text:
# Subregular representations of n and simple singularities of type 𝐴_{𝑛-1}

## 1. Introduction

### 1.1.

Fix an integer $`n>0`$. Let $`𝕂`$ (respectively $`𝕃`$) be an algebraically closed field of characteristic $`p`$ (respectively arbitrary characteristic). We will assume throughout that $`p`$ and $`n`$ are coprime. Let $`𝔽`$ be the prime subfield of $`𝕂`$. Given an integer $`m`$ we denote its reduction modulo $`p`$ by $`\overline{m}𝔽`$.

### 1.2.

Quantisations of Kleinian singularities were introduced by Hodges  for type $`A`$ and later by Crawley-Boevey and Holland  for all types. Premet has suggested a possible relationship between these quantisations and subregular representations of a simple Lie algebra. In  Premet examines this in characteristic zero.

### 1.3.

The first half of the paper is concerned with exploring Premet’s suggestion in the modular type $`A`$ case. We refer the reader to later sections of the paper for unexplained definitions and notation. Let $`U`$ be the enveloping algebra of $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ and for $`v𝕂[t]`$ let $`T(v)`$ be Hodges’ non-commutative deformation of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A`$ over $`𝕂`$. Let $`U_\chi `$ be the reduced enveloping algebra for a subregular nilpotent functional $`\chi `$ and let $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ be the central reduction of $`U_\chi `$ determined by the weight $`\lambda `$. We show in Theorem 7.2 that, for $`p>n`$, there exists a polynomial $`v_\lambda 𝕂[t]`$ such that $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{Mat}(t(v_\lambda ))`$, where $`t(v_\lambda )`$ is a central reduction of $`T(v_\lambda )`$. Moreover this isomorphism respects a natural $``$-grading on the algebras $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ and $`t(v_\lambda )`$ and so induces an equivalence between the category of $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-modules and a category of suitably graded $`t(v_\lambda )`$-modules.

### 1.4.

A crucial step in the above theorem is the comparison of $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ and $`t(v_\lambda )`$ with a basic algebra we call the no-cycle algebra. This algebra is defined over any field $`𝕃`$, depends on a positive integer $`k`$, and is denoted $`N_𝕃(k)`$. The no-cycle algebra is a string algebra and hence its indecomposable modules can be described by a simple combinatorial procedure. As an application of this comparison we give a sufficient condition for the indecomposability of a baby Verma module belonging to the block of $`U_\chi `$ determined by a regular weight $`\lambda `$. This is formulated in terms of the geometry of the Springer fibre $`_\chi `$.

### 1.5.

The second half of the paper concerns conjectures of Lusztig on a relationship between equivariant $`K`$-theory and modular representations of simple Lie algebras, . We work only with subregular representations of type A, where these conjectures have been confirmed numerically by Jantzen, . Let $`𝐇`$ be the minimal desingularisation over $``$ of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A`$ and let $`𝐇_0`$ be the corresponding exceptional divisor. Both $`𝐇`$ and $`𝐇_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ admit an action of a two dimensional torus, $`T`$. Lusztig has constructed an action of an affine Iwahori-Hecke algebra on both $`K_T(𝐇)`$ and $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$, the $`T`$-equivariant $`K`$-groups of $`𝐇`$ and $`𝐇_\mathrm{𝟎}`$ respectively. Using Kapranov and Vasserot’s interpretation of the McKay correspondence in terms of derived categories, , we show in Theorem 11.13 that the above action on $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ admits a categorification in $`D_T(𝐇_0)`$, the bounded derived category of $`T`$-equivariant sheaves on $`𝐇_0`$. This essentially means that $`D_T(𝐇_0)`$ admits an action of the affine braid group which specialises to Lusztig’s Iwahori-Hecke algebra action on $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$. We also describe a form and a duality on $`D_T(𝐇_0)`$ which specialise to those considered by Lusztig on $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ in . The reader should beware that we do not concern ourselves with the existence of a braid group action as described in ; in the literature, our action is sometimes referred to as a weak action.

### 1.6.

The two themes of the paper are linked by the no-cycle algebra, $`N_𝕃(n)`$. There is a natural bigrading on $`N_𝕃(n)`$. In the characteristic zero case there is a triangulated functor from $`D(N_{}(n)\mathrm{grmod})`$, the bounded derived category of bigraded $`N_{}(n)`$-modules, to $`D_T(𝐇_0)`$. This functor induces an isomorphism on $`K`$-theory, sending simple $`N_{}(n)`$-modules to the signed basis of $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ constructed by Lusztig in . In the modular case, forgetting half of the bigrading on $`N_𝕂(n)`$, there is an isomorphism between the $`K`$-groups of graded $`N_𝕂(n)`$-modules and of $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-modules for regular $`\lambda `$. Under this isomorphism the operations of wall-crossing functors on $`U_\chi `$-modules correspond to the generators of an Iwahori-Hecke algebra action, a characteristic $`p`$ analogue of that in 1.5. The category of bigraded $`N_𝕂(n)`$-modules is a mixed category lying over the usual category of $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-modules.

### 1.7.

There are several clear directions for future work arising from this paper. Firstly, the hypothesis $`p>n`$ should be weakened to $`p`$ and $`n`$ being coprime. It would also be highly desirable to extend the results to other types. In Section 12 we indicate how to extend our results to type $`B`$. It seems likely, however, that the techniques used here are not sufficient for this in general. Furthermore, we expect $`N_{}(n)`$-modules to correspond to a central reduction of the subregular representations of a quantum group of type $`A`$ at a root of unity. We have not, however, checked this here.

### 1.8.

The paper is organised as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the notation we will require when we deal with categories having group actions. We define the no-cycle algebra in Section 3 and describe some of its indecomposable representations. In Section 4 we study subregular representations of $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ and relate them to the no-cycle algebra. Section 5 takes a brief look at Gröbner-Shirshov bases for non-commutative algebras and their representations. In Section 6 we study Hodges’ quantisation using, in particular, the results of the previous section. In Section 7 we prove Theorem 7.2, whilst in Section 8 we present the application to baby Verma modules. We remind the reader about equivariant sheaves and Hilbert schemes in Section 9. In Section 10 we find a new interpretation of Lusztig’s signed basis (in the subregular situation) and in Section 11 we prove Theorem 11.13. Section 12 sees our final remarks, tying together the two themes.

## 2. $`G`$-categories

### 2.1.

Let $`𝒞`$ be an abelian $`𝕃`$-category and let $`G`$ be a group acting on $`𝒞`$. So, for every $`gG`$, we have an exact shift functor, $`[g]`$, together with natural isomorphisms $`[g][g^{}][gg^{}]`$. Sometimes in the literature such actions are called “weak” as opposed to “strong” actions, which satisfy associativity constraints for natural isomorphisms. We do not use the term “weak” since we are not interested in associativity constraints.

We call $`𝒞`$ a $`G`$-category if an action of $`G`$ on $`𝒞`$ is fixed. If $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒟`$ are both $`G`$-categories, we say that the functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒞𝒟`$ is a $`G`$-functor if functors $`\mathrm{\Phi }[g]`$ and $`[g]\mathrm{\Phi }`$ are naturally isomorphic for every $`gG`$.

A $`G`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒞𝒟`$ is a $`G`$-equivalence if there exists a $`G`$-functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }:𝒟𝒞`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Phi }1_𝒞`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }1_𝒟`$. We say $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒟`$ are equivalent $`G`$-categories. Note that an equivalence that is a $`G`$-graded functor need not be a $`G`$-equivalence \[13, Section 5\].

### 2.2.

Let $`R=_{gG}R_g`$ be a $`G`$-graded (noetherian) algebra, that is $`R_gR_g^{}R_{gg^{}}`$. A $`G`$-graded $`R`$-module is an $`R`$-module, $`M`$, together with a $`K`$-space decomposition $`M=_{gG}M_g`$ satisfying $`R_gM_g^{}M_{gg^{}}`$. The category of $`G`$-graded (finitely generated) $`R`$-modules, denoted $`R\mathrm{Grmod}`$ ($`R\mathrm{grmod}`$) is an example of a $`G`$-category. By definition, we have $`(M[g])_g^{}=M_{g^{}g^1}.`$ for all $`g,g^{}G`$.

If $`G`$ acts on an algebra $`R`$ by automorphisms then $`R\mathrm{mod}`$ is another example of a $`G`$-category. The group $`G`$ acts by twisting.

### 2.3.

Given $`X,Y𝒞`$ and $`gG`$, set $`\text{H}\text{om}(X,Y)_g=\text{H}\text{om}_𝒞(X[g],Y)`$. We define

$$\text{H}\text{om}(X,Y)=\underset{gG}{}\text{H}\text{om}(X,Y)_g,$$

a $`G`$-graded vector space. The identification $`\text{H}\text{om}_𝒞(X[g],Y)\text{H}\text{om}_𝒞(X[gg^{}],Y[g^{}])`$ yields a composition law for $`X,Y,Z𝒞`$: $`\text{H}\text{om}(Y,Z)_g^{}\times \text{H}\text{om}(X,Y)_g\text{H}\text{om}(X,Z)_{gg^{}}`$. Then, for the examples appearing in 2.2, the space $`\text{E}\text{nd}(X)=\text{H}\text{om}(X,X)`$ becomes a $`G`$-graded $`K`$-algebra and $`\text{H}\text{om}(X,Y)`$ a $`G`$-graded $`\text{E}\text{nd}(X)`$-module. The functor $`\text{H}\text{om}(X,)`$ is a $`G`$-graded functor from $`𝒞`$ to $`\text{E}\text{nd}(X)\mathrm{Grmod}`$.

### 2.4.

A triangulated $`G`$-category is a triangulated category with exact shift functors $`[g]`$, $`gG`$, and natural isomorphisms $`[g][g^{}][gg^{}]`$. The bounded derived category $`D(𝒞)`$ of a $`G`$-category is a triangulated $`G`$-category. Analogous to 2.1, we have the notions of triangulated $`G`$-functors and equivalences of triangulated $`G`$-categories.

### 2.5.

Let $`K(𝒞)`$ denote the Grothendieck group of $`𝒞`$. The Grothendieck group of $`D(𝒞)`$, denoted $`K^{}(𝒞)`$, is defined to be the free abelian group generated by the isomorphism classes of objects of $`D(𝒞)`$ subject to the relations $`[M][M^{}][M^{\prime \prime }]`$ for every distinguished triangle

$$M^{}MM^{\prime \prime }M^{}[1].$$

Taking the Euler characteristic induces an isomorphism $`𝐢:K^{}(𝒞)K(𝒞)`$.

Let $`𝒞`$ be a $`G`$-category. Since shift functors are exact, they induce an action of $`[G]`$, the group algebra of $`G`$, on both $`K(𝒞)`$ and $`K^{}(𝒞)`$, which commutes with $`𝐢`$. From now on, we will identify $`K(𝒞)`$ and $`K^{}(𝒞)`$.

## 3. The no-cycle algebra

### 3.1.

Let $`k`$ be a fixed integer. Let $`Q`$ be the directed graph with $`k`$ vertices and $`2k`$ edges labelled $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ for $`i/k`$, see Figure 1.

Let $`𝕃Q`$ be the path algebra of $`Q`$. The no-cycle algebra, $`N_𝕃(k)`$, is the quotient of $`𝕃Q`$ by the two sided ideal generated by all non-trivial paths in $`Q`$ which start and end at the same vertex. By inspection, $`N_𝕃(k)`$ is a $`k(2k1)`$-dimensional algebra.

### 3.2.

The algebra $`N_𝕃(k)`$ is $``$-graded: a vertex idempotent $`e_i`$ has degree $`0`$, $`a_i`$ has degree $`1`$ and $`b_i`$ has degree $`1`$. Following 2.2 the category of $``$-graded modules will be denoted by $`N_𝕃(k)\mathrm{grmod}`$.

### 3.3.

We need some notation before describing several $`N_𝕃(k)`$-modules. For $`i/k`$, introduce formal inverses of the arrows $`a_i`$ (respectively $`b_i`$), written $`a_i^{}`$ (respectively $`b_i^{}`$). The head (respectively tail) of an arrow, $`c`$, is denoted $`h(c)`$ (respectively $`t(c)`$), and we define $`h(c^{})=t(c)`$ (respectively $`t(c^{})=h(c)`$). We form formal paths of length t, $`c_1\mathrm{}c_t`$, where each $`c_j`$ is of the form $`c`$ or $`c^{}`$ for some arrow $`c`$ and $`t(c_j)=h(c_{j+1})`$. Given a formal path $`c_1\mathrm{}c_t`$, we define its inverse to be $`c_t^{}\mathrm{}c_1^{}`$, where $`(c^{})^{}`$ equals $`c`$.

### 3.4.

For $`tk`$, let $`S_t`$ be the set of formal paths $`c_1\mathrm{}c_t`$ such that if $`c_j=a_i`$ (respectively $`b_i`$) then $`c_{j+1}`$ is either $`a_{i1}`$ or $`b_{i1}^{}`$ (respectively $`b_{i+1}`$ or $`a_{i+1}^{}`$), and similarly if $`c_j=a_i^{}`$ (respectively $`b_i^{}`$). Furthermore if $`t=k`$ then exclude from $`S_k`$ the formal paths consisting entirely of $`a`$’s or entirely of $`b`$’s and also the inverses of such formal paths. For $`t<k`$ (respectively $`t=k`$) let $`\rho _t`$ be the equivalence relation on $`S_t`$ which identifies a formal path with its inverse (respectively its cyclic permutations and their inverses). Let $`W_t`$ be a set of equivalence class representatives in $`S_t`$ for $`\rho _t`$.

### 3.5.

For $`t<k`$, an element $`C=c_1\mathrm{}c_tW_t`$ defines a $`t+1`$-dimensional indecomposable string $`N_𝕃(k)`$-module $`St(C)`$. A basis is given by $`\{z_0,\mathrm{},z_t\}`$ where, for $`1jt`$, the element $`z_j`$ is concentrated at vertex $`h(c_j)`$, and $`z_0`$ is concentrated at vertex $`t(c_1)`$. For $`1jt`$ if $`c_j=c`$, an arrow, define $`c(z_j)=z_{j1}`$, whilst if $`c_j=c^{}`$, define $`c(z_{j1})=z_j`$. All other arrows in $`Q`$ act as zero.

### 3.6.

For $`t=k`$, and element $`C=c_1\mathrm{}c_kW_k`$ together with a scalar $`\lambda 𝕃^{}`$, define an indecomposable band $`N_𝕃(k)`$-module $`Bd_\lambda (C)`$. A basis is given by $`\{z_0,\mathrm{}z_{k1}\}`$ where, for $`0jk1`$, the element $`z_j`$ is concentrated at vertex $`h(c_j)`$. If $`c_k=c`$, an arrow, define $`c(z_0)=\lambda z_{k1}`$, whilst if $`c_k=c^{}`$, define $`c(z_{k1})=\lambda ^1z_0`$. For $`1jk1`$, if $`c_j=c`$, an arrow, then $`c(z_j)=z_{j1}`$, whilst if $`c_j=c^{}`$ define $`c(z_{j1})=z_j`$. All other arrows of $`Q`$ act as zero.

