text:
# Algebraic Approach to 𝑞,𝑡-Characters

## 1. Introduction

We suppose $`q^{}`$ is not a root of unity. In the case of a semi-simple Lie algebra $`𝔤`$, the structure of the Grothendieck ring $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(𝔤))`$ of finite dimensional representations of the quantum algebra $`𝒰_q(𝔤)`$ is well understood. It is analogous to the classical case $`q=1`$. In particular we have ring isomorphisms:

$$\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(𝔤))\text{Rep}(𝔤)[\mathrm{\Lambda }]^W[T_1,\mathrm{},T_n]$$

deduced from the injective homomorphism of characters $`\chi `$:

$$\chi (V)=\underset{\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }}{}\text{dim}(V_\lambda )\lambda $$

where $`V_\lambda `$ are weight spaces of a representation $`V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the weight lattice.

For the general case of Kac-Moody algebras the picture is less clear. In the affine case $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$, Frenkel and Reshetikhin  introduced an injective ring homomorphism of $`q`$-characters:

$$\chi _q:\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))[Y_{i,a}^\pm ]_{1in,a^{}}=𝒴$$

The homomorphism $`\chi _q`$ allows to describe the ring $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))[X_{i,a}]_{iI,a^{}}`$, where the $`X_{i,a}`$ are fundamental representations. It particular $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ is commutative.

The morphism of $`q`$-characters has a symmetry property analogous to the classical action of the Weyl group $`\text{Im}(\chi )=[\mathrm{\Lambda }]^W`$: Frenkel and Reshetikhin defined $`n`$ screening operators $`S_i`$ such that $`\text{Im}(\chi _q)=\underset{iI}{}\text{Ker}(S_i)`$ (the result was proved by Frenkel and Mukhin for the general case in ).

In the simply laced case Nakajima introduced $`t`$-analogues of $`q`$-characters (, ): it is a $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear map

$$\chi _{q,t}:\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))_{}[t^\pm ]𝒴_t=[Y_{i,a}^\pm ,t^\pm ]_{iI,a^{}}$$

which is a deformation of $`\chi _q`$ and multiplicative in a certain sense. A combinatorial axiomatic definition of $`q,t`$-characters is given. But the existence is non-trivial and is proved with the geometric theory of quiver varieties which holds only in the simply laced case.

In  we introduced $`t`$-analogues of screening operators $`S_{i,t}`$ such that in the simply laced case:

$$\underset{iI}{}\text{Ker}(S_{i,t})=\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})$$

It is a first step in the algebraic approach to $`q,t`$-characters proposed in this article: we define and construct $`q,t`$-characters in the general (non necessarily simply laced) case. The motivation of the construction appears in the non-commutative structure of the Cartan subalgebra $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔥})𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$, the study of screening currents and of deformed screening operators.

As an application we construct a deformed algebra structure and an involution of the Grothendieck ring, and analogues of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials in the general case in the same spirit as Nakajima did for the simply laced case. In particular this article proves a conjecture that Nakajima made for the simply laced case (remark 3.10 in ): there exists a purely combinatorial proof of the existence of $`q,t`$-characters.

This article is organized as follows: after some backgrounds in section 2, we define a deformed non-commutative algebra structure on $`𝒴_t=[Y_{i,a}^\pm ,t^\pm ]_{iI,a^{}}`$ (section 3): it is naturally deduced from the relations of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔥})𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ (theorem 3.11) by using the quantization in the direction of the central element $`c`$. In particular in the simply laced case it can be used to construct the deformed multiplication of Nakajima  (proposition 3.18) and of Varagnolo-Vasserot  (section 3.5.4).

This picture allows us to introduce the deformed screening operators of  as commutators of Frenkel-Reshetikhin’s screening currents of  (section 4). In  we gave explicitly the kernel of each deformed screening operator (theorem 4.10).

In analogy to the classic case where $`\text{Im}(\chi _q)=\underset{iI}{}\text{Ker}(S_i)`$, we have to describe the intersection of the kernels of deformed screening operators. We introduce a completion of this intersection (section 5.2) and give its structure in proposition 5.19. It is easy to see that it is not too big (lemma 5.7); but the point is to prove that it contains enough elements: it is the main result of our construction in theorem 5.13 which is crucial for us. It is proved by induction on the rank $`n`$ of $`𝔤`$.

We define a $`t`$-deformed algorithm (section 5.7.2) analog to the Frenkel-Mukhin’s algorithm  to construct $`q,t`$-characters in the completion of $`𝒴_t`$. An algorithm was also used by Nakajima in the simply laced case in order to compute the $`q,t`$-characters for some examples () assuming they exist (which was geometrically proved). Our aim is different : we do not know a priori the existence in the general case. That is why we have to show the algorithm is well defined, never fails (lemma 5.24) and gives a convenient element (lemma 5.25).

This construction gives $`q,t`$-characters for fundamental representations; we deduce from them the injective morphism of $`q,t`$-characters $`\chi _{q,t}`$ (definition 6.1). We study the properties of $`\chi _{q,t}`$ (theorem 6.2). Some of them are generalization of the axioms that Nakajima defined in the simply laced case (); in particular we have constructed the morphism of .

We have some applications: the morphism gives a deformation of the Grothendieck ring because the image of $`\chi _{q,t}`$ is a subalgebra for the deformed multiplication (section 6.2). Moreover we define an antimultiplicative involution of the deformed Grothendieck ring (section 6.3); the construction of this involution is motivated by the new point view adopted in this paper : it is just replacing $`c`$ by $`c`$ in $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$. In particular we define constructively analogues of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials and a canonical basis (theorem 6.13) motivated by the introduction of . We compute explicitly the polynomials for some examples.

In section 7 we raise some questions : we conjecture that the coefficients of $`q,t`$-characters are in $`[t^\pm ][t^\pm ]`$. In the $`ADE`$-case it a result of Nakajima; we give an alternative elementary proof for the $`A`$-cases in section 7.1. The cases $`G_2,B_2,C_2`$ are also checked in section 8. The cases $`F_4,B_n,C_n`$ ($`n10`$) have been checked on a computer.

We also conjecture that the generalized analogues to Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials give at $`t=1`$ the multiplicity of simple modules in standard modules. We propose some generalizations and further applications which will be studied elsewhere.

In the appendix (section 8) we give explicit computations of $`q,t`$-characters for semi-simple Lie algebras of rank 2. They are used in the proof of theorem 5.13.

For convenience of the reader we give at the end of this article an index of notations defined in the main body of the text.

Acknowledgments. The author would like to thank M. Rosso for encouragements and precious comments on a previous version of this paper, I. B. Frenkel for having encouraged him in this direction, E. Frenkel for encouragements, useful discussions and references, E. Vasserot for very interesting explanations about , O. Schiffmann for valuable comments and his kind hospitality in Yale university, and T. Schedler for help on programming.

## 2. Background

### 2.1. Cartan matrix

A generalized Cartan matrix of rank $`n`$ is a matrix $`C=(C_{i,j})_{1i,jn}`$ such that $`C_{i,j}`$ and:

$$C_{i,i}=2$$

$$ijC_{i,j}0$$

$$C_{i,j}=0C_{j,i}=0$$

Let $`I=\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$.

We say that $`C`$ is symmetrizable if there is a matrix $`D=\text{diag}(r_1,\mathrm{},r_n)`$ ($`r_i^{}`$) such that $`B=DC`$ is symmetric.

Let $`q^{}`$ be the parameter of quantization. In the following we suppose it is not a root of unity. $`z`$ is an indeterminate.

If $`C`$ is symmetrizable, let $`q_i=q^{r_i}`$, $`z_i=z^{r_i}`$ and $`C(z)=(C(z)_{i,j})_{1i,jn}`$ the matrix with coefficients in $`[z^\pm ]`$ such that:

$$C(z)_{i,j}=[C_{i,j}]_z\text{ if }ij$$

$$C(z)_{i,i}=[C_{i,i}]_{z_i}=z_i+z_i^1$$

where for $`l`$ we use the notation:

$$[l]_z=\frac{z^lz^l}{zz^1}\text{ (}=z^{l+1}+z^{l+3}+\mathrm{}+z^{l1}\text{ for }l1\text{)}$$

In particular, the coefficients of $`C(z)`$ are symmetric Laurent polynomials (invariant under $`zz^1`$). We define the diagonal matrix $`D_{i,j}(z)=\delta _{i,j}[r_i]_z`$ and the matrix $`B(z)=D(z)C(z)`$.

In the following we suppose that $`C`$ is of finite type, in particular $`\text{det}(C)0`$. In this case $`C`$ is symmetrizable; if $`C`$ is indecomposable there is a unique choice of $`r_i^{}`$ such that $`r_1\mathrm{}r_n=1`$. We have $`B_{i,j}(z)=[B_{i,j}]_z`$ and $`B(z)`$ is symmetric. See  or  for a classification of those finite Cartan matrices.

We say that $`C`$ is simply-laced if $`r_1=\mathrm{}=r_n=1`$. In this case $`C`$ is symmetric, $`C(z)=B(z)`$ is symmetric. In the classification those matrices are of type $`ADE`$.

Denote by $`𝔘(z)`$ the subgroup $``$-linearly spanned by the $`\frac{P(z)}{Q(z^1)}`$ such that $`P(z)[z^\pm ]`$, $`Q(z)[z]`$, the zeros of $`Q(z)`$ are roots of unity and $`Q(0)=1`$. It is a subring of $`(z)`$, and for $`R(z)𝔘,m`$ we have $`R(q^m)𝔘`$ and $`R(q^m)`$ makes sense.

It follows from lemma 1.1 of  that $`C(z)`$ has inverse $`\stackrel{~}{C}(z)`$ with coefficients of the form $`R(z)𝔘`$.

### 2.2. Finite quantum algebras

We refer to  for the definition of the finite quantum algebra $`𝒰_q(𝔤)`$ associated to a finite Cartan matrix, the definition and properties of the type $`1`$-representations of $`𝒰_q(𝔤)`$, the Grothendieck ring $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(𝔤))`$ and the injective ring morphism of characters $`\chi :\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(𝔤))[y_i^\pm ]`$.

### 2.3. Quantum affine algebras

The quantum affine algebra associated to a finite Cartan matrix $`C`$ is the $``$-algebra $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ defined (Drinfeld new realization) by generators $`x_{i,m}^\pm `$ ($`iI`$, $`m`$), $`k_i^\pm `$ ($`iI`$), $`h_{i,m}`$ ($`iI`$, $`m^{}`$), central elements $`c^{\pm \frac{1}{2}}`$, and relations:

$$k_ik_j=k_jk_i$$

$$k_ih_{j,m}=h_{j,m}k_i$$

$$k_ix_{j,m}^\pm k_i^1=q^{\pm B_{ij}}x_{j,m}^\pm $$

$$[h_{i,m},x_{j,m^{}}^\pm ]=\pm \frac{1}{m}[mB_{ij}]_qc^{\frac{m}{2}}x_{j,m+m^{}}^\pm $$

$$x_{i,m+1}^\pm x_{j,m^{}}^\pm q^{\pm B_{ij}}x_{j,m^{}}^\pm x_{i,m+1}^\pm =q^{\pm B_{ij}}x_{i,m}^\pm x_{j,m^{}+1}^\pm x_{j,m^{}+1}^\pm x_{i,m}^\pm $$

$$[h_{i,m},h_{j,m^{}}]=\delta _{m,m^{}}\frac{1}{m}[mB_{ij}]_q\frac{c^mc^m}{qq^1}$$

$$[x_{i,m}^+,x_{j,m^{}}^{}]=\delta _{ij}\frac{c^{\frac{mm^{}}{2}}\varphi _{i,m+m^{}}^+c^{\frac{mm^{}}{2}}\varphi _{i,m+m^{}}^{}}{q_iq_i^1}$$

$$\underset{\pi \mathrm{\Sigma }_s}{}\underset{k=0..s}{}(1)^k\left[\begin{array}{c}s\\ k\end{array}\right]_{q_i}x_{i,m_{\pi (1)}}^\pm \mathrm{}x_{i,m_{\pi (k)}}^\pm x_{j,m^{}}^\pm x_{i,m_{\pi (k+1)}}^\pm \mathrm{}x_{i,m_{\pi (s)}}^\pm =0$$

where the last relation holds for all $`ij`$, $`s=1C_{ij}`$, all sequences of integers $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_s`$. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_s`$ is the symmetric group on $`s`$ letters. For $`iI`$ and $`m`$, $`\varphi _{i,m}^\pm 𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ is determined by the formal power series in $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})[[u]]`$ (resp. in $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})[[u^1]]`$):

$$\underset{m=0..\mathrm{}}{}\varphi _{i,\pm m}^\pm u^{\pm m}=k_i^\pm \text{exp}(\pm (qq^1)\underset{m^{}=1..\mathrm{}}{}h_{i,\pm m^{}}u^{\pm m^{}})$$

and $`\varphi _{i,m}^+=0`$ for $`m<0`$, $`\varphi _{i,m}^{}=0`$ for $`m>0`$.

One has an embedding $`𝒰_q(𝔤)𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ and a Hopf algebra structure on $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ (see  for example).

The Cartan algebra $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔥})𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ is the $``$-subalgebra of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ generated by the $`h_{i,m},c^\pm `$ ($`iI,m\{0\}`$).

### 2.4. Finite dimensional representations of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$

A finite dimensional representation $`V`$ of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ is called of type $`1`$ if $`c`$ acts as Id and $`V`$ is of type $`1`$ as a representation of $`𝒰_q(𝔤)`$. Denote by $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ the Grothendieck ring of finite dimensional representations of type $`1`$.

The operators $`\{\varphi _{i,\pm m}^\pm ,iI,m\}`$ commute on $`V`$. So we have a pseudo-weight space decomposition:

$$V=\underset{\gamma ^{I\times }\times ^{I\times }}{}V_\gamma $$

where for $`\gamma =(\gamma ^+,\gamma ^{})`$, $`V_\gamma `$ is a simultaneous generalized eigenspace:

$$V_\gamma =\{xV/p,i\{1,\mathrm{},n\},m,(\varphi _{i,m}^\pm \gamma _{i,m}^\pm )^p.x=0\}$$

The $`\gamma _{i,m}^\pm `$ are called pseudo-eigen values of $`V`$.

###### Theorem 2.1.

(Chari, Pressley ,) Every simple representation $`V\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ is a highest weight representation $`V`$, that is to say there is $`v_0V`$ (highest weight vector) $`\gamma _{i,m}^\pm `$ (highest weight) such that:

$$V=𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}).v_0\text{ , }c^{\frac{1}{2}}.v_0=v_0$$

$$iI,m,x_{i,m}^+.v_0=0\text{ , }\text{ , }\varphi _{i,m}^\pm .v_0=\gamma _{i,m}^\pm v_0$$

Moreover we have an $`I`$-uplet $`(P_i(u))_{iI}`$ of (Drinfeld-)polynomials such that $`P_i(0)=1`$ and:

$$\gamma _i^\pm (u)=\underset{m}{}\gamma _{i,\pm m}^\pm u^\pm =q_i^{\mathrm{deg}(P_i)}\frac{P_i(uq_i^1)}{P_i(uq_i)}[[u^\pm ]]$$

and $`(P_i)_{iI}`$ parameterizes simple modules in $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$.

###### Theorem 2.2.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin ) The eigenvalues $`\gamma _i(u)^\pm [[u]]`$ of a representation $`V\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ have the form:

$$\gamma _i^\pm (u)=q_i^{deg(Q_i)deg(R_i)}\frac{Q_i(uq_i^1)R_i(uq_i)}{Q_i(uq_i)R_i(uq_i^1)}$$

where $`Q_i(u),R_i(u)[u]`$ and $`Q_i(0)=R_i(0)=1`$.

Note that the polynomials $`Q_i,R_i`$ are uniquely defined by $`\gamma `$. Denote by $`Q_{\gamma ,i}`$, $`R_{\gamma ,i}`$ the polynomials associated to $`\gamma `$.

### 2.5. q-characters

Let $`𝒴`$ be the commutative ring $`𝒴=[Y_{i,a}^\pm ]_{iI,a^{}}`$.

###### Definition 2.3.

For $`V\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ a representation, the $`q`$-character $`\chi _q(V)`$ of $`V`$ is:

$$\chi _q(V)=\underset{𝛾}{}\text{dim}(V_\gamma )\underset{iI,a^{}}{}Y_{i,a}^{\lambda _{\gamma ,i,a}\mu _{\gamma ,i,a}}𝒴$$

where for $`\gamma ^{I\times }\times ^{I\times }`$, $`iI`$, $`a^{}`$ the $`\lambda _{\gamma ,i,a},\mu _{\gamma ,i,a}`$ are defined by:

$$Q_{\gamma ,i}(z)=\underset{a^{}}{}(1za)^{\lambda _{\gamma ,i,a}}\text{ , }R_{\gamma ,i}(z)=\underset{a^{}}{}(1za)^{\mu _{\gamma ,i,a}}$$

###### Theorem 2.4.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin ) The map

$$\chi _q:\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))𝒴$$

is an injective ring homomorphism and the following diagram is commutative:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))& \stackrel{\chi _q}{}& [Y_{i,a}^\pm ]_{iI,a^{}}& & \\ \hfill res& & \beta & & \\ \hfill \text{Rep}(𝒰_q(𝔤))& \stackrel{\chi }{}& [y_i^\pm ]_{iI}& & \end{array}$$

where $`\beta `$ is the ring homomorphism such that $`\beta (Y_{i,a})=y_i`$ ($`iI,a^{}`$).

For $`m𝒴`$ of the form $`m=\underset{iI,a^{}}{}Y_{i,a}^{u_{i,a}(m)}`$ ($`u_{i,a}(m)0`$), denote $`V_m\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ the simple module with Drinfeld polynomials $`P_i(u)=\underset{a^{}}{}(1ua)^{u_{i,a}(m)}`$. In particular for $`iI,a^{}`$ denote $`V_{i,a}=V_{Y_{i,a}}`$ and $`X_{i,a}=\chi _q(V_{i,a})`$. The simple modules $`V_{i,a}`$ are called fundamental representations.

Denote by $`M_m\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ the module $`M_m=\underset{iI,a^{}}{}V_{i,a}^{u_{i,a}(m)}`$. It is called a standard module and his $`q`$-character is $`\underset{iI,a^{}}{}X_{i,a}^{u_{i,a}(m)}`$.

###### Corollary 2.5.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin ) The ring $`\text{Rep}(𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤}))`$ is commutative and isomorphic to $`[X_{i,a}]_{iI,a^{}}`$.

###### Proposition 2.6.

(Frenkel, Mukhin ) For $`iI,a^{}`$, we have $`X_{i,a}[Y_{j,aq^l}^\pm ]_{jI,l0}`$.

In particular for $`a^{}`$ we have an injective ring homomorphism:

$$\chi _q^a:\text{Rep}_a=[X_{i,aq^l}]_{iI,l}𝒴_a=[Y_{i,aq^l}^\pm ]_{iI,l}$$

For $`a,b^{}`$ denote $`\alpha _{b,a}:\text{Rep}_a\text{Rep}_b`$ and $`\beta _{b,a}:𝒴_a𝒴_b`$ the canonical ring homomorphism.

###### Lemma 2.7.

We have a commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \text{Rep}_a& \stackrel{\chi _q^a}{}& 𝒴_a& & \\ \hfill \alpha _{b,a}& & \beta _{b,a}& & \\ \hfill \text{Rep}_b& \stackrel{\chi _q^b}{}& 𝒴_b& & \end{array}$$

This result is a consequence of theorem 4.2 (or see , ). In particular it suffices to study $`\chi _q^1`$. In the following denote $`\text{Rep}=\text{Rep}_1`$, $`X_{i,l}=X_{i,q^l}`$, $`𝒴=𝒴_1`$ and $`\chi _q=\chi _q^1:\text{Rep}𝒴`$.

## 3. Twisted polynomial algebras related to quantum affine algebras

The aim of this section is to define the $`t`$-deformed algebra $`𝒴_t`$ and to describe its structure (theorem 3.11). We define the Heisenberg algebra $``$, the subalgebra $`𝒴_u[[h]]`$ and eventually $`𝒴_t`$ as a quotient of $`𝒴_u`$.

### 3.1. Heisenberg algebras related to quantum affine algebras

#### 3.1.1. The Heisenberg algebra $``$

###### Definition 3.1.

$``$ is the $``$-algebra defined by generators $`a_i[m]`$ ($`iI,m\{0\}`$), central elements $`c_r`$ ($`r>0`$) and relations ($`i,jI,m,r\{0\}`$):

$$[a_i[m],a_j[r]]=\delta _{m,r}(q^mq^m)B_{i,j}(q^m)c_{|m|}$$

This definition is motivated by the structure of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$: in $``$ the $`c_r`$ are algebraically independent, but we have a surjective homomorphism from $``$ to $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔥})`$ such that $`a_i[m](qq^1)h_{i,m}`$ and $`c_r\frac{c^rc^r}{r}`$.

#### 3.1.2. Properties of $``$

For $`jI,m`$ we set:

$$y_j[m]=\underset{iI}{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,j}(q^m)a_i[m]$$

###### Lemma 3.2.

We have the Lie brackets in $``$ ($`i,jI,m,r`$):

$$[a_i[m],y_j[r]]=(q^{mr_i}q^{r_im})\delta _{m,r}\delta _{i,j}c_{|m|}$$

$$[y_i[m],y_j[r]]=\delta _{m,r}\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(q^m)(q^{mr_j}q^{mr_j})c_{|m|}$$

Proof: We compute in $``$:

$$[a_i[m],y_j[r]]=[a_i[m],\underset{kI}{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{k,j}(q^r)a_k[r]]=\delta _{m,r}c_{|m|}\underset{kI}{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{k,j}(q^m)[r_i]_{q^m}C_{i,k}(q^m)(q^mq^m)$$

$$=\delta _{i,j}\delta _{m,r}(q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i})c_{|m|}$$

$$[y_i[m],y_j[r]]=[\underset{kI}{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{k,i}(q^m)a_k[m],y_j[r]]=\delta _{m,r}\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(q^m)(q^{mr_j}q^{mr_j})c_{|m|}$$

Let $`\pi _+`$ and $`\pi _{}`$ be the $``$-algebra endomorphisms of $``$ such that ($`iI`$, $`m>0`$, $`r<0`$):

$$\pi _+(a_i[m])=a_i[m]\text{ , }\pi _+(a_i[r])=0\text{ , }\pi _+(c_m)=0$$

$$\pi _{}(a_i[m])=0\text{ , }\pi _{}(a_i[r])=a_i[r]\text{ , }\pi _{}(c_m)=0$$

They are well-defined because the relations are preserved. We set $`^+=\text{Im}(\pi _+)`$ and $`^{}=\text{Im}(\pi _{})`$.

