text:
# On the category 𝒪 for rational Cherednik algebras

## 1. Introduction

Let $`W`$ be a complex reflection group acting on a vector space $`V`$. Let $`𝖠_W`$ denote the rational Cherednik algebra introduced in \[EtGi\] as a certain deformation of $`𝒟(V)W`$, the cross-product of $`W`$ with the algebra of polynomial differential operators on $`V`$. The algebra $`𝖠_W`$ can be also realized as an algebra of operators (Dunkl operators) acting on polynomial functions on $`V`$. When $`W`$ is a Weyl group, $`𝖠_W`$ is a rational degeneration of the double affine Hecke algebra.

A nice category $`𝒪`$ of $`𝖠_W`$-modules has been discovered in \[DuOp\], cf. also \[BeEtGi\]. It shares many similarities with the Bernstein-Gelfand-Gelfand category $`𝒪`$ for a finite-dimensional semi-simple Lie algebra.

We develop a general approach to the category $`𝒪`$ for a rational Cherednik algebra, similar in spirit to Soergel’s analysis, see \[So1\], of the category $`𝒪`$ in the Lie algebra case. Specifically, in addition to the algebra $`𝖠_W`$, we consider an appropriate (finite) Hecke algebra $`_W`$, and construct an exact functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪_W\mathrm{mod}`$, that may be thought of as a Cherednik algebra analogue of the functor $`𝕍`$ of \[So1\]. One of our main results says that the functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ is fully faithful on projectives. Thus, the (noncommutative!) Hecke algebra plays, in our case, the role similar to that the coinvariant algebra (= cohomology of the flag manifold) plays in the Lie algebra case. It is also interesting to note that, in both cases, the algebra in question is Frobenius.

To prove our results, in §2 we develop some basic representation theory over a ground ring (which is not necessarily a field) of a general associative algebra with a triangular decomposition. This generalizes earlier work of the second author \[Gu\] and of the last two authors (unpublished). Such generality will be essential for us in order to use deformation arguments in §5. The results of section 2 are applied to Cherednik algebras in §3.2.

In §4, we explain how to generalize some classical constructions for $`𝒟(V)`$, the Weyl algebra, (such as characteristic varieties, duality) to the rational Cherednik algebra. We study two kinds of dualities. One of them is related to Fourier transform while the other, much more important one, generalizes the usual (Verdier type) duality on $`𝒟`$-modules. This enables us to show that the Ringel dual of category $`𝒪`$ is a category $`𝒪`$ for the dual reflection group. We also give a formula for the dimension of the characteristic variety involving only the highest weight structure of $`𝒪`$.

Our most important results are concentrated in §5.4. We use the de Rham functor for Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov type $`𝒟`$-modules over the complement of the ramification locus in $`V`$. This way, we relate the category $`𝒪`$ with a Hecke algebra. We prove that the category $`𝒪`$ can be recovered from its quotient by the subcategory of objects with non-maximal characteristic variety (Theorem 5.3 and Corollary 5.5).

Then, we obtain a “double centralizer” Theorem 5.16, asserting in particular that the category $`𝒪`$ is equivalent to the category of modules over the endomorphism ring of some Hecke algebra module. A crucial point is the proof that the de Rham functor sends the $`𝒟`$-modules coming from objects of $`𝒪`$ to representations of the braid group that factor through the Hecke algebra (Theorem 5.13).

In a different perspective, our results provide a solution to the problem of associating a generalized “$`q`$-Schur algebra” to an arbitrary finite complex reflection group $`W`$. This seems to be new even when $`W`$ is a Weyl group (except for types $`𝐀,𝐁`$). For instance, let $`W`$ be the Weyl group of an irreducible simply-laced root system. Then, the data defining the Cherednik algebra $`𝖠_W`$ reduces to a single complex parameter $`c𝐂`$. In this case, $`_W`$ is the standard Iwahori-Hecke algebra of $`W`$, specialised at the parameter $`q=e^{2\pi ic}`$. If $`c`$ is a rational number, then $`q`$ is a root of unity, and the corresponding category $`_W\mathrm{mod}`$ becomes quite complicated. Our results show that the category $`𝒪`$ for $`𝖠_W`$ may be viewed as a natural “quasi-hereditary cover” of the category $`_W\mathrm{mod}`$, which is not itself quasi-hereditary. As a consequence, the decomposition matrices of Hecke algebras (in characteristic $`0`$) are triangular (Corollary 5.19). We remark that, in view of \[CPS2\], one might have expected on general grounds that the category $`_W\mathrm{mod}`$ only has a “stratified cover”, which is weaker than having a “quasi-hereditary cover”.

The reader should be reminded that, in type $`𝐀`$, a well-known “quasi-hereditary cover” of $`_W\mathrm{mod}`$ is provided by the $`q`$-Schur algebra. We expect that the latter category is equivalent to the category $`𝒪`$. Furthermore, for an arbitrary finite Weyl group $`W`$, we prove in §6 that the $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$-functor sends the standard modules in $`𝒪`$ to modules over the Hecke algebra (with equal parameters) that can be described via Kazhdan-Lusztig’s theory of cells. It follows in particular that, in type $`𝐀`$, the standard modules in category $`𝒪`$ go to Specht (or ‘dual Specht’, depending on the sign of parameter ‘$`c`$’) $`_W`$-modules, introduced in \[DJ\].

Acknowledgments.  The second named author gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the Fonds NATEQ. The third named author was partially supported by a Pioner grant of the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO).

## 2. Category $`𝒪`$

### 2.1. Algebras with triangular decomposition.

In this section, we assume given an associative algebra $`A`$ with a triangular decomposition. We study a category $`𝒪(A)`$ of $`A`$-modules, similar to the Bernstein-Gelfand-Gelfand category $`𝒪`$ for a complex semi-simple Lie algebra. The main result of this section is Theorem 2.19 below, saying that the category $`𝒪(A)`$ is a highest weight category (in the sense of \[CPS1\]).

Throughout this section 2, let $`k_0`$ be an algebraically closed field and $`k`$ a commutative noetherian $`k_0`$-algebra.

Let $`A`$ be a graded $`k`$-algebra with three graded subalgebras $`B`$, $`\overline{B}`$ and $`H`$ such that

* $`A=\overline{B}HB`$ as $`k`$-modules
* $`B`$ and $`\overline{B}`$ are projective over $`k`$
* $`BH=HB`$ and $`H\overline{B}=\overline{B}H`$
* $`B=_{i0}B_i`$, $`\overline{B}=_{i0}\overline{B}_i`$, and $`B_0=\overline{B}_0=k`$ and $`HA_0`$.
* $`H=k_{k_0}H(k_0)`$ where $`H(k_0)`$ is a finite dimensional semi-simple split $`k_0`$-algebra
* the grading on $`A`$ is inner, i.e., there exists $`A_0`$ such that $`A_i=\{uA|uu=iu\}`$.

We denote by $`BH`$ and $`\overline{B}H`$ the subalgebras $`BH`$ and $`\overline{B}H`$. We put $`B^i=B_i`$. We denote by $`\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$ the set of isomorphism classes of finite dimensional simple $`H(k_0)`$-modules. We put $`=^{}_0`$ with $`^{}\overline{B}HB^{>0}`$ and $`_0Z(H)`$. For $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$, we denote by $`c_E`$ the scalar by which $`_0`$ acts on $`k_{k_0}E`$.

The theory developped here is closely related to the one developped by Soergel \[So2, §3-6\] in the case where $`𝔤`$ is a graded Lie algebra with $`𝔤_0`$ reductive, $`A=𝒰(𝔤)`$, $`B=𝒰(𝔤_{>0})`$, $`\overline{B}=𝒰(𝔤_{<0})`$ and $`H=𝒰(𝔤_0)`$.111In the Lie algebra case, the algebra $`H=𝒰(𝔤_0)`$ is not finite dimensional. One then has to restrict oneself to the consideration of $`H`$-semisimple $`A`$-modules only. The theory developed below easily extends to such a case.

### 2.2. Locally nilpotent modules

We denote by $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ the full subcategory of the category of $`A`$-modules consisting of those modules that are locally nilpotent for $`B`$, i.e., an $`A`$-module $`M`$ is in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ if for every $`mM`$, there exists $`n0`$ such that $`B^{>n}m=0`$. This is a Serre subcategory of the category of $`A`$-modules.

###### Remark 2.1.

The canonical functor $`D^b(𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}})D^b(A)`$ is not faithful in general. Nevertheless, for $`i=0,1`$, and any $`M,M^{}𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$, one still has $`\mathrm{Ext}_{𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}}^i(M,M^{})\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Ext}_A^i(M,M^{})`$.

### 2.3. Standard modules

#### 2.3.1.

Let $`hH`$. We denote by $`\varphi _h:\overline{B}\overline{B}HA`$ the map defined by $`\varphi _h(\overline{b})=h\overline{b}`$. Similarly, we denote by $`\psi _h:BHBA`$ the map defined by $`\psi _h(b)=bh`$.

Let $`E`$ be an $`H`$-module. The augmentation $`BB/B^{>0}=k`$ induces a morphism of algebras $`BHH`$ and we view $`E`$ as a $`BH`$-module by restriction via this morphism. All simple $`BH`$-modules that are locally nilpotent over $`B`$ are obtained by this construction, starting with $`E`$ a simple $`H`$-module.

We put

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(E)=\mathrm{Ind}_{BH}^AE=A_{BH}E.$$

The canonical isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)\stackrel{}{}\overline{B}E`$ is an isomorphism of graded $`\overline{B}H`$-modules ($`E`$ is viewed in degree $`0`$), where $`\overline{B}`$ acts by multiplication on $`\overline{B}`$ and the action of $`hH`$ is given by $`\varphi _h_H1_E:\overline{B}E\overline{B}H_HE=\overline{B}E`$.

We now put $`(E)=\mathrm{Homgr}_{\overline{B}H}^{}(A,E)=_i\mathrm{Homgr}_{\overline{B}H}^i(A,E)`$ (this is also the submodule of elements of $`\mathrm{Hom}_{\overline{B}H}(A,E)`$ that are locally finite for $`B`$). Here, $`E`$ is viewed as a $`\overline{B}H`$-module via the canonical morphism $`\overline{B}H(\overline{B}/\overline{B}_{>0})H=H`$.

We have an isomorphism of graded $`BH`$-modules $`(E)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_k(B,k)E`$ where $`B`$ acts by left multiplication on $`\mathrm{Hom}_k(B,k)`$ and the action of $`hH`$ is given by $`fe(be(1f)(\psi _h(b))e)`$.

The $`A`$-module $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ is a graded module, generated by its degree $`0`$ component. The $`A`$-module $`(E)`$ is also graded. Both $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ and $`(E)`$ are concentrated in non-negative degrees, hence are locally nilpotent for $`B`$.

#### 2.3.2.

We have

$$\mathrm{Ext}_A^i(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),(F))\mathrm{Ext}_{\overline{B}H}^i(\mathrm{Res}_{\overline{B}H}\mathrm{\Delta }(E),F)\mathrm{Ext}_{\overline{B}H}^i(\mathrm{Ind}_H^{\overline{B}H}E,F)\mathrm{Ext}_H^i(E,F).$$

It follows that, when $`k`$ is a field and $`E,F`$ are simple, then

(1)
$$\mathrm{Ext}_A^i(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),(F))=0\text{ if }i0\text{ or }E\simeq ̸F\text{ and }\mathrm{Hom}_A(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),(E))k.$$

Let $`N`$ be any $`A`$-module. We have

(2)
$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),N)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{BH}(E,\mathrm{Res}_{BH}N)$$

#### 2.3.3.

A $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration for a $`A`$-module $`M`$ is a filtration $`0=M_0M_1\mathrm{}M_n=M`$ with $`M_{i+1}/M_i\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}E_i)`$ for some $`E_i\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$. We denote by $`𝒪^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the full subcategory of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ of objects with a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration.

Given an $`H`$-module $`E`$ and $`n0`$, we also consider more general modules

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_n(E)=\mathrm{Ind}_{BH}^A\left((B/B^{>n})_kE\right)$$

The modules $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n(k_{k_0}F)`$ have a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration, when $`F`$ is a finite dimensional $`H(k_0)`$-module.

For $`N`$ a $`A`$-module, we have

$$\mathrm{Hom}_A(\mathrm{\Delta }_n(E),N)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{BH}((B/B^{>n})_kE,N).$$

As a consequence, we have a characterization of $`B`$-locally nilpotent $`A`$-modules :

###### Proposition 2.2.

Let $`N`$ be a $`A`$-module. Then, the following are equivalent

* $`N`$ is in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$
* $`N`$ is a quotient of a (possibily infinite) sum of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_n(E)`$’s
* $`N`$ has an ascending filtration whose successive quotients are quotients of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$’s.