### 3.7.

The algebra $`N_𝕃(k)`$ belongs to a family of tame algebras called string algebras. Any non-zero indecomposable $`N_𝕃(k)`$-module of dimension no greater than $`k`$ is isomorphic to either $`St(C)`$ or $`Bd_\lambda (C)`$ for some unique $`C`$ and $`\lambda `$, see \[6, Section 3\]. Observe that the modules $`St(C)`$ admit a $``$-grading compatible with the $``$-grading on $`N_𝕃(k)`$ introduced in 3.2.

## 4. The reduced enveloping algebra

### 4.1.

Let $`\chi 𝔰𝔩_n(𝕃)^{}`$ be the functional vanishing on upper triangular matrices and defined as follows on the strictly lower triangular matrices

$$\chi (E_{i,j})=\{\begin{array}{cc}1\hfill & \text{if }i=j+1\text{ and }1jn2,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`P`$ (respectively $`P^+`$) be the weight lattice (respectively dominant weights) of $`SL_n(𝕃)`$ with respect to the standard choice of torus and Borel subgroup. Let $`\{\varpi _1,\mathrm{},\varpi _{n1}\}`$ be the fundamental weights and let $`\rho =\varpi _1+\mathrm{}+\varpi _{n1}`$. The Weyl group $`W`$ is the symmetric group $`𝔖_n`$ acting on $`P`$. The $`W`$-orbit through $`\lambda P`$ contains a unique representative in $`P^+`$. We also need a dot action given by

$$w\lambda =w(\lambda +\rho )\rho ,wW,\lambda P.$$

### 4.2.

Let $``$ be the flag variety. As a set this consists of all Borel subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕃)`$, that is those subalgebras which are conjugate under $`SL_n(𝕃)`$ to the upper triangular matrices. The cotangent bundle of $``$ is naturally identified with the variety

$$\stackrel{~}{𝒩}=\{(x,𝔟):x(𝔟)=0\}𝔰𝔩_n(𝕃)^{}\times $$

where the first projection $`\pi _1`$ becomes the moment map. The Springer fibre $`_\chi `$ is the subvariety $`\pi _1^1(\chi )`$ of $``$.

There is a simple way to parametrise $`_\chi `$, \[34, Section 6.3\]. Given a basis $`u_i`$ of $`𝕃^n`$, let $`(u_1,\mathrm{},u_n)`$ be a flag with the span of $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_k`$ as the $`k`$-dimensional space. Let $`v_i`$ be an element of the standard basis of $`𝕃^n`$ so that $`E_{i,j}v_j=v_i`$. We introduce the flag

$$_{k,\alpha }=(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_{k1},v_k+\alpha v_n,v_n,v_{k+1},v_{k+2},\mathrm{},v_{n1})$$

for all $`(k,\alpha )(\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}\times 𝕃)(0,0)`$. The irreducible components of $`_\chi `$ are projective lines $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$, $`1kn1`$ where

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_k=\{_{nk,\alpha }|\alpha 𝕃\}\{_{nk1,0}\}.$$

For $`2kn1`$ the components $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{k1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$ intersect transversally at a point $`p_{k1,k}=_{nk,0}`$. Components $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_j`$ with $`|ij|>1`$ do not intersect.

Consider the following one parameter subgroup of the diagonal matrices in $`SL_n(𝕃)`$

$$T_0=\{\nu (\tau )=\tau E_{1,1}+\tau E_{2,2}\mathrm{}+\tau E_{n1,n1}+\tau ^{1n}E_{n,n}:\tau 𝕃^{}\}.$$

Notice that $`T_0`$ stabilises $`_\chi `$, since $`\nu (\tau )_{i,\alpha }=_{i,\tau ^n\alpha }`$.

### 4.3.

Let us further assume that $`𝕃=`$. By the Jacobson-Morozov theorem there exists an $`𝔰𝔩_2`$-triple $`e,h,f𝔰𝔩_n()`$ such that Tr$`(ex)=\chi (x)`$ for each $`x𝔰𝔩_n()`$. Let $`𝒩`$ be the variety of nilpotent elements in $`𝔰𝔩_n()`$. Let

$$V_\chi =\{\mu 𝔰𝔩_n()^{}|x𝔰𝔩_n()\mu ([x,f])=\chi ([x,f])\}.$$

By \[34, Theorem 6.4 and Section 7.4\] $`V_\chi `$ is a Kleinian singularity of type $`A_{n1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi =\pi _1^1(V_\chi )`$ is its minimal desingularisation with the exceptional fibre $`_\chi `$.

### 4.4.

For the rest of this section we will assume that $`p>n`$. We expect, however, all results to hold under the weaker condition that $`p`$ and $`n`$ are coprime. The proof of Proposition 4.13 is the crucial point where we require the restriction $`p>n`$ and all other results of this section, up to 4.17 inclusive, will continue to hold if this proposition can be proved under the weaker hypothesis.

### 4.5.

We are going to work with the Lie algebra $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ now. For any element $`X𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ let $`X^{[p]}𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ denote the $`p`$-th power of $`X`$.

Let $`U(𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂))`$ be the universal enveloping algebra of $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$. For any $`X𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ the element $`X^pX^{[p]}U(𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂))`$ is central. We will study representations of the following subregular reduced enveloping algebra

$$U_\chi :=\frac{U(𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂))}{(X^pX^{[p]}\chi (X)^p:X𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂))}.$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=P/pP`$, an $`𝔽`$-vector space, and let $`\psi :P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the quotient map. Both the usual and the dot actions of $`W`$ on $`P`$ pass to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Let $`W(\lambda )`$ be the stabiliser of $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ under the dot action. Set

$$C_0=\{\lambda P:\lambda +\rho =r_i\varpi _i\text{ with }r_i0\text{ and }p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})\}.$$

A weight in the interior of $`C_0`$ is called regular.

### 4.6. Blocks

By \[5, Theorem 3.18\] we have a block decomposition

$$U_\chi =\underset{\lambda }{}B_{\chi ,\lambda },$$

where $`\lambda `$ runs over a set of representatives of the $`W`$-orbits on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Let $`𝔥`$ be the diagonal Cartan subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$. The Weyl group acts by algebra automorphisms on the polynomial ring $`S(𝔥)`$. For $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the partial coinvariants give a local, graded algebra

$$C_\lambda =\frac{S(𝔥)^{W(\lambda )}}{(S(𝔥)_+^W)}.$$

Thanks to \[28, Theorem 10\] and \[31, Theorem 8.2\] there is an injective algebra homomorphism $`C_\lambda B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$, whose image is central in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$. Henceforth, we will identify $`C_\lambda `$ with its image in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$.

### 4.7.

We will be concerned with the category of finite dimensional $`U_\chi `$-modules, $`U_\chi \mathrm{mod}`$, or more specifically the subcategory of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules. These categories have graded analogues which we introduce now.

By construction $`\chi (tXt^1)=\chi (X)`$ for all $`X𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$ and $`tT_0`$. As a result the action of $`T_0`$ on $`U(𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂))`$ passes to an action on the quotient $`U_\chi `$.

Following Jantzen , a $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0`$-module to be a finite dimensional vector space $`V`$ over $`K`$ that has a structure both as a $`U_\chi `$-module and as a rational $`T_0`$-module such that the following compatibility conditions hold:

1. We have $`t(Xv)=(tXt^1)tv`$ for all $`X𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂),tT_0`$ and $`vV`$;
2. The restriction of the $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$-action on $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{Lie}(T_0)`$ is equal to the derivative of the $`T_0`$-action on $`V`$.

We obtain the category $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$, whose objects are the $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0`$-modules and whose morphisms are the $`T_0`$-equivariant $`U_\chi `$-module homomorphisms.

For $`i`$, there are shift functors $`[i]:U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$. These send a given $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0`$-module $`V`$ to the object having the same $`U_\chi `$-module structure but with $`T_0`$ acting by $`\nu (\tau ).v=\tau ^{ip}\nu (\tau )v`$ for $`\nu (\tau )T_0`$ and all $`vV`$. This makes $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ a $``$-category.

By \[12, 9.3\] the full $``$-subcategory $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ of $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ is well-defined. Its objects are $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules with a compatible rational $`T_0`$-action. The projection functor $`\text{pr}_\lambda :U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ is a $``$-functor.

### 4.8.

Let $`F:U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}U_\chi \mathrm{mod}`$ denote the functor which forgets the $`T_0`$-structure. The objects of $`U_\chi \mathrm{mod}`$ which are in the image of $`F`$ are called gradable. It follows from \[13, Corollary 3.4\] and \[19, Corollary 1.4.1\] that the simple $`U_\chi `$-modules and their projective covers are gradable. Moreover any lift of a simple $`U_\chi `$-module is simple in $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ and any lift of a projective indecomposable $`U_\chi `$-module is projective indecomposable in $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$. Suppose $`M`$ is gradable, that is there exists a $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0`$-module $`V`$ such that $`F(V)=M`$. Then, by \[19, Remark 1.5\], we have $`F(\mathrm{soc}V)=\mathrm{soc}M`$ and $`F(\mathrm{rad}V)=\mathrm{rad}M`$.

For any $`M,NU_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$, using the notation of 2.3, we have $`\text{H}\text{om}_{U_\chi }(F(M),F(N))=_i\text{H}\text{om}_{U_\chi \text{-}T_0}(M[i],N)`$, \[13, Section 2\].

### 4.9.

The category $`U_\chi \text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ admits a contravariant self-equivalence, $`D`$ whose square is canonically isomorphic to the identity functor, \[17, Sections 1.13 and 1.14\]. Moreover $`D`$ fixes the simple modules in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$, \[17, Proposition 2.16\].

### 4.10. Translation functors

Using the map $`\psi :P\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we will abuse notation by writing $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ and $`\text{pr}_\lambda `$ for $`\lambda P`$ (we should really take the image of $`\lambda `$ under $`\psi `$). Given $`\lambda ,\mu C_0`$ we define a translation functor

$$T_\lambda ^\mu :B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}B_{\chi ,\mu }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}$$

by $`T_\lambda ^\mu (V)=pr_\mu (EV)`$, where $`E`$ is the simple $`SL_n(𝕂)`$-module with the highest weight $`w(\mu \lambda )P^+`$ for some $`wW`$.

Note that we get (in general) more than one functor $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}B_{\chi ,\mu }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ for fixed $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$: if $`\mu `$ and $`\mu ^{}`$ are two distinct weights in $`C_0`$ with $`\pi (\mu )`$ and $`\pi (\mu ^{})`$ in the same $`W`$-orbit then $`T_\lambda ^\mu `$ and $`T_\lambda ^\mu ^{}`$ will be two (in general) distinct functors from $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ to $`B_{\chi ,\mu }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}=B_{\chi ,\mu ^{}}\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$.

### 4.11. Baby Verma modules

Given $`𝔟_\chi `$ and $`\lambda P`$ we have a one dimensional representation of $`U_0(𝔟)`$, the subalgebra of $`U_\chi `$ generated by the elements of $`𝔟`$, described as follows. Let $`gSL_n(𝕂)`$ be such that $`g`$ conjugates $`𝔟`$ to the upper triangular matrices in $`𝔰𝔩_n(𝕂)`$, say $`𝔟_+`$. There is a one dimensional $`U_0(𝔟_+)`$-module which is annihilated by strictly upper triangular matrices and on which diagonal matrices act via $`\psi (\lambda )`$. Conjugation by $`g`$ provides an isomorphism between $`U_0(𝔟)`$ and $`U_0(𝔟_+)`$, and so gives a one dimensional $`U_0(𝔟)`$-module, say $`𝕂_\lambda `$. It can be checked that this module is independent of the choice of $`gSL_n(𝕂)`$. Induction yields a baby Verma module

$$V(𝔟,\lambda )=U_\chi _{U_0(b)}𝕂_\lambda $$

This is a $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-module on which $`C_\lambda `$ acts by scalar multiplication.

### 4.12.

The module $`V(𝔟_+,\lambda )`$ can be given the structure of a $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-module where $`T_0`$ acts on $`11`$ through $`\lambda `$. Set $`V(𝔟_+,\lambda )^{}=D(V(𝔟_+,\lambda ))`$ (it follows from \[16, 11.16(1)\] that this is a baby Verma module with respect to the Borel subalgebra obtained by conjugating $`𝔟_+`$ by the Coxeter element $`s_1s_2\mathrm{}s_{n1}`$).

###### Proposition.

\[17, Theorem 2.6\] Suppose $`\lambda C_0`$ with $`\lambda +\rho =r_i\varpi _i`$ and let $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$.

(i) The category $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ has simple modules $`L_0,L_1,\mathrm{},L_{n1}`$ (up to isomorphism and shift) where the module $`L_i`$ has dimension $`p^{(n^2n2)/2}r_{n1i}`$ (if $`r_{n1i}=0`$ then $`L_i`$ should be omitted from the list of simple modules).

(ii) For each $`i`$ between $`0`$ and $`n1`$ there exists a unserial module $`V_iB_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ whose Loewy layers are $`L_i,L_{i+1}[1],\mathrm{},L_{i1}[1n]`$ (omit $`V_i`$ and $`L_i`$ whenever $`r_{n1i}=0`$).

(iii) For each $`i`$ between $`0`$ and $`n1`$ there exists a unserial module $`V_i^{}B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ whose Loewy layers are $`L_i,L_{i1}[1],\mathrm{},L_{i+1}[n1]`$ (omit $`V_i^{}`$ and $`L_i`$ whenever $`r_{n1i}=0`$).

(iv) For any $`\mu X`$ such that $`\pi (\mu )`$ and $`\pi (\lambda )`$ are in the same $`W`$-orbit there exists a unique $`i`$ and $`j`$ (respectively $`i^{},j^{}`$) such that $`V(𝔟_+,\mu )V_i[j]`$ (respectively $`V(𝔟_+,\mu )^{}V_i^{}^{}[j^{}]`$).

### 4.13. Endomorphisms

Let $`\lambda P`$ and let $`Z_\lambda `$ be the centre of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$. Recall $`C_\lambda Z_\lambda `$. Let $`M`$ be in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$. There is a homomorphism

$$\theta _M:Z_\lambda \text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(M)),$$

sending $`zZ_\lambda `$ to the endomorphism $`(mzm)`$.

###### Proposition.

Let $`\lambda C_0`$ and $`Q`$ be a projective indecomposable module in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$. The homomorphism

$$\theta _Q:Z_\lambda \text{End}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(Q))$$

is surjective.

###### Proof.

To make the paper as self-contained as possible, we will give a direct proof of this for regular weights $`\lambda `$, since the general case relies on an unpublished result of Jantzen, .