Note that $`^+`$ (resp. $`^{}`$) is the subalgebra of $``$ generated by the $`a_i[m]`$, $`iI,m>0`$ (resp. $`m<0`$). So $`^+`$ and $`^{}`$ are commutative algebras, and:

$$^+^{}[a_i[m]]_{iI,m>0}$$

We say that $`m`$ is a $``$-monomial if it is a product of the generators $`a_i[m],c_r`$.

###### Lemma 3.3.

There is a unique $``$-linear endomorphism $`::`$ of $``$ such that for all $``$-monomials $`m`$ we have:

$$:m:=\pi _+(m)\pi _{}(m)$$

In particular there is a vector space triangular decomposition $`^+[c_r]_{r>0}^{}`$.

Proof: The $``$-monomials span the $``$-vector space $``$, so the map is unique. But there are non trivial linear combinations between them because of the relations of $``$: it suffices to show that for $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$ $``$-monomials the definition of $`::`$ is compatible with the relations ($`i,jI`$, $`l,k\{0\}`$):

$$m_1a_i[k]a_j[l]m_2m_1a_j[l]a_i[k]m_2=\delta _{k,l}(q^kq^k)B_{i,j}(q^k)m_1c_{|k|}m_2$$

As $`^+`$ and $`^{}`$ are commutative, we have:

$$\pi _+(m_1a_i[k]a_j[l]m_2)\pi _{}(m_1a_i[k]a_j[l]m_2)=\pi _+(m_1a_j[l]a_i[k]m_2)\pi _{}(m_1a_j[l]a_i[k]m_2)$$

and we can conclude because $`\pi _+(m_1c_{|k|}m_2)=\pi _{}(m_1c_{|k|}m_2)=0`$.∎

### 3.2. The deformed algebra $`𝒴_u`$

#### 3.2.1. Construction of $`𝒴_u`$

Consider the $``$-algebra $`_h=[[h]]`$. The application exp is well-defined on the subalgebra $`h_h`$:

$$\text{exp}:h_h_h$$

For $`l`$, $`iI`$, introduce $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l},\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}_h`$ such that:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})$$

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})$$

Note that $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}`$ are invertible in $`_h`$ and that:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})$$

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^1=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})$$

Recall the definition $`𝔘(z)`$ of section 2.1. For $`R𝔘`$, introduce $`t_R_h`$:

$$t_R=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}R(q^m)c_m)$$

###### Definition 3.4.

$`𝒴_u`$ is the $``$-subalgebra of $`_h`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm ,t_R`$ ($`iI,l,R𝔘`$).

In this section we give properties of $`𝒴_u`$ and subalgebras of $`𝒴_u`$ which will be useful in section 3.3.

#### 3.2.2. Relations in $`𝒴_u`$

###### Lemma 3.5.

We have the following relations in $`𝒴_u`$ ($`i,jI`$ $`l,k`$):

(1)
$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}^1=t_{\delta _{i,j}(z^{r_i}z^{r_i})(z^{(lk)}+z^{(kl)})}$$

(2)
$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}^1=t_{\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z)(z^{r_j}z^{r_j})(z^{(lk)}+z^{(kl)})}$$

(3)
$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}^1=t_{B_{i,j}(z)(z^1z)(z^{(lk)}+z^{(kl)})}$$

Proof: For $`A,Bh_h`$ such that $`[A,B]h[c_r]_{r>0}`$, we have:

$$\text{exp}(A)\text{exp}(B)=\text{exp}(B)\text{exp}(A)\text{exp}([A,B])$$

So we can compute (see lemma 3.2):

$`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km}))\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}B_{i,j}(q^m)(q^mq^m)q^{m(kl)}c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}B_{i,j}(q^m)(q^mq^m)(q^{m(lk)}+q^{m(kl)})c_m)\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km}))\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\delta _{i,j}(q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i})q^{m(kl)}c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{ml})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{ml})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\delta _{i,j}(q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i})(q^{m(lk)}+q^{m(kl)})c_m)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{ml})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{ml})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk}))\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}q^{m(kl)}\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(q^m)(q^{mr_j}q^{mr_j})c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{ml})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{ml})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{mk})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(q^m)(q^{mr_j}q^{mr_j})(q^{m(lk)}+q^{m(kl)})c_m)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}`$

#### 3.2.3. Commutative subalgebras of $`_h`$

The $``$-algebra endomorphisms $`\pi _+,\pi _{}`$ of $``$ are naturally extended to $``$-algebra endomorphisms of $`_h`$. As $`𝒴_u_h`$, we have by restriction the $``$-algebra morphisms $`\pi _\pm :𝒴_u_h`$.

Introduce $`𝒴=\pi _+(𝒴_u)^+[[h]]`$. In this section 3.2.3 we study $`𝒴`$. In particular we will see in proposition 3.8 that the notation $`𝒴`$ is consistent with the notation of section 2.5.

For $`iI,l`$, denote:

$$Y_{i,l}^\pm =\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm )=\text{exp}(\pm \underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})$$

$$A_{i,l}^\pm =\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm )=\text{exp}(\pm \underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})$$

###### Lemma 3.6.

For $`iI,l`$, we have:

$$A_{i,l}=Y_{i,lr_i}Y_{i,l+r_i}(\underset{j/C_{j,i}=1}{}Y_{j,l}^1)(\underset{j/C_{j,i}=2}{}Y_{j,l+1}^1Y_{j,l1}^1)(\underset{j/C_{j,i}=3}{}Y_{j,l+2}^1Y_{j,l}^1Y_{j,l2}^1)$$

In particular $`𝒴`$ is generated by the $`Y_{i,l}^\pm `$ ($`iI,l`$).

Proof:

We have $`a_i[m]=\underset{jI}{}C_{j,i}(q^m)y_j[m]`$, and:

$$\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})=\underset{jI}{}\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^mC_{j,i}(q^m)y_j[m]q^{lm})$$

As $`C_{i,i}(q)=q^{r_i}+q^{r_i}`$, we have:

$$\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^mC_{i,i}(q^m)y_i[m]q^{lm})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{(lr_i)m})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{(l+r_i)m})=Y_{i,lr_i}Y_{i,l+r_i}$$

If $`C_{j,i}<0`$, we have $`C_{j,i}(q)=\underset{k=C_{j,i}+1,C_{j,i}+3\mathrm{}C_{j,i}1}{}q^k`$ and:

$$\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^mC_{j,i}(q^m)y_j[m]q^{lm})=\underset{k=C_{j,i}+1,C_{j,i}+3\mathrm{}C_{j,i}1}{}\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{(l+k)m})$$

As $`𝒴_u`$ is generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm ,t_R`$ we get the last point.∎

Note that the formula of lemma 3.6 already appeared in .

We need a general technical lemma to describe $`𝒴`$:

###### Lemma 3.7.

Let $`J=\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the polynomial commutative algebra
$`\mathrm{\Lambda }=[\lambda _{j,m}]_{jJ,m0}`$. For $`R=(R_1,\mathrm{},R_r)𝔘^r`$, consider:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_R=\text{exp}(\underset{jJ,m>0}{}h^mR_j(q^m)\lambda _{j,m})\mathrm{\Lambda }[[h]]$$

Then the $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_R)_{R𝔘^r}`$ are $``$-linearly independent. In particular the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{j,l}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{(0,\mathrm{},0,z^l,0,\mathrm{},0)}`$ ($`jJ`$, $`l`$) are $``$-algebraically independent.

Proof: Suppose we have a linear combination ($`\mu _R`$, only a finite number of $`\mu _R0`$):

$$\underset{R𝔘^r}{}\mu _R\mathrm{\Lambda }_R=0$$

The coefficients of $`h^L`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_R`$ are of the form $`R_{j_1}(q^{l_1})^{L_1}R_{j_2}(q^{l_2})^{L_2}\mathrm{}R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})^{L_N}\lambda _{j_1,l_1}^{L_1}\lambda _{j_2,l_2}^{L_2}\mathrm{}\lambda _{j_N,l_N}^{L_N}`$ where $`l_1L_1+\mathrm{}+l_NL_N=L`$. So for $`N0`$, $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_NJ`$, $`l_1,\mathrm{},l_N>0`$, $`L_1,\mathrm{},L_N0`$ we have:

$$\underset{R𝔘^r}{}\mu _RR_{j_1}(q^{l_1})^{L_1}R_{j_2}(q^{l_2})^{L_2}\mathrm{}R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})^{L_N}=0$$

If we fix $`L_2,\mathrm{},L_N`$, we have for all $`L_1=l0`$:

$$\underset{\alpha _1}{}\alpha _1^l\underset{R𝔘^r/R_{j_1}(q^{l_1})=\alpha _1}{}\mu _RR_{j_2}(q^{l_2})^{L_2}\mathrm{}R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})^{L_N}=0$$

We get a Van der Monde system which is invertible, so for all $`\alpha _1`$:

$$\underset{R𝔘^r/R_{j_1}(q^{l_1})=\alpha _1}{}\mu _RR_{j_2}(q^{l_2})^{L_2}\mathrm{}R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})^{l_N}=0$$

By induction we get for $`r^{}N`$ and all $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r^{}`$:

$$\underset{R𝔘^r/R_{j_1}(q^{l_1})=\alpha _1,\mathrm{},R_{j_r^{}}(q^{l_r^{}})=\alpha _r^{}}{}\mu _RR_{j_{r^{}+1}}(q^{l_{r^{}+1}})^{L_{r^{}+1}}\mathrm{}R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})^{L_N}=0$$

And so for $`r^{}=N`$:

$$\underset{R𝔘^r/R_{j_1}(q^{l_1})=\alpha _1,\mathrm{},R_{j_N}(q^{l_N})=\alpha _N}{}\mu _R=0$$

Let be $`S0`$ such that for all $`\mu _R,\mu _R^{}0`$, $`jJ`$ we have $`R_jR_j^{}=0`$ or $`R_jR_j^{}`$ has at most $`S1`$ roots. We set $`N=Sr`$ and $`((j_1,l_1),\mathrm{},(j_S,l_S))=((1,1),(1,2),\mathrm{},(1,S),(2,1),\mathrm{},(2,S),(3,1),\mathrm{},(r,S))`$. We get for all $`\alpha _{j,l}`$ ($`jJ,1lS`$):

$$\underset{R𝔘^r/jJ,1lS,R_j(q^l)=\alpha _{j,l}}{}\mu _R=0$$

It suffices to show that there is at most one term is this sum. But consider $`P,Q𝔘`$ such that for all $`1lS`$, $`P(q^l)=P^{}(q^l)`$. As $`q`$ is not a root of unity the $`q^l`$ are different and $`PP^{}`$ has $`S`$ roots, so is $`0`$.

For the last assertion, we can write a monomial $`\underset{jJ,l}{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{j,l}^{u_{j,l}}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\underset{l}{{\scriptscriptstyle }}u_{1,l}z^l,\mathrm{},\underset{l}{{\scriptscriptstyle }}u_{r,l}z^l}`$. In particular there is no trivial linear combination between those monomials.∎

It follows from lemma 3.6 and lemma 3.7:

###### Proposition 3.8.

The $`Y_{i,l}𝒴`$ are $``$-algebraically independent and generate the $``$-algebra $`𝒴`$. In particular, $`𝒴`$ is the commutative polynomial algebra $`[Y_{i,l}^\pm ]_{iI,l}`$.

The $`A_{i,l}^1𝒴`$ are $``$-algebraically independent. In particular the subalgebra of $`𝒴`$ generated by the $`A_{i,l}^1`$ is the commutative polynomial algebra $`[A_{i,l}^1]_{iI,l}`$.

#### 3.2.4. Generators of $`𝒴_u`$

The $``$-linear endomorphism $`::`$ of $``$ is naturally extended to a $``$-linear endomorphism of $`_h`$. As $`𝒴_u_h`$, we have by restriction a $``$-linear morphism $`::`$ from $`𝒴_u`$ to $`_h`$.

We say that $`m𝒴_u`$ is a $`𝒴_u`$-monomial if it is a product of generators $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,t_R`$.

In the following, for a product of non commuting terms, denote $`\underset{s=1..S}{\overset{}{}}U_s=U_1U_2\mathrm{}U_S`$.

###### Lemma 3.9.

The algebra $`𝒴_u`$ is generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,t_R`$ ($`iI,l,R𝔘`$).

Proof: Let be $`iI`$, $`l`$. It follows from proposition 3.8 that $`\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l})`$ is of the form $`\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l})=\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}}`$ and that $`:m:=:\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}}:`$. So it suffices to show that for $`m`$ a $`𝒴_u`$-monomial, there is a unique $`R_m𝔘`$ such that $`m=t_{R_m}:m:`$. Let us write $`m=t_R\underset{s=1..S}{\overset{}{}}U_s`$ where $`U_s\{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm \}_{iI,l}`$ are generators. Then:

$$:m:=(\underset{s=1..S}{}\pi _+(U_s))(\underset{s=1..S}{}\pi _{}(U_s))$$

And we can conclude because it follows from the proof of lemma 3.5 that for $`1s,s^{}S`$, there is $`R_{s,s^{}}𝔘`$ such that $`\pi _+(U_s)\pi _{}(U_s^{})=t_{R_{s,s^{}}}\pi _{}(U_s^{})\pi _+(U_s)`$.∎

In particular it follows from this proof that $`:𝒴_u:𝒴_u`$.

### 3.3. The deformed algebra $`𝒴_t`$

#### 3.3.1. Construction of $`𝒴_t`$

Denote by $`((z^1))`$ the ring of series of the form $`P=\underset{rR_P}{}P_rz^r`$ where $`R_P`$ and the coefficients $`P_r`$. Recall the definition $`𝔘`$ of section 2.1. We have an embedding $`𝔘((z^1))`$ by expanding $`\frac{1}{Q(z^1)}`$ in $`[[z^1]]`$ for $`Q(z)[z]`$ such that $`Q(0)=1`$. So we can introduce maps:

$$\pi _r:𝔘\text{ , }P=\underset{kR_P}{}P_kz^kP_r$$

Note that we could have consider the expansion in $`((z))`$ and that the maps $`\pi _r`$ are not independent of our choice.

###### Definition 3.10.

We define $`𝒴_t`$ (resp. $`_t`$) as the algebra quotient of $`𝒴_u`$ (resp. $`_h`$) by relations:

$$t_R=t_R^{}\text{ if }\pi _0(R)=\pi _0(R^{})$$

We keep the notations $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm `$ for their image in $`𝒴_t`$. Denote by $`t`$ the image of $`t_1=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}c_m)`$ in $`𝒴_t`$. As $`\pi _0`$ is additive, the image of $`t_R`$ in $`𝒴_t`$ is $`t^{\pi _o(R)}`$. In particular $`𝒴_t`$ is generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm ,t^\pm `$.

As the defining relations of $`_t`$ involve only the $`c_l`$ and $`\pi _+(c_l)=\pi _{}(c_l)=0`$, the algebra endomorphisms $`\pi _+,\pi _{}`$ of $`_t`$ are well-defined. So we can define $`_t^+,_t^{},𝒴_t^+,𝒴_t^{}`$ in the same way as in section 3.2.3 and $`::`$ a $``$-linear endomorphism of $`_t`$ as in section 3.2.4. The $`[t^\pm ]`$-subalgebra $`𝒴_t_t`$ verifies $`:𝒴_t:𝒴_t`$ (proof of lemma 3.9). We have $`𝒴_t^+𝒴`$.

We say that $`m𝒴_t`$ (resp. $`m𝒴`$) is a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial (resp. a $`𝒴`$-monomial) if it is a product of the generators $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,m}^\pm ,t^\pm `$ (resp. $`Y_{i,m}^\pm `$).

#### 3.3.2. Structure of $`𝒴_t`$

The following theorem gives the structure of $`𝒴_t`$:

###### Theorem 3.11.

The algebra $`𝒴_t`$ is defined by generators $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm `$ $`(iI,l)`$, central elements $`t^\pm `$ and relations ($`i,jI,k,l`$):

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=t^{\gamma (i,l,j,k)}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}$$

where $`\gamma :(I\times )^2`$ is given by (recall the maps $`\pi _r`$ of section 3.3.1):

$$\gamma (i,l,j,k)=\underset{r}{}\pi _r(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))(\delta _{lk,r_jr}\delta _{lk,rr_j}+\delta _{lk,r_jr}+\delta _{lk,r_j+r})$$

Proof: As the image of $`t_R`$ in $`𝒴_t`$ is $`t^{\pi _o(R)}`$, we can deduce the relations from lemma 3.5. For example formula 2 (p. 2) gives:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}^1=t^{\pi _0((\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z)(z^{r_j}z^{r_j})(z^{(lk)}+z^{(kl)}))}$$

where:

$$\pi _0(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z)(z^{r_j}z^{r_j})(z^{(lk)}+z^{(kl)}))$$

$$=\underset{r}{}\pi _r(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))(\delta _{r_j+r+kl,0}+\delta _{r_j+r+lk,0}\delta _{r_j+r+lk,0}\delta _{r_j+r+kl,0})=\gamma (i,l,j,k)$$

It follows from lemma 3.6 that $`𝒴_t`$ is generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm ,t^\pm `$.

It follows from lemma 3.7 that the $`t_R𝒴_u`$ ($`R𝔘`$) are $``$-linearly independent. So the $``$-algebra $`[t_R]_{R𝔘}`$ is defined by generators $`(t_R)_{R𝔘}`$ and relations $`t_{R+R^{}}=t_Rt_R^{}`$ for $`R,R^{}𝔘`$. In particular the image of $`[t_R]_{R𝔘}`$ in $`𝒴_t`$ is $`[t^\pm ]`$.

Let $`A`$ be the classes of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials modulo $`t^{}`$. So we have:

$$\underset{mA}{}[t^\pm ].m=𝒴_t$$

We prove the sum is direct: suppose we have a linear combination $`\underset{mA}{}\lambda _m(t)m=0`$ where $`\lambda _m(t)[t^\pm ]`$. We saw in proposition 3.8 that $`𝒴[Y_{i,l}^\pm ]_{iI,l}`$. So $`\lambda _m(1)=0`$ and $`\lambda _m(t)=(t1)\lambda _m^{(1)}(t)`$ where $`\lambda _m^{(1)}(t)[t^\pm ]`$. In particular $`\underset{mA}{}\lambda _m(t)^{(1)}(t)m=0`$ and we get by induction $`\lambda _m(t)(t1)^r[t^\pm ]`$ for all $`r0`$. This is possible if and only if all $`\lambda _m(t)=0`$.∎

In the same way using the last assertion of proposition 3.8, we have:

###### Proposition 3.12.

The sub $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra of $`𝒴_t`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1`$ is defined by generators $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1,t^\pm `$ $`(iI,l)`$ and relations:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}^1=t^{\alpha (i,l,j,k)}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1$$

where $`\alpha :(I\times )^2`$ is given by:

$$\alpha (i,l,i,k)=2(\delta _{lk,2r_i}+\delta _{lk,2r_i})$$

$$\alpha (i,l,j,k)=2\underset{r=C_{i,j}+1,C_{i,j}+3,\mathrm{},C_{i,j}1}{}(\delta _{lk,r_i+r}+\delta _{lk,r_i+r})\text{ (if }ij\text{)}$$

Moreover we have the following relations in $`𝒴_t`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=t^{\beta (i,l,j,k)}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}$$

where $`\beta :(I\times )^2`$ is given by:

$$\beta (i,l,j,k)=2\delta _{i,j}(\delta _{lk,r_i}+\delta _{lk,r_i})$$

### 3.4. Notations and properties related to monomials

In this section we study some technical properties of the $`𝒴`$-monomials and the $`𝒴_t`$-monomials which will be used in the following.

#### 3.4.1. Basis

Denote by $`A`$ the set of $`𝒴`$-monomials. It is a $``$-basis of $`𝒴`$ (proposition 3.8). Let us define an analog $`[t^\pm ]`$-basis of $`𝒴_t`$: denote $`A^{}`$ the set of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of the form $`m=:m:`$. It follows from theorem 3.11 that:

$$𝒴_t=\underset{mA^{}}{}[t^\pm ]m$$

The map $`\pi :A^{}A`$ defined by $`\pi (m)=\pi _+(m)`$ is a bijection. In the following we identify $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$. In particular we have an embedding $`𝒴𝒴_t`$ and an isomorphism of $`[t^\pm ]`$-modules $`𝒴_{}[t^\pm ]𝒴_t`$. Note that it depends on the choice of the $`[t^\pm ]`$-basis of $`𝒴_t`$.

We say that $`\chi _1𝒴_t`$ has the same monomials as $`\chi _2𝒴`$ if in the decompositions $`\chi _1=\underset{mA}{}\lambda _m(t)m`$, $`\chi _2=\underset{mA}{}\mu _mm`$ we have $`\lambda _m(t)=0\mu _m=0`$.

#### 3.4.2. The notation $`u_{i,l}`$

For $`m`$ a $`𝒴`$-monomial we set $`u_{i,l}(m)`$ such that $`m=\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}(m)}`$ and $`u_i(m)=\underset{l}{}u_{i,l}(m)`$. For $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, we set $`u_{i,l}(m)=u_{i,l}(\pi _+(m))`$ and $`u_i(m)=u_i(\pi _+(m))`$. Note that $`u_{i,l}`$ is invariant by multiplication by $`t`$ and compatible with the identification of $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$.

Note that section 3.3.2 implies that for $`iI,l`$ and $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial we have:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}m=t^{2u_{i,lr_i}(m)+2u_{i,l+r_i}(m)}m\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}$$

Denote by $`B_iA`$ the set of $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴`$-monomials, that is to say $`mB_i`$ if $`l`$, $`u_{i,l}(m)0`$. For $`JI`$ denote $`B_J=\underset{iJ}{}B_i`$ the set of $`J`$-dominant $`𝒴`$-monomials. In particular, $`B=B_I`$ is the set of dominant $`𝒴`$-monomials.

