$ for $`F_1^{BK}`$ is needed. Precise measurements of these modes may provide a good measurement of the form factor $`F_1^{BK}`$. If a better understanding of the form factor $`F_1^{BK}`$ can be obtained from other experimental measurements and from theoretical calculations in the future, precise measurement of $`B\varphi K`$ may provide us with important information about new physics beyond the SM.

The semi-inclusive $`B\varphi X_s`$ decay

We will follow the procedures for semi-inclusive B decays described in Ref. to study $`B\varphi X_s`$. The final state $`X_s`$ can be viewed as containing a perturbatively produced $`s`$ quark and some non-perturbatively produced state $`X`$ containing no strange number. Neglecting color octet contribution the decay width for each of the helicity state $`\lambda `$ of $`\varphi (\lambda )`$, at the leading order with light quark masses set to zero, can be written as

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\lambda (B\varphi X_s)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}G_F^2|\stackrel{~}{C}|^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d^4q}{(2\pi )^4}2\pi \delta (q^2)d^4xe^{iqx}}`$ (30)
$``$ $`<B|\overline{b}\gamma _\mu (1\gamma _5)\gamma q\gamma _\nu (1\gamma _5)b(x)|B>`$ (31)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{X}{}}<0|\overline{s}(0)\gamma ^\mu (1\gamma _5)s(0)|\varphi (\lambda )+X><\varphi (\lambda )+X|\overline{s}(x)\gamma ^\nu (1\gamma _5)s(x)|0>,`$ (32)
where the parameter $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is related to the Wilson Coefficients $`c_i`$. In the vacuum saturation approximation,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{X}{}}<0|\overline{s}(0)\gamma ^\mu (1\gamma _5)s(0)|\varphi (\lambda )+X><\varphi (\lambda )+X|\overline{s}(x)\gamma ^\nu (1\gamma _5)s(x)|0>`$ (33)
$`<0|\overline{s}(0)\gamma ^\mu (1\gamma _5)s(0)|\varphi (\lambda )><\varphi (\lambda )|\overline{s}(x)\gamma ^\nu (1\gamma _5)s(x)|0>.`$ (34)
In this approximation the color octet contributions are automatically neglected. We will work with this approximation to estimate the branching ratio for $`B\varphi X_s`$. This approximation is consistent with the assumption made in the previous section if color octet is neglected. If one cuts the $`\varphi `$ momentum to be above 2 GeV or so, the contributions are dominated by the effective two body decay $`b\varphi s`$. In this case $`\stackrel{~}{C}`$ is similar to $`C`$ but with $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$ set to be zero. In principle terms proportional to $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$ also contribute. However this contribution is small and can be neglected. This is because that in the semi-inclusive decay only $`\varphi `$ in the final state is specified. When the constraint of having $`K`$ in the final state is relaxed, the term corresponding to $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$ leads to a three body decay. Requiring the identified hadron in the final state to be hard limits the phase space and results in a small contribution from $`f_\varphi ^{II}`$ compared with other contributions.

If the b quark mass is infinitively large, $`Br(B\varphi X_s)`$ is equal to $`Br(b\varphi s)`$. However due to initial b quark bound state effect there are corrections. This correction is included in the factor $`<B|\overline{b}(0)\gamma _\mu (1\gamma _5)\gamma q\gamma ^\nu (1\gamma _5)b(x)|B>`$. Following the discussions in Ref. we obtain $`1/m_b^2`$ correction factor,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }(B\varphi X_s){\displaystyle \frac{G_F^2f_\varphi ^2m_b^3}{16\pi }}|\stackrel{~}{C}|^2(1+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _g^2}{m_b^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{53}{6}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu _\pi ^2}{m_b^2}}),`$ (35)
where

$`\mu _g^2`$ $`=`$ $`<B|\overline{h}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}g_sG_{\mu \nu }\sigma ^{\mu \nu }h|B>,`$ (36)
$`\mu _\pi ^2`$ $`=`$ $`<B|\overline{h}D_T^2h|B>.`$ (37)
Here the field $`h`$ is related to $`b`$ by $`b(x)=e^{im_bvx}`$ $`\{1+i\gamma D_T/2m_b+vD\gamma D_T/4m_b^2(\gamma D_T)^2/8m_b^2\}h(x)+O(1/m_b^3)+(\text{terms for anti-quark})`$. $`D_T^\mu =D^\mu v^\mu vD`$ with $`v`$ being the four velocity of the $`B`$ meson satisfying $`v^2=1`$ and $`D^\mu =^\mu +ig_sG^\mu (x)`$.

Analysis of spectroscopy of heavy hadrons and QCD sum rule calculations give, $`\mu _g^20.36`$ GeV2 and $`\mu _\pi ^2(0.30.54)`$ GeV2. We will use $`\mu _g^2=\mu _\pi ^2=0.36`$ GeV2 for numerical calculations. The initial state $`1/m_b^2`$ correction reduces the branching ratio by about 10%. The branching ratio for $`B\varphi X_s`$ is predicted to be

$`Br(B\varphi X_s)=(5.16.3)\times 10^5.`$ (38)
This prediction, as in the case for exclusive decays, is insensitive the phase angle $`\gamma `$. The NLO corrections enhance the branching ratio significantly, similar to the exclusive decay cases.

The expression for the semi-inclusive decay in eq.(35), on the face of it, has less parameters (no dependence on $`F_1^{BK}`$) compared with the exclusive branching ratios discussed earlier. One might think that the prediction for $`Br(B\varphi X_s)`$ is more certain compared with the exclusive cases. However, one should be careful about this because in the calculation we have only included color singlet and the $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}`$ $`s\overline{s}`$ bound state contribution. There may be other contributions such as color octet and other $`S`$ and $`P`$ wave states from $`s\overline{s}`$. These contributions are in general smaller than the contributions already considered. One can not rule out significant enhancement at the present. However, we can view the color singlet result as leading contribution which gives a good order of magnitude estimate of the semi-inclusive decay $`B\varphi X_s`$.

In conclusion, we have studied $`B\varphi K`$ and $`B\varphi X_s`$ decays in the heavy quark limit using perturbative QCD. We found that the next leading order corrections introduce substantial modifications to the leading native factorization results (more than 50%). The branching ratio $`Br(B\varphi K)`$ is predicted to be in the range $`(F_1^{BK}(m_\varphi ^2)/0.33)^2(3.54.2)\times 10^6`$ which is within the one $`\sigma `$ allowed region from the central value of $`6.2\times 10^6`$ measured by CLEO, but outside the one $`\sigma `$ allowed region from the central value of $`17.2\times 10^6`$ measured by BELLE for reasonable $`F_1^{BK}`$. For the semi-inclusive decay $`B\varphi X_s`$ we also included initial bound state effect in the heavy quark limit which decreases the branching ratio by about 10%. $`Br(B\varphi X_s)`$ is predicted to be in the range $`(5.16.3)\times 10^5`$. Future experimental data will provide us with more information about these decays and about method based on QCD improved factorization approximation.

This work was supported in part by NSC under grant number NSC 89-2112-M-002-016.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

A left-symmetric algebra is an algebra whose associators are left symmetric. The commutator algebra associated with a left-symmetric algebra forms a Lie algebra. Left-symmetric algebras play a fundamental role in the theory of affine manifolds (cf. \[A\], \[FD\]). Kim \[K1-2\] classified all the left-symmetric algebras whose commutator Lie algebra are of small dimensions. Left-symmetric rings were studied by Kleinfeld \[Kl\]. A real finite-dimensional left-symmetric algebra $`𝒢`$ with $`[𝒢,𝒢]=𝒢`$ is trivial (cf. \[H\]). Moreover, a left finite-dimensional left-symmetric algebra is trvial if its commutator Lie algebra is semi-simple over a field with characteristic 0 by Whitehead’s Lemma. Over a field with characteristic $`p`$, Burde proved that there exist finite-dimensional left-symmetric algebras whose commutator Lie algebras are classical simple Lie algebras with dimension divisible by $`p`$ or nonrestricted simple Lie algebras of Cartan type, and Shen \[S\] found some special left-symmetric algebras whose commutator Lie algebras are Witt algebras.

A Novikov algebra is a left-symmetric algebra whose right multiplication operators are mutually commutative. Novikov algebras appeared in the work of Gel’fand and Dorfman \[GDo\], corresponding to certain type of Hamiltonian operators. Balinskii and Novikov \[BN\] found the same algebraic structure in connection with Poisson brackets of hydrodynamic type. The abstract study of Novikov algebras was started by Zel’manov \[Z\] and Filipov \[F\]. The term “Novikov algebra” was given by Osborn \[O1\].

In this paper, we first present a classification theorem of simple infinite-dimensional Novikov algebras over an algebraically closed field with characteristic 0. Then we classify all the irreducible modules of a certain infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element whose left action is locally finite.

To our best knowledge, there are no relatively complete classification results on simple left-symmetric algebras. However, we do have some relatively complete classification results on simple Novikov algebras. Zel’manov \[Z\] proved that a finite-dimensional simple Novikov algebra over an algebraically closed field with characteristic 0 is one-dimensional. Osborn \[O1\] proved that for any finite-dimensional simple Novikov algebra over a perfect field with characteristic $`p>2`$, the associated commutator Lie algebra is isomorphic to a rank-one Witt algebra. These Witt algebras play fundamental roles in Lie algebras over a field with prime characteristic and are also important in other mathematical fields. An element $`e`$ of a Novikov algebra $`(𝒩,)`$ over a field $`𝔽`$ is called idempotent if $`ee𝔽e`$. Moreover, Osborn \[O2\] classified finite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element over an algebraically closed field with characteristic $`p>2`$. We gave in \[X1\] a complete classification of finite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras over an algebraically closed field with characteristic $`p>2`$ without any conditions. Although the classification problem of finite-dimensional irreducible modules of its associated rank-one Witt algebra is still open, finite-dimensional irreducible modules of a finite-dimensional simple Novikov algebra over an algebraically closed field with characteristic $`p>2`$ were completely determined in \[X1\].

In \[X1\], we also introduced “Novikov-Poisson algebras,” which are analogues of (Lie) Poisson algebras, and their tensor theory. Structures of Novikov-Poisson algebras have given us a better picture on simple Novikov algebras and their modules. Before our work \[X2\], all the known simple Novikov algebras (cf. \[F\], \[Z\], \[O1-3\], \[X1\]) have an idempotent element. A natural question was whether there exist simple Novikov algebras without idempotent elements. In \[X2\], a large family of simple Novikov algebras without idempotent elements were constructed through Novikov-Poisson algebras. Besides, a large class of Novikov-Poisson algebras are NX-bialgebras, which determine certain Hamiltonian superoperators of one supervariable (cf. \[X3\]).

Osborn \[O3\] gave a classification of infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element, assuming the existence of generalized-eigenspace decomposition with respect to its left multiplication operator. There are four fundamantal mistakes in his classification. The first is using of Proposition 2.6 (d) in \[O1\] with $`\beta 0`$, which was misproved. The second is that the eigenspace $`A_0`$ in Lemma 2.12 of \[O3\] does not form a field when $`b=0`$ with respect to the Novikov algebraic operation. The third is that $`A_0`$ may not be a perfect field when $`b0`$. The fourth is that the author forgot the case $`b=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\{0\}`$ in Lemma 2.8. In addition to these four mistakes, there are gaps in the arguments of classification in \[O3\]. It seems that one can not draw any conclusions of the classifications based on the arguments in \[O3\]. In \[O5\], Osborn have given certain properties of modules of infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element.