It is enough to prove this in the ungraded case. Let $`P_0,\mathrm{}P_r`$ be all distinct (up to isomorphism) projective indecomposable $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules. The algebra $`C_\lambda `$ has a simple socle \[11, Corollary 3.9\]. Therefore if Ann$`{}_{C_\lambda }{}^{}(P_i)`$ is non-zero it must contain the socle of $`C_\lambda `$. The equality $`0=\text{Ann}_{C_\lambda }(B_{\chi ,\lambda })=_i\text{Ann}_{C_\lambda }(P_i)`$, implies that $`C_\lambda `$ acts faithfully on at least one projective indecomposable, say $`P_0`$. By Proposition 4.12 and a result of Jantzen \[16, Proposition 10.11\] the dimension of $`\text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(P_0)=dimC_\lambda `$, so $`Z_\lambda `$ generates $`\text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(P_0)`$.

Now assume $`\lambda `$ is regular. It follows from \[17, Section 2.3\] that we can find a translation functor $`T`$ such that $`T(P_0)P_i`$ and, by \[16, Section 11.21\], that $`T`$ is a self-equivalence of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\mathrm{mod}`$. Since $`Z_\lambda `$ can be identified with the endomorphism ring of the identity functor on $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\mathrm{mod}`$, conjugation by $`T`$ induces a ring automorphism of $`Z_\lambda `$, say $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$. It follows that $`\text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(P_i)`$ is generated by $`\stackrel{~}{T}(C_\lambda )Z_\lambda `$, as claimed.

If $`\lambda `$ is not regular the above argument fails since it need no longer be true that we can find a translation functor $`T`$ which is a self-equivalence and sends $`P_0`$ to $`P_i`$. In this situation we use the following fact, \[20, C.6 Claim 2\]: if the highest weight of $`P_i`$ (in the graded category) belongs to $`C_0`$ and does not lie on the affine wall, then the canonical map $`C_\lambda \text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(P_i)`$ is an isomorphism. Hence it is enough to show that we can find a representative of the isomorphism class of $`P_i`$ whose highest weight belongs to $`C_0`$ and does not lie on the affine wall. A straightforward calculation shows that this follows from \[18, Section 2.3\]. ∎

### 4.14.

It is possible to slightly weaken the hypothesis $`p>n`$ when using the results of , and hence the hypothesis of this whole section. The proof of Jantzen’s results, however, do not apparently generalise to the best case where $`p`$ and $`n`$ are coprime. We leave these details to the interested reader.

### 4.15.

Let $`J`$ be the unique maximal ideal of $`Z_\lambda `$.

###### Lemma.

Let $`P_i`$ be the projective cover of $`L_i`$ in $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$. Then $`[P_i/JP_i:L_i[j]]=\delta _{j0}`$.

###### Proof.

It is enough to prove this for ungraded $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules. Suppose that $`F(L_i)`$ is a composition factor of $`F(P_i)/JF(P_i)`$. Thus $`F(L_i)`$ appears as a direct summand of $`\mathrm{rad}^mF(P_i)/\mathrm{rad}^{m+1}F(P_i)`$ for some $`m`$. Hence we have a commutative diagram

Thanks to Lemma 4.13 there exists $`zZ_\lambda `$ such that the above endomorphism of $`F(P_i)`$ is multiplication by $`z`$. Then $`zJ`$ since, by hypothesis, the composition factor $`F(L_i)`$ does not lie in $`JF(P_i)`$. Since $`Z_\lambda `$ is local it follows that the endomorphism is an isomorphism and so $`F(L_i)`$ lies in the head of $`F(P_i)`$ as required. ∎

### 4.16. Two central reductions

Let $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ be the unique maximal ideal of $`C_\lambda `$ and recall that $`J`$ is the unique maximal ideal of $`Z_\lambda `$. We introduce two central reductions

$$\stackrel{~}{U}_{\chi ,\lambda }=\frac{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}{\stackrel{~}{J}B_{\chi ,\lambda }},U_{\chi ,\lambda }=\frac{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}{JB_{\chi ,\lambda }}.$$

Since $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ and $`J`$ are homogeneous both $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ and $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ inherit $``$-gradings from $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$. The category of graded modules $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ is thus a full subcategory of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ and there is $``$-action on $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$, inherited from $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$.

### 4.17.

The main result of this section follows.

###### Proposition.

Suppose $`\lambda C_0`$ with $`\lambda +\rho =r_i\varpi _i`$, and let $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$. Let $`k`$ be the number of non-zero $`r_i`$’s. Then $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ is Morita equivalent to the no-cycle algebra $`N_𝕂(k)`$. Moreover, if $`\lambda `$ is regular there is a $``$-equivalence of categories

$$U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}N_𝕂(n)\mathrm{grmod}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`A`$ be a finite dimensional algebra with simple modules $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_r`$. The Gabriel quiver of $`A`$ is the directed graph with vertices labelled from $`1`$ to $`r`$ and $`dim\mathrm{Ext}_A^1(S_i,S_j)`$ edges from $`i`$ to $`j`$. By \[1, Proposition 4.17\] $`A`$ is Morita equivalent to the the path algebra of its Gabriel quiver factored by some admissible ideal, that is an ideal generated by linear combinations of paths of length at least two.

Let $`0i_1<i_2<\mathrm{}<i_kn1`$ be such that $`L_{i_t}0`$, or, equivalently, $`r_{n1i_t}0`$. Set $`s_t=i_{t+1}i_t`$ for $`1t<k`$ and set $`s_k=n+i_1i_k`$. Since $`L_i`$ appears only once as a composition factor of $`V_i`$, $`Z(B_{\chi ,\lambda })`$ acts by scalars on $`V_i`$, making $`V_i`$ a $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-module. By \[17, Proposition 2.19\], for $`tt^{}`$ modulo $`k`$ and $`j`$

$$\mathrm{Ext}_{U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0}^1(L_{i_t}[j],L_{i_t^{}})=\{\begin{array}{cc}𝕂& \text{ if }t^{}=t+1,j=s_t\text{ or }t^{}=t1,j=s_{t1},\hfill \\ 0& \text{ otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus the Gabriel quiver of $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ is of the form 3.1, possibly with loops added at the vertices. Let $`B`$ be the quotient of this quiver which is Morita equivalent to $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$. We will show $`B`$ is isomorphic to $`N_𝕂(k)`$.

The projective covers of the simple $`B`$-modules are spanned by the paths ending in a fixed vertex. Hence, Lemma 4.15 shows that there can be no loops at vertices and further, that $`B`$ is therefore a quotient of $`N_𝕂(k)`$. In particular, its dimension is at most $`k(2k1)`$.

Let $`T_{i_t}`$ be the kernel of the sum of two projections $`V_{i_t}V_{i_t}^{}L_{i_t}`$. By Proposition 4.12

$$[F(T_{i_t}):F(L_{i_t^{}})]=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\hfill & \text{ if }tt^{}\hfill \\ 1\hfill & \text{ if }t=t^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Since $`F(T_{i_t})`$ is a quotient module of $`F(P_{i_t})`$, the dimension of $`B`$ can be estimated by

$$dimB=\text{E}\text{nd}(\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}F(P_{i_t}))=\underset{t,t^{}}{}[F(P_{i_t}):F(L_{i_t^{}})]\underset{t,t^{}}{}[F(T_{i_t}):F(L_{i_t^{}})]=k(2k1).$$

We deduce that $`BN_𝕂(k)`$, proving the first statement of the theorem. This also proves that $`T_{i_t}`$ is the projective cover of $`L_{i_t}`$ in $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$.

Let $`\lambda `$ be regular, so that $`k=n`$, and let $`T=T_{i_t}`$. Thanks to 2.3 and 4.8 the algebra $`E=\text{E}\text{nd}_{U_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(T))^{\text{op}}`$ has a $``$-grading. By \[13, Theorem 5.4\] $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ and $`N_𝕂(n)\mathrm{mod}`$ are equivalent $``$-categories if $`EN_𝕂(n)`$ as a $``$-graded algebra. But, up to a choice of scalars, $`b_i`$ corresponds to a $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-module homomorphism sending $`T_i[1]`$ to $`T_{i+1}`$, and $`a_i`$ corresponds to the a $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-module homomorphism sending $`T_{i+1}[1]`$ to $`T_i`$. This proves the second claim. ∎

### 4.18. Two central reductions (II)

In general the inclusion $`C_\lambda Z_\lambda `$ is strict, \[11, Corollary 3.9\]. However, the natural homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{\chi ,\lambda }U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ is an isomorphism. This follows from the fact in the proof of Proposition 4.13 that the map

$$\theta _1:C_\lambda \text{E}\text{nd}_{B_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(P))$$

is an isomorphism for any projective indecomposable module $`P`$. The arguments of 4.15 and 4.17 are then valid for $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{\chi ,\lambda }`$, from which the isomorphism follows. We expect this continues to hold under the weaker hypothesis that $`p`$ and $`n`$ are coprime.

## 5. Gröbner-Shirshov Bases

### 5.1.

We are going to use Gröbner-Shirshov bases for associative algebras (see  for two-sided ideals and  for one-sided ideals). In this section we quickly explain the technique to make our paper self-contained. Although the version for one-sided ideals  is sufficient for our ends, we generalise to arbitrary modules to avoid repetitions.

### 5.2.

Let $`R=𝕃<X_1,X_2,\mathrm{},X_l>`$ be a free associative algebra. Let $`F`$ be a free $`R`$-module with generators $`Y_1,\mathrm{},Y_k`$. Although $`l`$ and $`k`$ are natural numbers here, one can use, with certain care, the technique for transfinite ordinals.

Let $``$ be the set of monomials in $`R`$, $``$ the set of monomials in $`F`$. The set $``$ admits a partial multiplication with a two-sided unit $`1_R`$ (one agrees that $`m1=m`$ for $`m`$). We always make the assumption that a product is defined when we write the product. We start with a linear order $``$ on $``$ such that

* $`zz1_R`$;
* $`z_1z_2wz_1vwz_2v`$;
* $`z`$ the set $`\{w|zw\}`$ is finite.

A degree lexicographical order is most practical but there are different orders. For a non-zero element $`f`$ of $`RF`$ we denote the highest term of $`f`$ by $`\overline{f}`$.

### 5.3.

A pair of subsets $`SR`$ and $`TF`$ determine an algebra $`A=R/RSR`$ and a left $`A`$-module $`M=A_R(F/RT)=F/(RT+RSF)`$. The technique of Gröbner-Shirshov pairs allows to solve questions about $`M`$ by producing an explicit basis of $`M`$.

Each $`fST`$ gives a rewriting rule $`\overline{f}\overline{f}f`$. We write $`ab`$ if $`b`$ can be obtained from $`a`$ by using rewriting rules. Note that one cannot rewrite a monomial $`\overline{f}t`$ unless $`t=1`$ or $`fS`$.

### 5.4. Composition

For certain $`f,gRF`$, $`w`$, we can form a composition $`(f,g)_w`$. If $`w=\overline{f}V=W\overline{g}=WZV`$ for some $`W,Z,V`$ with $`Z1`$ then the composition is

$$(f,g)_w=fVWg.$$

If $`w=W\overline{f}V=\overline{g}`$ for some $`W,V`$ then the composition is

$$(f,g)_w=WfVg.$$

These two cases are mutually exclusive.

A pair $`(S,T)`$ is a Gröbner-Shirshov pair if $`(f,g)_w0`$ for all possible $`f,gST`$ and $`w`$.

The following version of Shirshov’s composition lemma can be proved by standard methods . If $`k=1`$ and $`T=\mathrm{}`$ then the statement is the standard version of Shirshov’s composition lemma . If $`k=1`$ and $`T`$ arbitrary then it is a version for left ideals .

### 5.5. Shirshov’s composition lemma

For $`S`$ and $`T`$ as above, we consider the set of monomials

$$B=\{Z|fSTW,VZW\overline{f}V\}.$$

If $`(S,T)`$ is a Gröbner-Shirshov pair then the image of $`B`$ is a basis of $`M`$ as an $`𝕃`$-vector space.

Moreover, for every $`(S,T)`$ there exits a Gröbner-Shirshov pair $`(S^{},T^{})`$ such that $`RSR=RS^{}R`$ and $`RSF+RT=RS^{}F+RT^{}`$.

### 5.6. Buchberger’s algorithm

A proof of existence of a Gröbner-Shirshov pair uses transfinite recursion, called Buchberger’s algorithm. It proceeds as follows. One starts with $`(S_0,T_0)=(S,T)`$. Given $`(S_m,T_m)`$ we produce the next pair $`(S_{m+1},T_{m+1})`$ such that $`RS_mR=RS_{m+1}R`$ and $`RS_mF+RT_m=RS_{m+1}F+RT_{m+1}`$. Consider all possible compostions $`(f,g)_w`$ with $`f,gS_mT_m`$. To each such composition, apply a sequence of rewriting rules $`\overline{v}\overline{v}v`$ with $`vS_mT_m`$ so that $`(f,g)_w[f,g]_w`$ and $`[f,g]_w`$ cannot be rewritten any further. Note that the element $`[f,g]_w`$ is not canonical since we choose a sequence of rewriting rules to use. Another sequence can give a different answer. Define the following sets

$$I_m=\{[f,g]_w|f,gS_mT_m,[f,g]_w0\},$$

$$J_m=\{g|f,gS_mT_m,(f,g)_w=WfVg,[f,g]_w0\}.$$

Now we can make the recursion step,

$$S_{m+1}=(S_m(I_m))J_m,T_{m+1}=(T_m(I_m))J_m.$$

### 5.7. Termination of Buchberger’s algorithm

If $`(S,T)`$ is a Gröbner-Shirshov pair then $`S_1=S_0`$, $`T_1=T_0`$, and the procedure terminates immediately. If $`S`$ is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis (equivalently $`(S,\mathrm{})`$ is a Gröbner-Shirshov pair), and $`R/RSR`$ is noetherian then the procedure terminates after finitely many steps.

## 6. Hodges’ Quantisation

### 6.1. Kleinian singularities

Let $`\zeta 𝕂`$ be a primitive root of unity of degree $`n`$. Set

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\{g^i:g=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\zeta & 0\\ 0& \zeta ^1\end{array}\right)\},$$

a subgroup of $`SL_2(𝕂)`$. The natural action of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on $`𝕂^2`$ induces an action on $`𝕂[X,Y]`$: $`gX=\zeta X`$, $`gY=\zeta ^1Y`$. The invariants of $`𝕂[X,Y]`$ under this action are generated by $`X^n,XY`$ and $`Y^n`$. Thus, the orbit space $`𝕂^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has co-ordinate ring

$$𝒪(𝕂^2/\mathrm{\Gamma })=𝕂[X^n,XY,Y^n]\frac{𝕂[A,B,H]}{(ABH^n)}.$$

The variety $`𝕂^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has an isolated singularity at $`0`$, a Kleinian singularity of type $`A_{n1}`$.

