format: text

text:
# 𝑞-Analogs of symmetric function operators

## 1.  Introduction

The Hall-Littlewood and Macdonald symmetric functions are two examples of families of symmetric functions that depend on a parameter $`q`$ such that setting this parameter $`q`$ equal to $`0`$ yields one class of symmetric functions which is not a product of generators and setting the parameter $`q`$ equal to $`1`$ yields a multiplicative basis. There are other other classes of symmetric functions with the same property, and in this article we will show that practically any of these families are instances of the same $`q`$-twisting of the symmetric function found by setting $`q=0`$.

This remarkable fact has lead to a completely elementary proof of the polynomiality of the $`q,t`$-Kostka coefficients \[GZ\] and in this article we use the very same observation to derive a combinatorial recurrence on these coefficients as well as algebraic formulas for operators that add a column to the partition indexing a Macdonald symmetric function.

The first section of this article will introduce some necessary notation and the definition of this $`q`$-analog. In the second section we give several examples where it arises. Some examples will be nothing more than showing that $`\overline{V}`$ for some $`V`$ is a formula that is well known in the literature. Other examples present some completely new equations, the most important of which will concern the relation of the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions to the Macdonald symmetric functions. This section will show that this single $`q`$-analog appears in the creation of several different classes of Schur positive symmetric functions.

In the third section we derive some formulas related to an operator that adds a column to the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions. The $`q`$-analog of this operator adds a column to the Macdonald symmetric functions. In the fourth section these equations are used to give a formula for the action of this operator on the Schur basis giving a combinatorial rule for computing the Macdonald symmetric functions (i.e. a ‘Morris-like’ recurrence for the $`q,t`$-Kostka coefficients).

## 2. Notation

A partition of $`n`$ is a sequence of non-negative integers $`\lambda =(\lambda _1\lambda _2\lambda _3\mathrm{})`$ such that $`_i\lambda _i=n`$. The length of a partition is the largest index $`i`$ such that $`\lambda _i`$ is nonzero, and it will be denoted here by $`\mathrm{}(\lambda )`$. A partition will be drawn as a sequence of rows of boxes aligned at the left edge with $`\lambda _i`$ cells in the $`i^{th}`$ row. We will use the French convention and draw these diagrams with the largest row on the bottom and the smallest row on the top. The conjugate partition $`\lambda ^{}`$ is the sequence whose $`i^{th}`$ entry is the number of cells in the $`i^{th}`$ column of the diagram for $`\lambda `$.

The partition will be sometimes be identified with its diagram in the sort of language that is used. For instance, the operations of adding rows or columns to partitions indexing bases for the symmetric functions are important here. the notation $`(m,\mu )`$ is used to represent the sequence $`\mu `$ with a part of size $`m`$ prepended, which will be a partition as long as $`\mu _1m`$. The notation $`1^m|\mu `$ will be used to represent the partition $`(\mu _1+1,\mu _2+1,\mathrm{},\mu _m+1)`$ (as long as $`\mathrm{}(\mu )m`$).

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the space of symmetric functions with the standard bases for this space, $`h_\lambda `$ homogeneous, $`e_\lambda `$ elementary, $`m_\lambda `$ monomial, $`f_\lambda `$ forgotten, $`p_\lambda `$ power, and $`s_\lambda `$ the Schur symmetric functions defined as they are in \[M\]. The involution $`\omega `$ that sends $`p_k`$ to $`(1)^{k1}p_k`$ relates these bases by $`\omega (h_\lambda )=e_\lambda `$, $`\omega (m_\lambda )=f_\lambda `$ and $`\omega (s_\lambda )=s_\lambda ^{}`$. The standard inner product on this space determines the dual bases

(1)
$$p_\lambda ,p_\mu /z_\mu =h_\lambda ,m_\mu =e_\lambda ,f_\mu =s_\lambda ,s_\mu =\delta _{\lambda \mu },$$

where $`z_\lambda =_{i>1}i^{n_i(\lambda )}n_i(\lambda )!`$ with $`n_i(\lambda )`$ equal to the number of parts of size $`i`$ in $`\lambda `$, and we have set $`\delta _{\lambda \lambda }=1`$ and $`\delta _{\lambda \mu }=0`$ if $`\lambda \mu `$.

For any element $`f`$ of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, let $`f^{}`$ be the operation that is dual to multiplication by $`f`$ with respect to the standard inner product. By definition we have that for any dual bases $`\{a_\lambda \}_\lambda `$ and $`\{b_\lambda \}_\lambda `$, the action of $`f^{}`$ on another symmetric function $`g`$ is given by the formula

(2)
$$f^{}g=\underset{\lambda }{}g,fa_\lambda b_\lambda .$$

‘Plethystic’ notation is a device for expressing the substitution of the monomials of one expression in a symmetric function. Assume that $`E`$ is a formal series in a set of variables $`x_1,x_2,\mathrm{}`$ with possible special parameters $`q`$ and $`t`$. For $`k1`$, set $`p_k[E]`$ to be $`E`$ with $`x_i`$ replaced by $`x_i^k`$ and $`q`$ and $`t`$ replaced by $`q^k`$ and $`t^k`$ respectively, that is

(3)
$$p_k[E(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},q,t)]=E(x_1^k,x_2^k,\mathrm{};q^k,t^k)$$

For an arbitrary symmetric function $`P`$, $`P[E]`$ will represent the the formal series found by expanding $`P`$ in terms of the power symmetric functions and then substituting $`p_k[E]`$ for $`p_k`$. More precisely, if the power sum expansion of the symmetric function $`P`$ is given by $`P=_\lambda c_\lambda p_\lambda `$ then $`P[E]`$ is given by the formula

(4)
$$P[E]=\underset{\lambda }{}c_\lambda p_{\lambda _1}[E]p_{\lambda _2}[E]\mathrm{}p_{\lambda _{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}}[E].$$

The symmetric functions in the infinite set of variables $`x_1,x_2,x_3,\mathrm{}`$ will be denoted by $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^X`$. $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^X`$ are isomorphic and in this exposition we will identify the two spaces when it is convenient. In plethystic notation, the isomorphism that identifies the two spaces is given by $`ff[X]`$ where $`X=x_1+x_2+x_3+\mathrm{}`$ since under this map $`p_k`$ is sent to $`x_1^k+x_2^k+x_3^k+\mathrm{}`$. Also use the notation $`X_n=x_1+x_2+\mathrm{}+x_n`$ to represent when a symmetric function being evaluated a finite set of variables. For sets of variables using other letters we use a similar convention.

The symbol $`\mathrm{\Omega }=_{n0}h_n`$ will represent a special generating function, and we will use the plethystic notation for symmetric functions with this expression as well with the following identities.

(5)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }[X+Y]=\mathrm{\Omega }[X]\mathrm{\Omega }[Y]$$

(6)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }[X]=\underset{i}{}\frac{1}{1x_i}$$

(7)
$$\mathrm{\Omega }[XY]=\underset{\lambda }{}s_\lambda [X]s_\lambda [Y]$$

Operators that have the property that they add a row or a column to the partition indexing a symmetric function will be known as ‘creation operators.’ The creation operators that will be used repeatedly are those that add a row to the Schur symmetric functions (due to Bernstein, see \[Ze, p. 69\], \[M, p. 96\]) and the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions (due to Jing, see \[J\], \[G\] or \[M, p. 238\]). In the third section, the operator introduced in \[Za1\] that adds a column to the partition indexing a Hall-Littlewood symmetric function will be developed further.

Define the following involution on the space $`Hom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ that is a useful tool for deriving identities within the theory of symmetric functions. Let $`V`$ be an element of $`Hom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We define the flip of $`V`$ by the formula

(8)
$$\overline{V}P[X]=V^YP[XY]|_{Y=X}.$$

It seems to arise naturally when one considers the sorts of operators that will concern us here (see \[Za1\] and \[Za2\]).

The degree of a symmetric function $`P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the highest power of $`z`$ in $`P[zX]`$ and will be denoted by $`deg(P)`$. If $`P[zX]=z^{deg(P)}P[X]`$ then we will say that $`P`$ is of homogeneous degree.

Use this involution here to define a $`q`$-twisting of a symmetric function operator. Let $`V`$ once again be an element of $`Hom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and let $`F^q`$ be defined by $`F^qP[X]=P[X(1q)]`$. Our $`q`$-analog is defined when it acts of the symmetric function $`P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ by the formula

(9)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qP[X]=V^YP[qX+(1q)Y]|_{Y=X}=\overline{\overline{V}F^q}P[X].$$

It is easily seen that this $`q`$-analog has the following fundamental propery.

###### Remark 1.

Let $`V`$ be an element of $`Hom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and create the $`q`$-twisting of this operator from formula (9), $`\stackrel{~}{V}^q`$, and act this new operator on a symmetric function $`P[X]`$ to create an expression such as

(10)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qP[X]$$

This $`q`$-analog has the property that when $`q=0`$, the expression becomes

(11)
$$VP[X]$$

and if $`q=1`$, then it reduces to the product

(12)
$$V(1)P[X]$$

This paper is concerned with generalizations of the standard bases, the Hall-Littlewood and Macdonald symmetric functions, which depend on additional parameters $`q`$ and $`t`$. There are two important scalar products on the symmetric functions related to these bases. They are defined by their values on the power symmetric basis.

(13)
$$p_\lambda ,p_\mu _t=\delta _{\lambda \mu }z_\lambda \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}{}}1t^{\lambda _i}$$

(14)
$$p_\lambda ,p_\mu _{qt}=\delta _{\lambda \mu }z_\lambda \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}{}}(1q^{\lambda _i})(1t^{\lambda _i})$$

The Macdonald symmetric functions $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ are defined by the following three conditions.

1. $`H_\lambda [X;q,t],H_\mu [X;q,t]_{qt}=0`$ if $`\lambda \mu `$.

2. $`F^tH_\mu [X;q,t]=_{\lambda \mu }c_{\lambda \mu }m_\lambda [X]`$ for suitable coefficients $`c_{\lambda \mu }`$ and the sum is over all partitions $`\lambda `$ that are smaller than $`\mu `$ in the standard dominance order.

3. $`H_\mu [X],h_n[X]=t^{n(\mu )}`$ where $`n(\mu )=_i(i1)\mu _i`$.

The expansion of the $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ basis in the Schur basis for the symmetric functions defines the coefficients $`K_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)`$, that is $`H_\mu [X;q,t]=_{\lambda |\mu |}K_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)s_\lambda [X]`$.

The Hall-Littlewood basis is defined similarly with respect to the $`,_t`$ scalar product; simply stated $`H_\mu [X;t]=H_\mu [X;0,t]`$.

The symmetric functions $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ and $`H_\mu [X;t]`$ are the two families of symmetric functions that will interest us the most here. A symmetric function with the property that when expressed in terms of the Schur basis their coefficients are polynomials in $`q`$ and $`t`$ with non-negative coefficients will be called Schur positive. The Macdonald and Hall-Littlewood functions are just two examples of families with this property.