We recall we can define a partial ordering on $`A`$ by putting $`mm^{}`$ if there is a $`𝒴`$-monomial $`M`$ which is a product of $`A_{i,l}^\pm `$ ($`iI,l`$) such that $`m=Mm^{}`$ (see for example ). A maximal (resp. lowest, higher…) weight $`𝒴`$-monomial is a maximal (resp. minimal, higher…) element of $`A`$ for this ordering. We deduce from $`\pi _+`$ a partial ordering on the $`𝒴_t`$-monomials.

Following , a $`𝒴`$-monomial $`m`$ is said to be right negative if the factors $`Y_{j,l}`$ appearing in $`m`$, for which $`l`$ is maximal, have negative powers. A product of right negative $`𝒴`$-monomials is right negative. It follows from lemma 3.6 that the $`A_{i,l}^1`$ are right negative. A $`𝒴_t`$-monomial is said to be right negative if $`\pi _+(m)`$ is right negative.

#### 3.4.3. Some technical properties

###### Lemma 3.13.

Let $`(i_1,l_1),\mathrm{},(i_K,l_K)`$ be in $`(I\times )^K`$. For $`U0`$, the set of the $`m=\underset{k=1\mathrm{}K}{}A_{i_k,l_k}^{v_{i_k,l_k}(m)}`$ ($`v_{i_k,l_k}(m)0`$) such that $`\underset{iI,k}{\text{min}}u_{i,k}(m)U`$ is finite.

Proof: Suppose it is not the case: let be $`(m_p)_{p0}`$ such that $`\underset{iI,k}{\text{min}}u_{i,k}(m_p)U`$ but
$`\underset{k=1\mathrm{}K}{}v_{i_k,l_k}(m_p)\underset{p\mathrm{}}{}+\mathrm{}`$. So there is at least one $`k`$ such that $`v_{i_k,l_k}(m_p)\underset{p\mathrm{}}{}+\mathrm{}`$. Denote by $``$ the set of such $`k`$. Among those $`k`$, such that $`l_k`$ is maximal suppose that $`r_{i_k}`$ is maximal (recall the definition of $`r_i`$ in section 2.1). In particular, we have $`u_{i_k,l_k+r_{i_k}}(m_p)=v_{i_k,l_k}(m_p)+f(p)`$ where $`f(p)`$ depends only of the $`v_{i_k^{},l_k^{}}(m_p)`$, $`k^{}`$. In particular, $`f(p)`$ is bounded and $`u_{i_k,l_k+r_{i_k}}(m_p)\underset{p\mathrm{}}{}\mathrm{}`$.∎

###### Lemma 3.14.

For $`MB`$, $`K0`$ the set of $`𝒴`$-monomials $`\{MA_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}A_{i_R,l_R}^1/R0,l_1,\mathrm{},l_RK\}B`$ is finite.

Proof: Let us write $`M=Y_{i_1,l_1}\mathrm{}Y_{i_R,l_R}`$ such that $`l_1=\underset{r=1\mathrm{}R}{\text{min}}l_r`$, $`l_R=\underset{r=1\mathrm{}R}{\text{max}}l_r`$ and consider $`m`$ in the set. It is of the form $`m=MM^{}`$ where $`M^{}=\underset{iI,lK}{}A_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}}`$ ($`v_{i,l}0`$). Let $`L=\text{max}\{l/iI,u_{i,l}(M^{})<0\}`$. $`M^{}`$ is right negative so for all $`iI`$, $`l>Lv_{i,l}=0`$. But $`m`$ is dominant, so $`Ll_R`$. In particular $`M^{}=\underset{iI,Kll_R}{}A_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}}`$. It suffices to prove that the $`v_{i,l}(m_r)`$ are bounded under the condition $`m`$ dominant. This follows from lemma 3.13.∎

### 3.5. Presentations of deformed algebras

Our construction of $`𝒴_t`$ using $`_h`$ (section 3.3) is a “concrete” presentation of the deformed structure. Let us look at another approach: in this section we define two bicharacters $`𝒩,𝒩_t`$ related to basis of $`𝒴_t`$. All the information of the multiplication of $`𝒴_t`$ is contained is those bicharacters because we can construct a deformed $``$ multiplication on the “abstract” $`[t^\pm ]`$-module $`𝒴_{}[t^\pm ]`$ by putting for $`m_1,m_2A`$ $`𝒴`$-monomials:

$$m_1m_2=t^{𝒩(m_1,m_2)𝒩(m_2,m_1)}m_2m_1$$

or

$$m_1m_2=t^{𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)𝒩_t(m_2,m_1)}m_2m_1$$

Those presentations appeared earlier in the literature ,  for the simply laced case. In particular this section identifies our approach with those articles and gives an algebraic motivation of the deformed structures of ,  related to the structure of $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$.

#### 3.5.1. The bicharacter $`𝒩`$

It follows from the proof of lemma 3.9 that for $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, there is $`N(m)`$ such that $`m=t^{N(m)}:m:`$. For $`m_1,m_2`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials we define $`𝒩(m_1,m_2)=N(m_1m_2)N(m_1)N(m_2)`$. We have $`N(Y_{i,l})=N(A_{i,l})=0`$. Note that for $`\alpha ,\beta `$ we have:

$$N(t^\alpha m)=\alpha +N(m)\text{ , }𝒩(t^\alpha m_1,t^\beta m_2)=𝒩(m_1,m_2)$$

In particular the map $`𝒩:A\times A`$ is well-defined and independent of the choice of a representant in $`\pi _+^1(A)`$.

###### Lemma 3.15.

For $`m_1,m_2`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials, we have in $`_t`$:

$$\pi _{}(m_1)\pi _+(m_2)=t^{𝒩(m_1,m_2)}\pi _+(m_2)\pi _{}(m_1)$$

Proof: We have:

$$m_1=t^{N(m_1)}\pi _+(m_1)\pi _{}(m_1)\text{ , }m_2=t^{N(m_2)}\pi _+(m_2)\pi _{}(m_2)$$

and so:

$$m_1m_2=t^{N(m_1m_2)}\pi _+(m_1)\pi _+(m_2)\pi _{}(m_1)\pi _{}(m_2)=t^{N(m_1)+N(m_2)}\pi _+(m_1)\pi _{}(m_1)\pi _+(m_2)\pi _{}(m_2)$$

###### Lemma 3.16.

The map $`𝒩:A\times A`$ is a bicharacter, that is to say for $`m_1,m_2,m_3A`$, we have:

$$𝒩(m_1m_2,m_3)=𝒩(m_1,m_3)+𝒩(m_2,m_3)\text{ and }𝒩(m_1,m_2m_3)=𝒩(m_1,m_2)+𝒩(m_1,m_3)$$

Moreover for $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_k`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials, we have:

$$N(m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_k)=N(m_1)+N(m_2)+\mathrm{}+N(m_k)+\underset{1i<jk}{}𝒩(m_i,m_j)$$

Proof: For the first point it follows from lemma 3.15:

$$\pi _{}(m_1m_2)\pi _+(m_3)=t^{𝒩(m_1m_2,m_3)}\pi _+(m_3)\pi _{}(m_1m_2)=t^{𝒩(m_2,m_3)}\pi _{}(m_1)\pi _+(m_3)\pi _{}(m_2)$$

$$=t^{𝒩(m_1,m_3)+𝒩(m_2,m_3)}\pi _+(m_3)\pi _{}(m_1m_2)$$

For the second point we have first:

$$N(m_1m_2)=N(m_1)+N(m_2)+𝒩(m_1,m_2)$$

and by induction:

$$N(m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_k)=N(m_1)+N(m_2\mathrm{}m_k)+𝒩(m_1,m_2\mathrm{}m_k)$$

$$=N(m_1)+N(m_2)+\mathrm{}+N(m_k)+\underset{1<i<jk}{}𝒩(m_i,m_j)+𝒩(m_1,m_2)+\mathrm{}+𝒩(m_1,m_k)$$

#### 3.5.2. The bicharacter $`𝒩_t`$

For $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial and $`l`$, denote $`\pi _l(m)=\underset{jI}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}^{u_{j,l}(m)}`$. It is well defined because for $`i,jI`$ and $`l`$ we have $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}`$ (theorem 3.11). Moreover for $`m_1,m_2`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials we have $`\pi _l(m_1m_2)=\pi _l(m_1)\pi _l(m_2)=\underset{iI}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}(m_1)+u_{i,l}(m_2)}`$.

For $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial denote $`\stackrel{~}{m}=\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\pi _l(m)`$, and $`A_t`$ the set of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of the form $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$. From theorem 3.11 there is a unique $`N_t(m)`$ such that $`m=t^{N_t(m)}\stackrel{~}{m}`$, and:

$$𝒴_t=\underset{mA_t}{}[t^\pm ]m$$

For $`m_1,m_2`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials we define $`𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)=N_t(m_1m_2)N_t(m_1)N_t(m_2)`$. We have $`N_t(Y_{i,l})=0`$. Note that for $`\alpha ,\beta `$ we have:

$$N_t(t^\alpha m)=\alpha +N_t(m)\text{ , }𝒩_t(t^\alpha m_1,t^\beta m_2)=𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)$$

In particular the map $`𝒩_t:A\times A`$ is well-defined and independent of the choice of $`A`$.

###### Lemma 3.17.

For $`m_1,m_2`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials, we have:

$$𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)=\underset{l>l^{}}{}(𝒩(\pi _l(m_1),\pi _l^{}(m_2))𝒩(\pi _l^{}(m_2),\pi _l(m_1)))$$

In particular, $`𝒩_t`$ is a bicharacter and for $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_k`$ $`𝒴_t`$-monomials, we have:

$$N_t(m_1m_2\mathrm{}m_k)=N_t(m_1)+N_t(m_2)+\mathrm{}+N_t(m_k)+\underset{1i<jk}{}𝒩_t(m_i,m_j)$$

Proof: For the first point, it follows from the definition that $`\stackrel{~}{(m_1m_2)}=t^{𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)}\stackrel{~}{m_1}\stackrel{~}{m_2}`$. But:

$$\stackrel{~}{(m_1m_2)}=\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\pi _l(m_1)\pi _l(m_2)\text{ , }\stackrel{~}{m_1}\stackrel{~}{m_2}=(\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\pi _l(m_1))(\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\pi _l(m_2))$$

So we have to commute $`\pi _l(m_1)`$ and $`\pi _l^{}(m_2)`$ for $`l>l^{}`$. The last assertion is proved as in lemma 3.16.∎

#### 3.5.3. Presentation related to the basis $`A_t`$ and identification with

We suppose we are in the $`ADE`$-case.

Let be $`m_1=:\underset{iI,l}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{y_{i,l}}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}}:,m_2=:\underset{iI,l}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{y_{i,l}^{}}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}^{}}:𝒴_t`$. We set $`m_1^y=:\underset{iI,l}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{y_{i,l}}:`$ and $`m_2^y=:\underset{iI,l}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{y_{i,l}^{}}:`$.

###### Proposition 3.18.

We have $`𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)=𝒩_t(m_1^y,m_2^y)+2d(m_1,m_2)`$, where:

$$d(m_1,m_2)=\underset{iI,l}{}v_{i,l+1}u_{i,l}^{}+y_{i,l+1}v_{i,l}^{}=\underset{iI,l}{}u_{i,l+1}v_{i,l}^{}+v_{i,l+1}y_{i,l}^{}$$

where $`u_{i,l}=y_{i,l}v_{i,l1}v_{i,l+1}+\underset{j/C_{i,j}=1}{}v_{j,l}`$ and $`u_{i,l}^{}=y_{i,l}^{}v_{i,l1}^{}v_{i,l+1}^{}+\underset{j/C_{i,j}=1}{}v_{j,l}^{}`$.

Proof:

First notice that we have ($`iI,l`$):

$$𝒩_t(Y_{i,l},A_{i,l1}^1)=2\text{ , }𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l})=2\text{ , }𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,A_{i,l1}^1)=2$$

$$𝒩_t(Y_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l1}^1)=2\text{ , }𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l})=2$$

For example $`𝒩_t(Y_{i,l},A_{i,l1}^1)=𝒩(Y_{i,l},A_{i,l1}^1)𝒩(A_{i,l1}^1,Y_{i,l})=2`$ because $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l1}^1=t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l1}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}`$.

We have $`𝒩_t(m_1,m_2)=A+B+C+D`$ where:

$`A=𝒩_t(m_1^y,m_2^y)`$

$`B=\underset{i,jI,l,k}{}y_{i,l}v_{j,k}^{}𝒩_t(Y_{i,l},A_{j,k}^1)=\underset{iI,l}{}y_{i,l}v_{i,l1}^{}𝒩_t(Y_{i,l},A_{i,l1}^1)=2\underset{iI,l}{}y_{i,l}v_{i,l1}^{}`$

$`C=\underset{i,jI,l,k}{}v_{i,l}y_{j,k}^{}𝒩_t(A_{i,l}^1,Y_{j,k})=\underset{iI,l}{}v_{i,l+1}y_{i,l}^{}𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l})=2\underset{iI,l}{}v_{i,l+1}y_{i,l}^{}`$

$`D=\underset{i,jI,l,k}{}v_{i,l}v_{j,k}^{}𝒩_t(A_{i,l}^1,A_{j,k}^1)=\underset{iI,l}{}v_{i,l+1}v_{i,l1}^{}𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,A_{i,l1}^1)+v_{i,l}v_{i,l}^{}𝒩_t(Y_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l1}^1)+\underset{C_{j,i}=1,l}{}v_{i,l+1}v_{j,l}^{}𝒩_t(A_{i,l+1}^1,Y_{i,l})=2\underset{iI,l}{}(v_{i,l+1}v_{i,l1}^{}+v_{i,l}v_{i,l^{}})+2\underset{C_{j,i}=1,l}{}v_{i,l+1}v_{j,l}^{}`$

In particular, we have:

$$B+C+D=2\underset{iI,l}{}(y_{i,l}v_{i,l1}^{}+v_{i,l+1}y_{i,l}^{}v_{i,l+1}v_{i,l1}^{}v_{i,l}v_{i,l}^{})+2\underset{C_{j,i}=1,l}{}v_{i,l+1}v_{j,l}^{}$$

The bicharacter $`d`$ was introduced for the $`ADE`$-case by Nakajima in  motivated by geometry. It particular this proposition 3.18 gives a new motivation for this deformed structure.

#### 3.5.4. Presentation related to the basis $`A`$ and identification with

###### Lemma 3.19.

For $`m_1,m_2A`$, we have:

$$𝒩(m_1,m_2)=\underset{i,jI,l,k}{}u_{i,l}(m_1)u_{j,k}(m_2)((\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))_{r_j+lk}(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))_{r_j+lk})$$

Proof: First we can compute in $`𝒴_u`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}[y_i[m],y_j[m]]q^{m(kl)}):\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}:=t_{\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z)z^{kl}(z^{r_j}z^{r_j})}:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}:$$

and as $`N(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l})=N(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k})=0`$ we have $`𝒩(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l},\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k})=(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))_{r_j+lk}(\stackrel{~}{C}_{j,i}(z))_{r_j+lk}`$.∎

In $`sl_2`$-case we have $`C(z)=z+z^1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{C}(z)=\frac{1}{z+z^1}=\underset{r0}{}(1)^rz^{2r1}`$. So:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_k=t^s:\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_k:$$

where:

$`s=0`$ if $`lk=1+2r`$, $`r`$

$`s=0`$ if $`lk=2r`$, $`r>0`$

$`s=2(1)^{r+1}`$ if $`lk=2r`$, $`r<0`$

$`s=1`$ if $`l=k`$

It is analogous to the multiplication introduced for the $`ADE`$-case by Varagnolo-Vasserot in : we suppose we are in the $`ADE`$-case, denote $`P=\underset{iI}{}\omega _i`$ (resp. $`Q=\underset{iI}{}\alpha _i`$) the weight-lattice (resp. root-lattice) and:

$`\overline{}:P[z^\pm ]P[z^\pm ]`$ is defined by $`\overline{\lambda P(z)}=\lambda P(z^1)`$.

$`(,):Q((z^1))\times P((z^1))((z^1))`$ is the $`((z^1))`$-bilinear form defined by $`(\alpha _i,\omega _j)=\delta _{i,j}`$.

$`\mathrm{\Omega }^1:P[z^\pm ]Q((z^1))`$ is defined by $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1(\omega _i)=\underset{kI}{}\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,k}(z)\alpha _k`$.

The map $`ϵ:P[z^\pm ]\times P[z^\pm ]`$ is defined by:

$$ϵ_{\lambda ,\mu }=\pi _0((z^1\mathrm{\Omega }^1(\overline{\lambda })|\mu ))$$

The multiplication of  is defined by:

$$Y_{i,l}Y_{j,m}=t^{2ϵ_{z^l\omega _i,z^m\omega _j}2ϵ_{z^m\omega _j,z^l\omega _i}}Y_{j,m}Y_{i,l}$$

So we can compute:

$$ϵ_{z^l\omega _i,z^m\omega _j}=\pi _0((z^1\mathrm{\Omega }^1(z^l\omega _i)|z^m\omega _j))=\pi _0(\underset{kI}{}(z^{1l}\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,k}(z)\alpha _k|z^m\omega _j))$$

$$=\pi _0(z^{ml1}\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,j}(z))=(\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,j}(z))_{l+1m}$$

If we set $`ϵ_{\lambda ,\mu }^{}=\pi _0((z\mathrm{\Omega }^1(\overline{\lambda })|\mu ))`$ then we have $`ϵ_{z^l\omega _i,z^m\omega _j}^{}=(\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,j}(z))_{l1m}`$ and:

$$ϵ_{z^l\omega _i,z^m\omega _j}ϵ_{z^l\omega _i,z^m\omega _j}^{}=𝒩(Y_{i,l},Y_{j,m})$$

## 4. Deformed screening operators

Motivated by the screening currents of  we give in this section a “concrete” approach to deformations of screening operators. In particular the $`t`$-analogues of screening operators defined in  will appear as commutators in $`_h`$. Let us begin with some background about classic screening operators.

### 4.1. Reminder: classic screening operators (,)

#### 4.1.1. Classic screening operators and symmetry property of $`q`$-characters

Recall the definition of
$`\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm )=A_{i,l}^\pm 𝒴`$ and of $`u_{i,l}:A`$ in section 3.

###### Definition 4.1.

The $`i^{\text{th}}`$-screening operator is the $``$-linear map defined by:

$$S_i:𝒴𝒴_i=\frac{\underset{l}{}𝒴.S_{i,l}}{\underset{l}{}𝒴.(S_{i,l+2r_i}A_{i,l+r_i}.S_{i,l})}$$

$$mA,S_i(m)=\underset{l}{}u_{i,l}(m)S_{i,l}$$

Note that the $`i^{\text{th}}`$-screening operator can also be defined as the derivation such that:

$$S_i(1)=0\text{ , }jI,l,S_i(Y_{j,l})=\delta _{i,j}Y_{i,l}.S_{i,l}$$

###### Theorem 4.2.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin, Mukhin ,) The image of $`\chi _q:[X_{i,l}]_{iI,l}𝒴`$ is:

$$\text{Im}(\chi _q)=\underset{iI}{}\text{Ker}(S_i)$$

It is analogous to the classical symmetry property of $`\chi `$: $`\text{Im}(\chi )=[y_i^\pm ]_{iI}^W`$.

#### 4.1.2. Structure of the kernel of $`S_i`$

Let $`𝔎_i=\text{Ker}(S_i)`$. It is a $``$-subalgebra of $`𝒴`$.

###### Theorem 4.3.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin, Mukhin ,) The $``$-subalgebra $`𝔎_i`$ of $`𝒴`$ is generated by the $`Y_{i,l}(1+A_{i,l+r_i}^1),Y_{j,l}^\pm `$ ($`ji,l`$).

For $`mB_i`$, we denote:

$$E_i(m)=m\underset{l}{}(1+A_{i,l+r_i}^{}{}_{}{}^{1})^{u_{i,l}(m)}𝔎_i$$

In particular:

###### Corollary 4.4.

The $``$-module $`𝔎_i`$ is freely generated by the $`E_i(m)`$ ($`mB_i`$):

$$𝔎_i=\underset{mB_i}{}E_i(m)^{(B_i)}$$

#### 4.1.3. Examples in the $`sl_2`$-case

We suppose in this section that we are in the $`sl_2`$-case. For $`mB`$, let $`L(m)=\chi _q(V_m)`$ be the $`q`$-character of the $`𝒰_q(\widehat{sl_2})`$-irreducible representation of highest weight $`m`$. In particular $`L(m)𝔎`$ and $`𝔎=\underset{mB}{}L(m)`$.

In  an explicit formula for $`L(m)`$ is given: a $`\sigma `$ is called a $`2`$-segment if $`\sigma `$ is of the form $`\sigma =\{l,l+2,\mathrm{},l+2k\}`$. Two $`2`$-segment are said to be in special position if their union is a $`2`$-segment that properly contains each of them. All finite subset of $``$ with multiplicity $`(l,u_l)_l`$ ($`u_l0`$) can be broken in a unique way into a union of $`2`$-segments which are not in pairwise special position.

For $`mB`$ we decompose $`m=\underset{𝑗}{}\underset{l\sigma _j}{}Y_lB`$ where the $`(\sigma _j)_j`$ is the decomposition of the $`(l,u_l(m))_l`$. We have:

$$L(m)=\underset{𝑗}{}L(\underset{l\sigma _j}{}Y_l)$$

So it suffices to give the formula for a $`2`$-segments:

$$L(Y_lY_{l+2}Y_{l+4}\mathrm{}Y_{l+2k})=Y_lY_{l+2}Y_{l+4}\mathrm{}Y_{l+2k}+Y_lY_{l+2}\mathrm{}Y_{l+2(k1)}Y_{l+2(k+1)}^1$$

$$+Y_lY_{l+2}\mathrm{}Y_{l+2(k2)}Y_{l+2k}^1Y_{l+2(k+1)}^1+\mathrm{}+Y_{l+2}^1Y_{l+2}^1\mathrm{}Y_{l+2(k+1)}^1$$

We say that $`m`$ is irregular if there are $`j_1j_2`$ such that

$$\sigma _{j_1}\sigma _{j_2}\text{ and }\sigma _{j_1}+2\sigma _{j_2}$$

###### Lemma 4.5.

(Frenkel, Reshetikhin ) There is a dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial other than $`m`$ in $`L(m)`$ if and only if $`m`$ is irregular.

