text:
# HARISH-CHANDRA MODULES FOR YANGIANS

## 1. Introduction

Throughout the paper we fix an algebraically closed field $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ of characteristic $`0`$. Consider the pair $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ where $`U`$ is an associative $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-algebra and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a subalgebra of $`U`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the cofinite spectrum of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e.,

$$\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{\text{maximal two-sided ideals }𝐦\text{ of }\mathrm{\Gamma }|dim\mathrm{\Gamma }/𝐦<\mathrm{}\}.$$

A finitely generated module $`M`$ over $`U`$ is called a Harish-Chandra module (with respect to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$) if

$$M=\underset{𝐦\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}M(𝐦),$$

where

$$M(𝐦)=\{xM|𝐦^kx=0\text{for some}k0\}.$$

Harish-Chandra modules play a central role in the classical representation theory; see e.g. Dixmier \[Di\]. In particular, weight modules over a semisimple Lie algebra are Harish-Chandra modules with respect to a Cartan subalgebra. Another important example is provided by the Gelfand–Tsetlin modules \[DFO1\] over the universal enveloping algebra $`U(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ of the general linear Lie algebra $`𝔤𝔩_n`$. They are Harish-Chandra modules with respect to the Gelfand–Tsetlin subalgebra of $`U(𝔤𝔩_n)`$. The latter is the commutative subalgebra generated by the centers of $`U(𝔤𝔩_k)`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$. A theory of Harish-Chandra modules for general pairs $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is developed in \[DFO2\].

An irreducible Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ is said to be extended from $`𝐦\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ if $`M(𝐦)0`$. A central problem in the theory of Harish-Chandra modules is to investigate the existence and uniqueness conditions for such an extension. In the case where the extension is unique, the irreducible Harish-Chandra modules are parametrized by some equivalence classes of the elements of $`\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. It has been recently proved in \[Ov\] that for the case of Gelfand–Tsetlin modules over $`𝔤𝔩_n`$ the number of pairwise non-isomorphic irreducible modules extended from a given $`𝐦\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is nonzero and finite.

In this paper we begin a detailed study of Harish-Chandra modules over the Yangians. The Yangian for $`𝔤𝔩_n`$ is a unital associative algebra $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ over $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ with countably many generators $`t_{ij}^{(1)},t_{ij}^{(2)},\mathrm{}`$ where $`1i,jn`$, and the defining relations

(1.1)
$$(uv)[t_{ij}(u),t_{kl}(v)]=t_{kj}(u)t_{il}(v)t_{kj}(v)t_{il}(u),$$

where

$$t_{ij}(u)=\delta _{ij}+t_{ij}^{(1)}u^1+t_{ij}^{(2)}u^2+\mathrm{}$$

and $`u,v`$ are formal variables. This algebra originally appeared in the works on the quantum inverse scattering method; see e.g. Takhtajan–Faddeev \[TF\], Kulish–Sklyanin \[KS\]. The term “Yangian” and generalizations of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ to an arbitrary simple Lie algebra were introduced by Drinfeld \[D1\]. He then classified finite-dimensional irreducible modules over the Yangians in \[D2\] using earlier results of Tarasov \[T1, T2\]. An explicit construction of every such module over $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is given in those papers by Tarasov and also in the work by Chari and Pressley \[CP\]. Apart from this case, the structure of a general finite-dimensional irreducible representation of the Yangian remains unknown. In the case of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ a description of generic modules was given in \[M1\] via Gelfand–Tsetlin bases. A more general class of tame representations of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ was introduced and explicitly constructed by Nazarov and Tarasov \[NT\]. Another family of representations has been constructed in \[M3\] via tensor products of the so-called evaluation modules. An important role in these works is played by the Drinfeld generators \[D2\]

$$a_i(u),i=1,\mathrm{},n,b_i(u),c_i(u),i=1,\mathrm{},n1$$

of the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ which are defined as certain quantum minors of the matrix $`T(u)=\left(t_{ij}(u)\right)`$. The coefficients of the series $`a_i(u)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ form a commutative subalgebra of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ which can be regarded as an analogue of the Gelfand–Tsetlin subalgebra of $`\mathrm{U}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$. We shall consider the Harish-Chandra modules for $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ with respect to this particular subalgebra. So, the Harish-Chandra modules for $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ are natural analogues of the Gelfand–Tsetlin modules for $`𝔤𝔩_n`$ \[DFO1\]. Note also that the tame modules over $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_n)`$ \[NT\] is a particular case of Harish-Chandra modules.

In this paper we are concerned with Harish-Chandra modules for the Yangian $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Recall that every irreducible finite-dimensional $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module contains a unique vector $`\xi `$ annihilated by $`t_{12}(u)`$ and which is an eigenvector for the Drinfeld generators $`a_1(u)`$ and $`a_2(u)`$ defined by

(1.2)
$$a_1(u)=t_{11}(u)t_{22}(u1)t_{21}(u)t_{12}(u1),a_2(u)=t_{22}(u);$$

see \[T1, T2\] and \[CP\]. Moreover, there exists an automorphism $`t_{ij}(u)c(u)t_{ij}(u)`$ of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$, where $`c(u)1+u^1\mathrm{𝕜}[[u^1]]`$, such that the eigenvalues of $`\xi `$ become polynomials in $`u^1`$ under the corresponding twisted action of the Yangian. This prompts the introduction of the class of Harish-Chandra polynomial modules over $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$, i.e., such Harish-Chandra modules where the operators $`a_1(u)`$ and $`a_2(u)`$ are polynomials. More precisely, due to (1.2), it is natural to require that for some positive integer $`p`$ the polynomials $`a_1(u)`$ and $`a_2(u)`$ have degrees $`2p`$ and $`p`$, respectively. Note that $`a_1(u)`$ is the quantum determinant of the matrix $`T(u)`$ \[IK\], \[KS\]. Its coefficients are algebraically independent generators of the center of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

We can interpret the definition of Harish-Chandra polynomial modules using the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ called the Yangian of level $`p`$; see Cherednik \[C1, C2\]. It is defined as the quotient of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ by the ideal generated by the elements $`t_{ij}^{(r)}`$ with $`rp+1`$. A Harish-Chandra polynomial module over $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is just a Harish-Chandra module over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ for some positive integer $`p`$. In what follows we shall consider Harish-Chandra modules over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ with respect to the commutative subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ generated by the coefficients of $`a_1(u)`$ and $`a_2(u)`$.

Let us now describe our main results. First, we prove that $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is free as a left (right) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module (Theorem 3.4). This is an analogue of the well-known Kostant theorem \[K\]. Each character of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can therefore be extended to an irreducible $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module. An important role in our study is played by certain universal Harish-Chandra modules over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ (Theorem 4.5) such that every irreducible module in $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is a quotient of the corresponding universal module.

Further, we show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra (Theorem 5.3) in the sense of \[DFO2\] which allows us to apply the general theory of \[DFO2\] to the study of Harish-Chandra modules for $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. In particular, it provides an equivalence between the category $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of Harish-Chandra modules and the category of finitely generated modules over a certain category $`𝒜`$ whose objects are the maximal ideals of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We then use this to prove that the number of pairwise non-isomorphic extensions of a character of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to an irreducible $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module is finite (Theorem 7.2). The full subcategory $`W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ which consists of modules with diagonalizable action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ turns out to be equivalent to the category of finitely generated modules over a certain quotient category of $`𝒜`$ (Section 2.1). In Section 8 we study a full subcategory in $`W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of generic modules, this imposes a certain condition on the eigenvalues of $`a_2(u)`$ while those of $`a_1(u)`$ are arbitrary. In particular, we give a complete description of irreducible modules (Theorem 8.5) and indecomposable modules in tame blocks of this category (Theorem 8.9).

## 2. Preliminaries

### 2.1. Harish-Chandra subalgebras

In this paper we shall only consider the pairs $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ where the subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`U`$ is commutative. In this case $`\mathrm{cfs}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ coincides with the set $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of all maximal ideals in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

We let $`U\text{-mod}`$ denote the category of finitely generated left modules over an associative algebra $`U`$. The Harish-Chandra modules for the pair $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ form a full abelian subcategory in $`U\text{-mod}`$ which we denote by $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. A Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ is called weight if the following condition holds: for all $`𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and all $`xM(𝐦)`$ one has $`𝐦x=0`$. The full subcategory of $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ consisting of weight modules will be denoted $`W(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. The support of a Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ is the subset $`\mathrm{Supp}M`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which consists of those $`𝐦`$ which have the property $`M(𝐦)0`$. If for a given $`𝐦`$ there exists an irreducible Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ with $`M(𝐦)0`$ then we say that $`𝐦`$ extends to $`M`$.

A commutative subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }U`$ is called a Harish-Chandra subalgebra of $`U`$ \[DFO2\] if for any $`aU`$ the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-bimodule $`\mathrm{\Gamma }a\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is finitely generated both as left and as right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. The property of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to be a Harish-Chandra subalgebra is important for the effective study of the category $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. In this case, for any finite-dimensional $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module $`X`$ the module $`U_\mathrm{\Gamma }X`$ is a Harish-Chandra module. For any $`aU`$ set

$$X_a=\{(𝐦,𝐧)\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }\times \mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }|\mathrm{\Gamma }/𝐧\text{ is a subquotient of }\mathrm{\Gamma }a\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{\Gamma }a𝐦\}.$$

Equivalently, $`(𝐦,𝐧)`$ $`X_a`$ if and only if ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }/𝐧)_\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }a\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Gamma }/𝐦)0`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the minimal equivalence on $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ containing all $`X_a`$, $`aU`$ and by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(A,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ the set of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-equivalence classes on $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then for any $`aU`$ and $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ we have

(2.1)
$$aM(𝐦)\underset{(𝐦,𝐧)X_a}{}M(𝐧),(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })=\underset{D\mathrm{\Delta }(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })}{}(U,\mathrm{\Gamma },D).$$

Define a category $`𝒜`$ $`=𝒜_{U,\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ with the set of objects $`\mathrm{Ob}𝒜=\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and with the space of morphisms $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ from $`𝐦`$ to $`𝐧`$, where

(2.2)
$$𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧_\mathrm{\Gamma }U_\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦$$

and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦=`$ $`\underset{n}{lim}\mathrm{\Gamma }/𝐦^n`$ is the completion of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then the space $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ has a natural structure of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-bimodule. We have the decomposition

$$𝒜=\underset{D\mathrm{\Delta }(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })}{}𝒜(D),$$

where $`𝒜(D)`$ is the restriction of $`𝒜`$ on $`D`$. The category $`𝒜`$ is endowed with the topology of the inverse limit while the category of $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-vector spaces ($`\mathrm{𝕜}\text{-mod}`$) is endowed with the discrete topology. Consider the category $`𝒜\text{-mod}_d`$ of continuous functors $`M:𝒜\mathrm{𝕜}\text{-mod}`$. We call them discrete modules following the terminology of \[DFO2, Section 1.5\]. For any discrete $`𝒜`$-module $`N`$ define a Harish-Chandra $`U`$-module

$$𝔽(N)=\underset{𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}N(𝐦).$$

Furthermore, for $`xN(𝐦)`$ and $`aU`$ set

$$ax=\underset{𝐧\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}a_𝐧x$$

where $`a_𝐧`$ is the image of $`a`$ in $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$. For any morphism $`f:MN`$ in the category $`𝒜\text{-mod}_d`$ set

$$𝔽(f)=\underset{𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}f(𝐦).$$

We thus have a functor $`𝔽:𝒜\text{-mod}_d(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

( \[DFO2\], Theorem 17.) The functor $`𝔽`$ is an equivalence.

We will identify a discrete $`𝒜`$-module $`N`$ with the corresponding Harish-Chandra module $`𝔽(N)`$. For $`𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denote by $`\widehat{𝐦}`$ the completion of $`𝐦`$. Consider the two-sided ideal $`I𝒜`$ generated by the completions $`\widehat{𝐦}`$ for all $`𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and set $`𝒜_W=𝒜/I`$. Proposition 2.1 implies the following.

###### Corollary 2.2.

The categories $`W(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`𝒜_W\text{-mod}`$ are equivalent.

The subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is called big in $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ if $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐦)`$ is finitely generated as a left (or, equivalently, right) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-module.