### 2.4. Graded modules

#### 2.4.1.

Given $`\alpha k`$ and $`M`$ a $`A`$-module, define generalized weight spaces in $`M`$ by

$$𝒲_\alpha (M)=\{mM|(\alpha )^nm=0\text{ for }n0\}.$$

Let $`𝒪`$ be the full subcategory of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ consisting of those modules $`M`$ such that $`M=_{\alpha k}𝒲_\alpha (M)`$ where $`𝒲_\alpha (M)`$ is finitely generated over $`k`$, for every $`\alpha k`$. This is a Serre subcategory of the category of $`A`$-modules.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$ be the category of graded $`A`$-modules that are in $`𝒪`$. This is a Serre subcategory of the category of graded $`A`$-modules.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^\alpha `$ be the full subcategory of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$ consisting of those objects $`M`$ such that $`M_i𝒲_{i\alpha }(M)`$ for all $`i`$. Note that this amounts to requiring that $`^{}(i+c_F\alpha )`$ acts nilpotently on $`\mathrm{Homgr}_H^i(k_{k_0}F,M)`$ for $`F\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$, since $``$ and $`_0`$ commute.

More generally, if $`I`$ is a subset of $`k`$, we denote by $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^I`$ the full subcategory of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$ consisting of those objects $`M`$ such that $`M_i_{\alpha I}𝒲_{i\alpha }(M)`$.

We denote by $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(E)`$ the graded version of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ (it is generated in degree $`0`$ and has no terms in negative degrees). Further, write $`r`$ for ‘grading shift by $`r`$’ of a graded vector space.

###### Lemma 2.3.

Let $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$. We have $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E)r\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^{c_Er}`$.

###### Proof.

Note that $`^{}`$ acts as zero on $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E)_0`$, since $`B^{>0}`$ acts as zero on it. So, $``$ acts as $`c_E`$ on it. It follows that $``$ acts by $`ic_E`$ on $`\overline{B}_i\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E)_0=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E)_i`$ and we are done. ∎

#### 2.4.2.

Let $`𝒫`$ be the quotient of $`_{E\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))}(c_E+𝐙)`$ by the equivalence relation given as the transitive closure of the relation : $`\alpha \beta `$ if $`\alpha \beta `$ is not invertible.

We make the following assumption until the end of §2.4.

###### Hypothesis 1.

We assume that $`c_Ec_E+n`$ for some $`n𝐙`$ implies $`n=0`$ (this holds for example when $`k`$ is a local ring of characteristic zero).

###### Proposition 2.4.

We have $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}=_{a𝒫}\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$.

The image by the canonical functor $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}𝒪`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^{a+n}`$ is a full subcategory $`𝒪^{a+𝐙}`$ independent of $`n𝐙`$.

We have $`𝒪=_{a𝒫/𝐙}𝒪^{a+𝐙}`$ and the forgetful functor $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a\stackrel{}{}𝒪^{a+𝐙}`$ is an equivalence.

###### Proof.

Let $`M`$ be an object of $`𝒪`$. Let $`a𝒫`$ and $`M^a=_{\alpha a+𝐙}𝒲_\alpha (M)`$. By Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.2, we have a decomposition $`M=_{a𝒫/𝐙}M^a`$ as $`A`$-modules.

Similarly, given $`\stackrel{~}{M}\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$, we have $`\stackrel{~}{M}=_{a𝒫}\stackrel{~}{M}^a`$ where

$$\stackrel{~}{M}^a=\underset{i}{}\underset{\alpha a}{}(𝒲_{i\alpha }(M)M_i)\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a.$$

Given $`M𝒪^{a+𝐙}`$, we put a grading on $`M`$ by setting $`M_i=_{\alpha ia}𝒲_\alpha (M)`$ (here we use the assumption on $`k`$). This defines an element of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$ and completes the proof of the proposition. ∎

We denote by $`p_a:\stackrel{~}{𝒪}\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$ the projection functor.

#### 2.4.3.

We now give a construction of projective objects (under Hypothesis 1).

###### Lemma 2.5.

Let $`a𝒫`$ and $`d𝐙`$. There is an integer $`r`$ such that the canonical map

$$\mathrm{Hom}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_m(H)d,M)M_d$$

is an isomorphism for all $`mr`$ and $`M\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$.

###### Proof.

Replacing $`M`$ by $`Md`$ and $`a`$ by $`a+d`$, we can assume that $`d=0`$.

There is an integer $`r`$ such that $`p_a(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(H)r^{})=0`$ for $`r^{}r`$. The exact sequence

$$0\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(B^mH)m\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_m(H)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_{m1}(H)0$$

shows that the canonical map

$$\mathrm{Hom}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_r(H),M)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_m(H),M)$$

is an isomorphism for any $`M\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$ and $`mr`$. Equivalently, the canonical map

$$\mathrm{Hom}_B(B/B^r,M)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_B(B/B^m,M)$$

is an isomorphism. Since $`M`$ is locally $`B`$-nilpotent, this gives an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Hom}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_m(H),M)\stackrel{}{}M_0.$$

###### Corollary 2.6.

Let $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$ and $`ac_E+𝐙`$. Then, the object $`p_a(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}_r(k_{k_0}E)ac_E)`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$ is independent of $`r`$, for $`r0`$. It is projective, has a filtration by modules $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}F)r`$ and has a quotient isomorphic to $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E)ac_E`$.

###### Corollary 2.7.

Let $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$. Then, for $`r0`$, the module $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r(k_{k_0}E)`$ has a projective direct summand which is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered and has a quotient isomorphic to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}E)`$.

###### Corollary 2.8.

There is an integer $`r`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r(H)`$ contains a progenerator of $`𝒪`$ as a direct summand.

###### Lemma 2.9.

Let $`E,F\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$ such that $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}E),\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}F))0`$. Then, $`c_Fc_E`$ is a positive integer.

###### Proof.

By Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.4, we have $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}E),\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}F))=0`$ if $`c_Fc_E`$ is not an integer. Assume now $`c_Fc_E`$ is an integer. Then

$`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}E),\mathrm{\Delta }(k_{k_0}F))`$ $`\mathrm{Ext}_{\stackrel{~}{𝒪}}^1(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}F)c_Fc_E)`$
$`\mathrm{Ext}_A^1(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}F)c_Fc_E),`$
by Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.4. Now,

$$\mathrm{Ext}_A^1(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}E),\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}F)c_Fc_E)\mathrm{Ext}_{BH}^1(k_{k_0}E,\mathrm{Res}_{BH}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(k_{k_0}F)c_Fc_E).$$

If the last $`\mathrm{Ext}^1`$ is non zero, then $`c_Fc_E`$ is a positive integer. ∎

###### Corollary 2.10.

Assume $`k`$ is a field. Let $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H)`$. Then, $`L(E)`$ has a projective cover $`P(E)`$ with a filtration $`Q_0=0Q_1\mathrm{}Q_d=P(E)`$ such that $`Q_i/Q_{i1}\mathrm{\Delta }(F_i)`$ for some $`F_i\mathrm{Irr}(H)`$, $`c_{F_i}c_E`$ is a positive integer for $`id`$ and $`F_d=E`$.

###### Proof.

We know already that there is an indecomposable projective module $`P(E)`$ as in the statement satisfying all assumptions but the one on $`c_{F_i}c_E`$, by Corollary 2.7.

Take $`rd`$ maximal such that $`Q_r/Q_{r1}\mathrm{\Delta }(F)`$ with $`c_Fc_E`$ not a positive integer. By Lemma 2.9, the extension of $`P(E)/Q_{r1}`$ by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(F)`$ splits. So, we have a surjective morphism $`P(E)\mathrm{\Delta }(E)\mathrm{\Delta }(F)`$. This is impossible since $`P(E)`$ is indecomposable and projective. ∎

### 2.5. Highest weight theory

#### 2.5.1.

We assume here that $`k`$ is a field.

For $`E`$ a simple $`H`$-module, all proper submodules of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ are graded submodules by Proposition 2.4, hence are contained in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)_{>0}`$. Consequently, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ has a unique maximal proper submodule, hence a unique simple quotient which we denote by $`L(E)`$.

It follows from (1) that $`L(E)`$ is the unique simple submodule of $`(E)`$ and that $`L(E)\simeq ̸L(F)`$ for $`E\simeq ̸F`$.

###### Proposition 2.11.

The simple objects of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ are the $`L(E)`$ for $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`N𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$. Then there is a simple $`H`$-module $`E`$ such that $`\mathrm{Hom}_{BH}(E,\mathrm{Res}_{BH}N)0`$. By (2), it follows that every simple object of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ for some simple $`H`$-module $`E`$. ∎

#### 2.5.2.

Let $`M`$ be a $`A`$-module. Let $`p(M)`$ be the set of elements of $`M`$ annihilated by $`B^{>0}`$. This is an $`H`$-submodule of $`M`$.

###### Lemma 2.12.

Let $`M`$ be a $`A`$-module and $`E`$ an $`H`$-module. Then,

* $`M`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ if and only if there is a morphism of $`H`$-modules $`\phi :Ep(M)`$ such that $`M=A\phi (E)`$ ;
* If $`k`$ is a field and $`E`$ is simple, then $`ML(E)`$ if and only if $`M=Ap(M)`$ and $`p(M)E`$.

In particular, $`Ap(M)`$ is the largest submodule of $`M`$ that is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(F)`$ for some $`H`$-module $`F`$.

###### Proof.

The first assertion follows from (2) and the isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{BH}(E,\mathrm{Res}_{BH}M)\mathrm{Hom}_H(E,p(M)).$$

Now, we assume $`k`$ is a field and $`E`$ is simple.

Assume $`p(M)E`$ and $`M=Ap(M)`$. Then, $`M`$ is in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$. Let $`N`$ be a non-zero submodule of $`M`$. We have $`0p(N)p(M)`$, hence $`p(N)=p(M)`$ and $`N=M`$. So, $`M`$ is simple and isomorphic to $`L(E)`$ since $`M`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$.

Assume $`ML(E)`$. Since $`dim_k\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{\Delta }(F),L(E))=1`$ if $`EF`$, and this Hom-space vanishes otherwise, it follows from (2) that $`p(M)E`$. ∎

Let $`M\{0\}=0`$ and define by induction $`N\{i\}=M/M\{i\}`$, $`L\{i\}=Ap(N\{i\})`$ and $`M\{i+1\}`$ as the inverse image of $`L\{i\}`$ in $`M`$. We have obtained a sequence of submodules of $`M`$, $`0=M\{0\}M\{1\}\mathrm{}M`$.

Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ is locally nilpotent for $`B`$, the following proposition is clear. It describes how the objects of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ are constructed from $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$’s (cf Proposition 2.2).

###### Proposition 2.13.

A $`A`$-module $`M`$ is locally nilpotent for $`B`$ if and only if $`_iM\{i\}=M`$, i.e., if $`M`$ has a filtration whose successive quotients are quotients of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$’s.

###### Lemma 2.14.

Assume $`k`$ is a field. Every $`A`$-module quotient $`M`$ of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ has a finite Jordan-Hölder series $`0=M^0M^1\mathrm{}M^d=M`$ with quotients $`M^i/M^{i1}L(F_i)`$ such that $`F_i\mathrm{Irr}(kW)`$, $`c_Ec_{F_i}`$ is a positive integer for $`id`$ and $`F_d=E`$.

###### Proof.

By Proposition 2.4, we can assume $`c_Fc_E𝐙`$. From Proposition 2.4, it follows that $`M`$ inherits a grading from $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ (with $`M_00`$ and $`M_{<0}=0`$). Note that since $`^{}`$ acts as zero on $`p(M)`$, we have $`p(M)_{F\mathrm{Irr}(H)}M_{c_Ec_F}`$.

We will first show that $`M`$ has a simple submodule.

Take $`i`$ maximal such that $`p(M)_i0`$ and $`F`$ a simple $`H`$-submodule of $`p(M)_i`$. Let $`L=AF`$. Then, $`p(L)p(M)M_i`$ and $`p(L)FL_{>i}`$, hence $`p(L)=F`$. It follows from Lemma 2.12 that $`LL(F)`$ and we are done.

Let $`d(M)=_{F\mathrm{Irr}(H)}dimM_{c_Ec_F}`$.

We put $`M^{}=M/L`$. We have $`d(M^{})<d(M)`$. So, the lemma follows by induction on $`d(M)`$. ∎

### 2.6. Properties of category $`𝒪`$

We assume here in §2.6 that $`k`$ is a field. We now derive structural properties of our categories.

#### 2.6.1.

###### Corollary 2.15.

Every object of $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ has an ascending filtration whose successive quotients are semi-simple.

###### Proof.

Follows from Lemma 2.14 and Proposition 2.2. ∎

###### Corollary 2.16.

Every object of $`𝒪`$ has a finite Jordan-Hölder series.

###### Proof.

The multiplicity of $`L(E)`$ in a filtration of $`M𝒪`$ given by Corollary 2.15 is bounded by $`dim𝒲_{c_E}(M)`$, hence the filtration must be finite. ∎

###### Corollary 2.17.

The category $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}^a`$ is generated by the $`L(E)r`$, with $`r=c_Ea`$.

