text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

The major motivation for our paper is the fundamental work  of G.I. Kac on extensions of finite groups which are, in modern terms, finite dimensional Kac algebras (or Hopf $``$-algebras). Being invented in the early sixties (see ) in order to explain in a symmetric way the duality for locally compact (l.c.) groups, Kac algebras gave historically the first wide class of quantum groups that included besides usual groups and their duals also non-trivial (i.e., non-commutative and non-cocommutative) objects , . In fact, one of the goals of  was to give a systematic approach to the construction of such objects. The general theory of Kac algebras was completed independently on the one hand by G.I. Kac and the second author  and on the other hand by M. Enock and J.-M. Schwartz (for a survey see ).

After the appearence of quantum groups in the eighties a lot of efforts were spent in order to construct their general theory in operator algebraic framework that would cover known examples and that would be as elegant and symmetric as the one of Kac algebras. Important steps in this direction were made by S. Baaj and G. Skandalis , S.L. Woronowicz , T. Masuda and Y. Nakagami  and A. Van Daele . The general theory of l.c. quantum groups was proposed by J. Kustermans and the first author  (see  for an overview).

It is natural to expect that the main ideas of  still work in this much more general framework. Indeed, generalizing the classical group extension theory, G.I. Kac explained there that, in order to construct an extension of finite groups $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$, it is necessary and sufficient: 1) To define a pair of compatible actions of $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ on each other (as on sets) or, equivalently, $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ must be subgroups of a certain group $`G`$ such that $`G_1G_2=\{e\}`$ and any $`gG`$ can be written as $`g=g_1g_2(g_1G_1,g_2G_2)`$; so $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ must form a matched pair (this term was introduced later by W.M. Singer  and M. Takeuchi ). 2) To define a pair of compatible 2-cocycles for these actions, so $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ must form a cocycle matched pair. Then an arbitrary extension has the structure of their cocycle bicrossed product.

This last construction was studied intensively by S. Majid both in algebraic and in analytic aspects . In particular, in  he defines a matched pair of Hopf algebras and studies their bicrossed product, later in  and , 6.3 he considers cocycle bicrossed products of Hopf algebras. In  S. Majid defines a matched pair of l.c. groups with continuous mutual actions and constructs the corresponding bicrossed product Hopf-von Neumann algebra, which is a Kac algebra under some additional assumption (modularity). Later T. Yamanouchi proved  that in this situation one always gets a quasi Woronowicz algebra. Our analysis, involving measurable and almost everywhere defined actions, shows that in general this bicrossed product is a l.c. quantum group. S. Majid also gave very interesting concrete examples of bicrossed products (without cocycles).

S. Baaj and G. Skandalis defined in  a matched pair of Kac systems and studied their bicrossed product. In particular they considered matched pairs of locally compact groups $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$, and to keep themselves in the framework of regular multiplicative unitaries, they assumed that $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are closed subgroups of a locally compact group $`G`$ such that the map $`(g_1,g_2)g_1g_2`$ is a homeomorphism of $`G_1\times G_2`$ onto $`G`$. In  they extended this notion requiring the above map to be a homeomorphism of $`G_1\times G_2`$ only onto an open subset of $`G`$ with complement of measure zero. We will use the same setting in Subsection 4.2 and Section 5. In  and  S. Baaj and G. Skandalis gave important concrete examples of bicrossed products.

We also want to mention the algebraic papers  on extensions of Hopf algebras and especially , where A. Masuoka established interesting connections with extensions of Lie bialgebras. All this, as well as the recent paper , served as a motivation for our work aimed at the construction of new examples of l.c. quantum groups. We explain the structure of our work.

In Preliminaries we establish notations and briefly summarize the main definitions and results of the theory of l.c. quantum groups in the von Neumann algebraic setting.

Section 1 is in a sense preparatory, although we believe its results are of independent interest. Here we define and study cocycle actions of l.c. quantum groups on von Neumann algebras generalizing twisted group actions  and ordinary (without cocycles) l.c. quantum group actions . We construct the von Neumann cocycle crossed product algebra which is an operator algebra version of the Hopf algebraic cocycle crossed product , Chapter 7, we perform the dual weight construction and obtain a canonical unitary implementation for these cocycle actions. Finally, we explain relations between cocycle crossed products and cleft extensions of von Neumann algebras, which is also motivated by the Hopf algebraic results , Chapter 7. Some facts concerning operator spaces  are needed for this discussion.

Section 2 starts with the most general (and inevitably quite complicated) definition of a cocycle matched pair of l.c. quantum groups. Then we construct the corresponding cocycle bicrossed product (which is an operator algebra version of the Hopf algebraic construction described in , 6.3), we show that it is a l.c. quantum group and compute its invariant weights, fundamental unitary and the dual l.c. quantum group. Finally, we investigate when the above cocycle bicrossed product is compact and discrete.

In Section 3 the notions of extensions and cleft extensions of l.c. quantum groups are introduced and a one-to-one correspondence between cleft extensions and cocycle bicrossed products is established. We also define isomorphic extensions and give necessary and sufficient conditions for two cleft extensions to be isomorphic. These results are similar to Hopf algebraic results obtained in .

Section 4 is devoted to the study of the special, but the most important, case when the cocycle matched pair is formed by usual locally compact groups. When both groups are discrete, we extend the result obtained by G.I. Kac  for finite groups and show that every extension is cleft and so has a cocycle bicrossed product structure. Then for a matched pair of locally compact groups we describe the corresponding bicrossed product and compute all the ingredients of this locally compact quantum group. The same formulas were given by S. Baaj and G. Skandalis  in the absence of cocycles. We also characterize the Kac algebra case and here we extend , Theorem 2.12. Finally, we introduce the group of extensions related to a matched pair of locally compact groups and discuss relations with cocycles in the sense of S. Baaj and G. Skandalis.

Discussing examples of matched pairs of locally compact groups and corresponding extensions in Section 5, we start with a brief survey of known examples distinguishing the cases when all extensions are or are not Kac algebras. Then we discuss the relation between locally compact quantum groups obtained from matched pairs of Lie groups and the corresponding infinitesimal objects: Hopf algebras and Lie bialgebras. Next, in Subsection 5.3, we discuss an example which was already presented by S. Baaj and G. Skandalis in a talk in Oberwolfach , but we include it here because it seems worthwhile to compute explicitly the associated infinitesimal Hopf algebra and to show how this example is a deformation of the $`ax+b`$-group. Finally, we construct a new example of a matched pair of Lie groups and compute the corresponding extension getting this way a new example of a locally compact quantum group. The description of this example was announced in . In Subsection 5.5 we present the first, up to our knowledge, series of extensions with non-trivial cocycles which are not Kac algebras. For this we compute explicitly a family of corresponding 2-cocycles.

Acknowledgements. Both authors are grateful to Professor A. Van Daele for stimulating discussions. The first author wants to thank the research group in Leuven for the nice working atmosphere. The second author is grateful to the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven and to the Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik in Bonn for kind hospitality during his work on this paper and to Professor D. Gurevich for helpful discussions. Both authors want to thank Professors S. Baaj and G. Skandalis for their interesting comments.