A linear transformation $`T`$ of a vector space $`V`$ is called locally finite if the subspace

$$\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝔽T^m(v)\text{is finite-dimensional for any}vV.$$
$`(1.1)`$
An element $`u`$ of a Novikov algebra $`𝒩`$ is called left locally finite if its left multiplication operator $`L_u`$ is locally finite.

The aim of this paper is to classify infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras over an algebraically field $`𝔽`$ with characteristic 0, which contain a left locally finite element $`e`$ whose right multiplication operator $`R_e`$ is a constant map and left multiplication operator is surjective if $`R_e=0`$ (see Theorem 3.4), and to classify all the irreducible modules of a certain infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element whose left action is locally finite (see Theorem 4.3).

Throughout this paper, all the vector space are assumed over a field $`𝔽`$ with characteristic 0. Denote by $``$ the ring of integers and by $``$ the additive semi-group of nonnegative intgers.

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is a preparation for our classification of algebras, where we discuss “homological group algebras” and their connection with simple Novikov algebras. The classification of simple Novikov algebras is given in Section 3. In Section 4, we classify the irreducible modules.

## 2 Homological Group Algebras

In this section, we shall introduce the notion “homological group algebra” and use it to construct a family of simple Novkov algebras larger than the one we obtained in Section 2 of \[X2\]

Definition 2.1. Let $`G`$ be a group and let $`𝔽_1`$ be any field. Set

$$𝔽_1^\times =𝔽_1\{0\}.$$
$`(2.1)`$
We view $`𝔽_1^\times `$ as the multiplication group of $`𝔽_1`$. A map $`f:G\times G𝔽_1^\times `$ is called a two-cycle if

$$f(g_1,g_2)f(g_1g_2,g_3)=f(g_1,g_2g_3)f(g_2,g_3)\text{for}g_1,g_2,g_3G.$$
$`(2.2)`$
We denote the set of two-cycles by $`c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$. The multiplication on $`c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ is defined by

$$(f_1f_2)(g_1,g_2)=f_1(g_1,g_2)f_2(g_1,g_2)\text{for}f_1,f_2c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times ),g_1,g_2G.$$
$`(2.3)`$
With respect to the above operation, $`c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ forms an abelian group. For any map $`\eta :G𝔽_1^\times `$, we define

$$d_\eta (g_1,g_2)=\eta (g_1g_2)\eta (g_1)^1\eta (g_2)^1g_1,g_2G.$$
$`(2.4)`$
Then

$`d_\eta (g_1,g_2)d_\eta (g_1g_2,g_3)`$ $`=`$ $`\eta (g_1g_2)\eta (g_1)^1\eta (g_2)^1\eta (g_1g_2g_3)\eta (g_1g_2)^1\eta (g_3)^1`$
$`=`$ $`\eta (g_1)^1\eta (g_2)^1\eta (g_3)^1\eta (g_1g_2g_3)`$
$`=`$ $`\eta (g_1g_2g_3)\eta (g_1)^1\eta (g_2g_3)^1\eta (g_2g_3)\eta (g_2)^1\eta (g_3)^1`$
$`=`$ $`d_\eta (g_1,g_2g_3)d_\eta (g_2,g_3)(2.5)`$
for $`g_1,g_2,g_3G`$. So $`d_\eta c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$. We call $`d_\eta `$ a two-boundary. The set $`b^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ of two-boundaries forms a subgroup of $`c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$. We define the second cohomology group:

$$H^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )=c^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )/b^2(G,𝔽_1^\times ).$$
$`(2.6)`$
For any $`fc^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$, we define a homological group algebra $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$ to be a vector space with a basis $`\{e_ggG\}`$ and its algebaric operation “$``$” defined by

$$e_{g_1}e_{g_2}=f(g_1,g_2)e_{g_1g_2}\text{for}g_1,g_2\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
$`(2.7)`$
Expression (2.2) implies the associativity of $`(𝔽_1[G]_f,)`$. For any map $`\eta :G𝔽_1^\times `$, $`\{\eta (g)^1e_gg\mathrm{\Gamma }\}`$ is also a basis of $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$. Moreover,

$$(\eta (g_1)^1e_{g_1})(\eta (g_2)^1e_{g_2})=f(g_1,g_2)\eta (g_1g_2)\eta (g_1)^1\eta (g_2)^1(\eta (g_1g_2)^1e_{g_1g_2})$$
$`(2.8)`$
for $`g_1,g_2G.`$ This shows that $`f`$ and $`fd_\eta `$ define isomorphic homological group algebras. So each element in $`H^2(G,𝔽_1)`$ corresponds to a homological group algebra over $`𝔽_1`$. Another factor causing an isomorphisms between two homological group algebras is the automorphism group $`\text{Aut}G`$ of $`G`$. For $`\sigma \text{Aut}G`$, we define its action on $`c^2(G,𝔽_1)`$ by

$$(\sigma f)(g_1,g_2)=f(\sigma ^1g_1,\sigma ^1g_2)\text{for}fc^2(G,𝔽_1),g_1,g_2G.$$
$`(2.9)`$
This provides a group action of $`\text{Aut}G`$ on $`c^2(G,𝔽_1)`$. Similarly, we define a group action of $`\text{Aut}G`$ on the set $`\text{Map}(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ of maps from $`G`$ to $`𝔽_1^\times `$ by

$$(\sigma \eta )(g)=\eta (\sigma ^1g)\text{for}\eta \text{Map}(G,𝔽_1^\times ),\sigma \text{Aut}G,gG.$$
$`(2.10)`$
Furthermore, for $`\eta \text{Map}(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ and $`\sigma \text{Aut}G`$,

$`(\sigma d_\eta )(g_1,g_2)`$ $`=`$ $`d_\eta (\sigma ^1g_1,\sigma ^1g_2)`$
$`=`$ $`\eta (\sigma ^1(g_1)\sigma ^1(g_2))\eta (\sigma ^1g_1)^1\eta (\sigma ^1g_2)^1`$
$`=`$ $`\eta (\sigma ^1(g_1g_2))\eta (\sigma ^1g_1)^1\eta (\sigma ^1g_2)^1`$
$`=`$ $`d_{\sigma \eta }(g_1,g_2)(2.11)`$
for $`g_1,g_2G`$. Thus

$$\sigma d_\eta =d_{\sigma \eta }\text{for}\eta \text{Map}(G,𝔽_1^\times ),$$
$`(2.12)`$
which implies,

$$(\text{Aut}G)(b^2(G,𝔽_1))=b^2(G,𝔽_1).$$
$`(2.13)`$
Thus we have an induced group action of $`\text{Aut}G`$ on $`H^2(G,𝔽_1)`$. We define the absolute second cohomogy of $`G`$ over $`𝔽_1`$ as the set of $`(\text{Aut}G)`$-orbits:

$$H^{!,2}(G,𝔽_1)=H^2(G,𝔽_1)/(\text{Aut}G).$$
$`(2.14)`$
When $`G`$ is torsion free, every invertible element in a homological group algebra $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$ is of form $`\lambda e_g`$ for some $`\lambda 𝔽_1^\times `$ and $`gG`$. Hence we have:

Proposition 2.2. There exists a one-to-one correspondence between the set of isomorphic classes of homological group algebras and absolute second cohomogy when the group is torsion-free.

Note that there exists an identity element $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ in $`c^2(G,𝔽_1)`$ defined by

$$\mathrm{𝟏}(g_1,g_2)=1_{𝔽_1}\text{for}g_1,g_2G.$$
$`(2.15)`$
In particular, $`𝔽_1[G]_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is the usual group algebra of $`G`$ over $`𝔽_1`$. When the context is clear, we also use $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ to denote its image in $`H^2(G,𝔽_1)`$. Recall that a perfect field $`𝔽_1`$ is a field such that $`x^n\lambda =0`$ has a solution in $`𝔽_1`$ for any postive integer $`n`$ and $`\lambda 𝔽_1`$. A two cycle $`f`$ of $`G`$ is called symmetric if

$$f(g_1,g_2)=f(g_2,g_1)\text{for}g_1,g_2G.$$
$`(2.16)`$
Note that when $`g_2=g_3=1`$ in (2.2), we have

$$f(g_1,1)f(g_1,1)=f(g_1,1)f(1,1)\text{for}g_1G,$$
$`(2.17)`$
eqivalently,

$$f(g_1,1)=f(1,1)\text{for}g_1G.$$
$`(2.18)`$
Similarly, we get

$$f(1,1)=f(1,g_3)\text{for}g_3G$$
$`(2.19)`$
Moreover, we define $`\zeta \text{Map}(G,𝔽^\times )`$ by

$$\zeta (g)=f(1,1)^{\delta _{1,g}}\text{for}gG$$
$`(2.20)`$
Then

$$(fd_\zeta )(1,g)=(fd_\zeta )(g,1)=1\text{for}gG$$
$`(2.21)`$
Proposition 5.4.4. Suppose that $`G`$ is a torsion-free abelian group and $`fc^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ is symmetric. We have $`fb^2(G,𝔽_1)`$ if $`G`$ is a free group or $`𝔽_1`$ is perfect.

Proof. To prove the conclusion is equivalent to proving that $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$ is isomorphic to $`𝔽_1[G]_\mathrm{𝟏}`$ for any symmetric $`fc^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$. For convenience, we use $`+`$ to denote the group operation of the torsion-free abelian group $`G`$ and $`0`$ to denote $`1_G`$. Let $`fc^2(G,𝔽_1^\times )`$ be a given symmetric element. By (2.17)-(2.21), we can assume

$$f(0,\alpha )=f(\alpha ,0)=1\text{for}\alpha G$$
$`(2.22)`$
Thus $`e_0`$ is an identity element of the algebra $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$, which is commutative by (2.16).

Assume that $`G`$ is a free abelian group with a generator set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ ($``$-basis). For any $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we let

$$\vartheta _\gamma =e_\gamma ,\vartheta _\gamma =f(\gamma ,\gamma )^1e_\gamma .$$
$`(2.23)`$
Any element $`\alpha G`$ can be written as $`\alpha =_{\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }}ϵ_\gamma n_\gamma \gamma `$ with $`n_\gamma `$ and $`ϵ_\gamma \{1,1\}`$, we define

$$\vartheta _\alpha =\underset{\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\vartheta _{ϵ_\gamma \gamma }^{n_\gamma }𝔽_1e_\alpha .$$
$`(2.24)`$
Then we have

$$\vartheta _\alpha \vartheta _\beta =\vartheta _{\alpha +\beta }$$
$`(2.25)`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta G`$. So $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$ is isomorphic to $`𝔽_1[G]_\mathrm{𝟏}`$.