###### Lemma 2.3.

( \[DFO2\], Corollary 19.) If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is big in $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ then there exist finitely many non-isomorphic irreducible Harish-Chandra $`U`$-modules $`M`$ such that $`M(𝐦)0`$. For any such module $`dimM(𝐦)<\mathrm{}`$.

### 2.2. Special PBW algebras

Let $`U`$ be an associative algebra over $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ endowed with an increasing filtration $`\{U_i\}_i`$, $`U_1=`$ $`\{0\}`$, $`U_0=`$ $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$, $`U_iU_jU_{i+j}`$. For $`uU_iU_{i1}`$ set $`\mathrm{deg}u=i`$. Let $`\overline{U}=\mathrm{gr}U`$ be the associated graded algebra

$$\overline{U}=\underset{i=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}U_i/U_{i1}.$$

For $`uU`$ denote by $`\overline{u}`$ its image in $`\overline{U}`$ and for a subset $`SU`$ set $`\overline{S}=`$ $`\{\overline{s}|sS\}`$ $`\overline{U}`$. The algebra $`U`$ is called a *special* PBW algebra if any element of $`U`$ can be written uniquely as a linear combination of ordered monomials in some fixed generators of $`U`$ and if $`\overline{U}`$ is a polynomial algebra. Such algebras were introduced in \[FO\].

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=`$ $`\mathrm{𝕜}[X_1,\mathrm{},X_n]`$ be a polynomial algebra. A sequence $`g_1,\mathrm{}`$, $`g_t\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is called regular (in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) if the class of $`g_i`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }/(g_1,\mathrm{},g_{i1})`$ is non-invertible and is not a zero divisor for any $`i=1,\mathrm{},t`$.

Next proposition contains some properties of regular sequences which will be used in the sequel; see e.g. \[BH\].

###### Proposition 2.4.

1. A sequence of the form $`X_1,\mathrm{},X_r,G_1,\mathrm{}G_t`$ is regular in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ if and only if the sequence $`g_1,\mathrm{},g_t`$ is regular in $`\mathrm{𝕜}[X_{r+1},`$ $`\mathrm{},`$ $`X_n]`$, where $`g_i(X_{r+1},\mathrm{},X_n)=G_i(0,\mathrm{},0,X_{r+1},\mathrm{},X_n)`$.
2. A sequence $`g_1g_1^{},g_2,\mathrm{},g_t`$ is regular if and only if the sequences $`g_1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_t`$ and $`g_1^{},g_2,\mathrm{},g_t`$ are regular.

The following analogue of Kostant theorem \[K\] is valid for special PBW algebras.

###### Theorem 2.5.

\[FO\] Let $`U`$ be a special PBW algebra and let $`g_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`g_tU`$ be mutually commuting elements such that $`\overline{g}_1`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\overline{g}_t`$ is a regular sequence in $`\overline{U}`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=`$ $`\mathrm{𝕜}[g_1,\mathrm{},g_t]`$. Then $`U`$ is a free left (right) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. Moreover $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a direct summand of $`U`$.

## 3. Freeness of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$

Let $`p`$ be a positive integer. The level $`p`$ Yangian $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ for the Lie algebra $`𝔤𝔩_2`$ \[C2\] can be defined as the algebra over $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ with generators $`t_{ij}^{(1)},\mathrm{},t_{ij}^{(p)}`$, $`i,j=1,2`$, subject to the relations

(3.1)
$$[T_{ij}(u),T_{kl}(v)]=\frac{1}{uv}(T_{kj}(u)T_{il}(v)T_{kj}(v)T_{il}(u)),$$

where $`u,v`$ are formal variables and

$$T_{ij}(u)=\delta _{ij}u^p+\underset{k=1}{\overset{p}{}}t_{ij}^{(k)}u^{pk}\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)[u].$$

Explicitly, (3.1) reads

$$[t_{ij}^{(r)},t_{kl}^{(s)}]=\underset{a=1}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(r,s)}{}}\left(t_{kj}^{(a1)}t_{il}^{(r+sa)}t_{kj}^{(r+sa)}t_{il}^{(a1)}\right),$$

where $`t_{ij}^{(0)}=\delta _{ij}`$ and $`t_{ij}^{(r)}=0`$ for $`rp+1`$. Note that the level $`1`$ Yangian $`\mathrm{Y}_1(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ coincides with the universal enveloping algebra $`\mathrm{U}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Set

$$\mathrm{deg}t_{ij}^{(k)}=k\text{for}i,j=1,2\text{and}k=1,\mathrm{},p.$$

This defines a natural filtration on the Yangian $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. The corresponding graded algebra will be denoted by $`\overline{\mathrm{Y}}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. We have the following analogue of the Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem for the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

###### Proposition 3.1.

( \[C2\]; see also \[M2\]) Given an arbitrary linear ordering on the set of generators $`t_{ij}^{(k)}`$, any element of the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is uniquely written as a linear combination of ordered monomials in these generators. Moreover, the algebra $`\overline{\mathrm{Y}}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is a polynomial algebra in generators $`\overline{t}_{ij}^{(k)}`$.

Proposition 3.1 implies that $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is a special PBW algebra. Denote by $`D(u)`$ the quantum determinant

(3.2) $`D(u)`$ $`=T_{11}(u)T_{22}(u1)T_{21}(u)T_{12}(u1)`$
$`=T_{11}(u1)T_{22}(u)T_{12}(u1)T_{21}(u)`$
$`=T_{22}(u)T_{11}(u1)T_{12}(u)T_{21}(u1)`$
$`=T_{22}(u1)T_{11}(u)T_{21}(u1)T_{12}(u).`$
Clearly, $`D(u)`$ is a monic polynomial in $`u`$ of degree $`2p`$,

(3.3)
$$D(u)=u^{2p}+d_1u^{2p1}+\mathrm{}+d_{2p},d_i\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2).$$

It was shown in \[C1, C2\] (see also \[M2\] for a different proof) that the coefficients $`d_1,\mathrm{},d_{2p}`$ are algebraically independent generators of the center of the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the subalgebra of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ generated by the coefficients of $`D(u)`$ and by the elements $`t_{22}^{(k)}`$, $`k=1,\mathrm{},p`$. This algebra is obviously commutative. We will show later (Corollary 5.3) that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra in $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

###### Lemma 3.2.

The sequence $`\overline{t}_{22}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{t}_{22}^{(p)},\overline{d}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{d}_{2p}`$ of the images of the generators of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is regular in $`\overline{\mathrm{Y}}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

###### Proof.

Let us set

$$t_i=\overline{t}_{11}^{(i)}+\overline{t}_{22}^{(i)},i=1,\mathrm{},p\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,j}=\overline{t}_{11}^{(i)}\overline{t}_{22}^{(j)}\overline{t}_{21}^{(i)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(j)},i,j=1,\mathrm{},p.$$

It follows from (3.3) that

$$\overline{D}(u)=u^{2p}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{2p}{}}\overline{d}_iu^{2pi},$$

with

$`\overline{d}_i`$ $`=t_i+{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{i1}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{j,ij}`$ $`\text{for}i=1,\mathrm{},p\text{and}`$
$`\overline{d}_i`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{j=ip}{\overset{p}{}}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{j,ij}`$ $`\text{for}i=p+1,\mathrm{},2p.`$
Hence we need to show that the sequence

$$\overline{t}_{22}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{t}_{22}^{(p)},t_1,t_2+\mathrm{\Delta }_{11},\mathrm{},t_p+\underset{i=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,pi},\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{i,p+1i},\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Delta }_{pp}$$

is regular. We will denote by $`_i`$ the result of the substitution $`\overline{t}_{22}^{(1)}=\mathrm{}=\overline{t}_{22}^{(p)}=0`$ in $`\overline{d}_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},2p`$. By Proposition 2.4 (1), we only need to show the regularity of the sequence

$$_1,\mathrm{},_{2p}.$$

Consider the automorphism $`\varphi `$ of $`\overline{\mathrm{Y}}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)/I`$ given by

$$\overline{t}_{11}^{(i)}_i,\overline{t}_{21}^{(i)}\overline{t}_{21}^{(i)},\overline{t}_{12}^{(i)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(i)},\text{for}i=1,\mathrm{},p,$$

where $`I`$ is the ideal generated by $`\overline{t}_{22}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{t}_{22}^{(p)}`$. Since the regularity of a sequence is preserved by automorphisms, it is sufficient to demonstrate the regularity of the sequence

$$\overline{t}_{11}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{t}_{11}^{(p)},_{p+1},\mathrm{},_{2p}.$$

Since the elements $`_i`$ do not depend on the $`\overline{t}_{11}^{(k)}`$, Proposition 2.4 (1) implies that this is equivalent to the regularity of the sequence $`_{p+1},`$ $`\mathrm{},`$ $`_{2p}.`$ For each pair of indices $`k,l\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$ and any index $`1a\mathrm{max}\{k,l\}`$, consider the sequence of $`a`$ elements which occupy the rows of the table $`s(k,l,a)`$ below

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(k1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l1)}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(k2)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l1)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l2)}\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(ka+1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(ka+2)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l+1)}+\mathrm{}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(la+1)}\hfill \end{array}\right)$$

Note that when $`k=l=a=p`$ the rows of the table are exactly the elements $`_i`$, $`i=p+1,\mathrm{},2p`$. We will show by induction on $`a`$ that the sequence of rows of $`s(k,l,a)`$ is regular. Note that $`s(k,l,1)`$ consists of the single element $`\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}`$ and is obviously regular. Now let $`a>1`$. Consider the following two tables which we denote by $`s^{}(k,l,a)`$ and $`s^{\prime \prime }(k,l,a)`$, respectively.

$$\left(\begin{array}{c}\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(k1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l1)}\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(ka+1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\mathrm{}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(la+1)}\hfill \end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{c}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(k1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l1)}\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill \\ \overline{t}_{21}^{(ka+1)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(l)}+\mathrm{}+\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}\overline{t}_{12}^{(la+1)}\hfill \end{array}\right)$$

Due to Proposition 2.4 (2), it is sufficient to verify the regularity of both $`s^{}(k,l,a)`$ and $`s^{\prime \prime }(k,l,a)`$. Using again Proposition 2.4 (1), substitute $`\overline{t}_{21}^{(k)}=0`$ in $`s^{}(k,l,a)`$ and $`\overline{t}_{12}^{(k)}=0`$ in $`s^{\prime \prime }(k,l,a)`$. It is easy to see that after this substitution we obtain the tables $`s(k1,l,a1)`$ and $`s(k,l1,a1)`$, respectively. By the induction hypothesis, both of them are regular and so is $`s(k,l,a)`$. In particular, the sequence $`s(p,p,p)`$ is regular which completes the proof. ∎

Using the regularity of the sequence $`\overline{t}_{22}^{(1)},\mathrm{},\overline{t}_{22}^{(p)},\overline{d}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{d}_{2p}`$ we immediately obtain the following.

###### Corollary 3.3.

The generators $`t_{22}^{(1)},\mathrm{},t_{22}^{(p)},d_1,\mathrm{},d_{2p}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are algebraically independent.

Combining Lemma 3.2 with Proposition 2.5 we obtain our first main result.

###### Theorem 3.4.

1. $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is free as a left (right) module over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Moreover $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a direct summand of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.
2. Any $`𝐦\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ extends to an irreducible $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module.

For a subset $`P\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ denote by $`𝔻(P)`$ the set of all $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ such that there exists $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`z0`$ for which $`zx`$ $`P`$.

###### Corollary 3.5.

Let $`P\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ be a finitely generated left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module then $`𝔻(P)`$ is a finitely generated left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module.

###### Proof.

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a domain then $`𝔻(P)`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-submodule in $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Using the fact that $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is a free left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module we conclude that $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ $`F_PF`$ where $`F_P`$ and $`F`$ are free left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules, $`F_P`$ has a finite rank and $`PF_P`$. Then $`𝔻(P)`$ $`F_P`$ and hence it is finitely generated as a module over a noetherian ring. ∎

## 4. Harish-Chandra modules for $`𝔤𝔩_2`$ Yangians

In this section we introduce universal Harish-Chandra modules $`M(\mathrm{})`$. We also describe their structure in an explicit form in the case of generic parameters $`\mathrm{}`$.