### 6.2.

Let $`v(z)𝕂[z]`$ be a polynomial of degree $`n`$, whose roots lie in $`𝔽`$. Following , we define an associative algebra, $`T(v)`$, over $`𝕂`$ with generators $`a,b`$ and $`h`$ satisfying the relations

(1)
$$ha=a(h+1),hb=b(h1),ba=v(h),ab=v(h1).$$

There exists a filtration on $`T(v)`$ such that $`\text{gr}(T(v))𝕂[A,B,H]/(ABH^n).`$ In other words, $`T(v)`$ is a deformation of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A_{n1}`$.

Using the translation $`hh1`$ we will assume without loss of generality that $`0`$ is a root of $`v(z)`$.

### 6.3. A $``$-category

There is also a $``$-grading on $`T(v)`$: we assign $`a`$ degree $`n`$, $`b`$ degree $`n`$ and $`h`$ degree $`0`$. We want to study a category of graded $`T(v)`$-modules similar in spirit to the construction of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ in Section 4.8.

Since $`p`$ and $`n`$ are coprime, we can find an inverse of $`\overline{n}`$ in $`𝔽`$, say $`\overline{c}`$. We will consider the full subcategory of finitely generated $``$-graded $`T(v)`$-modules consisting of objects

$$M=\underset{j}{}M_j,$$

such that $`h`$ acts on $`M_j`$ through scalar multiplication by $`\overline{j}\overline{c}`$. Note that $`aM_jM_{j+n}`$ (respectively $`bM_jM_{jn}`$) showing that this definition is compatible with the relation $`ha=a(h+1)`$ (respectively $`hb=b(h1)`$). Denote this category by $`T(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$.

For $`i`$, there is a shift functor $`[i]:T(v)\mathrm{grmod}T(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$: given $`MT(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$, set $`(M[i])_j=M_{jpi}`$ for all $`j`$. This makes $`T(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$ a $``$-category.

### 6.4.

We will be interested in a finite dimensional central quotient of $`T(v)`$.

###### Lemma.

The centre of $`T(v)`$ is generated by $`a^p,b^p`$ and $`h^ph`$. It is isomorphic to the algebra of functions on a type $`A_{n1}`$ Kleinian singularity.

###### Proof.

It is straightforward to check that $`a^p`$, $`b^p`$ and $`h^ph`$ are central elements. By construction $`T(v)`$ is a free $`𝕂[h]`$-module with basis $`\{a^i,b^j:i,j0\}`$. It follows from the relations in $`T(v)`$ that the degrees of the homogeneous components of any non-zero central elements must be a multiple of $`pn`$. Since $`a^p`$ and $`b^p`$ are central we must find which polynomials in $`h`$ are central. Let $`q(h)`$ be such a polynomial. Since $`aq(h)=q(h+1)a`$ we deduce that the roots of $`q`$ are invariant under integer addition. It follows that $`q(h)`$ is a polynomial in $`h^ph`$ as required.

Using the defining relations once more we have

$$a^pb^p=v(h)v(h+1)\mathrm{}v(h+p1).$$

Since $`v(h)`$ has degree $`n`$ it follows that $`a^pb^p=(h^ph)^n`$. Hence, the centre of $`T(v)`$ is a quotient of the ring of functions of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A_{n1}`$. Any proper quotient of the ring of functions on a Kleinian singularity has dimension 0 or 1. Thus since $`T(v)`$ is finitely generated over its centre and has Gelfand-Kirillov dimension 2, the centre must be the entire ring of functions. ∎

### 6.5.

Now we can introduce the protagonist of this section:

$$t(v)=\frac{T(v)}{(a^p,b^p,h^ph)}.$$

Since the ideal $`(a^p,b^p,h^ph)`$ is homogeneous, $`t(v)`$ inherits a $``$-grading from $`T(v)`$. We denote the full subcategory of $`T(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$ consisting of $``$-graded $`t(v)`$-modules by $`t(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$.

### 6.6.

In order to study $`t(v)`$ we introduce an intermediate algebra

(2)
$$𝔗(v)=T(v)/(a^p,b^p).$$

Let us use a degree lexicographical order on non-commutative associative monomials in $`a`$ of degree 1, $`b`$ of degree $`2n1`$, and $`h`$ of degree 1 with $`h>b>a`$.

The relations of (1) already form a Gröbner-Shirshov basis. It follows that monomials not containing $`ha`$, $`hb`$, $`ba`$, or $`ab`$ as submonomials form a basis of $`T(v)`$.

For any polynomial $`f(z)𝕂[z]`$ and a positive integer $`i`$, we denote

$$f_{(i)}(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{i1}{}}f(z+\overline{k}),f_{(i)}(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{i1}{}}f(z\overline{k}).$$

###### Lemma.

The following relations, together with those in (1) and (2), form a Gröbner-Shirshov basis of $`𝔗(v)`$,

(3) $`a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h1)`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},p,`$
(4) $`b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h)`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},p1.`$
###### Proof.

Let us obtain all relations in (Lemma) recursively. For $`i=1,\mathrm{}p`$,

$$(bav(h),a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h1))_{ba^{pi}h^{ni}}=ba^{pi}v_{(i)}(h1)(bav(h))a^{pi1}h^{ni}=$$

$$=ba^{pi}(v_{(i)}(h1)h^{ni})+v(h)a^{pi1}h^{ni}v(h)a^{pi1}(v_{(i)}(h1)h^{ni})+$$

$$+v(h)a^{pi1}h^{ni}=v(h)a^{pi1}v_{(i)}(h1)av(h+1)a^{pi2}v_{(i)}(h1)\mathrm{}$$

$$a^{pi1}v(h+pi1)v_{(i)}(h1)=a^{pi1}v_{(i1)}(h1).$$

Similarly, for $`i=1,\mathrm{},p1`$, $`(b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h),abv(h1))_{ab^{pi}h^{ni}}b^{pi1}v_{(i+1)}(h).`$ Now we need to show that all remaining compositions are trivial. The highest terms of defining relations are $`ha`$, $`hb`$, $`ba`$, $`ab`$, $`a^{pi}h^{ni}`$, and $`b^{pi}h^{ni}`$. Let us make certain that all compositions are trivial. Firstly,

$$(bav(h),abv(h1))_{bab}=bv(h1)v(h)bbv(h1)bv(h1)=0.$$

Similarly, $`(abv(h1),bav(h))_{aba}0.`$ Then

$$(hbbh+b,b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h))_{hb^{pi}h^{ni}}=hb^{pi}(h^{ni}v_{(i)}(h))bhb^{pi1}h^{ni}+b^{pi}h^{ni}$$

$$b^{pi}((hp+i)(h^{ni}v_{(i)}(h))(hp+i+1)h^{ni}+h^{ni}=b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h)h0.$$

Analagously, the compositions $`(a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h),abv(h1))_{a^pb}`$ and $`(b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h),abv(h1))_{ab^p}`$ are trivial. Then

$$(haaha,abv(h1))_{hab}=hv(h1)ahbabhv(h1)a(bhb)ab=$$

$$=hv(h1)abh0.$$

Another possible composition to consider is

$$(haaha,a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h))_{ha^{pi}h^{ni}}=ha^{pi}(v_{(i)}(h)h^{ni})+aha^{pi1}h^{ni}+a^{pi}h^{ni}$$

$$a^{pi}((hi)(v_{(i)}(h)h^{ni})+(hi1)h^{ni}+h^{ni})=a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h)(hi)0.$$

The remaining compositions $`(haaha,a^{pi}h^{ni})_{a^{pi}h^{ni}a}`$, $`(hbbh+b,a^{pi}h^{ni})_{a^{pi}h^{ni}b}`$, $`(haaha,b^{pi}h^{ni})_{b^{pi}h^{ni}a}`$, and $`(hb,b^{pi}h^{ni})_{b^{pi}h^{ni}b}`$ are trivial by a similar argument. ∎

### 6.7. Corollary

The dimension of $`𝔗(v)`$ is $`np^2`$. Moreover, there is a direct sum decomposition

(5)
$$𝔗(v)=[\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}a^{pi}𝕂[h]/(v_{(i)}(h1))][\underset{j=1}{\overset{p1}{}}b^j𝕂[h]/(v_{(pj)}(h))]$$

###### Proof.

The direct sum decomposition (5) follows at once from the description of the Gröbner-Shirshov basis of $`𝔗(v)`$. Adding dimensions of summands, we arrive at the dimension of $`𝔗(v)`$, that is $`2(n+2n+\mathrm{}(p1)n)+pn=np^2`$. ∎

### 6.8.

If we write $`\text{gcd}(f(Z),g(Z))`$ for the greatest common divisor of two polynomials then decomposition (5) is inherited:

(6)
$$t(v)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}\frac{a^{pi}𝕂[h]}{(\text{gcd}(v_{(i)}(h1),h^ph))}\underset{j=1}{\overset{p1}{}}\frac{b^j𝕂[h]}{(\text{gcd}(v_{(pj)}(h),h^ph))}.$$

This decomposition allows one to compute the dimension of $`t(v)`$.

Let $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_{n1}`$ be such that $`r_i0`$ and $`pr_1+\mathrm{}r_{n1}`$ and

$$v(z)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(z(\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i})).$$

Set $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$.

###### Corollary.

The dimension of $`t(v)`$ is $`2p^2_{i=0}^{n1}r_i^2`$.

###### Proof.

If $`f(z,i)=z(\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i})`$ then the roots of $`f_{(j)}(z,i)`$ are $`\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}\overline{r_i},\mathrm{},\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i}\overline{j}`$. If $`jr_i`$ then $`\overline{r_1}\mathrm{}\overline{r_{i1}},\mathrm{},\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i}\overline{j}`$ are already roots of $`f_{(j)}(z,i+1)`$. Thus, the dimension of the first summand in (6) is

$$p^2\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}(1+2+\mathrm{}+(r_i1)+r_i+r_i+\mathrm{}r_i),$$

where the number of summands in the parenthesis is $`p`$. This sum equals $`p^2+(p_{i=0}^{n1}r_i^2)/2`$. Similarly, the second summand has dimension $`p^2(p+_{i=0}^{n1}r_i^2)/2`$, so that the total dimension is $`2p^2_{i=0}^{n1}r_i^2`$. ∎

### 6.9. Baby Verma modules (II)

Let $`u`$ (respectively $`u^{}`$) be the subalgebra of $`t(v)`$ generated by $`a`$ and $`h`$ (respectively $`b`$ and $`h`$). Similarly let $`U`$ (respectively $`U^{}`$) be the subalgebra of $`𝔗(v)`$ generated by $`a`$ and $`h`$ (respectively $`b`$ and $`h`$).

We introduce two sets of baby Verma modules. For $`\lambda `$ let $`𝕂_\lambda `$ (respectively $`𝕂_\lambda ^{}`$) be the one dimensional $`U`$-module (respectively $`U^{}`$-module) with basis $`|0>`$ (respectively $`|1>`$) and

$$h|0>=\overline{\lambda }|0>,a|0>=0,h|1>=\overline{\lambda }|1>,b|1>=0.$$

The baby Verma module $`V(\lambda )`$ (respectively $`V(\lambda )^{}`$) is

$$V(\lambda )=𝔗(v)_U𝕂_\lambda (\text{respectively }V(\lambda )^{}=𝔗(v)_U^{}𝕂_\lambda ^{}).$$

### 6.10. Lemma

(i) If $`\overline{\lambda }`$ is not a root of $`v(z)`$ then $`V(\lambda )=0`$, whilst if $`\overline{\lambda }`$ is a root of $`v(z)`$ then $`V(\lambda )`$ has a basis of $`p`$ elements $`|0>,b|0>,\mathrm{},b^{p1}|0>`$. We have

$$ab^k|0>=v(\overline{\lambda }\overline{k})b^{k1}|0>,hb^k|0>=(\overline{\lambda }\overline{k})b^k|0>.$$

(ii) If $`\overline{\lambda }1`$ is not a root of $`v(z)`$ then $`V(\lambda )^{}=0`$, whilst if $`\overline{\lambda }1`$ is a root of $`v(z)`$ then $`V(\lambda )^{}`$ has a basis of $`p`$ elements $`|1>,a|1>,\mathrm{},a^{p1}|1>`$. We have

$$ba^k|1>=v(\overline{\lambda }+\overline{k}1)a^{k1}|1>,ha^k|1>=(\overline{\lambda }+\overline{k})a^k|1>.$$

###### Proof.

(i) For the generator $`|0>V(\lambda )`$ one observes that

$$0=ba|0>(bav(h))|0>=v(h)|0>=v(\overline{\lambda })|0>.$$

Thus if $`\overline{\lambda }`$ is not a root of $`v(z)`$ then $`|0>=0`$ and $`V(\lambda )=0`$.

Let $`\overline{\lambda }`$ be a root of $`v(z)`$. Let $`S`$ be the Gröbner-Shirshov basis of $`𝔗(v)`$ constructed in Lemma Lemma. The module $`V(\lambda )`$ is determined by the pair $`(S,\{(h\overline{\lambda })|0>,a|0>\})`$ and this turns out to be a Gröbner-Shirshov pair. Indeed, there are three elements in $`S`$ whose leading monomials end with $`a`$:

$$(a|0>,haaha)_a=ha|0>(haaha)|0>=(ah+a)|0>(\lambda a+a)|0>0,$$

$$(a|0>,bav(h))_a=ba|0>(bav(h))|0>=v(h)|0>v(\overline{\lambda })|0>=0,$$

$$(a^p,a|0>)_a=a^p|0>a^{p1}a|0>=0.$$

Elements of $`S`$ whose leading monomials end with $`h`$ fall into two types:

$$(a^{pi}v_{(i)}(h1)|0>,(h\overline{\lambda })|0>)_h=(\overline{\lambda }a^{pi}h^{ni1}+a^{pi}(v_{(i)}(h1)h^{ni}))|0>$$

$$v_{(i)}(\overline{\lambda }1)a^{pi}|0>0,$$

$$(b^{pi}v_{(i)}(h),(h\overline{\lambda })|0>)_h=(\overline{\lambda }b^{pi}h^{ni1}+b^{pi}(v_{(i)}(h)h^{ni}))|0>b^{pi}v_{(i)}(\overline{\lambda })|0>=0.$$

Direct computation now yields the formulas for the action.

(ii) The proof is analogous. ∎

Thanks to the lemma we can consider $`V(\lambda )`$ and $`V(\lambda )^{}`$ as objects in $`T(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$. Indeed if $`V(\lambda )`$ (respectively $`V(\lambda )^{}`$) is non-zero we let $`b^k|0>`$ (respectively $`a^k|1>`$) span the $`(\lambda k)n`$ (respectively $`(\lambda +k)n`$) homogeneous component.

### 6.11.

Under our assumptions, we have $`(\overline{\lambda }\overline{k})^p=\overline{\lambda }\overline{k}`$. It follows that $`(h^ph)V(\lambda )=0`$ (respectively $`(h^ph)V(\lambda )^{}=0`$), and so $`V(\lambda )`$ and $`V(\lambda )^{}`$ are objects in $`t(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$.