## 3. Examples

### 3.1. Schur symmetric functions I

In \[Ze\] an operator attributed to Bernstein that adds a row to the Schur function is given by $`S_m=_{i0}(1)^ih_{m+i}e_i^{}`$. The formula has a very convenient form when expressed in terms of plethystic notation. Let $`P[X]`$ be a symmetric function in the $`X`$ variables. Define a generating function of operators given by

(15)
$$S(z)P[X]=P\left[X\frac{1}{z}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX].$$

Now for any $`m`$, set $`S_mP[X]=S(z)P[X]|_{z^m}`$. If $`m\mu _1`$, then it easily follows that $`S_ms_\mu [X]=s_{(m,\mu )}[X]`$. $`S_m`$ is a creation operator for the Schur basis since we have the formula

(16)
$$S_{\mu _1}S_{\mu _2}\mathrm{}S_{\mu _{\mathrm{}(\mu )}}1=s_\mu [X].$$

Now if we set $`H(z)=\stackrel{~}{S(z)}^q`$ and $`H_m^q=H(z)|_{z^m}`$, then this is a $`q`$-analog of the operator $`S_m`$ and we may calculate that

$`H(z)P[X]`$ $`=`$ $`S(z)P[qX+(1q)Y]|_{Y=X}`$
$`=`$ $`P\left[qX+(1q)\left(X{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX]`$
$`=`$ $`P\left[X{\displaystyle \frac{1q}{z}}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX]`$
Remarkably, this is the formula for the Hall-Littlewood creation operator of Jing \[J\] in the notation used by Garsia \[G\]. These operators have the property that

###### Theorem 2.

(Jing \[J\]) Let $`H_m^q=\stackrel{~}{S_m}^q`$. Then

(18)
$$H_{\mu _1}^qH_{\mu _1}^q\mathrm{}H_{\mu _{\mathrm{}(\mu )}}^q1=H_\mu [X;q].$$

The fact that $`H_\mu [X;0]=s_\mu [X]`$ and $`H_\mu [X;1]=h_\mu [X]`$ follows from Remark 1.

### 3.2.  Schur symmetric functions II

For any sequence of integers $`\gamma =(\gamma _1,\gamma _2,\mathrm{},\gamma _n)`$, let $`x^\gamma `$ represent the monomial $`x_1^{\gamma _1}x_2^{\gamma _2}\mathrm{}x_n^{\gamma _n}`$. We say that $`\gamma `$ is a dominant weight if $`\gamma _1\gamma _2\mathrm{}\gamma _n`$.

The symmetric group $`S_n`$ acts on any polynomial in the $`X_n`$ variables by permuting their indices. For any $`\sigma S_n`$, set $`\epsilon _\sigma `$ to be the sign of the permutation. Also set $`\delta =(n1,n2,\mathrm{},1,0)`$. Then define for any polynomial $`f`$ in the $`x_i`$ variables a symmetrization operator $`\pi _n(f)=J(f)/J(1)`$ where

(19)
$$J(f)=\underset{\sigma S_n}{}\epsilon _\sigma \sigma (x^\delta f).$$

When $`\lambda `$ is a partition, $`\pi _n`$ sends $`x^\lambda `$ to the Schur function $`s_\lambda [X_n]`$. When $`\lambda `$ is any dominant weight, set $`s_\lambda (X_n)=\pi _n(x^\lambda )`$ to be the resulting Laurent polynomial.

Let $`\eta `$ be a sequence of positive integers whose sum is $`n`$ (a composition) and define the set of ordered pairs $`Roots_\eta =\{(i,j):1i\eta _1+\eta _2+\mathrm{}+\eta _r<jn\text{ for some }r\}`$. Consider the following formal power series given by the formula

(20)
$$H_{\mu \eta }(X_n;q)=\pi _n\left(x^\mu \underset{(i,j)Roots_\eta }{}(1qx_i/x_j)^1\right).$$

This formal series has an expansion in terms of the Schur functions indexed by all dominant integral weights. Define $`K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)`$ as the coefficient of $`s_\lambda (X_n)`$ in $`H_{\mu \eta }(X_n;q)`$, so that

(21)
$$H_{\mu \eta }(X_n;q)=\underset{\lambda }{}K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)s_\lambda (X_n),$$

where the sum is over all dominant integral weights $`\lambda `$. The $`K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)`$ are known as the generalized or parabolic Kostka polynomials. For a more complete exposition of these polynomials we refer the reader to $`[KS]`$, $`[SW]`$, or $`[K]`$.

Now consider a composition of the Bernstein Schur function operators $`S_\nu =S_{\nu _1}S_{\nu _2}\mathrm{}S_{\nu _{\mathrm{}(\nu )}}`$ and define $`H_\nu ^q=\stackrel{~}{S_\nu }^q`$. By a calculation similar to (3.1), one may show that

(22)
$$H_\nu ^qP[X]=P\left[X(1q)Z^{}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[ZX]\underset{1j<i\mathrm{}(\nu )}{}1z_i/z_j|_{z_1^{\nu _1}z_2^{\nu _2}\mathrm{}z_{\mathrm{}(\nu )}^{\nu _{\mathrm{}(\nu )}}},$$

where $`Z^{}=_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}(\nu )}1/z_i`$.

In work with Mark Shimozono \[SZ\], we demonstrated that $`H_\nu ^q`$ is an operator with interesting properties related to the generalized Kostka coefficients. In particular, they can be used as generating functions for the generalized Kostka coefficients. They are also operators which act on symmetric functions and can be used to build a family of symmetric functions.

###### Theorem 3.

(Shimozono, Zabrocki \[SZ\]) Let $`\eta `$ be a composition of $`k`$ and $`\mu ^k`$, set $`\mu ^{(i)}=(\mu _{\eta _1+\mathrm{}+\eta _{i1}},\mathrm{},\mu _{\eta _1+\mathrm{}+\eta _i})`$. For any $`\nu ^{\mathrm{}}`$ set $`H_\nu =\stackrel{~}{S_\nu }^q`$ where $`S_\nu =S_{\nu _1}\mathrm{}S_{\nu _{\mathrm{}(\nu )}}`$, then we have

(23)
$$H_{\mu ^{(1)}}^qH_{\mu ^{(2)}}^q\mathrm{}H_{\mu ^{(\mathrm{})}}^q=\underset{\lambda }{}K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)H_\lambda ^q,$$

where the sum is over all dominant weights $`\lambda `$. In particular, when this operator is applied to the symmetric function $`1`$, we arrive at a class of symmetric functions and may set

(24)
$$H_{\mu \eta }[X;q]:=H_{\mu ^{(1)}}^qH_{\mu ^{(2)}}^q\mathrm{}H_{\mu ^{(k)}}^q1=\underset{\lambda }{}K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)s_\lambda [X],$$

where the sum is over all partitions $`\lambda `$.

In addition, these operators also seem to be fundamentally related to the new class of symmetric functions referred to as ‘atoms’ $`A_\lambda ^{(k)}[X;q]`$ (see \[LLM\], \[LM1\], \[LM2\]). In particular, when the partition indexing the operator is a rectangle, it was conjectured that $`H_{(\mathrm{}^{k+1\mathrm{}})}^q`$ is a creation operator for this class of symmetric functions.

By Remark 1, the coefficients $`H_{\mu \eta }[X;q],s_\lambda [X]=K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)`$ have the property that when $`q=1`$, they are the Littlewood-Richardson coefficients $`c_{\mu ^{(1)}\mu ^{(2)}\mathrm{}\mu ^{(k)}}^\lambda `$ and when $`q=0`$, the $`K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(0)=1`$ if $`\mu =\lambda `$ and $`0`$ otherwise. It is conjectured that the coefficients $`K_{\lambda \mu \eta }(q)`$ are polynomials in $`q`$ with non-negative integer coefficients.

### 3.3.  Homogeneous creation operator

Multiplication by $`h_k`$ is an operator that adds a row to the homogeneous symmetric functions. The $`q`$-analog of this operator is once again $`h_k`$ and so this is not particularly interesting. However, in \[Za2\] we gave a formula for an operator that adds a column to the homogeneous symmetric functions and in \[Za1\] we gave a combinatorial description of the action of this operator on the Schur function basis. Let $`H_{1^m}`$ be a family of operators with the property that

(25)
$$H_{1^{\lambda _1}}H_{1^{\lambda _2}}\mathrm{}H_{1^{\lambda _{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}}}1=h_\lambda ^{}[X].$$

The $`q`$-twisting of this operator is another example where this $`q`$-analog appears naturally to produce a family of Schur postitive symmetric functions. It develops that $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}}^q`$ is an operator that adds a column to the the symmetric functions $`(q;q)_\lambda h_\lambda \left[\frac{X}{1q}\right]`$, where $`(q;q)_k=(1q)(1q^2)\mathrm{}(1q^k)`$ and $`(q;q)_\lambda =(q;q)_{\lambda _1}(q;q)_{\lambda _2}\mathrm{}(q;q)_{\lambda _{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}}`$. This family has the property that when $`q=1`$ the symmetric functions become $`h_{1^{|\lambda |}}`$ and when $`q=0`$ they become $`h_\lambda `$.

###### Theorem 4.

Let $`H_{1^m}`$ be an operator with the property that $`H_{1^m}h_\lambda [X]=h_{1^m|\lambda }[X]`$ for $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(\lambda )m`$. Then we have

(26)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _1}}}^q\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _2}}}^q\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{H_{1^\lambda _{\mathrm{}}}}^q1=(q;q)_\lambda ^{}h_\lambda ^{}\left[\frac{X}{1q}\right]$$

Proof:

(27)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}}^q\left((q;q)_\lambda h_\lambda \left[\frac{X}{1q}\right]\right)=(q;q)_\lambda H_{1^m}^Y\left(h_\lambda \left[\frac{qX+(1q)Y}{1q}\right]\right)|_{Y=X}$$

Since the summation formula for a homogeneous symmetric function in two sets of variables is given as $`h_m[X+Y]=_{i=0}^mh_i[X]h_{mi}[Y]`$, then for a partition $`\lambda `$, $`h_\lambda [X+Y]=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}_{i=0}^{\lambda _n}h_i[X]h_{\lambda _ni}[Y]`$. It follows that (27) reduces to

$`=`$ $`(q;q)_\lambda {\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{m}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{\lambda _n}{}}}h_i\left[{\displaystyle \frac{qX}{1q}}\right]h_{\lambda _ni+1}[X]`$
$`=`$ $`(q;q)_\lambda {\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{m}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{\lambda _n+1}{}}}h_i\left[{\displaystyle \frac{qX}{1q}}\right]h_{\lambda _ni+1}[X]h_{\lambda _n+1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{qX}{1q}}\right]\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(q;q)_\lambda {\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{m}{}}}h_{\lambda _n+1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{X}{1q}}\right]q^{\lambda _n+1}h_{\lambda _n+1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{X}{1q}}\right]`$
$`=`$ $`(q;q)_\lambda {\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{m}{}}}(1q^{\lambda _n+1})h_{\lambda _n+1}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{X}{1q}}\right]`$
$`=`$ $`(q;q)_{1^m|\lambda }h_{1^m|\lambda }\left[{\displaystyle \frac{X}{1q}}\right].`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

There are elementary proofs that the functions $`(q;q)_\lambda h_\lambda \left[\frac{X}{1q}\right]`$ are Schur positive. Once again we have a case of a Schur positive $`q`$-analog arising from a Schur positive family of symmetric functions $`h_\lambda [X]`$. Remark 1 implies that the limit as $`q`$ goes to $`1`$ of these symmetric functions is $`h_{1^n}[X]`$ when $`\lambda `$ is a partition of $`n`$ and when $`q=0`$ we have that they reduce to $`h_\lambda ^{}[X]`$.

### 3.4.  Macdonald’s Operators

Macdonald introduced operators $`D_n^r`$ (see \[M\] p. 315) such that the Macdonald polynomials $`P_\lambda (X;q,t)`$ are characterized as eigenfunctions of this family of operators. What we will show is that the Macdonald operators are the $`q`$-twisting of the same operators with $`q`$ set equal to $`0`$.

Let $`T_{x_i}`$ be an operator on polynomials with the property $`T_{x_i}P[X_n]=P[Xx_i]`$. Consider the operator

(29)
$$D_n^r(t)=\underset{I\{1,\mathrm{},n\}}{}A_I(X_n;t)\underset{iI}{}T_{x_i}$$

where $`A_I(X_n;t)=t^{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{r}{2}\right)}_{iI,jI}\frac{tx_ix_j}{x_ix_j}`$ and the sum is over all subsets $`I`$ of size $`r`$.