Let $`\mathrm{L}`$ be a polynomial algebra in the variables $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_p,g_1,\mathrm{}g_{2p}`$. Define a $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-homomorphism $`ı:\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{L}`$ by

(4.1)
$$ı(t_{22}^{(k)})=\sigma _{k,p}(b_1,\mathrm{},b_p),ı(d_i)=\sigma _{i,2p}(g_1,\mathrm{},g_{2p}),$$

where $`\sigma _{i,j}`$ is the $`i`$-th elementary symmetric polynomial in $`j`$ variables. Due to Corollary 3.3, $`ı`$ is injective. We will identify the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with their images in $`\mathrm{L}`$ and treat them as polynomials in the variables $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_p,g_1,\mathrm{}g_{2p}`$ invariant under the action of the group $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$ . Set $`=\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{L}`$. We will identify $``$ with $`\mathrm{𝕜}^{3p}`$. If

$$\beta =(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p),\gamma =(\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _{2p})\text{and}\mathrm{}=(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p,\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _{2p})$$

then we shall write $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$. The monomorphism $`ı`$ induces the epimorphism

(4.2)
$$ı^{}:\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$

If $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`𝐦=ı^{}(\mathrm{})`$ then $`D(\mathrm{})`$ will denote the equivalence class of $`𝐦`$ in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$; see Section 2.1.

Let $`𝒫_0`$, $`𝒫_0^p`$, be the lattice generated by the elements $`\delta _i\mathrm{𝕜}^{3p}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$, where

$$\delta _i=(\delta _i^1,\mathrm{},\delta _i^{3p}),\delta _i^j=\delta _{ij}.$$

Then $`𝒫_0`$ acts on $``$ by shifts $`\delta _i(\mathrm{}):=\mathrm{}+\delta _i`$. Furthermore, the group $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$ acts on $``$ by permutations. Thus the semidirect product $`𝕎`$ of the groups $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$ and $`𝒫_0`$ acts on $``$ and $`\mathrm{L}`$. Denote by $`S`$ a multiplicative set in $`\mathrm{L}`$ generated by the elements $`b_ib_jm`$ for all $`ij`$ and all $`m`$ and by $`𝕃`$ the localization of $`\mathrm{L}`$ by $`S`$. Note that $`S`$ is invariant under the action of $`𝕎`$ and hence $`𝕎`$ acts on $`𝕃`$ as well.

For arbitrary $`3p`$-tuple $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$ set

$$\beta (u)=(u+\beta _1)\mathrm{}(u+\beta _p),\gamma (u)=(u+\gamma _1)\mathrm{}(u+\gamma _{2p}).$$

Let $`I_{\mathrm{}}`$ be the left ideal of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ generated by the coefficients of the polynomials $`T_{22}(u)\beta (u)`$ and $`D(u)\gamma (u)`$. Define the corresponding quotient module over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ by

(4.3)
$$M(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)/I_{\mathrm{}}.$$

We shall call it the universal module. It follows from Theorem 3.4 that $`I_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a proper ideal of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ and so $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is a non-trivial module. It is clear that if $`V`$ is an arbitrary Harish-Chandra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module generated by a non-zero $`\eta V`$ such that $`D(u)\eta =\gamma (u)\eta `$ and $`T_{22}(u)\eta =\beta (u)\eta `$ then $`V`$ is a homomorphic image of $`M(\mathrm{})`$.

Set $`𝒫_1=`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}𝕃`$ $``$, i.e. $`𝒫_1`$ consists of *generic* $`3p`$-tuples $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$ such that

(4.4)
$$\beta _i\beta _j\text{for all}ij.$$

If $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ then the modules from the category $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ $`D(\mathrm{}))`$ are called *generic* Harish-Chandra modules.

### 4.1. Weight modules

For $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$ the category $`W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ $`D(\mathrm{}))`$ consists of finitely generated weight modules $`V`$ with central character $`\gamma `$ and with $`\mathrm{Supp}VD(\mathrm{})`$. We shall denote this category by $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ for brevity. If $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ then the modules from $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ will be called *generic* weight modules.

A $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module $`V`$ is an object of $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ if $`V`$ is a direct sum of its *weight* subspaces:

$$V=\underset{\mathrm{}}{}V_{\mathrm{}},V_{\mathrm{}}=\{\eta V|T_{22}(u)\eta =\beta (u)\eta ,D(u)\eta =\gamma (u)\eta \}.$$

If $`VR_{\mathrm{}}`$ then we shall simply write $`V_\beta `$ instead of $`V_{\mathrm{}}`$ and identify $`\mathrm{Supp}V`$ with the set of all $`\beta `$ such that the subspace $`V_\beta `$ is nonzero. The next lemma describes the action of the Yangian generators on the weight subspaces; cf. (2.1).

###### Lemma 4.1.

Let $`V`$ be a generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module and let $`\beta =(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p)\mathrm{Supp}V`$. Then

(4.5)
$$T_{21}(u)V_\beta \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}V_{\beta +\delta _i}\text{and}T_{12}(u)V_\beta \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}V_{\beta \delta _i}$$

where $`\beta \pm \delta _i=(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _i\pm 1,\mathrm{},\beta _p)`$.

###### Proof.

First we show that $`T_{21}(\beta _i)V_\beta V_{\beta +\delta _i}`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$. Since

$$T_{22}(u1)T_{21}(u)=T_{21}(u1)T_{22}(u)$$

we have

$$T_{22}(\beta _i1)T_{21}(\beta _i)\eta =T_{21}(\beta _i1)T_{22}(\beta _i)\eta =0$$

for all $`\eta V_\beta `$. Also,

$`T_{22}(\beta _j)T_{21}(\beta _i)\eta `$ $`=(\beta _i\beta _j)^1(T_{21}(\beta _i)T_{22}(\beta _j)T_{21}(\beta _j)T_{22}(\beta _i))\eta `$
$`+T_{21}(\beta _i)T_{22}(\beta _j)\eta =0`$
since $`T_{22}(\beta _k)\eta =0`$ for all $`k=1,\mathrm{},p`$. Using the fact that $`\beta _i\beta _j`$ we conclude that $`T_{21}(\beta _i)V_\beta V_{\beta +\delta _i}`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$. Since $`T_{21}(u)`$ is a polynomial of degree $`p1`$ in $`u`$ and $`\beta _i\beta _j`$ if $`ij`$, we thus get the first containment of (4.5). The second is verified in the same way with the use of the identity $`T_{22}(u)T_{12}(u1)=T_{12}(u)T_{22}(u1)`$. ∎

###### Corollary 4.2.

If $`V`$ is indecomposable generic weight module over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ and $`\beta \mathrm{Supp}V`$ then $`\mathrm{Supp}V\beta +^p`$. ∎

###### Lemma 4.3.

If $`V`$ is a generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module with the central character $`\gamma `$ then for any $`\beta =(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p)\mathrm{Supp}V`$ and any $`\eta V_\beta `$ we have

$$T_{12}(\beta _r)T_{21}(\beta _s)\eta =T_{21}(\beta _s)T_{12}(\beta _r)\eta ,$$

if $`sr`$, and

$`T_{12}(\beta _i1)T_{21}(\beta _i)\eta `$ $`=\gamma (\beta _i)\eta ,`$
$`T_{21}(\beta _i+1)T_{12}(\beta _i)\eta `$ $`=\gamma (\beta _i+1)\eta .`$
###### Proof.

The first equality follows from the defining relations (1.1). The two remaining follow from (3.2). ∎

The following corollary is immediate from Lemma 4.3.

###### Corollary 4.4.

Let $`V`$ be a generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module with the central character $`\gamma `$ and let $`\beta =(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p)\mathrm{Supp}V`$.

1. If $`\gamma (\beta _i)0`$ then $`\mathrm{Ker}T_{21}(\beta _i)V_\beta =0`$.
2. If $`\gamma (\beta _i+1)0`$ then $`\mathrm{Ker}T_{12}(\beta _i)V_\beta =0`$.
3. If $`V`$ is indecomposable and $`\gamma (\beta _i+k)0`$ for all $`k`$ then

$$\mathrm{Ker}T_{21}(\psi _i)V_\psi =\mathrm{Ker}T_{12}(\psi _i)V_\psi =0$$

for all $`\psi =(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)\mathrm{Supp}V`$. ∎

Since the universal module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is non-trivial, the image of $`1`$ in $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is nonzero. We shall denote this image by $`\xi `$. Assume that $`\beta `$ satisfies the genericity condition (4.4). For any $`(k)=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_p)^p`$ define the corresponding vector of the module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ by

(4.6) $`\xi ^{(k)}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k_i>0}{}}T_{21}(\beta _ik_i+1)\mathrm{}T_{21}(\beta _i1)T_{21}(\beta _i)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k_i<0}{}}T_{12}(\beta _ik_i1)\mathrm{}T_{12}(\beta _i+1)T_{12}(\beta _i)\xi .`$
###### Theorem 4.5.

The vectors $`\xi ^{(k)},(k)^p`$ form a basis of $`M(\mathrm{})`$. Moreover, we have the formulas

(4.7)
$$T_{22}(u)\xi ^{(k)}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}(u+\beta _i+k_i)\xi ^{(k)},$$

(4.8) $`T_{21}(u)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}A_i(k){\displaystyle \frac{(u+\beta _1+k_1)\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}(u+\beta _p+k_p)}{(\beta _1\beta _i+k_1k_i)\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}(\beta _p\beta _i+k_pk_i)}}\xi ^{(k+\delta _i)},`$
$`T_{12}(u)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}}B_i(k){\displaystyle \frac{(u+\beta _1+k_1)\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}(u+\beta _p+k_p)}{(\beta _1\beta _i+k_1k_i)\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}(\beta _p\beta _i+k_pk_i)}}\xi ^{(k\delta _i)},`$
where

$$A_i(k)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if}k_i0\hfill \\ \gamma (\beta _ik_i)\hfill & \text{if}k_i<0\hfill \end{array}$$

and

$$B_i(k)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\gamma (\beta _ik_i+1)\hfill & \text{if}k_i>0\hfill \\ 1\hfill & \text{if}k_i0.\hfill \end{array}$$

The action of $`T_{11}(u)`$ is found from the relation

(4.9)
$$\left(T_{11}(u)T_{22}(u1)T_{21}(u)T_{12}(u1)\right)\xi ^{(k)}=\gamma (u)\xi ^{(k)}.$$

###### Proof.

We start by proving the formulas for the action of the generators of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Formula (4.7) follows by induction with the use of the relations

(4.10) $`T_{22}(u)T_{21}(v)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{uv+1}{uv}}T_{21}(v)T_{22}(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{uv}}T_{21}(u)T_{22}(v)`$
and
(4.11) $`T_{22}(u)T_{12}(v)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{uv1}{uv}}T_{12}(v)T_{22}(u)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{uv}}T_{12}(u)T_{22}(v)`$
implied by (3.1). By Lemma 4.3 we have: if $`k_i>0`$ then

(4.12) $`T_{21}(\beta _ik_i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\xi ^{(k+\delta _i)},`$
$`T_{12}(\beta _ik_i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i+1)\xi ^{(k\delta _i)};`$
if $`k_i<0`$ then

(4.13) $`T_{12}(\beta _ik_i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\xi ^{(k\delta _i)},`$
$`T_{21}(\beta _ik_i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i)\xi ^{(k+\delta _i)};`$
and if $`k_i=0`$ then

(4.14) $`T_{12}(\beta _i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\xi ^{(k\delta _i)},`$
$`T_{21}(\beta _i)\xi ^{(k)}`$ $`=\xi ^{(k+\delta _i)}.`$
Applying the Lagrange interpolation formula we obtain the remaining formulas.

It is implied by the formulas, that the module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is spanned by the vectors $`\xi ^{(k)}`$. By (4.7) and the genericity assumption, the $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ are eigenvectors for $`T_{22}(u)`$ with distinct eigenvalues. In order to verify their linear independence, suppose first that $`\gamma (u)`$ satisfies the condition

(4.15)
$$\gamma (\beta _ik)0\text{for all}k\text{and all}i.$$

In this case the linear independence of the $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ follows from the fact that each of them is nonzero. This is implied by (4.12)–(4.13) since $`\xi 0`$ in $`M(\mathrm{})`$.