Suppose that $`𝔽_1`$ is perfect. We let $`\vartheta _0=e_0`$. Assume that we have choosen

$$\{0\vartheta _\alpha 𝔽_1e_\alpha \alpha G^{}\}$$
$`(2.26)`$
for a subgroup $`G^{}`$ of $`G`$ such that (2.25) holds for $`\alpha ,\beta G^{}`$. Let $`\gamma GG^{}`$. If $`\gamma G^{}=\{0\}`$, we choose $`\vartheta _{\pm \gamma }`$ as in (2.23) and define

$$\vartheta _{\pm n\gamma +\alpha }=(\vartheta _{\pm \gamma })^n\vartheta _\alpha \text{for}n,\alpha G^{}.$$
$`(2.27)`$
Then (2.25) holds for $`\alpha ,\beta \gamma +G^{}`$. If $`\gamma G^{}\{0\}`$, then

$$\beta G^{}=m\gamma $$
$`(2.28)`$
for some positive integer $`m`$. Note that

$$e_\gamma ^m=\lambda \vartheta _{m\gamma }\text{for some}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\lambda 𝔽_1.$$
$`(2.29)`$
Choose any $`\mu 𝔽_1`$ such that $`\mu ^m=\lambda `$ and define

$$\vartheta _\gamma =\mu e_\gamma ,\vartheta _\gamma =\mu ^1f(\gamma ,\gamma )^1e_\gamma .$$
$`(2.30)`$
Then (2.27) is well defined. Again (2.25) holds for $`\alpha ,\beta \gamma +G^{}`$. Since (2.25) holds for $`\alpha ,\beta G^{}`$ when $`G^{}=\{0\}`$, we can choose $`\{0\vartheta _\alpha 𝔽_1e_\alpha \alpha G\}`$ such that (2.25) holds for $`\alpha ,\beta G`$ by induction on subgroup $`G^{}`$. So $`𝔽_1[G]_f`$ is again isomorphic to $`𝔽_1[G]_\mathrm{𝟏}.\mathrm{}`$

Let us now give a detailed definition of “Novikov algebra.” A Novikov algebra is a vector space $`𝒩`$ with an algebraic operation $``$ such that

$$(uv)w=(uw)v,$$
$`(2.31)`$
$$(uv)wu(vw)=(vu)wv(uw)$$
$`(2.32)`$
for $`u,v,w𝒩`$. A subspace $``$ of the Novikov algebra $`𝒩`$ is called an left ideal (right ideal) if $`𝒩`$ ($`𝒩`$). A subspace is called an ideal if it is a both left and right ideal. The algebra $`𝒩`$ is called simple if the only ideals of $`𝒩`$ are the trivial ideals: $`\{0\}`$, $`𝒩`$, and $`𝒩𝒩\{0\}`$.

Now we want to construct simple Novikov algebras. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be an additive subgroup of the base field of $`𝔽`$ and let $`𝔽_1`$ be an extension field of $`𝔽`$. For a symmetric element $`fc^2(\mathrm{\Delta },𝔽_1^\times )`$, we define $`𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,)`$ to be a vector space over $`𝔽_1`$ with a basis

$$\{u_{\alpha ,j}(\alpha ,j)\mathrm{\Delta }\times \}$$
$`(2.33)`$
and define an algebraic operation “$``$” on $`𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,)`$ by

$$u_{\alpha _1,j_1}u_{\alpha _2,j_2}=f(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)u_{\alpha _1+\alpha _2,j_1+j_2}\text{for}(\alpha _1,j_1),(\alpha _2,j_2)\mathrm{\Delta }\times .$$
$`(2.34)`$
Then $`(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,),)`$ forms a commutative associative algebra and

$$(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,),)𝔽_1[\mathrm{\Delta }]_f_{𝔽_1}𝔽_1[t]$$
$`(2.35)`$
as associative algebras. Moreover,

$$𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,\{0\})=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝔽_1u_{\alpha ,0}$$
$`(2.36)`$
forms a subalgebra that is isomorphic to $`𝔽_1[\mathrm{\Delta }]_f`$.

Let $`J\{\{0\},\}`$. The algebra $`𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J)`$ is defined as in the above. We define $`\text{End}_{𝔽_1}𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J)`$ by

$$(u_{\alpha ,j})=\alpha u_{\alpha ,j}+ju_{\alpha ,j1}\text{for}(\alpha ,j)\mathrm{\Delta }\times J.$$
$`(2.37)`$
We view $`𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J)`$ as an algebra over $`𝔽`$. Then $``$ is again a derivation. For any $`\xi 𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J)`$, we define the algebraic operation $`_\xi `$ on $`𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J)`$ over $`𝔽`$ by

$$u_\xi v=u(v)+\xi uv\text{for}u,v𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J).$$
$`(2.38)`$
By the proof of Theorem 2.9 in \[X2\], we have:

Proposition 2.3. The algebra $`(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J),_\xi )`$ forms a simple Novikov algebra over the field $`𝔽`$.

## 3 Classification of Algebras

In this section, we shall classify of infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras containing a left locally finite element $`e`$ whose right multiplication operator $`R_e`$ is a constant map and the left multiplication operator is surjective if $`R_e=0`$.

Let $`(𝒩,)`$ be a Novikov algebra. For $`u𝒩`$, we define the left multiplication operator $`L_u`$ and the right multiplication operator $`R_u`$ by

$$L_u(v)=uv,R_u(v)=vu\text{for}v𝒩.$$
$`(3.1)`$
Equation (2.31) implies

$$R_uR_v=R_vR_u,L_{uv}=R_vL_u\text{for}u,v𝒩.$$
$`(3.2)`$
Define

$$[u,v]^{}=uvvu\text{for}u,v𝒩.$$
$`(3.3)`$
Then $`(𝒩,[,]^{})`$ form a Lie algebra, which is called the commutator Lie algebra associated with the Novikov algebra $`(𝒩,)`$. Moreover, Equation (2.32) shows

$$L_{[u,v]^{}}=[L_u,L_v],[L_u,R_v]=R_{uv}R_vR_u\text{for}u,v𝒩$$
$`(3.4)`$
For a fixed element $`u𝒩`$ and $`\lambda 𝔽`$, we define

$$𝒩_{u,\lambda }=\{v𝒩(R_u\lambda )^m(v)=0\text{for some}m\}.$$
$`(3.5)`$
Lemma 3.1 (Zel’manov, \[Z\]). The subspace $`𝒩_{u,\lambda }`$ is an ideal of $`𝒩`$.

Let $`M`$ be a module of a Novikov algebra $`(𝒩,)`$. We define the left action $`L_M`$ and right action $`R_M`$ by

$$L_M(u)(w)=uw,R_M(u)(w)=wu\text{for}u𝒩,wM.$$
$`(3.6)`$
Lemma 3.2 Suppose that $`𝒩`$ has an element $`e`$ such that

$$ee=\lambda e.$$
$`(3.7)`$
Then we have the following identity:

$$(R_M(e)\lambda )^2R_M(e)=0.$$
$`(3.8)`$
Proof. Let $`wM`$. By (2.32),

$$(we)ew(ee)=(ew)ee(we),$$
$`(3.9)`$
which is equivalent to

$$(we)e\lambda we=\lambda ewe(we)$$
$`(3.10)`$
by (2.31) and (3.7). Multiplying on the right by $`e`$, we obtain

$$((we)e)e\lambda (we)e=\lambda (ew)e(e(we))e,$$
$`(3.11)`$
which is equivalent to

$$((we)e)e\lambda (we)e=\lambda ^2ew\lambda e(we)$$
$`(3.12)`$
by (2.31). Subtracting $`\lambda \times (3.10)`$ from (3.12), we get

$$((we)e)e2\lambda (we)e+\lambda ^2we=0,$$
$`(3.13)`$
equivalently,

$$(R_M(e)\lambda )^2R_M(e)(w)=0.$$
$`(3.14)`$
Since $`w`$ is arbitrary, (3.8) follows from (3.14).$`\mathrm{}`$

Lemma 3.3. Let $`(𝒩,)`$ be a simple Novikov algebra with an element $`e`$ such that $`ee=be`$ with $`b𝔽`$ and $`L_e`$ is locally finite. Set

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}=\{u𝒩(L_e\alpha b)^m(u)=0\text{for some}m\}\text{for}\alpha 𝔽,$$
$`(3.15)`$
and denote

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\alpha 𝔽𝒩_\alpha ^{}\{0\}\}.$$
$`(3.16)`$
Then

$$𝒩=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}$$
$`(3.17)`$
and

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\beta ^{}𝒩_{\alpha +\beta }^{}\text{for}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }\text{when}R_e|_{𝒩_\alpha ^{}}=b\text{Id}_{𝒩_\alpha ^{}},$$
$`(3.18)`$
$$𝒩_b^{}𝒩_\beta ^{}𝒩_{\beta b}^{}+𝒩_{\beta 2b}^{}\text{for}\beta \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.19)`$
In particular, (3.18) implies

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\beta ^{}𝒩_{\alpha +\beta }^{}\text{for}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },\alpha b.$$
$`(3.20)`$
Proof. Note that (3.17) follows from the local finiteness of $`L_e`$. We define

$$=L_eb.$$
$`(3.21)`$
For $`u,v𝒩`$ such that $`ue=bu`$, we get

$`(uv)`$ $`=`$ $`e(uv)b(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(eu)v+u(ev)(ue)vb(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(eu)v+u(ev)2b(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(eubu)v+u(evbv)`$
$`=`$ $`(u)v+u(v)(3.22)`$
by (2.32). Observe that

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}=\{u𝒩(\alpha )^m(n)=0\text{for some}m\}\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.23)`$
Suppose that $`u,v𝒩`$ satisfy $`ue=bu`$ and

$$(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)=0,(\beta )^{m_2}(v)=0\text{for some}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },m_1,m_2.$$
$`(3.24)`$
$`(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_2}(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_21}((uv)(\alpha +\beta )uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_21}((u)v+u(v)(\alpha +\beta )uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_21}((\alpha )(u)v+u(\beta )(v))`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{m_1+m_2}{}}}(_j^{m_1+m_2})(\alpha )^j(u)(\beta )^{m_1+m_2j}(v)=0.(3.25)`$
Thus (3.18) holds. Furthermore, by linear algebra,

$$e𝒩_\alpha ^{}=𝒩_\alpha ^{}\text{for}b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.26)`$
By (2.31),

$$R_e|_{𝒩_\alpha ^{}}=b\text{Id}_{𝒩_\alpha ^{}}\text{for}b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.27)`$
Hence (3.20) is implied by (3.18).