###### Proposition.

Let $`v(z)=_{i=0}^{n1}(z(\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i}))`$ be as in 6.8 and let $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$.

(i) The category $`t(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$ has simple modules $`L_0,\mathrm{},L_{n1}`$ (up to isomorphism and shift) where the dimension of $`L_i`$ is $`r_{n1i}`$ (if $`r_{n1i}=0`$ then $`L_i`$ should be omitted from the list of simple modules).

(ii) For each $`i`$ lying between $`0`$ and $`n1`$ there exists a uniserial module $`V_it(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$ whose Loewy layers are $`L_i,L_{i+1}[1],\mathrm{},L_{i1}[1n]`$ (omit $`V_i`$ and $`L_i`$ whenever $`r_{n1i}=0`$).

(iii) For each $`i`$ lying between $`0`$ and $`n1`$ there exists a unserial module $`V_i^{}t(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$ whose Loewy layers are $`L_i,L_{i1}[1],\mathrm{},L_{i+1}[n1]`$ (omit $`V_i^{}`$ and $`L_i`$ whenever $`r_{n1i}=0`$).

(iv) For any $`\lambda `$ such that $`\overline{\lambda }`$ is a root of $`v(z)`$ there exists a unique $`i`$ and $`j`$ (respectively $`i^{},j^{}`$) such that $`V(\lambda )V_i[j]`$ (respectively $`V(\lambda +1)^{}V_i^{}^{}[j^{}]`$).

###### Proof.

Set $`V_0=V(0)`$ and $`V_i=V(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1i})[i]`$. Note that if $`r_{n1i}=0`$ then $`V_iV_{i+1}[1]`$. Since every $`t(v)`$-module has a $`u`$-fixed point we see that any simple $`t(v)`$-module is a quotient of $`F(V_i)`$ for some $`i`$. By Lemma 6.9(i) $`F(V_i)`$ is isomorphic to $`𝕂[b]/(b^p)`$ as a $`𝕂[b]/(b^p)`$-module. Since $`𝕂[b]/(b^p)`$ is a local algebra it follows that $`V_i`$ has a simple head.

In $`V_i`$ the element $`b^{r_{n1i}}|0>`$ is annihilated by $`a`$ and belongs to the $`n(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1(i+1)})+pi`$ component, so there is a graded $`t(v)`$ homomorphism

$$\theta _i:V_{i+1}[1]V_i.$$

The cokernel of $`\theta _i`$, say $`L_i`$, has dimension $`r_{n1i}`$ and is simple if $`r_{n1i}0`$ since it is generated by any basis vector $`b^i|0>`$ it contains. If $`r_{n1i}0`$ it follows from Lemma 6.11 that $`L_i`$ has a unique $`u`$-fixed point, namely $`|0>`$. Hence if $`r_{n1i}`$ and $`r_{n1j}`$ are non-zero $`L_i`$ and $`L_j`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`i=j`$. This proves (i).

Since $`V_i`$ is simple-headed, $`dimV_i=p`$ and $`_{i=0}^{n1}r_i=p`$ the chain of homomorphisms

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccc}V_{i1}[1n]& \stackrel{\theta _{i2}}{}& V_{i2}[2n]& \stackrel{\theta _{i3}}{}& \mathrm{}& \stackrel{\theta _{i+1}}{}& V_{i+1}[1]& \stackrel{\theta _i}{}& V_i\end{array}$$

proves (ii). The proof of (iii) is similar. Part (iv) is clear. ∎

### 6.12. Proposition

Let $`v(z)=_{i=0}^{n1}(z(\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i}))`$ be as in 6.8 and set $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$. Let $`k`$ be the number of non-zero $`r_i`$’s. Then $`t(v)`$ is Morita equivalent to $`N_𝕂(k)`$. Moreover, if $`k=n`$, there is a $``$-equivalence of categories

$$t(v)\mathrm{grmod}N_𝕂(n)\mathrm{grmod}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`0i_1\mathrm{}i_kn1`$ be such that $`r_{n1i_t}0`$. Let $`Q_{i_t}`$ be the projective cover of $`L_{i_t}`$ in $`t(v)\mathrm{grmod}`$. Recall the general formula, \[1, Section 1.7\]

$$dimt(v)=\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}dimQ_{i_t}dimL_{i_t}.$$

Let $`T_{i_t}`$ be the kernel of the sum of two projections $`V_{i_t}V_{i_t}^{}L_{i_t}`$. Then $`T_{i_t}`$ has head isomorphic to $`L_{i_t}`$ so is a quotient of $`Q_{i_t}`$. By Lemma 6.9 and Proposition 6.11 $`dimT_{i_t}=2pr_{n1i_t}`$. Using Lemma 6.8 we find

$$\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}dimQ_{i_t}dimL_{i_t}\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}dimT_{i_t}dimL_{i_t}=\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}(2pr_{n1i_t})r_{n1i_t}$$

$$=2p^2\underset{t=1}{\overset{k}{}}r_{n1i_t}^2=dimt(v),$$

proving that $`T_{i_t}Q_{i_t}`$.

Let $`T=T_{i_t}`$. The basic algebra of $`t(v)`$ is $`\text{E}\text{nd}_{t(v)}(F(T))^{\text{op}}`$. Let $`b_t`$ (respectively $`a_t`$) be the homomorphism $`F(T_{i_t})F(T_{i_{t+1}})`$ (respectively $`F(T_{i_{t+1}})F(T_{i_t})`$) associated to the composition factor $`F(L_{i_t})`$ of $`F(T_{i_{t+1}})`$ (respectively $`F(T_{i_t})`$) lying in the second Loewy layer of $`F(V_{i_{t+1}})`$ (respectively $`F(V_{i_t}^{})`$). It is straightforward to check that $`a_t`$ and $`b_t`$, together with the idempotents arising from the projections in $`\text{End}_{t(v)}(F(T))`$, generate the basic algebra and satisfy the relations of the no-cycle algebra. Since

$$dim\text{E}\text{nd}_{t(v)}(F(T))=k(2k1)$$

the first statement of the proposition follows. The second statement is proved in the same manner as Proposition 4.17. ∎

## 7. Proof of Premet’s conjecture

### 7.1.

We require $`p>n`$ for the following theorem. Thanks to 4.18 we can replace $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ with $`\stackrel{~}{U}_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ throughout, if we wish.

### 7.2. Theorem

Let $`p>n`$. Suppose $`\lambda C_0`$ with $`\lambda +\rho =r_i\varpi _i`$ and let $`v(z)=_{i=0}^{n1}(z(\overline{r_1}+\mathrm{}+\overline{r_i}))`$. There is an isomorphism

$$U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{Mat}_{p^{(n^2n2)/2}}(t(v)).$$

Moreover, there is a $``$-equivalence of categories

$$U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}t(v)\mathrm{grmod}.$$

###### Proof.

Set $`r_0=p(r_1+\mathrm{}+r_{n1})`$ and let $`k`$ be the number of non-zero $`r_i`$’s. Let $`0i_1\mathrm{}i_kn1`$ be such that $`r_{n1i_t}0`$. Let $`L_1,\mathrm{},L_k`$ (respectively $`M_1,\mathrm{},M_k`$) be the simple $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0`$-modules (respectively graded $`t(v)`$-modules) appearing in Proposition 4.12 (respectively Proposition 6.11) and let $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_k`$ (respectively $`Q_1,\mathrm{},Q_k`$) be their projective covers. We have

$$U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{E}\text{nd}_{U_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(P_t)^{p^{(n^2n2)/2}r_{n1i_t}})\text{Mat}_{p^{(n^2n2)/2}}(\text{E}\text{nd}_{U_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(P_t)^{r_{n1i_t}}))$$

and

$$t(v)\text{E}\text{nd}_{t(v)}(F(Q_t)^{r_{n1i_t}}).$$

Thanks to our construction of $`P_t`$ in Proposition 4.17 and $`Q_t`$ in Proposition 6.12 we have a graded isomorphism

$$\text{E}\text{nd}_{U_{\chi ,\lambda }}(F(P_t)^{r_{n1i_t}})\text{E}\text{nd}_{t(v)}(F(Q_t)^{r_{n1i_t}}),$$

proving the first statement of the theorem, together with an equivalence. The equivalence is a $``$-equivalence by \[13, Theorem 5.4\]. ∎

## 8. More on Baby Verma Modules

### 8.1.

We want to study baby Verma modules in “general position”. To do so, we need a general lemma.

###### Lemma.

Let $`A`$ be a finite dimensional $`𝕃`$-algebra and $`Y`$ a connected algebraic variety over $`𝕃`$. Suppose $`M_\alpha `$, $`\alpha Y`$, is a flat family of finite dimensional $`A`$-modules over $`Y`$. Then the Grothendieck group element $`[M_\alpha ]K_0(A)`$ is independent of $`\alpha `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`B`$ be the basic algebra of $`A`$. There exists a $`(B,A)`$-bimodule $`N`$, flat over $`A`$, such that the functor $`N_A`$ induces an equivalence between the categories of finite dimensional $`A`$-modules and finite dimensional $`B`$-modules. Let $`K_\alpha =N_AM_\alpha `$, a flat family of $`B`$-modules over $`Y`$. Given a primitive idempotent $`eB`$, it suffices to show that the dimension of $`eK_\alpha `$ is independent of $`\alpha U`$, a Zariski open neighbourhood of a point. Without loss of generality we can trivialise the family $`K\times U`$. Then $`e`$ defines an algebraic family of projection operators on the finite dimensional vector space $`K`$,

$$e_\alpha :k\text{pr}_K(e(k,\alpha )).$$

Since the dimension of $`eK_\alpha `$ is equal to the rank of $`e_\alpha `$, and the latter is obviously constant, the lemma is proved. ∎

###### Proof.

(Alternative) Without loss of generality we can assume that $`Y`$ is irreducible. Let $`n=dimM_\alpha `$. For any $`aA`$ let $`c_a(\alpha )`$ be the characteristic polynomial corresponding to the action of $`a`$ on $`M_\alpha `$. As this a polynomial of degree $`n`$ we obtain a regular map $`\chi _a:YK^n`$ sending $`\alpha `$ to the coefficients of $`c_a(\alpha )`$ (coefficients written in order $`1,t,t^2,\mathrm{}`$).

Given a simple $`A`$-module, $`S`$, let $`d_s(\alpha )=dimS[M_\alpha :S]`$. Thanks to \[8, Section 4, Theorem\] we have

$$d_s(\alpha )=\text{min}_{aAnn(S)}\{\text{ord}_{t=0}c_a(\alpha )\}.$$

For any $`0mn`$ let $`V_mK^n`$ be the closed set defined by the vanishing of the first $`m`$ co-ordinates. Then $`\chi _a^1(V_m)`$ is closed and consists of the values $`\alpha `$ for which $`\text{ord}_{t=0}c_a(\alpha )m`$. Hence, for $`aA`$, there exists an open set, $`U_aY`$ such that for all $`\alpha U_a`$ the value $`\text{ord}_{t=0}c_a(\alpha )`$ is minimal. Let $`m_a`$ be this minimum.

The set $`\{m_a:aAnn(S)\}`$ has a minimum, denoted $`\mu `$, which is achieved at $`a_\mu A`$ say. Then for all $`\alpha U_{a_\mu }`$ we have $`d_S(\alpha )=a_\mu `$. We deduce that the set $`\{\alpha Y:d_S(\alpha )\text{ minimal}\}`$ is dense in $`K`$ since it contains $`U_{a_\mu }`$.

Repeating the above for all simples we see there is a dense set in $`K`$ where all the functions $`d_S(\alpha )`$ take minimal values. But $`_Sd_S(\alpha )=dimM_\alpha =n`$ is constant and therefore they must take minimal values everywhere, proving the lemma. ∎

### 8.2.

Given $`\lambda X`$, it is an interesting problem to describe the isomorphism classes of all baby Verma modules $`V(𝔟,\lambda )`$ as $`𝔟`$ runs over $`_\chi `$. If $`\lambda `$ is regular then the description of $`_\chi `$, Proposition 4.12 and Lemma 8.1 show that, for every $`𝔟_\chi `$,

$$[V(𝔟,\lambda )]=\underset{i=0}{\overset{n1}{}}[L_i]K_0(U_{\chi ,\lambda }).$$

Therefore, on passing to the no-cycle algebra, we see that such $`V(𝔟,\lambda )`$ corresponds to a $`N_𝕂(n)`$-module $`M(𝔟)`$, such that $`e_iM(𝔟)`$ is one dimensional for all $`i`$. Thanks to Section 3, all modules of this dimension are known.

Let $`(k,\alpha )(\{1,\mathrm{},n1\}\times 𝕂\})(0,0)`$ and let $`𝔟_{k,\alpha }`$ be the stabiliser of $`_{k,\alpha }`$. Suppose first that $`\alpha =0`$. Since the torus $`T_0`$ stabilises $`𝔟_{k,0}`$ for any $`k`$, twists by elements of $`T_0`$ provide a grading of $`V(𝔟_{k,0},\lambda )`$. Therefore $`M(𝔟_{k,\alpha })`$ is gradable and, by Section 3, must be a direct sum of string modules if $`n`$ is odd (note that some band modules are gradable for even $`n`$). When $`\lambda `$ is regular, we expect that gradable band modules are not baby Verma modules, and that baby Verma modules are indecomposable.

The generic case is dealt with in the following proposition.

### 8.3. Proposition

Keep the above notation and let $`\lambda X`$ be a regular weight, $`1kn1`$ and $`\alpha 0`$. Then the baby Verma module $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ is indecomposable.

###### Proof.

It follows from Section 3 that if $`M(𝔟_{k,\alpha })`$ is not gradable it is necessarily a band module and hence indecomposable. Thus, by Proposition 4.17, it suffices to show that $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ does not admit a $`T_0`$-grading.

Suppose for a contradiction that $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ admits a $`T_0`$-grading. Let $`L_k`$ be the $`𝔰𝔩_2(𝕂)`$-subalgebra generated by $`E_{nk,n},E_{nk,nk}E_{n,n}`$ and $`E_{n,nk}`$. Any Borel subalgebra belonging to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$ is uniquely determined by its intersection with $`L_k`$. Let $`\lambda _k=\lambda (E_{nk,nk}E_{n,n})`$. A straightforward calculation shows that the restriction of $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ to $`L_k`$ has a direct summand isomorphic to the baby Verma module for $`L_k`$ induced from $`𝔟_{k,\alpha }L_k`$ with highest weight $`\lambda _k`$.