## Preliminaries

We denote by $``$ the tensor product of Hilbert spaces (resp., von Neumann algebras) and by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (resp., $`\sigma `$) the flip map on it. We also use the leg-numbering notation. For example, if $`H,K`$ and $`L`$ are Hilbert spaces and $`XB(HL)`$, we denote by $`X_{13}`$ (resp., $`X_{12},X_{23}`$) the operator $`(1\mathrm{\Sigma }^{})(X1)(1\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ (resp., $`X1,1X`$) defined on $`HKL`$. If now $`H=H_1H_2`$ is itself a tensor product of two Hilbert spaces, then we sometimes switch from the leg-numbering notation with respect to $`HKL`$ to the one with respect to the finer tensor product $`H_1H_2KL`$, for example, from $`X_{13}`$ to $`X_{124}`$. There is no confusion here, because the number of legs changes.

We denote the $`\sigma `$-strong closure of a subset $`A`$ of a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ by $`A^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}`$ and we use  as a general reference to the modular theory of normal semifinite faithful (n.s.f.) weights on von Neumann algebras. If $`\theta `$ is a weight on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$, we use the notations

$$_\theta ^+=\{xN^+\theta (x)<+\mathrm{}\},𝒩_\theta =\{xNx^{}x_\theta ^+\}\text{and}_\theta =\mathrm{span}_\theta ^+.$$

If $`N_0`$ is a von Neumann subalgebra of $`N`$ and if $`T`$ is an operator valued weight from $`N`$ to $`N_0`$ , Section 11.5, we denote by $`𝒩_T`$ the set of elements $`xN`$ such that $`T(x^{}x)`$ is a bounded operator. Recall that if $`T`$ is a n.s.f. operator valued weight and $`\theta _0`$ is a n.s.f. weight on $`N_0`$, then $`\theta :=\theta _0T`$ defines a n.s.f. weight on $`N`$. The modular automorphism group of $`\theta _0`$ is the restriction of the modular automorphism group of $`\theta `$ to the von Neumann algebra $`N_0`$, , Section 11.9.

If $`\theta `$ is a n.s.f. weight on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ and if $`(H_\theta ,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$ is a GNS-construction for $`\theta `$, we recall that the GNS-map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta `$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed. This expression means that the map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta `$ is closed for the $`\sigma `$-strong topology on $`N`$ and the norm topology on $`H_\theta `$. We denote by $`𝒯_\theta `$ the Tomita -algebra, consisting of elements $`xN`$ analytic w.r.t. the modular group $`\sigma ^\theta `$ of $`\theta `$ and such that $`\sigma _z^\theta (x)𝒩_\theta 𝒩_\theta ^{}`$ for all $`z`$.

In this paper we use systematically l.c. quantum groups in von Neumann algebraic setting  including special types of morphisms in the definition of extensions in Section 3. However it should be mentioned that a comprehensive definition of morphisms and then of a category of l.c. quantum groups can be done only in the universal $`C^{}`$-algebraic setting ; this was known already for Kac algebras , Chapter 5.

A pair $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is called a (von Neumann algebraic) l.c. quantum group  when

* $`M`$ is a von Neumann algebra and $`\mathrm{\Delta }:MMM`$ is a normal and unital $``$-homomorphism satisfying the coassociativity relation : $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\Delta }`$.
* There exist n.s.f. weights $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ on $`M`$ such that

+ $`\phi `$ is left invariant in the sense that $`\phi \left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right)=\phi (x)\omega (1)`$ for all $`x_\phi ^+`$ and $`\omega M_{}^+`$,
    + $`\psi `$ is right invariant in the sense that $`\psi \left((\iota \omega )\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right)=\psi (x)\omega (1)`$ for all $`x_\psi ^+`$ and $`\omega M_{}^+`$.

From , Theorem 7.14 we know that left invariant weights on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ are unique up to a positive scalar and the same holds for right invariant weights.

Let us fix a left invariant n.s.f. weight $`\phi `$ on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and represent $`M`$ on the GNS-space of $`\phi `$ such that $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is a GNS-construction for $`\phi `$. Then we can define a unitary $`W`$ on $`HH`$ by

$$W^{}(\mathrm{\Lambda }(a)\mathrm{\Lambda }(b))=(\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda })(\mathrm{\Delta }(b)(a1))\text{for all}a,b𝒩_\phi .$$

Here $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ denotes the canonical GNS-map for the tensor product weight $`\phi \phi `$. One proves that $`W`$ satisfies the pentagonal equation: $`W_{12}W_{13}W_{23}=W_{23}W_{12}`$. We say that $`W`$ is a multiplicative unitary. The comultiplication can be given in terms of $`W`$ by the formula $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)=W^{}(1x)W`$ for all $`xM`$. Also the von Neumann algebra $`M`$ can be written in terms of $`W`$ as

$$M=\{(\iota \omega )(W)\omega B(H)_{}\}^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.$$

Next the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ has an antipode $`S`$, which is the unique $`\sigma `$-strong closed linear map from $`M`$ to $`M`$ satisfying $`(\iota \omega )(W)𝒟(S)`$ for all $`\omega B(H)_{}`$, $`S(\iota \omega )(W)=(\iota \omega )(W^{})`$ and such that the elements $`(\iota \omega )(W)`$ form a $`\sigma `$-strong core for $`S`$. $`S`$ has a polar decomposition $`S=R\tau _{i/2}`$ where $`R`$ is an anti-automorphism of $`M`$ and $`(\tau _t)`$ is a strongly continuous one-parameter group of automorphisms of $`M`$. We call $`R`$ the unitary antipode and $`(\tau _t)`$ the scaling group of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. From , Proposition 5.26 we know that $`\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }R`$. So $`\phi R`$ is a right invariant weight on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and we take $`\psi :=\phi R`$. Let us denote by $`(\sigma _t)`$ the modular automorphism group of $`\phi `$. From , Proposition 6.8 we get the existence of a number $`\nu >0`$, called the scaling constant, such that $`\psi \sigma _t=\nu ^t\psi `$ for all $`t`$. Hence we get the existence of a unique positive, self-adjoint operator $`\delta _M`$ affiliated to $`M`$, such that $`\sigma _t(\delta _M)=\nu ^t\delta _M`$ for all $`t`$ and $`\psi =\phi _{\delta _M}`$, see , Definition 7.1. Formally this means that $`\psi (x)=\phi (\delta _M^{1/2}x\delta _M^{1/2})`$, and for a precise definition of $`\phi _{\delta _M}`$ we refer to . The operator $`\delta _M`$ is called the modular element of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. If $`\delta _M=1`$ we call $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ unimodular. Let us also mention that the scaling constant can be characterized as well by the relative invariance $`\phi \tau _t=\nu ^t\phi `$.

We use the notation $`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}`$ to denote the opposite comultiplication defined by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}:=\sigma \mathrm{\Delta }`$.

From , Notation 7.2 we get the canonical GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ for the n.s.f. weight $`\psi `$, formally given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)=\mathrm{\Lambda }(x\delta _M^{1/2})`$. Then we can define another multiplicative unitary $`V`$ by

$$V(\mathrm{\Gamma }(a)\mathrm{\Gamma }(b))=(\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma })(\mathrm{\Delta }(a)(1b))\text{for all}a,b𝒩_\psi .$$

The comultiplication can be expressed by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)=V(x1)V^{}`$ for all $`xM`$.