For any $`\alpha 𝔽`$, we set

$$𝒩_\alpha =\{u𝒩L_e(u)=(\alpha +b)u\}.$$
$`(3.28)`$
Since $`(R_eb)(e)=0`$, we have

$$(R_eb)^2=0$$
$`(3.29)`$
by Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2. For any $`u𝒩`$, we have

$`e(uebu)`$ $`=`$ $`(eu)e+u(ee)(ue)ebeu`$
$`=`$ $`(ee)u+bue(ue)ebeu`$
$`=`$ $`(bR_eR_e^2)(u)`$
$`=`$ $`(b^2bR_e)(u)`$
$`=`$ $`b(uebu)(3.30)`$
by (2.31), (2.32) and (3.29), and

$$(uebu)e=(R_e^2bR_e)(u)=(bR_eb^2)(u)=b(uebu)$$
$`(3.31)`$
by (3.29). So

$$(R_eb)(𝒩)𝒩_{2b},R_e|_{(R_eb)(𝒩)}=b.$$
$`(3.32)`$
Let $`u,v𝒩`$ such that

$$(+b)^{m_1}(u)=0,(\beta )^{m_2}(v)=0\text{for some}\beta \mathrm{\Delta },m_1,m_2.$$
$`(3.33)`$
By (3.25) and (3.32),

$$(\beta +2b)^{m_2}[(+b)^{j_1}(bR_e)(u)](\beta )^{j_2}(v)=0\text{for}j_1,j_2.$$
$`(3.34)`$
Since

$`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}(\beta +b)(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}[e(uv)\beta (uv)]`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}[(eu)v+u(ev)(ue)v\beta (uv)]`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}[(+b)(u)v+u(e\beta b)v)+(bR_e)(u)v]`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}[(+b)(u)v+u(\beta )v)](3.35)`$
by (2.32) and (3.34), we have

$`(\beta +2b)^{m_2}(\beta +b)^{m_1+m_2}(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{m_1+m_2}{}}}(_j^{m_1+m_2})(\beta +2b)^{m_2}(+b)^j(u)(\beta )^{m_1+m_2j}(v)=0.(3.36)`$
Thus (3.19) holds.$`\mathrm{}`$

Note the arguments in the above proof also show the following properties on the eigenspaces:

$$𝒩_\alpha 𝒩_\beta 𝒩_{\alpha +\beta }\text{for}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }\text{when}R_e|_{𝒩_\alpha }=b\text{Id}_{𝒩_\alpha },$$
$`(3.37)`$
$$𝒩_b𝒩_\beta 𝒩_{\beta b}+𝒩_{\beta 2b}\text{for}\beta \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.38)`$
In particular, (3.37) implies

$$𝒩_\alpha 𝒩_\beta 𝒩_{\alpha +\beta }\text{for}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },\alpha b.$$
$`(3.39)`$
Below, we shall re-establish a classification theorem, partially based on Osborn’s arguments in \[O3\]. We assume that $`𝔽`$ is algebraically closed. The following is the first main theorem in this paper.

Theorem 3.4. Suppose that $`(𝒩,)`$ is an infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebra with a left locally finite element $`e`$ whose right multiplication operator $`R_e`$ is a constant map and left multiplication operator is surjective if $`R_e=0`$. Then there exist an additive subgroup $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of $`𝔽`$, an extension field $`𝔽_1`$ of $`𝔽`$, a symmetric element $`fc^2(\mathrm{\Delta },𝔽_1)`$, $`J\{\{0\},\}`$ and $`\xi 𝔽`$ such that the algebra $`(𝒩,)`$ is isomorphic to $`(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,J),_\xi )`$ (cf. (2.38)).

Proof. Let $`(𝒩,)`$ be the Novikov algebra in the theorem. Assume

$$R_e=b\text{Id}_𝒩\text{with}b𝔽.$$
$`(3.40)`$
In particular,

$$ee=be.$$
$`(3.41)`$
We shall use the notations and conclusions in the above lemma.

Let

$$\widehat{𝒩}=e𝒩.$$
$`(3.42)`$
Then

$$\widehat{𝒩}\underset{b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}$$
$`(3.43)`$
by (3.26). In fact, one can derive

$$R_e|_{\widehat{𝒩}}=b\text{Id}_{\widehat{𝒩}}$$
$`(3.44)`$
from (3.41) by (3.31) without assumption (3.40). The assumption (3.40) is a replacement of (3.41) that was used in \[O3\] in the following Case 3 of our classification.

For

$$u\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(R_𝒩)^n(e)\text{and}v𝒩,$$
$`(3.45)`$
Define

$$u(ev)=uv.$$
$`(3.46)`$
Then “$``$”: $`\widehat{𝒩}\times \widehat{𝒩}𝒩`$ is a commutative bilinear map by (2.31). For any $`u,v,w𝒩`$ such that $`(ev)w\widehat{𝒩}`$, we have

$`(eu)[(ev)(ew)]`$ $`=`$ $`[(ev)(ew)](eu)`$
$`=`$ $`((ev)w)u`$
$`=`$ $`((eu)v]w`$
$`=`$ $`[(eu)(ev)](ew)(3.47)`$
by (2.31) and the commutativity. So the map “$``$” is associative. Furthermore, when $`e\widehat{𝒩}`$,

$$e(eu)=eu\text{for}u𝒩.$$
$`(3.48)`$
Hence $`e`$ is an identity element of $`(\widehat{𝒩},)`$ when $`b0`$.

We use the notation in (3.21). For $`u,v𝒩`$, by (3.22), we get

$`[(eu)(ev)]`$ $`=`$ $`[(eu)v]`$
$`=`$ $`(eu)v+(eu)(v)`$
$`=`$ $`(eu)v+(eu)(e(v))`$
$`=`$ $`(eu)(ev)+(eu)(ev).(3.49)`$
So $``$ is a derivation with respect to $`(\widehat{𝒩},)`$. Moreover,

$$(eu)v=(eu)(ev)=(eu)((v)+bv)\text{for}u,v𝒩.$$
$`(3.50)`$
Furthermore, by (3.18) and the fact that $`e𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}`$ for any $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ (cf. (3.16)), we have

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\beta ^{}𝒩_{\alpha +\beta }^{}\text{for}𝒩_\alpha ^{},𝒩_\beta ^{}\widehat{𝒩}.$$
$`(3.51)`$
Case 1. $`𝒩=\widehat{𝒩}`$.

Under this assumption, $`(𝒩,)`$ is $``$-simple commutative and associative algebra by (3.50) and the simplicity of $`(𝒩,)`$, that is, the only $``$-invariant ideal of $`(𝒩,)`$ are $`𝒩`$ and $`\{0\}`$. Hence

$$(𝒩,)𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,)$$
$`(3.52)`$
(cf . (2.33), (2.34)) by Theorem 2.1 in \[SXZ\]. Therefore by (3.50),

$$(𝒩,)(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,),_b).$$
$`(3.53)`$
Case 2. $`\widehat{𝒩}𝒩,b0`$ and

$$𝒩_b^{}\underset{0,b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_{\alpha b}^{}$$
$`(3.54)`$
(cf. (3.18)).

Replacing $`e`$ by $`b^1e`$, we can assume $`b=1`$. If $`1\mathrm{\Delta }`$, then $`\widehat{𝒩}=𝒩`$, which is in Case 1. So we asssume $`1\mathrm{\Delta }`$. In this case, we can derive (3.40) from (3.41) and (3.54) by (2.31). For $`0u𝒩_\alpha `$ with $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$, we set

$$I_u=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(R_𝒩)^n(u).$$
$`(3.55)`$
Note that $`eu=(\alpha +1)uI_u`$. Suppose that

$$e((\mathrm{}((uv_1)v_2)\mathrm{})v_k)I_u\text{for}v_s𝒩,s=1,\mathrm{},k.$$
$`(3.56)`$
Denote

$$w=(\mathrm{}((uv_1)v_2)\mathrm{})v_k.$$
$`(3.57)`$
For any $`v_{k+1}𝒩`$, we have

$$e(wv_{k+1})=(ew)v_{k+1}+w(ev_{k+1})(we)v_kI_u.$$
$`(3.58)`$
By induction on $`k`$, we have

$$eI_uI_u.$$
$`(3.59)`$
Hence

$$\widehat{𝒩}I_u=(e𝒩)I_u=(eI_u)𝒩I_u.$$
$`(3.60)`$
Moreover, by (2.31), (3.43) and (3.54), $`I_u`$ is an ideal of $`𝒩`$. Since $`u=ueI_u`$, $`I_u`$ is a nonzero ideal. The simplicity of $`𝒩`$ implies

$$I_u=𝒩.$$
$`(3.61)`$
Note that

$$\widehat{𝒩}𝒩_1=(e𝒩)𝒩_1=(e𝒩_1)𝒩=\{0\}$$
$`(3.62)`$
by (2.31) and (3.28). Moreover, (3.54) and (3.62) imply

$$𝒩𝒩_1=\{0\}$$
$`(3.63)`$
by (2.31). Suppose that

$$uv=0\text{for some}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}u𝒩_\alpha ^{},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}v𝒩_\beta ^{}.$$
$`(3.64)`$
Let $`m_1,m_2`$ be the minimal non-negative integers such that

$$(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)0,(\beta )^{m_2}(v)0,(\alpha )^{m_1+1}(u)=(\beta )^{m_2+1}(v)=0$$
$`(3.65)`$
(cf. (3.23)). By (3.25), we have

$$0=(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_2}(uv)=(_{m_1}^{m_1+m_2})(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)(\beta )^{m_2}(v).$$
$`(3.66)`$
So we have

$$(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)(\beta )^{m_2}(v)=0.$$
$`(3.67)`$
Observe that $`(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)𝒩_\alpha `$ by (3.65). Hence

$$𝒩(\beta )^{m_2}(v)=I_{(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)}(\beta )^{m_2}(v)=\{0\}$$
$`(3.68)`$
by (2.31), (3.55) and (3.61). Furthermore by (3.25) and (3.68), we have

$$0=(\alpha \beta )^{m_1+m_21}(uv)=(_{m_1}^{m_1+m_21})(\alpha )^{m_1}(u)(\beta )^{m_21}(v)$$
$`(3.69)`$
when $`m_2>0`$. By the above arguments, we get

$$𝒩(\beta )^{m_21}(v)=\{0\}$$
$`(3.70)`$
when $`m_2>0`$. Continuing this process, we can prove

$$𝒩v=0.$$
$`(3.71)`$
In particular,

$$ev=0.$$
$`(3.72)`$
Hence

$$v𝒩_1.$$
$`(3.73)`$
Therefore,

$$R_v\text{is injective}\text{for}v(\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{})𝒩_1.$$
$`(3.74)`$
For any $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$, we pick $`0u𝒩_\alpha `$. Expressions (3.55) and (3.61) imply that there exists $`\{v_s𝒩_{\beta _s}^{}s=1,\mathrm{},k\}`$ such that

$$0(\mathrm{}((uv_1)v_2)\mathrm{})v_k𝒩_0^{}.$$
$`(3.75)`$
Moreover, $`v_s𝒩_1`$ by (3.63) for each $`s\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$ and $`_{j=1}^k\beta _j=\alpha `$. By (3.64),

$$0(\mathrm{}(v_1v_2)\mathrm{})v_k𝒩_\alpha ^{}.$$
$`(3.76)`$
So

$$\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.77)`$
Therefore, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ forms an additive subgroup of $`𝔽`$ by (3.18) and the fact that $`e𝒩_0`$.