Now define $`D_n^r(q,t)=\stackrel{~}{D_n^r(t)}^q`$, then calculate that

(30) $`D_n^r(q,t)P[X_n]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{I\{1,\mathrm{},n\}}{|I|=r}}{}}A_I(Y_n;t){\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}T_{y_i}P[qX_n+(1q)Y_n]|_{Y_n=X_n}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{I\{1,\mathrm{},n\}}{|I|=r}}{}}A_I(Y_n;t)P[X_n(1q)X_I].`$
If we set $`T_{q,x_i}P[X_n]=P[X_n(1q)x_i]=\stackrel{~}{T_{x_i}}^q`$, then

(31)
$$D_n^r(q,t)=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{I\{1,\mathrm{},n\}}{|I|=r}}{}A_I(X_n;t)\underset{iI}{}T_{q,x_i},$$

and these are the operators $`D_n^r`$ as they are defined in \[M\]. As was presented in this reference, set $`D_n(u;q,t)=_{r=0}^nu^rD_n^r(q,t)`$.

Consider again the Bernstein operators, $`S_m`$, as they were defined in equation (15) and also consider $`\stackrel{~}{S}_m=\omega S_m\omega =(1)^mS(z)|_{z^m}`$. From these operators create a $`q,t`$ analog by applying this parameter deformation twice. Set $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m=\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{~}{S}_m}^q}^{1/t}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m^{}=\stackrel{~}{\stackrel{~}{S_m}^t}^{1/q}`$.

A simple calculation yields that

(32)
$$\stackrel{~}{D}_mP[X]=P\left[X+\frac{(1q)(11/t)}{z}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX]|_{z^m},$$

and

(33)
$$\stackrel{~}{D}_m^{}P[X]=P\left[X\frac{(11/q)(1t)}{z}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX]|_{z^m}.$$

These families of operators were studied in \[GHT\] and more extensively in \[BGHT\] to show the polynomiality of the $`q,t`$-Catalan numbers. In particular, when $`m=0`$ it is known that these operators are related to the operators $`D_n^1`$ and that they have the family $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ as eigenfunctions. Theorem $`1.2`$ of \[GHT\] was the following result (translated on the $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ basis).

###### Theorem 5.

(Garsia-Haiman-Tesler \[GHT\]) For $`\mu `$ a partition of $`n`$, we have

(34)
$$\stackrel{~}{D}_0H_\mu [X;q,t]=\left(1(11/t)\underset{i1}{}t^i(1q^{\mu _i})\right)H_\mu [X;q,t],$$

(35)
$$\stackrel{~}{D}_0^{}H_\mu [X;q,t]=\left(1(1t)\underset{i1}{}t^i(1q^{\mu _i})\right)H_\mu [X;q,t].$$

### 3.5.  Hall-Littlewood creation operator

Consider now an operator that adds a column to the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions $`H_\lambda [X;t]`$. One such operator was introduced in \[Za2\] where the combinatorial action on the Schur function basis was discussed and some explicit formulas were presented. We will discuss some of these operators in more detail in the following section. For now we present the following theorem.

###### Theorem 6.

Let $`\lambda `$ be a partition such that $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(\lambda )m`$. Any operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$ with the property $`H_{1^m}^tH_\mu [X;t]=H_{1^m|\lambda }[X;t]`$ satisfies the equation

(36)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _1}}^t}^q\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _2}}^t}^q\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{H_{1^\lambda _{\mathrm{}}}^t}^q=H_\lambda ^{}[X;q,t]$$

The most elementary proof of this theorem can be seen in \[GZ\] and is self contained and uses nothing more than the identities in the original paper of Macdonald. We present here a short proof that follows by demonstrating that if the theorem is true for one such operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$, then it is true for all such operators.

Some of the first proofs of the polynomiality of the $`q,t`$-Kostka coefficients used operators of this type to show that the $`q,t`$-Kostka polynomials satisfied recurrences that did not have denominators. Almost any of the operators given by Kirillov-Lapointe-Noumi-Vinet \[KN1\] \[KN2\] \[LV1\] \[LV2\] are of this type. We need only one example and the following lemma.

###### Lemma 7.

Let $`\lambda `$ be a partition such that $`\mathrm{}(\lambda )m`$. Assume that there exists some operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$ such that

(37)
$$H_{1^m}^tH_\lambda [X;t]=H_{1^m|\lambda }[X;t]$$

and

(38)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^qH_\lambda [X;q,t]=H_{1^m|\lambda }[X;q,t].$$

Then for any operator $`H_{}^{}{}_{1^m}{}^{t}`$ that satisfies equation (37) will also satisfy equation (38).

Proof: It follows from the definition of the Macdonald symmetric functions and the property that $`H_\mu [X;t,q]=\omega H_\mu ^{}[X;q,t]`$ that we have the triangularity relation $`H_\mu [X(1q);q,t]=_{\lambda \mu }a_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)s_\lambda [X]`$. Since $`H_\mu [X;t]=_{\lambda \mu }K_{\lambda \mu }(t)s_\lambda [X]`$, then there exist coefficients $`b_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)`$ such that $`H_\mu [(1q)X;q,t]=_{\lambda \mu }b_{\lambda \mu }(q,t)H_\lambda [X;t]`$.

Consider the expansion of $`H_\mu [X+Y;q,t]=_{\nu \mu }H_{\mu /\nu }[X;q,t]H_\nu [Y;q,t]`$ which may be seen as a transformation of formula $`(7.9)`$ on p. 345 of \[M\].

Since our operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$ adds a column of size $`m`$ to $`H_\nu [X;t]`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^q`$ adds a column to $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$, then $`H_{1^m|\mu }[X;q,t]`$ is given by the formula

$`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^qH_\mu [X;q,t]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda \mu }{}}H_{\mu /\lambda }[qX;q,t]H_{1^m}^tH_\lambda [(1q)X;q,t]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda \mu }{}}H_{\mu /\lambda }[qX;q,t]{\displaystyle \underset{\nu \lambda }{}}b_{\lambda \nu }(q,t)H_{1^m}^tH_\nu [X;t]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda \mu }{}}H_{\mu /\lambda }[qX;q,t]{\displaystyle \underset{\nu \lambda }{}}b_{\lambda \nu }(q,t)H_{1^m|\nu }[X;t].`$
The right hand side of this expression is independent of the operator that is used to derive it, therefore absolutely any operator $`H_{}^{}{}_{1^m}{}^{t}`$ that has the property that $`H_{}^{}{}_{1^m}{}^{t}H_\mu [X;t]=H_{1^m|\mu }[X;t]`$, also has the property that $`\stackrel{~}{H_{}^{}{}_{1^m}{}^{t}}^q`$ adds a column to the Macdonald symmetric functions $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

To prove the theorem it is necessary to produce at least one operator that satisfies the property of the lemma. Fortunately this is relatively easy since practically any in the development in \[KN1\] \[KN2\] \[LV1\] \[LV2\] such that one can set $`q=0`$ without needing to take a limit satisfies the properties of Lemma 7 (once transformed to the $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ basis).

Consider Expression $`3`$ of \[LV1\]. Let $`D_I^r(u;q,t)`$ be the Macdonald operator of equation (31) that acts only on the variables $`x_i`$ for $`i`$ in the set $`I`$. A formula for an operator that adds a column of size $`m`$ onto the $`J_\mu [X;q,t]:=H_\mu [X(1t);q,t]`$ basis is given by

(40)
$$B_m^{(3)}(q,t)=\underset{|I|=m}{}\underset{r=0}{\overset{m}{}}t^rx_I\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{iI}{jI}}{}\frac{x_ix_j/t}{x_ix_j}D_I^r(t;q,t)$$

where $`x_I`$ here represents $`_{iI}x_i`$. It is easy to demonstrate by acting on an arbitrary symmetric function that

(41)
$$B_m^{(3)}(q,t)=\stackrel{~}{B_m^{(3)}(0,t)}^q$$

Let $`F^t`$ be an operator that sends the symmetric function $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ to the symmetric function $`J_\mu [X;q,t]`$. More precisely, for an arbitrary symmetric function $`P[X]`$ set $`F^tP[X]=P[X(1t)]`$ and denote the inverse of this operator $`F_t^1`$. Since $`B_m^{(3)}(q,t)`$ adds a column of size $`m`$ to the $`J_\mu [X;q,t]`$ basis, $`F_t^1B_m^{(3)}(q,t)F^t`$ is an operator that adds a column to the $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ basis.

When $`q=0`$ in the operator $`B_m^{(3)}(q,t)`$ it becomes an operator that adds a column to the $`H_\mu [X(1t);t]`$ basis. That is, we have

(42)
$$B_m^{(3)}(0,t)H_\mu [X(1t);t]=H_{1^m|\mu }[X(1t);t].$$

Since $`F^tH_\mu [X;t]=H_\mu [X(1t);t]`$, this implies $`F_t^1B_m^{(3)}(0,t)F^t`$ is an operator that adds a column to the $`H_\mu [X;t]`$ basis.

To demonstrate the theorem, it remains to show that the $`q`$-twist of $`F_t^1B_m^{(3)}(0,t)F^t`$ is exactly the operator $`F_t^1B_m^{(3)}(q,t)F^t`$. This follows from the fact that conjugation by $`F^t`$ commutes with the $`q`$-twisting for any symmetric function operator.

###### Lemma 8.

For $`VHom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ we have

(43)
$$F_t^1\stackrel{~}{V}^qF^t=\stackrel{~}{F_t^1VF^t}^q.$$

Proof: This follows by acting both the left and the right hand side of this equation on an arbitrary symmetric function. $`\mathrm{}`$

This leads us to several other formulas for operators with similar properties. Consider the following corollary.

###### Corollary 9.

Define $`h_\lambda (q)=_{s\lambda }1q^{a_\lambda (s)+l_\lambda (s)+1}`$. Let $`H_{1^m}^q`$ be an operator with the property $`H_{1^m}^qH_\lambda [X;q]=H_{1^m|\lambda }[X;q]`$ for $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(\lambda )m`$. Then

(44)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _1}}^q}^t\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _2}}^q}^t\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{H_{1^\lambda _{\mathrm{}}}^q}^t1=\omega H_\lambda [X;q,t],$$

and

(45)
$$\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _1}}^q}^q\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda _2}}^q}^q\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{H_{1^\lambda _{\mathrm{}}}^q}^q=h_\lambda ^{}(q)s_\lambda ^{}\left[\frac{X}{1q}\right].$$

Proof: This follows from Theorem 6 and the following two identities about Macdonald’s symmetric functions.

(46)
$$H_\mu [X;t,q]=\omega H_\mu ^{}[X;q,t]$$

(47)
$$H_\mu [X;q,q]=h_\mu (q)s_\mu \left[\frac{X}{1q}\right]$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

In the next two sections we will develop this last example in more detail. The observation that the Macdonald polynomials are built up from the $`q`$-twisting of the operators that build the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions allows us to derive several interesting formulas for these operators.

###### Remark 10.

Unfortunately, the analog of section 3.2 does not seem to extend to these operators as a way of generalizing the Maconald symmetric functions. Consider the operator $`H_{1^\lambda }^t:=H_{1^{\lambda _1}}^tH_{1^{\lambda _2}}^t\mathrm{}H_{1^{\lambda _{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}}}^t`$. We would hope that a composition of $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^\lambda }^t}^q`$ are Schur positive if reasonable conditions are placed on $`\lambda `$. By calculating examples we begin to be encouraged by such a conjecture, however for large enough examples it seems to break down (for example if $`\lambda ^{(1)}=(4),\lambda ^{(2)}=(2,2),\lambda ^{(3)}=(1,1)`$, then $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda ^{(1)}}}^t}^q\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda ^{(2)}}}^t}^q\stackrel{~}{H_{1^{\lambda ^{(3)}}}^t}^q1`$ is not Schur positive).