#### 4.1.4. Complements: another basis of $`𝔎_i`$

Let us go back to the general case. Let $`𝒴_{sl_2}=[Y_l^\pm ]_l`$ the ring $`𝒴`$ for the $`sl_2`$-case. Let $`i`$ be in $`I`$ and for $`0kr_i1`$, let $`\omega _k:A𝒴_{sl_2}`$ be the map defined by:

$$\omega _k(m)=\underset{l}{}Y_l^{u_{i,k+lr_i}(m)}$$

and $`\nu _k:[(Y_{l1}Y_{l+1})^1]_l𝒴`$ be the ring homomorphism such that $`\nu _k((Y_{l1}Y_{l+1})^1)=A_{i,k+lr_i}^1`$.

For $`mB_i`$, $`\omega _k(m)`$ is dominant in $`𝒴_{sl_2}`$ and so we can define $`L(\omega _k(m))`$ (see section 4.1.3). We have $`L(\omega _k(m))\omega _k(m)^1[(Y_{l1}Y_{l+1})^1]_l`$. We introduce:

$$L_i(m)=m\underset{0kr_i1}{}\nu _k(L(\omega _k(m))\omega _k(m)^1)𝔎_i$$

In analogy with the corollary 4.4 the $``$-module $`𝔎_i`$ is freely generated by the $`L_i(m)`$ ($`mB_i`$):

$$𝔎_i=\underset{mB_i}{}L_i(m)^{(B_i)}$$

### 4.2. Screening currents

Following , for $`iI,l`$, introduce $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}_h`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q_i^mq_i^m}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q_i^mq_i^m}q^{lm})$$

###### Lemma 4.6.

We have the following relations in $`_h`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,lr_i}=t_{z^{2r_i}1}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}=t_{C_{i,j}(z)(z^{(kl)}+z^{(lk)})}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=t_{\delta _{i,j}(z^{(kl)}+z^{(lk)})}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}$$

Proof:

As for lemma 3.5 we compute in $`_h`$:

$`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,lr_i}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(lr_i)})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(r_il)})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\frac{q^{2mr_i}+q^{2mr_i}}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{mr_i}c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm}+h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(lr_i)})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(r_il)}+h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})=t_{z^{2r_i}1}\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m](1+\frac{q^{mr_i}}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}})q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m](1+\frac{q^{mr_i}}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}})q^{lm})=t_{z^{2r_i}1}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}`$

$`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km}))\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\frac{(q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i})C_{i,j}(q^m)}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(kl)}c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}C_{i,j}(q^m)(q^{m(kl)}+q^{(lk)m})c_m)\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$

Finally:

$`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})(\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km}))\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\delta _{i,j}\frac{(q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i})}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{m(kl)}c_m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q^{mr_i}q^{mr_i}}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_j[m]q^{km})=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}\delta _{i,j}h^{2m}(q^{m(kl)}+q^{(lk)m})c_m)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$

### 4.3. Deformed bimodules

In this section we define and study a $`t`$-analogue $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ of the module $`𝒴_i`$.

For $`iI`$, let $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ be the $`𝒴_u`$ sub left-module of $`_h`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$ ($`l`$). It follows from lemma 4.6 that $`(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})_{r_il<r_i}`$ generate $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ and that it is also a subbimodule of $`_h`$. Denote by $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}_t`$ the image of $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}_h`$ in $`_t`$.

###### Definition 4.7.

$`𝒴_{i,t}`$ is the sub left-module of $`_t`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$ ($`l`$).

In particular it is to say the image of $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ in $`_t`$. It follows from lemma 4.6 that for $`l`$, we have in $`𝒴_{i,t}`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,lr_i}=t^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}$$

It particular $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ is generated by the $`(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})_{r_il<r_i}`$.

It follows from lemma 4.6 that for $`l`$, we have:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}.\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}=t^{2\delta _{i,j}\delta _{l,k}}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k}.\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\text{ , }\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}.t=t.\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}$$

In particular $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ a subbimodule of $`_t`$. Moreover:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}.\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,k}=t^{2\delta _{lk,r_i}+2\delta _{lk,r_i}}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,k}.\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}$$

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}.\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}=t^{2\underset{r=C_{i,j}+1,C_{i,j}+3,\mathrm{},C_{i,j}1}{{\scriptscriptstyle }}\delta _{lk,r}}\stackrel{~}{A}_{j,k}.\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\text{ (if }ij\text{)}$$

###### Proposition 4.8.

The $`𝒴_t`$ left module $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ is freely generated by $`(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})_{r_il<r_i}`$:

$$𝒴_{i,t}=\underset{r_il<r_i}{}𝒴_t\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}𝒴_t^{2r_i}$$

Proof: We saw that $`(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})_{r_il<r_i}`$ generate $`𝒴_{i,t}`$. We prove they are $`𝒴_t`$-linearly independent:
for $`(R_1,\mathrm{},R_n)𝔘^n`$, introduce:

$$Y_{R_1,\mathrm{},R_n}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0,jI}{}h^my_j[m]R_j(q^m))_t^+$$

It follows from lemma 3.7 that the $`(Y_R)_{R𝔘^n}`$ are $``$-linearly independent. Note that we have $`\pi _+(𝒴_{i,t})\underset{R𝔘^n}{}Y_R`$ and that $`𝒴=\underset{R[z^\pm ]^n}{}Y_R`$. Suppose we have a linear combination ($`\lambda _r𝒴_t`$):

$$\lambda _{r_i}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,r_i}+\mathrm{}+\lambda _{r_i1}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,r_i1}=0$$

Introduce $`\mu _{k,R}`$ such that:

$$\pi _+(\lambda _k)=\underset{R[z^\pm ]^n}{}\mu _{k,R}Y_R$$

and $`R_{i,k}=(R_{i,k}^1(z),\mathrm{},R_{i,k}^n(z))𝔘^n`$ such that $`\pi _+(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,k})=Y_{R_{i,k}}`$. If we apply $`\pi _+`$ to the linear combination, we get:

$$\underset{R[z^\pm ]^n,r_ikr_i1}{}\mu _{k,R}Y_RY_{R_{i,k}}=0$$

and we have for all $`R^{}𝔘`$:

$$\underset{r_ikr_i1/R^{}R_{i,k}[z^\pm ]^n}{}\mu _{k,R^{}R_{i,k}}=0$$

Suppose we have $`r_ik_1k_2r_i1`$ such that $`R^{}R_{i,k_1},R^{}R_{i,k_2}[z^\pm ]^n`$. So $`R_{i,k_1}R_{i,k_2}[z^\pm ]^n`$. But $`a_i[m]=\underset{jI}{}C_{j,i}(q^m)y_j[m]`$, so for $`jI`$:

$$C_{j,i}(z)\frac{z^{k_1}z^{k_2}}{z^{r_i}z^{r_i}}=(R_{i,k_1}^j(z)R_{i,k_2}^j(z))[z^\pm ]$$

In particular for $`j=i`$ we have $`C_{i,i}(z)\frac{z^{k_1}z^{k_2}}{z^{r_i}z^{r_i}}=\frac{(z^{r_i}+z^{r_i})(z^{k_1}z^{k_2})}{z^{r_i}z^{r_i}}[z^\pm ]`$. This is impossible because $`|k_1k_2|<2r_i`$. So we have only one term in the sum and all $`\mu _{k,R}=0`$. So $`\pi _+(\lambda _k)=0`$, and $`\lambda _k(t1)𝒴_t`$. We have by induction for all $`m>0`$, $`\lambda _k(t1)^m𝒴_t`$. It is possible if and only if $`\lambda _k=0`$.∎

Denote by $`𝒴_i`$ the $`𝒴`$-bimodule $`\pi _+(𝒴_{i,t})`$. It is consistent with the notations of section 4.1.

### 4.4. $`t`$-analogues of screening operators

We introduced $`t`$-analogues of screening operators in . The picture of the last section enables us to define them from a new point of view.

For $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, we have:

$$[\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l},m]=\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}mm\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=(t^{2u_{i,l}(m)}1)m\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=t^{u_{i,l}(m)}(tt^1)[u_{i,l}(m)]_tm\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}$$

So for $`\lambda 𝒴_t`$ we have $`[\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l},\lambda ](t^21)𝒴_{i,t}`$, and $`[\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l},\lambda ]0`$ only for a finite number of $`l`$. So we can define:

###### Definition 4.9.

The $`i^{th}`$ $`t`$-screening operator is the map $`S_{i,t}:𝒴_t𝒴_{i,t}`$ such that ($`\lambda 𝒴_t`$):

$$S_{i,t}(\lambda )=\frac{1}{t^21}\underset{l}{}[\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l},\lambda ]𝒴_{i,t}$$

In particular, $`S_{i,t}`$ is $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear and a derivation. It is our map of .

For $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, we have $`\pi _+(S_{i,t}(m))=\pi _+(t^{u_{i,l}(m)1}[u_{i,l}(m)]_t)\pi _+(m\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})=u_{i,l}(m)\pi _+(m\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l})`$ and the following commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill 𝒴_t& \stackrel{S_{i,t}}{}& 𝒴_{i,t}& & \\ \hfill \pi _+& & & \pi _+& \\ \hfill 𝒴& \stackrel{S_i}{}& 𝒴_i& & \end{array}$$

### 4.5. Kernel of deformed screening operators

#### 4.5.1. Structure of the kernel

We proved in  a $`t`$-analogue of theorem 4.3:

###### Theorem 4.10.

() The kernel of the $`i^{th}`$ $`t`$-screening operator $`S_{i,t}`$ is the $`[t^\pm ]`$-subalgebra of $`𝒴_t`$ generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1),\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}^\pm `$ ($`ji,l`$).

Proof: For the first inclusion we compute:

$$S_{i,t}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1))=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}+t\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1(t^2)\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+2r_i}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}t^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+2r_i})=0$$

For the other inclusion we refer to . ∎

Let $`𝔎_{i,t}=\text{Ker}(S_{i,t})`$. It is a $`[t^\pm ]`$-subalgebra of $`𝒴_t`$. In particular we have $`\pi _+(𝔎_{i,t})=𝔎_i`$ (consequence of theorem 4.3 and 4.10).

For $`mB_i`$ introduce: (recall that $`\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}U_l`$ means $`\mathrm{}U_1U_0U_1U_2\mathrm{}`$):

$$E_{i,t}(m)=\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}((\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1))^{u_{i,l}(m)}\underset{ji}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}^{u_{j,l}(m)})$$

It is well defined because it follows from theorem 3.11 that for $`ji,l`$, $`(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1))`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}`$ commute. For $`mB_i`$, the formula shows that the $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ are the $`𝒴`$-monomials of $`E_i(m)`$ (with identification by $`\pi _+`$). Such elements were used in  for the $`ADE`$ case.

The theorem 4.10 allows us to describe $`𝔎_{i,t}`$:

###### Corollary 4.11.

For all $`mB_i`$, we have $`E_{i,t}(m)𝔎_{i,t}`$. Moreover:

$$𝔎_{i,t}=\underset{mB_i}{}[t^\pm ]E_{i,t}(m)[t^\pm ]^{(B_i)}$$

Proof: First $`E_{i,t}(m)𝔎_{i,t}`$ as product of elements of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$. We show easily that the $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ are $`[t^\pm ]`$-linearly independent by looking at a maximal $`𝒴_t`$-monomial in a linear combination.

Let us prove that the $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ are $`[t^\pm ]`$-generators of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$: for a product $`\chi `$ of the algebra-generators of theorem 4.10, let us look at the highest weight $`𝒴_t`$-monomial $`m`$. Then $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ is this product up to the order in the multiplication. But for $`p=1`$ or $`p3`$, $`Y_{i,l}Y_{i,l+pr_i}`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial of $`E_i(Y_{i,l})E_i(Y_{i,l+pr_i})`$, so:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l+pr_i}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+pr_i+r_i}^1)t^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l+pr_i}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+pr_i+r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)$$

And for $`p=2`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l+2r_i}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+3r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l+2r_i}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+3r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)$$

$$[t^\pm ]+t^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l+2r_i}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+3r_i}^1)$$

#### 4.5.2. Elements of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$ with a unique $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial

###### Proposition 4.12.

For $`mB_i`$, there is a unique $`F_{i,t}(m)𝔎_{i,t}`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_{i,t}(m)`$. Moreover :

$$𝔎_{i,t}=\underset{mB_i}{}F_{i,t}(m)$$

Proof: It follows from corollary 4.11 that an element of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$ has at least one $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial. In particular we have the uniqueness of $`F_{i,t}(m)`$.

For the existence, let us look at the $`sl_2`$-case. Let $`m`$ be in $`B`$. It follows from the lemma 3.14 that $`\{MA_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}A_{i_R,l_R}^1/R0,l_1,\mathrm{},l_Rl(M)\}B`$ is finite (where $`l(M)=\text{min}\{l/iI,u_{i,l}(M)0\}`$). We define on this set a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering: $`m_L=m>m_{L1}>\mathrm{}>m_1`$. Let us prove by induction on $`l`$ the existence of $`F_t(m_l)`$. The unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`E_t(m_1)`$ is $`m_1`$ so $`F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)`$. In general let $`\lambda _1(t),\mathrm{},\lambda _{l1}(t)[t^\pm ]`$ be the coefficient of the dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_{l1}`$ in $`E_t(m_l)`$. We put:

$$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)\underset{r=1\mathrm{}l1}{}\lambda _r(t)F_t(m_r)$$

Notice that this construction gives $`F_t(m)m[\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1,t^\pm ]_l`$.

For the general case, let $`i`$ be in $`I`$ and $`m`$ be in $`B_i`$. Consider $`\omega _k(m)`$ as in section 4.1.4. The study of the $`sl_2`$-case allows us to set $`\chi _k=\omega _k(m)^1F_t(\omega _k(m))[\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1,t^\pm ]_l`$. And using the $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra homomorphism $`\nu _{k,t}:[\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1,t^\pm ]_l[\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1,t^\pm ]_{iI,l}`$ defined by $`\nu _{k,t}(\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1)=\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,k+lr_i}^1`$, we set (the terms of the product commute):

$$F_{i,t}(m)=m\underset{0kr_i1}{}\nu _{k,t}(\chi _k)𝔎_{i,t}$$

For the last assertion, we have $`E_{i,t}(m)=\underset{l=1\mathrm{}L}{}\lambda _l(t)F_{i,t}(m_l)`$ where $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_L`$ are the $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ with coefficients $`\lambda _1(t),\mathrm{},\lambda _L(t)[t^\pm ]`$.∎

In the same way there is a unique $`F_i(m)𝔎_i`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial of $`F_i(m)`$. Moreover $`F_i(m)=\pi _+(F_{i,t}(m))`$.

#### 4.5.3. Examples in the $`sl_2`$-case

In this section we suppose that $`𝔤=sl_2`$ and we compute $`F_t(m)=F_{1,t}(m)`$ in some examples with the help of section 4.1.3.

###### Lemma 4.13.

Let $`\sigma =\{l,l+2,\mathrm{},l+2k\}`$ be a $`2`$-segment and $`m_\sigma =\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l+2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l+2k}B`$. Then we have the formula:

$$F_t(m_\sigma )=m_\sigma (1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2k+1}^1+t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+(2k+1)}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+(2k1)}^1+\mathrm{}+t^k\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+(2k+1)}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+(2k1)}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1)$$

If $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2`$ are $`2`$-segments not in special position, we have:

$$F_t(m_{\sigma _1})F_t(m_{\sigma _2})=t^{𝒩(m_{\sigma _1},m_{\sigma _2})𝒩(m_{\sigma _2},m_{\sigma _1})}F_t(m_{\sigma _2})F_t(m_{\sigma _1})$$

If $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _R`$ are $`2`$-segments such that $`m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _r}`$ is regular, we have:

$$F_t(m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _R})=F_t(m_{\sigma _1})\mathrm{}F_t(m_{\sigma _R})$$

In particular if $`mB`$ verifies $`l,u_l(m)1`$ then it is of the form $`m=m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _R}`$ where the $`\sigma _r`$ are $`2`$-segments such that $`\text{max}(\sigma _r)+2<\text{min}(\sigma _{r+1})`$. So the lemma 4.13 gives an explicit formula $`F_t(m)=F_t(m_{\sigma _1})\mathrm{}F_t(m_{\sigma _R})`$.

Proof: First we need some relations in $`𝒴_{1,t}`$ : we know that for $`l`$ we have $`t\stackrel{~}{S}_{l1}=\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}=t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1`$, so $`t^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l1}=\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1`$. So we get by induction that for $`r0`$:

$$t^r\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+12r}=\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2(r1)}^1$$

As $`u_{i,l+1}(\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2(r1)}^1)=u_{i,l+1}(\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1)=1`$, we get:

$$t^r\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+12r}=t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2(r1)}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}$$

For $`r^{}0`$, by multiplying on the left by $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2r^{}}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2(r^{}1)}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2}^1`$, we get:

$$t^r\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2r^{}}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2(r^{}1)}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+12r}=t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2r^{}}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+2(r^{}1)}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l2(r1)}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+1}$$

If we put $`r^{}=1+R^{},r=RR^{},l=L12R^{}`$, we get for $`0R^{}R`$:

$$t^R^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{L+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{L1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{L+12R^{}}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{L2R}=t^{R2}\stackrel{~}{A}_{L+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{L1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{L+12R}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{L2R^{}}$$

Now let be $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_0\stackrel{~}{Y}_2\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l`$ and $`\chi 𝒴_t`$ given by the formula in the lemma. Let us compute $`\stackrel{~}{S}_t(\chi )`$:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_t(\chi )=m(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_l)$$

$$+tm\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_{l2}t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+2})$$

$$+t^2m\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l1}^1(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_{l4}t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_lt^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+2})$$

$$+\mathrm{}$$

$$+t^lm\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1(t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_lt^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{l+2})$$

$$=m(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_l)$$

$$+tm\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_{l2})m\stackrel{~}{S}_l$$

$$+t^2m\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l1}^1(\stackrel{~}{S}_0+\stackrel{~}{S}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{S}_{l4})tm\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{l2}m\stackrel{~}{S}_{l2}$$

$$+\mathrm{}$$

$$mt^{l1}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_3^1\mathrm{}t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_lm\stackrel{~}{S}_0$$

$$=0$$

So $`\chi 𝔎_t`$. But we see on the formula that $`m`$ is the unique dominant monomial of $`\chi `$. So $`\chi =F_t(m)`$.

For the second point, we have two cases:

if $`m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2}`$ is regular, it follows from lemma 4.5 that $`L(m_{\sigma _1})L(m_{\sigma _2})=L(m_{\sigma _2})L(m_{\sigma _1})`$ has no dominant monomial other than $`m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2}`$. But our formula shows that $`F_t(m_{\sigma _1})`$ (resp. $`F_t(m_{\sigma _2}`$)) has the same monomials than $`L(m_{\sigma _1})`$ (resp. $`L(m_{\sigma _2})`$). So

$$F_t(m_{\sigma _1})F_t(m_{\sigma _2})t^{𝒩(m_{\sigma _1},m_{\sigma _2})𝒩(m_{\sigma _2},m_{\sigma _1})}F_t(m_{\sigma _2})F_t(m_{\sigma _1})$$

has no dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial because $`m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2}t^{𝒩(m_{\sigma _1},m_{\sigma _2})𝒩(m_{\sigma _2},m_{\sigma _1})}m_{\sigma _2}m_{\sigma _1}=0`$.

if $`m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2}`$ is irregular, we have for example $`\sigma _{j_1}\sigma _{j_2}`$ and $`\sigma _{j_1}+2\sigma _{j_2}`$. Let us write $`\sigma _{j_1}=\{l_1,l_1+2,\mathrm{},,p_1\}`$ and $`\sigma _2=\{l_2,l_2+2,\mathrm{},,p_2\}`$. So we have $`l_2l_1`$ and $`p_1p_22`$. Let $`m=m_1m_2`$ be a dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial of $`L(m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2})=L(m_{\sigma _1})L(m_{\sigma _2})`$ where $`m_1`$ (resp. $`m_2`$) is a $`𝒴`$-monomial of $`L(m_{\sigma _1})`$ (resp. $`L(m_{\sigma _2})`$). If $`m_2`$ is not $`m_{\sigma _2}`$, we have $`Y_{p_2}^1`$ in $`m_2`$ which can not be canceled by $`m_1`$. So $`m=m_1m_{\sigma _2}`$. Let us write $`m_1=m_{\sigma _1}A_{p_1+1}^1\mathrm{}A_{p_1+12r}^1`$. So we just have to prove:

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_{p_1+1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{p_1+12r}^1m_{\sigma _2}=m_{\sigma _2}\stackrel{~}{A}_{p_1+1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{p_1+12r}^1$$

This follows from ($`l`$):

$$\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l1}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l+1}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l1}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l+1}\stackrel{~}{A}_l^1$$

For the last assertion it suffices to show that $`F_t(m_{\sigma _1})\mathrm{}F_t(m_{\sigma _R})`$ has no other dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial than $`m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _R}`$. But $`F_t(m_{\sigma _1})\mathrm{}F_t(m_{\sigma _R})`$ has the same monomials than $`L(m_{\sigma _1})\mathrm{}L(m_{\sigma _R})=L(m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _R})`$. As $`m_{\sigma _1}\mathrm{}m_{\sigma _R}`$ is regular we get the result.∎

#### 4.5.4. Technical complements

Let us go back to the general case. We give some technical results which will be used in the following to compute $`F_{i,t}(m)`$ in some cases (see proposition 5.17 and section 8).

###### Lemma 4.14.

Let $`i`$ be in $`I`$, $`l`$, $`MA`$ such that $`u_{i,l}(M)=1`$ and $`u_{i,l+2r_i}=0`$. Then we have $`𝒩(M,\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)=1`$. In particular $`\pi ^1(MA_{i,l+r_i}^1)=tM\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1`$.

Proof: We can suppose $`M=:M:`$ and we compute in $`𝒴_u`$:

$$M\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1=\pi _+(m)\text{exp}(\underset{m>0,r,jI}{}u_{j,r}(M)h^mq^{rm}y_j[m])$$

$$\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^mq^{(l+r_i)m}a_i[m])\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^mq^{(l+r_i)m}a_i[m])$$

$$=:M\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1:\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}([a_i[m],a_i[m]]\underset{r}{}u_{i,r}(m)[y_i[m],a_i[m]]q^{(l+r_ir)m}c_m)=t_R:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1:$$

where:

$$R(z)=(z^{2r_i}z^{2r_i})+\underset{r}{}u_{i,r}(M)z^{(l+r_ir)}(z^{r_i}z^{r_i})$$

So:

$$𝒩(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l},M\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l+r_i}^1)=\underset{r}{}u_{i,r}(M)(z^{2r_i+lr}z^{lr})_0=u_{i,l}(M)+u_{i,l+2r_i}(M)=1$$

###### Lemma 4.15.

Let $`m`$ be in $`B_i`$ such that $`l,u_{i,l}(m)1`$ and for $`1r2r_i`$ the set
$`\{l/u_{i,r+2lr_i}(m)=1\}`$ is a $`1`$-segment. Then we have $`F_{i,t}(m)=\pi ^1(F_i(m))`$.