By (3.21) and (3.28),

$$eu=u,(u)=0\text{for}u𝒩_0$$
$`(3.78)`$
(recall $`b=1`$). Moreover,

$$uv=u(ev)=uv\text{for}u\widehat{𝒩},v𝒩_0.$$
$`(3.79)`$
Let $`u_1𝒩_\alpha ^{},u_2𝒩_\beta ^{}`$ with $`1\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$. When $`\alpha +\beta 1`$, we have

$`(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`(u_1(u_2v_2))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1(+1)(u_2v_2))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1((+1)(u_2)v_2))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1(+1)(u_2))v_2)v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_2v_1)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)(3.80)`$
by (2.31), (3.18), (3.47), (3.49), (3.50), (3.78) and (3.79). When $`\alpha +\beta =1`$, we write $`u_1=ew`$ with $`w𝒩_\alpha ^{}`$ and obtain

$`(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`((ew)v_1)(u_2v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`((ev_1)(u_2v_2))w`$
$`=`$ $`[(eu_2)(v_1v_2)]w`$
$`=`$ $`((ew)u_2)(v_1v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)(3.81)`$
by (2.31) and (3.80). Now for $`u_1𝒩_\alpha ^{},u_2𝒩_{\alpha 1}^{},u_3𝒩_\beta ^{}`$ with $`1\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$, we have

$`[(u_1u_2)v_1](u_3v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`[(u_1v_1)(u_3v_2)]u_2`$
$`=`$ $`[(u_1u_3)(v_1v_2)]u_2`$
$`=`$ $`[(u_1u_2)u_3](v_1v_2)(3.82)`$
by (2.31), (3.80) and (3.81). Hence we get

$$(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)=(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)$$
$`(3.83)`$
for $`u_1𝒩_\alpha ^{},u_2𝒩_\beta ^{}`$ with $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },\beta 1`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$ by (3.54) and (3.80)-(3.82).

Observe

$$e(uv)=(eu)v+u(ev)(ue)v=(eu)v$$
$`(3.84)`$
for $`u𝒩`$ and $`v𝒩_0`$ by (2.32), (3.40) and (3.78) (recall $`b=1`$). Thus for $`u_1𝒩_\alpha ^{}`$ with $`\alpha 1`$, $`u_2𝒩_1`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$, we write $`u_1=ew`$ with $`w𝒩_\alpha ^{}`$ and get

$`(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)`$ $`=`$ $`((ew)v_1)(u_2v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`((e(u_2v_2))w)v_1`$
$`=`$ $`((eu_2)v_2)w)v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(((eu_2)w)v_2)(ev_1)`$
$`=`$ $`(((ew)u_2)e)(v_2v_1)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)(3.85)`$
by (2.31), (3.83) and (3.84). Moreover, for $`u_1𝒩_\alpha ^{},u_2𝒩_{\alpha 1}^{}`$ with $`1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`u_3𝒩_1^{}`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$, we have (3.82). Therefore, by (3.54), (3.82) with $`u_3𝒩_1^{}`$, (3.83) and (3.85), we get

$$(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)=(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)\text{for}u_1,u_2𝒩,v_1,v_2𝒩_0.$$
$`(3.86)`$
Let $`0v𝒩_0`$. Then $`𝒩v`$ is a nonzero ideal of $`𝒩`$ by (3.86) with $`v_1=e`$. Hence

$$𝒩v=𝒩,$$
$`(3.87)`$
which implies

$$𝒩_0^{}v=𝒩_0^{}$$
$`(3.88)`$
by (3.54). Thus there exists $`u𝒩_0^{}`$ such that

$$uv=e.$$
$`(3.89)`$
By (3.78),

$$0=(uv)=(u)v+u(v)=(u)v.$$
$`(3.90)`$
So $`(u)=0`$ by (3.74). Thus $`u𝒩_0`$ by (3.21) and (3.28). Therefore $`(𝒩_0,)`$ forms a field by (3.79) and the commutativity and associativity of $`(𝒩_0,)`$. Moreover, $`𝒩_\alpha ^{}`$ and $`𝒩_\alpha `$ are right vector space over $`𝒩_0`$ for $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ by (3.86) with $`u_2=e`$. For $`1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`0v𝒩_\alpha `$, $`R_v:𝒩_\alpha 𝒩_0`$ is an injevtive $`𝒩_0`$-linear map by (3.37) and (3.74) and (3.86) with $`v_2=e`$. So $`\text{dim}(𝒩_\alpha /𝒩_0)=1`$. In particular, $`\text{dim}(𝒩_2/𝒩_0)=1`$. We choose $`0u𝒩_1`$. Then $`R_u:𝒩_1𝒩_2`$ is an injective $`𝒩_0`$-linear map. Hence $`\text{dim}(𝒩_1/𝒩_0)=1`$. Therefore, we get

$$\text{dim}(𝒩_\alpha /𝒩_0)=1\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.91)`$
Since we assume $`\widehat{𝒩}𝒩`$, (3.91) implies

$$𝒩_\alpha ^{}=𝒩_\alpha \text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.92)`$
Again we let $`𝔽_1=𝒩_0`$. We choose $`\{0e_\alpha 𝒩_\alpha 1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\}`$ and

$$e_1=e_2e_1.$$
$`(3.93)`$
We define an algebraic operation “$``$” on $`𝒩`$ over $`𝔽_1`$

$$e_\alpha e_\beta =(\beta +1)^1e_\alpha (ee_\beta )=(\beta +1)^1e_\alpha e_\beta $$
$`(3.94)`$
and

$$e_\alpha e_1=2(e_\alpha e_2)e_1$$
$`(3.95)`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },\beta 1`$. This definition conincides with (3.46) on $`\widehat{𝒩}=_{1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }}𝒩_\alpha `$. For $`1\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$,

$`e_\alpha e_1`$ $`=`$ $`2(e_2e_\alpha )e_1`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1(e_2e_\alpha )e_1`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1(e_2e_1)e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`e_1e_\alpha (3.96)`$
by (2.31), (3.94), (3.95) and the commutativity of $`(\widehat{𝒩},)`$. Hence $`(𝒩,)`$ is commutative. Thus for $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\alpha ,\gamma 1`$, we have

$`e_\alpha (e_\beta e_\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`(e_\beta e_\gamma )e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1(\gamma +1)^1(e_\beta e_\gamma )e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1(\gamma +1)^1(e_\beta e_\alpha )e_\gamma `$
$`=`$ $`(e_\beta e_\alpha )e_\gamma `$
$`=`$ $`(e_\alpha e_\beta )e_\gamma (3.97)`$
by (2.31). For $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\alpha 1`$, we ge

$`(e_\alpha e_\beta )e_1`$ $`=`$ $`2((e_\beta e_\alpha )e_2)e_1`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1((e_\beta e_\alpha )e_2)e_1`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +1)^1((e_\beta e_2)e_1)e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`2((e_\beta e_2)e_1)e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`(e_\beta e_1)e_\alpha `$
$`=`$ $`e_\alpha (e_\beta e_1),(3.98)`$
$$(e_1e_\beta )e_1=e_1(e_1e_\beta )=e_1(e_\beta e_1).$$
$`(3.99)`$
Thus $`(𝒩,)`$ forms a commutative and associative algebra. According to Theorem 2.1 in \[SXZ\], we get

$$(𝒩,)(𝒜(\mathrm{\Delta },f,\{0\}),_1)$$
$`(3.100)`$
by (3.62), (3.95) and the fact

$$(+1)(𝒩_1)=(1+1)𝒩_1=\{0\}.$$
$`(3.101)`$
Case 3. $`b0`$ and (3.54) does not hold and $`\widehat{𝒩}𝒩`$.

Again we can assume $`b=1`$ and $`1\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Otherwise (3.54) holds. Let

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{}=\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.102)`$
By (2.32), (3.17), (3.19) and (3.20), the subspace

$$U=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}+\underset{\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\beta ^{}$$
$`(3.103)`$
is ideal of $`𝒩`$. If $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\mathrm{}`$, then $`U=𝒩`$. So

$$𝒩_1^{}\underset{\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }^{}}{}𝒩_\alpha ^{}𝒩_\beta ^{},$$
$`(3.104)`$
that is, (3.54) holds. Hence

$$\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.105)`$
The assumption in (3.40) is crucial to the following proof of $`1\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Expression (3.40) implies the equation in (3.18) holds for any $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$. Since $`_{0m\mathrm{\Delta }}𝒩_m^{}+_{0m,n\mathrm{\Delta }}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_n^{}`$ is an ideal by (3.17) and (3.18), we have

$$𝒩=\underset{0m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_m^{}+\underset{0m,n\mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_n^{}.$$
$`(3.106)`$
Hence

$$𝒩_0^{}\underset{0m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_m^{}.$$
$`(3.107)`$
Moreover, $`𝒩𝒩=𝒩`$ by the simplicity of $`𝒩`$. Thus

$`𝒩_1^{}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_{m1}^{}={\displaystyle \underset{0,1m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_{m1}^{}+𝒩_0^{}𝒩_1^{}+𝒩_1^{}𝒩_0^{}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0,1m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_{m1}^{}+{\displaystyle \underset{0m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}[(𝒩_m^{}𝒩_m^{})𝒩_1^{}+𝒩_1^{}(𝒩_m^{}𝒩_m^{})]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0,1m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_{m1}^{}+{\displaystyle \underset{0m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}[(𝒩_m^{}𝒩_1^{})𝒩_m^{}`$
$`+(𝒩_1^{}𝒩_m^{})𝒩_m^{}+𝒩_m^{}(𝒩_1^{}𝒩_m^{})]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0,1m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}𝒩_m^{}𝒩_{m1}^{}+(𝒩_1^{}𝒩_1^{})𝒩_1^{}`$
$`+(𝒩_1^{}𝒩_1^{})𝒩_1^{}+𝒩_1^{}(𝒩_1^{}𝒩_1^{})(3.108)`$
by (2.31), (2.32), (3.18), (3.40) and (3.107). Since (3.54) fails, we have

$$1\mathrm{\Delta },$$
$`(3.109)`$
which is important in this case of classification.