###### Proof.

Follows from Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.11. ∎

###### Corollary 2.18.

Given $`ak`$, the full abelian Serre subcategory of the category of $`A`$-modules generated by the $`L(E)`$ with $`c_Ea+𝐙`$ is $`𝒪^{a+𝐙}`$.

#### 2.6.2.

###### Theorem 2.19.

The category $`𝒪`$ is a highest weight category (in the sense of \[CPS1\]) with respect to the relation: $`E<F`$ if $`c_Fc_E`$ is a positive integer.

###### Proof.

Follows from Corollary 2.10 and Lemma 2.14. ∎

The standard and costandard objects are the $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ and $`(E)`$. There are projective modules $`P(E)`$, injective modules $`I(E)`$, tilting modules $`T(E)`$. We have reciprocity formulas, cf. \[CPS1, Theorem 3.11\]:

$$[I(E):(F)]=[\mathrm{\Delta }(F):L(E)]\text{and}[P(E):\mathrm{\Delta }(F)]=[(F):L(E)].$$

###### Corollary 2.20.

If $`c_Ec_F𝐙\{0\}`$ for all $`E,F\mathrm{Irr}(H(k_0))`$, then $`𝒪`$ is semi-simple.

###### Proposition 2.21.

Let $`M𝒪`$. The following assertions are equivalent

* $`M`$ has a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration
* $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^i(M,(H))=0`$ for $`i>0`$
* $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^1(M,(H))=0`$
* the restriction of $`M`$ to $`\overline{B}`$ is free.

###### Proof.

The equivalence between the first three assertions is classical. The remaining equivalences follow from the isomorphism $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^1(M,(H))\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Ext}_A^1(M,(H))\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Ext}_{\overline{B}}^1(M,k)`$. ∎

#### 2.6.3.

From Proposition 2.2, we deduce

###### Lemma 2.22.

Let $`M𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$. The following conditions are equivalent

* $`M𝒪`$
* $`M`$ is finitely generated as a $`A`$-module
* $`M`$ is finitely generated as a $`\overline{B}`$-module.

###### Lemma 2.23.

There is $`r0`$ such that for all $`M𝒪`$, $`ak`$ and $`m`$ in the generalized eigenspace for $`^{}`$ for the eigenvalue $`a`$, then $`(^{}a)^rm=0`$.

###### Proof.

The action of $`^{}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Delta }(H)`$ is semi-simple. It follows that, given $`r0`$, $`ak`$ and $`m\mathrm{\Delta }_r(H)`$ in the generalized eigenspace for $`^{}`$ for the eigenvalue $`a`$, then $`(^{}a)^rm=0`$.

Now, by Corollary 2.7, there is some integer $`r`$ such that every object of $`𝒪`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r(H)^l`$ for some $`l`$. ∎

###### Proposition 2.24.

There is $`r0`$ such that every module in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ is generated by the kernel of $`B^r`$. Further, there is an integer $`r>0`$ such that for $`M𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$, we have $`M\{i\}=M\{r\}`$ for $`ir`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`r0`$ such that every projective indecomposable object in $`𝒪`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{r1}(H)`$. This means that every object in $`𝒪`$ is generated by the kernel of $`B^r`$. Now, consider $`M𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ and $`mM`$. Let $`N`$ be the $`A`$-submodule of $`M`$ generated by $`m`$. This is in $`𝒪`$, hence $`m`$ is in the submodule of $`N`$ generated by the kernel of $`B^r`$. ∎

###### Proposition 2.25.

Every object in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ is generated by the $`0`$-generalized eigenspace of $`^{}`$.

###### Proof.

It is enough to prove the proposition for projective indecomposable objects in $`𝒪`$, hence for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$’s, where it is obvious. ∎

#### 2.6.4.

Let $`Q`$ be a progenerator for $`𝒪`$ (cf Corollary 2.8) and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\mathrm{End}_AQ)^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. Then, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a finitely generated projective $`𝒪`$-module. We have mutually inverse standard equivalences

(3)
$$\mathrm{Hom}(Q,):𝒪\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{mod},Q_\mathrm{\Gamma }():\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{mod}\stackrel{}{}𝒪.$$

Let now $`X`$ be a (non-necessarily finitely generated) $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. Then, $`Q_\mathrm{\Gamma }X`$ is a quotient of $`Q^{(I)}`$ for some set $`I`$, where $`X`$ is a quotient of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(I)}`$. Now, $`Q^{(I)}`$ is in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$. So, the functor $`Q_\mathrm{\Gamma }():\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Mod}A\mathrm{Mod}`$ takes values in $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ and we have equivalences

$$\mathrm{Hom}(Q,):𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Mod},Q_\mathrm{\Gamma }:\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{Mod}\stackrel{}{}𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}.$$

## 3. Rational Cherednik algebras

### 3.1. Basic definitions

Let $`V`$ be a finite dimensional vector space and $`W\mathrm{GL}(V)`$ a finite complex reflection group. Let $`𝒜`$ be the set of reflecting hyperplanes of $`W`$. Given $`H𝒜,`$ let $`W_HW`$ be the subgroup formed by the elements of $`W`$ that fix $`H`$ pointwise. We choose $`v_HV`$ such that $`𝐂v_H`$ is a $`W_H`$-stable complement to $`H`$. Also, let $`\alpha _HV^{}`$ be a linear form with kernel $`H`$.

Let $`k`$ be a noetherian commutative $`𝐂`$-algebra. The group $`W`$ acts naturally on $`𝒜`$ and on the group algebra $`kW`$, by conjugation. Let $`\gamma :𝒜kW,H\gamma _H,`$ be a $`W`$-equivariant map such that $`\gamma _H`$ is an element of $`kW_HkW`$ with trace zero, for each $`H𝒜`$.

Given $`\gamma `$ as above, one introduces an associative $`k`$-algebra $`𝖠(V,\gamma ),`$ the rational Cherednik algebra. It is defined as the quotient of $`k_𝐂T(VV^{})W`$, the cross-product of $`W`$ with $`k`$-tensor algebra, by the relations

$$[\xi ,\eta ]=0\text{ for }\xi ,\eta V,[x,y]=0\text{ for }x,yV^{}$$

$$[\xi ,x]=\xi ,x+\underset{H𝒜}{}\frac{\xi ,\alpha _Hv_H,x}{v_H,\alpha _H}\gamma _H$$

###### Remark 3.1.

Let $`\mathrm{Refl}W`$ denote the set of (pseudo)-reflections. Clearly $`\mathrm{Refl}`$ is an $`\mathrm{Ad}W`$-stable subset. Giving $`\gamma `$ as above is equivalent to giving a $`W`$-invariant function $`c:\mathrm{Refl}k,gc_g`$ such that $`\gamma _H=_{gW_H\{1\}}c_gg`$. One may use the function $`c`$ instead of $`\gamma `$, and write $`v_gV`$, resp. $`\alpha _gV^{}`$, instead of $`v_H`$, resp. $`\alpha _H`$, for any $`gW_H\{1\}`$. Then the last commutation relation in the algebra $`𝖠(V,\gamma )`$ reads:

$$[\xi ,x]=\xi ,x+\underset{g\mathrm{Refl}}{}c_g\frac{\xi ,\alpha _gv_g,x}{v_g,\alpha _g}g,$$

which is essentially the commutation relation used in \[EtGi\]. In case of a Weyl group $`W`$, in \[EtGi, BeEtGi, Gu\], the coefficients $`c_\alpha `$ ($`\alpha `$ a root) were used instead of the $`c_g`$’s. Then, $`\gamma _H=2c_\alpha g`$ for $`H`$ the kernel of $`\alpha `$ and $`g`$ the associated reflection.

###### Remark 3.2.

Put $`e_H=|W_H|`$. Denote by $`\epsilon _{H,j}=\frac{1}{e_H}_{wW_H}det(w)^jw`$ the idempotent of $`𝐂W_H`$ associated to the character $`det_{|W_H}^j`$. Given $`\gamma `$ as above, there is a unique family $`\{k_{H,i}=k_{H,i}(\gamma )\}_{H𝒜/W,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}ie_H}`$ of elements of $`k`$ such that $`k_{H,0}=k_{H,e_H}=0`$ and

$$\gamma _H=e_H\underset{j=0}{\overset{e_H1}{}}(k_{H,j+1}(\gamma )k_{H,j}(\gamma ))\epsilon _{H,j}.$$

We observe that $`\gamma `$ can be recovered from the $`k_{H,i}(\gamma )`$’s by the formula

$$\gamma _H=\underset{wW_H\{1\}}{}\left(\underset{j=0}{\overset{e_H1}{}}det(w)^j(k_{H,j+1}(\gamma )k_{H,j}(\gamma ))\right)w.$$

This way, we get back to the definition of \[DuOp\].

Introduce free commutative positively graded $`k`$-algebras $`𝖯=k_𝐂S(V^{})=_{i0}𝖯_i`$ and $`𝖲=k_𝐂S(V)=_{i0}𝖲^i`$. We have a triangular decomposition $`𝖠=𝖯_kkW_k𝖲`$ as $`k`$-modules \[EtGi, Theorem 1.3\].

For $`H𝒜`$, we put

$$a_H(\gamma )=\underset{i=1}{\overset{e_H1}{}}e_Hk_{H,i}(\gamma )\epsilon _{H,i}k[W_H]\text{and}z(\gamma )=\underset{H𝒜}{}a_H(\gamma )Z(kW).$$

We denote by $`\mathrm{Irr}(kW)`$ a complete set of representatives of isomorphism classes of simple $`kW`$-modules.

For $`E\mathrm{Irr}(𝐂W)`$, we denote by $`c_E=c_E(\gamma )`$ the scalar by which $`z(\gamma )`$ acts on $`k_𝐂E`$. The elements $`a_H(\gamma ),z(\gamma ),`$ and $`c_E(\gamma ),`$ may be thought of as functions of the coefficients $`k_{H,i}=k_{H,i}(\gamma )`$ (through their dependence on $`\gamma `$). In particular, it was shown in \[DuOp, Lemma 2.5\] that $`c_E`$, expressed as a function of the $`k_{H,i}`$’s, is a linear function with non-negative integer coefficients.

Below, we will often use simplified notations and write $`𝖠`$ for $`𝖠(\gamma )`$, $`k_{H,i}`$ for $`k_{H,i}(\gamma )`$, and $`z`$ for $`z(\gamma ),`$ etc.

We introduce a grading on $`𝖠`$ by putting $`V^{}`$ in degree $`1`$, $`V`$ in degree $`1`$ and $`W`$ in degree $`0`$ (thus, the induced grading on the subalgebra $`𝖯𝖠`$ coincides with the standard one on $`𝖯`$, while the induced grading on the subalgebra $`𝖲𝖠`$ differs by a sign from the standard one on $`𝖲`$).222We use superscripts to indicate the standard (non-negative) grading on $`𝖲`$, and subscripts to denote the gradings on $`𝖠`$ and $`𝖯`$. Thus, putting formally $`𝖲_i:=𝖲^i`$ one recovers compatibility: $`𝖲_i=𝖲𝖠_i`$.

Let $`\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}_k=_bb^{}b`$ be the “deformed Euler vector field”, where $``$ is a basis of $`V`$ and $`\{b^{}\}_b`$ is the dual basis. We also put $`\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}=\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}_kz`$. The elements $`\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}_k`$ and $`\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}`$ commute with $`W`$. Note that $`_b[b,b^{}]=dimV+_H\gamma _H`$.

We have

(4)
$$[\mathrm{𝖾𝗎},\xi ]=\xi \text{ and }[\mathrm{𝖾𝗎},x]=x\text{ for }\xi V\text{ and }xV^{}.$$

This shows the grading on $`𝖠`$ is “inner”, i.e., $`𝖠_i=\{a𝖠|[\mathrm{𝖾𝗎},a]=ia\}`$.

### 3.2. Category $`𝒪`$ for the rational Cherednik algebra

#### 3.2.1.

We apply now the results of §2 in the special case: $`A=𝖠=𝖠(V,\gamma )`$, $`B=𝖲`$, $`\overline{B}=𝖯`$, $`H=kW`$, $`k_0=𝐂`$, $`H(k_0)=𝐂W`$, $`=\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}`$, $`^{}=\mathrm{𝖾𝗎}_k`$ and $`_0=z`$. In particular, we have the category $`𝒪(\gamma ):=𝒪(𝖠(V,\gamma ))`$, which was first considered, in the setup of Cherednik algebras, in \[DuOp\].

For any (commutative) algebra map $`\psi :kk^{}`$, there is a base extension functor $`𝒪(\gamma )𝒪(\psi (\gamma ))`$ given by $`𝖠(\psi (\gamma ))_𝖠()`$.

#### 3.2.2.

Assume $`k`$ is a field. Since $`𝒪`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒪}`$ have finite global dimension (Theorem 2.19), the Grothendieck group of the category of modules coincides with the Grothendieck group $`K_0`$ of projective modules.