Proof: Let us look at the $`sl_2`$-case : $`m=m_1m_2=m_{\sigma _1}m_{\sigma _2}`$ where $`\sigma _1,\sigma _2`$ are $`2`$-segment. So the lemma 4.13 gives an explicit formula for $`F_t(m)`$ and it follows from lemma 4.14 that $`F_t(m)=\pi ^1(F(m))`$.

We go back to the general case : let us write $`m=m^{}m_1\mathrm{}m_{2r_i}`$ where $`m^{}=\underset{ji,l}{}Y_{j,l}^{u_{j,l}(m)}`$ and $`m_r=\underset{l}{}Y_{i,r+2lr_i}^{u_{i,r+2lr_i}(m)}`$. We have $`m_r`$ of the form $`m_r=Y_{i,l_r}Y_{i,l_r+2r_i}\mathrm{}Y_{i,l_r+2n_ir_i}`$. We have $`F_{i,t}(m)=t^{N(m^{}m_1\mathrm{}m_r)}m^{}F_{i,t}(m_1)\mathrm{}F_{i,t}(m_{2r_i})`$. The study of the $`sl_2`$-case gives $`F_{i,t}(m_r)=\pi ^1(F_i(m_r))`$. It follows from lemma 4.14 that:

$$t^{N(m^{}m_1\mathrm{}m_r)}m^{}\pi ^1(F_i(m_1))\mathrm{}\pi ^1(F_i(m_r))=\pi ^1(m^{}F_i(m_1)\mathrm{}F_i(m_r))=\pi ^1(F_i(m))$$

## 5. Intersection of kernels of deformed screening operators

Motivated by theorem 4.2 we study the structure of a completion of $`𝔎_t=\underset{iI}{}\text{Ker}(S_{i,t})`$ in order to construct $`\chi _{q,t}`$ in section 6. Note that in the $`sl_2`$-case we have $`𝔎_t=\text{Ker}(S_{1,t})`$ that was studied in section 4.

### 5.1. Reminder: classic case (, )

#### 5.1.1. The elements $`E(m)`$ and $`q`$-characters

For $`JI`$, denote the $``$-subalgebra $`𝔎_J=\underset{iJ}{}𝔎_i𝒴`$ and $`𝔎=𝔎_I`$.

###### Lemma 5.1.

(, ) A non zero element of $`𝔎_J`$ has at least one $`J`$-dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial.

Proof: It suffices to look at a maximal weight $`𝒴`$-monomial $`m`$ of $`\chi 𝔎_J`$: for $`iJ`$ we have $`mB_i`$ because $`\chi 𝔎_i`$.∎

###### Theorem 5.2.

(, ) For $`iI`$ there is a unique $`E(Y_{i,0})𝔎`$ such that $`Y_{i,0}`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial in $`E(Y_{i,0})`$.

The uniqueness follows from lemma 5.1. For the existence we have $`E(Y_{i,0})=\chi _q(V_{\omega _i}(1))`$ (theorem 4.2).

Note that the existence of $`E(Y_{i,0})𝔎`$ suffices to characterize $`\chi _q:\text{Rep}𝔎`$. It is the ring homomorphism such that $`\chi _q(X_{i,l})=s_l(E(Y_{i,0}))`$ where $`s_l:𝒴𝒴`$ is given by $`s_l(Y_{j,k})=Y_{j,k+l}`$.

For $`mB`$, we defined the standard module $`M_m`$ in section 2. We set:

$$E(m)=\underset{mB}{}s_l(E(Y_{i,0}))^{u_{i,l}(m)}=\chi _q(M_m)𝔎$$

We defined the simple module $`V_m`$ in section 2. We set $`L(m)=\chi _q(V_m)𝔎`$. We have:

$$𝔎=\underset{mB}{}E(m)=\underset{mB}{}L(m)^{(B)}$$

For $`mB`$, we can also define a unique $`F(m)𝔎`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial which appears in $`F(m)`$ (see for example the proof of proposition 4.12).

#### 5.1.2. Technical complements

For $`JI`$, let $`𝔤_J`$ be the semi-simple Lie algebra of Cartan Matrix $`(C_{i,j})_{i,jJ}`$ and $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J`$ the associated quantum affine algebra with coefficient $`(r_i)_{iJ}`$. In analogy with the definition of $`E_i(m),L_i(m)`$ using the $`sl_2`$-case (section 4.1.4), we define for $`mB_J`$: $`E_J(m)`$, $`L_J(m)`$, $`F_J(m)𝔎_J`$ using $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J`$. We have:

$$𝔎_J=\underset{mB_J}{}E_J(m)=\underset{mB_J}{}L_J(m)=\underset{mB_J}{}F_J(m)^{(B_J)}$$

As a direct consequence of proposition 2.6 we have :

###### Lemma 5.3.

For $`mB`$, we have $`E(m)[Y_{i,l}]_{iI,ll(m)}`$ where $`l(m)=\text{min}\{l/iI,u_{i,l}(m)0\}`$.

### 5.2. Completion of the deformed algebras

In this section we introduce completions of $`𝒴_t`$ and of $`𝔎_{J,t}=\underset{iJ}{}𝔎_{i,t}𝒴_t`$ ($`JI`$). We have the following motivation: we have seen $`\pi _+(𝔎_{J,t})𝔎_J`$ (section 4). In order to prove an analogue of the other inclusion (theorem 5.13) we have to introduce completions where infinite sums are allowed.

#### 5.2.1. The completion $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`𝒴_t`$

Let $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ be the $`[t^\pm ]`$-module $`\stackrel{}{A}_t=\underset{mA}{}[t^\pm ].m[t^\pm ]^A`$. An element $`(\lambda _m(t)m)_{mA}\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ is noted $`\underset{mA}{}\lambda _m(t)m`$. We have $`\underset{mA}{}[t^\pm ].m=𝒴_t\stackrel{}{A}_t`$. The algebra structure of $`𝒴_t`$ gives a $`[t^\pm ]`$-bilinear morphisms $`𝒴_t\stackrel{}{A}_t\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ and $`\stackrel{}{A}_t𝒴_t\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ such that $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ is a $`𝒴_t`$-bimodule. But the $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra structure of $`𝒴_t`$ can not be naturally extended to $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$. We define a $`[t^\pm ]`$-submodule $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`𝒴_t𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{A}_t`$, for which it is the case:

Let $`𝒴_t^A`$ be the $`[t^\pm ]`$-subalgebra of $`𝒴_t`$ generated by the $`(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1)_{iI,l}`$. We gave in proposition 3.12 the structure of $`𝒴_t^A`$. In particular we have $`𝒴_t^A=\underset{K0}{}𝒴_t^{A,K}`$ where for $`K0`$:

$$𝒴_t^{A,K}=\underset{m=:\stackrel{~}{A}_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i_K,l_K}^1:}{}[t^\pm ].m𝒴_t^A$$

Note that for $`K_1,K_20`$, $`𝒴_t^{A,K_1}𝒴_t^{A,K_2}𝒴_t^{A,K_1+K_2}`$ for the multiplication of $`𝒴_t`$. So $`𝒴_t^A`$ is a graded algebra if we set $`\text{deg}(x)=K`$ for $`x𝒴_t^{A,K}`$. Denote by $`𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$ the completion of $`𝒴_t^A`$ for this gradation. It is a sub-$`[t^\pm ]`$-module of $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$.

###### Definition 5.4.

We define $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ as the sub $`𝒴_t`$-leftmodule of $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ generated by $`𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$.

In particular, we have: $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}=\underset{MA}{}M.𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}\stackrel{}{A}_t`$.

###### Lemma 5.5.

There is a unique algebra structure on $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ compatible with the structure of $`𝒴_t𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

Proof: The structure is unique because the elements of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ are infinite sums of elements of $`𝒴_t`$. For $`MA`$, we have $`𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}.MM.𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$, so $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a sub $`𝒴_t`$-bimodule of $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$. For $`MA`$ and $`\lambda 𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$ denote $`\lambda ^M𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`\lambda .M=M.\lambda ^M`$. We define the $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra structure on $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ by ($`M,M^{}A,\lambda ,\lambda ^{}𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$):

$$(M.\lambda )(M^{}.\lambda ^{})=MM^{}.(\lambda ^M^{}\lambda ^{})$$

It is well defined because for $`M_1,M_2,MA,\lambda ,\lambda _2𝒴_t^A`$ we have $`M_1\lambda _1=M_2\lambda _2M_1M\lambda _1^M=M_2M\lambda _2^M`$.∎

#### 5.2.2. The completion $`𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$

We define a completion of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$ analog to the completed algebra $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

For $`MA`$, we define a $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear endomorphism $`E_{i,t}^M:M𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}M𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$ such that ($`m`$ $`𝒴_t^A`$-monomial):

$$E_{i,t}^M(Mm)=0\text{ if }:Mm:B_i$$

$$E_{i,t}^M(Mm)=E_{i,t}(Mm)\text{ if }:Mm:B_i$$

It is well-defined because if $`m𝒴_t^{A,K}`$ and $`:Mm:B_i`$ we have $`E_{i,t}(Mm)M\underset{K^{}K}{}𝒴^{A,K^{}}`$.

###### Definition 5.6.

We define $`𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}=\underset{MA}{}\text{Im}(E_{i,t}^M)𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

For $`JI`$, we set $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}=\underset{iJ}{}𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}=𝔎_{I,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$.

###### Lemma 5.7.

A non zero element of $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ has at least one $`J`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial.

Proof: Analog to the proof of lemma 5.1.

###### Lemma 5.8.

For $`JI`$, we have $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}𝒴_t=𝔎_{J,t}`$. Moreover $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a $`[t^\pm ]`$-subalgebra of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

Proof: It suffices to prove the results for $`J=\{i\}`$. First for $`mB_i`$ we have $`E_{i,t}(m)=E_{i,t}^m(m)𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ and so $`𝔎_{i,t}=\underset{mB_i}{}[t^\pm ]E_{i,t}(m)𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}𝒴_t`$. Now let $`\chi `$ be in $`𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`\chi `$ has only a finite number of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials. In particular it has only a finite number of $`i`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_r`$ with coefficients $`\lambda _1(t),\mathrm{},\lambda _r(t)`$. In particular it follows from lemma 5.7 that $`\chi =\lambda _1(t)F_{i,t}(m_1)+\mathrm{}+\lambda _r(t)F_{i,t}(m_r)𝔎_{i,t}`$ (see proposition 4.12 for the definition of $`F_{i,t}(m)`$).

For the last assertion, consider $`M_1`$, $`M_2A`$ and $`m_1`$, $`m_2`$ $`𝒴_t^A`$-monomials such that $`:M_1m_1:,:M_2m_2:B_i`$. Then $`E_{i,t}(M_1m_1)E_{i,t}(M_2m_2)`$ is in the the sub-algebra $`𝔎_{i,t}𝒴_t`$ and in $`\text{Im}(E_{i,t}^{M_1M_2})`$.∎

In the same way for $`t=1`$ we define the $``$-algebra $`𝒴^{\mathrm{}}`$ and the $``$-subalgebras $`𝔎_J^{\mathrm{}}𝒴^{\mathrm{}}`$.

The surjective map $`\pi _+:𝒴_t𝒴`$ is naturally extended to a surjective map $`\pi _+:𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}𝒴^{\mathrm{}}`$. For $`iI`$, we have $`\pi _+(𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}})=𝔎_i^{\mathrm{}}`$ and for $`JI`$, $`\pi _+(𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}})𝔎_J^{\mathrm{}}`$. The other inclusion is equivalent to theorem 5.13.

#### 5.2.3. Special submodules of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$

For $`mA`$, $`K0`$ we construct a subset $`D_{m,K}m\{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i_K,l_K}^1\}`$ stable by the maps $`E_{i,t}^m`$ such that $`\underset{K0}{}D_{m,K}`$ is countable: we say that $`m^{}D_{m,K}`$ if and only if there is a finite sequence $`(m_0=m,m_1,\mathrm{},m_R=m^{})`$ of length $`RK`$, such that for all $`1rR`$, there is $`r^{}<r`$, $`JI`$ such that $`m_r^{}B_J`$ and for $`r^{}<r^{\prime \prime }r`$, $`m_{r^{\prime \prime }}`$ is a $`𝒴`$-monomial of $`E_J(m_r^{})`$ and $`m_{r^{\prime \prime }}m_{r^{\prime \prime }1}^1\{A_{j,l}^1/l,jJ\}`$.

The definition means that “there is chain of monomials of some $`E_J(m^{\prime \prime })`$ from $`m`$ to $`m^{}`$”.

###### Lemma 5.9.

The set $`D_{m,K}`$ is finite. In particular, the set $`D_m`$ is countable.

Proof: Let us prove by induction on $`K0`$ that $`D_{m,K}`$ is finite: we have $`D_{m,0}=\{m\}`$ and:

$$D_{m,K+1}\underset{JI,m^{}D_{m,K}B_J}{}\{𝒴\text{-monomials of }E_J(m^{})\}$$

###### Lemma 5.10.

For $`m,m^{}A`$ such that $`m^{}D_m`$ we have $`D_m^{}D_m`$. For $`MA`$, the set $`BD_M`$ is finite.

Proof: Consider $`(m_0=m,m_1,\mathrm{},m_R=m^{})`$ a sequence adapted to the definition of $`D_m`$. Let $`m^{\prime \prime }`$ be in $`D_m^{}`$ and $`(m_R=m^{},m_{R+1},\mathrm{},m_R^{}=m^{\prime \prime })`$ a sequence adapted to the definition of $`D_m^{}`$. So $`(m_0,m_1,\mathrm{},m_R^{})`$ is adapted to the definition of $`D_m`$, and $`m^{\prime \prime }D_m`$.

Let us look at $`mBD_M`$: we can see by induction on the length of a sequence $`(m_0=M,m_1,\mathrm{},m_R=m)`$ adapted to the definition of $`D_M`$ that $`m`$ is of the form $`m=MM^{}`$ where $`M^{}=\underset{iI,ll_1}{}A_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}}`$ ($`v_{i,l}0`$). So the last assertion follows from lemma 3.14.∎

###### Definition 5.11.

$`\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ is the $`[t^\pm ]`$-submodule of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ whose elements are of the form $`(\lambda _m(t)m)_{mD_m}`$.

For $`mA`$ introduce $`m_0=m>m_1>m_2>\mathrm{}`$ the countable set $`D_m`$ with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering. For $`k0`$ consider an element $`F_k\stackrel{~}{D}_{m_k}`$.

Note that some infinite sums make sense in $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$: for $`k0`$, we have $`D_{m_k}\{m_k,m_{k+1},\mathrm{}\}`$. So $`m_k`$ appears only in the $`F_k^{}`$ with $`k^{}k`$ and the infinite sum $`\underset{k0}{}F_k`$ makes sense in $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$.

### 5.3. Crucial result for our construction

Our construction of $`q,t`$-characters is based on theorem 5.13 proved in this section.

#### 5.3.1. Statement

###### Definition 5.12.

For $`n1`$ denote $`P(n)`$ the property “for all semi-simple Lie-algebras $`𝔤`$ of rank $`\text{rk}(𝔤)=n`$, for all $`mB`$ there is a unique $`F_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(m)`$.”.

###### Theorem 5.13.

For all $`n1`$, the property $`P(n)`$ is true.

Note that for $`n=1`$, that is to say $`𝔤=sl_2`$, the result follows from section 4.

The uniqueness follows from lemma 5.7 : if $`\chi _1,\chi _2𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ are solutions, then $`\chi _1\chi _2`$ has no dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, so $`\chi _1=\chi _2`$.

Remark: in the simply-laced case the existence is a consequence of the geometric theory of quivers , , and in $`A_n,D_n`$-cases of algebraic explicit constructions . In the rest of this section 5 we give an algebraic proof of this theorem in the general case.

#### 5.3.2. Outline of the proof

First we give some preliminary technical results (section 5.4) in which we construct $`t`$-analogues of the $`E(m)`$. Next we prove $`P(n)`$ by induction on $`n`$. Our proof has 3 steps:

Step 1 (section 5.5): we prove $`P(1)`$ and $`P(2)`$ using a more precise property $`Q(n)`$ such that $`Q(n)P(n)`$. The property $`Q(n)`$ has the following advantage: it can be verified by computation in elementary cases $`n=1,2`$.

Step 2 (section 5.6): we give some consequences of $`P(n)`$ which will be used in the proof of $`P(r)`$ ($`r>n`$): we give the structure of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ (proposition 5.19) for $`\text{rk}(𝔤)=n`$ and the structure of $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ where $`JI`$, $`|J|=n`$ and $`|I|>n`$ (corollary 5.20).

Step 3 (section 5.7): we prove $`P(n)`$ ($`n3`$) assuming $`P(r)`$, $`rn`$ are true. We give an algorithm (section 5.7.2) to construct explicitly $`F_t(m)`$. It is called $`t`$-algorithm and is a $`t`$-analogue of Frenkel-Mukhin algorithm  (a deformed algorithm was also used by Nakajima in the $`ADE`$-case ). As we do not know a priori the algorithm is well defined the general case, we have to show that it never fails (lemma 5.24) and gives a convenient element (lemma 5.25).

### 5.4. Preliminary: Construction of the $`E_t(m)`$

###### Lemma 5.14.

We suppose that for $`iI`$, there is $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$. Then:

i) All $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$, except the highest weight $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, are right negative.

ii) All $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ are products of $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,l}^\pm `$ with $`l0`$.

iii) The only $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ which contains a $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0}^\pm `$ ($`jI`$) is the highest weight monomial $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$.

iv) The $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ ($`iI`$) commute.

Note that (i),(ii) and (iii) appeared in .

Proof:

i) It suffices to prove that all $`𝒴_t`$-monomials $`m_0=Y_{i,0},m_1,\mathrm{}`$ of $`D_{Y_{i,0}}`$ except $`Y_{i,0}`$ are right negative. But $`m_1`$ is the monomial $`Y_{i,0}A_{i,1}^1`$ of $`E_i(Y_{i,0})`$ and it is right negative. We can now prove the statement by induction: suppose that $`m_r`$ is a monomial of $`E_J(m_r^{})`$, where $`m_r^{}`$ is right negative. So $`m_r`$ is a product of $`m_r^{}`$ by some $`A_{j,l}^1`$ ($`l`$).Those monomials are right negative because a product of right negative monomial is right negative.

ii) Suppose that $`mA`$ is product of $`Y_{k,l}^\pm `$ with $`l0`$. It follows from lemma 5.3 that all monomials of $`D_m`$ are product of $`Y_{k,l}^\pm `$ with $`l0`$.

iii) All $`𝒴`$-monomials of $`D_{Y_{i,0}}`$ except $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$ are in $`D_{Y_{i,0}A_{i,r_i}^1}`$. But $`l(Y_{i,0}A_{i,r_i}^1)1`$ and we can conclude with the help of lemma 5.3.

iv) Let $`ij`$ be in $`I`$ and look at $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})`$. Suppose we have a dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial $`m_0=m_1m_2`$ in $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})`$ different from the highest weight $`𝒴_t`$-monomial $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0}`$. We have for example $`m_1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$, so $`m_1`$ is right negative. Let $`l_1`$ be the maximal $`l`$ such that a $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{k,l}`$ appears in $`m_1`$. We have $`u_{k,l}(m_1)<0`$ and $`l>0`$. As $`u_{k,l}(m_0)0`$ we have $`u_{k,l}(m_2)>0`$ and $`m_2Y_{j,0}`$. So $`m_2`$ is right negative and there is $`k^{}I`$ and $`l^{}>l`$ such that $`u_{k^{},l^{}}(m_2)<0`$. So $`u_{k^{},l^{}}(m_1)>0`$, contradiction. So the highest weight $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial. In the same way the highest weight $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial. But we have $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$, so $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,0})F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ has no dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, so is equal to $`0`$.∎

Denote, for $`l`$, by $`s_l:𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ the endomorphism of $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra such that $`s_l(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k})=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{j,k+l}`$ (it is well-defined because the defining relations of $`𝒴_t`$ are invariant for $`kk+l`$). If the hypothesis of the lemma 5.14 are verified, we can define for $`mt^{}B`$ :

$$E_t(m)=m(\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}(m)})^1\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))^{u_{i,l}(m)}𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}$$

because for $`l`$ the product $`\underset{iI}{}s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))^{u_{i,l}(m)}`$ is commutative (lemma 5.14).

### 5.5. Step 1: Proof of $`P(1)`$ and $`P(2)`$

The aim of this section is to prove $`P(1)`$ and $`P(2)`$. First we define a more precise property $`Q(n)`$ such that $`Q(n)P(n)`$.

#### 5.5.1. The property $`Q(n)`$

###### Definition 5.15.

For $`n1`$ denote $`Q(n)`$ the property “for all semi-simple Lie-algebras $`𝔤`$ of rank $`\text{rk}(𝔤)=n`$, for all $`iI`$ there is a unique $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})𝔎_t\stackrel{~}{D}_{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$. Moreover $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ has the same monomials as $`E(Y_{i,0})`$”.

The property $`Q(n)`$ is more precise than $`P(n)`$ because it asks that $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ has only a finite number of monomials.

###### Lemma 5.16.

For $`n1`$, the property $`Q(n)`$ implies the property $`P(n)`$.

Proof: We suppose $`Q(n)`$ is true. In particular the section 5.4 enables us to construct $`E_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ for $`mB`$. The defining formula of $`E_t(m)`$ shows that it has the same monomials as $`E(m)`$. So $`E_t(m)\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ and $`E_t(m)𝔎_t`$.