Let $`0v𝒩_k`$ with $`k`$. Set

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\{u𝒩uv=0\}.$$
$`(3.110)`$
Then

$$\mathrm{\Psi }𝒩\mathrm{\Psi }$$
$`(3.111)`$
by (2.31). Moreover, for $`u\mathrm{\Psi }`$,

$$(eu)v=e(uv)+(ue)vu(ev)=kuv=0$$
$`(3.112)`$
by (2.31) and (2.32). So $`L_e(\mathrm{\Psi })\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\underset{m\mathrm{\Delta }}{}\mathrm{\Psi }_m,\mathrm{\Psi }_m=\mathrm{\Psi }𝒩_m^{}.$$
$`(3.113)`$
Note that

$$\widehat{𝒩}\mathrm{\Psi }=(e𝒩)\mathrm{\Psi }=(e\mathrm{\Psi })𝒩\mathrm{\Psi }$$
$`(3.114)`$
by (2.31), (3.111) and (3.112). Let $`u𝒩_1^{}`$ and $`w\mathrm{\Psi }_m`$. We have

$`(m+1)(uw)v`$
$`=`$ $`(m+1)[u(wv)+(wu)vw(uv)]`$
$`=`$ $`(m+1)w(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(L_em1)(w)(uv)(ew)(uv)`$
$`=`$ $`(L_em1)(w)(uv)(e(uv))w`$
$`=`$ $`(L_em1)(w)(uv)[(eu)v+u(ev)(ue)v]w`$
$`=`$ $`(L_em1)(w)(uv)[L_e(u)v+(k+1)uvuv]w`$
$`=`$ $`(L_em1)(w)(uv)(L_e(u)v)wk(uv)w`$
$`=`$ $`((L_em1)(w)u)v+u((L_em1)(w)v)(u(L_em1)(w))v`$
$`(L_e(u)w)vk(uw)v`$
$`=`$ $`[L_e(u)w+u(L_em1)(w)]vk(uw)v(3.115)`$
by (2.31), (2.32), (3.40), (3.111) and (3.112). Thus

$$(m+k+1)(uw)v=[L_e(u)w+u(L_em1)(w)]v.$$
$`(3.116)`$
Let $`n`$ by a positive integer such that $`(L_e)^n(u)=(L_em1)^n(w)=0`$. Then

$$(m+k+1)^{2n}(uw)v=\underset{j=0}{\overset{2n}{}}(_j^{2n})[(L_e)^j(u)(L_em1)^{2nj}(w)]v=0.$$
$`(3.117)`$
When $`mk1`$, we get $`(uw)v=0`$. Hence

$$𝒩_1^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_m\mathrm{\Psi }\text{for}k1m\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.118)`$
Set

$$V=\mathrm{\Psi }+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^n(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1}).$$
$`(3.119)`$
Note

$$𝒩\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }+L_{𝒩_1^{}}(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1})V$$
$`(3.120)`$
by (3.114) and (3.118). Assume that

$$𝒩(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^n(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1})V.$$
$`(3.121)`$
$`𝒩(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^{n+1}(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1})`$ $`=`$ $`(𝒩𝒩_1^{}𝒩_1^{}𝒩)(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^n(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1})`$
$`+L_{𝒩_1^{}}(𝒩(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^n(\mathrm{\Psi }_{k1}))V(3.122)`$
by (2.32) and (3.121). By induction on $`n`$, (3.121) holds for any $`n`$. Hence $`V`$ is a left ideal. Furthermore, $`V`$ is a right ideal by (2.31), (3.111) and (3.121). If $`V=𝒩`$, then

$$e\mathrm{\Psi }$$
$`(3.123)`$
by (3.18) and the fact $`k0`$. Thus

$$0=ev=(k+1)v,$$
$`(3.124)`$
which is absurd. Thus $`V=\{0\}`$, and we have

$$R_v\text{is injective}\text{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}v𝒩_k,k.$$
$`(3.125)`$
Next we choose $`0u𝒩_n`$ for any $`1n\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Note that $`𝒩u`$ is a right ideal. Moreover, for $`v_1,v_2𝒩`$, we get

$`(ev_1)(v_2u)`$
$`=`$ $`(e(v_2u))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`[(ev_2)u+v_2(eu)(v_2e)u]v_1`$
$`=`$ $`[(ev_2)u+(n+1)v_2uv_2u]v_1`$
$`=`$ $`[(ev_2)v_1+nv_2v_1]u𝒩u(3.126)`$
by (2.31) and (2.32). Hence

$$𝒩_m^{}(𝒩u)𝒩u\text{for}1m\mathrm{\Delta }$$
$`(3.127)`$
by (3.26). Furthermore, for $`v_1𝒩_1^{}`$ and $`v_2𝒩_m^{}`$ with $`1m\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we have

$$v_1(v_2u)=(v_1v_2)u+v_2(v_1u)(v_2v_1)u𝒩u$$
$`(3.128)`$
by (2.32) and (3.127). Thus

$$𝒩u+\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^j(u)$$
$`(3.129)`$
is a nonzero ideal of $`𝒩`$ by the same arguments as (3.120)-(3.122). So

$$𝒩=𝒩u+\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(L_{𝒩_1^{}})^j(u).$$
$`(3.130)`$
Expressions (3.18) and (3.130) show

$$𝒩_m^{}=𝒩_{mn}^{}u\text{for}n1m\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(3.131)`$
If $`2\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we take $`n=2`$ in the above and get

$$𝒩_1^{}u=𝒩_1^{},$$
$`(3.132)`$
which implies (3.54). Thus $`𝒩_2^{}=\{0\}`$. Furthermore, (3.125) with $`k=1`$ implies

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\{1\}.$$
$`(3.133)`$
For $`u𝒩_1^{}`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$, we have

$`(uv_1)v_2u(v_1v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`(v_1u)v_2v_1(uv_2)`$
$`=`$ $`((ev_1)u)v_2(ev_1)(uv_2)`$
$`=`$ $`((eu)v_1)v_2(e(uv_2))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`((eu)v_1)v_2((eu)v_2)v_1=0(3.134)`$
by (2.31), (2.32), (3.77) and (3.83). Moreover, for $`u_1𝒩_1^{}`$, $`u_2𝒩_\beta `$ with $`\beta 1`$ and $`v_1,v_2𝒩_0`$, we get

$`(u_1v_1)(u_2v_2)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1(u_2v_2))v_1`$
$`=`$ $`[(u_1u_2)v_2+u_2(u_1v_2)(u_2u_1)v_2]v_1`$
$`=`$ $`[(u_1u_2)v_2+(u_2u_1)v_2(u_2u_1)v_2]v_1`$
$`=`$ $`((u_1u_2)v_2)v_1`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_2v_1)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_1u_2)(v_1v_2)(3.135)`$
by (2.31), (2.32), (3.40), (3.79), (3.85), (3.134) and the commutativity of $`(𝒩_0,)`$. Futhermore,

$$𝒩_1^{}𝒩_1^{}=\{0\}$$
$`(3.136)`$
by (3.18) and (3.133). Thus (3.86) holds in this case by (3.80), (3.85), (3.135) and (3.136). Therefore, $`(𝒩_0,)`$ forms a field and (3.92) holds. Pick any $`0e^{}𝒩_1`$, then

$$e^{}e^{}=0$$
$`(3.137)`$
by (3.136) and

$$e^{}𝒩=𝒩$$
$`(3.138)`$
by (3.86), (3.92), (3.125) and (3.138). By (2.31), (3.137) and (3.138), $`R_e^{}=0`$. Replacing $`e`$ by $`e^{}`$, we go back to Case 1.

This completes the proof of Theorem 3.4.$`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Classification of Irreducible Modules

In this section, we shall classify all the irreducible modules of a certain infinite-dimensional simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent element whose left action is locally finite.

As usual, a submodule of a module $`M`$ of a Novikov algebra $`(𝒩,)`$ is a subspace $`V`$ of $`M`$ such that

$$uV,VuV\text{for}u𝒩.$$
$`(4.1)`$
The module $`M`$ is called irreducible if it does not contain any proper nonzero submodule. First we present a Lemma due to Osborn \[O4\] and gave the proof for the reader’s convenience. Recall the notations in (3.6).

Lemma 4.1 (Osbron). Let $`M`$ be an irreducible module of a Novikov algebra $`(𝒩,)`$. Suppose that $`R_M([𝒩,𝒩]^{})\{0\}`$. If $`T`$ is a polynomial of right multiplication operators on $`𝒩`$ such that $`T(𝒩)=\{0\}`$, then the operator $`T^{}`$ obtained from $`T`$ with $`R_u`$ replaced by $`R_M(u)`$ also satisfy $`T^{}(M)=\{0\}`$.

Proof. Note that $`𝒩M`$ is a submodule of $`M`$ by (2.31). If $`M=𝒩M`$, then

$$T^{}(M)=T^{}(𝒩M)=T(𝒩)M=\{0\}$$
$`(4.2)`$
by (2.31). So the lemma holds.

If $`M𝒩M`$, then $`𝒩M=\{0\}`$ by the irreducibility of $`M`$. For $`u_1,u_2𝒩`$ and $`wM`$, we have:

$$(wu_1)u_2w(u_1u_2)=(u_1w)u_2u_1(wu_2)=0$$
$`(4.3)`$
by (2.32). Moreover,

$`R_M([u_1,u_2]^{})(w)`$ $`=`$ $`w(u_1u_2u_2u_1)`$
$`=`$ $`(wu_1)u_2(wu_2)u_1`$
$`=`$ $`(wu_2)u_1(wu_2)u_1=0(4.4)`$
by (2.31) and (4.3). Since $`w`$ is arbitrary, $`R_M([u_1,u_2]^{})=0`$. Hence $`R_M([𝒩,𝒩]^{})=\{0\}`$, which contradicts our assumption.$`\mathrm{}`$

Next we shall give the constructions of irreducible modules. Take $`J`$ to be the additive semi-group $`\{0\}`$ or $``$. Let $`𝒜`$ be a vector space with a basis

$$\{u_{\alpha ,i}\alpha 𝔽,iJ\}.$$
$`(4.5)`$
Define the operation “$``$” on $`𝒜`$ by

$$u_{\alpha ,i}u_{\beta ,j}=u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j}\text{for}\alpha ,\beta 𝔽,i,jJ.$$
$`(4.6)`$
Then $`(𝒜,)`$ forms a commutative associative algebra with the identity element $`1=u_{0,0}`$. We define the map $`:𝒜𝒜`$ by:

$$(u_{\alpha ,j})=\alpha u_{\alpha ,j}+ju_{\alpha ,j1}\text{for}\alpha 𝔽,jJ.$$
$`(4.7)`$
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be an additive subgroup of $`𝔽`$ such that $`J+\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\}`$. Set

$$𝒩=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ}{}𝔽u_{\alpha ,i}.$$
$`(4.8)`$
Next, for any fixed element $`\xi 𝒩`$, we define the operation “$``$” on $`𝒜`$ by

$$uv=u(v)+\xi uv\text{for}u,v𝒜.$$
$`(4.9)`$
By Theorem 2.9 in \[X2\], $`(𝒜,)`$ forms a simple Novikov algebra and $`(𝒩,)`$ forms a simple subalgebra of $`(𝒜,)`$. For $`\lambda 𝔽`$, we set

$$M(\lambda )=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ}{}𝔽u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i}$$
$`(4.10)`$
Expression (4.9) shows

$$𝒩M(\lambda ),M(\lambda )𝒩M(\lambda ).$$
$`(4.11)`$
Thus $`M(\lambda )`$ forms an $`𝒩`$-module. In fact, by a similar proof as that of Theorem 2.9 in \[X2\], we obtain:

Theorem 4.2. The $`𝒩`$-module $`M(\lambda )`$ is irreducible.

A natural question is to what extent the modules $`\{M(\lambda )\lambda 𝔽\}`$ cover the irreducible modules of $`𝒩`$. Up to this point, we are not be able to answer this for a general element $`\xi 𝒩`$. The following is our second main theorem in this paper.

Theorem 4.3. If $`\xi =b𝔽`$, then any irreducible $`𝒩`$-module $`M`$ with locally finite $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$ is isomorphic to $`M(\lambda )`$ for some $`\lambda 𝔽`$.