We have a morphism of $`𝐙`$-modules $`f:K_0(\stackrel{~}{𝒪})𝐙[[q]][q^1]K_0(𝐂W)`$ given by taking the graded character of the restriction of the module to $`W`$ :

$$M\underset{E\mathrm{Irr}(kW)}{}\underset{i}{}q^idim\mathrm{Hom}_{kW}(E,M_i)[E].$$

Set $`[𝖯]:=_{E\mathrm{Irr}(kW)}_iq^idim\mathrm{Hom}_{kW}(E,𝖯_i)[E]`$. This is an invertible element of $`𝐙[[q]][q^1]K_0(𝐂W)`$, and for any $`F\mathrm{Irr}(kW)`$, we have $`f([\mathrm{\Delta }(F)])=[𝖯][F].`$ Since the classes of standard modules generate the $`K_0`$-group, we obtain an isomorphism $`\frac{1}{[𝖯]}f:K_0(\stackrel{~}{𝒪})\stackrel{}{}𝐙[q,q^1]K_0(𝐂W)`$.

Let $`k[(𝐤_{H,i})_{1ie_H1}]`$ be the polynomial ring in the indeterminates $`𝐤_{H,i}`$ with $`𝐤_{w(H),i}=𝐤_{H,i}`$ for $`wW`$. We have a canonical evaluation morphism $`k[(𝐤_{H,i})]k`$ given by the choice of parameters. Let $`𝔪`$ be the kernel of that morphism, $`R`$ the completion of $`k[(𝐤_{H,i})]`$ at $`𝔪`$, and $`K`$ the field of fractions of $`R`$.

We have a decomposition map $`K_0(𝒪_K)\stackrel{}{}K_0(𝒪)`$. It sends $`[\mathrm{\Delta }(K_𝐂E)]`$ to $`[\mathrm{\Delta }(k_𝐂E)]`$.

###### Proposition 3.3.

Assume $`k`$ is a field. Then, $`[\mathrm{\Delta }(E)]=[(E)]`$ and $`[P(E)]=[I(E)]`$ for any $`kW`$-module $`E`$.

###### Proof.

We first consider the equality $`[\mathrm{\Delta }(E)]=[(E)]`$. The corresponding statement for $`K`$ is true, since the category is semi-simple in that case. Hence the modules are determined, up to isomorphism, by their socle (resp. by their head).

The statement for $`k`$ follows by using the decomposition map.

Now, the equality $`[P(E)]=[I(E)]`$ follows, using the reciprocity formulas (§2.6.2). ∎

## 4. Duality, Tiltings, and Projectives

### 4.1. Ringel duality

We keep the setup of §2.1, with $`k`$ being a field. We make the following two additional assumptions

* We have $`\overline{B}HB=BH\overline{B}=A`$;
* The subalgebra $`BA`$ is Gorenstein (with parameter $`n`$), i.e., there exists an integer $`n`$ such that

$$\mathrm{Ext}_B^i(k,B)=\{\begin{array}{cc}k\hfill & \text{if }i=n\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }in.\hfill \end{array}$$

The Gorenstein condition implies that, for any $`E\mathrm{Irr}(H)`$, viewed as a $`BH`$-module via the projection $`BHH`$, we have $`\mathrm{Ext}_{BH}^i(E,BH)=0,`$ for all $`in`$; moreover, $`\mathrm{Ext}_{BH}^n(E,BH)=E^{\mathrm{}},`$ where $`E^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a right $`BH`$-module such that $`dimE^{\mathrm{}}=dimE`$.

Assume further that the algebra $`A`$ has finite homological dimension. Thus (see \[Bj\]), there is a well-defined duality functor

$$R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,A):D^b(A\mathrm{mod})\stackrel{}{}D^b(A^{\mathrm{opp}}\mathrm{mod})^{\mathrm{opp}}.$$

Furthermore, this functor is an equivalence with inverse $`R\mathrm{Hom}_{A^{\mathrm{opp}}}(,A)`$.

The triangular decomposition $`A=BH\overline{B}`$ gives a similar decomposition $`A^{\mathrm{opp}}=\overline{B}^{\mathrm{opp}}H^{\mathrm{opp}}B^{\mathrm{opp}}`$, for the opposite algebras. Therefore, we may consider the category $`𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})`$ and, for any simple right $`H`$-module $`E^{}`$, introduce the standard $`A^{\mathrm{opp}}`$-module

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{}):=\mathrm{Ind}_{(BH)^{\mathrm{opp}}}^{A^{\mathrm{opp}}}E^{}=E^{}_{BH}A,$$

and also the projective object $`P^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{})𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})`$, the tilting object $`T^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{})𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})`$, etc.

###### Lemma 4.1.

The functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,A[n])`$ sends $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{\mathrm{}}),`$ for $`E`$ a finite-dimensional $`H`$-module.

###### Proof.

Using that $`A`$ is free as a left $`BH`$-module, we compute

$$\mathrm{Ext}_A^i(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),A)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Ext}_{BH}^i(E,A)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Ext}_{BH}^i(E,BH)_{BH}A.$$

We see that this space vanishes for $`in`$, and for $`i=n`$ we get $`R\mathrm{Hom}_A(\mathrm{\Delta }(E),A[n])E^{\mathrm{}}_{BH}A=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{\mathrm{}})`$. ∎

We would like to use the duality functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,A[n])`$ to obtain a functor $`D^b(𝒪(A))D^b(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}}))^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. To this end, we will exploit a general result below valid for arbitrary highest weight categories (a contravariant version of Ringel duality \[Ri, §6\]).

Given an additive category $`𝒞`$, let $`K^b(𝒞)`$ be the corresponding homotopy category of bounded complexes in $`𝒞`$.

###### Proposition 4.2.

Let $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ be two quasi-hereditary algebras and $`𝒞=A\mathrm{mod}`$, $`𝒞^{}=A^{}\mathrm{mod}`$ the associated highest weight categories. Let $`F`$ be a contravariant equivalence between the exact categories of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered objects $`F:𝒞^\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{}{}(𝒞^\mathrm{\Delta })^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. Then,

$``$ $`F`$ restricts to equivalences

$$𝒞\mathrm{proj}\stackrel{}{}(𝒞^{}\mathrm{tilt})^{\mathrm{opp}}\text{ and }𝒞\mathrm{tilt}\stackrel{}{}(𝒞^{}\mathrm{proj})^{\mathrm{opp}}$$

$``$ The canonical equivalences $`K^b(𝒞\mathrm{proj})\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒞)`$ and $`K^b(𝒞^{}\mathrm{tilt})\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒞^{})`$, yield an equivalence of derived categories

$$D:D^b(𝒞)\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒞^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}.$$

$``$ Let $`T=F(A)`$, an $`(AA^{})`$-module. Then, we have $`D=R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,T)`$ and $`D^1=R\mathrm{Hom}_A^{}(,T)`$. Via duality $`(A\mathrm{mod})\stackrel{}{}(A^{\mathrm{opp}})\mathrm{mod}^{\mathrm{opp}}`$, the functor $`D`$ identifies $`𝒞^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ with the Ringel dual of $`𝒞^{}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`M𝒞^\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then, $`M`$ is projective if and only if $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(M,\mathrm{\Delta }(E))=0`$ for every standard object $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ of $`𝒞`$ (indeed, if $`0M^{}PM0`$ is an exact sequence with $`P`$ projective, then $`M^{}`$ is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered, hence the sequence splits). The module $`F(M)`$ is tilting if and only if $`\mathrm{Ext}^1(\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{}),F(M))=0`$ for every standard object $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{})`$ of $`𝒞^{}`$. We deduce that $`M`$ is projective if and only if $`F(M)`$ is tilting.

So, $`F`$ restricts to equivalences $`𝒞\mathrm{proj}\stackrel{}{}(𝒞^{}\mathrm{tilt})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ and $`𝒞\mathrm{tilt}\stackrel{}{}(𝒞^{}\mathrm{proj})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$.

The last assertions of the Proposition are clear. ∎

We can now apply this construction to the category $`𝒪(A)`$. Specifically, Lemma 4.1 implies that the functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,A[n])`$ restricts to an equivalence $`𝒪(A)^\mathrm{\Delta }\stackrel{}{}(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})^\mathrm{\Delta })^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. Therefore, using Proposition 4.2 we immediately obtain the following

###### Proposition 4.3.

The functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_A(,A[n])^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ restricts to equivalences

$$𝒪(A)\mathrm{proj}\stackrel{}{}(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})\mathrm{tilt})^{\mathrm{opp}}\text{ and }𝒪(A)\mathrm{tilt}\stackrel{}{}(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})\mathrm{proj})^{\mathrm{opp}}.$$

The canonical equivalences $`K^b(𝒪(A)\mathrm{proj})\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒪(A))`$ and $`K^b(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})\mathrm{tilt})\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}}))`$ induce an equivalence $`D:D^b(𝒪(A))\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}}))^{\mathrm{opp}},`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)\mathrm{\Delta }^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{\mathrm{}}),P(E)T^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{\mathrm{}}),`$ and $`T(E)P^{\mathrm{opp}}(E^{\mathrm{}}).`$

###### Corollary 4.4.

The category $`𝒪(A^{\mathrm{opp}})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ is the Ringel dual of $`𝒪(A)`$.∎

### 4.2. Naive duality for Cherednik algebras

Recall the setup of §3.2.

Denote by $`()^{}:𝐂W\stackrel{}{}𝐂W`$ the anti-involution given by $`ww^{}:=w^1`$ for $`wW`$.

In this section, we compare the algebras $`𝖠=𝖠(V,\gamma )`$ and $`𝖠(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$. This will provide us with means to switch between left and right modules, between $`𝖲`$-locally finite and $`𝖯`$-locally finite modules.

The anti-involution $`()^{}:𝐂W\stackrel{}{}𝐂W`$ extends to an isomorphism

(5)
$$()^{}:𝖠(\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝖠(\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}},V\xi \xi ,V^{}xx,Www^1.$$

###### Remark 4.5.

If all pseudo-reflections of $`W`$ have order $`2`$, then $`\gamma ^{}=\gamma `$.

Further, we define an isomorphism of $`k`$-algebras reversing the gradings by

$$\phi :𝖠(V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝖠(V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}$$

$$V\xi \xi ,V^{}xx,Www^1.$$

###### Remark 4.6.

When $`V`$ is self-dual, an isomorphism of $`𝐂W`$-modules $`F:V\stackrel{}{}V^{}`$ extends to an algebra isomorphism (Fourier transform)

$$F:𝖠(V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝖠(V^{},\gamma )$$

$$V\xi F(\xi ),V^{}xF^1(x),Www.$$

The functor $`F_{}`$ restricts to an equivalence $`𝒪(V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝒪(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$.

#### 4.2.1.

Given $`M𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$, denote by $`M^{}`$ the $`k`$-submodule of $`𝖯`$-locally nilpotent elements of $`\mathrm{Hom}_k(M,k)`$. This is a right $`𝖠`$-module. Via $`\phi _{}`$, this becomes a left $`𝖠(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$-module. If $`M`$ is graded, then $`M^{}=\mathrm{Homgr}_k^{}(M,k)`$.

Thus we have defined a functor (analogous of the standard duality on the category $`𝒪`$ in the Lie algebra case):

(6)
$$()^{}:𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}(V,\gamma )𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}(V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}$$

When $`k`$ is a field, this functor is an equivalence.

Given a $`kW`$-module $`E`$, we use the notation $`E^{}=\mathrm{Hom}_k(E,k)`$ for the dual $`kW`$-module.

###### Proposition 4.7.

We have $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}(E^{})`$ for any $`kW`$-module $`E`$. If $`k`$ is a field, then

$$L(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}L(E^{}),P(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}I(E^{}),I(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}P(E^{}),(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{}),T(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}T(E^{}).$$

###### Proof.

We have

$$\mathrm{Homgr}_k^{}(𝖠_{𝖲W}E,k)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Homgr}_{(𝖲W)^{\mathrm{opp}}}^{}(𝖠,\mathrm{Hom}_k(E,k))$$

and the first part of the proposition follows.

The second assertion follows from the characterization of $`L(E)`$ (resp. $`L(E^{})`$) as the unique simple quotient (resp. submodule) of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ (resp. $`(E^{})`$). The other assertions are immediate consequences of the homological characterizations of the objects and/or the existence of suitable filtrations. ∎

Note that the functor $`()^{}`$ restricts to a functor $`𝒪(V,\gamma )𝒪(V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. When $`k`$ is a field, it is an equivalence. A compatible choice of progenerators for $`𝒪(V,\gamma )`$ and $`𝒪(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$ gives then an isomorphism between the algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(V)`$ for $`𝒪(V,\gamma )`$ and the oppposite algebra $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(V^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ for $`𝒪(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$ (cf §2.6.4).

###### Corollary 4.8.

Let $`E`$ and $`F`$ be two simple $`kW`$-modules. Then, the multiplicity of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ in a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration of $`P(F)`$, for $`𝒪(V,\gamma )`$, is equal to the multiplicity of $`L(F^{})`$ in a composition series of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{})`$, for $`𝒪(V^{},\gamma ^{})`$.