The dual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is defined in , Section 8. Its von Neumann algebra $`\widehat{M}`$ is

$$\widehat{M}=\{(\omega \iota )(W)\omega B(H)_{}\}^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}$$

and the comultiplication is given by $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(x)=\mathrm{\Sigma }W(x1)W^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for all $`x\widehat{M}`$. If we turn the predual $`M_{}`$ into a Banach algebra with product $`\omega \mu =(\omega \mu )\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and define

$$\lambda :M_{}\widehat{M}:\lambda (\omega )=(\omega \iota )(W),$$

then $`\lambda `$ is a homomorphism and $`\lambda (M_{})`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong dense subalgebra of $`\widehat{M}`$. To construct explicitly a left invariant n.s.f. weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$, first introduce the space

$$=\{\omega M_{}\text{there exists a vector}\xi (\omega )H\text{such that}\omega (x^{})=\xi (\omega ),\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)\text{for all}x𝒩_\phi \}.$$

If $`\omega `$ then such a vector $`\xi (\omega )`$ clearly is uniquely determined. Next one proves that there exists a unique n.s.f. weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ on $`\widehat{M}`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ such that $`\lambda ()`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\lambda (\omega ))=\xi (\omega )\text{for all}\omega .$$

One proves that the weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is left invariant, and the associated multiplicative unitary is denoted by $`\widehat{W}`$. From , Proposition 8.16 it follows that $`\widehat{W}=\mathrm{\Sigma }W^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

Since $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is again a l.c. quantum group, we can introduce the antipode $`\widehat{S}`$, the unitary antipode $`\widehat{R}`$ and the scaling group $`(\widehat{\tau }_t)`$ exactly as we did it for $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Also, we can again construct the dual of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, starting from the left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. From , Theorem 8.29 we get that the bidual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M}\widehat{\text{}},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\widehat{\text{}})`$ is isomorphic to $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Also, defining $`\widehat{}`$ and $`\widehat{\xi }`$ similarly to the definition of $``$ and $`\xi `$, it follows from , Proposition 8.30 that, for all $`\omega \widehat{}`$,

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }((\iota \omega )(W^{}))=\widehat{\xi }(\omega ).$$

We denote by $`(\widehat{\sigma }_t)`$ the modular automorphism groups of the weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$. The modular conjugations of the weights $`\phi `$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$ will be denoted by $`J`$ and $`\widehat{J}`$ respectively. Then it is worthwhile to mention that

$$R(x)=\widehat{J}x^{}\widehat{J}\text{for all}xM\text{and}\widehat{R}(y)=Jy^{}J\text{for all}y\widehat{M}.$$

From , Proposition 2.15 we know that

$$V=(\widehat{J}\widehat{J})\mathrm{\Sigma }W^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }(\widehat{J}\widehat{J})$$

and in particular $`V\widehat{M}^{}M`$.

Let us mention important special cases of l.c. quantum groups.

a) If $`(\tau _t)`$ is trivial and the modular element $`\delta _M`$ is affiliated to the center of $`M`$, $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ becomes a Kac algebra . Let us explain this in more detail. From  we know that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra if and only if $`(\tau _t)`$ is trivial and $`\sigma _tR=R\sigma _t`$ for all $`t`$. Now denote by $`(\sigma _t^{})`$ the modular automorphism group of $`\psi `$. Because $`\psi =\phi R`$ we get that $`\sigma _t^{}R=R\sigma _t`$ for all $`t`$. Hence $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra if and only if $`(\tau _t)`$ is trivial and $`\sigma ^{}=\sigma `$. From  we know that $`\sigma _t^{}(x)=\delta _M^{it}\sigma _t(x)\delta _M^{it}`$ for all $`xM`$ and $`t`$. Hence $`\sigma ^{}=\sigma `$ if and only if $`\delta _M`$ is affiliated to the center of $`M`$.

In particular, $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra if $`M`$ is commutative. Then $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is generated by a usual l.c. group $`G:M=L^{\mathrm{}}(G),(\mathrm{\Delta }f)(g,h)=f(gh),(Sf)(g)=f(g^1),\phi (f)=f(g)𝑑g`$, where $`fL^{\mathrm{}}(G),g,hG`$ and we integrate with respect to the left Haar measure $`dg`$ on $`G`$. The right invariant weight $`\psi `$ is given by $`\psi (f)=f(g^1)𝑑g`$. The modular element $`\delta _M`$ is given by the strictly positive function $`g\delta _G(g)^1`$, where $`\delta _G`$ is the modular function of the l.c. group $`G`$.

The von Neumann algebra $`M`$ acts on $`H=L^2(G)`$ by multiplication and

$$(W\xi )(g,h)=\xi (g,g^1h)$$

for all $`\xi HH=L^2(G\times G)`$. Then $`\widehat{M}=(G)`$ is the group von Neumann algebra generated by the operators $`(\lambda _g)_{gG}`$ of the left regular representation of $`G`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\lambda _g)=\lambda _g\lambda _g`$. Clearly, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}:=\sigma \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$; so, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is cocommutative.

b) A l.c. quantum group is called compact if its Haar measure is finite: $`\phi (1)<+\mathrm{}`$, which is equivalent to the fact that the norm closure of $`\{(\iota \omega )(W)|\omega B(H)_{}\}`$ is a unital $`C^{}`$-algebra. A l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is called discrete if $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is compact.

Sometimes we refer to Hopf algebra theory, and then we use the Sweedler notation for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(a)=a_{(1)}a_{(2)}.$$

## 1 Cocycle crossed products and the dual weight construction

### 1.1 Cocycle actions, crossed products and the dual action

###### Definition 1.1.

We call a pair $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ a cocycle action of a l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ if

$$\alpha :NMN$$

is a normal, injective and unital $``$-homomorphism,

$$𝒰MMN$$

is a unitary, and if $`\alpha `$ and $`𝒰`$ satisfy

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)`$ $`=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\alpha (x)𝒰^{}\text{for all}xN`$
$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰).`$
Consider some special cases. First, let $`(\alpha ,u)`$ be a twisted action of a (separable) l.c. group $`G`$ on a ($`\sigma `$-finite) von Neumann algebra $`N`$. This means that $`G\mathrm{Aut}N:s\alpha _s`$ and $`u:G\times GN`$ are Borel maps, such that $`u`$ takes values in the set of unitaries of $`N`$ and

$`\alpha _s\alpha _t`$ $`=\mathrm{Ad}u(s,t)\alpha _{st}`$
$`\alpha _r(u(s,t))u(r,st)`$ $`=u(r,s)u(rs,t)`$
nearly everywhere. Putting $`M=L^{\mathrm{}}(G)`$, one can identify $`MN`$ with $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G,N)`$ and hence one can define $`\alpha :NL^{\mathrm{}}(G)N`$ by $`(\alpha (x))(s)=\alpha _{s^1}(x)`$ for $`xN`$ and $`sG`$. We also identify $`MMN`$ with $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G\times G,N)`$ and define $`𝒰L^{\mathrm{}}(G)L^{\mathrm{}}(G)N`$ by $`𝒰(s,t)=u(t^1,s^1)`$. Then $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of the commutative l.c. quantum group $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G),\mathrm{\Delta }_G)`$ on $`N`$.

Second, if $`𝒰=1`$, we obtain the definition of an ordinary action $`\alpha `$ of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ , Definition 1.1.