Let us prove $`P(n)`$: let $`m`$ be in $`B`$. The uniqueness of $`F_t(m)`$ follows from lemma 5.7. Let $`m_L=m>m_{L1}>\mathrm{}>m_1`$ be the dominant monomials of $`D_m`$ with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering (it follows from lemma 3.14 that $`D_mB`$ is finite). Let us prove by induction on $`l`$ the existence of $`F_t(m_l)`$. The unique dominant of $`D_{m_1}`$ is $`m_1`$ so $`F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\stackrel{~}{D}_{m_1}`$. In general let $`\lambda _1(t),\mathrm{},\lambda _{l1}(t)[t^\pm ]`$ be the coefficient of the dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_{l1}`$ in $`E_t(m_l)`$. We put:

$$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)\underset{r=1\mathrm{}l1}{}\lambda _r(t)F_t(m_r)$$

We see in the construction that $`F_t(m)\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ because for $`m^{}D_m`$ we have $`E_t(m^{})\stackrel{~}{D}_m^{}\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ (lemma 5.10). ∎

#### 5.5.2. Cases $`n=1,n=2`$

We need the following general technical result:

###### Proposition 5.17.

Let $`m`$ be in $`B`$ such that all monomial $`m^{}`$ of $`F(m)`$ verifies : $`iI,m^{}B_i`$ implies $`l,u_{i,l}(m^{})1`$ and for $`1r2r_i`$ the set $`\{l/u_{i,r+2lr_i}(m^{})=1\}`$ is a $`1`$-segment. Then $`\pi ^1(F(m))𝒴_t`$ is in $`𝔎_t`$ and has a unique dominant monomial $`m`$.

Proof: Let us write $`F(m)=\underset{m^{}A}{}\mu (m^{})m^{}`$ ($`\mu (m^{})`$). Let $`i`$ be in $`I`$ and consider the decomposition of $`F(m)`$ in $`𝔎_i`$:

$$F(m)=\underset{m^{}B_i}{}\mu (m^{})F_i(m^{})$$

But $`\mu (m^{})0`$ implies the hypothesis of lemma 4.15 is verified for $`m^{}B_i`$. So $`\pi ^1(F_i(m^{}))=F_{i,t}(m^{})`$. And:

$$\pi ^1(F(m))=\underset{m^{}B_i}{}\mu (m^{})F_{i,t}(m^{})𝔎_{i,t}$$

For $`n=1`$ (section 4.5), $`n=2`$ (section 8), we can give explicit formula for the $`E(Y_{i,0})=F(Y_{i,0})`$. In particular we see that the hypothesis of proposition 5.17 are verified, so:

###### Corollary 5.18.

The properties $`Q(1)`$, $`Q(2)`$ and so $`P(1)`$, $`P(2)`$ are true.

This allow us to start our induction in the proof of theorem 5.13.

In section 7.1 we will see other applications of proposition 5.17.

Note that the hypothesis of proposition 5.17 are not verified for fundamental monomials $`m=Y_{i,0}`$ in general: for example for the $`D_5`$-case we have in $`F(Y_{2,0})`$ the monomial $`Y_{3,3}^2Y_{5,4}^1Y_{2,4}^1Y_{4,4}^1`$.

### 5.6. Step 2: consequences of the property $`P(n)`$

Let be $`n1`$. We suppose in this section that $`P(n)`$ is proved. We give some consequences of $`P(n)`$ which will be used in the proof of $`P(r)`$ ($`r>n`$).

Let $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$ be the $`[t^\pm ]`$-submodule of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ generated by elements with a finite number of dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials.

###### Proposition 5.19.

We suppose $`\text{rk}(𝔤)=n`$. We have:

$$𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}=\underset{mB}{}[t^\pm ]F_t(m)[t^\pm ]^{(B)}$$

Moreover for $`MA`$, we have:

$$𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_M=\underset{mBD_M}{}[t^\pm ]F_t(m)[t^\pm ]^{BD_M}$$

Proof: Let $`\chi `$ be in $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$ and $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_LB`$ the dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`\chi `$ and $`\lambda _1(t),\mathrm{},\lambda _L(t)[t^\pm ]`$ their coefficients. It follows from lemma 5.7 that $`\chi =\underset{l=1\mathrm{}L}{}\lambda _l(t)F_t(m_l)`$.

Let us look at the second point: lemma 5.10 shows that $`mBD_MF_t(m)\stackrel{~}{D}_M`$. In particular the inclusion $``$ is clear. For the other inclusion we prove as in the first point that $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_M=\underset{mBD_M}{}[t^\pm ]F_t(m)`$. We can conclude because it follows from lemma 3.14 that $`D_MB`$ is finite.∎

We recall that have seen in section 5.2.3 that some infinite sum make sense in $`\stackrel{~}{D}_M`$.

###### Corollary 5.20.

We suppose $`\text{rk}(𝔤)>n`$ and let $`J`$ be a subset of $`I`$ such that $`|J|=n`$. For $`mB_J`$, there is a unique $`F_{J,t}(m)𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique $`J`$-dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`F_{J,t}(m)`$. Moreover $`F_{J,t}(m)\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$.

For $`MA`$, the elements of $`𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_M`$ are infinite sums $`\underset{mB_JD_M}{}\lambda _m(t)F_{J,t}(m)`$. In particular:

$$𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_M[t^\pm ]^{B_JD_M}$$

Proof: The uniqueness of $`F_{J,t}(m)`$ follows from lemma 5.7. Let us write $`m=m_Jm^{}`$ where
$`m_J=\underset{iJ,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}(m)}`$. So $`m_J`$ is a dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial of $`[Y_{i,l}^\pm ]_{iJ,l}`$. In particular the proposition 5.19 with the algebra $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J`$ of rank $`n`$ gives $`m_J\chi `$ where $`\chi [\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J,1},t^\pm ]_{iJ,l}`$ (where for $`iI,l`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J,\pm }=\beta _{I,J}(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^\pm )`$ where $`\beta _{I,J}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm )=\delta _{iJ}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^\pm `$). So we can put $`F_t(m)=m\nu _{J,t}(\chi )`$ where $`\nu _{J,t}:[\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J,1},t^\pm ]_{iJ,l}𝒴_t`$ is the ring homomorphism such that $`\nu _{J,t}(\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^{𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})_J,1})=\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1`$.

The last assertion is proved as in proposition 5.19.∎

### 5.7. Step 3: $`t`$-algorithm and end of the proof of theorem 5.13

In this section we explain why the $`P(r)`$ ($`r<n`$) imply $`P(n)`$. In particular we define the $`t`$-algorithm which constructs explicitly the $`F_t(m)`$.

#### 5.7.1. The induction

We prove the property $`P(n)`$ by induction on $`n1`$. It follows from section 5.5 that $`P(1)`$ and $`P(2)`$ are true. Let be $`n3`$ and suppose that $`P(r)`$ is proved for $`r<n`$.

Let $`m_+`$ be in $`B`$ and $`m_0=m_+>m_1>m_2>\mathrm{}`$ the countable set $`D_{m_+}`$ with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering.

For $`JI`$ and $`mB_J`$, it follows from $`P(r)`$ and corollary 5.20 that there is a unique $`F_{J,t}(m)\stackrel{~}{D}_m𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that $`m`$ is the unique $`J`$-dominant monomial of $`F_{J,t}(m)`$ and that the elements of $`\stackrel{~}{D}_{m_+}𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$ are the infinite sums of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$: $`\underset{mD_{m_+}B_J}{}\lambda _m(t)F_{J,t}(m)`$ where $`\lambda _m(t)[t^\pm ]`$.

If $`mAB_J`$, denote $`F_{J,t}(m)=0`$.

#### 5.7.2. Definition of the $`t`$-algorithm

For $`r,r^{}0`$ and $`JI`$ denote $`[F_{J,t}(m_r^{})]_{m_r}[t^\pm ]`$ the coefficient of $`m_r`$ in $`F_{J,t}(m_r^{})`$.

###### Definition 5.21.

We call $`t`$-algorithm the following inductive definition of the sequences $`(s(m_r)(t))_{r0}[t^\pm ]^{}`$, $`(s_J(m_r)(t))_{r0}[t^\pm ]^{}`$ ($`JI`$):

$$s(m_0)(t)=1\text{ , }s_J(m_0)(t)=0$$

and for $`r1,JI`$:

$$s_J(m_r)(t)=\underset{r^{}<r}{}(s(m_r^{})(t)s_J(m_r^{})(t))[F_{J,t}(m_r^{})]_{m_r}$$

$$\text{ if }m_rB_J,s(m_r)(t)=s_J(m_r)(t)$$

$$\text{ if }m_rB,s(m_r)(t)=0$$

We have to prove that the $`t`$-algorithm defines the sequences in a unique way. We see that if $`s(m_r),s_J(m_r)`$ are defined for $`rR`$ so are $`s_J(m_{R+1})`$ for $`JI`$. The $`s_J(m_R)`$ impose the value of $`s(m_{R+1})`$ and by induction the uniqueness is clear. We say that the $`t`$-algorithm is well defined to step $`R`$ if there exist $`s(m_r),s_J(m_r)`$ such that the formulas of the $`t`$-algorithm are verified for $`rR`$.

###### Lemma 5.22.

The $`t`$-algorithm is well defined to step $`r`$ if and only if:

$$J_1,J_2I,r^{}r,m_r^{}B_{J_1}\text{ and }m_r^{}B_{J_2}s_{J_1}(m_r^{})(t)=s_{J_2}(m_r^{})(t)$$

Proof: If for $`r^{}<r`$ the $`s(m_r^{})(t),s_J(m_r^{})(t)`$ are well defined, so is $`s_J(m_r)(t)`$. If $`m_rB`$, $`s(m_r)(t)=0`$ is well defined. If $`m_rB`$, it is well defined if and only if $`\{s_J(m_r)(t)/m_rB_J\}`$ has one unique element.∎

#### 5.7.3. The $`t`$-algorithm never fails

If the $`t`$-algorithm is well defined to all steps, we say that the $`t`$-algorithm never fails. In this section we show that the $`t`$-algorithm never fails.

If the $`t`$-algorithm is well defined to step $`r`$, for $`JI`$ we set:

$$\mu _J(m_r)(t)=s(m_r)(t)s_J(m_r)(t)$$

$$\chi _J^r=\underset{r^{}r}{}\mu _J(m_r^{}(t))F_{J,t}(m_r^{})𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}}$$

###### Lemma 5.23.

If the $`t`$-algorithm is well defined to step $`r`$, for $`JI`$ we have:

$$\chi _J^r(\underset{r^{}r}{}s(m_r^{})(t)m_r^{})+s_J(m_{r+1})(t)m_{r+1}+\underset{r^{}>r+1}{}[t^\pm ]m_r^{}$$

For $`J_1J_2I`$, we have:

$$\chi _{J_2}^r=\chi _{J_1}^r+\underset{r^{}>r}{}\lambda _r^{}(t)F_{J_1,t}(m_r^{})$$

where $`\lambda _r^{}(t)[t^\pm ]`$. In particular, if $`m_{r+1}B_{J_1}`$, we have $`s_{J_1,t}(m_{r+1})=s_{J_2,t}(m_{r+1})`$.

Proof: For $`r^{}r`$ let us compute the coefficient $`(\chi _J^r)_{m_r^{}}[t^\pm ]`$ of $`m_r^{}`$ in $`\chi _J^r`$:

$$(\chi _J^r)_{m_r^{}}=\underset{r^{\prime \prime }r^{}}{}(s(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t)s_J(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t))[F_{J,t}(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})]_{m_r^{}}$$

$$=(s(m_r^{})(t)s_J(m_r^{})(t))[F_{J,t}(m_r^{})]_{m_r^{}}+\underset{r^{\prime \prime }<r^{}}{}(s(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t)s_J(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t))[F_{J,t}(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})]_{m_r^{}}$$

$$=(s(m_r^{})(t)s_J(m_r^{})(t))+s_J(m_r^{})(t)=s(m_r^{})(t)$$

Let us compute the coefficient $`(\chi _J^r)_{m_{r+1}}[t^\pm ]`$ of $`m_{r+1}`$ in $`\chi _J^r`$:

$$(\chi _J^r)_{m_{r+1}}=\underset{r^{\prime \prime }<r+1}{}(s(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t)s_J(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})(t))[F_{J,t}(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})]_{m_{r+1}}=s_J(m_{r+1})$$

For the second point let $`J_1J_2I`$. We have $`\chi _{J_2}^r𝔎_{J_1,t}^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_{m+}`$ and it follows from $`P(|J_1|)`$ and corollary 5.20 (or section 5.5.2 if $`|J_1|2`$) that we can introduce $`\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)[t^\pm ]`$ such that :

$$\chi _{J_2}^r=\underset{r^{}0}{}\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)F_{J_1,t}(m_r^{})$$

We show by induction on $`r^{}`$ that for $`r^{}r`$, $`m_r^{}B_{J_1}\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)=\mu _{J_1}(m_r^{})(t)`$. First we have $`\lambda _{m_0}(t)=(\chi _{J_2}^r)_{m_0}=s(m_0)(t)=1=\mu _{J_1}(m_0)`$. For $`r^{}r`$:

$$s(m_r^{})(t)=\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)+\underset{r^{\prime \prime }<r^{}}{}\lambda _{m_{r^{\prime \prime }}}(t)[F_{J_1,t}(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})]_{m_r^{}}$$

$$\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)=s(m_r^{})(t)\underset{r^{\prime \prime }<r^{}}{}\mu _{J_1}(m_r^{})(t)[F_{J_1,t}(m_{r^{\prime \prime }})]_{m_r^{}}=s(m_r^{})(t)s_{J_1}(m_r^{})(t)=\mu _{J_1}(m_r^{})(t)$$

For the last assertion if $`m_{r+1}B_{J_1}`$, the coefficient of $`m_{r+1}`$ in $`\underset{r^{}>r}{}[t^\pm ]F_{J_1,t}(m_r^{})`$ is 0, and $`(\chi _{J_2}^r)_{m_{r+1}}=(\chi _{J_1}^r)_{m_{r+1}}`$. It follows from the first point that $`s_{J_1,t}(m_{r+1})=s_{J_2,t}(m_{r+1})`$.∎

###### Lemma 5.24.

The $`t`$-algorithm never fails.

Proof: Suppose the sequence is well defined until the step $`r1`$ and let $`J_1,J_2I`$ such that $`m_rB_{J_1}`$ and $`m_rB_{J_2}`$. Let $`i`$ be in $`J_1`$, $`j`$ in $`J_2`$ such that $`m_rB_i`$ and $`m_rB_j`$. Consider $`J=\{i,j\}I`$. The $`\chi _J^{r1},\chi _i^{r1},\chi _j^{r1}𝒴_t`$ have the same coefficient $`s(m_r^{})(t)`$ on $`m_r^{}`$ for $`r^{}r1`$. Moreover:

$$s_i(m_r)(t)=(\chi _i^{r1})_{m_r}\text{ , }s_j(m_r)(t)=(\chi _j^{r1})_{m_r}\text{ , }s_J(m_r)(t)=(\chi _J^{r1})_{m_r}$$

But $`m_rB_J`$, so:

$$\chi _J^{r1}=\underset{r^{}r1}{}\mu _i(m_r^{})(t)F_{i,t}(m_r^{})+\underset{r^{}r+1}{}\lambda _{m_r^{}}(t)F_{i,t}(m_r^{})$$

So $`(\chi _J^{r1})_{m_r}=(\chi _i^{r1})_{m_r}`$ and we have $`s_i(m_r)(t)=s_J(m_r)(t)`$. In the same way we have $`s_i(m_r)(t)=s_{J_1}(m_r)(t)`$, $`s_j(m_r)(t)=s_J(m_r)(t)`$ and $`s_j(m_r)(t)=s_{J_2}(m_r)(t)`$. So we can conclude $`s_{J_1}(m_r)(t)=s_{J_2}(m_r)(t)`$.∎

#### 5.7.4. Proof of $`P(n)`$

It follows from lemma 5.24 that $`\chi =\underset{r0}{}s(m_r)(t)m_r𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ is well defined.

###### Lemma 5.25.

We have $`\chi 𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{~}{D}_{m_+}`$. Moreover the only dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial in $`\chi `$ is $`m_0=m_+`$.

Proof: The defining formula of $`\chi `$ gives $`\chi \stackrel{~}{D}_{m_+}`$. Let $`i`$ be in $`I`$ and:

$$\chi _i=\underset{r0}{}\mu _i(m_r)(t)F_{i,t}(m_r)𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}$$

Let us compute for $`r0`$ the coefficient of $`m_r`$ in $`\chi \chi _i`$:

$$(\chi \chi _i)_{m_r}=s(m_r)(t)\underset{r^{}r}{}\mu _i(m_r^{})(t)[F_{i,t}(m_r^{})]_{m_r}$$

$$=s(m_r)(t)s_i(m_r)(t)\mu _i(m_r)(t)[F_{i,t}(m_r)]_{m_r}=(s(m_r)(t)s_i(m_r)(t))(1[F_{i,t}(m_r)]_{m_r})$$

We have two cases:

if $`m_rB_i`$, we have $`1[F_{i,t}(m_r)]_{m_r}=0`$.

if $`m_rB_i`$, we have $`s(m_r)(t)s_i(m_r)(t)=0`$.

So $`\chi =\chi _i𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}}`$, and $`\chi 𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

The last assertion follows from the definition of the algorithm: for $`r>0`$, $`m_rBs(m_r)(t)=0`$.∎

This lemma implies:

###### Corollary 5.26.

For $`n3`$, if the $`P(r)`$ ($`r<n`$) are true, then $`P(n)`$ is true.

In particular the theorem 5.13 is proved by induction on $`n`$.

## 6. Morphism of $`q,t`$-characters and applications

### 6.1. Morphism of $`q,t`$-characters

#### 6.1.1. Definition of the morphism

We set $`\text{Rep}_t=\text{Rep}_{}[t^\pm ]=[X_{i,l},t^\pm ]_{iI,l}`$. We say that $`M\text{Rep}_t`$ is a $`\text{Rep}_t`$-monomial if it is of the form $`M=\underset{iI,l}{}X_{i,l}^{x_{i,l}}`$ ($`x_{i,l}0`$). In this case denote $`x_{i,l}(M)=x_{i,l}`$. Recall the definition of the $`E_t(m)`$ (section 5.4).

###### Definition 6.1.

The morphism of $`q,t`$-characters is the $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear map $`\chi _{q,t}:\text{Rep}_t𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that ($`u_{i,l}0`$):

$$\chi _{q,t}(\underset{iI,l}{}X_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}})=E_t(\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{u_{i,l}})$$

#### 6.1.2. Properties of $`\chi _{q,t}`$

###### Theorem 6.2.

We have $`\pi _+(\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t}))𝒴`$ and the following diagram is commutative:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \text{Rep}& \stackrel{\chi _{q,t}}{}& \text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})& & \\ \hfill \text{id}& & & \pi _+& \\ \hfill \text{Rep}& \stackrel{\chi _q}{}& 𝒴& & \end{array}$$

In particular the map $`\chi _{q,t}`$ is injective. The $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear map $`\chi _{q,t}:\text{Rep}_t𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ is characterized by the three following properties:

1) For a $`\text{Rep}_t`$-monomial $`M`$ define $`m=\pi ^1(\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{x_{i,l}(M)})A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{m}A_t`$ as in section 3.5.2. Then we have :

$$\chi _{q,t}(M)=\stackrel{~}{m}+\underset{m^{}<m}{}a_m^{}(t)m^{}\text{ (where }a_m^{}(t)[t^\pm ]\text{)}$$

2) The image of $`\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})`$ is contained in $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

3) Let $`M_1,M_2`$ be $`\text{Rep}_t`$-monomials such that $`\text{max}\{l/\underset{iI}{}x_{i,l}(M_1)>0\}\text{min}\{l/\underset{iI}{}x_{i,l}(M_2)>0\}`$. We have :

$$\chi _{q,t}(M_1M_2)=\chi _{q,t}(M_1)\chi _{q,t}(M_2)$$

Note that the properties $`1,2,3`$ are generalizations of the defining axioms introduced by Nakajima in  for the $`ADE`$-case; in particular in the $`ADE`$-case $`\chi _{q,t}`$ is the morphism of $`q,t`$-characters constructed in .

Proof:$`\pi _+(\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t}))𝒴`$ means that only a finite number of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials of $`E_t(m)`$ have coefficient $`\lambda (t)(t1)[t^\pm ]`$. As $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})`$ has no dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial other than $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}`$, we have the same property for $`\pi _+(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))𝔎^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\pi _+(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))=E(Y_{i,0})𝒴`$. As $`𝒴`$ is a subalgebra of $`𝒴^{\mathrm{}}`$ we get $`\pi _+(E_t(m))𝒴`$ with the help of the defining formula.

The diagram is commutative because $`\pi _+s_l=s_l\pi _+`$ and $`\pi _+(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))=E(Y_{i,0})`$. It is proved by Frenkel, Reshetikhin in  that $`\chi _q`$ is injective, so $`\chi _{q,t}`$ is injective.

Let us show that $`\chi _{q,t}`$ verifies the three properties:

1) By definition we have $`\chi _{q,t}(M)=E_t(m)`$. But $`s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))=F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l})\stackrel{~}{D}(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l})`$. In particular $`s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))`$ is of the form $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}+\underset{m^{}<Y_{i,l}}{}\lambda _m^{}(t)m^{}`$ and we get the property for $`E_t(m)`$ by multiplication.

2) We have $`s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))=E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l})𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a subalgebra of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$, so $`\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

3) If we set $`L=\text{max}\{l/\underset{iI}{}x_{i,l}(M_1)>0\}`$, $`m_1=\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{x_{i,l}(M_1)}`$, $`m_2=\underset{iI,l}{}Y_{i,l}^{x_{i,l}(M_2)}`$, we have:

$$E_t(m_1)=\underset{lL}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))^{x_{i,l}(M_1)}\text{ , }E_t(m_2)=\underset{lL}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))^{x_{i,l}(M_2)}$$

and in particular:

$$E_t(m_1m_2)=E_t(m_1)E_t(m_2)$$

Finally let $`f:\text{Rep}_t𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear homomorphism which verifies properties 1,2,3. We saw that the only element of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ with highest weight monomial $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}`$ is $`s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))`$. In particular we have $`f(X_{i,l})=E_t(Y_{i,l})`$. Using property 3, we get for $`M\text{Rep}_t`$ a monomial :

$$f(M)=\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}f(X_{i,l})^{u_{i,l}(m)}=\underset{l}{\overset{}{}}\underset{iI}{}s_l(F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0}))^{u_{i,l}(m)}=\chi _{q,t}(M)$$

### 6.2. Quantization of the Grothendieck Ring

In this section we see that $`\chi _{q,t}`$ allows us to define a deformed algebra structure on $`\text{Rep}_t`$ generalizing the quantization of . The point is to show that $`\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})`$ is a subalgebra of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

#### 6.2.1. Generators of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$

Recall the definition of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$ in section 5.6. For $`mB`$, all monomials of $`E_t(m)`$ are in $`\{mA_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}A_{i_K,l_K}^1/k0,l_kL\}`$ where $`L=\text{min}\{l,iI,u_{i,l}(m)>0\}`$. So it follows from lemma 3.14 that $`E_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ has only a finite number of dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials, that is to say $`E_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$.