###### Proof.

By §2.19, the multiplicity of $`(E^{})`$ in a $``$-filtration of $`I(F^{})`$ is equal to the multiplicity of $`L(F^{})`$ in a composition series of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E^{})`$.

The functor $`()^{}`$ sends $`P(F)`$ to $`I(F^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ to $`(E^{})`$ (Proposition 4.7) and the result follows. ∎

###### Remark 4.9.

When $`k`$ is a field and $`W`$ is real, we obtain, via Fourier transform, a duality on $`𝒪^{\mathrm{ln}}`$ and on $`𝒪`$. Since all complex representations of $`W`$ are self-dual, we have then $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)^{}\stackrel{}{}(E)`$.

### 4.3. Homological properties of Cherednik algebras

#### 4.3.1.

The rational Cherednik algebra is a deformation of the cross-product of $`W`$ with the Weyl algebra of polynomial differential operators on $`V`$. In particular, there is a standard increasing filtration on $`𝖠`$ with $`W`$ placed in degree $`0`$ and $`VV^{}`$ in degree $`1`$. The associated graded ring, $`\mathrm{gr}𝖠`$, is isomorphic to $`S(VV^{})W`$ \[EtGi, §1\]. It follows (see \[Bj\], \[Bo, §V.2.2\]), that $`𝖠`$ is left and right noetherian, provided $`k`$ is noetherian. Since $`V^{}V`$ is a smooth variety of dimension $`2dimV`$, the algebra $`𝖠`$ has homological dimension at most $`2dimV`$. Furthermore, the usual results and concepts on $`𝒟`$-modules (characteristic variety, duality) also make sense for $`𝖠`$, even though the algebra $`\mathrm{gr}𝖠`$ is not commutative.

#### 4.3.2.

We assume $`k`$ is a field, and put $`n=dimV`$. The algebras $`𝖲`$ and $`𝖯`$ are clearly Gorenstein with parameter $`n`$. Moreover, we have $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝖲^n(k,𝖲)\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV^{}`$. Hence, $`E^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV^{}\mathrm{Hom}_k(E,k)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV^{}E^{},`$ for any finite dimensional $`W`$-module $`E`$.

It will be useful to compose the functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖠(\gamma )}(,𝖠(\gamma ))`$ with the anti-involution $`()^{}`$, see (5), to get the following composite equivalence

(7)
$$R\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖠(\gamma )}(,𝖠(\gamma ))^{}:D^b(𝖠(\gamma )\mathrm{mod})\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝖠(\gamma )^{\mathrm{opp}}\mathrm{mod})^{\mathrm{opp}}\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝖠(\gamma ^{})\mathrm{mod})^{\mathrm{opp}}.$$

From Proposition 4.2 we immediately obtain the following

###### Proposition 4.10.

The functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_𝖠(,𝖠[n])^{}`$ gives rise to an equivalence

$$D:D^b(𝒪(\gamma ))\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒪(\gamma ^{}))^{\mathrm{opp}}.\mathit{}$$

We further introduce an equivalence

$$()^{}D:D^b(𝒪(V,\gamma ))\stackrel{}{}D^b(𝒪(V^{},\gamma ))$$

such that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(E)(\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV_𝐂E)$$

$$T(E)I(\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV_𝐂E)$$

$$P(E)T(\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV_𝐂E)$$

In particular, we obtain (cf. Corollary 4.4)

###### Corollary 4.11.

The category $`𝒪(V^{},\gamma )`$ is the Ringel dual of $`𝒪(V,\gamma )`$.∎

###### Remark 4.12.

Note that if $`W`$ is real, then $`𝒪`$ is its own Ringel dual.

#### 4.3.3. Semiregular bimodule.

Write $`𝖯^{}=_i\mathrm{Hom}(𝖯_i,k)`$ for the graded dual of $`𝖯`$, and form the vector space $`R:=𝖯^{}_k𝖲W`$. Let us fix an isomorphism of $`𝐂`$-vector spaces $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV\stackrel{}{}𝐂`$. We have the following canonical isomorphisms:

$$\mathrm{Homgr}_{𝖲W}^{}(𝖠,\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV_𝐂𝖲W)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Homgr}_k^{}(𝖯,𝖲W)\stackrel{}{}𝖯^{}_k𝖲W\stackrel{}{}𝖯^{}_𝖯𝖠.$$

The first two isomorphisms define a left $`𝖠`$-module structure on $`R`$, and the last one defines a right $`𝖠`$-module structure on $`R`$. It is possible to check by explicit calculations that the left and right $`𝖠`$-module structures commute, so that $`R`$ becomes an $`𝖠`$-bimodule. It is a Cherednik algebra analogue of the semiregular bimodule, considered in \[A\], \[So2\] in the Lie algebra case.

From the isomorphisms of $`𝖠`$-modules

$$R_𝖠\mathrm{\Delta }(E)=R_{𝖲W}E\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Homgr}_{𝖲W}^{}(𝖠,\mathrm{\Lambda }^nVE)$$

we deduce

###### Proposition 4.13.

The functor $`M\mathrm{Homgr}_k^{}(R_𝖠M,k)^{}`$ (= left $`𝖠(V,\gamma ^{})`$-module) sends $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Lambda }^nV^{}_𝐂E^{})`$. ∎

#### 4.3.4.

Given $`M`$ a finitely generated $`𝖠`$-module, a good filtration of $`M`$ is a structure of filtered $`𝖠`$-module on $`M`$ such that $`\mathrm{gr}M`$ is a finitely generated $`\mathrm{gr}𝖠`$-module. The characteristic variety $`\mathrm{Ch}(M)`$ is the support of $`\mathrm{gr}M`$, viewed as a $`W`$-equivariant sheaf on $`V^{}V`$ (a closed subvariety). It is well defined, i.e., is independent of the choice of the good filtration (every finitely generated $`𝖠`$-module admits a good filtration). Note that Bernstein’s inequality: $`dim\mathrm{Ch}(M)dimV`$ does not hold in general. Further, for $`M`$ in $`𝒪`$, the complex $`D(M)`$ has zero homology outside the degrees $`0,\mathrm{},n`$.

Let $`T=_ET(E)`$ where $`E`$ runs over the simple $`kW`$-modules.

###### Corollary 4.14.

Let $`M𝒪`$. Then, $`dim\mathrm{Ch}(M)=dimV\mathrm{min}\{i|\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^i(T,M)0\}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`R=\mathrm{End}(T)^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. The functor $`R\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(T,):D^b(𝒪)\stackrel{}{}D^b(R\mathrm{mod})`$ is an equivalence. Composing with the inverse of $`()^{}D`$ we obtain an equivalence $`D^b(𝒪(V^{},\gamma ))\stackrel{}{}D^b(R\mathrm{mod})`$ that restricts to an equivalence $`𝒪(V^{},\gamma )\stackrel{}{}R\mathrm{mod}`$. We see that $`\mathrm{min}\{i|`$ $`\mathrm{Ext}_𝒪^i(T,M)0\}`$ $`=\mathrm{min}\{i|H^i(DM)0\},`$ where the RHS is equal to $`\mathrm{min}\{i|\mathrm{Ext}_𝖠^i(M,𝖠)0\}dimV`$ by the definition of $`D`$. The result now follows from the well-known formula, see e.g \[Bj\]: $`dim\mathrm{Ch}(M)=2dimV\mathrm{min}\{i|\mathrm{Ext}_𝖠^i(M,𝖠)0\}.`$

## 5. Hecke algebras via monodromy

### 5.1. Localisation

#### 5.1.1.

Let $`V_{\mathrm{reg}}=V_{H𝒜}H`$ and $`𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}=k[V_{\mathrm{reg}}]=𝖯[(\alpha _H^1)]_{H𝒜}`$. The algebra structure on $`𝖠`$ extends to an algebra structure on $`𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}=𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}_k𝖲_kkW`$.

We denote by

$$MM_{\mathrm{reg}}=𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}_𝖠M:𝖠\mathrm{Mod}𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}\mathrm{Mod}$$

the localisation functor. Note that $`\mathrm{Res}_{𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}}M_{\mathrm{reg}}=𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}_𝖯M`$. Note also that every element of $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ can be written as $`\alpha ^rm`$ for some $`r0`$, $`mM`$, where $`\alpha =_{H𝒜}\alpha _H`$. This makes the localisation functor have specially good properties.

The restriction functor $`𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}\mathrm{Mod}𝖠\mathrm{Mod}`$ is a right adjoint to the localisation functor. It is fully faithful. The adjunction morphism coincides with the natural localisation morphism $`MM_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ of $`𝖠`$-modules. Its kernel is $`M_{\mathrm{tor}}`$, the submodule of $`M`$ of elements whose support is contained in $`VV_{\mathrm{reg}}`$. Denote by $`(𝖠\mathrm{Mod})_{\mathrm{tor}}`$ the full subcategory of $`𝖠\mathrm{Mod}`$ of objects $`M`$ such that $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}=0`$. The following is clear.

###### Lemma 5.1.

The localisation functor induces an equivalence

$$𝖠\mathrm{Mod}/(𝖠\mathrm{Mod})_{\mathrm{tor}}\stackrel{}{}𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}\mathrm{Mod}.$$

The category $`𝒪`$ is a Serre subcategory of $`𝖠\mathrm{Mod}`$. Let $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}=𝒪(𝖠\mathrm{Mod})_{\mathrm{tor}}`$. Then, the canonical functor $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}𝖠\mathrm{Mod}/(𝖠\mathrm{Mod})_{\mathrm{tor}}`$ is fully faithful. Consequently, the canonical functor

$$𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}\mathrm{Mod}$$

is fully faithful, with image a full abelian subcategory closed under taking subobjects and quotients (but in general not closed under extensions).

#### 5.1.2.

When $`k`$ is a field, we have a commutative diagram

where the vertical arrows are given by localisation.

#### 5.1.3.

###### Lemma 5.2.

Assume $`k`$ is a field. Then, $`()^{}`$ restricts to an equivalence $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}(V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}(V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`M𝒪`$. We put a grading on $`M`$ (Proposition 2.4). Since $`M`$ is a finitely generated graded $`𝖯`$-module (Lemma 2.22), the dimension of $`\mathrm{Ch}(M)`$, the characteristic variety of $`M`$, can be obtained from the growth of the function $`idimM_i`$. In particular, $`M𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$ if and only if $`lim_i\mathrm{}\left(i^{1dimV}dimM_i\right)=0`$. Such a property is preserved by $`()^{}`$. ∎

Denote by $`𝕍:𝒪\overline{𝒪}=𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}},M\overline{M},`$ the quotient functor (the notation $`𝕍`$ has been used by Soergel \[So1\] for an analogous functor in the Lie algebra setup). The functor $`𝕍`$ admits, by the standard ‘abstract nonsense’, both a left adjoint and right adjoint functors $`{}_{}{}^{}𝕍,𝕍^{}:\overline{𝒪}𝒪`$.

###### Theorem 5.3.

Assume $`k`$ is a field, and $`Q`$ is a projective in $`𝒪`$. Then, the canonical adjunction morphism $`a:Q𝕍^{}(\overline{Q})`$ is an isomorphism. In particular, for any object $`M`$ in $`𝒪`$, the following canonical morphism is an isomorphism

(8)
$$𝕍_{}:\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(M,Q)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{\overline{𝒪}}(\overline{M},\overline{Q}).$$

###### Proof.

By §5.1.1, for any two objects $`M,Q,`$ of $`𝒪`$, we have a canonical isomorphism

$$\mathrm{Hom}_{\overline{𝒪}}(\overline{M},\overline{Q})\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}}(M_{\mathrm{reg}},Q_{\mathrm{reg}}).$$

Assume $`Q`$ has a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration. Then it is free over $`𝖯`$ and thus has no non-zero submodule lying in $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$, hence $`𝕍_{}`$ is injective.

Assume furthermore that $`M`$ has a $``$-filtration. Then $`M^{}`$ has a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration (Proposition 4.7), hence has no non-zero submodule lying in $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$. Since $`()^{}`$ restricts to an equivalence $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}(V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}(V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ (Lemma 5.2), it follows that $`M`$ has no non-zero quotient lying in $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$. This shows that $`𝕍_{}`$ in (8) is an isomorphism.

From now on, we assume that $`Q`$ is projective. It follows that $`Q^{}=D(Q)`$ is tilting (Proposition 4.10), hence $``$-filtered.

Now let $`M`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered object. Then, $`M^{}=D(M)`$ is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered. We apply the result on $`𝕍_{}`$, that we have already proved, to $`𝒪(\gamma ^{})`$. This yields, by duality (cf §5.1.2), that (8) is an isomorphism, for any $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered object $`M`$.