In the case of general $`\gamma (u)`$ let us define a $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module $`\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{})`$ as follows. As a vector space, $`\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{})`$ is the $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-linear span of the basis vectors $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(k)}`$ with $`(k)`$ running over $`^p`$ and the action of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is given by the formulas (4.7)–(4.9), where the $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ should be replaced with $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(k)}`$. We have to verify that the operators $`T_{ij}(u)`$ do satisfy the Yangian defining relations (3.1). However, the application of both sides of (3.1) to a basis vector $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(k)}`$ amounts to polynomial relations on the coefficients of $`\gamma (u)`$. By the previous argument, if $`\gamma (u)`$ satisfies (4.15) then these relations are identities. Therefore, these identities remain hold for an arbitrary $`\gamma (u)`$ and thus $`\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{})`$ is well defined.

Finally, consider the $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module homomorphism

$$\phi :\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{}),1\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(0)}.$$

Obviously, the ideal $`I_{\mathrm{}}`$ is contained in the kernel $`\mathrm{Ker}\phi `$ and so, this defines a homomorphism $`M(\mathrm{})\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{})`$ which takes $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ to the corresponding vector $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(k)}`$. Since the vectors $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }^{(k)}`$ form a basis of $`\stackrel{~}{M}(\mathrm{})`$ this proves that the vectors $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ are linearly independent. ∎

Let us fix a $`p`$-tuple $`\beta `$ satisfying the genericity condition (4.4) and introduce the elements of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ by

$`\tau ^{(k)}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k_i>0}{}}T_{21}(\beta _ik_i+1)\mathrm{}T_{21}(\beta _i1)T_{21}(\beta _i)`$
$`\times `$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k_i<0}{}}T_{12}(\beta _ik_i1)\mathrm{}T_{12}(\beta _i+1)T_{12}(\beta _i),`$
where $`(k)`$ runs over $`^p`$.

###### Corollary 4.6.

The elements $`\tau ^{(k)}`$ are linearly independent over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in the right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose that a linear combination of the elements $`\tau ^{(k)}`$ with coefficients in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is zero:

(4.16)
$$\underset{(k)}{}\tau ^{(k)}c_{(k)}=0,c_{(k)}\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$

Apply the left hand side to the vector $`\xi `$ in a module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ with $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$ satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 4.5. We get the relation

$$\underset{(k)}{}c_{(k)}(\mathrm{})\xi ^{(k)}=0,$$

where $`c_{(k)}(\mathrm{})`$ is the evaluation of the polynomial $`c_{(k)}`$ at $`T_{22}(u)=\beta (u)`$ and $`D(u)=\gamma (u)`$. Since the vectors $`\xi ^{(k)}`$ form a basis of $`M(\mathrm{})`$ this implies that $`c_{(k)}(\mathrm{})=0`$ for any choice of the parameters $`\gamma `$. Therefore, each $`c_{(k)}`$ does not depend on the generators $`d_i`$ and so it is a polynomial in the $`t_{22}^{(i)}`$. However, due to the Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem for the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ (Proposition 3.1), a nontrivial relation (4.16) can only hold if the elements $`\tau ^{(k)}`$ are linearly dependent over $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$. But this is not the case because the vectors $`\xi ^{(k)}=\tau ^{(k)}\xi `$ are linearly independent in $`M(\mathrm{})`$ by Theorem 4.5. ∎

###### Remark 4.7.

One can also produce a family of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-linearly independent elements for the left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. They can be obtained as images of the $`\tau ^{(k)}`$ under the anti-automorphism of the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ given by

(4.17)
$$t_{ij}^{(r)}t_{ji}^{(r)}.$$

For the proof we observe that every generator of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is stable under this anti-automorphism. With the exception of the case $`p=1`$, the elements $`\tau ^{(k)}`$ do not apparently constitute a basis of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module.

###### Remark 4.8.

Given two monic polynomials $`\alpha (u)`$ and $`\beta (u)`$ of degree $`p`$ define the corresponding Verma module $`V(\alpha (u),\beta (u))`$ as the quotient of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ by the left ideal generated by the coefficients of the polynomials $`T_{11}(u)\alpha (u)`$, $`T_{22}(u)\beta (u)`$ and $`T_{12}(u)`$; cf. \[T1, T2\]. Then the same argument as above shows that $`V(\alpha (u),\beta (u))`$ has a basis $`\{\xi ^{(k)}\}`$ parameterized by $`p`$-tuples of nonnegative integers $`(k)`$. The formulas of Theorem 4.5 hold for the basis vectors $`\xi ^{(k)}`$, where $`\gamma (u)`$ should be taken to be $`\alpha (u)\beta (u1)`$ which defines the central character $`\gamma `$ of $`V(\alpha (u),\beta (u))`$. In fact, $`V(\alpha (u),\beta (u))`$ is isomorphic to the quotient of the corresponding universal module $`M(\mathrm{})`$, $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$ by the submodule spanned by the vectors $`\{\xi ^{(k)}\}`$ such that $`(k)`$ contains at least one negative component $`k_i`$.

###### Corollary 4.9.

Let $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )𝒫_1`$.

1. The module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is a generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module with central character $`\gamma `$, $`\mathrm{Supp}M(\mathrm{})=^p`$ and all weight spaces are $`1`$-dimensional.
2. The module $`M(\mathrm{})`$ has a unique maximal submodule and hence a unique irreducible quotient.
3. The equivalence class $`D(\mathrm{})`$ coincides with the set $`\mathrm{}+𝒫_0`$.

###### Proof.

Statement (1) follows immediately from Theorem 4.5. The sum of all proper submodules of $`M(\mathrm{})`$ is again a proper submodule implying (2). The statement (3) follows immediately from (1). ∎

We will denote the unique irreducible quotient of $`M(\mathrm{})`$ by $`L(\mathrm{})`$. It follows from Corollary 4.9 that all weight spaces of $`L(\mathrm{})`$ are $`1`$-dimensional. We can now describe all irreducible generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-modules.

###### Corollary 4.10.

Let $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )𝒫_1`$.

1. There exists an irreducible generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module $`L(\mathrm{})`$ with $`L(\mathrm{})_\beta 0`$ and with central character $`\gamma `$. Moreover, $`dimL(\mathrm{})_\psi =1`$ for all $`\psi \mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})`$.
2. Any irreducible weight module over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ with central character $`\gamma `$ generated by a nonzero vector of weight $`\beta `$ is isomorphic to $`L(\mathrm{})`$.

## 5. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra

In this section we adapt the results from \[DFO2\] and \[Ov\] for the Yangians. In particular, we show that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra.

We have the following analogue of the Harish-Chandra theorem for Lie algebras \[Di\].

###### Proposition 5.1.

Let $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ be such that $`xM(\mathrm{})=0`$ for any $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$. Then $`x=0`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`M(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)/I_{\mathrm{}}`$ it will be sufficient to show that the intersection $`_{\mathrm{}}I_{\mathrm{}}`$ over all $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ is zero. By Theorem 3.4 (1), the Yangian $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is free as a right module over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Let $`x_i,i`$ be a basis of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. If $`x=_ix_iz_i`$ for some $`z_i\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ then $`xI_{\mathrm{}}`$ if and only if $`z_i(\mathrm{})=0`$ for all $`i`$. Since $`𝒫_1`$ is dense in $``$ in Zariski topology it follows immediately that if $`x_{\mathrm{}}I_{\mathrm{}}`$ then $`z_i=0`$ for all $`i`$ and thus $`x=0`$. This completes the proof. ∎

For any $`\mathrm{}_0𝒫_1`$ the module $`M(\mathrm{}_0)`$ has a basis $`\xi ^{(k)}`$, $`(k)^p`$ with the action of generators of $`\mathrm{Y}(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ defined by formulas (4.7)–(4.9). We will relabel the basis elements of $`M(\mathrm{}_0)`$ as $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}`$, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}_0+𝒫_0`$. It follows from Theorem 4.5 that for every $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ there exists a finite subset $`_x𝒫_0`$ consisting of elements $`\delta `$ such that

(5.1)
$$x\xi _{\mathrm{}}=\underset{\delta _x}{}\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )\xi _{\mathrm{}+\delta }$$

for some nonzero coefficients $`\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )\mathrm{𝕜}`$. We can also regard these coefficients as the values of the rational functions $`\theta (x,𝖻,\delta )𝕃`$ at $`𝖻=\mathrm{}`$, where $`𝖻=(b_1,\mathrm{},b_p,g_1,\mathrm{},g_{2p})`$. Clearly, the set $`_x`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant. Note that for a given $`x`$ this formula does not depend on $`\mathrm{}_0`$.

We identify the $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-bimodule structure on $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ with the corresponding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module structure. For any $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and any finite $`S`$ introduce the following polynomial

$$F_{S,z}=F_{S,z}(z,𝖻)=\underset{\delta S}{}(z11z(𝖻+\delta ))=\underset{i=0}{\overset{|S|}{}}z^ia_i,a_i\mathrm{L}.$$

###### Proposition 5.2.

( cf. \[DFO2, Lemma 25\].) Let $`S`$ be a finite $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant subset in $``$, $`q=|S|`$, $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`F_{S,z}={\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}}z^ia_i,a_i\mathrm{L}.`$ Then

1. $`a_i\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},q`$.
2. For any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ such that $`_xS`$ we have $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}}z^ixa_i=0.`$

###### Proof.

Since $`S`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant, the coefficients of the polynomial $`F_{S,z}`$ are $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant and hence belong to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which proves (1). It is sufficient to check the statement (2) for $`S=_x`$ since $`F_{S,z}=F_{S_x,z}F_{_x,z}`$. Let $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ and let $`\xi _{\mathrm{}}`$ be a basis element of $`M(\mathrm{})`$. Then

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}z^ixa_i(\xi _{\mathrm{}})=\underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}z^ixa_i(\mathrm{})(\xi _{\mathrm{}})$$

$$=\underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}z^ia_i(\mathrm{})\underset{\delta _x}{}\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )\xi _{\mathrm{}+\delta }$$

$$=\underset{\delta _x}{}\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )\underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}a_i(\mathrm{})(z^i\xi _{\mathrm{}+\delta })$$

$$=\underset{\delta _x}{}\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )\underset{i=0}{\overset{q}{}}a_i(\mathrm{})z(\mathrm{}+\delta )^i\xi _{\mathrm{}+\delta }=\underset{\delta _x}{}\theta (x,\mathrm{},\delta )F_{_x,z}(z(\mathrm{}+\delta ),\mathrm{})\xi _{\mathrm{}+\delta }=0$$

since $`F_{_x,z}(z(\mathrm{}+\delta ),\mathrm{})=0`$ for every $`\delta _x`$. Applying Corollary 5.1 we obtain the statement of the proposition. ∎

The main result of this section is the following theorem.

###### Theorem 5.3.

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.