## 4. Ribbons and Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions

In \[Za1\] we gave a combinatorial formula for the action of an operator that adds a column to the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions. We will recall some of the definitions and theorems from that work and use them to derive some useful formulas.

The definition of a ribbon is a skew partition that contains no $`2\times 2`$ subdiagrams. For a non-empty partition $`\lambda `$, define $`\lambda ^{rc}=(\lambda _21,\lambda _31,\mathrm{},\lambda _{\mathrm{}(\lambda )}1)`$ (the $`rc`$ indicates that $`\lambda `$ has the first row and first column removed). If $`R`$ is a ribbon of size $`m`$ (denoted by $`Rm`$) then $`R`$ will be equal to $`\lambda /\lambda ^{rc}`$ for some partition $`\lambda `$ with $`\lambda _1+\mathrm{}(\lambda )1=m`$.

Set $`D(R)`$ equal to the descent set of $`R`$, that is the set $`\{i|i+1^{st}`$ cell lies below the $`i^{th}`$ cell in R $`\}`$ when the cells are labeled with the integers $`1`$ to $`n`$ from left to right and top to bottom. Therefore every ribbon can be identified with a subset of $`\{1,\mathrm{},m1\}`$.

There is a natural statistic associated with a ribbon. Define the major index of a ribbon to be $`maj(R)=_{iD(R)}i`$. Its complementary statistic will be $`comaj(R)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{|R|}{2}\right)maj(R)`$.

From formula (15), $`S_m`$ is an operator that adds a row to the partition indexing a Schur symmetric function. By conjugating $`S_m`$ by $`\omega `$, one obtains an operator that adds a column. Define $`\stackrel{~}{S}_m=\omega S_m\omega `$. In plethystic notation, this operator is given as

(48)
$$\stackrel{~}{S}_mP[X]=(1)^mP\left[X+\frac{1}{z}\right]\mathrm{\Omega }[zX]|_{z^m}.$$

Now for each ribbon of size $`m`$, define an operator that raises the degree of a symmetric function by $`m`$. For $`R=\lambda /\lambda ^{rc}`$ set

(49)
$$S^R=s_{\lambda ^{rc}}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\lambda _1^{}}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\lambda _2^{}}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\lambda _{\lambda _1}^{}},$$

where $`\lambda _i^{}`$ is the length of the $`i^{th}`$ column in $`\lambda `$. This is a combinatorial operator in the sense that all calculations can be computed on the Schur basis using the Littlewood-Richardson rule and the commutation relations $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a\stackrel{~}{S}_b=\stackrel{~}{S}_{b1}\stackrel{~}{S}_{a+1}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{S}_a\stackrel{~}{S}_{a+1}=0`$ so that the operator $`S^R`$ can be thought of as an operator that acts on $`s_\lambda `$ by adding the ribbon $`R`$ to the left of $`\lambda `$.

The main theorem in $`[Za1]`$ was the following result.

###### Theorem 11.

(Theorem 1.1 of \[Za1\]) The operator $`H_{1^m}^q=_{Rm}q^{comaj(R)}S^R`$ has the property that $`H_{1^m}^qH_\mu [X;q]=H_{1^m|\mu }[X;q]`$ for $`\mathrm{}(\mu )m`$.

Some elegant relations develop with the flip operation and ribbon operators. Note that it follows directly from the definition that if $`R`$ is a ribbon of size $`m`$ and $`R^+`$ is a ribbon of size $`m+1`$ with $`D(R)=D(R^+)`$, then $`S^{R^+}=S^R\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$. It develops that there is also a recursive method for adding a cell below the ribbon. If $`R_+`$ is a ribbon of size $`m+1`$ such that $`D(R_+)=D(R)\{m\}`$, then we have the following surprising formula.

###### Theorem 12.

(Theorem 2.2 of \[Za1\]) If $`Rm`$ and $`R_+m+1`$ such that $`D(R_+)=D(R)\{m\}`$, then $`S^{R_+}=\overline{\overline{S^R}S_1}`$.

This theorem can be used to produce the following plethystic formula for a ribbon operator.

###### Proposition 13.

Let $`Rm`$, then

(50)
$$S^RP[X]=(1)^{m|D(R)|}P[X+Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[(z_1+Z_{D(R)^c+1})X]\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m},$$

where we have set $`Z^{}=_{i=1}^m1/z_i`$ and $`Z_{D(R)^c+1}=_{i[1,m1]D(R)}z_{i+1}`$.

Proof: By induction using Theorem 12 and direct calculation. $`\mathrm{}`$

It follows from Theorem 11 and 12 that $`H_{1^m}^t`$ may be defined recursively. Set $`H_{1^1}^t=\stackrel{~}{S}_1`$ and

(51)
$$H_{1^{m+1}}^t=t^mH_{1^m}^t\stackrel{~}{S}_1+\overline{\overline{H_{1^m}^t}S_1}.$$

Either from this recursive definition or from the previous proposition, one may demonstrate the following plethystic formula for the $`H_{1^m}^t`$ operator.

###### Proposition 14.

The operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$ of Theorem 11 has the following form in plethystic notation.

(52)
$$H_{1^m}^tP[X]=P[X+Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[z_1X]\underset{i=2}{\overset{m}{}}(1t^{i1}\mathrm{\Omega }[z_iX])\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}$$

Note that because the coefficient of $`z_1`$ in the expression

(53)
$$P[X+Z^{}]\underset{i=2}{\overset{m}{}}(1t^{i1}\mathrm{\Omega }[z_iX])\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)$$

is zero, we also have the following equivalent expression.

###### Corollary 15.

The operator $`H_{1^m}^t`$ of Theorem 11 has the following form in plethystic notation.

(54)
$$H_{1^m}^tP[X]=P[X+Z^{}]\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}(1t^{i1}\mathrm{\Omega }[z_iX])\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}$$

In the next section Theorem 6 will be used to develop methods for computing Macdonald polynomials and the $`q,t`$-Kostka coefficients from these formulas. One may use some of the properties of the ribbon operators to derive several other formulas for operators $`H_{1^m}^t`$ and hence for $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^q`$, but this particular formula seems like a natural extension to the ribbon operator formula for the Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions.

## 5. Generalized ribbons and Macdonald symmetric functions

Consider the following generalization of the plethystic formulas presented in the previous section. Since we know from Theorem 6 that the operator $`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^q`$ is an operator that adds a column to the Macdonald symmetric functions, the $`q`$-analog of equation (54) yields the following theorem.

###### Theorem 16.

The following operator adds a column to the Macdonald symmetric functions $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$ if $`\mathrm{}(\mu )m`$.

(55)
$$H_{1^m}^{qt}P[X]=P[X+(1q)Z^{}]\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}(1t^{i1}\mathrm{\Omega }[z_iX])\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}$$

Proof: This follows from Theorem 6 and Corollary 15. Calculate (55) by using equation (54) and (9) to show

$`\stackrel{~}{H_{1^m}^t}^qP[X]`$ $`=`$ $`H_{1^m}^{tY}P[qX+(1q)Y]|_{Y=X}`$
$`=`$ $`P[qX+(1q)Y+(1q)Z^{}]{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}(1t^{i1}\mathrm{\Omega }[z_iY])`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jm}{}}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}|_{Y=X}.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

We will develop this operator further and show that the combinatorial definition of a ribbon operator can be generalized and used to give a formula analogous to Theorem 11.

Let $`VHom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ be an operator that does not involve the parameter $`q`$ and let $`P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ also not include the parameter $`q`$. By setting $`q=0`$ in the expression $`\stackrel{~}{V}^qP[X]`$,

(57)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qP[X]|_{q=0}=V^YP[qX+(1q)Y]|_{Y=X}|_{q=0}=VP[X].$$

We remark that the highest power of $`q`$ that appears in this expression is the degree of the symmetric function $`P`$. By acting $`\stackrel{~}{V}^q`$ on a Schur function, it can be seen that

(58)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qs_\lambda [X]=\underset{\mu \lambda }{}q^{|\mu |}V^Y(s_\mu [XY]s_{\lambda /\mu }[Y])|_{Y=X}.$$

The coefficient of $`q^{|\lambda |}`$ in this expression will be the term

(59)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qs_\lambda [X]|_{q^{|\lambda |}}=V^Ys_\lambda [XY]|_{Y=X}=\overline{V}s_\lambda [X].$$

The coefficients of $`q^k`$ may be interpreted then as a discrete interpolation between $`V`$ and $`\overline{V}`$. Define notation for the coefficient of $`q^k`$ of this expression so that

(60)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^qP[X]|_{q^k}=\overline{V}^{(k)}P[X]=\underset{\lambda k}{}V^Y(s_\lambda [XY](s_\lambda ^{}P)[Y])|_{Y=X}.$$

By linearity, this notation may be extended to any operator $`V`$ that may now depend on the parameter $`q`$. This yields the following proposition.

###### Proposition 17.

For $`VHom(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$,

(61)
$$\stackrel{~}{V}^q=\underset{k0}{}q^k\overline{V}^{(k)},$$

where $`\overline{V}^{(k)}`$ is defined in equation (60).

$`\overline{S^R}^{(k)}`$ can be developed in detail thereby giving a combinatorial method for calculating the coefficient of $`q^i`$ in a Macdonald polynomial.

Define a notion of a generalized ribbon operator that starts with a ribbon $`Rm`$ with $`R=\lambda /\lambda ^{rc}`$ and associate with this a sequence $`v=(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_m)`$ with $`v_i0`$. Generalize the notion of a ribbon by setting the ‘thickness’ of the $`i^{th}`$ cell of the ribbon to be $`v_i+1`$ so that when the sequence consists of $`m`$ zeros this gives the standard ribbon.

Let $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}(\lambda )`$ and say that $`D(R)=\{i_1>i_2>\mathrm{}>i_\mathrm{}1\}`$ and $`\{1,\mathrm{},m\}D(R)=\{j_1<j_2<\mathrm{}<j_{\lambda _1}\}`$. Let $`\alpha =\lambda ^{rc}(v_{i_1+1},v_{i_2+1},\mathrm{},v_{i_\mathrm{}1+1})`$ (as vectors) and $`\beta ^{}=\lambda ^{}+(v_1,v_{j_1+1},v_{j_2+1},\mathrm{},v_{j_{\lambda _11}+1})`$ (neither $`\alpha `$ nor $`\beta ^{}`$ are necessarily partitions). Then set $`S^{(R,v)}=(1)^{|\lambda ^{rc}||\alpha |}s_\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\beta _1^{}}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\beta _2^{}}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{\beta _{\lambda _1}^{}}`$. Call $`S^{(R,v)}`$ a generalized ribbon operator.

The formulation of these operators leads to a simple construction with a picture: draw the original ribbon and place $`v_i`$ cells either to the left of the $`i^{th}`$ cell if $`i1`$ is a descent of the ribbon or above the cell if it is not. $`\alpha `$ is the sequence representing the space underneath the diagram and $`\beta ^{}`$ is the sequence representing the heights of the columns of the diagram. The sign represents the number of cells that are ‘underneath’ the ribbon. We present a couple of examples to give a better picture of these truly combinatorial constructions.