For $`tT_0`$ the element $`t(11)V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ is a highest weight vector for the Borel subalgebra $`t𝔟_{k,\alpha }`$, yielding an isomorphism $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )V(t𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$. Since $`\lambda `$ is regular $`\lambda _k1`$, and so, by \[30, Main Theorem\], the baby Verma modules for $`L_k`$ induced from different Borel subalgebras of $`L_k`$ with highest weight $`\lambda _k`$ are not isomorphic. Hence, by the last paragraph, the isomorphism $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )V(t𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ forces $`V(𝔟_{k,\alpha },\lambda )`$ to have infinitely many non-isomorphic direct summands, a contradiction. ∎

## 9. Equivariant $`K`$-theory and Hilbert schemes

### 9.1. Equivariant sheaves

Let $`G`$ be an affine algebraic group acting rationally on a quasi-projective noetherian variety $`X`$. Let $`\text{C}\text{oh}_G(X)`$ denote the abelian category of $`G`$-equivariant coherent sheaves on $`X`$, \[7, Chapter 5\]. Let $`D_G(X)`$ denote the bounded derived category of $`\text{C}\text{oh}_G(X)`$.

Let $`f:XY`$ be a $`G`$-equivariant map. If $`f`$ is proper then the right derived functor of $`f_{}`$ gives a pushforward

$$𝐑f_{}:D_G(X)D_G(Y).$$

Similarly, if $`f`$ has finite Tor dimension (for example if $`f`$ is flat or if $`Y`$ is smooth), then the left derived functor of $`f^{}`$ gives a pullback

$$𝐋f^{}:D_G(Y)D_G(X).$$

### 9.2.

Suppose $`Z`$ is a closed $`G`$-stable subvariety of $`X`$. Let $`D_G(X,Z)`$ denote the full subcategory of $`D_G(X)`$ whose objects are complexes with homology supported on $`Z`$. If $`i:ZX`$ is inclusion then $`𝐑i_{}:D_G(Z)D_G(X,Z)`$ is an equivalence of categories.

### 9.3.

Let $`K_G(X)`$ denote the Grothendieck group of $`\text{C}\text{oh}_G(X)`$, or equally, by 2.5, of $`D_G(X)`$. The constructions of 9.1 and 9.2 yield pushforward (respectively pullback) homomorphisms between the Grothendieck groups of $`X`$ and $`Y`$ for a proper (respectively finite Tor dimension) $`G`$-equivariant map $`f:XY`$ and, for any closed $`G`$-stable subvariety $`Z`$, an identification between $`K_G(Z)`$ and the Grothendieck group of complexes of equivariant sheaves on $`X`$ whose homology is supported on $`Z`$.

Let $`f:X\{pt\}`$ be projection to a point. Since $`\text{C}\text{oh}_G(pt)`$ can be identified with the category of finite dimensional $`G`$-modules, any $`G`$-module, say $`M`$, can be pulled back to a $`G`$-equivariant locally free sheaf on $`X`$, $`f^{}M`$. Since the operation of tensoring by a locally free sheaf is exact we obtain a functor $`D_G(X)D_G(X)`$ associated to each $`G`$-module and therefore an action of $`K_G(pt)=\text{R}\text{ep}(G)`$, the representation ring of $`G`$, on $`K_G(X)`$.

### 9.4. Equivariant line bundles on $`^1`$, \[27, Section 5.4\]

Fix $`k`$ such that $`1kn1`$ and suppose $`T=^{}\times ^{}`$ acts on $`^1`$ by $`(\lambda ,\mu )(a:b)=((\lambda \mu )^ka:(\lambda ^1\mu )^{nk}b)`$. The following lemma can be proved by explicit calculation on the two standard charts of $`^1`$.

###### Lemma.

Let $`T`$ act on $`^1`$ as above. For every collection on integers $`i,i^{},j,j^{}`$ satisfying $`i^{}j^{}=nm`$ and $`ij=(2kn)m`$ for some integer $`m`$, there exists a $`T`$-equivariant line bundle on $`^1`$, unique up to isomorphism, where $`(\lambda ,\mu )`$ acts as $`\lambda ^j^{}\mu ^j`$ on the fibre above $`(1:0)`$ and as $`\lambda ^i^{}\mu ^i`$ on the fibre above $`(0:1)`$. All such $`T`$-equivariant line bundles arise in this way.

We will denote the above line bundle $`𝒪_k^{j^{}j,;i^{},i}`$.

### 9.5. Braid groups

The affine Braid group of type $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{n1}`$, denoted $`B_{ad}`$, is the group with generators $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ for $`0in1`$, satisfying the braid relations $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i\stackrel{~}{T}_{i+1}\stackrel{~}{T}_i=\stackrel{~}{T}_{i+1}\stackrel{~}{T}_i\stackrel{~}{T}_{i+1}`$ (we set $`\stackrel{~}{T}_n=\stackrel{~}{T}_0`$). There is a natural action of $`<\sigma >=/n`$ on $`B_{ad}`$ given by $`\sigma (\stackrel{~}{T}_i)=\stackrel{~}{T}_{i+1}`$. The extended affine Braid group is

$$B:=/nB_{ad}.$$

Let $`\iota :BB`$ be the involution which sends $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i^1`$ and fixes $`\sigma `$.

### 9.6. Hecke algebras

Let $`𝒜=[v^{\pm 1}]`$. Let $`𝒜[B]`$ be the group algebra of $`B`$ over $`𝒜`$ and let $``$, the extended affine Hecke algebra, be the quotient of $`𝒜[B]`$ by the ideal generated by $`(\stackrel{~}{T}_i+v^1)(\stackrel{~}{T}_iv)`$ for $`1in`$. The subalgebra generated by $`T_i`$ for $`1in1`$ (respectively $`1in`$) is the finite Hecke algebra (respectively affine Hecke algebra) and denoted by $`_{fin}`$ (respectively $`_{ad}`$).

The involution $`\iota `$ on $`B`$ induces a ring automorphism on $``$, which we denote by $`\overline{\text{}}`$, sending $`v`$ to $`v^1`$, $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ to $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i^1=\stackrel{~}{T}_i+(v^1v)`$ and fixes $`\sigma `$.

There is a second presentation of $``$, , discovered by Bernstein. In this presentation $``$ is the $`𝒜`$-algebra generated by $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$, for $`1in1`$, and $`\theta _x`$, for $`xP`$, the weight lattice of $`SL_n()`$. For the fundamental weight $`\varpi _{n1}`$ we have $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}=\sigma \stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_n=\stackrel{~}{T}_{n1}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_2\stackrel{~}{T}_1\sigma `$.

### 9.7.

Since $`T=^{}\times ^{}`$ we can identify $`\text{R}\text{ep}(T)`$ with $`[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^{\pm 1}]`$. The torus $`T`$ acts on $`_\chi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$, \[34, 7.5\]. The $`T`$-action on $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$ agrees with the $`k`$-th action considered in 9.4, \[27, 5.1\]. There is an action of $``$ on $`K_T(_\chi )`$, \[24, Section 10\]. We will denote this action by $``$ always. The action of $`𝒜`$ arises from the action of $`\text{R}\text{ep}(T)`$, whilst the action of $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ for $`1in1`$ is explained in \[27, Sections 2,3\]. For $`xX`$ the action of $`\theta _x`$ is given by tensoring by certain line bundles on $``$, \[27, Section 2\].

### 9.8.

There is an involution,

$$\stackrel{~}{\beta }:K_T(_\chi )K_T(_\chi ),$$

which is $`[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}]`$-linear and twists the action of $``$ by the involution $`\overline{\text{}}`$, \[24, Proposition 12.10\].

Let $`\text{}^{}`$ denote the $`𝒜`$-algebra involution of $`𝒜[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}]`$ which sends $`v^{}`$ to $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$ and let $`\delta `$ denote the $`𝒜`$-algebra anti-involution of $``$ which fixes $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ and sends $`\sigma `$ to $`\sigma ^1`$. By \[24, 12.16\] there is a pairing

$$(|):K_T(_\chi )\times K_T(_\chi )[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^{\pm 1}],$$

which, for $`F,F^{}K_T(_\chi )`$, $`p[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^{\pm 1}]`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$, satisfies

1. $`(p.F|F^{})=(F|p^{}.F^{})=p(F|F^{})`$;
2. $`(\stackrel{~}{T}F|F^{})=(F|\delta (\stackrel{~}{T})F^{})`$;
3. $`(F|F^{})=(F^{}|F)^{}`$.

As in \[25, 5.11\] we define

$$𝐁__\chi ^\pm =\{FK_T(_\chi ):\stackrel{~}{\beta }(F)=F,(F|F)1+[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^1]\}.$$

Thanks to \[27, Section 5\] this set is a signed basis for the free $`𝒜`$-module $`K_T(_\chi )`$.

Let $`𝐩_{k1,k}`$ denote the element in $`K_T(_\chi )`$ representing the skyscraper sheaf at $`p_{k1,k}`$ with trivial $`T`$-action. Abusing notation we will let $`𝒪_k^{j^{},j;i^{},i}`$ denote the coherent sheaf on $`_\chi `$ obtained by extension by zero of the $`T`$-equivariant line bundle $`𝒪_k^{j^{},j;i^{},i}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k^1`$. For $`1kn1`$ set $`𝐎_k=𝒪_k^{0,n+k;n,k}`$. We define

$$𝐎_n=𝐩_{0,1}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}v^{nk}𝐎_k=𝐩_{n1,n}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^k𝐎_k.$$

Then, by \[27, Proposition 5.25\], we have

$$\text{B}__\chi ^\pm =\{\pm v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{s}𝐎_k:1kn,s\}.$$

### 9.9.

There is an explicit description of the action of $`_{fin}`$ on $`K_T(_\chi )`$ given in \[27, 5.11\]. For $`1i,kn1`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_i𝐎_k=\{\begin{array}{cc}v𝐎_k\hfill & \text{if }i=k\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_k𝐎_{k\pm 1}\hfill & \text{if }i=k\pm 1\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_k\hfill & \text{otherwise,}\hfill \end{array}$$

whilst $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i(𝐩_{0,1})=v^1𝐩_{0,1}+\delta _{1,i}(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}+v^n)𝐎_1`$. By \[27, Lemma 5.24\], for $`ij`$, the pairing is given by

(7)
$$(𝐎_i,𝐎_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1+v^2\hfill & \text{if }i=j\hfill \\ v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^1\hfill & \text{ if }i=n\text{ and }j=1\hfill \\ v^1\hfill & \text{if }j=i1\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

### 9.10. The equivariant Hilbert scheme

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the finite cyclic subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ of order $`n`$, defined analogously to 6.1. Let $`𝐇`$ be the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-equivariant Hilbert scheme of $`^2`$, \[29, Chapter 4\]. By definition the points of $`𝐇`$ are $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-equivariant ideals of $`[X,Y]`$, $`I`$, such that $`[X,Y]/I`$ is isomorphic to the regular representation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. There is a morphism

$$\pi :𝐇^2/\mathrm{\Gamma },$$

which, by \[29, Theorem 4.1\], is the minimal resolution of singularities of $`^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Let $`𝐇_0`$ denote the zero fibre $`\pi ^1(0)`$. There is a $`T`$-equivariant isomorphism between $`𝐇`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$ which restricts to an isomorphism between $`𝐇_0`$ and $`_\chi `$.

### 9.11. Derived equivalences

Let $`𝒵=𝐇\times _{^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }}^2`$. By definition we have a commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{cccc}𝒵& \stackrel{\psi }{}& & ^2\\ \eta & & & \sigma & & \\ 𝐇& \stackrel{\pi }{}& & ^2/\mathrm{\Gamma },\end{array}$$

in which $`\sigma `$ and $`\eta `$ are finite, $`\psi `$ and $`\pi `$ are proper and birational, and $`\eta `$ is flat. Thanks to \[22, Theorem 1.4\] the functor

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}=(𝐑p_{}𝐋q^{})^\mathrm{\Gamma }:D_\mathrm{\Gamma }(^2)D(𝐇)$$

is an equivalence of triangulated categories. Moreover $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ restricts to an equivalence between $`D_\mathrm{\Gamma }(^2,0)`$ and $`D(𝐇,𝐇_0)`$, \[4, 9.1\].

Since $`\psi `$ and $`\eta `$ are $`T`$-equivariant morphisms $`\overline{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ can be lifted to an equivalence of triangulated categories

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=(𝐑p_{}𝐋q^{})^\mathrm{\Gamma }:D_{\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T}(^2)D_T(𝐇).$$

### 9.12.

Let $`X`$ be any $`T`$-equivariant quasi-projective variety and let $`p_X:X\{pt\}`$ be projection onto a point. Let $`v^{}`$ (respectively $`v`$) be the one dimensional $`T`$-module where $`(\lambda ,\mu ).1=\lambda `$ (respectively $`(\lambda ,\mu ).1=\mu `$). As in 9.3, pulling back yields a $`T`$-equivariant line bundle which we denote by $`v_X^{}`$ (respectively $`v_X`$). Observe that tensoring by these line bundles realises an action of $`\times `$ on $`\text{C}\text{oh}_T(X)`$ and $`D_T(X)`$, making them into (triangulated) $`\times `$-categories. We will denote the shift functors by $`v_{}^{}{}_{X}{}^{i}v_X^j`$ for $`i,j`$. When there is no confusion as to which variety we mean we will suppress the subscript.

In particular the above discussion applies to $`^2,𝐇,𝐇_0`$ and $`𝒵`$.

###### Lemma.

The equivalence $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a $`\times `$-equivalence.

###### Proof.

Let $`D_{\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T}(^2)`$. We have the following natural isomorphisms

$`𝐑p_{}(𝐋q^{}(v_^2))`$ $`𝐑p_{}(𝐋q^{}()q^{}v_^2)`$ $`𝐑p_{}(𝐋q^{}()v_𝒵)`$
$`𝐑p_{}(𝐋q^{}()p^{}v_𝐇)`$ $`(𝐑p_{}𝐋q^{}())v_𝐇,`$
where the last isomorphism is the projection formula. The same equations hold for $`v^{}`$, so $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a $`\times `$-functor. Using the same formalism, one checks the inverse is also a $`\times `$-functor. ∎

### 9.13. Serre-Grothendieck duality

Let $`\omega _^2`$ (respectively $`\omega _𝐇`$) be the canonical line bundle of $`^2`$ (respectively $`𝐇`$). As $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T`$-equivariant bundles we have $`\omega _^2v_^2^2`$. As $`T`$-equivariant) bundles we have $`\omega _𝐇v_𝐇^2`$ \[24, Proposition 11.10\]. We have contravariant isomorphisms of the derived categories $`D_^2`$ and $`D_𝐇`$ where

$$D_^2=𝐑om_^2(,\omega _^2[2]),D_𝐇=𝐑om_𝐇(,\omega _𝐇[2]).$$

Here $`om`$ denotes the sheaf of homomorphisms. Note that $`D_𝐇`$ sends $`D_T(𝐇,𝐇_0)`$ to itself.

### 9.14. Skew group rings

The algebra $`R=[X,Y]`$ has a $`\times `$-grading with $`\text{deg}(X)=(1,1)`$ and $`\text{deg}(Y)=(1,1)`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ acts on $`R`$ we can form the skew group ring $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The $`\times `$-grading can be extended to $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ by giving the elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ degree 0. We consider the category of finitely generated, bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules, denoted $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$. As in 2.2 $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$ is a $`\times `$-category. As in 9.12, for $`i,j`$ we will denote the associated shift functor by $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{i}v^j`$. The following lemma is standard.