Third, let us explain the link with the Hopf algebra theory , Definition 4.1.1 and Lemma 7.1.2. Let $`(H,\mathrm{\Delta },S,\epsilon )`$ be a Hopf algebra and let $`A`$ be a unital algebra equipped with a linear map $`HAA:haha`$ such that

$$h(ab)=(h_{(1)}a)(h_{(2)}b)\text{and}h1=\epsilon (h)1$$

and equipped with a convolution invertible linear map $`\sigma :HHA`$ such that

$`h(ka)`$ $`={\displaystyle \sigma (h_{(1)},k_{(1)})\left((h_{(2)}k_{(2)})a\right)\sigma ^1(h_{(3)},k_{(3)})}`$
$`{\displaystyle \left(h_{(1)}\sigma (k_{(1)},m_{(1)})\right)\sigma (h_{(2)},k_{(2)}m_{(2)})}`$ $`={\displaystyle \sigma (h_{(1)},k_{(1)})\sigma (h_{(2)}k_{(2)},m)}.`$
Here the convolution invertibility of $`\sigma `$ means that there exists a linear map $`\sigma ^1`$ from $`HH`$ to $`A`$ such that

$$\sigma (h_{(1)},k_{(1)})\sigma ^1(h_{(2)},k_{(2)})=\epsilon (h)\epsilon (k)1=\sigma ^1(h_{(1)},k_{(1)})\sigma (h_{(2)},k_{(2)}).$$

If now $`H`$ is finite dimensional, the linear dual $`\widehat{H}`$ is a Hopf algebra by $`(\omega \mu )(h)=\omega (h_{(1)})\mu (h_{(2)})`$ and $`\omega _{(1)}(h)\omega _{(2)}(k)=\omega (kh)`$ for all $`\omega ,\mu \widehat{H}`$ and $`h,kH`$. Observe that we use the opposite comultiplication on $`\widehat{H}`$. Identifying $`\widehat{H}A`$ with the space of linear maps from $`H`$ to $`A`$ one defines $`\alpha :A\widehat{H}A`$ by $`\alpha (a)(h)=ha`$. Then $`\alpha `$ is a unital homomorphism. Further identifying $`\widehat{H}\widehat{H}A`$ with the space of linear maps from $`HH`$ to $`A`$ we define $`𝒰\widehat{H}\widehat{H}A`$ by $`𝒰(h,k)=\sigma (k,h)`$. Then $`𝒰`$ is invertible and

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (a)`$ $`=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\alpha (a)𝒰^1`$
$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰).`$
In this setting without involution it is natural to replace $`𝒰^{}`$ by $`𝒰^1`$, so the Hopf algebraic definition of a cocycle action agrees with our definition.

Let us now start with the operator algebraic theory of cocycle actions and their crossed products.

###### Notation 1.2.

If $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ we introduce the notation

$$\stackrel{~}{W}=(W1)𝒰^{},$$

and then $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is a unitary in $`MB(H)N`$.

###### Definition 1.3.

Given a cocycle action $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ of a l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$, the cocycle crossed product $`M\text{α,U}N`$ is the von Neumann subalgebra of $`B(H)N`$ generated by

$$\alpha (N)\text{and}\{(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega M_{}\}.$$

As in the case of ordinary actions , Proposition 2.2 we can define a dual action $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`M\text{α,U}N`$ with trivial cocycle.

###### Proposition 1.4.

There exists a unique action $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`M\text{α,U}N`$ such that

$`\widehat{\alpha }(\alpha (x))`$ $`=1\alpha (x)\text{for all}xN`$
$`(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(\stackrel{~}{W})`$ $`=W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}.`$
Moreover denoting by $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ the unitary $`(JJ)\mathrm{\Sigma }W\mathrm{\Sigma }(JJ)`$ we have

$$\widehat{\alpha }(z)=(\stackrel{~}{V}1)(1z)(\stackrel{~}{V}^{}1)\text{for all}zM\text{α,U}N.$$

###### Proof.

Observe that $`\stackrel{~}{V}\widehat{M}M^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}(1x)\stackrel{~}{V}^{}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(x)`$ for all $`x\widehat{M}`$. So one gets for every $`xN`$

$$(\stackrel{~}{V}1)(1\alpha (x))(\stackrel{~}{V}^{}1)=1\alpha (x).$$

Next we have

$`\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}^{}`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}W_{13}𝒰_{134}^{}\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}^{}=\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}W_{13}\stackrel{~}{V}_{23}^{}𝒰_{134}^{}`$
$`=(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})(W)_{123}𝒰_{134}^{}=W_{12}W_{13}𝒰_{134}^{}=W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}.`$
So it is clear that we can define a normal, unital and injective $``$-homomorphism

$$\widehat{\alpha }:M\text{α,U}N\widehat{M}(M\text{α,U}N)$$

by $`\widehat{\alpha }(z)=(\stackrel{~}{V}1)(1z)(\stackrel{~}{V}^{}1)`$ for all $`zM\text{α,U}N`$, and then $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ satisfies $`\widehat{\alpha }(\alpha (x))=1\alpha (x)`$ for $`xN`$ and $`(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(\stackrel{~}{W})=W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}`$. It is obvious that

$$(\iota \widehat{\alpha })\widehat{\alpha }(\alpha (x))=(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )\widehat{\alpha }(\alpha (x))$$

for all $`xN`$. Further we have

$`(\iota \iota \widehat{\alpha })(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(\stackrel{~}{W})`$ $`=(\iota \iota \widehat{\alpha })(W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134})`$
$`=W_{12}W_{13}\stackrel{~}{W}_{145}=(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})(W)_{123}\stackrel{~}{W}_{145}`$
$`=(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )(W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134})=(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(\stackrel{~}{W}).`$
Both statements together give $`(\iota \widehat{\alpha })\widehat{\alpha }(z)=(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )\widehat{\alpha }(z)`$ for all $`zM\text{α,U}N`$. Hence $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ is indeed an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on the von Neumann algebra $`M\text{α,U}N`$. The uniqueness statement is obvious. ∎

Let us get another formula for $`\widehat{\alpha }`$. Since $`M\text{α,U}NB(H)N`$, the following proposition makes sense.

###### Proposition 1.5.

For all $`zM\text{α,U}N`$ we have

$$\widehat{\alpha }(z)=\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(z)\stackrel{~}{W}^{}.$$

###### Proof.

By definition $`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)=\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\alpha (x))\stackrel{~}{W}`$, so

$$\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)\stackrel{~}{W}^{}=1\alpha (x)=\widehat{\alpha }(\alpha (x)).$$

Next we have

$`\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}(\iota \iota \alpha )(\stackrel{~}{W})\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}^{}`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}W_{12}(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}^{}`$
$`=\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}W_{12}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰^{})(1𝒰^{})\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}^{}`$
$`=W_{23}W_{12}W_{23}^{}𝒰_{134}^{}=W_{12}W_{13}𝒰_{134}^{}`$
$`=W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}=(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(\stackrel{~}{W}).`$
Both computations together give the formula stated in the proposition. ∎

The following result will be needed in Section 5.