###### Example 18.

Consider the ribbon $`R=\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \end{array}`$ of size $`4`$ with $`D(R)=\{3,2\}`$. If $`v=(0,0,0,0)`$, then $`S^{(R,v)}=S^R`$. If $`v`$ is one of $`(1,0,0,0)`$, $`(0,1,0,0)`$, $`(0,0,1,0)`$, $`(0,0,0,1)`$ then $`S^{(R,v)}`$ is equivalent to the following ribbon operators (respectively)

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_{11}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_4\stackrel{~}{S}_3\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_{11}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_3\stackrel{~}{S}_4\begin{array}{cc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_1^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_3\stackrel{~}{S}_3\begin{array}{cc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_{01}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_3\stackrel{~}{S}_3$$

The second and fourth generalized ribbons are $`0`$. The second because it contains the operation of adding a column of size $`3`$ on a column of size $`4`$, and the fourth because a row of size $`0`$ is added on a row of size $`1`$ in the skew part of the operator.

###### Example 19.

Let $`R=\begin{array}{ccc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & & & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & & & \text{    }\hfill \end{array}`$. Now let $`v=(1,1,0,1,0,2,0,1,0)`$ This is represented by the following picture where a dot is placed in each of the cells representing the original ribbon and there are $`v_i`$ cells either to the left of the $`i^{th}`$ cell if $`i1D(R)`$ or above if $`i1D(R)`$ (and the $`v_1`$ cells always go above the first cell in the ribbon).

$$\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & & & \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & & & & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_{4321}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_5\stackrel{~}{S}_5\stackrel{~}{S}_3$$

Representing these operators with a diagram of this sort works fine if $`i1`$ is a descent and $`v_i`$ is so large that it creates a negative index in $`\alpha `$. Interpret this to mean that skewing by a Schur function with a negative index kills the term and the result is $`0`$.

Note also that some ‘straightening’ using the relation $`S_mS_n=S_{n1}S_{m+1}`$ may be necessary.

###### Example 20.

$`R`$ is as above, but $`v=(1,1,0,1,0,4,0,1,5)`$. Then $`R`$ can be represented by the image

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & & & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & & & & \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}=s_{1,3,2,1}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_5\stackrel{~}{S}_7\stackrel{~}{S}_3=s_{1,3,2,1}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_3=s_{2,1,1,1}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_6\stackrel{~}{S}_3=\begin{array}{cccc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \end{array}$$

The final image comes from first straightening the columns of the generalized ribbon and then straightening Schur function that one skews by with appropriate sign changes.

Generalized ribbon operators are related to the original notion of a ribbon operator by the following easily statable theorem.

###### Theorem 21.

Let $`R`$ be a ribbon of size $`m`$ and $`k0`$ an integer.

(62)
$$\overline{S^R}^{(k)}=\underset{v}{}S^{(R,v)}e_v^{},$$

where the sum is over all sequences $`v`$ having length $`m`$ and whose sum is $`k`$ and the condition that $`v_i0`$ and $`e_v`$ is the elementary symmetric function indexed by the sequence $`v`$. Let

(63)
$$H_{1^m}^{qt}=\underset{Rm}{}\underset{v}{}q^{|v|}t^{comaj(R)}S^{(R,v)}e_v^{},$$

where here the sum is over all sequences $`v`$ having length $`m`$ and non-negative entries. Then $`H_{1^m}^{qt}H_\mu [X;q,t]=H_{1^m|\mu }[X;q,t]`$ for $`\mathrm{}(\mu )m`$.

This theorem is a combinatorial rule for computing Macdonald symmetric functions. Before we present the proof, we give an example of how this theorem works.

###### Example 22.

Computation of a Macdonald symmetric function with generalized ribbons

We will use formula (63) to compute $`H_{222}[X;q,t]`$. This is a long and involved example, but it demonstrates the power of this this recurrence since with a reasonable amount of work one can calculate a Macdonald polynomial of size $`6`$ or higher by hand.

Start with the formula for $`H_{111}[X;q,t]=\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \end{array}+(t+t^2)\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{ccc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \end{array}`$ (this may be calculated by acting $`H_{1^3}^{qt}`$ on $`1`$).

The sum in equation (63) over $`v`$ is finite because only terms such that $`|v|`$ is less than or equal to the degree of the symmetric function that is being acted on are needed. In this computation quite a few operators are necessary.

We list all of the relevant operators (those which are non-zero) and place a dot in the cells that consist of a the core of the operator so that it is easy to read the sequence $`v`$ from the picture. The sign associated to each picture of the operator is $`1`$ to the power of the number of cells under the ribbon.

| . |
| --- |
| . |
| . |

.              .              .                                            .              .              .                                                          .              .              .
$$\text{  .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{      .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{  .    .        .  }\text{ }\text{          .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{          .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{      .    .        .  }\text{ }\text{          .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{              .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{              .    .    .  }\text{ }\text{          .    .        .  }\text{ }\text{          .    .        .  }\text{ }\text{              .    .    .  }\text{ }\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}$$

| . |
| --- |
| . | . |

.              .             .                .                           .             .                                            .              .             .                              .                           .             .                                                          .              .             .                                            .                           .             .                                           .                           .             .                                              .                           .             .
| . | . | . |
| --- | --- | --- |

.             .             .                                            .             .             .                                           .             .             .                                              .             .             .                                                          .             .             .                                                         .             .             .                                                        .             .             .                                                             .             .             .                                                           .             .             .                                                            .             .             .                                                                .             .             .
To complete this computation, calculate $`e_\lambda ^{}`$ on the symmetric function $`H_{111}[X;t]`$ for $`|\lambda |3`$. This is given by the following list

(64)
$$e_1^{}H_{111}[X;t]=\left(1+t+t^2\right)\left(ts_2+s_{1,1}\right)$$

(65)
$$e_2^{}H_{111}[X;t]=\left(1+t+t^2\right)s_1$$

(66)
$$e_{11}^{}H_{111}[X;t]=\left(1+2t+2t^2+t^3\right)s_1$$

(67)
$$e_3^{}H_{111}[X;t]=1$$

(68)
$$e_{21}^{}H_{111}[X;t]=1+t+t^2$$

(69)
$$e_{111}^{}H_{111}[X;t]=1+2t+2t^2+t^3$$

The computation proceeds as follows. The coefficient of $`q^0`$ is just the Hall-Littlewood symmetric function $`H_{222}[X;t]`$, calculated by acting $`\begin{array}{c}\text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{cc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{ccc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ on $`H_{111}[X;t]`$. So the coefficient of $`q^0`$ is

(70)
$$s_{222}+(t+t^2)s_{321}+t^3s_{33}+t^3s_{411}+(t^2+t^3+t^4)s_{42}+(t^4+t^5)s_{51}+t^6s_6$$

The coefficient of $`q^1`$ is the operator $`\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}t\begin{array}{cc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{cc}\text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on the symmetric function $`\left(1+t+t^2\right)\left(ts_2+s_{1,1}\right).`$

(71)
$$\left(1+t+t^2\right)(t^4s_{51}+(t^2+t^3)s_{411}+t^3s_{42}+(t+t^2)s_{321}+t^2s_{33}+ts_{3111}+s_{2211})$$

The coefficient of $`q^2`$ comes from two components, $`\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on the symmetric function $`e_2^{}H_{111}[X;q,t]`$, and $`t\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on the symmetric function $`e_{11}^{}H_{111}[X;q,t]`$. The first part is

(72)
$$\left(t^2+t+1\right)\left(t^3s_{42}+t^3s_{411}+\left(t+t^2\right)s_{3111}ts_{222}+s_{2211}t+s_{21111}\right)$$

and the second is

(73)
$$\left(1+2t+2t^2+t^3\right)\left(t^3s_{42}+t^2s_{321}+ts_{222}\right)$$

The sum of these two quantities is

(74)
$$\left(t^2+t+1\right)\left(t^4s_{42}+t^3s_{411}+\left(t^2+t^3\right)s_{321}+\left(t+t^2\right)s_{3111}+t^2s_{222}+ts_{2211}+s_{21111}\right)$$

The coefficient of $`q^3`$ comes from three different operators acting each on a different constant. The first operator is $`\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{ccc}& & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill \\ & & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on $`1`$, the second is $`t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}t\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}t\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^2\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{c}\text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{cc}& \text{    }\hfill \\ & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{ccc}& & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on $`1+t+t^2`$, and the third is $`t\begin{array}{cc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \\ \text{    }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}+t^3\begin{array}{ccc}\text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill & \text{    }\hfill \\ \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill & \text{  .  }\hfill \end{array}`$ when it acts on the symmetric function $`2t+2t^2+t^3+1`$. These three parts are

(75)
$$t^3s_{33}t^3s_{321}+t^3s_{3111}\left(t+t^2\right)s_{222}+\left(t+t^2\right)s_{21111}+s_{111111}$$

(76)
$$\left(1+t+t^2\right)\left(2t^3s_{33}+t^3s_{321}+\left(t^2+2t\right)s_{222}+t^2s_{2211}\right)$$

(77)
$$\left(2t+2t^2+t^3+1\right)\left(ts_{222}+t^3s_{33}\right)$$

The sum of these three quantities is

(78)
$$t^6s_{33}+\left(t^4+t^5\right)s_{321}+t^3s_{3111}+t^3s_{222}+\left(t^2+t+1\right)t^2s_{2211}+\left(t+t^2\right)s_{21111}+s_{111111}$$

which is the coefficient of $`q^3`$ in $`H_{222}[X;q,t]`$.

Clearly, an enormous amount of simplification occurs when arriving at a final expression for $`H_\mu [X;q,t]`$. An eventual goal of a combinatorial recurrence on the $`q,t`$-Kostka coefficients will be to arrive at a combinatorial interpretation for them in terms of standard tableaux. Even if this recurrence turns out to be too complicated, these techniques (in particular, Theorem 6 and Theorem 11) can certainly be used to derive many other recurrences for the coefficients.

Before presenting the proof, we will need a few lemmas that come from the derivation of the ribbon operator. We state them without proof and refer the reader to \[Za1\].

###### Lemma 23.

For any operator $`V`$, $`\overline{\overline{V}S_m}=_{j0}(1)^{mj}h_jV\stackrel{~}{S}_{mj}`$

###### Lemma 24.

$`\overline{\overline{s_\lambda ^{}}S_m}=(s_{(m,\lambda )})^{}`$.

Proof:  (of Theorem 21) If $`a0`$ and $`v`$ is a list, then we denote $`v`$ with $`a`$ prepended (resp. appended) by $`(a,v)`$ (resp. $`(v,a)`$).