###### Lemma.

Taking global sections induces a $`\times `$-equivalence of categories

$$\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}\text{C}\text{oh}_{\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T}(^2).$$

### 9.15.

Let $`\tau :R\mathrm{\Gamma }R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the anti-involution fixing $`R`$ and sending $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ to $`g^1`$. If $`M`$ is a bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module then $`\tau `$ ensures $`\text{H}\text{om}_R(M,R)`$ is too. Serre-Grothendieck duality then induces the contravariant equivalence $`D_^2=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_R(,v^2R[2])`$ on $`D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$, the bounded derived category of $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$.

Let $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ be the bounded derived category of finitely generated, bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules which are $`(X,Y)`$-primary, that is it which are annihilated by some power of $`(X,Y)`$. If $`M`$ is a complex in $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ then $`D_^2(M)M^{}`$, the vector space dual of $`M`$, \[35, (4.9)\].

### 9.16.

The results of this section can be summarised as follows.

###### Proposition.

There exists a $`\times `$-equivalence of triangulated categories

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=D_𝐇\mathrm{\Phi }D_^2\mathrm{{\rm Y}}:D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})D_T(𝐇),$$

which restricts to a $`\times `$-equivalence between $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ and $`D_T(𝐇_0)`$.

## 10. The equivalence on $`K`$-theory

### 10.1.

Let $`K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ be the Grothendieck group of $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$. The equivalence of Proposition 9.16 yields isomorphisms

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }:K(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})K_T(𝐇)\text{and}\mathrm{\Sigma }_0:K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})K_T(𝐇_0).$$

Moreover, since the equivalence preserves $`\times `$-action, both $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ are $`[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^{\pm 1}]`$-module isomorphisms.

### 10.2.

The simple $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules are labelled by the elements of $`/n`$: the element $`g`$ acts on the $`i`$-th simple module as scalar multiplication by $`\zeta ^i`$. Associated to the $`i`$-th simple $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module there are two bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules: the one dimensional module $`S_i`$ which is annihilated by both $`X`$ and $`Y`$, and the $`R`$-projective cover of $`S_i`$, denoted $`R_i`$. As $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T`$-equivariant sheaves on $`^2`$ these correspond to the skyscraper sheaf supported at $`0`$ and the trivial line bundle, with trivial $`T`$-structure and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-structure given by the $`i`$-th simple $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. There is a Koszul resolution relating the two types of module

(8)
$$0v^2R_i\stackrel{(X,Y)^t}{}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}vR_{i1}v^{}vR_{i+1}\stackrel{(Y,X)}{}R_iS_i0.$$

By 9.13 we have $`D(R_i)=v^2R_{ni}[2]`$ and $`D(S_i)=S_{ni}`$.

### 10.3. Tautological bundles on H

Since the projection $`\eta :𝒵𝐇`$ is a flat and finite $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T`$-equivariant morphism, the pushforward $`\eta _{}𝒪_𝒵`$ is naturally a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\times T`$-equivariant locally free sheaf, denoted $``$. The fibre of $``$ above the ideal $`I𝐇`$ is the vector space $`R/I`$, the regular representation as a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module. Now $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-equivariance allows us to decompose $``$ into a direct sum of $`T`$-equivariant bundles

$$=\underset{1in}{}_i.$$

By definition, the fibre of $`_i`$ above $`I𝐇`$ is the $`i`$-th isotypic component of $`R/I`$. These are described in \[27, 5.27\].

###### Lemma.

The isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ sends $`R_i`$ to $`_i^{}`$, the dual of $`_i`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`\pi _^2:𝐇\times ^2^2`$ be the projection map. Since there is a natural isomorphism $`𝐋\varphi ^{}𝒪_𝒵^𝐋\pi _^2^{}`$, we have

$`\mathrm{\Psi }(R_i)`$ $``$ $`D_𝐇((𝐑\eta _{}𝐋\varphi ^{}(v_^2^2R_{ni}[2]))^\mathrm{\Gamma })D_𝐇((𝐑\eta _{}(𝒪_𝒵^𝐋\pi _^2^{}(v_^2^2R_{ni}[2]))^\mathrm{\Gamma })`$
$``$ $`D_𝐇((v_𝐇^2[2]S_{ni})^\mathrm{\Gamma })D_𝐇(v_𝐇^2_i[2])_i^{}.`$
### 10.4.

Using the resolution (8) and Lemma 10.3 we find that under $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ the module $`S_i`$ is sent to the Koszul complex

(9)
###### Proposition.

For $`1in`$ we have $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0([S_i])=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{ni}𝐎_i`$.

###### Proof.

In the non-equivariant setting the complex (9) was studied in . It is shown in \[15, Propositions 6.2\] that its homology vanishes in degrees 1 and 2 and is $`𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_i}(1)`$ in degree 0 if $`1in1`$. Thus we have a quasi-isomorphism

For $`1in1`$ the bundle $`_i^{}`$ restricted to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ is $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{ni}𝐎_i`$\[27, 5.27\]. If $`i=n`$ a similar argument using \[15, 6.4\], shows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0(S_i)=D_𝐇(𝒪_{𝐇_0})`$. It remains to prove that $`[D_𝐇(𝒪_{𝐇_0})]=𝐎_n`$.

For $`1kn1`$ let $`B_k`$ be the subscheme of $`𝐇_0`$ consisting of the components $`\mathrm{\Pi }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$. Associated to this subscheme we have the maps of coherent sheaves arising from the inclusions $`p_{k1,k}\mathrm{\Pi }_kB_k`$ and $`p_{k1,k}B_{k1}B_k`$

$$𝒪_{B_k}𝒪_{B_{k1}}𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_k}p_{k1,k}$$

This is an exact sequence; so we have $`[𝒪_{B_k}]=[𝒪_{B_{k1}}]+[𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_k}]𝐩_{k1,k}`$. Induction yields

$$[𝒪_{𝐇_0}]=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}[𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_k}]\underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}𝐩_{k,k+1}.$$

By \[27, 5.4\] we have $`𝐩_{k,k+1}=[𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_{k+1}}][𝒪_{k+1}^{n,n+2(k+1);0,0}]`$ and $`[𝒪_{\mathrm{\Pi }_1}]=𝐩_{0,1}+[𝒪_1^{n,n+2;0,0}]`$, which yields

$$[𝒪_{𝐇_0}]=𝐩_{0,1}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}[𝒪_k^{n,n+2k;0,0}]=𝐩_{0,1}+\underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^k𝐎_k.$$

By \[27, Lemma 5.16\] we have $`[D_𝐇(𝐎_k)]=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^n[𝐎_k]`$ and $`[D_𝐇(p_{0,1})]=p_{0,1}`$. The result follows. ∎

The proposition shows that the signed basis $`\{\pm v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{s}[S_i]:1in,s\}`$ of the free $`𝒜`$-module $`K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ is sent by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ to $`𝐁__\chi ^\pm `$. A similar statement is true for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\chi `$, using $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and Lemma 10.3.

## 11. Categorification

### 11.1. Braid group action

Given a pair of objects $`M,ND_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$, the functor $`𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(M,N)`$ takes values in the derived category of bigraded, finite dimensional $``$-vector spaces. We denote this category by $`𝒱`$. In particular, given the simple $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules $`S_i`$ and $`S_j`$ the resolution (8) shows

(10)
$$𝐑^n\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(S_i,S_j)=\text{Ext}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}^n(S_i,S_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill & \text{if }n=0\text{ and }i=j\hfill \\ v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}v^1\hfill & \text{if }n=1\text{ and }i=j\pm 1\hfill \\ v^2\hfill & \text{if }n=2\text{ and }i=j\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Given any complex $`C`$ belonging to $`𝒱`$ and $`MD(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ we can form the tensor product $`CDD(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ and the space of linear maps $`lin(C,M)D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$, \[33, 2a\]. Given a complex of complexes $`\mathrm{}C^1C^0C^1\mathrm{}`$ we write

$$\{\mathrm{}C^1C^0C^1\mathrm{}\}$$

to denote the associated total complex.

For $`0in1`$ let $`\tau _i:D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ be the $`\times `$-functor defined on objects by

$$\tau _i(M)=\text{}$$

where $`ev`$ is the evaluation map and $`M`$ is in degree $`0`$, \[33, Definition 2.5\]. By construction, this is nothing but the mapping cone of $`ev`$, which turns out to be canonical for such complexes. The various $`\tau _i`$’s furnish an action of the affine braid group, $`B_{ad}`$, on $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$, \[33, Proposition 2.4, 2c and Example 3.9\]. For our purposes it is better to work with an adjusted action for $`0in1`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i=D_^2\tau _{ni}D_^2v^1[1].$$

The $`\times `$-equivalences $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i`$ continue to satisfy the braid relations.

### 11.2.

For $`i/n`$ let $`M_i^+`$ (respectively $`M_i^{}`$) be the unique two dimensional bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module with head isomorphic to $`S_i`$ and socle isomorphic to $`v^{}vS_{i+1}`$ (respectively $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}vS_{i1}`$), where multiplication by $`X`$ (respectively $`Y`$) sends the head to the socle.

###### Lemma.

For $`i,j/n`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i(S_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}vS_j\hfill & \text{if }i=j\hfill \\ v^1M_j^\pm [1]\hfill & \text{if }i=j\pm 1\hfill \\ v^1j[1]\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

###### Proof.

We first calculate $`\tau _i`$. If $`i=j`$ then, using (8), we see that $`\tau _j(S_j)`$ equals the complex

$$v^2R_j\stackrel{(X,Y)^t}{}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}vR_{j1}v^{}vR_{j+1}\stackrel{\left(\begin{array}{cc}Y& 0\\ X& 0\end{array}\right)}{}R_jR_j\stackrel{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}ϵ_j& 0& 0\\ ϵ_j& X& Y\end{array}\right)^t}{}$$

$$S_iv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^1R_{j1}v^{}v^1R_{j+1}\stackrel{(0,Y,X)}{}v^2R_j.$$

It is straightforward to check that this complex only has homology at its end term, equal to $`v^2S_j`$. Therefore $`\tau _j(S_j)=v^2S_j[1]`$. If $`i=j+1`$ (the case $`i=j1`$ is analogous) we find $`\tau _{j+1}(S_j)`$ is the complex

$$v^{}vR_{j+1}\stackrel{(X,Y)^t}{}R_jv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}R_{j+2}\stackrel{\left(\begin{array}{cc}ϵ_j& 0\\ Y& X\end{array}\right)}{}S_jv^{}v^1R_{j+1}.$$

Again, it is straightforward to check that this complex only has homology at its end term. A basis for this homology group is $`\{\overline{(1,0)},\overline{(0,1)}\}S_jv^{}v^1R_{j+1}`$, showing that this is the unique bigraded $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-module with head $`v^{}v^1S_{j+1}`$ and socle $`S_j`$ (multiplication by $`Y`$ sends the head $`\overline{(0,1)}`$ to the socle $`\overline{(1,0)}`$). Call this $`N_j`$. If $`ij,j\pm 1`$, then $`\tau _i(S_j)=S_j`$ since the relevant Ext-group vanishes, (10).

The description of $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i`$ follows immediately, noting that $`D_^2(N_{nj})M_j^{}`$ thanks to 9.15. ∎

### 11.3.

Let $`\varsigma `$ be the automorphism of $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which fixes $`X`$ and $`Y`$ and sends $`g`$ to $`\zeta g`$. Following 2.2, this induces an $`\times `$-equivariant action of $`/n`$ on the derived category $`D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$. This satisfies $`\varsigma \stackrel{~}{\tau }_i\varsigma ^1\stackrel{~}{\tau }_{i+1}`$. Therefore we have an action of the extended affine braid group $`B`$ on $`D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ via $`[\stackrel{~}{T}_i]=\stackrel{~}{\tau }_i`$, $`[\sigma ]=\varsigma `$.

### 11.4.

The action of $`B`$ on $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ induces an action of $`𝒜[B]`$ on $`K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ which, by Lemma 11.2, satisfies

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_i([S_j])=\{\begin{array}{cc}v[S_j]\hfill & \text{if }i=j\hfill \\ v^1[S_j]v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}[S_{j\pm 1}]\hfill & \text{if }i=j\pm 1\hfill \\ v^1[S_j]\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, since $`(\stackrel{~}{T}_i+v^1)(\stackrel{~}{T}_iv)`$ acts as zero, this factors through an action of $``$.

###### Proposition.

The isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0:K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})K_T(𝐇_0)`$ is $`_{ad}`$-equivariant.

The action on $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ referred to in the proposition comes from 9.7. The proposition will be proved in the following six subsections, where we also identify the full $``$-action.

### 11.5.

Let’s translate the action from $`K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ over to $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$. Using Proposition 10.4 it is straightforward to check we have

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_i(𝐎_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}v𝐎_j\hfill & \text{if }i=j\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_1v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}𝐎_n\hfill & \text{if }i=n,j=1\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_nv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}𝐎_1\hfill & \text{if }i=1,j=n\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_j𝐎_{j\pm 1}\hfill & \text{if }i=j\pm 1\text{ is not as above}\hfill \\ v^1𝐎_j\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

By 9.9 the action of $`_{fin}`$ here agrees with the $``$-action on $`𝐎_j`$ for $`1jn1`$.

### 11.6.

We first check that the actions of $`_{fin}`$ also agree on $`𝐎_n`$. Thanks to 9.9 we have

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_1𝐎_n=v^1𝐩_{0,1}+(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}+v^n)𝐎_1v^n𝐎_1v^{n2}(v^1𝐎_2𝐎_1)+\underset{k=3}{\overset{n1}{}}v^{nk1}𝐎_k$$

$$=v^1𝐩_{0,1}+(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}+v^{n2})𝐎_1+\underset{k=2}{\overset{n1}{}}v^{nk1}𝐎_k=v^1𝐎_nv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}𝐎_1.$$

Similarly, for $`2in2`$, we have $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i𝐎_n=v^1𝐎_n`$, whilst $`\stackrel{~}{T}_{n1}𝐎_n=v^1𝐎_n𝐎_{n1}`$. This shows that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ is $`_{fin}`$-equivariant.