Since any projective is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered, for any two projective objects $`P,Q`$ in $`𝒪`$, we have established the isomorphisms

(9)
$$\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P,Q)\stackrel{𝕍_{}}{\stackrel{}{}}\mathrm{Hom}_{\overline{𝒪}}(\overline{P},\overline{Q})\stackrel{\text{adjunction}}{=====}\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P,𝕍^{}(\overline{Q})).$$

The above isomorphisms imply, in particular, that, for any indecomposable projective $`P`$, we have $`dim\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P,Q)=dim\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P,𝕍^{}(\overline{Q}))`$. It follows readily that the objects $`Q`$ and $`𝕍^{}(\overline{Q})`$ have the same composition factors with the same multiplicities.

We can finally prove that the canonical adjunction map $`a:Q𝕍^{}(\overline{Q})`$ is an isomorphism. By the previous paragraph, it suffices to show that $`a`$ is injective. To this end, put $`K:=\mathrm{ker}(a)`$, and assume $`K0`$. Let $`L(E)`$ be a simple submodule in $`K`$, and $`P(E)L(E),`$ its projective cover. By construction, the composite map $`g:P(E)L(E)KQ`$ is nonzero. This map $`g\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P(E),Q)`$ goes, under the isomorphism between the left-hand and right-hand sides of (9), to the map $`a{}_{^{^{}}}{}^{}g:P(E)KQ\stackrel{a}{}𝕍^{}(\overline{Q})`$. But the latter map is the zero map since $`K=\mathrm{ker}(a)`$, which contradicts the fact that (9) is an isomorphism. Thus, $`\mathrm{ker}(a)=0`$, and the Theorem is proved. ∎

###### Remark 5.4.

In general, the assumption that $`Q`$ is projective cannot be replaced by the weaker assumption that it is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered (already for $`W=𝐙/2𝐙`$). Nevertheless, see Proposition 5.9.

###### Corollary 5.5.

Let $`X`$ be a progenerator of $`𝒪`$ and $`:=(\mathrm{End}_{\overline{𝒪}}\overline{X})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$. Then there is an equivalence $`𝒪\stackrel{}{}(\mathrm{mod})^{\mathrm{opp}}.`$

###### Proof.

The preceding theorem implies that $`(\mathrm{End}_𝒪X)^{\mathrm{opp}}\stackrel{}{}`$ since projective modules are $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered. Hence we can use category equivalences (3). ∎

### 5.2. Dunkl operators

#### 5.2.1.

One has an $`𝖠`$-action on the vector space $`𝖯`$, hence an $`𝖲`$-action, arising via the identification $`𝖯=\mathrm{\Delta }(k)`$. One finds, in particular, that the action of $`\xi V`$ on $`𝖯`$ is given by the Dunkl operator

$$T_\xi =_\xi +\underset{H𝒜}{}\frac{\xi ,\alpha _H}{\alpha _H}a_H𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}})W,$$

where $`𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}})`$ stands for the algebra of regular differential operators on $`V_{\mathrm{reg}}`$, acted upon by $`W`$ in a natural way, and $`a_HkW`$ is viewed as an element of $`𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}})W`$. It follows that $`T_\xi (𝖯)𝖯`$ (as part of $`𝖠`$-action on $`𝖯=\mathrm{\Delta }(k)`$); furthermore, this $`𝖠`$-action on $`𝖯`$ is known (Cherednik, \[EtGi, Proposition 4.5\]) to be faithful:

###### Theorem 5.6.

The $`𝖠`$-representation $`\mathrm{\Delta }(k)`$ is faithful. Thus, the natural action of $`𝖯W`$ on $`𝖯`$ extends to an injective algebra morphism $`i:𝖠k_𝐂𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}})W`$ which maps $`\xi V`$ to $`T_\xi `$.

The map $`i`$ induces an algebra isomorphism $`𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}\stackrel{}{}k_𝐂𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}})W`$.

#### 5.2.2.

We consider $`M=\mathrm{Ind}_{𝖲W}^𝖠X=𝖯X`$, where $`X`$ is locally nilpotent and finitely generated as an $`𝖲`$-module, free over $`k`$. The action of $`\xi V`$ on $`pv`$, $`p𝖯`$ and $`vX`$ is given by

$$\xi (pv)=p\xi v+_\xi (p)v+\underset{H}{}\underset{0i,je_H1}{}e_H(k_{H,i+j}k_{H,j})\frac{\alpha _H(\xi )}{\alpha _H}\epsilon _{H,i}(p)\epsilon _{H,j}(v).$$

Using Dunkl operators, i.e., via the isomorphism of Theorem 5.6, we have a structure of $`W`$-equivariant $`(k_𝐂𝒟(V_{\mathrm{reg}}))`$-module on $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}`$. The corresponding connection is given by

$$_\xi =\xi \underset{H}{}\frac{\alpha _H(\xi )}{\alpha _H}\left(\underset{0i,je_H1}{}e_Hk_{H,i+j}\epsilon _{H,i}\epsilon _{H,j}\right).$$

Hence

$$_\xi (pv)=p\xi v+_\xi (p)v\underset{H}{}\underset{i}{}e_Hk_{H,i}\frac{\alpha _H(\xi )}{\alpha _H}p\epsilon _{H,i}(v).$$

For the rest of §5, we assume that $`k=𝐂`$.

The following result is well-known to experts, but we could not find an appropriate reference in the literature.

###### Proposition 5.7.

The above formula for $`_\xi `$ defines a $`W`$-equivariant integrable algebraic connection on $`M`$ with regular singularities.

###### Proof.

All the claims follow from the construction, with the exception of the assertion that the singularities of the connection are regular. The connection has visibly only simple poles at the reflection hyperplanes, hence it suffices to prove the regularity at infinity with respect to some (hence any, see \[De\]) compactification of $`V`$.

Consider the $`W`$-equivariant compactification $`Y=(𝐂+V)`$ of $`V`$, and extend $`M`$ to the free $`𝒪_Y`$-module $`M_Y:=𝒪_YX`$. Using a filtration of $`X`$ we can reduce to the case where $`X=E`$ is simple.

A straightforward computation shows that with respect to the extension $`M_Y`$ of $`M`$ and with respect to any standard coordinate patch on $`Y`$, the poles at infinity are also simple in this case. ∎

#### 5.2.3.

We define a morphism of abelian groups $`r:K_0(𝒪)𝐙`$ by $`r([\mathrm{\Delta }(E)])=dimE,`$ for $`E\mathrm{Irr}(𝐂W)`$.

###### Lemma 5.8.

Let $`M𝒪`$. Then, $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ is a vector bundle of rank $`r([M])`$ on $`V_{\mathrm{reg}}`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ is a finitely generated $`𝐂[V_{\mathrm{reg}}]`$-module with a connection, it is a vector bundle.

Now, taking the rank of that vector bundle induces a morphism $`K_0(𝒪)𝐙`$, which takes the correct value on $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$. ∎

#### 5.2.4.

###### Proposition 5.9.

Assume $`k_{H,i}k_{H,j}+\frac{ij}{e_H}𝐙`$, for all $`H𝒜`$ and all $`0ije_H1`$. Let $`N`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered object in $`𝒪`$. Then, for any $`M𝒪`$, we have $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(M,N)\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Hom}_{\overline{𝒪}}(\overline{M},\overline{N})`$.

###### Proof.

Assume first that $`M`$ is also a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered object. Then, we can write $`M=\mathrm{Ind}_{𝖲W}^𝖠X`$ and $`N=\mathrm{Ind}_{𝖲W}^𝖠Y`$ with $`X,Y`$ finite dimensional $`𝖲W`$-modules, nilpotent over $`𝖲`$. The space $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝖠(M,N)`$ is the intersection of $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝖯(M,N)=𝖯\mathrm{Hom}_k(X,Y)`$ with $`\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}}(M_{\mathrm{reg}},N_{\mathrm{reg}})`$. As in the proof of Theorem 5.3, we have to show that any element $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of $`\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}}(M_{\mathrm{reg}},N_{\mathrm{reg}})`$ that commutes with the action of $`𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ extends to a $`𝖯`$-morphism $`MN`$. Observe that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is nothing but a flat, $`W`$-invariant section of the connection on $`\mathrm{Hom}_{𝖠_{\mathrm{reg}}}(M_{\mathrm{reg}},N_{\mathrm{reg}})`$.

The residue of this connection on a hyperplane $`H𝒜`$ is constant, and has eigenvalue $`e_H(k_{H,i}k_{H,j})`$ on $`\mathrm{Hom}_k(X_i,Y_j)`$, where $`X_i`$ is the summand of $`X`$ of $`W_H`$-type $`\mathrm{det}_{|W_H}^i`$ (and likewise for $`Y_j`$).

Locally near a generic point $`p`$ of $`H`$ we expand $`\mathrm{\Psi }=_{ll_0}\alpha _H^l\mathrm{\Psi }_l`$ with $`\mathrm{\Psi }_l`$ holomorphic on $`H`$ near $`p`$, of $`W_H`$-type $`\mathrm{det}_{|W_H}^l`$, and with $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{l_0}`$ not identically zero on $`H`$. From the lowest order term of the equation $`_{v_H}(\mathrm{\Psi })=0`$ we see that there exist $`i,j`$ such that $`ij=l_0\mathrm{mod}(e_H𝐙)`$, and such that $`l_0+e_H(k_{H,i}k_{H,j})=0`$. Thus $`l_0=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is regular on $`H`$. This completes the proof of the Proposition in the special case where both $`M`$ and $`N`$ are $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered.

The general case follows from the special case above by repeating the part of the argument from the proof of Theorem 5.3, starting with formula (9). ∎

###### Remark 5.10.

The condition of the Proposition is equivalent to the semi-simplicity of the Hecke algebra $`(W_H)`$ of $`W_H`$. One could conjecture that this assumption can be replaced by the assumption that $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(N)`$ is a projective $`(W_H)`$-module (this would still not cover completely Theorem 5.3).

###### Remark 5.11.

If $`e_H=2`$ for all $`H`$, then the condition of the Proposition reads: $`k_H\frac{1}{2}+𝐙`$.

#### 5.2.5.

Let $`𝐂[(𝐤_{H,i})_{1ie_H1}]`$ be the polynomial ring in the indeterminates $`𝐤_{H,i}`$ with $`𝐤_{w(H),i}=𝐤_{H,i}`$ for $`wW`$. We have a canonical morphism of $`𝐂`$-algebras $`𝐂[(𝐤_{H,i})]𝐂,𝐤_{H,i}k_{H,i}`$. Let $`𝔪`$ be the kernel of that morphism and $`R`$ the completion of $`𝐂[(𝐤_{H,i})]`$ at the maximal ideal $`𝔪`$.

Fix $`x_0V_{\mathrm{reg}}`$, and let $`B_W=\pi _1(V_{\mathrm{reg}}/W,x_0)`$ be the Artin braid group associated to $`W`$.

Let $`_R=_R(W,V,\gamma )`$ be the Hecke algebra of $`W`$ over $`R`$, that is the quotient of $`R[B_W]`$ by the relations

$$(T1)\underset{j=1}{\overset{e_H1}{}}(Tdet(s)^je^{2i\pi 𝐤_{H,j}})=0$$

for $`H𝒜`$, $`sW`$ the reflection around $`H`$ with non-trivial eigenvalue $`e^{2i\pi /e_H}`$ and $`T`$ an $`s`$-generator of the monodromy around $`H`$, cf \[BrMaRou, §4.C\]. Note that the parameters differ from \[BrMaRou\] because we will be using the horizontal sections functor instead of the solution functor.

We put $`_K=_R_RK`$, where $`K`$ is the field of fractions of $`R`$ and $`=_R_R(R/𝔪)`$.

###### Remark 5.12.

It is known that $`_R`$ is free of rank $`|W|`$ over $`R`$ for all $`W`$ that do not have an irreducible component of type $`G_{17\mathrm{}19}`$, $`G_{24\mathrm{}27}`$, $`G_{29}`$, $`G_{31\mathrm{}34}`$ in Shephard-Todd notation (in these cases, the statement is conjectural) \[Mu\].

### 5.3. The Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov functor.

Let $`M`$ be a $`(𝐂[V_{\mathrm{reg}}]W)`$-module, free of finite rank over $`𝖯_{\mathrm{reg}}=𝐂[V_{\mathrm{reg}}]`$. Let $`:MM_𝐂R`$ be an $`R`$-linear integrable connection. Then, the horizontal sections of $``$ define, via the monodromy representation, an $`RB_W`$-module $`L`$, free over $`R`$.

Let $`_0:MM`$ be the special fiber of $``$. Then, the horizontal sections of $`_0`$ is the $`𝐂B_W`$-module $`L_R(R/𝔪)`$.

Let $`_K:MK_𝐂M`$ be the generic fiber of $``$. Then, the horizontal sections of $`_K`$ is the $`KB_W`$-module $`L_RK`$.

Taking horizontal sections defines an exact functor from the category of $`W`$-equivariant vector bundles on $`R_𝐂V_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ with an integrable connection to the category of $`RB_W`$-modules that are free of finite rank over $`R`$.