Let $`R^+`$ be a ribbon of size $`m+1`$ that does not have $`m`$ as a descent. Also let $`R`$ be the ribbon of size $`m`$ such that $`D(R)=D(R^+)`$. By the definition of $`S^{(R,v)}`$, notice that $`S^{(R^+,(v,a))}=S^{(R,v)}\stackrel{~}{S}_{1+a}.`$

Now let $`R_+`$ be a ribbon of size $`m+1`$ such that $`m`$ is a descent. Let $`R=\lambda /\lambda ^{rc}`$ be the ribbon of size $`m`$ such that $`D(R)\{m\}=D(R_+)`$ then remark that $`R_+=(\lambda _1,\lambda )/(\lambda _11,\lambda ^{rc})`$. If $`S^{(R,v)}=(1)^{|v|}s_\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_\beta ^{}`$, then $`S^{(R_+,(v,a))}=(1)^{|v|+a}s_{(\lambda _11a,\alpha )}^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{(\lambda _1,\beta )^{}}`$. It follows from Lemma 23 and 24 and the commutation relation $`\stackrel{~}{S}_m\stackrel{~}{S}_n=\stackrel{~}{S}_{n1}\stackrel{~}{S}_{m+1}`$ that

$`S^{(R_+,(v,a))}`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{|\lambda ^{rc}||\alpha |+a}\overline{\overline{s_\alpha ^{}}S_{1+a\lambda _1}}\stackrel{~}{S}_{(\lambda _1,\beta )^{}}`$
$`=`$ $`(1)^{|\lambda ^{rc}||\alpha |+a}{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}(1)^{1+a\lambda _1j}h_js_\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{1+a\lambda _1j}\stackrel{~}{S}_{(\lambda _1,\beta )^{}}`$
$`=`$ $`(1)^{|\lambda ^{rc}||\alpha |+a}{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}(1)^{1+aj}h_js_\alpha ^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_\beta ^{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{1+aj}`$
$`=`$ $`(1)^a\overline{\overline{S^{(R,v)}}S_{1+a}}`$
Use these two relations to give an inductive derivation of the following plethystic form of the operator $`S^{(R,v)}`$. By carrying out nearly the exact same calculation (and using identical notation for $`Z_{D(R)^c+1}`$) as given in Proposition 13, derive that

(80) $`S^{(R,v)}P[X]`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{m|D(R)|+|v|}P[X+Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[(z_1+Z_{D(R)^c+1})X]`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jm}{}}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1^{1+v_1}z_2^{1+v_2}\mathrm{}z_m^{1+v_m}}.`$
Now consider a formula for $`\stackrel{~}{S^R}^q`$. Using the same calculation for Theorem 16 and the equation given in Proposition 13, demonstrate that

(81)
$$\stackrel{~}{S^R}^q=(1)^{m|D(R)|}P[X+(1q)Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[(z_1+Z_{D(R)^c+1})X]\underset{1i<jm}{}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}.$$

The coefficient of $`q^k`$ in this formula is

$`\overline{S^R}^{(k)}`$ $`=`$ $`(1)^{m|D(R)|}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda k}{}}f_\lambda [Z^{}]e_\lambda ^{}P[X+Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[(z_1+Z_{D(R)^c+1})X]{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jm}{}}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}`$
$`=`$ $`(1)^{m|D(R)|+k}{\displaystyle \underset{\lambda k}{}}m_\lambda [Z^{}]e_\lambda ^{}P[X+Z^{}]\mathrm{\Omega }[(z_1+Z_{D(R)^c+1})X]{\displaystyle \underset{1i<jm}{}}(1z_j/z_i)|_{z_1z_2\mathrm{}z_m}.`$
By expanding $`m_\lambda [Z^{}]`$ as $`_{v\lambda }z^v`$ we see clearly that this is equivalent to equation (62). The formula stated for the operator $`H_{1^m}^{qt}`$ follows from this derivation, Theorem 6 and Proposition 17. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6. Bibliography

$`[BGHT]`$F. Bergeron, A. M. Garsia, M. Haiman and G. P. Tesler, Identities and positivity conjectures for some remarkable operators in the theory of symmetric functions,  Methods of Analysis and Applications 6 (1999), 58 pp.

$`[G]`$A. M. Garsia, Orthogonality of Milne’s polynomials and raising operators, Discrete Math. 99 (1992), 247–264.

$`[GHT]`$A. M. Garsia, M. Haiman and G. P. Tesler, Explicit Plethystic Formulas for the Macdonald q,t-Kostka Coefficients, The Andrews Festschrift (Maratea, 1998), Sém. Lothar. Combin. 42 (1999), 45 pp.

$`[GZ]`$A. M. Garsia and M. Zabrocki, Polynomiality of the $`q,t`$-Kostka Revisited, Algebraic combinatorics and computer science, Springer Italia, Milan (2001), 473–491.

$`[J]`$N. Jing, Vertex operators and Hall-Littlewood symmetric functions, Adv. Math. 87 (1991), 226–248.

$`[K]`$A.N. Kirillov, Ubiquity of Kostka polynomials, math.QA/9912094.

$`[KN1]`$A.N. Kirillov and M. Noumi, $`q`$-difference raising operators for Macdonald polynomials and the integrality of transition coefficients. Algebraic methods and $`q`$-special functions,  CRM Proc. Lecture Notes (Montréal, QC, 1996)  22 , Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI (1999), 227–243.

$`[KN2]`$A.N. Kirillov and M. Noumi, Affine Hecke algebras and raising operators for Macdonald polynomials,  Duke Math. J 93 (1998), no. 1, 1–39.

$`[LLM]`$L. Lapointe, A. Lascoux, J. Morse, Tableau atoms and a new Macdonald positivity conjecture, preprint.

$`[LM1]`$L. Lapointe, J. Morse, Schur function identities, their t-analogs, and k-Schur irreducibility, preprint.

$`[LM1]`$L. Lapointe, J. Morse, Schur function analogs for a filtration of the symmetric function space, preprint.

$`[LV1]`$L. Lapointe and L. Vinet, A short proof of the integrality of the Macdonald $`(q,t)`$-Kostka coefficients,  Duke Math. J. 91 (1998), no. 1, 205–214.

$`[LV2]`$L. Lapointe and L. Vinet, Rodrigues formulas for the Macdonald polynomials, Adv. Math. 130 (1997), no. 2, 261–279.

$`[M1]`$I. G. Macdonald, A new class of symmetric functions,  Actes du $`20^e`$ Séminaire Lotharingien   Publ. I.R.M.A. Strasbourg (1988), 131-171.

$`[M2]`$I. G. Macdonald, “Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, Oxford Mathematical Monographs,” second edition, Oxford Univ. Press, 1995.

$`[SW]`$M. Shimozono and J. Weyman, Graded characters of modules supported in the closure of a nilpotent conjugacy class, European J. Combin. 21 (2000), no. 2, 257–288.

$`[SZ]`$M. Shimozono and M. Zabrocki, Hall-Littlewood vertex operators and generalized Kostka polynomials, Adv. Math 158 (2001), 66–85.

$`[Za1]`$M. Zabrocki, Ribbon Operators and Hall-Littlewood Symmetric Functions, Adv. Math. 156 (2000), no. 1, 33–43.

$`[Za2]`$M. Zabrocki, Vertex Operators for Standard Bases of the Symmetric Functions, J. of Alg. Comb. 13 (2000), no. 1, 83-101.

$`[Ze]`$A. V. Zelevinsky, “Representations of finite classical groups: a Hopf algebra approach,” Springer Lecture Notes, 869, 1981.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The noncommutative star product of Groenewold  is the linchpin of deformation (phase-space) quantization . Currently, it is ubiquitous in matrix systems and in M-physics applications of non-commutative geometry ideas, such as in D-branes on a “magnetic” B-field background . This product, connecting phase-space functions $`f(x,p)`$ and $`g(x,p)`$, is the unique associative pseudodifferential deformation  of ordinary products:

$$e^{i\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}})/2}.$$
(1)
Since the star product involves exponentials of derivative operators, it may be evaluated in practice through translation of function arguments,

$$f(x,p)g(x,p)=f(x+\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}},p\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}})g(x,p).$$
(2)
When the phase-space functions involved consist of exponentials or simple polynomials, such star products amount to combinations of translations and finite-order PDEs, and allow first-principles solution of concrete deformation quantization problems . However, for more complicated functions, explicit evaluations of long strings of star products in this language frequently appear intractable. (There exist well-developed numerical evaluation techniques , which, however, are not reviewed here.) What to do?

There may be a way out. The more practical Fourier representation of this product as an integral kernel has been utilized by Baker :

$$fg=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2\pi ^2}𝑑p^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }𝑑x^{}𝑑x^{\prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2i}{\mathrm{}}\left(p(x^{}x^{\prime \prime })+p^{}(x^{\prime \prime }x)+p^{\prime \prime }(xx^{})\right)\right).$$
(3)
The cyclic determinantal expression multiplying $`2i/\mathrm{}`$ in the exponent is twice the area of the phase-space triangle $`(𝐫^{\prime \prime },𝐫^{},𝐫)`$, where $`𝐫(x,p)`$,

namely,

$$2A(r^{\prime \prime },r^{},r)=(𝐫^{}𝐫)(𝐫𝐫^{\prime \prime })=𝐫^{\prime \prime }𝐫^{}+𝐫^{}𝐫+𝐫𝐫^{\prime \prime }.$$
(4)
For example, in this representation, it is straightforward to work out the distinctive hyperbolic tangent composition law of phase-space Gaussians,

$$\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a}{\mathrm{}}(x^2+p^2)\right)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{b}{\mathrm{}}(x^2+p^2)\right)$$

$$=\frac{1}{1+ab}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{a+b}{\mathrm{}(1+ab)}(x^2+p^2)\right),$$
(5)
which codifies the time evolution of the harmonic oscillator .

In this representation, multiple star turn out to be simpler to evaluate, and the geometrical constructions they motivate exhibit conspicuously the symmetries and the associativity of these products. The representation thus rises to the level of a ‘picture’, in Dirac’s sense of a “way of looking at the fundamental laws which makes their self-consistency obvious” . Such evaluations are illustrated below, with some practical hints, for the standard star product, as well as for some common variants and extensions, such as the supersymmetrized version. This survey is based on ref , but further covers alternate schemes and background.

## 2 Brief Historical Review—to be skipped by experts

To give the general reader a flavor of how the star product is defined in physics, some of the essentials of phase-space quantization which rely on it are reviewed briefly.

Weyl  introduced an association rule mapping invertibly c-number phase-space functions $`f(x,p)`$ (called classical kernels) to operators $`𝔉`$ in a given ordering prescription. Specifically, $`p𝔭`$, $`x𝔵`$, and, in general,

$$𝔉(𝔵,𝔭)=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma 𝑑x𝑑pf(x,p)\mathrm{exp}(i\tau (𝔭p)+i\sigma (𝔵x)).$$
(6)
The eponymous ordering prescription requires that an arbitrary operator, regarded as a power series in $`𝔵`$ and $`𝔭`$, be first ordered in a completely symmetrized expression in $`𝔵`$ and $`𝔭`$, by use of Heisenberg’s commutation relations, $`[𝔵,𝔭]=i\mathrm{}`$. A term with $`m`$ powers of $`𝔭`$ and $`n`$ powers of $`𝔵`$ will be obtained from the coefficient of $`\tau ^m\sigma ^n`$ in the expansion of $`(\tau 𝔭+\sigma 𝔵)^{m+n}`$. It is evident how the map yields a Weyl-ordered operator from a polynomial classical kernel. It includes every possible ordering with multiplicity one, e.g.,

$$6p^2x^2𝔭^2𝔵^2+𝔵^2𝔭^2+𝔭𝔵𝔭𝔵+𝔭𝔵^2𝔭+𝔵𝔭𝔵𝔭+𝔵𝔭^2𝔵.$$
(7)
Weyl-ordered operators clearly close among themselves under operator multiplication, given the degenerate Campbell-Baker-Hausdorff identity. In a study of the uniqueness of the Schrödinger representation, von Neumann  adumbrated the composition rule of classical kernels in an operator product, appreciating that Weyl’s correspondence was in fact a homomorphism. (Effectively, he arrived at a convolution representation of the star product.) Finally, Groenewold  neatly worked out in detail how the classical kernels $`f`$ and $`g`$ of two operators $`𝔉`$ and $`𝔊`$ must compose to yield the classical kernel of $`𝔉𝔊`$,

$`𝔉𝔊`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\xi 𝑑\eta 𝑑\xi ^{}𝑑\eta ^{}𝑑x^{}𝑑x^{\prime \prime }𝑑p^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })}`$ (8)
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}i(\xi (𝔭p^{})+\eta (𝔵x^{}))\mathrm{exp}i(\xi ^{}(𝔭p^{\prime \prime })+\eta ^{}(𝔵x^{\prime \prime }))`$
$$=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^4}𝑑\xi 𝑑\eta 𝑑\xi ^{}𝑑\eta ^{}𝑑x^{}𝑑x^{\prime \prime }𝑑p^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })\mathrm{exp}i\left((\xi +\xi ^{})𝔭+(\eta +\eta ^{})𝔵\right)$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}i\left(\xi p^{}\eta x^{}\xi ^{}p^{\prime \prime }\eta ^{}x^{\prime \prime }+\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}(\xi \eta ^{}\eta \xi ^{})\right).$$

Changing integration variables to

$$\xi ^{}\frac{2}{\mathrm{}}(xx^{}),\xi \tau \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}(xx^{}),\eta ^{}\frac{2}{\mathrm{}}(p^{}p),\eta \sigma \frac{2}{\mathrm{}}(p^{}p),$$
(9)
reduces the above integral to

$$𝔉𝔊=\frac{1}{(2\pi )^2}𝑑\tau 𝑑\sigma 𝑑x𝑑p\mathrm{exp}i\left(\tau (𝔭p)+\sigma (𝔵x)\right)(fg)(x,p),$$
(10)
where $`fg`$ is the expression (3). This is the original , and still most physically compelling definition of the star product. It is this fundamental isomorphism of operator products to associative strings of star multiplications which enables the formulation of Quantum Mechanics in phase space .