###### Proof.

Following \[DFO2, Proposition 8\], it is sufficient to show that a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-bimodule $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t_{ij}^{(k)}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is finitely generated both as left and as right module for every possible choice of indices $`i,j,k`$. This is obvious for $`i=j=2`$ since $`t_{22}^{(k)}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Suppose now that $`i=2,j=1`$. We have $`d_it_{21}^{(k)}=t_{21}^{(k)}d_i`$ by the centrality of $`d_i`$. It follows from (4.8) that $`_{t_{21}^{(k)}}=\{\delta _i|i=1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. Then for $`x=t_{21}^{(k)}`$ we have

$$F_{_x,t_{22}^{(i)}}=z^p1+\underset{l=0}{\overset{p1}{}}z^la_l,a_l\mathrm{\Gamma }$$

and

(5.2)
$$(t_{22}^{(i)})^pt_{21}^{(k)}+\underset{l=0}{\overset{p1}{}}(t_{22}^{(i)})^lt_{21}^{(k)}a_l=0$$

by Proposition 5.2 (2). Hence the elements

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}(t_{22}^{(i)})^{k_i}t_{21}^{(k)},0k_i<p$$

are generators of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t_{21}^{(k)}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. The cases $`i=1,j=2`$ and $`i=j=1`$ are treated similarly since

$$_{t_{12}^{(k)}}=\{\delta _i|i=1,\mathrm{},p\}\text{and}_{t_{11}^{(k)}}=\{\delta _i\delta _j|i,j=1,\mathrm{},p\}.$$

Thus, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }t_{ij}^{(k)}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is finitely generated as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. The claim for the left module is proved by the application of the anti-automorphism of the algebra $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ defined in (4.17) where we note that every element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is stable under this anti-automorphism. ∎

###### Example 5.4.

We give an explicit form of the relation (5.2) for the particular case $`i=k=p=2`$. It reads

$$t_{22}^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{2}t_{21}^{(2)}t_{22}^{(2)}t_{21}^{(2)}\left(2t_{22}^{(2)}+t_{22}^{(1)}\right)+t_{21}^{(2)}\left(t_{22}^{(2)}{}_{}{}^{2}+t_{22}^{(2)}t_{22}^{(1)}+t_{22}^{(2)}\right)=0.$$

## 6. Universal representation of the Yangian

We will denote by $`K(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ the field of fractions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Let $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ be the ring of locally finite matrices over $`𝕃`$ (with a finite number of non-zero elements in each row and each column) with the entries indexed by the elements of $`𝒫_0`$. Any $`\mathrm{}`$ $`𝒫_1`$ defines the evaluation homomorphism $`\chi _{\mathrm{}}:𝕃\mathrm{𝕜}`$, which induces the homomorphism of matrix algebras $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{}):`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(\mathrm{𝕜})`$. For $`\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}𝒫_0`$ denote by $`e_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}`$ the corresponding matrix unit in $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$. The group $`𝕎`$ acts on $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ by the rule: if $`X=(X_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}})_{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}𝒫_0}`$ then

(6.3)
$$(w^1X)_\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}=w^1X_{w(\mathrm{})w(\mathrm{}^{})}\text{for}w𝕎.$$

Define the map

$$\mathrm{G}:\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)$$

such that for any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ and any $`\mathrm{}𝒫_0`$, $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\theta (x,𝖻+\mathrm{},\delta )`$ if $`\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}=\delta `$ and $`0`$ otherwise; see (5.1).

###### Lemma 6.1.

1. $`\mathrm{G}`$ is a representation of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.
2. $`\mathrm{G}(x)`$ is $`𝕎`$-invariant for any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. In particular, $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}K(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$.
3. If $`x=x(b_1,\mathrm{},b_p,g_1,\mathrm{},g_{2p})\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{}=(l_1,\mathrm{},l_p,0,\mathrm{},0)𝒫_0`$ then

$$\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}=x(b_1+l_1,\mathrm{},b_p+l_p,g_1,\mathrm{},g_{2p}).$$
4. $`\mathrm{G}(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ consists of $`𝕎`$-invariant diagonal matrices $`X`$ such that $`X_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In particular, any such matrix $`X`$ is determined by $`X_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\mathrm{T}`$ be the free associative algebra with generators $`\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}^{(k)}`$, where $`i,j=1,2`$ and $`k=1,\mathrm{},p`$, and let

$$\pi :\mathrm{T}\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}^{(k)}t_{ij}^{(k)},$$

be the canonical projection. Define a homomorphism $`g:\mathrm{T}\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ by $`g(\stackrel{~}{t}_{ij}^{(k)})=\mathrm{G}(t_{ij}^{(k)})`$ for all suitable $`i,j,k`$. To prove (1) it is sufficient to show that $`g(\mathrm{Ker}\pi )=0`$. Suppose that $`f\mathrm{Ker}\pi `$. Then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{})(g(f))=0`$ and thus $`g(f)_{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}^{\prime \prime }}(\mathrm{})=0`$ for any $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$. Since $`𝒫_1`$ is dense in $`\mathrm{Specm}L`$ we conclude that $`g(f)=0`$ implying (1). The image of $`\mathrm{G}`$ is $`𝕎`$-invariant since this holds for the generators of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$; see (4.7)–(4.9). For any $`\sigma S_p\times S_{2p}`$ we have

$$(\sigma ^1\mathrm{G})(x)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}=\sigma ^1(\mathrm{G}(x)_{\sigma (\overline{0})\sigma (\overline{0})})=\sigma ^1(\mathrm{G}(x)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}).$$

Hence $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant proving (2). The statement (3) follows from (2) if we apply a shift by $`\mathrm{}𝒫_0`$ to an arbitrary $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. The statement (4) follows immediately from (2) and (3). ∎

The composition $`r_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{})\mathrm{G}`$ defines a representation of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. By the construction, this representation provides a matrix realization of the module $`M(\mathrm{})`$; see Theorem 4.5.

###### Proposition 6.2.

The representation $`\mathrm{G}:`$ $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ is faithful.

###### Proof.

It is clear that

$$\mathrm{Ker}\mathrm{G}\underset{\mathrm{}𝒫_1}{}\mathrm{Ker}r_{\mathrm{}}.$$

Hence it is sufficient to prove that the intersection of the kernels is zero. Let $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$. Then $`\mathrm{Ker}r_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{Ann}M(\mathrm{})`$ by definition and so $`\mathrm{Ker}r_{\mathrm{}}I_{\mathrm{}}`$. However, the intersection $`_{\mathrm{}}I_{\mathrm{}}`$ over all $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ is zero, as was shown in the proof of Proposition 5.1. ∎

###### Corollary 6.3.

1. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra in $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$.
2. If for $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ the matrix $`\mathrm{G}(x)`$ is diagonal then $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

Consider an element $`x`$ $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ which commutes with every $`z`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and such that $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Suppose that there exist $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}^{}𝒫_0`$, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}`$ such that $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}0`$. There exists $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`z(\mathrm{})`$ $`z(\mathrm{}^{})`$ and so $`\mathrm{G}(z)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}`$ $`\mathrm{G}(z)_{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}^{}}`$ by Lemma 6.1 (3). Then we have

$$\mathrm{G}(xz)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\mathrm{G}(z)_{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{G}(zx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{G}(z)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}$$

which contradicts to the assumption. Therefore $`\mathrm{G}(x)`$ is diagonal. To prove the maximality of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ it is now sufficient to verify part (2) of the corollary. By Lemma 6.1 (2), we have $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}=f/gK(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ with relatively prime $`f,g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Suppose that $`g\mathrm{𝕜}`$. By Lemma 6.1 (2) and (4), we derive that $`\mathrm{G}(x)\mathrm{G}(g)=`$ $`\mathrm{G}(f)`$ and hence $`xg=f`$ by Proposition 6.2. This shows that $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ due to Theorem 3.4 (1). ∎

Denote by $`X_0`$ the column matrix defined by

$$X_0=\underset{\delta 𝒫_0}{}𝕃e_{\delta ,\overline{0}},$$

where $`\overline{0}`$ is the zero element of $`𝒫_0`$. Note that the $`𝕎`$-action (6.3) induces an action of $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$ on the free $`𝕃`$-module $`X_0`$.

###### Corollary 6.4.

Let $`p:`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ $`X_0`$ be the natural projection. Then the composition $`r=p\mathrm{G}:\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)X_0`$ is injective. Moreover, the map $`p`$ commutes with the action of $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$ and, in particular, $`r(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2))`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant.

###### Proof.

Note that for any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ the matrix $`\mathrm{G}(x)`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)`$ is determined completely by its column $`p(\mathrm{G}(x))`$. Thus $`r(x)=0`$ implies $`\mathrm{G}(x)=0`$ and hence $`x=0`$ since $`\mathrm{G}`$ is faithful. This proves that $`r`$ is injective. The other statements follow immediately from the definitions and Lemma 6.1 (2). ∎

As in Section 5, we identify the $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-bimodule structure on $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ with the corresponding action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Using the embedding (4.1), we can regard the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as polynomials in two families of variables $`𝖻`$ and $`𝖻^{}`$ which are $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant.

###### Lemma 6.5.

Suppose that $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$, $`f`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}^{}`$ $`𝒫_0`$. Then

$$\mathrm{G}(fx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=f(𝖻+\mathrm{},𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`f=_iz_iz_i^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then $`\mathrm{G}(fx)=_i\mathrm{G}(z_i)\mathrm{G}(x)\mathrm{G}(z_i^{})`$ and hence, by Lemma 6.1 (4),

$$\mathrm{G}(fx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\underset{i}{}\mathrm{G}(z_i)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\mathrm{G}(z_i^{})_{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\underset{i}{}\mathrm{G}(z_i)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}}\mathrm{G}(z_i^{})_{\mathrm{}^{}\mathrm{}^{}}=$$

$$\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}\underset{i}{}z_i(𝖻+\mathrm{})z_i^{}(𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})=\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}f(𝖻+\mathrm{},𝖻+\mathrm{}^{}).$$

###### Lemma 6.6.

Let $`S`$ be an $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant set. Suppose that $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ is such that $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=0`$ for all $`\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}`$, $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}S`$. Then $`F_{S,z}x=0`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`F=F_{S,z}=_iz^ia_i`$ with $`a_i\mathrm{L}`$. If $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}S`$ then

$$\mathrm{G}(Fx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=F(z(𝖻+\mathrm{}),𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}$$

by Proposition 5.2(1) and Lemma 6.5. Furthermore, observe that $`h(z,𝖻)=z11z(𝖻+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{})`$ divides $`F`$ and that $`h(z(𝖻+\mathrm{}),𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})=0`$. Here we regard the result of the evaluation of the product of type $`zz^{}(𝖻^{})`$ at $`𝖻`$ as the polynomial $`z(𝖻)z^{}(𝖻^{})`$. This gives $`F(z(𝖻+\mathrm{}),𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})=0`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{G}(Fx)=0`$ implying $`Fx=0`$ by Proposition 6.2. ∎

Let $`S`$ $`𝒫_0`$ be a finite $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant set. Define $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$$`=\{x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)|_xS\}`$. Clearly $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-subbimodule of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. We have the following characterization of the bimodule $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$.

###### Lemma 6.7.

Let $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. Then

1. $`x`$ $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ if and only if the condition $`\mathrm{G}(x)_\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}0`$, for some $`\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}^{}`$ $`𝒫_0`$, implies that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}S`$.
2. $`F_{_xS,z}x`$ $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ for any $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.
3. $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ is a finitely generated left (right) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module and $`\mathrm{Y}^S=`$ $`𝔻(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$.
4. $`\mathrm{Y}^{\{0\}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

The statement (1) follows from the definition of $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Let $`F=F_{_xS,z}`$ and $`y=Fx`$. To prove (2) calculate the matrix element $`\mathrm{G}(y)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}`$ provided that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}S`$. By Lemma 6.5,

$$\mathrm{G}(y)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=\mathrm{G}(Fx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=F(z(𝖻+\mathrm{}),𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}.$$

If $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}_x`$ then $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=0`$ and hence $`\mathrm{G}(y)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=0`$. Suppose now that $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}_xS`$. Then

$$F(z(𝖻+\mathrm{}),𝖻+\mathrm{}^{})=\underset{\delta _xS}{}(z(𝖻+\mathrm{})z(𝖻+\mathrm{}^{}+\delta ))=0.$$

This proves (2).

Let $`x𝔻(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$ and suppose that $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is such that $`z0`$ and $`zx\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Since $`\mathrm{G}(zx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=`$ $`z(𝖻+\mathrm{})\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}`$ by Lemma 6.5, we have $`\mathrm{G}(zx)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=0`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}}=0`$ implying that $`x\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Hence $`\mathrm{Y}^S=`$ $`𝔻(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$.