###### Proposition 6.3.

The $`[t^\pm ]`$-module $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$ is freely generated by the $`E_t(m)`$:

$$𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}=\underset{mB}{}[t^\pm ]E_t(m)[t^\pm ]^{(B)}$$

Proof: The $`E_t(m)`$ are $`[t^\pm ]`$-linearly independent and we saw $`E_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$. It suffices to prove that the $`E_t(m)`$ generate the $`F_t(m)`$: let us look at $`m_0B`$ and consider $`L=\text{min}\{l,iI,u_{i,l}(m_0)>0\}`$. In the proof of lemma 3.14 we saw there is only a finite dominant monomials in $`\{m_0A_{i_1,l_1}^{v_{i_1,l_1}}\mathrm{}A_{i_R,l_R}^{v_{i_R,l_R}}/R0,i_rI,l_rL\}`$. Let $`m_0>m_1>\mathrm{}>m_DB`$ be those monomials with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering. In particular, for $`0dD`$ the dominant monomials of $`E_t(m_d)`$ are in $`\{m_d,m_{d+1},\mathrm{},m_D\}`$. So there are elements $`(\lambda _{d,d^{}}(t))_{0d,d^{}D}`$ of $`[t^\pm ]`$ such that:

$$E_t(m_d)=\underset{dd^{}D}{}\lambda _{d,d^{}}(t)F_t(m_d^{})$$

We have $`\lambda _{d,d^{}}(t)=0`$ if $`d^{}<d`$ and $`\lambda _{d,d}(t)=1`$. We have a triangular system with $`1`$ on the diagonal, so it is invertible in $`[t^\pm ]`$.∎

#### 6.2.2. Construction of the quantization

###### Lemma 6.4.

$`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$ is a subalgebra of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$.

Proof: It suffices to prove that for $`m_1,m_2B`$, $`E_t(m_1)E_t(m_2)`$ has only a finite number of dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomials. But $`E_t(m_1)E_t(m_2)`$ has the same monomials as $`E_t(m_1m_2)`$.∎

It follows from proposition 6.3 that $`\chi _{q,t}`$ is a $`[t^\pm ]`$-linear isomorphism between $`\text{Rep}_t`$ and $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}`$. So we can define:

###### Definition 6.5.

The associative deformed $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra structure on $`\text{Rep}_t`$ is defined by:

$$\lambda _1,\lambda _2\text{Rep}_t,\lambda _1\lambda _2=\chi _{q,t}^1(\chi _{q,t}(\lambda _1)\chi _{q,t}(\lambda _2))$$

#### 6.2.3. Examples: $`sl_2`$-case

We make explicit computation of the deformed multiplication in the $`sl_2`$-case:

###### Proposition 6.6.

In the $`sl_2`$-case, the deformed algebra structure on $`\text{Rep}_t=[X_l,t^\pm ]_l`$ is given by:

$$X_{l_1}X_{l_2}\mathrm{}X_{l_m}=X_{l_1}X_{l_2}\mathrm{}X_{l_m}\text{ if }l_1l_2\mathrm{}l_m$$

$$X_lX_l^{}=t^\gamma X_lX_l^{}=t^\gamma X_l^{}X_l\text{ if }l>l^{}\text{ and }ll^{}+2$$

$$X_lX_{l2}=t^2X_lX_{l2}+t^\gamma (1t^2)=t^2X_{l2}X_l+(1t^2)$$

where $`\gamma `$ is defined by $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}=t^\gamma \stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l`$.

Proof: For $`l`$ we have the $`q,t`$-character of the fundamental representation $`X_l`$:

$$\chi _{q,t}(X_l)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_l+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l+2}^1=\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1)$$

The first point of the proposition follows immediately from the definition of $`\chi _{q,t}`$. For example, for $`l,l^{}`$ we have:

$$\chi _{q,t}(X_lX_l^{})=\chi _{q,t}(X_{\text{min}(l,l^{})})\chi _{q,t}(X_{\text{max}(l,l^{})})$$

In particular if $`ll^{}`$, we have $`X_lX_l^{}=X_lX_l^{}`$. Suppose now that $`l>l^{}`$ and introduce $`\gamma `$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}=t^\gamma \stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l`$. We have:

$$\chi _{q,t}(X_l)\chi _{q,t}(X_l^{})=\stackrel{~}{Y}_l(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l^{}+1}^1)$$

$$=t^\gamma \stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l+t^{\gamma +1}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1+t^{\gamma +1+2\delta _{l,l^{}+2}}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l^{}+1}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_l+t^{\gamma +2}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l^{}+1}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{A}_{l+1}^1$$

$$=t^\gamma \chi _{q,t}(X_l^{}X_l)+t^{\gamma +1}(t^{2\delta _{l,l^{}+2}}1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l^{}+1}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_l$$

If $`ll^{}+2`$ we get $`X_lX_l^{}=t^\gamma X_l^{}X_l`$. If $`l=l^{}+2`$, we have:

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l^{}+1}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l^{}+2}=t^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l^{}+2}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l^{}+2}=t^1$$

But $`t^2\stackrel{~}{Y}_l\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l2}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{l2}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l`$, so $`X_lX_{l2}=t^2X_{l2}X_l+t^2(t^21)`$. ∎

Note that $`\gamma `$ were computed in section 3.5.4.

We see that the new $`[t^\pm ]`$-algebra structure is not commutative and not even twisted polynomial.

### 6.3. An involution of the Grothendieck ring

In this section we construct an antimultiplicative involution of the Grothendieck ring $`\text{Rep}_t`$. The construction is motivated by the point view adopted in this article : it is just replacing $`c_{|l|}`$ by $`c_{|l|}`$. In the $`ADE`$-case such an involution were introduced Nakajima  with different motivations.

#### 6.3.1. An antihomomorphism of $``$

###### Lemma 6.7.

There is a unique $``$-linear isomorphism of $``$ which is antimultiplicative and such that:

$$\overline{c_m}=c_m\text{ , }\overline{a_i[r]}=a_i[r]\text{ (}m>0,iI,r\{0\}\text{)}$$

Moreover it is an involution.

Proof: It suffices to show it is compatible with the defining relations of $``$ ($`i,jI,m,r\{0\}`$):

$$\overline{[a_i[m],a_j[r]]}=\overline{a_i[m]a_j[r]}\overline{a_j[r]a_i[m]}=[a_i[m],a_j[r]]$$

$$\overline{\delta _{m,r}(q^mq^m)B_{i,j}(q^m)c_{|m|}}=\delta _{m,r}(q^mq^m)B_{i,j}(q^m)c_{|m|}$$

For the last assertion, we have $`\overline{\overline{c_m}}=c_m`$ and $`\overline{\overline{a_i[r]}}=a_i[r]`$, and an algebra morphism which fixes the generators is the identity.∎

It can be naturally extended to an antimultiplicative $``$-isomorphism of $`_h`$.

###### Lemma 6.8.

The $``$-subalgebra $`𝒴_u_h`$ verifies $`\overline{𝒴_u}𝒴_u`$.

Proof: It suffices to check on the generators of $`𝒴_u`$ ($`R𝔘,iI,l`$):

$$\overline{t_R}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}R(q^m)(c_m))=t_R$$

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^my_i[m]q^{lm})$$

$$=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}[y_i[m],y_i[m]])\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}=t_{\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,i}(q)(q_iq_i^1)}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}𝒴_u$$

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}}^1=(\overline{\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}})^1=t_{\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,i}(q)(q_iq_i^1)}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^1𝒴_u$$

#### 6.3.2. Involution of $`𝒴_t`$

As for $`R,R^{}𝔘`$, we have $`\pi _0(R)=\pi _0(R^{})\pi _0(R)=\pi _0(R^{})`$, the involution of $`𝒴_u`$ (resp. of $`_h`$) is compatible with the defining relations of $`𝒴_t`$ (resp. $`_t`$). We get a $``$-linear involution of $`𝒴_t`$ (resp. of $`_t`$). For $`\lambda ,\lambda ^{}𝒴_t,\alpha `$, we have:

$$\overline{\lambda .\lambda ^{}}=\overline{\lambda ^{}}.\overline{\lambda }\text{ , }\overline{t^\alpha \lambda }=t^\alpha \overline{\lambda }$$

Note that in $`𝒴_u`$ for $`iI,l`$:

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^ma_i[m]q^{lm})$$

$$=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}[a_i[m],a_i[m]]c_m)\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}=t_{(q_i^2+q_i^2)}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}$$

So in $`𝒴_t`$ we have $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}`$ and $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1`$.

#### 6.3.3. The involution of deformed bimodules

###### Lemma 6.9.

For $`iI`$, the $`𝒴_{i,u}_h`$ verifies $`\overline{𝒴_{i,u}}𝒴_{i,u}`$.

Proof: First we compute for $`iI,l`$:

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}}=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q_i^mq_i^m}q^{lm})\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^m\frac{a_i[m]}{q_i^mq_i^m}q^{lm})$$

$$=\text{exp}(\underset{m>0}{}h^{2m}\frac{[a_i[m],a_i[m]]}{(q_i^mq_i^m)^2}c_m)\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=t_{\frac{q_i+q_i^1}{q_iq_i^1}}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}𝒴_{i,u}$$

Now for $`\lambda 𝒴_u`$, we have $`\overline{\lambda .\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}}=t_{\frac{q_i+q_i^1}{q_iq_i^1}}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\overline{\lambda }`$. But it is in $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ because $`\overline{\lambda }𝒴_u`$ (lemma 6.8) and $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ is a $`𝒴_u`$-subbimodule of $`_h`$ (lemma 4.6).∎

In $`_t`$ we have $`\overline{\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}}=t\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$ because $`\pi _0(\frac{q_i+q_i^1}{q_iq_i^1})=1`$. As said before we get a $``$-linear involution of $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ such that:

$$\overline{\lambda \stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}}=t\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\overline{\lambda }$$

We introduced such an involution in . With this new point of view, the compatibility with the relation $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,lr_i}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=t^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}`$ is a direct consequence of lemma 4.6 and needs no computation; for example:

$$\overline{\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,lr_i}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}}=t\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,lr_i}=t^3\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,lr_i}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}=t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}$$

$$\overline{t^1\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}}=t\overline{\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}}=t^2\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l+r_i}$$

#### 6.3.4. The induced involution of $`\text{Rep}_t`$

###### Lemma 6.10.

For $`iI`$, the subalgebra $`𝔎_{i,t}𝒴_t`$ verifies $`\overline{𝔎_{i,t}}𝔎_{i,t}`$.

Proof: Suppose $`\lambda 𝔎_{i,t}`$, that is to say $`S_{i,t}(\lambda )=0`$. So $`\overline{(t^21)S_{i,t}(\lambda )}=0`$ and:

$$\underset{l}{}(\overline{\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\lambda }\overline{\lambda \stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}})=0t\underset{l}{}(\overline{\lambda }\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}\overline{\lambda })=0$$

So $`t(1t^2)S_{i,t}(\overline{\lambda })=0`$ and $`\overline{\lambda }𝔎_{i,t}`$.∎

Note that $`\chi 𝒴_t`$ has the same monomials as $`\overline{\chi }`$, that is to say if $`\chi =\underset{mA}{}\lambda (t)m`$ and $`\overline{\chi }=\underset{mA}{}\mu (t)m`$, we have $`\lambda (t)0\mu (t)0`$. In particular we can naturally extend our involution to an antimultiplicative involution on $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$. Moreover we have $`\overline{𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}}𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\overline{𝔎_t^{\mathrm{},f}}=\overline{\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})}\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})`$. So we can define:

###### Definition 6.11.

The $``$-linear involution of $`\text{Rep}_t`$ is defined by:

$$\lambda \text{Rep}_t\text{ , }\overline{\lambda }=\chi _{q,t}^1(\overline{\chi _{q,t}(\lambda )})$$

### 6.4. Analogues of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials

In this section we define analogues of Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials (see ) with the help of the antimultiplicative involution of section 6.3 in the same spirit Nakajima did for the $`ADE`$-case . Let us begin we some technical properties of the action of the involution on monomials.

#### 6.4.1. Invariance of monomials

We recall that the $`𝒴_t^A`$-monomials are products of the $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1`$ ($`iI,l`$).

###### Lemma 6.12.

For $`M`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial and $`m`$ a $`𝒴_t^A`$-monomial there is a unique $`\alpha (M,m)`$ such that $`\overline{t^{\alpha (M,m)}Mm}=t^{\alpha (M,m)}\overline{M}m`$.

Proof: Let $`\beta `$ such that $`\overline{m}=t^\beta m`$. We have $`\overline{Mm}=\overline{m}\overline{M}=t^{\beta +\gamma }\overline{M}m`$ where $`\gamma 2`$ (section 3.4.2). So it suffices to prove that $`\beta 2`$.

Let us compute $`\beta `$. Let $`\pi _+(m)=\underset{iI,l}{}A_{i,l}^{v_{i,l}}`$. In $`𝒴_u`$ we have $`\pi _+(m)\pi _{}(m)=t_R\pi _{}(m)\pi _+(m)`$ where $`\pi _0(R)=\beta `$ and:

$$R(q)=\underset{i,jI,r,r^{}}{}v_{i,r}v_{j,r^{}}\underset{l>0}{}q^{lrlr^{}}\frac{[a_i[l],a_j[l]]}{c_l}$$

where for $`l>0`$ we set $`\frac{[a_i[l],a_j[l]]}{c_l}=B_{i,j}(q^l)(q^lq^l)[q^\pm ]`$ which is antisymmetric. For $`i=j`$, we have the term:

$$\underset{r,r^{}}{}v_{i,r}v_{i,r^{}}\underset{l>0}{}q^{lrlr^{}}\frac{[a_i[l],a_i[l]]}{c_l}$$

$$=\underset{l>0}{}(\underset{\{r,r^{}\},rr^{}}{}v_{i,r}(m)v_{i,r^{}}(m)(q^{l(rr^{})}+q^{l(r^{}r)})+\underset{r}{}v_{i,r}(m)^2)\frac{[a_i[l],a_i[l]]}{c_l}$$

It is antisymmetric, so it has no term in $`q^0`$. So $`\pi _0(R)=\pi _0(R^{})`$ where $`R^{}`$ is the sum of the contributions for $`ij`$:

$$\underset{r,r^{}}{}v_{i,r}(m)v_{j,r^{}}(m)\underset{l>0}{}q^{lrlr^{}}(\frac{[a_i[l],a_j[l]]}{c_l}+\frac{[a_j[l],a_i[l]]}{c_l})$$

$$=2\underset{r,r^{}}{}v_{i,r}(m)v_{j,r^{}}(m)\underset{l>0}{}q^{lrlr^{}}\frac{[a_i[l],a_j[l]]}{c_l}$$

In particular $`\pi _0(R^{})2`$.∎

For $`M`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial denote $`A_M^{\text{inv}}=\{t^{\alpha (m,M)}Mm/m\text{ }𝒴_t^A\text{-monomial}\}`$. In particular for $`m^{}A_M^{\text{inv}}`$ we have $`\overline{m^{}}m_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}=\overline{M}M^1`$.

#### 6.4.2. The polynomials

For $`M`$ a $`𝒴_t`$-monomial, denote $`B_M^{\text{inv}}=t^{}BA_M^{\text{inv}}`$.

###### Theorem 6.13.

For $`mt^{}B`$ there is a unique $`L_t(m)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that:

$$\overline{L_t(m)}=(\overline{m}m^1)L_t(m)$$

$$E_t(m)=L_t(m)+\underset{m^{}<m,m^{}B_m^{\text{inv}}}{}P_{m^{},m}(t)L_t(m^{})$$

where $`P_{m^{},m}(t)t^1[t^1]`$.

Those polynomials $`P_{m^{},m}(t)`$ are called analogues to Kazhdan-Lusztig polynomials and the $`L_t(m)`$ ($`mB`$) for a canonical basis of $`𝔎_t^{f,\mathrm{}}`$. Such polynomials were introduced by Nakajima  for the $`ADE`$-case.

Proof: First consider $`\overline{F_t(m)}`$: it is in $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ and has only one dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial $`\overline{m}`$, so $`\overline{F_t(m)}=\overline{m}m^1F_t(m)`$.

Let be $`m=m_L>m_{L1}>\mathrm{}>m_0`$ the finite set $`t^{}D(m)B_m^{\text{inv}}`$ (see lemma 5.10) with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering. Note that it follows from section 6.4.1 that for $`Ll0`$, we have $`\overline{m_l}m_l^1=\overline{m}m^1`$.

We have $`E_t(m_0)=F_t(m_0)`$ and so $`\overline{E_t(m_0)}=\overline{m_0}m_0^1E_t(m_0)`$. As $`B_{m_0}^{\text{inv}}=\{m_0\}`$, we have $`L_t(m_0)=E_t(m_0)`$. We suppose by induction that the $`L_t(m_l)`$ ($`L1l0`$) are uniquely and well defined. In particular $`m_l`$ is of highest weight in $`L_t(m_l)`$, $`\overline{L_t(m_l)}=\overline{m_l}m_l^1L_t(m_l)=\overline{m}m^1L_t(m_l)`$, and we can write:

$$\stackrel{~}{D}_t(m_L)𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}=[t^\pm ]F_t(m_L)\underset{0lL1}{}[t^\pm ]L_t(m_l)$$

In particular consider $`\alpha _{l,L}(t)[t^\pm ]`$ such that:

$$E_t(m)=F_t(m)+\underset{l<L}{}\alpha _{l,L}(t)L_t(m_l)$$

We want $`L_t(m)`$ of the form :

$$L_t(m)=F_t(m)+\underset{l<L}{}\beta _{l,L}(t)L_t(m_l)$$

The condition $`\overline{L_t(m)}=\overline{m}m^1mL_t(m)`$ means that the $`\beta _{l,L}(t)`$ are symmetric. The condition $`P_{m^{},m}(t)t^1[t^1]`$ means $`\alpha _{l,L}(t)\beta _{l,L}(t)t^1[t^1]`$. So it suffices to prove that those two conditions uniquely define the $`\beta _{l,L}(t)`$: let us write $`\alpha _{l,L}(t)=\alpha _{l,L}^+(t)+\alpha _{l,L}^0(t)+\alpha _{l,L}^{}(t)`$ (resp. $`\beta _{l,L}(t)=\beta _{l,L}^+(t)+\beta _{l,L}^0(t)+\beta _{l,L}^{}(t)`$) where $`\alpha _{l,L}^\pm (t)t^\pm [t^\pm ]`$ and $`\alpha _{l,L}^0(t)`$ (resp. for $`\beta `$). The condition $`\alpha _{l,L}(t)\beta _{l,L}(t)t^1[t^1]`$ means $`\beta _{l,L}^0(t)=\alpha _{l,L}^0(t)`$ and $`\beta _{l,L}^{}(t)=\alpha _{l,L}^{}(t)`$. The symmetry of $`\beta _{l,L}(t)`$ means $`\beta _{l,L}^+(t)=\beta _{l,L}^{}(t^1)=\alpha _{l,L}^{}(t^1)`$.∎

#### 6.4.3. Examples for $`𝔤=sl_2`$

In this section we suppose that $`𝔤=sl_2`$.

###### Proposition 6.14.

Let $`mt^{}B`$ such that $`l,u_l(m)1`$. Then $`L_t(m)=F_t(m)`$. Moreover:

$$E_t(m)=L_t(m)+\underset{m^{}<m/m^{}B_m^{\text{inv}}}{}t^{R(m^{})}L_t(m^{})$$

where $`R(m^{})1`$ is given by $`\pi _+(m^{}m^1)=A_{i_1,l_1}^1\mathrm{}A_{i_R,l_R}^1`$. In particular for $`m^{}B_m^{\text{inv}}`$ such that $`m^{}<m`$ we have $`P_{m^{},m}(t)=t^{R(m^{})}`$.

Proof: Note that a dominant monomial $`m^{}<m`$ verifies $`l,u_l(m^{})1`$ and appears in $`E_t(m)`$. We know that $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m𝔎_t=\underset{m^{}t^{}D_mB_m^{\text{inv}}}{}[t^\pm ]F_t(m^{})`$. We can introduce $`P_{m^{},m}(t)[t^\pm ]`$ such that:

$$E_t(m)=F_t(m)+\underset{m^{}t^{}D_mB^{\text{inv}}\{m\}}{}P_{m^{},m}(t)F_t(m^{})$$

So by induction it suffices to show that $`P_{m^{},m}(t)t^1[t^1]`$.

$`P_{m^{},m}(t)`$ is the coefficient of $`m^{}`$ in $`E_t(m)`$. A dominant $`𝒴_t`$-monomial $`M`$ which appears in $`E_t(m)`$ is of the form:

$$M=m(m_1\mathrm{}m_{R+1})^1m_1t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}^1m_2t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_2}^1m_3\mathrm{}t\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}^1m_{R+1}$$

where $`l_1<\mathrm{}<l_R`$ verify $`\{l_r+2,l_r2\}\{l_1,\mathrm{},l_{r1},l_{r+1},\mathrm{},l_R\}`$ is empty, $`u_{l_r1}(m)=u_{l_r+1}(m)=1`$ and we have set $`m_r=\underset{l_{r1}<ll_r}{\overset{}{}}\stackrel{~}{Y}_l^{u_l(m)}`$. Such a monomial appears one time in $`E_t(m)`$. In particular $`P_{m^{},m}(t)=t^\alpha `$ where $`\alpha `$ is given by $`M=t^\alpha m^{}`$ that is to say $`\overline{M}M^1=t^{2\alpha }m_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}m^{}=t^{2\alpha }m^1m`$. So we compute:

$`\overline{M}M^1=t^{2R}\overline{m_{R+1}}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}^1\overline{m_R}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}^1\overline{m_1}(\overline{m}_1^1\mathrm{}\overline{m}_{R+1}^1)\overline{m}m_{R+1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}m_R^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}m_1^1(m_1\mathrm{}m_{R+1})m^1=t^{2R}t^{4R}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}^1\overline{m}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}m^1=t^{2R}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}^1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_R}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{A}_{l_1}\overline{m}m^1=t^{2R}\overline{m}m^1`$

Let us look at another example $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_0^2\stackrel{~}{Y}_2`$. We have:

$$E_t(m)=L_t(m)+t^2L_t(m^{})$$

where $`m^{}=t\stackrel{~}{Y}_0^2\stackrel{~}{Y}_2\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1B_m^{\text{inv}}`$ and:

$$L_t(m)=F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_0)F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_0\stackrel{~}{Y}_2)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_0(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1)\stackrel{~}{Y}_0\stackrel{~}{Y}_2(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_3^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1))$$

$$L_t(m^{})=F_t(m^{})=t\stackrel{~}{Y}_0^2\stackrel{~}{Y}_2\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1)$$

Indeed the dominant monomials appearing in $`E_t(m)`$ are $`m`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_0t\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_0\stackrel{~}{Y}_2+\stackrel{~}{Y}_0^2t\stackrel{~}{A}_1^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_2=(1+t^2)m^{}`$.