###### Proposition 1.6.

Let $`xN`$. Then $`\alpha (x)`$ commutes with the elements $`\{(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega B(H)_{}\}`$ if and only if $`\alpha (x)=1x`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)=\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\alpha (x))\stackrel{~}{W}`$, $`\alpha (x)`$ commutes with the elements $`\{(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega B(H)_{}\}`$ if and only if $`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)=1\alpha (x)`$. Since $`\iota \alpha `$ is faithful this equality is valid if and only if $`\alpha (x)=1x`$. ∎

### 1.2 Stabilization of cocycle actions

###### Definition 1.7.

A cocycle action $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ is said to be stabilizable with a unitary $`XMN`$ if

$$(1X)(\iota \alpha )(X)=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)𝒰^{}.$$

###### Proposition 1.8.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ which is stabilizable with a unitary $`XMN`$. Then the formulas

$$\beta :NMN:\beta (x)=X\alpha (x)X^{}and\mathrm{\Phi }:zX^{}zX$$

define respectively an action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ and a $``$-isomorphism from $`M\text{β}N`$ onto $`M\text{α,U}N`$ satisfying

$$\widehat{\alpha }\mathrm{\Phi }=(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })\widehat{\beta }.$$

###### Proof.

Define $`\beta `$ as above. Then one has for all $`xN`$

$`(\iota \beta )\beta (x)`$ $`=(1X)(\iota \alpha )(X)(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)(\iota \alpha )(X^{})(1X^{})`$
$`=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)𝒰^{}𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\alpha (x)𝒰^{}𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\beta (x).`$
Hence $`\beta `$ is an action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Considering $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ as an isomorphism of $`B(H)N`$, we clearly have $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\beta (x))=\alpha (x)`$ for all $`xN`$ and

$`(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })(W1)`$ $`=(1X^{})(W1)(1X)=(W1)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})(1X)`$
$`=(W1)𝒰^{}(\iota \alpha )(X^{})=\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{}).`$
So $`\mathrm{\Phi }(M\text{β}N)M\text{α,U}N`$; similarly one proves the converse inclusion. Hence $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is an isomorphism of $`M\text{β}N`$ onto $`M\text{α,U}N`$.

Recalling the definition of the dual actions $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ and $`\widehat{\beta }`$ and the unitary $`\stackrel{~}{V}`$ implementing them, we only have to observe that $`1X`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}1`$ commute to get the formula $`(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })\widehat{\beta }=\widehat{\alpha }\mathrm{\Phi }`$. ∎

The next proposition shows that many cocycle actions are stabilizable.

###### Proposition 1.9.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Then $`(\alpha \iota ,𝒰1)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`NB(H)`$ which is stabilizable with the unitary

$$X=V_{31}^{}𝒰_{312}^{}.$$

###### Proof.

It is easy to check that $`XMNB(H)`$. Next we have to prove that

$$(1X)(\iota \alpha \iota )(X)=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(X)(𝒰^{}1).$$

So we have to prove that

$$X_{341}(\iota \iota \alpha )(X_{231})=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X_{231})𝒰_{234}^{}.$$

Starting the computation on the left hand side we get

$`X_{341}(\iota \iota \alpha )(X_{231})`$ $`=V_{13}^{}𝒰_{134}^{}V_{12}^{}(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})`$
$`=V_{13}^{}𝒰_{134}^{}V_{12}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰^{})𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=V_{13}^{}𝒰_{134}^{}𝒰_{134}V_{12}^{}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰^{})𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })(V^{})_{123}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰^{})𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X_{231})𝒰_{234}^{}.`$
This computation proves our result. ∎

Let us give now a definition of the fixed point algebra of a cocycle action.

###### Definition 1.10.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Then

$$N^\alpha =\{xN\alpha (x)=1x\}$$

is called the fixed point algebra of $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$. It is clear that $`N^\alpha `$ is a von Neumann subalgebra of $`N`$.

###### Theorem 1.11.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of a l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on a von Neumann algebra $`N`$ and $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ the dual action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on the cocycle crossed product $`M\text{α,U}N`$. Then

1. $`(M\text{α,U}N)^{\widehat{\alpha }}=\alpha (N),`$
2. $`(M\text{α,U}NM^{})^{\prime \prime }=B(H)N,`$
3. $`M\text{α,U}N=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)xN,\omega M_{}\}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.`$

###### Proof.

First let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be stabilizable with a unitary $`X`$. Using the action $`\beta `$ and the isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of Proposition 1.8 we get the first two statements, because they are valid for ordinary actions , Theorems 2.6 and 2.7. Recalling that $`(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })(W1)=\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{})`$ and using that

$$M\text{β}N=\left(\mathrm{span}\{\left((\omega \iota )(W)1\right)\beta (x)xN,\omega M_{}\}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}$$

we get

$$M\text{α,U}N=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\omega \iota \iota )\left(\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{})\right)\alpha (x)xN,\omega M_{}\}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.$$

Now we define the following linear subspace of $`M\text{α,U}N:`$

$$𝒪:=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)xN,\omega M_{}\}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.$$

Choose $`\xi ,\eta H`$, $`xN`$ and an orthonormal basis $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ for $`H`$. Then we have with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence

$$(\omega _{\xi ,\eta }\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{}))\alpha (x)=\underset{iI}{}(\omega _{e_i,\eta }\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )(X^{})x\right)𝒪.$$

So $`M\text{α,U}N𝒪`$ and hence $`𝒪=M\text{α,U}N`$. This proves the result for stabilizable actions. From Proposition 1.9 the general result now follows. ∎

### 1.3 The dual weight construction

Theorem 1.11 shows that $`\alpha (N)`$ is the fixed point algebra of the dual action $`\widehat{\alpha }`$ of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`M\text{α,U}N`$, so the formula $`T:=(\widehat{\phi }\iota \iota )\widehat{\alpha }`$ defines a normal and faithful operator valued weight from $`M\text{α,U}N`$ to $`\alpha (N)`$ , Proposition 1.3. To define then the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ for a given weight $`\theta `$ on $`N`$ by the formula $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\theta \alpha ^1T`$, we have to prove first that $`T`$ is semifinite.

###### Lemma 1.12.

We still write $`T:=(\widehat{\phi }\iota \iota )\widehat{\alpha }`$. For every $`\omega `$ and $`xN`$ we have

$$(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)𝒩_T$$

and

$$T\left(\alpha (x^{})(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})^{}(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi (\omega )^2\alpha (x^{}x).$$

###### Proof.

Let $`N`$ act on $`K`$. Choose $`\omega `$, $`xN`$, a vector $`\xi HK`$ and an orthonormal basis $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ for $`HK`$. Define

$$z:=\alpha (x^{})(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})^{}(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x).$$

Then we get

$`(\iota \omega _{\xi ,\xi })\widehat{\alpha }(z)`$ $`=(\iota \omega _{\alpha (x)\xi ,\alpha (x)\xi })\left((\omega \iota \iota \iota )(W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134})^{}(\omega \iota \iota \iota )(W_{12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134})\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}\left((\iota \omega _{\alpha (x)\xi ,e_i})(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega \iota \right)(W)^{}\left((\iota \omega _{\alpha (x)\xi ,e_i})(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega \iota \right)(W).`$
Because $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is normal we get that

$`\widehat{\phi }(\iota \omega _{\xi ,\xi })\widehat{\alpha }(z)`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}\xi \left((\iota \omega _{\alpha (x)\xi ,e_i})(\stackrel{~}{W})\omega \right)^2`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}(\iota \omega _{\alpha (x)\xi ,e_i})(\stackrel{~}{W})\xi (\omega )^2`$
$`=\xi (\omega )\alpha (x)\xi ^2=\xi (\omega )^2\omega _{\xi ,\xi }(\alpha (x^{}x)).`$
This final computation proves the lemma. ∎

Combining this lemma with Theorem 1.11 one gets that the operator valued weight $`T`$ is semifinite. So one can use the theory of operator valued weights  to give the following definition.

###### Definition 1.13.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Given a n.s.f. weight $`\theta `$ on $`N`$ we can define the dual n.s.f. weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ on $`M\text{α,U}N`$ by the formula

$$\stackrel{~}{\theta }=\theta \alpha ^1(\widehat{\phi }\iota \iota )\widehat{\alpha }.$$

Let us fix a n.s.f. weight $`\theta `$ on $`N`$ with GNS-construction $`(K,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ be the dual weight of $`\theta `$. Lemma 1.12 implies by polarization the following formula for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ on a dense subset of $`M\text{α,U}N`$.