Proof. Assume $`\xi =b`$. Then (4.9) becomes

$$u_{\alpha ,i}u_{\beta ,j}=(\beta +b)u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j}+ju_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j1}\text{for}\alpha ,\beta 𝔽,i,jJ.$$
$`(4.12)`$
In particular,

$$u_{0,0}u_{\gamma ,l}=(\gamma +b)u_{\gamma ,l}+lu_{\gamma ,l1}\text{for}\gamma \mathrm{\Delta },lJ$$
$`(4.13)`$
and

$$u_{\alpha ,i}u_{\lambda ,0}=(\lambda +b)u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i}\text{for}\alpha ,\lambda 𝔽,iJ.$$
$`(4.14)`$
Expression (4.14) implies

$$R_{u_{0,0}}=b\text{Id}_𝒜.$$
$`(4.15)`$
Let $`M`$ be an $`𝒩`$-module $`M`$ with locally finite $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$. The local finiteness of $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$ implies the existence of its eigenvectors in $`M`$.

Case 1. The operator $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$ has an eigenvector with a nonzero eigenvalue.

Let $`w`$ be the eigenvector and let $`\lambda +b`$ be the coresponding nonzero eigenvalue. Set

$$M^{}=𝒩w=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ}{}𝔽u_{\alpha ,i}w.$$
$`(4.16)`$
In particular, $`wM^{}`$. For $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ`$ and $`u𝒩`$,

$$(u_{\alpha ,i}w)u=(u_{\alpha ,i}u)wM^{}$$
$`(4.17)`$
by (2.31). Note that

$`u_{0,0}(u_{\alpha ,i}w)`$ $`=`$ $`(u_{0,0}u_{\alpha ,i})w+u_{\alpha ,i}(u_{0,0}w)(u_{\alpha ,i}u_{0,0})w`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +b)u_{\alpha ,i}w+iu_{\alpha ,i1}w+(\lambda +b)u_{\alpha ,i}wbu_{\alpha ,i}w`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +\lambda +b)u_{\alpha ,i}w+iu_{\alpha ,i1}w(4.18)`$
by (2.32). Moreover,

$`(u_{0,0}u)(u_{\alpha ,i}w)`$
$`=`$ $`(u_{0,0}(u_{\alpha ,i}w))u`$
$`=`$ $`((\alpha +\lambda +b)u_{\alpha ,i}w+iu_{\alpha ,i1}w)u`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +\lambda +b)(u_{\alpha ,i}u)w+i(u_{\alpha ,i1}u)w(4.19)`$
by (2.31) and (4.18). Futhermore, (4.13) shows

$$u_{0,0}𝒩=𝒩\text{if}J=\text{or}b\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(4.20)`$
Thus $`M^{}`$ is a nonzero submodule of $`M`$ if $`J=`$ or $`b\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by (4.17) and (4.19). Assume that $`J=\{0\}`$ and $`b\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Since we assume $`J+\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\}`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\}`$. In this case,

$$u_{\alpha ,0}u_{0,0}𝒩\text{for}b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }$$
$`(4.21)`$
by (4.13). Since $`\text{char}𝔽=0`$, we have $`|\mathrm{\Delta }|=\mathrm{}`$. There exists $`\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\gamma 0,b`$. Since $`u_{\gamma b,0},u_{\gamma ,0}u_{0,0}𝒩`$ by (4.21). Hence

$`u_{b,0}(u_{\alpha ,0}w)`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b,0}u_{\gamma ,0})(u_{\alpha ,0}w)`$
$`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b,0}(u_{\gamma ,0}w))u_{\gamma ,0}`$
$``$ $`(𝒩w)u_{\gamma ,0}`$
$`=`$ $`(𝒩u_{\gamma ,0})w`$
$``$ $`𝒩w`$
$`=`$ $`M^{}(4.22)`$
for $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ by (2.31), (4.14) and (4.19). Therefore, $`M^{}`$ is again a nonzero submodule of $`M`$. The irreducibility of $`M`$ shows

$$M=M^{}.$$
$`(4.23)`$
We define a linear map $`\sigma :M(\lambda )M`$ by

$$\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})=u_{\alpha ,i}w\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ.$$
$`(4.24)`$
By (4.12) and (4.17),

$`\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i}u_{\beta ,j})`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma ((\beta +b)u_{\alpha +\beta +\lambda ,i+j}+ju_{\alpha +\beta +\lambda ,i+j1})`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +b)\sigma (u_{\alpha +\beta +\lambda ,i+j})+j\sigma (u_{\alpha +\beta +\lambda ,i+j1})`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +b)u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j}w+ju_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j1}w`$
$`=`$ $`[(\beta +b)u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j}+ju_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j1}]w`$
$`=`$ $`(u_{\alpha ,i}u_{\beta ,j})w`$
$`=`$ $`(u_{\alpha ,i}w)u_{\beta ,j}`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})u_{\beta ,j}(4.25)`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`i,jJ`$. Moreover, (4.13) and (4.17) show

$`\sigma (u_{0,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma ((\alpha +\lambda +b)u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i}+iu_{\alpha +\lambda ,i1})`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +\lambda +b)\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})+i\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i1})`$
$`=`$ $`(\alpha +\lambda +b)u_{\alpha ,i}w+iu_{\alpha ,i1}w`$
$`=`$ $`u_{0,0}(u_{\alpha ,i}w)`$
$`=`$ $`u_{0,0}\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})(4.26)`$
for $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`iJ`$. Furthermore,

$`\sigma ((u_{0,0}u_{\beta ,j})u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma ((u_{0,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})u_{\beta ,j})`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma (u_{0,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})u_{\beta ,j}`$
$`=`$ $`(u_{0,0}\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i}))u_{\beta ,j}`$
$`=`$ $`(u_{0,0}u_{\beta ,j})\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,i})(4.27)`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`i,jJ`$. Thus $`\sigma `$ is an $`𝒩`$-module homomorphism when $`J=`$ or $`b\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by (4.20). If $`J=\{0\}`$ and $`b\mathrm{\Delta }`$, we choose $`\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\gamma 0,b`$ and get

$`\sigma (u_{b,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})`$ $`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1\sigma ((u_{\gamma b,0}u_{\gamma ,0})u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})`$
$`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1\sigma ((u_{\gamma b,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})u_{\gamma ,0})`$
$`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1\sigma (u_{\gamma b,0}u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})u_{\gamma ,0}`$
$`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b,0}\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0}))u_{\gamma ,0}`$
$`=`$ $`(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b,0}u_{\gamma ,0})\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})`$
$`=`$ $`u_{b,0}\sigma (u_{\alpha +\lambda ,0})(4.28)`$
by (4.21) and (4.27). Again $`\sigma `$ is an $`𝒩`$-module homomorphism. Since $`M(\lambda )`$ is irreducible and $`M\{0\}`$, $`\sigma `$ must be an $`𝒩`$-module isomorphism.

Case 2. The operator $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$ has only zero eigenvalue.

By (4.12),

$$[u_{\alpha ,i},u_{\beta ,j}]^{}=(\beta \alpha )u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j}+(ji)u_{\alpha +\beta ,i+j1}\text{for}\alpha ,\beta \mathrm{\Delta },i,jJ.$$
$`(4.29)`$
In particular,

$$[u_{0,0},u_{\beta ,j}]^{}=\beta u_{\beta ,j}+ju_{\beta ,j1}\text{for}\beta \mathrm{\Delta },jJ.$$
$`(4.30)`$
Hence

$$[u_{0,0},𝒩]^{}=𝒩$$
$`(4.31)`$
if $`J=`$. When $`J=\{0\}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\}`$ by our assumption. Note that (4.30) shows

$$u_{\alpha ,0}[u_{0,0},𝒩]^{}\text{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(4.32)`$
Moreover,

$$[u_{\alpha ,0},u_{\alpha ,0}]^{}=2\alpha u_{0,0}\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(4.33)`$
Thus we always have

$$[𝒩,𝒩]^{}=𝒩.$$
$`(4.34)`$
If $`R_M([𝒩,𝒩]^{})=\{0\}`$, then $`R_M(𝒩)=0`$. So $`𝒩M\{0\}`$ because $`M`$ is not trivial. Since $`𝒩M`$ is a submodule of $`M`$, $`M=𝒩M`$. But

$$M=𝒩M=(𝒩𝒩)M=(𝒩M)𝒩=\{0\},$$
$`(4.35)`$
which contradicts to the non-triviality of $`M`$. Thus $`R_M([𝒩,𝒩]^{})\{0\}`$. By Lemma 4.1 and (4.15), we have:

$$R_M(u_{0,0})=b\text{Id}_M.$$
$`(4.36)`$
Again we let $`w`$ be an eigenvector of $`L_{u_{0,0}}`$ (remember the corresponding eigenvalue is 0). Then we have

$`u_{0,0}(wu_{\alpha ,i})`$ $`=`$ $`(u_{0,0}w)u_{\alpha ,i}+w(u_{0,0}u_{\alpha ,i})(wu_{0,0})u_{\alpha ,i}`$
$`=`$ $`w((\alpha +b)u_{\alpha ,i}+iu_{\alpha ,i1})bwu_{\alpha ,i}`$
$`=`$ $`\alpha wu_{\alpha ,i}+iwu_{\alpha ,i1}(4.37)`$
for $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`iJ`$ by (2.32), (4.13) and (4.36). In particular, $`wu_{\alpha ,0}`$ is an eigenvector with the eigenvalue $`\alpha `$ if it is not zero. Hence by our assumption of the zero eigenvalue of $`L_M(u_{0,0})`$, we have

$$wu_{\alpha ,0}=0\text{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(4.38)`$
Moreover, (4.37) shows that $`wu_{\alpha ,1}`$ is an eigenvector with the eigenvalue $`\alpha `$ if it is not zero. So

$$wu_{\alpha ,1}=0\text{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.$$
$`(4.39)`$
Continuing this process, we can prove

$$wu_{\alpha ,i}=0\text{for}\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}\hspace{0.33em}0}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ.$$
$`(4.40)`$
Note that

$$(u_{0,0}u_{\alpha ,i})w=(u_{0,0}w)u_{\alpha ,i}=0\text{for}\alpha \mathrm{\Delta },iJ.$$
$`(4.41)`$
So

$$𝒩w=\{0\}\text{if}J=\text{or}b\mathrm{\Delta }$$
$`(4.42)`$
by (4.20). Assume that $`J=\{0\}`$ and $`b\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

$$u_{\alpha ,0}w=0\text{for}b\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }$$
$`(4.43)`$
by (4.21). Moreover, we choose $`\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }`$ such that $`\gamma 0,b`$ and get

$$u_{b,0}w=(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b}u_{\gamma ,0})w=(\gamma +b)^1(u_{\gamma b}w)u_{\gamma ,0}=0$$
$`(4.44)`$
by (2.31). Thus we always have

$$𝒩w=\{0\}.$$
$`(4.45)`$
If $`\mathrm{\Delta }\{0\}`$, then we choose any $`0,b\beta \mathrm{\Delta }`$. We get

$`(\beta +b)wu_{0,j}+jwu_{0,j1}`$
$`=`$ $`w(u_{\beta ,0}u_{\beta ,j})`$
$`=`$ $`(wu_{\beta ,0})u_{\beta ,j}+u_{\beta ,0}(wu_{\beta ,j})(u_{\beta ,0}w)u_{\beta ,j}=0(4.46)`$
by (2.32), (4.40) and (4.45). By induction on $`j`$, we get

$$wu_{0,j}=0\text{for}jJ.$$
$`(4.47)`$
So $`𝔽w`$ is a trivial submodule by (4.40), (4.45) and (4.47), which contradicts to the irreduciblity of $`M`$. Thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\{0\}`$, which implies $`J=`$ by our assumption.