In particular: $`P_{m^{},m}(t)=t^2`$.

#### 6.4.4. Example in non-simply laced case

We suppose that $`C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 2\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right)`$ and $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}`$. The formulas for $`E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})`$ and $`E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5})`$ are given is section 8. We have:

$$E_t(m)=L_t(m)+t^1L_t(m^{})$$

where $`m^{}=t\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,2}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1B_m^{\text{inv}}`$ and:

$$L_t(m^{})=F_t(m^{})=t\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,2}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,4}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,6}^1)))$$

Indeed the dominant monomials appearing in $`E_t(m)`$ are $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,2}^1t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}=t^1m^{}`$.

In particular $`P_{m^{},m}(t)=t^1`$.

## 7. Questions and conjectures

### 7.1. Positivity of coefficients

###### Proposition 7.1.

If $`𝔤`$ is of type $`A_n`$ ($`n1`$), the coefficients of $`\chi _{q,t}(Y_{i,0})`$ are in $`[t^\pm ]`$.

Proof: We show that for all $`iI`$ the hypothesis of proposition 5.17 for $`m=Y_{i,0}`$ are verified; in particular the property $`Q`$ of section 5.5.1 will be verified.

Let $`i`$ be in $`I`$. For $`jI`$, let us write $`E(Y_{i,0})=\underset{mB_j}{}\lambda _j(m)E_j(m)𝔎_j`$ where $`\lambda _j(m)`$. Let $`D`$ be the set $`D=\{\text{monomials of }E_j(m)\text{ }/jI,mB_j,\lambda _j(m)0\}`$. It suffices to prove that for $`jI`$, $`mB_jDu_j(m)1`$ (because proposition 5.17 implies that for all $`iI`$, $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})=\pi ^1(E(Y_{i,0}))`$).

As $`E(Y_{i,0})=F(Y_{i,0})`$, $`Y_{i,0}`$ is the unique dominant $`𝒴`$-monomial in $`E(Y_{i,0})`$. So for a monomial $`mD`$ there is a finite sequence $`\{m_0=Y_{i,0},m_1,\mathrm{},m_R=m\}`$ such that for all $`1rR`$, there is $`r^{}<r`$ and $`jI`$ such that $`m_r^{}B_j`$ and for $`r^{}<r^{\prime \prime }r`$, $`m_{r^{\prime \prime }}`$ is a monomial of $`E_j(m_r^{})`$ and $`m_{r^{\prime \prime }}m_{r^{\prime \prime }1}^1\{A_{j,l}^1/l\}`$. Such a sequence is said to be adapted to $`m`$. Suppose there is $`jI`$ and $`mB_jD`$ such that $`u_j(m)2`$. So there is $`m^{}m`$ in $`DB_j`$ such that $`u_j(m)=2`$. So we can consider $`m_0D`$ such that there is $`j_0I`$, $`m_0B_{j_0}`$, $`u_{j_0}(m)2`$ and for all $`m^{}<m_0`$ in $`D`$ we have $`jI,m^{}B_ju_j(m^{})1`$. Let us write:

$$m_0=Y_{j_0,q^l}Y_{j_0,q^m}\underset{jj_0}{}m_0^{(j)}$$

where for $`jj_0`$, $`m_0^{(j)}=\underset{l}{}Y_{j,l}^{u_{j,l}(m_0)}`$. In a finite sequence adapted to $`m_0`$, a term $`Y_{j_0,q^l}`$ or $`Y_{j_0,q^m}`$ must come from a $`E_{j_0+1}(m_1)`$ or a $`E_{j_01}(m_1)`$. So for example we have $`m_1<m_0`$ in $`D`$ of the form $`m_1=Y_{j_0,q^m}Y_{j_0+1,q^{l1}}\underset{jj_0,j_0+1}{}m_1^{(j)}`$. In all cases we get a monomial $`m_1<m_0`$ in $`D`$ of the form:

$$m_1=Y_{j_1,q^{m_1}}Y_{j_1+1,q^{l_1}}\underset{jj_1,j_1+1}{}m_1^{(j)}$$

But the term $`Y_{j_1+1,q^{l1}}`$ can not come from a $`E_{j_1}(m_2)`$ because we would have $`u_{j_1}(m_2)2`$. So we have $`m_2<m_1`$ in $`D`$ of the form:

$$m_2=Y_{j_2,q^{m_2}}Y_{j_2+2,q^{l_2}}\underset{jj_2,j_2+1,j_2+2}{}m_2^{(j)}$$

This term must come from a $`E_{j_21},E_{j_2+3}`$. By induction, we get $`m_N<m_0`$ in $`D`$ of the form :

$$m_N=Y_{1,q^{m_N}}Y_{n,q^{l_N}}\underset{j1,..,n}{}m_N^{(j)}=Y_{1,q^{mN}}Y_{n,q^{l_N}}$$

It is a dominant monomial of $`DD_{Y_{i,0}}`$ which is not $`Y_{i,0}`$. It is impossible (proof of lemma 5.14).∎

An analog result is also geometrically proved by Nakajima for the $`ADE`$-case in  (it is also algebraically for $`AD`$-cases proved in ). Those results and the explicit formulas in $`n=1,2`$-cases (see section 8) suggest:

###### Conjecture 7.2.

The coefficients of $`F_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,0})=\chi _{q,t}(Y_{i,0})`$ are in $`[t^\pm ]`$.

In particular for $`mB`$, the coefficients of $`E_t(m)`$ would be in $`[t^\pm ]`$; moreover $`\chi _{q,t}(Y_{i,0})`$ and $`\chi _q(Y_{i,0})`$ would have the same monomials, the $`t`$-algorithm would stop and $`\text{Im}(\chi _{q,t})𝒴_t`$.

At the time he wrote this paper the author does not know a general proof of the conjecture. However a case by case investigation seems possible: the cases $`G_2,B_2,C_2`$ are checked in section 8 and the cases $`F_4,B_n,C_n`$ ($`n10`$) have been checked on a computer. So a combinatorial proof for series $`B_n,C_n`$ ($`n2`$) analog to the proof of proposition 7.1 would complete the picture.

### 7.2. Decomposition in irreducible modules

The proposition 6.14 suggests:

###### Conjecture 7.3.

For $`mB`$ we have $`\pi _+(L_t(m))=L(m)`$.

In the $`ADE`$-case the conjecture 7.3 is proved by Nakajima with the help of geometry (). In particular this conjecture implies that the coefficients of $`\pi _+(L_t(m))`$ are non negative. It gives a way to compute explicitly the decomposition of a standard module in irreducible modules, because the conjecture 7.3 implies:

$$E(m)=L(m)+\underset{m^{}<m}{}P_{m^{},m}(1)L(m^{})$$

In particular we would have $`P_{m^{},m}(1)0`$.

In section 6.4.3 we have studied some examples:

-In proposition 6.14 for $`𝔤=sl_2`$ and $`mB`$ such that $`l,u_l(m)1`$: we have $`\pi _+(L_t(m))=F(m)=L(m)`$ and:

$$E(m)=\underset{m^{}B/m^{}m}{}L(m^{})$$

-For $`𝔤=sl_2`$ and $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_0^2\stackrel{~}{Y}_2`$: we have $`\pi _+(L_t(m))=F(Y_0)F(Y_0Y_2)=L(m)`$ and:

$$E(Y_0^2Y_2)=L(Y_0^2Y_2)+L(Y_0)$$

Note that $`L(Y_0^2Y_2)`$ has two dominant monomials $`Y_0^2Y_2`$ and $`Y_0`$ because $`Y_0^2Y_2`$ is irregular (lemma 4.5).

-For $`C=B_2`$ and $`m=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}`$. The $`\pi _+(L_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}))`$ has non negative coefficients and the conjecture implies $`E(Y_{2,0}Y_{1,5})=L(Y_{2,0}Y_{1,5})+L(Y_{1,1})`$.

### 7.3. Further applications and generalizations

We hope to address the following questions in the future:

#### 7.3.1. Iterated deformed screening operators

Our presentation of deformed screening operators as commutators leads to the definition of iterated deformed screening operators. For example in order 2 we set:

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{j,i,t}(m)=[\underset{l}{}\stackrel{~}{S}_{j,l},S_{i,t}(m)]$$

#### 7.3.2. Possible generalizations

Some generalizations of the approach used in this article will be studied:

a) the theory of $`q`$-characters at roots of unity () suggests a generalization to the case $`q^N=1`$.

b) in this article we decided to work with $`𝒴_t`$ which is a quotient of $`𝒴_u`$. The same construction with $`𝒴_u`$ will give characters with an infinity of parameters of deformation $`t_r=\text{exp}(\underset{l>0}{}h^{2l}q^{lr}c_l)`$ ($`r`$).

c) our construction is independent of representation theory and could be established for other generalized Cartan matrices (in particular for twisted affine cases).

## 8. Appendix

There are 5 types of semi-simple Lie algebra of rank 2: $`A_1\times A_1`$, $`A_2`$, $`C_2`$, $`B_2`$, $`G_2`$ (see for example ). In each case we give the formula for $`E(1),E(2)𝔎`$ and we see that the hypothesis of proposition 5.17 is verified. In particular we have $`E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0})=\pi ^1(E(1)),E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\pi ^1(E(2))𝔎_t`$.

Following , we represent the $`E(1),E(2)𝔎`$ as a $`I\times `$-oriented colored tree. For $`\chi 𝔎`$ the tree $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\chi `$ is defined as follows: the set of vertices is the set of $`𝒴`$-monomials of $`\chi `$. We draw an arrow of color $`(i,l)`$ from $`m_1`$ to $`m_2`$ if $`m_2=A_{i,l}^1m_1`$ and if in the decomposition $`\chi =\underset{mB_i}{}\mu _mL_i(m)`$ there is $`MB_i`$ such that $`\mu _M0`$ and $`m_1,m_2`$ appear in $`L_i(M)`$.

Then we give a formula for $`E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}),E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})`$ and we write it in $`𝔎_{1,t}`$ and in $`𝔎_{2,t}`$.

### 8.1. $`A_1\times A_1`$-case

The Cartan matrix is $`C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 0\\ 0& 2\end{array}\right)`$ and $`r_1=r_2=1`$ (note that in this case the computations keep unchanged for all $`r_1,r_2`$).

and
$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{1,0}+Y_{1,2}^1)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,1}^1)𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,2}^1𝔎_{2,t}$$

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{2,0}+Y_{2,2}^1)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,1}^1)𝔎_{2,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,2}^1𝔎_{1,t}$$

### 8.2. $`A_2`$-case

The Cartan matrix is $`C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right)`$. It is symmetric, $`r_1=r_2=1`$:

and
$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{1,0}+Y_{1,2}^1Y_{2,1}+Y_{2,3}^1)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,1}^1)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,3}^1𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,2}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,2}^1)𝔎_{2,t}$$

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{2,0}+Y_{2,2}^1Y_{1,1}+Y_{1,3}^1)=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,1}^1)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}^1𝔎_{2,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,2}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}^1)𝔎_{1,t}$$

### 8.3. $`C_2,B_2`$-case

The two cases are dual so it suffices to compute for the Cartan matrix $`C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 2\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right)`$ and $`r_1=1`$, $`r_2=2`$.

and
$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{1,0}+Y_{1,2}^1Y_{2,1}+Y_{2,5}^1Y_{1,4}+Y_{1,6}^1)$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,1}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,5}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,4}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,5}^1)𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,2}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,3}^1)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,6}^1𝔎_{2,t}$$

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{2,0}+Y_{2,4}^1Y_{1,1}Y_{1,3}+Y_{1,1}Y_{1,5}^1+Y_{1,3}^1Y_{1,5}^1Y_{2,2}+Y_{2,6}^1)$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,4}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1+t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}^1)+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,6}^1𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,2}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}^1:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,2}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,4}^1)𝔎_{2,t}$$

### 8.4. $`G_2`$-case

The Cartan matrix is $`C=\left(\begin{array}{cc}2& 3\\ 1& 2\end{array}\right)`$ and $`r_1=1`$, $`r_2=3`$.

#### 8.4.1. First fundamental representation

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{1,0}+Y_{1,2}^1Y_{2,1}+Y_{2,7}^1Y_{1,4}Y_{1,6}+Y_{1,4}Y_{1,6}+Y_{1,6}^1Y_{1,8}^1Y_{2,5}+Y_{2,11}^1Y_{1,10}+Y_{1,12}^1)$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}(1+\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,1}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,7}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,4}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,6}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,7}^1+t^2\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,7}^1\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,5}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,11}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,10}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,11}^1)𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,2}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,4}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,4}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,6}:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,6}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,8}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,5}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,8}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,12}^1:𝔎_{2,t}$$

#### 8.4.2. Second fundamental representation

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\pi ^1(Y_{2,0}+Y_{2,6}^1Y_{1,5}Y_{1,3}Y_{1,1}+Y_{1,7}^1Y_{1,3}Y_{1,1}0+Y_{2,4}Y_{1,7}^1Y_{1,5}^1Y_{1,1}+Y_{1,7}^1Y_{1,5}^1Y_{1,3}^1Y_{2,4}Y_{2,2}$$

$$+Y_{2,10}^1Y_{1,9}Y_{1,1}+Y_{2,4}Y_{2,8}^1+Y_{2,2}Y_{2,10}^1Y_{1,9}Y_{1,3}^1+Y_{1,11}^1Y_{1,1}+Y_{2,8}^1Y_{2,10}^1Y_{1,9}Y_{1,7}Y_{1,5}+Y_{2,2}Y_{1,11}^1Y_{1,3}^1$$

$$+Y_{2,8}^1Y_{1,11}^1Y_{1,7}Y_{1,5}+Y_{1,11}^1Y_{1,9}^1Y_{1,5}+Y_{1,11}^1Y_{1,9}^1Y_{1,7}^1Y_{2,6}+Y_{2,12}^1)$$

We use the following relations to write $`E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})`$ in $`𝔎_{1,t}`$ and in $`𝔎_{2,t}`$: $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}=\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}`$.

$$E_t(\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0})=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,6}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,6}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,4}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}^1)))+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,10}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,9}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,2}^1)(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}^1)$$

$$+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,4}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,8}^1:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,8}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,10}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,9}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,7}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,10}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,8}^1(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{1,6}^1)))+\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,12}^1𝔎_{1,t}$$

$$=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,0}(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,3}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,7}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,4}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,7}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}^1)$$

$$+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,7}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,4}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,2}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,7}^1)(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}^1)+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,11}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,1}:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,2}\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,11}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,3}^1:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,5}^1)$$

$$+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,11}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,9}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,5}:+:\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,11}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,9}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{1,7}^1\stackrel{~}{Y}_{2,6}:(1+t\stackrel{~}{A}_{2,9}^1)𝔎_{2,t}$$

## Notations

| $`A`$ | set of $`𝒴`$-monomials | p 3.4.1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`A_t`$ | set of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials | p 3.5.2 |
| $`A_m^{\text{inv}},B_m^{\text{inv}}`$ | set of $`𝒴_t`$-monomials | p 6.4.1 |
| $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ | product module | p 5.2.1 |
| $`\alpha `$ | map $`(I\times )^2`$ | p 3.12 |
| $`\alpha (m)`$ | character | p 6.12 |
| $`a_i[m]`$ | element of $``$ | p 3.1 |
| $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l},\stackrel{~}{A}_{i,l}^1`$ | elements of $`𝒴_u`$ or $`𝒴_t`$ | p 3.2.1 |
| $`A_{i,l},A_{i,l}^1`$ | elements of $`𝒴`$ | p 3.2.3 |
| $`B`$ | a set of $`𝒴`$-monomials | p 3.4.2 |
| $`B_i`$, $`B_J`$ | a set of $`𝒴`$-monomials | p 3.4.2 |
| $`(B_{i,j})`$ | symmetrized |  |
|  | Cartan matrix | p 2.1 |
| $`\beta `$ | map $`(I\times )^2`$ | p 3.3.2 |
| $`(C_{i,j})`$ | Cartan matrix | p 2.1 |
| $`(\stackrel{~}{C}_{i,j})`$ | inverse of $`C`$ | p 2.1 |
| $`c_r`$ | central element of $``$ | p 3.1 |
| $`d`$ | bicharacter | p 3.18 |
| $`D_{m,K},D_m`$ | set of monomials | p 5.2.3 |
| $`\stackrel{~}{D}_m`$ | submodule of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | p 5.11 |
| $`E_i(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_i`$ | p 4.1.2 |
| $`E_{i,t}(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$ | p 4.5.1 |
| $`E_{i,t}^m`$ | map | p 5.2.2 |
| $`E(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎`$ | p 5.1.1 |
| $`E_t(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | p 5.4 |
| $`F_i(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_i`$ | p 4.5.2 |
| $`F_{i,t}(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_{i,t}`$ | p 4.12 |
| $`F(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎`$ | p 5.1.1 |
| $`F_t(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | p 5.12 |
| $`\gamma `$ | map $`(I\times )^2`$ | p 3.11 |
| $``$ | Heisenberg algebra | p 3.1 |
| $`^+,^{}`$ | subalgebras of $``$ | p 3.1.2 |
| $`_h`$ | formal series in $``$ | p 3.2.1 |
| $`_t`$ | quotient of $`_h`$ | p 3.10 |
| $`_t^+,_t^{}`$ | subalgebras of $`_t`$ | p 3.10 |
| $`𝔎_i,𝔎_J,𝔎`$ | subrings of $`𝒴`$ | p 4.1.2 |
| $`𝔎_{i,t},𝔎_{J,t},𝔎_t`$ | subrings of $`𝒴_t`$ | p 4.5.1 |
| $`𝔎_{i,t}^{\mathrm{}},𝔎_{J,t}^{\mathrm{}},𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | subrings of $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | p 5.6 |
| $`\chi _q`$ | morphism |  |
|  | of $`q`$-characters | p 2.3 |
| $`\chi _{q,t}`$ | morphism |  |
|  | of $`q,t`$-characters | p 6.1 |
| $`L_i(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_i`$ | p 4.1.4 |
| $`L_t(m)`$ | element of $`𝔎_t^{\mathrm{}}`$ | p 6.13 |
| $`:m:`$ | monomial in $`A`$ | p 3.2.4 |
| $`\stackrel{~}{m}`$ | monomial in $`A_t`$ | p 3.5.2 |
| $`N,N_t,𝒩,𝒩_t`$ | characters, bicharacters | p 3.5.1 |
| $`P(n)`$ | property of $`n`$ | p 5.12 |

| $`\pi `$ | map | p 3.4.1 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| $`\pi _r`$ | map to $``$ | p 3.3.1 |
| $`\pi _+,\pi _{}`$ | endomorphisms of |  |
|  | $`_h`$, $`_t`$ | p 3.1.2 |
| $`q`$ | complex number | p 2.1 |
| $`Q(n)`$ | property of $`n`$ | p 5.5.1 |
| Rep | Grothendieck ring | p 2.7 |
| $`\text{Rep}_t`$ | deformed |  |
|  | Grothendieck ring | p 6.1.1 |
| $`s(m_r)_J,s(m_r)`$ | sequences of $`[t^\pm ]`$ | p 5.21 |
| $`S_i`$ | screening operator | p 4.1 |
| $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{i,l}`$ | screening current | p 4.2 |
| $`S_{i,t}`$ | $`t`$-screening operator | p 4.3 |
| $`t`$ | central element of $`𝒴_t`$ | p 3.3.1 |
| $`t_R`$ | central element of $`𝒴_u`$ | p 3.2.1 |
| $`u_{i,l}`$ | multiplicity of $`Y_{i,l}`$ | p 3.4.2 |
| $`u_i`$ | sum of the $`u_{i,l}`$ | p 3.4.2 |
| $`𝔘`$ | subring of $`(q)`$ | p 2.1 |
| $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔤})`$ | quantum |  |
|  | affine algebra | p 2.3 |
| $`𝒰_q(\widehat{𝔥})`$ | Cartan algebra | p 2.3 |
| $`X_{i,l}`$ | element of Rep | p 2.5 |
| $`y_i[m]`$ | element of $``$ | p 3.1.2 |
| $`Y_{i,l},Y_{i,l}^1`$ | elements of $`𝒴`$ | p 3.2.3 |
| $`\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l},\stackrel{~}{Y}_{i,l}^1`$ | elements of $`𝒴_u`$ or $`𝒴_t`$ | p 3.2.1 |
| $`𝒴`$ | subalgebra of $`_h`$ | p 3.2.3 |
| $`𝒴_t`$ | quotient of $`𝒴_u`$ | p 3.10 |
| $`𝒴_t^+,𝒴_t^{}`$ | subalgebras of $`_t`$ | p 3.3.1 |
| $`𝒴_u`$ | subalgebra of $`_h`$ | p 3.4 |
| $`𝒴_{i,t}`$ | $`𝒴_t`$-module | p 4.7 |
| $`𝒴_{i,u}`$ | $`𝒴_u`$-module | p 4.3 |
| $`𝒴_t^{\mathrm{}},𝒴_t^{A,\mathrm{}}`$ | submodules of $`\stackrel{}{A}_t`$ | p 5.2.1 |
| $`𝒴_t^A,𝒴_t^{A,K}`$ | submodules of $`𝒴_t`$ | p 5.2.1 |
| $`z`$ | indeterminate | p 2.1 |
| $`::`$ | endomorphism of |  |
|  | $`,_h,𝒴_u,𝒴_t`$ | p 3.2.4 |
| $``$ | deformed |  |
|  | multiplication | p 6.5 |