###### Corollary 1.14.

For all $`\omega ,\mu `$ and $`x,y𝒩_\theta `$ the element $`(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)`$ belongs to $`𝒩_{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{\theta }\left(\alpha (y^{})(\mu \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})^{}(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x),\xi (\mu )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (y).$$

In order to apply the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ further in this chapter, we need a concrete GNS-construction for it. The corollary above suggests to define a GNS-map $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ by the formula

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x).$$

To do this, it is not enough to know that the elements $`(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)`$ span a dense set of $`M\text{α,U}N`$, we also need to prove that they form a core for a GNS-map for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$.

###### Proposition 1.15.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ and $`\theta `$ a n.s.f. weight on $`N`$ with GNS-construction $`(K,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$. Then there exists a unique GNS-construction $`(HK,\iota \pi _\theta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ for the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ satisfying

1. $`\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\eta H,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\theta \}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$.
2. $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)`$ for all $`\omega `$ and $`x𝒩_\theta `$.

###### Proof.

Let $`N`$ act on $`K`$ by $`\pi _\theta `$, hence we may assume that $`\pi _\theta =\iota `$. Suppose first that $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is stabilizable with the unitary $`X`$. Then we can construct the action $`\beta `$ and the isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ as in Proposition 1.8. Because $`(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })\widehat{\beta }=\widehat{\alpha }\mathrm{\Phi }`$ we get immediately that $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }\mathrm{\Phi }=\stackrel{~}{\theta }_\beta `$, where $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_\beta `$ is the dual weight of $`\theta `$ on $`M\text{β}N`$. Let $`(HK,\iota ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_\beta )`$ be the canonical GNS-construction for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }_\beta `$ as defined in , Definition 3.4. Define for $`z𝒩_{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}`$

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)=X^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_\beta (\mathrm{\Phi }^1(z)).$$

Then $`(HK,\iota ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ is a GNS-construction for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$. The isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and , Propositions 3.10 and 7.1 give

$$\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{}))\alpha (x)\eta H,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\theta \}$$

is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{}))\alpha (x)\right)=X^{}(\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x))$$
(1.1)
for all $`\omega `$ and $`x𝒩_\theta `$. By Corollary 1.14 we can define a unique isometry $`𝒱:HKHK`$ such that

$$𝒱(\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x))=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)$$

for all $`\omega `$ and $`x𝒩_\theta `$. Later we will show that $`𝒱=1`$ to get the second statement of the proposition. Let

$$𝒟_0:=\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\eta H,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\theta \}$$

and $`𝒟`$ the domain of the $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closure of the restriction of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ to $`𝒟_0`$. Choose $`\eta H`$, $`b𝒯_\phi `$, $`x𝒩_\theta `$ and an orthonormal basis $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ in $`H`$. Define

$$z:=(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(X^{}))\alpha (x)$$

and for every finite subset $`I_0I`$

$$z_{I_0}:=\underset{iI_0}{}(\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{\eta ,e_i}\iota )(X^{})x\right).$$

Then every $`z_{I_0}`$ belongs to $`𝒟_0`$ and, using , Proposition 7.1, we get

$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z_{I_0})`$ $`=𝒱\left({\displaystyle \underset{iI_0}{}}\xi (\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)})(\omega _{\eta ,e_i}\iota )(X^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)\right)`$
$`=𝒱\left({\displaystyle \underset{iI_0}{}}J\sigma _{i/2}(b)Je_i(\omega _{\eta ,e_i}\iota )(X^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)\right).`$
So we observe that $`\left(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z_{I_0})\right)_{I_0I}`$ converges in norm to

$$𝒱(J\sigma _{i/2}(b)J1)X^{}(\eta \mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x))=𝒱X^{}(J\sigma _{i/2}(b)J\eta \mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x))=𝒱X^{}(\xi (\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)).$$

Further $`(z_{I_0})_{I_0I}`$ converges in $`\sigma `$-strong topology to $`z`$. So we may conclude that $`z𝒟`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)=𝒱X^{}(\xi (\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)).$$

In the beginning of the proof we saw that the elements $`z`$ span a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$, so $`𝒟_0`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and by Eq. (1.1)

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)=X^{}(\xi (\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)})\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)),$$

so $`𝒱=1`$. Hence we have also proved the second statement of the proposition for stabilizable cocycle actions.

Consider now the general case. Choose a n.s.f. trace $`\mathrm{Tr}`$ on $`B(H)`$. Then $`\theta \mathrm{Tr}`$ is a n.s.f. weight on $`NB(H)`$, and $`(\alpha \iota ,𝒰1)`$ is a stabilizable cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`NB(H)`$. Writing $`\beta :=\alpha \iota `$, it is clear that

$$M\text{β,U⊗1}\left(NB(H)\right)=\left(M\text{α,U}N\right)B(H)$$

and $`\widehat{\beta }=\widehat{\alpha }\iota `$. Then it is clear that the dual weight of $`\theta \mathrm{Tr}`$ equals the tensor product weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }\mathrm{Tr}`$.

Choose now a GNS-construction $`(L,\pi _{\mathrm{Tr}},\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}})`$ for $`\mathrm{Tr}`$ and let $`(KL,\iota \pi _{\mathrm{Tr}},\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}})`$ be the canonical GNS-construction for the tensor product weight $`\theta \mathrm{Tr}`$. By the previous part of the proof we get a GNS-construction $`(HKL,\iota \iota \pi _{\mathrm{Tr}},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1)`$ for the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }\mathrm{Tr}`$, such that

1. $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)y\right)=\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}}(y)`$ for all $`\omega `$, $`x𝒩_\theta `$ and $`y𝒩_{\mathrm{Tr}}`$.
2. $`\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)y\eta H,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\theta ,y𝒩_{\mathrm{Tr}}\}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1`$.

To deduce the second statement above from the first part of the proof, observe that the elements $`xy`$ with $`x𝒩_\theta `$ and $`y𝒩_{\mathrm{Tr}}`$ span a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta \mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}}`$.

Choose now an arbitrary GNS-construction $`(K_2,\pi ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_2)`$ for the weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$. The lemma following this proposition shows that

$$\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\eta H,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\theta \}$$

is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_2`$. By Corollary 1.14 there is a unique isometry $`𝒱:HKK_2`$ such that

$$𝒱(\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x))=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_2\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)$$

for all $`\omega `$ and $`x𝒩_\theta `$. Because the elements $`(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)`$ span a core for $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_2`$, $`𝒱`$ is unitary and we can define a new GNS-construction $`(HK,\rho ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ by $`\rho (z)=𝒱^{}\pi (z)𝒱`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)=𝒱^{}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_2(z)`$. Of course, the elements $`(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)`$ still span a core of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi (\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta (x)$$

for all $`\omega `$ and $`x𝒩_\theta `$. Let $`(HKL,\rho \pi _{\mathrm{Tr}},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}})`$ be the tensor product GNS-construction for the weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }\mathrm{Tr}`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1`$ agree on a core for both $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1`$. Hence $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{Tr}}=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_1`$, from where $`\rho \pi _{\mathrm{Tr}}=\iota \iota \pi _{\mathrm{Tr}}`$. Then finally $`\rho =\iota `$, which concludes the proof. ∎

Now we still have to prove the following lemma.