### 11.7.

We now calculate the action of $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}=\sigma \stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_n`$ in both cases. Tensoring by the line bundle $`L_{n1,n}`$ on $``$, described in \[27, 5.1\], corresponds to $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}`$. The $`T`$-equivariant structure of $`L_{n1,n}`$ is given in \[27, 5.2\] for $`1kn`$ as follows

$$L_{n1,n}|_{p_{k1,k}}=\{\begin{array}{cc}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}\hfill & \text{if }k=n\hfill \\ v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}\hfill & \text{if }k<n.\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, if $`k<n`$ then the restriction of $`L_{n1,n}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Pi }_k`$ is the trivial line bundle with equivariant structure $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}`$. We deduce for $`1kn2`$

$$\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}𝐎_k=L_{n1,n}𝐎_k=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐎_k.$$

We have

$`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}𝐎_{n1}`$ $`=`$ $`L_{n1,n}𝐎_{n1}=[O_{n1}^{1,2n;n1,0}][O_{n1}^{0,1;n,1n}]`$
$`=`$ $`[O_{n1}^{1,1n;1,1n}]=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}[O_{n1}^{0,0;0,0}]`$
$`=`$ $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}(𝐩_{n1,n}+[O_{n1}^{0,0;n,2n}])=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}(𝐩_{n1,n}+v𝐎_{n1})`$
$`=`$ $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}(𝐩_{n1,n}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^k𝐎_k)+{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{k+1n}𝐎_k+(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n})𝐎_{n1}`$
$`=`$ $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{1n}({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}v^i𝐎_i)+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐎_{n1}+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}𝐎_n,`$
and similarly

$`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}𝐎_n`$ $`=`$ $`L_{n1,n}(𝐩_{0,1}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}v^{nk}𝐎_k)=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐩_{0,1}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2k}𝐎_k`$
$``$ $`v(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{1n}({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n1}{}}}v^i𝐎_i)+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐎_{n1}+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}𝐎_n)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{2+kn}𝐎_kv_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v𝐎_{n1}=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{2n}({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}}v^k𝐎_k).`$
### 11.8.

We calculate $`\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_i)`$ for $`1in`$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i\stackrel{~}{T}_{i1}(𝐎_i)=v^1𝐎_i`$ for $`2in1`$, whilst $`\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_n(𝐎_1)=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^1𝐎_n`$. It follows that, for $`2in1`$,

(11)
$$\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_i)=(1)^{n1}v^{2n}𝐎_{i1},$$

whilst

(12)
$$\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_1)=(1)^{n1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^{2n}𝐎_n.$$

We have $`\stackrel{~}{T}_j\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_{n1})=(1)^{j+1}(v^{j1}𝐎_{n1}+v^j𝐎_n+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^j_{k=1}^jv^k𝐎_k)`$ for $`1jn3`$: this can be proved by induction. We deduce that

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_{n1})=\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}((1)^{n2}(v^{2n}𝐎_{n1}+v^{3n}𝐎_n+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^{3n}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n3}{}}v^k𝐎_k))$$

(13)
$$=(1)^{n1}(v^{1n}𝐎_{n1}+v^{2n}𝐎_n+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^{2n}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}v^k𝐎_k+v^{2n}𝐎_{n2}).$$

Arguing by induction, we see $`\stackrel{~}{T}_j\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_n)=(1)^j(v^{1j}𝐎_n+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^{j+1}_{k=1}^jv^k𝐎_k)`$ for $`1jn2`$. In particular

(14)
$$\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n3}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\stackrel{~}{T}_0(𝐎_n)=(1)^{n2}(v^{3n}𝐎_n+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n}v^{3n}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n2}{}}v^k𝐎_k).$$

### 11.9.

To get $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}`$ we must twist by the automorphism $`\sigma `$. This twist sends $`S_i`$ to $`S_{i+1}`$ so, by Theorem 10.4, sends $`𝐎_i`$ to $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}𝐎_{i+1}`$ for $`1in1`$ and $`𝐎_n`$ to $`v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}𝐎_1`$. Combining this with (11), (12), (13) and (14) yields

$$\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}(𝐎_i)=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1)^{n1}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐎_i\hfill & \text{if }1in2\hfill \\ (1)^{n1}(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{1n}(_{k=1}^{n1}v^i𝐎_i)+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{2n}𝐎_{n1}+v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}v^{1n}𝐎_n)\hfill & \text{if }i=n1\hfill \\ (1)^{n2}v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{n1}v^{2n}(_{k=1}^{n2}v^k𝐎_k)\hfill & \text{if }i=n.\hfill \end{array}$$

### 11.10.

Comparing 11.7 and 11.9 we see the actions of $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}`$ differ by scalar multiplication by $`(1)^{n1}`$. Since $`\theta _{\varpi _{n1}}=\stackrel{~}{T}_{n1}\stackrel{~}{T}_{n2}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{T}_1\sigma `$ and the actions of $`_{fin}`$ agree we deduce that the actions of $`\sigma `$ must differ by scalar multiplication by $`(1)^{n1}`$. Since $`T_0=\sigma T_{n1}\sigma ^1`$ we deduce that the actions agree on $`T_n`$, and hence on $`_{ad}`$, proving Theorem 11.4.

There is an involution of $``$ which fixes $`_{ad}`$ and sends $`\sigma `$ to $`(1)^{n1}\sigma `$. The calculations show that the two module structures on $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ are twists of each other under this involution.

### 11.11. Duality

Let $`\nu `$ be the automorphism of $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which swaps $`X`$ and $`Y`$ and sends $`g`$ to $`g^1`$. As in 11.3 we can twist an object $`MR\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$ by $`\nu `$ where we set

$$(M^\nu )_{i,j}=M_{i,j}$$

for $`i,j`$. Twisting by $`\nu `$ commutes with $`D_^2`$ by 9.15. There is a contravariant self-equivalence

$$\stackrel{~}{\beta }:D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})$$

which sends $`M`$ to $`D_^2(M)^\nu `$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^bM)=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^b\stackrel{~}{\beta }(M)`$ for $`a,b`$ and $`MD_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$. Moreover, $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }(S_i)=S_i`$ for $`1in`$.

Recall the involution $`\iota `$ on $`B`$, defined in 9.5.

###### Lemma.

For all $`bB`$ and $`MD_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ we have $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }(b(M))\iota (b)(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(M))`$.

###### Proof.

Given any object $`C𝒱`$ and $`MD(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ evaluation gives a natural isomorphism $`lin(C,D_^2(M))D_^2(CM)`$ in $`D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$. Hence, by \[33, Section 2\],

$`T_i^1(M)`$ $`=`$ $`\{\text{}\}`$
$``$ $`\{MD_^2(𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(M,D_^2S_{ni})S_{ni})\}`$
$``$ $`\{MD_^2(𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(S_{ni},D_^2(M))S_{ni})\}`$
$``$ $`D_^2(\{\text{}\})`$
$`=`$ $`D_^2T_{ni}(D_^2(M)).`$
By construction $`\text{}^\nu T_i=T_{ni}\text{}^\nu `$ so we deduce that $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }T_i=T_i^1\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$. The same statement with $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ follows since

$$\stackrel{~}{T}_i\stackrel{~}{\beta }=D_^2T_{ni}D_^2v^1[1]\stackrel{~}{\beta }=\stackrel{~}{\beta }D_^2T_{ni}^1D_^2v[1]=\stackrel{~}{\beta }\stackrel{~}{T}_i^1.$$

Finally, since $`\nu \sigma =\sigma ^1\nu `$ and $`(M^{})^\sigma =(M^{\sigma ^1})^{}`$ we find $`(D_^2(M^\sigma ))^\nu =(D_^2(M))^{\sigma ^1\nu }=(D_^2(M)^\nu )^\sigma `$, as required. ∎

### 11.12. A pairing

There is a pairing

$$(,):D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})\times D(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})𝒱,$$

given by $`(M,N)=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N),M)`$.

Recall from 9.8 the involution $`\text{}^{}`$ on $`[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1},v^{\pm 1}]`$. This induces an involution on $`𝒱`$ which we denote also by $`\text{}^{}`$.

###### Lemma.

The pairing satisfies the following properties:

1) $`(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^bM,N)=(M,v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^bN)=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^b(M,N)`$;

2) $`(T_iM,N)=(M,T_iN)`$ and $`(\sigma M,N)=(M,\sigma ^1N)`$;

3) $`(M,N)=(N,M)^{}`$.

###### Proof.

Part 1 follows immediately from the variance properties of $`𝐑\text{H}\text{om}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$. By Lemma 11.11 we have

$$𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N),T_i(M))=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(T_i^1(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N)),M)=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(T_i(N)),M),$$

and

$$𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N),M^\sigma )=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_R\mathrm{\Gamma }(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N)^{\sigma ^1},M)=𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N^\sigma ),M),$$

proving part 2. Finally, we have

$$𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N),M)𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D_^2(M),D_^2(\stackrel{~}{\beta }(N)))𝐑\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(D_^2(M),N^\nu ).$$

In $`R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$ the identity provides an identification $`\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(A,B)=\text{H}\text{om}_{R\mathrm{\Gamma }}(A^\nu ,B^\nu )^{}`$, which, together with above equation, proves part 3. ∎

### 11.13.

The next corollary shows that the structures defined in this chapter give a categorification of the action of $`_{ad}`$ on $`K_T(_\chi )`$ discussed in 9.7. It is clear we can extend this to a categorification of the $``$-action. For more details about categorification, see .

###### Theorem.

The duality $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ and pairing $`(,)`$ on $`D_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$ induce a duality and a pairing on $`K_0(R\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod})`$, which, under the $`_{ad}`$-module isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$, correspond to the duality and pairing defined in 9.8.

###### Proof.

By construction $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }(v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^b[i^!])=v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{a}v^b[i^!]`$ for $`a,b`$ and $`1in`$. The claim about duality then follows from the sentence following the proof of Proposition 10.4.

The calculation of Ext-groups in (10) shows that

$$(S_i,S_j)=\{\begin{array}{cc}1+v^2[2]\hfill & \text{if }j=i\hfill \\ v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}v^1[1]\hfill & \text{if }j=i\pm 1\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

Calculating the image of this in $`K_T(𝐇_0)`$ under $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ yields (7). Thus the pairings agree since Claims 1,2 and 3 in Lemma 11.12 correspond to 9.8.1,9.8.2 and 9.8.3 ∎

## 12. Final Remarks

### 12.1. Coinvariant algebra

Define the skew coinvariant algebra

$$C_𝕃(n)=\frac{𝕃[X,Y]}{(X^n,XY,Y^n)}\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$

Since $`(X^n,XY,Y^n)`$ is a homogeneous ideal for the bigrading on $`𝕃[X,Y]`$ similar to that in 9.14, there is a natural bigraded structure on $`C_𝕃(n)`$. Let $`C_𝕃(n)\mathrm{grmod}`$ denote full $`\times `$-subcategory of $`𝕃[X,Y]\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{grmod}`$ consisting of $`C_𝕃(n)`$-modules.

Observe that the constructions in Section 11 of the braid group action, duality and pairing carry over to $`𝕃[X,Y]\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ if the characteristic of $`𝕃`$ is either zero or coprime to $`n`$. We will use $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_𝕃`$ to denote the duality. In particular, passing to $`K`$-theory induces an action of $``$ on the Grothendieck group of bigraded $`C_𝕃(n)`$-modules.

There is an isomorphism

$$\upsilon :N_𝕃(n)C_𝕃(n),$$

which sends $`X`$ to $`_{k=1}^nb_k`$, $`Y`$ to $`_{k=1}^na_k`$ and $`g`$ to $`_{k=1}^n\zeta ^{nk}e_k`$. By construction the $``$-grading on $`N_𝕃(n)`$ corresponds to the $`v^{}`$-component on $`C_𝕃(n)`$. We write $`C_𝕃(n)\mathrm{grmod}|_{v=1}`$ to denote to the associated category of $``$-graded $`C_𝕃(n)`$-modules.

### 12.2.

Fix a regular weight $`\lambda C_0`$. Proposition 4.17 proves the existence of a $``$-equivalence of categories

$$\mathrm{\Theta }:U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}C_𝕂(n)\mathrm{grmod}|_{v=1}.$$

Under the isomorphism $`\upsilon `$, the element $`g`$ acts on $`e_i`$ by scalar multiplication by $`\zeta ^{ni}`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{\Theta }(L_i)=S_{ni}`$. The reader can check that the duality $`D`$ on $`U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ corresponds, through $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, to $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_𝕂`$.

### 12.3. Translation functors (II)

Let $`\gamma _i=T_{\mu _i}^\lambda T_\lambda ^{\mu _i}:B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$ be the $`i`$th wall-crossing functor. By the adjunction property, there is a natural transformation $`ϵ_i:\gamma _i\text{id}`$, which, as in \[32, Section 3\], induces a triangulated $``$-functor $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ on the bounded derived category of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod}`$.

The functor $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ does not necessarily restrict to $`D(U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod})`$. However, there is an isomorphism between $`K(B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod})`$ and $`K(U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod})`$. By transfer of structure, the $`[v_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{\pm 1}]`$-linear operators $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ act on $`K(B_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod})`$.

Recall the action of $``$ on $`K(C\mathrm{grmod})`$. This gives us operators $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ on $`K(C\mathrm{grmod}|_{v=1})`$ when we specialise $`v`$ to $`1`$. It is not difficult to show that

The isomorphism $`\theta :K(U_{\chi ,\lambda }\text{-}T_0\mathrm{mod})K(C\mathrm{grmod}|_{v=1})`$ commutes with

the operators $`\stackrel{~}{T}_i`$ for $`0in1`$.

### 12.4. Extension to type B

For subregular representations of Lie algebras of type $`B`$, Jantzen has proved an analogue of Proposition 4.12 and calculated several extension groups, \[17, Section 3\]. Then, if we can prove an analogue of Proposition 4.13, it follows formally from the arguments of Sections 4, 6 and 7 that the central reduction of a block of a subregular reduced enveloping algebra of type $`B`$ is a matrix ring over a central reduction of Hodges’ deformation of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A`$.

Unfortunately, the proof of Proposition 4.13 does not immediately generalise to type $`B`$ since it is no longer true that we can find all highest weights in the fundamental alcove, $`C_0`$. For regular weights, however, this can be remedied as follows. Let $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ denote a block of a subregular reduced enveloping algebra of type $`B_n`$ associated to a regular weight $`\lambda `$. Rickard’s results in \[32, Section 3\] remain valid in this situation. To check this requires the specific information on the wall-crossing functors, denoted $`\gamma _i`$ for $`1in`$, provided by Jantzen in \[18, Section H\]. Thus, for $`1in`$, there are derived self-equivalences $`F_i`$ on the bounded derived categories of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules. In particular, given any $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-module $`M`$, $`F_i(M)`$ is the complex $`\gamma _i(M)M`$, the map being given by the counit of $`\gamma _i`$. Combining the known behaviour of baby Verma modules under wall-crossing, \[16, 11.20\], with existing results on filtrations of the projective indecomposable modules by baby Verma modules, \[16, Proposition 10.11\], it can be shown that, given two projective indecomposable $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$-modules $`Q`$ and $`Q^{}`$, there are integers $`1i_1,\mathrm{},i_tn`$ such that $`F_{i_1}\mathrm{}F_{i_t}(Q)`$ is quasi-isomorphic to $`Q^{}`$. Since it is known that the centre of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ is a derived-invariant, the proof of Proposition 4.13 can be generalised, using the derived category, to deal with $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$. As a result we find the central reduction of $`B_{\chi ,\lambda }`$ is a matrix ring over the central reduction of Hodges’ deformation of a Kleinian singularity of type $`A_{2n1}`$.