Consider $`r(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$ as a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-submodule of $`X_0`$ where $`r:\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)X_0`$ is defined in Corollary 6.4. Then $`r(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$ belongs to the free $`𝕃`$-submodule $`_\mathrm{}S𝕃e_{\mathrm{}\overline{0}}`$ of $`X_0`$ of finite rank. Hence $`𝕃r(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$ is finitely generated $`𝕃`$-module. Without loss of generality we can assume that this module is generated by the elements $`r(x_1),\mathrm{},r(x_s)r(\mathrm{Y}^S)`$. Since $`𝔻(\mathrm{Y}^S)=\mathrm{Y}^S`$ we have

$$𝔻\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }x_i\right)\mathrm{Y}^S.$$

Fix $`x\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Then

$$r(x)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}t_ir(x_i),t_i𝕃.$$

Note that for any $`y\mathrm{Y}^S`$ and any $`\sigma S_p\times S_{2p}`$ we have $`\sigma r(y)=r(y)`$ since $`S`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant. Hence

$$p!(2p)!r(x)=\underset{\sigma S_p\times S_{2p}}{}\sigma r(x)=\underset{\sigma S_p\times S_{2p}}{}\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}(\sigma t_i)\sigma r(x_i)$$

which can be rewritten as

(6.4)
$$r(x)=\frac{1}{p!(2p)!}\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}u_ir(x_i),\text{where}u_i=\underset{\sigma S_p\times S_{2p}}{}\sigma t_i.$$

Since each $`u_i`$ is $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-invariant, it belongs to the field of fractions $`K(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},s`$. Multiplying both parts of (6.4) by the common denominator of the $`u_i`$ we obtain from Corollary 6.4 that

$$x𝔻\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }x_i\right),\text{implying}𝔻\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }x_i\right)=\mathrm{Y}^S.$$

Due to Corollary 3.5, we can conclude that $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ is finitely generated over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This proves (3). By the definition of $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$, $`x\mathrm{Y}^{\{0\}}`$ if and only if $`\mathrm{G}(x)`$ is diagonal. Hence $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by Corollary 6.3 (2). ∎

## 7. Category of Harish-Chandra modules

We will show in this section that each character of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ extends to a finite number of irreducible Harish-Chandra modules over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. This is an analogue of the corresponding result in the case of a Lie algebra $`𝔤𝔩_n`$ which was conjectured in \[DFO1\] and proved in \[Ov\]. In this section we use the techniques of \[DFO2\] and \[Ov\].

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Harish-Chandra subalgebra of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ we can apply all the statements from Section 2.1. Set $`𝒜=𝒜_{\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$. Then by Proposition 2.1, the categories $`𝒜\text{-mod}_d`$ and $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ are equivalent. Also the full subcategory $`W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ consisting of weight modules is equivalent to the module category $`𝒜_W\text{-mod}`$. If $`\mathrm{}`$ then the category $`R_{\mathrm{}}=W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma },D(\mathrm{}))`$ is equivalent to the block $`𝒜_W(D(\mathrm{}))\text{-mod}`$ of the category $`𝒜_W\text{-mod}`$.

Let $`𝐦`$, $`𝐧`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{}_𝐦`$, $`\mathrm{}_𝐧`$ are such that $`ı^{}(\mathrm{}_𝐦)=𝐦`$ and $`ı^{}(\mathrm{}_𝐧)=𝐧`$; see (4.2). Set

$$S(𝐦,𝐧)=\{\sigma _1\mathrm{}_𝐧\sigma _2\mathrm{}_𝐦|\sigma _1,\sigma _2S_p\times S_{2p}\}𝒫_0.$$

Consider the following subset in $``$

$$𝒫_2=\{\mathrm{}|\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{}_j\{0\},i,j=1,\mathrm{},p\}$$

and put $`\mathrm{\Omega }=ı^{}(𝒫_2)`$. We shall also be using the set $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ introduced in (2.2).

###### Proposition 7.1.

1. For any $`𝐦`$, $`𝐧`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and any $`m,n0`$ we have

$$\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)=\mathrm{Y}^S+𝐧^n\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)+\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)𝐦^m,$$

where $`S=S(𝐦,𝐧)`$.
2. $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ is finitely generated as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$-module and as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-module. In particular, the algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is big in every $`𝐧`$ $`\mathrm{Ob}𝒜`$.
3. If $`S(𝐦,𝐧)=\{0\}`$ then $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ is generated as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$-module and as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-module by the image of $`1`$ in $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$.
4. If $`S(𝐦,𝐦)=\{0\}`$ then $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Moreover, $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐦)`$ is a quotient algebra of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$ and $`𝐦`$ extends uniquely to an irreducible $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module.
5. If $`\mathrm{}_𝐦𝒫_1`$ then $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐦)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$.
6. Let $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$, $`𝐦=ı^{}(\mathrm{})`$ and $`𝐧=ı^{}(\mathrm{}+\delta _i)`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. Then $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ is a free of rank $`1`$ as a right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-module and as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$-module.

###### Proof.

(1) We shall show that for any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ and any $`k1`$ there exists $`x_k`$ $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ such that

(7.1)
$$xx_k+\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}𝐧^{ki}x𝐦^i.$$

The statement will follow if we choose $`k=m+n+1`$. We will use induction on $`k`$. Suppose that $`k=1`$. If $`_xS`$ then $`x\mathrm{Y}^S`$ and there is nothing to prove. Furthermore, by the definition of the set $`S`$ for any $`\mathrm{}`$ $`_xS`$ the $`S_p\times S_{2p}`$-orbits of $`\mathrm{}_𝐧`$ and $`\mathrm{}_𝐦+\mathrm{}`$ are disjoint. Hence there exists $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that $`z(\mathrm{}_𝐧)`$ $`z(\mathrm{}_𝐦+\mathrm{})`$ for any $`\mathrm{}`$ $`_xS`$. Let $`F=F_{_xS,z}`$. Then

$$F(z(\mathrm{}_𝐧),\mathrm{}_𝐦)=\underset{\mathrm{}_xS}{}(z(\mathrm{}_𝐧)z(\mathrm{}_𝐦+\mathrm{}))0.$$

We can assume that $`F(z(\mathrm{}_𝐧),\mathrm{}_𝐦)=1`$. Hence we obtain that $`F=1+u`$ where $`u𝐧\mathrm{\Gamma }+`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }𝐦`$. It follows from Lemma 6.7 (2), that $`x_1=Fx`$ belongs to $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Hence we have

$$x_1=(1+u)xx+𝐧x\mathrm{\Gamma }+\mathrm{\Gamma }x𝐦\text{and thus}xx_1+𝐧x\mathrm{\Gamma }+\mathrm{\Gamma }x𝐦.$$

This proves the assertion in the case $`k=1`$. Assume that (7.1) holds for some $`k1`$. Then

$$xx_k+\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}𝐧^{ki}(x_k+\underset{j=0}{\overset{k}{}}𝐧^{kj}x𝐦^j)𝐦^ix_k+\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}𝐧^{ki}x_k𝐦^i+\underset{i=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}𝐧^{k+1i}x𝐦^i.$$

Since $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-bimodule we conclude that $`x_k+{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}}𝐧^{ki}x_k𝐦^i\mathrm{Y}^S`$ which implies the statement (1). In particular, we have proved that

(7.2)
$$x_{k+1}x_k\underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}𝐧^{ki}\mathrm{Y}^S𝐦^i.$$

(2) We prove the statement for the case of left module, the case of right module can be treated analogously. By (1) the image $`\overline{x}`$ of every $`x\mathrm{Y}^S`$ in $`𝒜(𝐧,𝐦)`$ is the limit of the sequence $`(\overline{x}_k)_{k1}`$, $`x_k`$ $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$. Let $`y_1,\mathrm{},y_m`$ be a finite system of generators of $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module which exists by Lemma 6.7 (3). Then for every $`N>1`$ and every $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ there exists $`N_i`$ such that

$$y_i𝐦^N\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}𝐧^{N_i}y_j.$$

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is noetherian we have that $`_k𝐧^k\mathrm{Y}^S=0`$ and hence there exists the maximum value $`d_N`$ such that

$$y_i𝐦^N\underset{j=1}{\overset{m}{}}𝐧^{d_N}y_j$$

for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$. Moreover, $`d_N\mathrm{}`$ while $`N\mathrm{}`$ since $`\mathrm{Y}^S`$ is a finitely generated right $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module and $`_k\mathrm{Y}^S𝐦^k=0`$. By (7.2), $`x_{k+1}x_k𝐧^{R_k}\mathrm{Y}^S`$ where $`R_k=\mathrm{min}\{[k/2],d_{[k/2]}\}`$. We have

$$\overline{x}=\overline{x}_1+\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\overline{(x_{k+1}x_k)}$$

and thus

$$\overline{x}\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\overline{𝐧^{R_k}\mathrm{Y}^S}\underset{l=1}{\overset{m}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧\overline{y_l}.$$

Note that the first sum is well defined since $`R_k\mathrm{}`$ when $`k\mathrm{}`$. We conclude that $`𝒜(𝐧,𝐦)`$ is finitely generated as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$-module. This completes the proof of (2).

(3) By Lemma 6.7 (4), $`\mathrm{Y}^{\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Hence $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ is generated (both as a left and as a right module) by the image of $`1\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by (1).

(4) By (3), $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐦)`$ is $`1`$-generated as a left $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$-module. Then the $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-algebra homomorphism

$$\widehat{ı}_𝐦:\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦𝒜(𝐦,𝐦),zz\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐦,$$

where $`\mathrm{𝟏}_𝐦`$ is a unit morphism, is an epimorphism which shows that $`A(𝐦,𝐦)`$ is a quotient algebra of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$. The uniqueness of the extension follows from the uniqueness of the simple $`A(𝐦,𝐦)`$-module and \[DFO2, Theorem 18\].

(5) Let $`\mathrm{}=\mathrm{}_𝐦𝒫_1`$. Then $`S(𝐦,𝐦)=\mathrm{}`$ and $`A(𝐦,𝐦)\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦/J_𝐦`$ by (4) and thus $`J_𝐦`$ acts trivially on $`M(𝐦)`$ in any Harish-Chandra module $`M`$. Since $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ then for any $`k>0`$ there exists a canonical projection $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }_k:`$ $`𝕃`$ $`𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k`$, where $`(\mathrm{})^k=\mathrm{}^k𝕃`$. It induces a homomorphism of the matrix algebras $`\pi _k:\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k)`$ and defines a Harish-Chandra module by the following composition

$$\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)\stackrel{\mathrm{G}}{}\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃)\stackrel{\pi _k}{}\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k).$$

For any nonzero $`x\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ there exists $`k>0`$ such that $`x(\mathrm{})^k`$ and hence $`\pi _k(\mathrm{G}(x)_{\overline{0},\overline{0}})=x+(\mathrm{})^k0`$. Therefore, there exists a Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ where $`x`$ acts nontrivially on $`M(𝐦)`$ implying that $`J_𝐦=0`$. This completes the proof.

(6) The proof is analogous to the proof of (5). Let $`z\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ $`z0`$. Suppose $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)z=0`$. Then by the construction of the equivalence $`𝔽:𝒜\text{-mod}_d`$ $``$ $`(U,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ for any Harish-Chandra module $`M`$ and any $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ the linear operator $`xz`$ on $`M`$ induces the zero map between $`M(𝐦)`$ and $`M(𝐧)`$. It is sufficient to construct a Harish-Chandra module where this is failed. For $`k1`$ consider as in (5) the composition $`\pi _k\mathrm{G}:\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)\mathrm{M}_{𝒫_0}(𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k)`$. It defines a Harish-Chandra module structure on a free $`𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k`$-module

$$\overline{X}=\underset{\delta 𝒫_0}{}𝕃/(\mathrm{})^ke_{\delta ,\overline{0}}.$$

Consider $`x\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ such that $`\mathrm{G}(x)_{\delta _i\overline{0}}0`$ for some $`i`$. Then

$$\mathrm{G}(xz)_{\delta _i\overline{0}}=\mathrm{G}(x)_{\delta _i\overline{0}}\mathrm{G}(z)_{\overline{0}\overline{0}}=\mathrm{G}(x)_{\delta _i\overline{0}}z0.$$

Choose $`k`$ such that $`\mathrm{G}(xz)_{\delta _i\overline{0}}(\mathrm{})^k`$. Hence $`(\pi _k\mathrm{G})(xz)_{\delta _i,\overline{0}}0`$ and the linear operator $`xz`$ induces a non-zero map between $`\overline{X}(𝐦)=𝕃/(\mathrm{})^k`$ and $`\overline{X}(𝐧)=𝕃/(\mathrm{}+\delta _i)^k`$. The contradiction shows that $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)z0`$. The case $`z𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)=0`$ is treated in a similar manner. ∎

Now we are in a position to state the main result of this section which follows immediately from Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 7.1 (2).