###### Lemma 1.16.

Let $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ be von Neumann algebras and $`\phi _i`$ a n.s.f. weight on $`N_i(i=1,2)`$. Suppose that $`(K_1,\pi _1,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1)`$ is a GNS-construction for $`\phi _1`$ and that $`(K,\pi ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is a GNS-construction for the tensor product weight $`\phi _1\phi _2`$. Suppose further that $`𝒟`$ is a linear subspace of $`𝒩_{\phi _1}`$ such that the algebraic tensor product $`𝒟𝒩_{\phi _2}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then $`𝒟`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$.

###### Proof.

Choose a GNS-construction $`(K_2,\pi _2,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)`$ for $`\phi _2`$. Because all GNS-constructions for $`\phi _1\phi _2`$ are isomorphic, we may assume that

$$(K,\pi ,\mathrm{\Lambda })=(K_1K_2,\pi _1\pi _2,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Lambda }_2).$$

Choose now $`a𝒩_{\phi _1}`$. Fix an element $`b𝒩_{\phi _2}`$, $`b0`$ and fix elements $`c,d𝒯_{\phi _2}`$ such that $`\phi _2(d^{}bc)=1`$.

Choose then a net $`(x_\alpha )_\alpha `$ in $`𝒟𝒩_{\phi _2}`$ such that

$$x_\alpha ab\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}\text{and}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)(x_\alpha )\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(a)\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(b)\text{in norm}.$$

Then $`\left((\iota \omega _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(c),\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(d)})(x_\alpha )\right)_\alpha `$ will be a net in $`𝒟`$, converging $`\sigma `$-strong to $`a`$. Further it is easy to verify that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\left((\iota \omega _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(c),\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(d)})(x_\alpha )\right)=(1\theta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(d\sigma _i^2(c)^{})}^{})(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)(x_\alpha )$$

and this converges in norm to

$$(1\theta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(d\sigma _i^2(c)^{})}^{})(\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(a)\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(b))=\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(a).$$

So, indeed $`𝒟`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$. ∎

###### Terminology 1.17.

If $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ and $`\theta `$ is a n.s.f. weight on $`N`$ with GNS-construction $`(K,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$, then the GNS-construction $`(HK,\iota \pi _\theta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ obtained in Proposition 1.15 is called the canonical GNS-construction for $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$.

### 1.4 The unitary implementation of a cocycle action and the biduality theorem

The results of this subsection follow from Propositions 1.8 and 1.9 and from similar results for ordinary actions , so we omit their proofs.

###### Definition 1.18.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ and let $`\theta `$ be a n.s.f. weight on $`N`$ with GNS-construction $`(K,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$. Let $`(HK,\iota \pi _\theta ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ be the canonical GNS-construction for the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$. Denote with $`J_\theta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{J}`$ the modular conjugations of $`\theta `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$ in these GNS-constructions. Then

$$U_\alpha =\stackrel{~}{J}(\widehat{J}J_\theta )$$

is called the unitary implementation of $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ obtained by $`\theta `$.

To justify this terminology let us state the following proposition.

###### Proposition 1.19.

With the notation of the previous definition we have

1. $`(\iota \pi _\theta )\alpha (x)=U_\alpha (1\pi _\theta (x))U_\alpha ^{}\text{for all}xN.`$
2. $`U_\alpha MB(K).`$
3. $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(U_\alpha )=(\iota \iota \pi _\theta )(𝒰^{})U_{\alpha \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}23}}U_{\alpha \mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}13}}(\widehat{J}\widehat{J}J_\theta )(\iota \iota \pi _\theta )(𝒰_{213})(\widehat{J}\widehat{J}J_\theta ).`$
4. $`(\widehat{J}J_\theta )U_\alpha =U_\alpha ^{}(\widehat{J}J_\theta ).`$

In fact, the unitary implementation $`U_\alpha `$ of $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ does not depend on the choice of the weight $`\theta `$ on $`N`$. If $`\theta `$ and $`\theta ^{}`$ are both n.s.f. weights on $`N`$ with GNS-constructions $`(K,\pi _\theta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta )`$ and $`(K^{},\pi _\theta ^{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_\theta ^{})`$ and if $`u`$ is the unitary from $`K`$ onto $`K^{}`$ intertwining $`\pi _\theta `$ and $`\pi _\theta ^{}`$ and mapping the positive cone of $`K`$ onto the one of $`K^{}`$, then

$$U_\alpha ^{}=(1u)U_\alpha (1u^{}).$$

Finally we state the biduality theorem.

###### Proposition 1.20.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Then the formula

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:z\stackrel{~}{W}(\iota \alpha )(z)\stackrel{~}{W}^{}$$

defines a $``$-isomorphism of $`B(H)N`$ onto $`\widehat{M}_{\widehat{\alpha }}(M\text{α,U}N)`$ satisfying

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(z)`$ $`=\widehat{\alpha }(z)\text{for all}zM\text{α,U}N,`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(x1)`$ $`=x11\text{for all}xM^{}.`$
Defining

$$\mu :B(H)NMB(H)N:\mu (z)=(\mathrm{\Sigma }V^{}1)𝒰^{}(\iota \alpha )(z)𝒰(V\mathrm{\Sigma }1)$$

we have $`(𝒥\mathrm{\Phi })\mu =\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\text{}}\mathrm{\Phi }`$, where $`𝒥(x)=J\widehat{J}x\widehat{J}J`$ for all $`xM`$.

Let us mention that up to the flip map between $`B(H)N`$ and $`NB(H)`$ the action $`\mu `$ precisely agrees with the stabilized action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`NB(H)`$ given by combining Propositions 1.8 and 1.9. Combining the previous proposition with the formula

$$\widehat{\alpha }(M\text{α,U}N)=\left(\widehat{M}_{\widehat{\alpha }}(M\text{α,U}N)\right)^{\widehat{\alpha }\widehat{\text{}}}$$

we get the following corollary.

###### Corollary 1.21.

Let $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ be a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. Then we have

$$M\text{α,U}N=\{zB(H)N(V^{}1)𝒰^{}(\iota \alpha )(z)𝒰(V1)=z_{13}\}.$$

### 1.5 Cocycle crossed products and cleft extensions of von Neumann algebras

Here we answer the following question. Let $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ be a l.c. quantum group and let $`\theta :N\widehat{M}N`$ be an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on the von Neumann algebra $`N`$. When does $`N`$ have the structure of a cocycle bicrossed product such that $`\theta `$ agrees with the dual action?

###### Proposition 1.22.

Let $`N`$ be a von Neumann algebra and $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ a l.c. quantum group. Suppose that $`\theta :N\widehat{M}N`$ is an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`N`$. Then the following assertions are equivalent.