Remark. On a phase-space torus, $`x+2\pi x`$, $`p+2\pi p`$, the integer modes of periodic functions, $`f(x,p)=\mathrm{exp}i(m^{}x+n^{}p)`$, $`g(x,p)=\mathrm{exp}i(m^{\prime \prime }x+n^{\prime \prime }p)`$, compose simply under the star product,

$$fg=e^{i\mathrm{}(m^{}n^{\prime \prime }m^{\prime \prime }n^{})/2}\mathrm{exp}i((m^{}+m^{\prime \prime })x+(n^{}+n^{\prime \prime })p).$$
(11)
Thus, in this maximally graded basis, the antisymmetrization of the star product (Moyal’s commutator) has a trigonometric structure constant : $`\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{}(m^{}n^{\prime \prime }m^{\prime \prime }n^{})/2`$. Its argument involves a cross product of two-dimensional integer-valued vectors. For $`\mathrm{}=4\pi /N`$, this Lie algebra is identifiable  with $`SU(N)`$ for $`N`$ odd, and $`SU(N/2)`$ for $`N`$ even, and thus with $`SU(\mathrm{})`$ as $`\mathrm{}0`$.

## 3 A remark on noncommutativity and Dirac Brackets

Parenthetically, the connection of this simple phase space to D-brane noncommutativity, a current application, arises as follows. The archetype of noncommutative geometry induced by magnetic flux is classical Landau orbital motion of a massless particle on a plane, in a constant magnetic field background. Thus, for a vector potential $`A^i=x^jϵ^{ji}B/2`$, and suppressing the kinetic term (which may be done consistently ), and morevoer choosing, e.g., a harmonic scalar potential :

$$L=\frac{B}{2}x^iϵ^{ij}\frac{dx^j}{dt}\frac{k}{2}𝐱^2,$$
(12)
whence the canonical momenta are constrained to the respective transverse coordinates,

$$p^i=\frac{B}{2}ϵ^{ij}x^j.$$
(13)
This amounts to two second class constraints, so the Poisson Brackets $`\{x^i,p^j\}=\delta ^{ij}`$, $`\{x^i,x^j\}=0`$, and $`\{p^i,p^j\}=0`$ must be upgraded to Dirac Brackets, instead, for consistency:

$`\{|x^i,x^j|\}`$ $`=`$ $`\{x^i,x^j\}\{x^i,p^k+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{2}}ϵ^{kl}x^l\}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{mk}}{B}}\{p^m+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{2}}ϵ^{mn}x^n,x^j\}`$ (14)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{ij}}{B}},`$
and likewise,

$$\{|x^i,p^j|\}=\frac{\delta ^{ij}}{2},\{|p^i,p^j|\}=\frac{B}{4}ϵ^{ij}.$$
(15)
For these particular expressions to hold, it is crucial that the magnetic field $`B`$ be a constant.

Thus, the Hamiltonian that results from the Lagrangian (which is linear in the velocity), $`H=\frac{k}{2}𝐱^2`$, yields the correct equations of motion describing the cyclotron orbits,

$$\frac{dx^i}{dt}=\{|x^i,H|\}=\frac{k}{B}ϵ^{ij}x^j.$$
(16)
The two directions $`x`$ and $`y`$, then, do not commute,

$$\{|x,y|\}=\frac{1}{B},$$
(17)
so that perpendicular directions behave as canonical momenta to each other.

Consequently, such a plane maps to the elementary phase space used for illustration in this talk, and the Dirac Bracket maps to the Moyal Bracket (the antisymmetrization of the star product already mentioned).

The reason these Dirac Brackets exponentiate effortlessly to produce an associative star product is because the constraints considered are linear, and hence these Dirac Brackets specify a Poisson manifold with constant bracket kernel:

$$\{|f,g|\}=f(\underset{x_i}{\overset{}{}}\frac{1}{2}\underset{p_i}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p_i}{\overset{}{}}\frac{1}{2}\underset{x_i}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x_i}{\overset{}{}}\frac{ϵ^{ij}}{B}\underset{x_j}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p_i}{\overset{}{}}\frac{ϵ^{ij}B}{4}\underset{p_j}{\overset{}{}})g$$

$$_ifJ_{ij}_jg.$$
(18)
In the example considered, the space where the antisymmetric matrix $`J_{ij}`$ acts is 4-dimensional ($`z_{2ii}=x_i`$, $`z_{2i}=p_i`$).

Because $`J_{ij}`$ here is constant, the system is one linear transformation away from a reduced standard phase space of one $`x,p`$ pair, $`x=x_1+(2/B)p_2`$, $`p=p_1/2(B/4)x_2`$, effectively governed by Poisson (not Dirac) Brackets, which exponentiate associatively (e.g., see the next section). The exponential

$$e^{i\mathrm{}\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}\underset{j}{\overset{}{}}}$$
(19)
is manifestly associative and hence defines a good star product. This is the type of star product exploited in the current literature on non-commutative applications to M-theory.

In sharp contrast, for nonlinear constraints, i.e. nonconstant $`J_{ij}(𝐱,𝐩)`$, exponentiation of the relevant Dirac Bracket kernel does not yield an associative star product, in general. (This is illustrated for hyperspherical phase space in , with brackets

$$\{|x_i,x_j|\}=0,\{|x_i,p_j|\}=\delta _{ij}x_ix_j,\{|p_i,p_j|\}=x_jp_ix_ip_j,$$
(20)
and whence bracket kernel

$$\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}xx\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}xx\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}px\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}xp\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}.$$
(21)
It is at variance with the generally non-associative proposal of .) That is, even though the Dirac Bracket satisfies the Jacobi identity , in this language,

$$(_kJ_{ij})J_{kl}+(_kJ_{jl})J_{ki}+(_kJ_{li})J_{kj}=0,$$
(22)
nevertheless, the exponential $`\mathrm{exp}\left(i\mathrm{}\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}\underset{j}{\overset{}{}}\right)`$ itself fails associativity, in general.

Kontsevich  discovered, instead, elaborate graphical rules for the generation of the appropriate associative star product as a series in $`\mathrm{}`$. The series starts as

$$1+i\mathrm{}\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}\underset{j}{\overset{}{}}\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}\left(\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}\underset{k}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}J_{kl}\underset{j}{\overset{}{}}\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\right)$$

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{3}(\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}\underset{k}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}(_jJ_{kl})\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{k}{\overset{}{}}J_{ij}(_jJ_{kl})\underset{i}{\overset{}{}}\underset{l}{\overset{}{}})+O(\mathrm{}^3).$$
(23)
The departure from the exponential is apparent in the second $`O(\mathrm{}^2)`$ term.

## 4 Composition of star products

In the Fourier representation, a triple star product can be expressed relatively simply ,

$$(fg)h=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^4\pi ^4}𝑑\overline{p}𝑑p^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }𝑑p^{\prime \prime \prime }𝑑\overline{x}𝑑x^{}𝑑x^{\prime \prime }𝑑x^{\prime \prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })h(x^{\prime \prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime \prime })$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\frac{4i}{\mathrm{}}\left(A(r^{\prime \prime },r^{},\overline{r})+A(r^{\prime \prime \prime },\overline{r},r)\right).$$
(24)
Fortunately, the intermediate $`d\overline{x}d\overline{p}`$ integrations collapse to mere $`\delta `$-functions:

$$(fgh)(x,p)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2\pi ^2}𝑑p^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }𝑑p^{\prime \prime \prime }𝑑x^{}𝑑x^{\prime \prime }𝑑x^{\prime \prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })h(x^{\prime \prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime \prime })$$

$$\times \delta (xx^{}+x^{\prime \prime }x^{\prime \prime \prime })\delta (pp^{}+p^{\prime \prime }p^{\prime \prime \prime })\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{4i}{\mathrm{}}A(r^{\prime \prime \prime },r^{\prime \prime },r^{})\right).$$
(25)
The product thus hinges on a triangle whose area enters in the phase of the exponential. The effective phase-space argument $`𝐫=(x,p)`$ of the product is now rigidly constrained: it lies on the new vertex of the parallelogram resulting from doubling up the triangle $`(𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime },𝐫^{\prime \prime },𝐫^{})`$, such that $`𝐫^{}𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ is one diagonal; the argument $`𝐫`$ lies at the end of the other diagonal, across $`𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$,

It is then straightforward to note how this expression bears no memory of the grouping (order of association) in which the two $``$-multiplications were performed, since the vertex $`𝐫`$ of the parallelogram is reached from $`𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }`$ by translating through $`𝐫^{}𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$, or, equivalently, from $`𝐫^{}`$ by translating through $`𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$. As a result , this may well realize the briefest graphic proof of the distinctive associativity property of the star product,

$$(fg)h=f(gh).$$
(26)
The symmetries of the triple star product, (1-3 complex conjugacy; cyclicity in the phase and alternating cyclicity in the effective argument; etc.) are now evident by inspection. E.g., for $`f=h`$, the triple product is real.

Moreover, integration of this triple product with respect to its argument $`𝐫`$ (tracing), e.g. to yield a lagrangian interaction term, trivially eliminates the $`\delta `$-function to result in a compact cyclic expression of the above triangle construction for the three functions star-multiplied,

$$𝑑x𝑑pfgh=\frac{1}{\mathrm{}^2\pi ^2}𝑑𝐫_1𝑑𝐫_2𝑑𝐫_3f(𝐫_1)g(𝐫_2)h(𝐫_3)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{4i}{\mathrm{}}A(r_3,r_2,r_1)\right).$$
(27)
A four function star product (with three stars) involves the sum of the areas of two triangles, $`(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1`$) and $`(𝐫,𝐫_4,𝐫_1𝐫_2+𝐫_3)`$. A five function star product involves the exponential of the sum of areas of two triangles, $`(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1`$) and $`(𝐫_5,𝐫_4,𝐫_1𝐫_2+𝐫_3)`$, with the effective argument restricted by $`\delta (𝐫𝐫_1+𝐫_2𝐫_3+𝐫_4𝐫_5)\delta (𝐫𝐬_5)`$.

Recursively, so on for even numbers of $``$-multiplied functions, the phase involving the sums $`A(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1)+A(𝐫_5,𝐫_4,𝐬_3)+\mathrm{}+A(𝐫,𝐫_{2n},𝐬_{2n1})`$. Note the cyclic symmetry, $`𝐫_1𝐫_2\mathrm{}𝐫_{2n}𝐫𝐫_1`$.