###### Theorem 7.2.

Let $`𝐦`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then the left ideal $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)𝐦`$ is contained in finitely many maximal left ideals of $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$. In particular, $`𝐦`$ extends to a finitely many (up to an isomorphism) irreducible $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-modules and for each such module $`M`$, $`dimM(𝐧)<`$ $`\mathrm{}`$ for all $`𝐧`$ $`\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

## 8. Category of generic Harish-Chandra modules

In this section we study a full subcategory of generic modules in $`W(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. We give a complete description of irreducible modules and indecomposable modules in tame blocks of this category.

###### Lemma 8.1.

Let $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$, $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$, $`𝐦=ı^{}(\mathrm{})\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`𝐧=ı^{}(\mathrm{}+\delta _i)`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. If $`\beta _i\{\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _{2p}\}`$ then the objects of $`𝒜`$ represented by $`𝐦`$ and $`𝐧`$ are isomorphic.

###### Proof.

Choose $`z_1,z_2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that

$$z_1(\mathrm{}+\delta _j)=\delta _{ij},z_2(\mathrm{}+\delta _i\delta _j)=\delta _{ij},j=1,\mathrm{},p.$$

Set $`z=z_2t_{12}^{(1)}z_1t_{21}^{(1)}`$. Then $`G(z)`$ is diagonal by Lemma 6.5 and hence $`z\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by Corollary 6.3 (2). We will show that the image of $`z`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$ is invertible. Clearly, this is equivalent to the fact that $`z(\mathrm{})0`$. Formulas (4.7)–(4.9) imply that $`z(\mathrm{})=\gamma (\beta _i)0`$ by assumption. Denote by $`T_1`$ (respectively $`T_2`$) the generator of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$(respectively, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$)-bimodule $`𝒜(𝐦,𝐧)`$ (respectively, $`𝒜(𝐧,𝐦)`$); see Proposition 7.1 (6). Then

$$z_2t_{12}^{(1)}=z_𝐦T_2,z_1t_{21}^{(1)}=T_1z_𝐦^{}$$

for some $`z_𝐦,z_𝐦^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$ and hence $`z=z_𝐦T_2T_1z_𝐦^{}`$. Since $`z(\mathrm{})0`$ it follows that $`z_𝐦^{}(\mathrm{})0,z_𝐦(\mathrm{})0`$ and so $`T_2T_1=z_𝐦^1z(z_𝐦^{})^1`$ is invertible in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$. A similar argument shows that $`T_1T_2`$ is invertible in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐧`$. Therefore the objects $`𝐦`$ and $`𝐧`$ are isomorphic. ∎

###### Corollary 8.2.

Let $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$, $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$, $`\beta _i\gamma _j`$ for all $`i,j`$. Then the category $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma },D(\mathrm{}))`$ is hereditary. Moreover,

$$dim\mathrm{Ext}_{(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma },D(\mathrm{}))}^1(L(\mathrm{}),L(\mathrm{}))=3p.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`𝐦=ı^{}(\mathrm{})\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. By Lemma 8.1 and our assumptions all objects of the category $`𝒜(D(\mathrm{}))`$ are isomorphic and hence the category $`𝒜(D(\mathrm{}))\text{-mod}_d`$ is equivalent to the category of finite-dimensional modules over $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$. Applying Proposition 2.1 we conclude that the category $`(\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2),\mathrm{\Gamma },D(\mathrm{}))`$ is hereditary. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦`$ is an algebra of power series in $`3p`$ variables the statement about $`dim\mathrm{Ext}^1`$ follows. ∎

### 8.1. Category of generic weight modules

Let us fix

$$\mathrm{}𝒫_1,𝐦=ı^{}(\mathrm{}),𝐧=ı^{}(\mathrm{}+\delta _i)\mathrm{Specm}\mathrm{\Gamma },i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}.$$

Then $`𝒜_W(𝐦,𝐦)\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦/\mathrm{\Gamma }_𝐦𝐦\mathrm{𝕜}`$ by Proposition 7.1 (5) and so, $`dim𝒜_W(𝐦,𝐧)=1`$ by Proposition 7.1 (6). We will give a direct construction of the category $`𝒜_W(D(\mathrm{}))`$.

We shall keep the notation

$$\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma ),\beta =(\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _p)\mathrm{𝕜}^p,\gamma =(\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _{2p})\mathrm{𝕜}^{2p}.$$

Since $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ then $`\beta _i\beta _j`$ for $`ij`$. Consider the following category $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$: $`\mathrm{Ob}(K_{\mathrm{}})=^p`$ and the morphisms are generated by

$$f_i(k):(k)(k+\delta _i)\text{and}e_i(k):(k)(k\delta _i),$$

where $`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$ and $`(k)=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_p)^p`$ with the following relations:

$`f_j(k+\delta _i)f_i(k)`$ $`=f_i(k+\delta _j)f_j(k),`$
$`e_j(k\delta _i)e_i(k)`$ $`=e_i(k\delta _j)e_j(k),`$
$`e_i(k+\delta _j)f_j(k)`$ $`=f_j(k\delta _i)e_i(k)\text{for}ij,`$
$`e_i(k+\delta _i)f_i(k)`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}_{(k)},`$
$`f_i(k\delta _i)e_i(k)`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i+1)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}_{(k)}.`$
It follows immediately from Lemmas 4.1 and 4.3 that any module in the category $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ can be naturally viewed as a module over the category $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ which defines a functor $`F:R_{\mathrm{}}K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$. Consider the cyclic subalgebra $`C_{\mathrm{}}(a)=\mathrm{Hom}_K_{\mathrm{}}(a,a)`$ for any $`a^p`$. Clearly, $`C_{\mathrm{}}(a)\mathrm{𝕜}`$ for any $`a^p`$ due to the defining relations of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$. For any $`a=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_p)^p`$ we can construct a universal module $`M(\mathrm{},a)K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$. Consider $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ as a $`C_{\mathrm{}}(a)`$-module with

$`e_i(k+\delta _i)f_i(k)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i),`$
$`f_i(k\delta _i)e_i(k)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ $`=\gamma (\beta _ik_i+1).`$
Let $`A_{\mathrm{},a}`$ be an algebra of paths in $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ originating in $`a`$. Now construct a $`^p`$-graded $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-module

$$M(\mathrm{},a)=A_{\mathrm{},a}_{C_{\mathrm{}}(a)}\mathrm{𝕜}.$$

Clearly, all graded components of $`M(\mathrm{},a)`$ are $`1`$-dimensional and $`M(\mathrm{},a)_a=1_a\mathrm{𝕜}`$. A module $`M(\mathrm{},a)`$ contains a unique maximal $`^p`$-graded submodule which intersects $`M(\mathrm{},a)_a`$ trivially and hence has a unique irreducible quotient $`L(\mathrm{},a)`$ with $`L(\mathrm{},a)_a\mathrm{𝕜}`$ and $`dimL(\mathrm{},a)_b1`$ for all $`b^p`$. If $`V`$ is another irreducible $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-module with $`V_a0`$ then there exists a non-trivial $`C_{\mathrm{}}(a)`$-homomorphism from $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$ to $`V_a`$ which can be extended to an epimorphism from $`M(\mathrm{},a)`$ to $`V`$. Since $`V`$ is irreducible we conclude that $`VL(\mathrm{},a)`$.

Obviously, we can view $`M(\mathrm{})`$ as a module over the category $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ with a natural action of the morphisms of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`F(M(\mathrm{}))=M(\mathrm{},\beta )`$. Thus a $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$-module $`M(\mathrm{},\beta )`$ can be extended to a $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module $`M(\mathrm{})`$. Moreover, the functor $`F`$ preserves the submodule structure of $`M(\mathrm{})`$. In particular, $`F(L(\mathrm{}))=L(\mathrm{},\beta )`$.

###### Proposition 8.3.

If $`\mathrm{}𝒫_1`$ then the categories $`K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ are equivalent.

###### Proof.

Let $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )`$. We already have the functor $`F:R_{\mathrm{}}K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$. Suppose that $`VK_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$. We want to show that $`V`$ can be extended to a $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module. Fix $`vV_{(k)}\{0\}`$. Let $`WV`$ be a submodule generated by $`v`$. Then $`W_{(k)}=\mathrm{𝕜}v`$ and there is an epimorphism from $`M(\mathrm{},a)`$ to $`W`$, where $`a=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_p)`$, which maps $`1_a1`$ to $`v`$. Since $`F(M(\mathrm{}^{}))=M(\mathrm{},a)`$, where $`\mathrm{}^{}=(\beta +a,\gamma )`$, then $`W`$ can be extended to a corresponding quotient of $`M(\mathrm{}^{})`$. Since $`v`$ was an arbitrary element of $`V`$ we conclude that $`V`$ can be extended to a $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module and will denote that module by $`G(V)`$. Clearly, $`G`$ defines a functor from $`K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$ to $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ (action on morphisms is obvious). One can easily see that the functors $`F`$ and $`G`$ define an equivalence between the categories $`K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$ and $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$. ∎

### 8.2. Support of irreducible generic weight modules

To complete the classification of irreducible modules we have to know when two irreducible modules $`L(\mathrm{})`$ and $`L(\mathrm{}^{})`$ are isomorphic. For that we need to describe the support $`\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})`$.

We shall say that the weight subspaces $`M(\mathrm{})_\psi `$ and $`M(\mathrm{})_{\psi +\delta _i}`$ are strongly isomorphic if $`\gamma (\psi _i)0`$ where $`\psi =(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)`$. This implies

$$f_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_\psi 0\text{and}e_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _i+1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_{\psi +\delta _i}0.$$

The statement below follows immediately from the relations in $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ (cf. also Corollary 4.4).

###### Lemma 8.4.

If $`M(\mathrm{})_\psi `$ and $`M(\mathrm{})_{\psi +\delta _i}`$ are strongly isomorphic, then $`M(\mathrm{})_{\psi \pm \delta _j}`$ and $`M(\mathrm{})_{\psi +\delta _i\pm \delta _j}`$ are strongly isomorphic for all $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},p`$ such that $`ij`$. Moreover, if

$$f_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_\psi =0\text{or}e_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_\psi =0$$

then

$`f_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _j\pm 1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_{\psi \pm \delta _j}`$ $`=0\text{or}`$
$`e_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _j+1,\mathrm{},\psi _p)M(\mathrm{})_{\psi \pm \delta _j}`$ $`=0,`$
respectively, for all $`ji`$.

Let $`a_i,a_i^{}\{\pm \mathrm{}\},a_ia_i^{}`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. Denote

$$P(a_1,\mathrm{},a_p,a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_p^{})=\{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_p)^p|a_ix_ia_i^{},i=1,\mathrm{},p\},$$

a parallelepiped in $`^p`$. Note that some faces of the parallelepiped can be infinite in some directions. In particular, in the case $`a_i=\mathrm{}`$, $`a_i^{}=\mathrm{}`$ for all $`i`$, the parallelepiped coincides with $`^p`$.

###### Theorem 8.5.

For any irreducible weight module $`L(\mathrm{})`$ over $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$ there exist elements $`a_i,a_i^{}\{\pm \mathrm{}\}`$, $`a_ia_i^{}`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$ such that

$$\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})=P(a_1,\mathrm{},a_p,a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_p^{}).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )𝒫_1`$. Fix $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$. If $`\gamma (\beta _i+k)0`$ for all $`k`$ then

$$(k_1,\mathrm{},k_i+m,\mathrm{},k_p)\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})$$

as soon as $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_p)\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})`$. This follows immediately from Lemma 8.4. In this case we set $`a_i=\mathrm{}`$ and $`a_i^{}=\mathrm{}`$. Now let $`\gamma (\beta _i+k)=0`$ for some $`k`$. Let $`m0`$ be the smallest integer (if it exists) such that $`\gamma (\beta _im)=0`$ and let $`n0`$ be the largest integer (if it exists) such that $`\gamma (\beta _in+1)=0`$. It follows from Lemma 8.4 that

$$\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})\{\beta +k\delta _i|k\}=\{\beta +n\delta _i,\mathrm{},\beta ,\mathrm{},\beta +m\delta _i\}.$$

If $`\beta +s\delta _j\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})`$, $`ji`$ then

$$\mathrm{Supp}L(\mathrm{})\{\beta +s\delta _j+k\delta _i|k\}=\{\beta +s\delta _j+n\delta _i,\mathrm{},\beta +s\delta _j,\mathrm{},\beta +s\delta _j+m\delta _i\}.$$

In this case we set $`a_i=\beta _i+n`$ and $`a_i^{}=\beta _i+m`$. The statement of the theorem now follows. ∎

### 8.3. Indecomposable generic weight modules

Fix $`\mathrm{}=(\beta ,\gamma )𝒫_1`$. A full subcategory $`𝒮K_{\mathrm{}}`$ is called a skeleton of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ provided the objects of $`𝒮`$ are pairwise non-isomorphic and any object of $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$ is isomorphic to some object of $`𝒮`$. In this case the categories of $`K_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}`$ and $`𝒮\text{-mod}`$ are equivalent.