We redenote $`u_{0,j}`$ by $`u_j`$ for $`j`$. Now (4.37) becomes

$$u_0(wu_i)=iwu_{i1}\text{for}i.$$
$`(4.48)`$
Note that for $`i,j,l`$ and $`\gamma 𝔽`$, we have

$`R_{u_j}R_{u_i}(u_{\gamma ,l})`$ $`=`$ $`R_{u_j}(bu_{\gamma ,i+l}+iu_{\gamma ,i+l1})`$
$`=`$ $`b^2u_{\gamma ,i+j+l}+(i+j)bu_{\gamma ,i+j+l1}+iju_{\gamma ,i+j+l2}(4.49)`$
by (4.12). If $`b=0`$ and $`i+j>1`$, the above expression shows

$$R_{u_j}R_{u_i}=ij(i+j1)^1R_{u_{i+j1}}$$
$`(4.50)`$
on $`𝒜`$, and in particular on $`𝒩`$. Assume $`b0`$. Then

$$R_{u_j}R_{u_i}=bR_{u_{i+j}}+ijb^1(R_{u_{i+j1}}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{i+j2}{}}(1)^kb^k(i+j1)\mathrm{}(i+jk)R_{u_{i+jk1}})$$
$`(4.51)`$
on $`𝒜`$ and in particular on $`𝒩`$. By Lemma 4.1, we must have

$$R_M(u_j)R_M(u_i)=ij(i+j1)^1R_M(u_{i+j1})\text{for}i,j,i+j>1$$
$`(4.52)`$
when $`b=0`$ and

$`R_M(u_j)R_M(u_i)=bR_M(u_{i+j})+ijb^1(R_M(u_{i+j1})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i+j2}{}}}(1)^kb^k(i+j1)\mathrm{}(i+jk)R_M(u_{i+jk1}))(4.53)`$
for $`i,j`$ when $`b0`$.

Set

$$M^{}=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝔽wu_j.$$
$`(4.54)`$
Then

$$(wu_0)u_j=bwu_j\text{for}j.$$
$`(4.55)`$
For $`0<i,j`$, we have

$$(wu_i)u_j=ij(i+j1)^1wu_{i+j1}\text{when}b=0$$
$`(4.56)`$
by (4.52) and

$`(wu_i)u_j=bwu_{i+j}+ijb^1(wu_{i+j1}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i+j2}{}}}(1)^kb^k(i+j1)\mathrm{}(i+jk)wu_{i+jk1})(4.57)`$
when $`b0`$. So

$$M^{}𝒩M^{}$$
$`(4.58)`$
by (4.36), (4.55)-(4.57). Furthermore,

$$(u_0u_j)(wu_i)=(u_0(wu_i))u_j=i(wu_{i1})u_jM^{}$$
$`(4.59)`$
for $`0<i,j`$ by (2.31), (4.48) and (4.57). Since $`u_0𝒩=𝒩`$ by (4.13), $`M^{}`$ is a submodule of $`M`$ by (4.45), (4.48), (4.58) and (4.59). When $`b0`$, $`w=b^1wu_0M^{}`$. So $`M^{}\{0\}`$. If $`b=0`$, then $`wu_0=0`$. If $`M^{}=\{0\}`$, then $`𝔽w`$ forms a trivial submodule by (4.45), which contradicts to the irreducibility of $`M`$. Hence, we always have $`M^{}\{0\}`$. Thus

$$M^{}=M.$$
$`(4.60)`$
Assume $`b0`$. Observe that (4.12) implies

$$u_{b,0}u_i=bu_{b,i}+iu_{b,i1}\text{for}i.$$
$`(4.61)`$
Hence

$$\{u_{b,0}u_ii\}$$
$`(4.62)`$
is a basis of $`M(b)`$. We define a linear map $`\sigma :M(b)M`$ by

$$\sigma (u_{b,0}u_i)=wu_i\text{for}i.$$
$`(4.63)`$
By (4.13) and (4.61),

$`u_0(u_{b,0}u_i)`$ $`=`$ $`u_0(bu_{b,i}+iu_{b,i1})`$
$`=`$ $`i(bu_{b,i1}+(i1)u_{b,i2})`$
$`=`$ $`i(u_{b,0}u_{i1}).(4.64)`$
Moreover,

$`\sigma ((u_{b,0}u_i)u_j)`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma [(bR_{u_{i+j}}+ijb^1(R_{u_{i+j1}}+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i+j2}{}}}(1)^kb^k`$
$`(i+j1)\mathrm{}(i+jk)R_{u_{i+jk1}}))(u_{b,0})]`$
$`=`$ $`[bR_M(u_{i+j})+ijb^1(R_M(u_{i+j1})+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{i+j2}{}}}(1)^kb^k`$
$`(i+j1)\mathrm{}(i+jk)R_M(u_{i+jk1}))](w)`$
$`=`$ $`(wu_i)u_j`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma (u_{b,0}u_i)u_j(4.65)`$
for $`i,j`$ by (4.51) and (4.53). Furthermore,

$`\sigma ((u_0u_j)(u_{b,0}u_i))`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma ((u_0(u_{b,0}u_i))u_j)`$
$`=`$ $`i\sigma ((u_{b,0}u_{i1})u_j)`$
$`=`$ $`i\sigma (u_{b,0}u_{i1})u_j`$
$`=`$ $`i(wu_{i1})u_j`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0(wu_i))u_j`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0u_j)(wu_{i1})`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0u_j)\sigma (u_{b,0}u_i)(4.66)`$
by (2.31), (4.48), (4.64) and (4.65). Since $`u_0𝒩=𝒩`$, $`\sigma `$ is an $`𝒩`$-module homomorphism by the above two expressions. Therefore, $`\sigma `$ is an isomorphism by the irreducibility of $`M(b)`$.

Finally, we assume $`b=0`$. In this case.

$$u_0u_j=ju_{j1}\text{for}j.$$
$`(4.67)`$
Hence

$$\{u_0u_jj\}$$
$`(4.68)`$
forms a basis of $`𝒩=M(0)`$. We define a linear map $`\sigma :𝒩M`$ by

$$\sigma (u_0u_i)=wu_i\text{for}i.$$
$`(4.69)`$
By (4.67),

$$u_0(u_0u_i)=iu_0u_{i1}.$$
$`(4.70)`$
Moreover, for $`0<i,j`$,

$`\sigma ((u_0u_i)u_j)`$ $`=`$ $`ij(i+j1)^1\sigma (u_0u_{i+j1})`$
$`=`$ $`ij(i+j1)^1wu_{i+j1}`$
$`=`$ $`(wu_i)u_j`$
$`=`$ $`\sigma (wu_i)u_j(4.71)`$
by (4.52). In addition, (4.15) and (4.36) show

$$\sigma ((u_0u_i)u_0)=\sigma (0)=0=\sigma (u_0u_i)u_0.$$
$`(4.72)`$
Furthermore,

$`\sigma ((u_0u_j)(u_0u_i))`$ $`=`$ $`\sigma ((u_0(u_0u_i))u_j)`$
$`=`$ $`i\sigma ((u_0u_{i1})u_j)`$
$`=`$ $`i\sigma (u_0u_{i1})u_j`$
$`=`$ $`i(wu_{i1})u_j`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0(wu_i))u_j`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0u_j)(wu_{i1})`$
$`=`$ $`(u_0u_j)\sigma (u_{b,0}u_i)(4.73)`$
for $`i,j`$ by (2.31), (4.48) and (4.70)-(4.72). Since $`u_0𝒩=𝒩`$, $`\sigma `$ is an $`𝒩`$-module homomorphism by the above three expressions, which must be an isomorphism because $`M(0)𝒩`$ is an irreducible $`𝒩`$-module. $`\mathrm{}`$

References

L. Ausland, Simply transitive groups of affine motions, Amer. J. Math. 99 (1977). 809-826.

A. A. Balinskii and S. P. Novikov, Poisson brackets of hydrodynamic type, Frobenius algebras and Lie algebras, Soviet Math. Dokl. Vol. 32 (1985), No. 1, 228-231.

D. Burde, Left-symmetric structures on simple modular Lie algebras, J. Algebra 169 (1994), 112-138.

V. T. Filipov, A class of simple nonassociative algebras, Mat. Zametki 45 (1989), 101-105.

D. Fried and W. Goldman, Three dimensional affine crystallographic groups, Adv. Math. 47 (1983), 1-49.

I. M. Gel’fand and L. A. Dikii, Asymptotic behaviour of the resolvent of Sturm-Liouville equations and the algebra of the Korteweg-de Vries equations, Russian Math. Surveys 30:5 (1975), 77-113.

I. M. Gel’fand and I. Ya. Dorfman, Hamiltonian operators and algebraic structures related to them, Funkts. Anal. Prilozhen 13 (1979), 13-30.

J. Helmstetter, Radical d’une algère symétrique a gauche, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 29 (1979), 17-35.

H. Kim, Complete left-invariant affine structures on nilpotent Lie groups, J. Diff. Geom. 24 (1986), 373-394.

H. Kim, Extensions of left-symmetric algebras, Algebras, Groups and Geometry 4(1987), 73-117.

E. Kleinfeld, On rings satisfying $`(x,y,z)=(y,x,z)`$, Algebras, Groups and Geometry 4(1987), 129-138.

J. Marshall Osborn, Novikov algebras, Nova J. Algebra & Geom. 1 (1992), 1-14.

J. Marshall Osborn, Simple Novikov algebras with an idempotent, Commun. Algebra 20 (1992), No. 9, 2729-2753.

J. Marshall Osborn, Infinite dimensional Novikov algebras of characteristic 0, J. Algebra 167 (1994), 146-167.

J. Marshall Osborn, Modules for Novikov algebras, Proceeding of the II International Congress on Algebra, Barnaul, 1991.

J. Marshall Osborn, Modules for Novikov algebras of characteristic 0, Commun. Algebra 23 (1995), 3627-3640.

J. Marshall Osborn and E. Zelmanov, Nonassociative algebras related to Hamiltonian operators in the formal calculus of variations, J. Pure. Appl. Algebra 101 (1995), 335-352.

G-Y. Shen, Translative isomorphisms and left-symmetric structures on $`W(m,𝐧)`$, J. Algebra 184 (1996), 575-582.

Y. Su, X. Xu and H. Zhang, Derivation-Simple algebras and the structures of Lie algebras of Witt type, J. Algebra, in press.

X. Xu, On simple Novikov algebras and their irreducible modules, J. Algebra 185 (1996), 905-934.

X. Xu, Novikov-Poisson algebras, J. Algebra 190 (1997), 253-279.

X. Xu, Variational calculus of supervariables and related algebraic structures, J. Algebra 223 (2000), 396-437.

E. I. Zelmanov, On a class of local translation invariant Lie algebras, Soviet Math. Dokl. Vol 35 (1987), No. 1, 216-218.