Since the connection on $`\mathrm{\Delta }(R_𝐂E)_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ has regular singularities it follows that the connection on $`M_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ has regular singularities for any $`M𝒪_R^\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Composing with the localisation functor, we obtain an exact functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R`$ from $`𝒪_R^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to the category of $`RB_W`$-modules that are free of finite rank over $`R`$.

Similarly, we obtain exact functors $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪𝐂B_W\mathrm{mod}`$ and $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K:𝒪_KKB_W\mathrm{mod}`$.

It is well-known (cf. e.g. \[BrMaRou, Theorem 4.12\]) that the representation of $`KB_W`$ on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K(\mathrm{\Delta }(K_𝐂E))`$ factors through $`_K`$ to give a representation corresponding (via Tits’ deformation Theorem) to the representation $`E`$ of $`𝐂W`$. Recall that $`=_R_R(R/𝔪)`$.

###### Theorem 5.13 (Hecke algebra action).

The functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪𝐂B_W\mathrm{mod}`$ factors through a functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}\mathrm{mod}`$. Similarly, the functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K:𝒪_KKB_W\mathrm{mod}`$ factors through a functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K:𝒪_K/(𝒪_K)_{\mathrm{tor}}_K\mathrm{mod}`$.

For $`M𝒪_R^\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the action of $`RB_W`$ on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(M)`$ factors through $`_R`$.

We have a commutative diagram

###### Proof.

First, $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$ (and $`(𝒪_K)_{\mathrm{tor}}`$) are the kernels of localisation.

When $`M=\mathrm{\Delta }(K_𝐂E)`$, then, we have the Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov connection and the representation $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K(M)`$ factors through $`_K`$. Since $`𝒪_K`$ is semi-simple (Corollary 2.20), it follows that the action on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K(M)`$ factors through $`_K`$ for any $`M`$ in $`𝒪_K`$.

We now consider the case of a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered module $`M`$ of $`𝒪_R`$. We know that the action of $`KB_W`$ on $`K_R\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(M)\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K(K_RM)`$ factors through $`_K`$. Since $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(M)`$ is free over $`R`$, it follows that the action of $`RB_W`$ on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(M)`$ factors through $`_R`$.

From this result, we deduce that the action of $`𝐂B_W`$ on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }^r(𝐂W))\stackrel{}{}𝐂_R\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(\mathrm{\Delta }^r(RW))`$ factors through $``$. Since every indecomposable projective object of $`𝒪`$ is a direct summand of $`\mathrm{\Delta }^r(𝐂W)`$ for appropriate $`r`$ (Corollary 2.7), it follows that the action of $`𝐂B_W`$ on $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(M)`$ factors through $``$ for every projective $`M`$, hence for every $`M`$ in $`𝒪`$. ∎

### 5.4. Main results

In this subsection we assume that $`dim=|W|`$, cf. Remark 5.12.

The functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪\mathrm{mod}`$ is exact. Hence, it is represented by a projective $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}𝒪`$. In other words, there exists an algebra morphism $`\varphi :(\mathrm{End}_𝒪P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ such that the functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ is isomorphic to $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}},)`$.

We know also, see §5.1.1, that the functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ factors through $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}\mathrm{mod}`$.

###### Theorem 5.14.

The functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ induces an equivalence: $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{mod}`$.

This Theorem is equivalent to

###### Theorem 5.15.

The morphism $`\varphi :(\mathrm{End}_𝒪P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ is an algebra isomorphism.

###### Proof of Theorems 5.14-5.15..

Recall that the horizontal sections functor gives an equivalence from the category of vector bundles over $`V_{\mathrm{reg}}/W`$ with a regular integrable connection to the category of finite-dimensional $`𝐂B_W`$-modules (Riemann-Hilbert correspondence, \[De, Theorems I.2.17 and II.5.9\]).

We deduce from §5.1.1 that $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}:𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$ is a fully faithful exact functor with image a full subcategory closed under taking subobjects and quotients. Furthermore, $`\overline{P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}}`$, the image of $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$ in $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$, is a progenerator of $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$. Thus, Theorem 5.14 follows from Theorem 5.15.

To prove Theorem 5.15, observe that the morphism $`\varphi `$ is surjective. Indeed, let $`𝒞^{}`$ be a full subcategory of an abelian category $`𝒞`$, closed under taking quotients, and $`{}_{}{}^{}F`$ a left adjoint to the inclusion $`F:𝒞^{}𝒞`$. Then the adjunction morphism $`\eta :\mathrm{Id}_𝒞F{}_{^{^{}}}{}^{}({}_{}{}^{}F)`$ is surjective, since $`\eta (X)`$ is the canonical map from $`X`$ to its largest quotient in $`𝒞^{}`$. This proves surjectivity of the morphism $`\varphi `$ above.

Further, we have

$$P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}=\underset{E\mathrm{Irr}(𝐂W)}{}(dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E)))P(E).$$

Hence, we compute

$$dim(\mathrm{End}_𝒪P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}})=\underset{E,F}{}dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E))dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(F))dim\mathrm{Hom}(P(E),P(F))$$

$$=\underset{E,F,G}{}dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E))dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(F))[P(E):\mathrm{\Delta }(G)][\mathrm{\Delta }(G):L(F)]$$

$$=\underset{E,F,G}{}dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E))dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(F))[(G):L(E)][\mathrm{\Delta }(G):L(F)]$$

$$=\underset{G}{}dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}((G))dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }(G))$$

Now, the restrictions of $`(G)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ to $`V_{\mathrm{reg}}`$ are vector bundles of rank $`dimG`$ (Proposition 3.3 and Lemma 5.8), hence $`dim(\mathrm{End}_𝒪P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}})=|W|=dim`$. This shows that $`\varphi `$ is an isomorphism. Note that this rank computation can also be achieved by deformation to $`R`$. ∎

The following result shows that the category $`𝒪`$ can be completely recovered from $``$ and a certain $``$-module :

###### Theorem 5.16 (Double-centralizer property).

Let $`Q`$ be a projective in $`𝒪`$. Then, the canonical map $`\mathrm{Hom}_𝒪(M,Q)\mathrm{Hom}_{}(\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(M),\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(Q))`$ is an isomorphism, for any $`M𝒪`$.

Furthermore, if $`X`$ is a progenerator for $`𝒪`$, then, we have an equivalence

$$\left(\mathrm{End}_{}\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(X)\right)^{\mathrm{opp}}\mathrm{mod}\stackrel{}{}𝒪.$$

###### Proof.

The first part follows from Theorems 5.3 and 5.15 and the second from Corollary 5.5. ∎

###### Remark 5.17.

We conjecture that, if $`W=S_n`$, then $`𝒪`$ is equivalent to the category of finitely-generated modules over the associated $`q`$-Schur algebra. That would imply, in particular, that if $`k_{H,1}=k_1<0`$ is a negative real constant, then the Cherednik algebras $`𝖠(S_n)`$ with parameters $`k_1`$ and $`k_11,`$ respectively, are Morita equivalent.

Let $`Z()`$ denote the center of the algebra $``$ and $`Z(𝒪)`$ the center of category $`𝒪`$ (i.e. the algebra of endomorphisms of the identity functor $`\mathrm{Id}_𝒪`$).

###### Corollary 5.18.

The canonical morphism $`Z(𝒪)\mathrm{End}_𝒪P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$ induces an isomorphism $`Z(𝒪)\stackrel{}{}Z()`$. In particular, the functor $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ induces a bijection between blocks of $`𝒪`$ and blocks of $``$.

###### Proof.

This follows immediately from Theorem 5.16 : given two rings $`B`$ and $`C`$ and a $`(B,C)`$-bimodule $`M`$ such that the canonical morphisms $`B\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{End}_{C^{\mathrm{opp}}}(M)`$ and $`C\stackrel{}{}(\mathrm{End}_BM)^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ are isomorphisms, then we have a canonical isomorphism $`Z(B)\stackrel{}{}Z(C)`$. ∎

The decomposition matrix $`K_0(𝒪_K)K_0(𝒪)`$ is triangular. We deduce the triangularity of decomposition matrices of Hecke algebras, in characteristic $`0`$ :

###### Corollary 5.19.

The decomposition matrix $`K_0(_K)K_0()`$ is triangular.

#### 5.4.1. $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$-functor and Twist

Let $`\zeta `$ be a one-dimensional character of $`W`$ and $`\tau __\zeta :𝐂W\stackrel{}{}𝐂W`$ the automorphism given by $`w\zeta (w)w`$ for $`wW`$. This extends to an isomorphism

$$\tau __\zeta :A(\gamma )\stackrel{}{}A(\tau __\zeta (\gamma )),V\xi \xi ,V^{}xx,Ww\zeta (w)w.$$

We obtain an equivalence $`𝒪(\gamma )\stackrel{}{}𝒪(\tau __\zeta (\gamma ))`$, sending $`V(E)`$ to $`V(E\zeta ^1)`$, where $`V`$ stands for any of the symbols: $`L,\mathrm{\Delta },,P,I,T`$.

For $`H𝒜`$, let $`d_H\{1,\mathrm{},e_H\}`$ such that $`\zeta _{|W_H}=det_{|W_H}^{d_H}`$. Define an automorphism $`\eta __\zeta `$ of $`𝒟(V_{_{\mathrm{reg}}})W`$ by

$$Pff,Ww\zeta (w)w$$

$$\text{and }_\xi _\xi \underset{H}{}\frac{\alpha _H(\xi )}{\alpha _H}\epsilon _{H,e_H}e_Hk_{H,e_Hd_H}\text{ for }\xi V.$$

(for notation, see Remark 3.2). We have a commutative diagram

Given $`M`$ a $`(𝒟(V_{_{\mathrm{reg}}})W)`$-module, then $`(\eta __\zeta )_{}M\stackrel{}{}M_{𝒪_{V_{_{\mathrm{reg}}}}}\mathrm{\Delta }(\zeta ^1)_{_{\mathrm{reg}}}`$.

This self-equivalence of the category of $`W`$-equivariant bundles with a regular singular connection on $`V_{reg}`$ corresponds, via the horizontal sections functor, to the automorphism of $`𝐂B_W`$ given by

$$Te^{2i\pi k_{H,e_Hd_H}}\zeta (s)^1T$$

for $`H𝒜`$, $`sW`$ the reflection around $`H`$ with non-trivial eigenvalue $`e^{2i\pi /e_H}`$ and $`T`$ an $`s`$-generator of the monodromy around $`H`$. This induces an isomorphism $`(\zeta ):(W,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}(W,\tau __\zeta (\gamma ))`$ and the following diagram is commutative :

#### 5.4.2. $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$-functor and Duality

We have a commutative diagram

where the vertical arrows are given by localisation followed by the Dunkl operator isomorphism $`i`$ of Theorem 5.6 and the bottom horizontal arrow is the classical $`𝒟`$-module duality.

Consider the isomorphism $`𝐂B_W\stackrel{}{}(𝐂B_W)^{\mathrm{opp}}`$ given by $`Tdet(s)^1e^{2i\pi k_{H,1}}T^1`$

for $`H𝒜`$, $`sW`$ the reflection around $`H`$ with non-trivial eigenvalue $`e^{2i\pi /e_H}`$ and $`T`$ an $`s`$-generator of the monodromy around $`H`$. It induces an isomorphism

$$({}_{}{}^{}):(W,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}(W,\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}.$$

We conclude that we have a commutative diagram

On the other hand, by Lemma 5.2, we know that $`()^{}`$ preserves $`𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$, hence descends to the quotient category $`𝒪/𝒪_{\mathrm{tor}}`$, i.e., there is an equivalence $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ making the following diagram commute:

Further, choose a $`W`$-invariant hermitian form on $`V`$, i.e., a semi-linear $`W`$-equivariant isomorphism $`\kappa :V\stackrel{}{}V^{}`$. Then, we get an isomorphism $`\pi _1(V_{\mathrm{reg}}/W,x_0)\stackrel{}{}\pi _1(V_{\mathrm{reg}}^{}/W,\kappa (x_0))`$. It induces an isomorphism $`(\kappa ):(W,V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}(W,V^{},\gamma )`$. Composing with $`({}_{}{}^{})`$, we obtain an isomorphism $`(\kappa {}_{^{^{}}}{}^{}()_{}^{}):(W,V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}(W,V^{},\gamma ^{})^{\mathrm{opp}}`$, which we denote below by $`\psi `$.

###### Remark 5.20.

One could conjecture that the two functors $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\psi _{}`$ are isomorphic (they induce the same maps at the level of Grothendieck groups).

#### 5.4.3. The $`𝖠`$-module $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$ and Duality

Let $`\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma )\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$ denote the subset formed by all $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$ such that $`L(E)_{\mathrm{reg}}0`$. We have a bijection $`\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma )\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{Irr}(W,V^{},\gamma ^{}),EE^{}`$ (Proposition 4.7 and Lemma 5.2). Thus, $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}=_{E\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma )}(dim\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E)))P(E)`$.

To make the dependence on $`V`$ and $`\gamma `$ explicit, we will write $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}=P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}(V,\gamma )`$.