Respectively, for odd numbers of functions, the phase involves sums $`A(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1)+A(𝐫_5,𝐫_4,𝐬_3)+\mathrm{}+A(𝐫_{2n+1},𝐫_{2n},𝐬_{2n1})`$, while the effective phase-space argument is restricted to $`𝐫=𝐬_{2n+1}_{m=1}^{2n+1}()^{m+1}𝐫_m`$. Note the cyclic symmetry in the phase, again, and the alternating cyclic structure in the effective phase-space argument.

As an illustration, consider phase-space points ri arrayed in a regular zigzag pattern, (i.e. for the $``$-multiplied functions getting support only on those points on the zigzag). The arguments of the $`\delta `$-functions, s2n+1, then lie on a line, while the areas of the triangles demarcated by these points increase in regular arithmetic progression ($`A,2A,3A,4A,\mathrm{}`$):

This result is independent of the pitch of the zigzag, i.e. the angle at r2 —which, in this figure, is chosen to be $`\pi /2`$, since this is a local maximum of the areas $`A`$ of the triangles for variable pitch but fixed lengths r$`{}_{i}{}^{}`$ri+1. One might well wonder if the configuration pictured could be used to define a “classical path”: its contribution to the phase of the exponential through the sum of all triangle areas, $`(1+2+3+4+\mathrm{})A`$, is stationary with respect to variations such as this angle variation discussed. The question suggests itself, then, whether configurations stationary under all variations can be constructed, leading to a stationary phase evaluation of large/infinite star products, e.g. useful in evaluating $``$-exponentials (which yield time-evolution operators in phase-space ); but, so far, no cogent general answers appear at hand111 As an amusing curiosity, one may consider four phase-space functions, $`a(𝐫^{})`$, $`b(𝐫^{\prime \prime })`$, $`c(𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime })`$, $`d(𝐫)`$, supported only at the vertices of the parallelogram $`(𝐫,𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime },𝐫^{\prime \prime },𝐫^{})`$, displayed after eqn (17). A product $`a(bcabdacd)`$ then repeats itself in a “limit cycle”, as additional octuple product factors $`(bcabdacd)`$ are appended to the right of the product, each such factor contributing to the phase twice the area of the parallelogram. .

## 5 Almeida’s Polygon

After completion of ref , an alternate, intriguing, earlier geometrical insight on star products was brought to my attention, , which organizes the problem into a different construction. In the conventions employed above, it essentially demonstrates the following :

For a star product of an odd number ($`2n+1`$) of functions, a unique $`2n+1`$-gon is propounded in phase space, whose area equals 4 times the sum of the areas of triangles considered above ($`A(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1)+\mathrm{}+A(𝐫_{2n+1},𝐫_{2n},𝐬_{2n1})`$) in the phase of the exponential kernel. Almeida’s polygon is constructed as follows.

First, s2n+1 (specified above) is constructed simply by alternating vector addition. One then extends the segment s$`{}_{2n+1}{}^{}`$r1 by an equal length past r1, to a point denoted by t1; thus, r1 lies at the midpoint of the first side of the polygon, s$`{}_{2n+1}{}^{}`$t1. Likewise, from t1, one connects to r2, then extending to t2, such that r2 lies at the midpoint of the second side, t$`{}_{2}{}^{}`$t1. So on, to t2n, whence one joins t2n to s2n+1. It can be seen that r2n+1 lies on t$`{}_{2n}{}^{}`$s2n+1, and, in fact, at its midpoint.

The polygon constructed has $`𝐫_1,\mathrm{}𝐫_{2n+1}`$ at the midpoints of its sides.

This polygon construction extends to an even number of functions $``$-multiplied, with the effective argument serving as the $`2n+1`$th point, as before. For nonconvex polygons, the signed sum of convex segments must be considered for the total area.

This polygon is completely “egalitarian”, in that no order of association is even apparent, which highlights its abstract elegance—whether it appears more economical in practice than the sequence of triangles considered in the previous section, or not. Illustrated in the above configuration for points $`𝐫_1,\mathrm{},𝐫_5`$, it turns out to be the nonconvex pentagon
($`𝐭_4,𝐭_3(=𝐫_1),𝐭_2(=𝐫_5),𝐭_1,𝐬_5`$):

This Almeida pentagon then has area $`A(𝐭_2,𝐭_1,𝐬_5)+A(𝐭_4,𝐭_3,𝐭_2)`$, which, indeed, amounts to 4 times the sum of areas of the two triangles of the recursive construction of the previous section, $`A(𝐫_3,𝐫_2,𝐫_1)+A(𝐬_3,𝐫_5,𝐫_4)`$.

The simple sequence of triangles of the assemblage of the previous section assumes a given order of association (grouping)—but associativity has already been demonstrated. On the other hand, by its recursiveness, the addition to the existing assembly of more phase-space points, e.g. r6 and r7 here, merely requires the evaluation of an extra triangle. By contrast, the corresponding Almeida heptagon is thoroughly different, as it starts from a different point, s7, so that the pentagon already evaluated is not of particular practical significance.

## 6 A Variant Product

A variant of the star product (cohomologically equivalent to it) is the lopsided associative product of Voros ,

$$|e^{i\mathrm{}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}}.$$
(28)
It is sometimes convenient to rotate phase-space variables canonically (i.e. preserving their Poisson Brackets),

$$(x,p)(\frac{x+ip}{\sqrt{2i}},\frac{xip}{\sqrt{2i}}),$$
(29)
to represent this product as

$`|`$ $``$ $`e^{\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}i\underset{p}{\overset{}{}})(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}+i\underset{p}{\overset{}{}})/2}=e^{i\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}})/2}e^{i\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}})/2}`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`e^{\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{}}}+\underset{p}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{}}})/4}e^{\mathrm{}(\underset{x}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{}}}+\underset{p}{\overset{2}{\stackrel{}{}}})/4}e^{\mathrm{}((\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{x}{\overset{}{}})^2+(\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}+\underset{p}{\overset{}{}})^2)/4}.`$
This turns out to be the covariant transform of the star product which controls the dynamics when Wigner distributions are transformed into Husimi distributions , a smoothed representation popular in applications.

It is plain that the Gaussian-Laplacian factors,

$$T^1(_x,_p)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{}(_x^2+_p^2)/4),$$
(31)
merely dress the standard star product into Voros’ product ,

$$T(fg)=T(f)|T(g).$$
(32)
The Lie algebra of brackets of $`|`$, i.e. the kernel of $`f|gg|f`$, starts with the Poisson Brackets to $`O(\mathrm{})`$. By the above equivalence, this Lie algebra is seen to be equivalent to the Moyal algebra  (the algebra of brackets of $``$, i.e. $`\{\{f,g\}\}fggf`$), in comportance with the general result on the essential uniqueness of the Moyal algebra as the one-parameter deformation of the Poisson Bracket algebra .

Actually, in Fourier space, this product in its original representation (28) appears even simpler than the star product,

$$(f|g)(x,p)=\frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}}d𝐫^{}d𝐫^{\prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })\delta (x^{\prime \prime }x)\delta (p^{}p)$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}(x^{\prime \prime }x^{})(p^{}p^{\prime \prime })\right).$$
(33)
The phase-space integral is then effectively a two-dimensional $`𝑑x^{}𝑑p^{\prime \prime }`$, not a four-dimensional one, as the kernel has vanishing support everywhere but on the lines $`x^{\prime \prime }=x`$, $`p^{}=p`$. The triangle whose doubled area multiplies $`i/\mathrm{}`$ in the exponent is now a phase-space right triangle $`(𝐫^{\prime \prime },𝐫^{},𝐫)`$, with its side $`𝐫𝐫^{}`$ horizontal, and its side $`𝐫𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$ vertical:

The triple product is then seen to be actuating shifts on a rectangular lattice,

$$(f|g)|h=\frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^2}d𝐫^{}d𝐫^{\prime \prime }d𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }f(x^{},p^{})g(x^{\prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime })h(x^{\prime \prime \prime },p^{\prime \prime \prime })\times $$
(34)
$$\times \delta (x^{\prime \prime \prime }x)\delta (p^{}p)\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}(x^{}(p^{\prime \prime }p^{})+x^{\prime \prime }(p^{\prime \prime \prime }p^{\prime \prime })+x^{\prime \prime \prime }(p^{}p^{\prime \prime \prime }))\right).$$

The phase is a cyclic expression with no memory of the order of association, which thus proves associativity for this product, $`(f|g)|h=f|(g|h)`$.

Pictorially, the phase is the area of the entire encompassing rectangle with diagonal $`𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }𝐬`$, minus the area of the rectangle with diagonal $`𝐫^{}𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$; which is also equal to the sum of the areas of the rectangles with diagonals $`𝐬^{}𝐫^{}`$, and $`𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime }𝐫^{\prime \prime }`$, respectively. (In general, it is not twice the area of the triangle $`(𝐫^{},𝐫^{\prime \prime },𝐫^{\prime \prime \prime })`$.)

The construction for an n-tuple $`|`$-product follows simply,

$$\frac{1}{(2\pi \mathrm{})^n}𝑑𝐫_1\mathrm{}𝑑𝐫_nf_1(𝐫_1)\mathrm{}f_n(𝐫_n)\delta (x_nx)\delta (p_1p)$$

$$\times \mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{i}{\mathrm{}}\underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}x_m(p_{m+1}p_m)\right),$$
(35)
where $`p_{n+1}`$ is defined as $`p_1`$. A fleeting inspection of this formula suggests an effective nearest-neighbor interaction in a natural chain.

Remark. More recondite star products for particular nonflat phase-space manifolds, including Kähler manifolds, can also be formulated through integral kernels involving the Calabi function .

## 7 Graded Extension

A superspace generalization of the star-product was introduced in ref , (to codify the graded extension of Moyal’s algebra introduced in ref ),

$$(1+\mathrm{}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}).$$
(36)
Here, $`\theta `$ is the superspace Grassmann variable (nilpotent, and commuting with the phase-space variables): the extended star-product is then a direct product of the conventional piece with a superspace factor $`1+\mathrm{}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}`$. Thus, the above extended product could have been alternatively written as

$$e^{\mathrm{}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}}.$$
(37)
Hence, it can also be rewritten  as the evocative form,

$$e^{\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}(\underset{x}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{p}{\overset{}{}}\underset{x}{\overset{}{}})+\mathrm{}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}\underset{\theta }{\overset{}{}}}.$$
(38)
Nevertheless, the original form displays associativity more readily, since the factor acting on the Grassmann structure is patently associative,

$$\left(AB\right)C=A\left(BC\right),$$
(39)
acting on 1d bosonic superfields $`A(\theta )=a+\theta \alpha `$, $`B(\theta )=b+\theta \beta `$, so that

$$AB=ab+\mathrm{}\alpha \beta +\theta (\alpha b+a\beta ).$$
(40)
Note the loose analogy to complex multiplication $`\overline{z}_1z_2`$. Even though this analogy cannot rise to an isomorphism, as evident from its noncommutativity and longer products such as the above, still, it turns out to be useful for actual evaluation of products in collecting the Grassmann even and odd terms in the answer. The symmetry of this product is further displayed by setting $`\mathrm{}=1`$ and considering standard Grassmann Fourier transforms from bosonic to fermionic superfields, $`\stackrel{~}{A}(\theta )=𝑑\varphi (1+\varphi \theta )A(\varphi )=\alpha +\theta a`$:

$$AB=\stackrel{~}{A}\stackrel{~}{B}.$$
(41)
The first of refs  provides a diagonal extension to a space of more Grassmann variables ($`N>1`$ supersymmetry).

Acknowledgments

Appreciation of discussions with T Curtright, D Fairlie, and A M Ozorio de Almeida is recorded. This work was supported in part by the US Department of Energy, Division of High Energy Physics, Contract W-31-109-ENG-38.