For each $`i\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$ consider a set $`I_i=\{k|\gamma (\beta _ik)=0\}`$. Define a category $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ as a $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-category with the set of objects

$$S_0=\{0,\mathrm{},|I_1|\}\times \mathrm{}\times \{0,\mathrm{},|I_p|\}$$

and with morphisms generated by

$`r_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_p)}^k:(i_1,\mathrm{},i_p)`$ $`(i_1,\mathrm{},i_k+1,\mathrm{},i_p),`$
$`s_{(j_1,\mathrm{},j_p)}^k:(j_1,\mathrm{},j_p)`$ $`(j_1,\mathrm{},j_k1,\mathrm{},j_p),`$
where $`k\{1,\mathrm{},p\}`$ is such that $`I_k\mathrm{}`$, $`i_k<|I_k|`$, $`j_k>0`$, subject to the relations:

$$s_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_k+1,\mathrm{},i_p)}^kr_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_p)}^k=r_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_p)}^ks_{(i_1,\mathrm{},i_k+1,\mathrm{},i_p)}^k=0$$

and

$$x_{(a_1,\mathrm{},a_p)}^ky_{(e_1,\mathrm{},e_p)}^r=y_{(c_1,\mathrm{},c_p)}^rx_{(e_1,\mathrm{},e_p)}^k$$

for all $`kr`$ and all possible $`x,y\{r,s\}`$ and all $`a_i,e_i,c_i`$, with $`1ip`$ for which this equality makes sense.

It follows from the construction that $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ is the skeleton of the category $`K_{\mathrm{}}`$. Note that the corresponding algebra is finite-dimensional. In particular, $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ is semisimple when $`I_k=\mathrm{}`$ for all $`1kp`$, i.e. when $`\gamma (\beta _k+r)0`$ for all $`k`$ and all $`i=1,\mathrm{},p`$. Hence it is sufficient to describe all indecomposable modules over $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$.

Fix $`aS_0`$ and define a simple $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$-module $`S_a`$ such that $`S_a(b)=\delta _{a,b}\mathrm{𝕜}`$ for all $`bS_0`$ and all morphisms are trivial. Since $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ defines a finite-dimensional algebra we have the following

###### Proposition 8.6.

Any simple module over $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ is isomorphic to $`S_a`$ for some $`aS_0`$.

This is another confirmation of the fact that all weight spaces in any irreducible generic weight $`\mathrm{Y}_p(𝔤𝔩_2)`$-module are $`1`$-dimensional. But this need not be the case for indecomposable modules. We restrict ourselves to a full subcategory $`R_{\mathrm{}}^fR_{\mathrm{}}`$ which consists of weight modules $`V`$ with $`dimV_\psi <\mathrm{}`$ for all $`\psi \mathrm{Supp}V`$. We will establish the representation type of the category $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ (finite, tame or wild). For the necessary definitions we refer the reader to \[Dr\].

To establish the representation type of the category $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ it is sufficient to consider the category $`S_{\mathrm{}}\text{-mod}^f`$ of modules over the category $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ with finite-dimensional weight spaces. Denote $`X_{\mathrm{}}=\{k\{1,\mathrm{},p\}|I_k\mathrm{}\}`$.

#### 8.3.1. Indecomposable modules in the case $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=1`$

In this section we describe all indecomposable modules over $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ in the case $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=1`$. Let $`X_{\mathrm{}}=\{i\}`$ and let $`|I_i|=r>0`$. In this case the category $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ has the following quiver $`𝐀`$ with the relations:

We denote by $`S_i`$, $`i\{1,\mathrm{},r+1\}`$, the simple module corresponding to the point $`i`$. These modules correspond to all irreducible modules in $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ by Proposition 8.6. Now describe the remaining indecomposable modules for the quiver above. Fix integers $`1k_1<k_2r+1`$ and a function

$$\xi _{k_1,k_2}:\{k_1,k_1+1,\mathrm{},k_2\}\{0,1\}.$$

Define the module $`M=M(k_1,k_2,\xi _{k_1,k_2})`$ as follows: $`M(i)=\mathrm{𝕜}e_i`$, $`k_1ik_2`$ and $`M(i)=0`$ otherwise. Furthermore,

$`a_ie_i`$ $`=e_{i+1},b_ie_{i+1}=0\text{if}\xi _{k_1,k_2}(i)=1`$
and
$`a_ie_i`$ $`=0,b_ie_{i+1}=e_i\text{if}\xi _{k_1,k_2}(i)=0,`$
for all $`1i<k_2`$. The proof of the following proposition is standard; see e.g. \[GR\].

###### Proposition 8.7.

The modules $`S_i`$ for $`1ir+1`$ and $`M(k_1,k_2,\xi _{k_1,k_2})`$ with $`1k_1<k_2r+1`$ and

$$\xi _{k_1,k_2}:\{k_1,k_1+1,\mathrm{},k_2\}\{0,1\},$$

exhaust all non-isomorphic indecomposable modules for $`𝐀`$.

#### 8.3.2. Indecomposable modules in the case $`|X|_{\mathrm{}}=2`$

In this section we describe the indecomposable modules for $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ when $`|X|_{\mathrm{}}=2`$ and $`|I_k|=1`$ for each $`kX_{\mathrm{}}`$. Then $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ is isomorphic to the following category $`𝐁`$ considered in \[BB\].

By Proposition 8.6, this category has four non-isomorphic simple modules $`S_i`$ where $`i\{0,1,2,3\}`$, with the support in the given point $`i`$. The indecomposable modules were described in \[BB\]. For the sake of completeness we repeat here this classification.

We will treat the objects of $`𝐁`$ as elements of $`/4`$. Consider the following three families of non-simple indecomposable modules.

Finite family. Fix $`i\{0,1,2,3\}`$ and define the $`𝐁`$-module $`M_i`$ such that $`M_i(j)=\mathrm{𝕜}e_j`$ for each $`j=0,1,2,3`$ and

$$a_ie_i=e_{i+1},a_{i+1}e_{i+1}=e_{i+2},b_{i1}e_i=e_{i2},b_{i2}e_{i1}=e_{i2}$$

while $`u_je_k=0`$ for all other cases of $`u\{a,b\}`$ and $`j,k=0,\mathrm{},3`$. Obviously, $`M_i`$ is indecomposable module for any $`i`$.

Infinite discrete families. Let $`n`$, $`n>1`$, and $`j_4`$. Define a $`𝐁`$-module $`M_{n,j,1}`$ (respectively, $`M_{n,j,2}`$) as follows. Consider $`n`$ elements $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$. A $`\mathrm{𝕜}`$-basis of the vector space $`M_{n,j,1}(l)`$ (respectively, $`M_{n,j,2}(l)`$) is the set of $`e_k`$ such that $`j+k1l(mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}).`$ The elements $`a_l`$ and $`b_{l1}`$ act as follows:

$$a_le_k=\{\begin{array}{cc}e_{k+1},\hfill & \text{ if }l\text{ is even (resp., odd), }k<n\text{ and }j+k1l(mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4})\text{;}\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{ otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

$$b_{l1}e_k=\{\begin{array}{cc}e_{k1},\hfill & \text{ if }l\text{ is even (resp., odd), }k>1\text{ and }j+k1l(mod\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4})\text{;}\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{ otherwise.}\hfill \end{array}$$

All modules $`M_{n,j,1}`$ and $`M_{n,j,2}`$, $`n>1`$, $`0j3`$ are non-isomorphic indecomposable $`𝐁`$-modules.

Infinite continuous families. For each $`\lambda \mathrm{𝕜}`$, $`\lambda 0`$, and $`d`$, $`d>0`$ define the $`𝐁`$-modules $`M_{d,\lambda ,1}`$ and $`M_{d,\lambda ,2}`$ as follows. Set

$`M_{d,\lambda ,1}(i)`$ $`=\mathrm{𝕜}^d,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,1}(a_0)`$ $`=M_{d,\lambda ,1}(a_2)=M_{d,\lambda ,1}(b_1)=𝐈_d,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,1}(b_0)`$ $`=M_{d,\lambda ,1}(b_2)=M_{d,\lambda ,1}(a_1)=M_{d,\lambda ,1}(a_3)=0,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,1}(b_3)`$ $`=J_{d,\lambda }`$
and

$`M_{d,\lambda ,2}(i)`$ $`=\mathrm{𝕜}^d,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,2}(b_0)`$ $`=M_{d,\lambda ,2}(b_2)=M_{d,\lambda ,2}(a_1)=𝐈_d,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,2}(a_0)`$ $`=M_{d,\lambda ,2}(a_2)=M_{d,\lambda ,2}(b_1)=M_{d,\lambda ,2}(b_3)=0,`$
$`M_{d,\lambda ,2}(a_3)`$ $`=J_{d,\lambda },`$
where $`J_{d,\lambda }`$ is the Jordan cell of dimension $`d`$ with the eigenvalue $`\lambda `$.

All modules $`M_{d,\lambda ,k}`$, $`k=1,2`$ are indecomposable and corresponding indecomposable modules in $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ have all weight spaces of dimension $`d`$.

###### Proposition 8.8.

( \[BB\], Proposition 3.3.1.) The modules $`S_i`$, $`M_i`$, $`M_{n,i,1}`$, $`M_{n,i,2}`$, $`M_{d,\lambda ,1}`$, $`M_{d,\lambda ,2}`$ where $`0i3`$, $`d`$ is a positive integer, $`\lambda \mathrm{𝕜}`$, $`\lambda 0`$, and $`n2`$ is an integer, constitute an exhaustive list of pairwise non-isomorphic indecomposable $`𝐁`$-modules.

The following theorem describes the representation type of $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$.

###### Theorem 8.9.

* If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=0`$ then $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ is a semisimple category with a unique indecomposable (=irreducible) module;
* If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=1`$ then $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has finite representation type;
* If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=2`$ then $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has tame representation type if and only if $`|I_k|=1`$ for all $`kX`$. Otherwise, $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has wild representation type;
* If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|>2`$ then $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has wild representation type.

###### Proof.

In the case when $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=1`$ all indecomposable modules for $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ are described in Proposition 8.7. Hence $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has the finite representation type. If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=2`$ and $`|I_k|=1`$ for each $`kX`$ then all indecomposable modules for $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ are described in Proposition 8.8. It follows from the definition that $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has the tame representation type in this case. If $`|I_k|>1`$ for at least one $`k`$ then it is easy to construct a family of indecomposable modules that depends on two continuous parameters. Hence, in this case $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has the wild representation type. Suppose now that $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|>2`$. Then $`S_{\mathrm{}}`$ contains a full subcategory of wild representation type considered in \[BB, Theorem 1\]. We immediately conclude that $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$ has the wild representation type. This completes the proof. ∎

###### Corollary 8.10.

1. If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=0`$ then the category $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a semisimple category with a unique indecomposable module.
2. If $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|=1`$ then $`R_{\mathrm{}}`$ has finite representation type with indecomposable modules as in Proposition 8.7.

###### Proof.

Since cases $`|X_{\mathrm{}}|1`$ correspond to the finite representation type then the corresponding categories do not admit infinite-dimensional indecomposable modules by \[A\] and hence every indecomposable module belongs to $`R_{\mathrm{}}^f`$. ∎

## Acknowledgment

The first author is a Regular Associate of the ICTP and is supported by the CNPq grant (Processo 300679/97-1). The first author is grateful to the University of Sydney for support and hospitality. The second and the third authors are grateful to FAPESP for the financial support (Processos 2001/13973-0 and 2002/01866-7) and to the University of São Paulo for the warm hospitality during their visits.