###### Proposition 5.21.

(i) We have $`D(P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}(V,\gamma ))P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}(V,\gamma ^{})`$ and $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}(V,\gamma )^{}P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}(V^{},\gamma )`$. In particular, $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$ is both projective and injective.

(ii) For $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$, the following are equivalent

* $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma )`$
* $`L(E)`$ is a submodule of a standard module
* $`P(E)`$ is a submodule of $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$
* $`P(E)`$ is injective
* $`P(E)`$ is tilting
* $`I(E)`$ is projective
* $`I(E)`$ is tilting

###### Proof.

The first claim follows from §5.4.2. Proposition 4.7 then implies that $`P_{\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}}`$ is injective.

The considerations above imply that if $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma )`$, then $`P(E)`$ is injective and tilting. The assertions about $`I(E)`$ follow by applying $`()^{}`$.

We know that if $`L(E)`$ is a submodule of a $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtered module or a quotient of a $``$-filtered module, then $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma ).`$

This shows that any of the assertions about $`P(E)`$ or $`I(E)`$ implies that $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W,V,\gamma ).`$

## 6. Relation to Kazhdan-Lusztig theory of cells

We review some parts of Kazhdan-Lusztig and Lusztig’s theory of Weyl group representations.

### 6.1. Lusztig’s algebra $`𝒥`$

#### 6.1.1.

Let $`(W,S)`$ be a finite Weyl group, $``$ be its Hecke algebra, a $`𝐙[v,v^1]`$-algebra with basis $`\{T_w\}_{wW}`$ and relations

$$T_wT_w^{}=T_{ww^{}}\text{ if }l(ww^{})=l(w)+l(w^{})\text{and}(T_s+1)(T_sv^2)=0\text{ for }sS.$$

Lusztig associated to $`W`$ a $`𝐙`$-ring $`𝒥`$, usually referred to as asymptotic Hecke algebra, \[Lu3, §2.3\]. Let $`\varpi :𝐙[v,v^1]_𝐙𝒥`$ be Lusztig’s morphism of $`𝐙[v,v^1]`$-algebras \[Lu3, §2.4\].

The ring $`𝐐_𝐙𝒥`$ is semi-simple and the morphism $`\mathrm{Id}_{𝐐(v)}\varpi `$ is an isomorphism.

For any commutative $`𝐐[v,v^1]`$-algebra $`R`$ we put $`_R:=R_{𝐙[v,v^1]}`$.

###### Definition 6.1.

The $`_R`$-modules $`S(M)=\varpi ^{}(R_𝐐M)`$, for $`M`$ a simple $`𝐐_𝐙𝒥`$-module, will be referred to as standard $`_R`$-modules.333There seems to be no name for such modules in the literature.

When $`R=𝐐(v)`$, then the standard $`_R`$-modules are simple and this gives a bijection from the set of simple $`(𝐐_𝐙𝒥)`$-modules to the set of simple $`(𝐐(v)_{𝐙[v,v^1]})`$-modules.

Similarly, taking $`K=𝐐[v,v^1]/(v1)`$, we obtain a bijection from the set of simple $`(𝐐_𝐙𝒥)`$-modules to the set of simple $`𝐐W`$-modules.

We will identify these sets of simple modules via these bijections.

We have an order $`_{LR}`$ on $`W`$ constructed in \[KaLu, p.167\]. We denote by $`𝒞`$ the set of two-sided cells of $`W`$ and by $``$ the order on $`𝒞`$ coming from $`_{LR}`$.

Let $`\{C_w\}_{wW}`$ be the Kazhdan-Lusztig basis for $``$. Let $`I`$ be an ideal of $`𝒞`$, i.e., a subset such that given $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{}`$, then $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{}I\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}I`$. We put $`^I=_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}I,w\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}𝐙[v,v^1]C_w`$. This is a two-sided ideal of $``$ \[Lu1, p.137\].

The ring $`𝒥`$ comes with a $`𝐙`$-basis $`\{t_w\}_{wW}`$ and we put $`𝒥_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}=_{w\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}𝐙t_w`$. This is a block of $`𝒥`$ and $`𝒥=_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}𝒞}𝒥_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}`$. The corresponding partition of the set of simple $`(𝐐_𝐙𝒥)`$-modules is called the partition into families.

Given $`I`$ an ideal of $`𝒞`$, we denote by $`I^{}`$ the set of $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}I`$ such that there is $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{}I`$ with $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}<\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{}`$.

The following is a slight reformulation of \[Lu3, §1.4\] :

###### Proposition 6.2.

Let $`I`$ be an ideal of $`𝒞`$. Then, the assignment $`t_wC_w`$ induces an isomorphism of $``$-modules

$$\underset{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}II^{}}{}\varpi ^{}\left(𝐙[v,v^1]_𝐙𝒥_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}\right)\stackrel{}{}^I/^I^{}.$$

In particular, the $`(𝐐[v,v^1]_{𝐙[v,v^1]})`$-module $`𝐐[v,v^1]_{𝐙[v,v^1]}(^I/^I^{})`$ is a direct sum of standard $`_{𝐐[v,v^1]}`$-modules.

This proposition gives a characterization of standard $`_{𝐐[v,v^1]}`$-modules via the Hecke algebra filtration coming from two-sided cells.

#### 6.1.2.

Next, we consider filtrations coming from certain functions on the set of two-sided cells.

###### Definition 6.3.

A sorting function $`f:W𝐙`$ is a function constant on two-sided cells and such that $`\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{}<\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}f(\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}^{})>f(\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}})`$.

Given a sorting function $`f`$, we put $`_R^i:=_{wW,f(w)i}RC_w`$ and $`_R^{>i}:=_{wW,f(w)>i}RC_w.`$ Then, $`_R^i`$ is a two-sided ideal of $`_R`$, since $`I=\{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}𝒞|f(\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}})i\}`$ is an ideal. Similarly, $`_R^{>i}`$ is a two-sided ideal of $`_R`$. Furthermore, $`I^{}\{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}𝒞|f(\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}})>i\}`$. Consequently, we deduce from Proposition 6.2 :

###### Corollary 6.4.

We have an isomorphism of $``$-modules

$$\underset{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}𝒞,f(\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}})=i}{}\varpi ^{}\left(𝐙[v,v^1]_𝐙𝒥_{\underset{¯}{\mathrm{c}}}\right)\stackrel{}{}^i/^{>i}.$$

In particular, the $`(𝐐[v,v^1]_{𝐙[v,v^1]})`$-module $`𝐐[v,v^1]_{𝐙[v,v^1]}(^i/^{>i})`$ is a direct sum of standard $`_{𝐐[v,v^1]}`$-modules.

Thus, we have another characterization of standard $`_{𝐐[v,v^1]}`$-modules via the Hecke algebra filtration coming from $`f`$.

Let $``$ be the set of families of irreducible characters of $`W`$. We transfer the concepts associated with $`𝒞`$ to $``$ via the canonical bijection between $`𝒞`$ and $``$.

In particular, we have a function $`f:\mathrm{Irr}(W)𝐙`$ constant on families.

We have $`^i=(_{f(E)i}e_E𝐐(v)_{𝐙[v,v^1]})`$, where $`e_E`$ is the primitive central idempotent of $`𝐐(v)_{𝐙[v,v^1]}`$ that acts as $`1`$ on the simple $`(𝐐(v)_{𝐙[v,v^1]})`$-module corresponding to $`E`$.

This shows that, if $`R`$ is a localisation of $`𝐐[v,v^1]`$, then the filtration on $`_R=R_{𝐙[v,v^1]}`$ given by $`f`$ can be recovered without using the Kazhdan-Lusztig basis. We obtain

###### Proposition 6.5.

Let $`R`$ be a localisation of $`𝐐[v,v^1]`$ and $`P`$ be a projective $`_R`$-module. Let $`Q^i`$ (resp. $`Q^{>i}`$) be the sum of the simple submodules $`E`$ of $`𝐐(v)_RP`$ such that $`f(E)i`$ (resp. $`f(E)>i`$).

Then, $`(PQ^i)/(PQ^{>i})`$ is a direct sum of standard $`_R`$-modules. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus, any sorting function yields a characterization of the standard $`_R`$-modules without using the Kazhdan-Lusztig basis.

#### 6.1.3.

Given $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$, we denote by $`a_E`$ (resp. $`A_E`$) the lowest (resp. highest) power of $`q`$ in the generic degree of $`E`$ \[Lu1, §4.1.1\].

By \[Lu2, Theorem 5.4 and Corollary 6.3 (b)\], Lusztig’s $`a`$-function is a sorting function. The corresponding filtrations on projective modules have been considered in \[GeRou\].

Write $`E<E^{}`$ for the order on $``$ arising from $`<_{KL}`$ via the canonical bijection between $`𝒞`$ and $``$. The following Lemma is a classical result :

###### Lemma 6.6.

Let $`E,E^{}`$. If $`E<E^{}`$, then $`a_E>a_E^{}`$ and $`A_E>A_E^{}`$.

###### Proof.

By \[KaLu, Remark 3.3(a)\], we have $`v_{LR}w`$ if and only if $`w_0w_{LR}w_0v`$, where $`w_0`$ is the element of maximal length. Left multiplication by $`w_0`$ induces a automorphism of $`𝒞`$. The corresponding automorphism of $``$ is tensor product by $`det`$ \[Lu1, Lemma 5.14\]. It follows that $`E<E^{}`$ if and only if $`E^{}det<Edet`$ (cf also \[BaVo, Proposition 2.25\]).

We have $`A_E=Na_{Edet}`$, where $`N`$ is the number of positive roots of $`W`$ \[Lu1, 5.11.5\].

The Lemma is now a consequence of the fact that $`E<E^{}a_E>a_E)`$. ∎

We deduce there is another sorting function :

###### Proposition 6.7.

The function $`a_E+A_E`$ is a sorting function.

### 6.2. Standard modules for the Hecke algebra via $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$-functor

#### 6.2.1.

We consider the setting of §3.1 with $`k_{H,1}=k_1`$ independent of $`H`$. According to \[BrMi, §4.21 and Proposition 4.1\] we have

$$c_E=k_1(a_E+A_E).$$

We can finally identify the images of the standard modules $`\mathrm{\Delta }(E)`$ of $`𝒪`$ via $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}`$ :

###### Theorem 6.8.

Assume $`k_{H,1}`$ is a positive real number independent of $`H`$. Let $`E\mathrm{Irr}(𝐂W)`$. Then, $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))\stackrel{}{}S(E)`$.

###### Proof.

We prove the result for $`R`$ local complete as in §5.2.5 instead of $`𝐂`$. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$-filtration of projective objects of $`𝒪_R`$ becomes, via $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R`$, the filtration of Proposition 6.5 for the sorting function $`f(E)=a_E+A_E`$ and the associated quotients are direct sums of standard $`_R`$-modules. It follows that the modules $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_R(\mathrm{\Delta }(RE))`$ for $`E\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$ coincide with the standard $`_R`$-modules. Since $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}_K(\mathrm{\Delta }(KE))\stackrel{}{}KS(E)`$ (cf the remark before Theorem 5.13)), we deduce the Theorem. ∎

###### Remark 6.9.

If the number $`k_{H,1}`$ (which is independent of $`H`$) is non-real, then the category $`𝒪`$ and the algebra $``$ are both semi-simple, hence it is still true that $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))S(E)`$. If the number is non-positive real, then a similar approach shows that $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))S(E)^{}`$.

###### Corollary 6.10.

Assume $`k_{H,1}`$ is a positive real number and $`W`$ has type $`A_n`$. Then, $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(\mathrm{\Delta }(E))`$ is isomorphic to the Specht module corresponding to $`E`$.

###### Proof.

The result is a consequence of \[Na, GaMc\], where it is proven that the module $`S(E)`$ is a Specht module. Alternatively, any projective $``$-module is known to have a filtration by Specht modules such that the order of terms in the filtration is compatible with the dominance order on partitions. The claim of the Corollary can be easily deduced from this by comparing with the order relation on two-sided cells. ∎

###### Corollary 6.11.

If $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E))0`$, then $`\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(P(E))`$ is a projective $``$-module and, for any $`F\mathrm{Irr}(W)`$, we have $`[S(F):\mathrm{𝙺𝚉}(L(E))]=[P(E):\mathrm{\Delta }(F)]`$.

###### Proof.

This is an immediate consequence of Theorem 6.8, the reciprocity formula in §2.6.2, and Proposition 3.3. ∎

V. Ginzburg: Department of Mathematics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA;
x ginzburg@math.uchicago.edu

N. Guay: Department of Mathematics, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA;
x nguay@math.uchicago.edu

E. Opdam: Korteweg de Vries Institute for Mathematics, University of Amsterdam,
x Plantage Muidergracht 24, 1018TV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; opdam@science.uva.nl

R. Rouquier: UFR de Mathématiques et Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu (CNRS UMR 7586),
x Université Paris VII, 2 place Jussieu, 75251 Paris Cedex 05, France; rouquier@math.jussieu.fr