1. There exists a cocycle action $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N^\theta `$ such that

$$(N,\theta )(M\text{α,U}N^\theta ,\widehat{\alpha }).$$
2. There exists a unitary $`XMN`$ such that

$$(\iota \theta )(X)=W_{12}X_{13}.$$

If the second condition is satisfied the formulas

$$\alpha (z)=X^{}(1z)X\text{for all}zN^\theta and𝒰=X_{23}^{}X_{13}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)$$

define a cocycle action $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N^\theta `$. The formula

$$\pi :NM\text{α,U}N^\theta :\pi (z)=X^{}\theta (z)X$$

defines a $``$-isomorphism satisfying

$$(\iota \pi )(X)=W_{12}𝒰^{},\pi (x)=\alpha (x)\text{for all}xN^\theta \text{and}\widehat{\alpha }\pi =(\iota \pi )\theta .$$

###### Proof.

Let us first suppose that the second statement is true and take a corresponding unitary $`X`$. Define

$$\alpha :N^\theta MN:\alpha (z)=X^{}(1z)X.$$

Then we get for all $`zN^\theta `$

$$(\iota \theta )\alpha (z)=(\iota \theta )(X^{})(1\theta (z))(\iota \theta )(X)=X_{13}^{}W_{12}^{}(11z)W_{12}X_{13}=\alpha (z)_{13}.$$

So $`\alpha (N^\theta )MN^\theta `$. Next we define the unitary $`𝒰`$ in $`MMN`$ by

$$𝒰:=X_{23}^{}X_{13}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X),$$

from where

$`(\iota \iota \theta )(𝒰)`$ $`=(\iota \theta )(X^{})_{234}(\iota \theta )(X^{})_{134}(\mathrm{\Delta }\theta )(X)=X_{24}^{}W_{23}^{}X_{14}^{}W_{13}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(W_{12}X_{13})`$
$`=X_{24}^{}X_{14}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)_{124}=𝒰_{124}.`$
Hence $`𝒰MMN^\theta `$. To show that $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N^\theta `$, we compute, for all $`zN^\theta `$:

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\alpha (z)=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})(11z)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)=𝒰^{}X_{23}^{}X_{13}^{}(11z)X_{13}X_{23}𝒰=𝒰^{}(\iota \alpha )\alpha (z)𝒰.$$

Further we have

$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=X_{34}^{}X_{24}^{}X_{14}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)_{124}X_{34}X_{34}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})_{124}((\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)`$
$`=X_{34}^{}X_{24}^{}X_{14}^{}((\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X).`$
On the other hand,

$`(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=X_{34}^{}X_{24}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)_{234}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})_{234}X_{14}^{}((\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)`$
$`=X_{34}^{}X_{24}^{}X_{14}^{}((\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X).`$
Hence we obtain the equality

$$(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota \iota )(𝒰)=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(𝒰).$$

So, $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$. We claim that the map

$$\pi :NB(H)N:\pi (z)=X^{}\theta (z)X$$

is such that $`\pi (N)M\text{α,U}N^\theta `$. To show this we use Corollary 1.21. First let us check that $`\pi (N)B(H)N^\theta `$. We have for all $`zN`$:

$`(\iota \theta )\pi (z)`$ $`=(\iota \theta )(X^{})(\iota \theta )\theta (z)(\iota \theta )(X)=X_{13}^{}W_{12}^{}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )\theta (z)W_{12}X_{13}`$
$`=X_{13}^{}\theta (z)_{13}X_{13}=\pi (z)_{13}.`$
Hence we get $`\pi (N)B(H)N^\theta `$. To prove our claim it now suffices to observe that

$`(V^{}1)𝒰^{}(\iota \alpha )\pi (z)𝒰(V1)`$ $`=(V^{}1)𝒰^{}X_{23}^{}X_{13}^{}\theta (z)_{13}X_{13}X_{23}𝒰(V1)`$
$`=(V^{}1)(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X^{})\theta (z)_{13}(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(X)(V1)`$
$`=X_{13}^{}V_{12}^{}\theta (z)_{13}V_{12}X_{13}=X_{13}^{}\theta (z)_{13}X_{13}=\pi (z)_{13}`$
for all $`zN`$, where we used the fact that $`V\widehat{M}^{}M`$ in the last line of the computation.

Next, for $`zN^\theta `$ we clearly have

$$\pi (z)=X^{}\theta (z)X=X^{}(1z)X=\alpha (z)$$

and further

$$(\iota \pi )(X)=X_{23}^{}(\iota \theta )(X)X_{23}=X_{23}^{}W_{12}X_{13}X_{23}=W_{12}𝒰^{}$$

so we may conclude that $`M\text{α,U}N^\theta \pi (N)`$. Thus, we have proved that $`\pi (N)=M\text{α,U}N^\theta `$.

To finish the first part of the proof we only have to verify the formula $`\widehat{\alpha }\pi =(\iota \pi )\theta `$, but for $`zN`$ we get

$`(\iota \pi )\theta (z)`$ $`=X_{23}^{}(\iota \theta )\theta (z)X_{23}=X_{23}^{}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\iota )\theta (z)X_{23}`$
$`=X_{23}^{}(\stackrel{~}{V}1)\theta (z)_{23}(\stackrel{~}{V}^{}1)X_{23}`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{V}1)(1\pi (z))(\stackrel{~}{V}^{}1)=\widehat{\alpha }(\pi (z)).`$
Here we used the notation $`\stackrel{~}{V}=(JJ)\mathrm{\Sigma }W\mathrm{\Sigma }(JJ)`$ and observe that $`\stackrel{~}{V}(1z)\stackrel{~}{V}^{}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(z)`$ for all $`z\widehat{M}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{V}\widehat{M}M^{}`$. So we have proved that the second statement of the proposition implies the first one.

To prove the converse statement we have to show that for every cocycle action $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ on $`N`$ there exists a unitary $`XM(M\text{α,U}N)`$ such that

$$(\iota \widehat{\alpha })(X)=W_{12}X_{13}.$$

Taking $`X=W_{12}𝒰^{}`$ an easy computation proves the result. ∎

From an algebraic point of view this proposition is related to the notion of a cleft extension , Definition 7.2.1; the definition below is given for the case of Hopf $``$-algebra actions:

Let $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }},\widehat{S},\widehat{\epsilon })`$ be a Hopf $``$-algebra and let $`\theta :N\widehat{M}N`$ be an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op},\widehat{S}^1,\widehat{\epsilon })`$ on a unital $``$-algebra $`N`$, then the extension $`N^\theta N`$ is called a cleft extension, if there exists a linear map $`\gamma :\widehat{M}N`$ such that

* $`\gamma `$ is a comodule map, which means that $`(\iota \gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}=\theta \gamma .`$
* $`\gamma `$ is convolution unitary, i.e., $`\mathrm{m}(\gamma ^{}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(z)=\widehat{\epsilon }(z)1=\mathrm{m}(\gamma \gamma ^{})\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(z)`$ for all $`z\widehat{M}`$, where $`\mathrm{m}`$ is the multiplication map and $`\gamma ^{}(z)=\gamma (\widehat{S}(z^{}))^{}`$.

For a similar definition in the framework of l.c. quantum groups we use the predual space $`M_{}`$ of $`M`$. When we turn $`M_{}`$ into an operator space (see e.g. ), the map $`\lambda :M_{}\widehat{M}:\lambda (\omega )=(\omega \iota )(W)`$ will be completely contractive. Next, it is possible to define the comultiplication $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ on the level of $`M_{}`$ using the extended Haagerup tensor product $`_{\text{eh}}`$ . Loosely speaking one can give a meaning in $`M_{}_{\text{eh}}M_{}`$ to expressions like

$$\underset{iI}{}\omega _i\mu _i$$

where $`I`$ is an index set, $`(\omega _i)`$ (resp., $`(\mu _i)`$) is a bounded infinite row (resp., column) over $`M_{}`$. Then one can show that there exists a unique complete contraction from $`M_{}`$ to $`M_{}_{\text{eh}}M_{}`$, also denoted by $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}`$, such that

$$(\lambda _{\text{eh}}\lambda )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\lambda $$

where $`\lambda _{\text{eh}}\lambda `$ is the obvious completely contractive embedding of $`M_{}_{\text{eh}}M_{}`$ into $`\widehat{M}\widehat{M}`$. We then have

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega _{\xi ,\eta })=\underset{iI}{}\omega _{e_i,\eta }\omega _{\xi ,e_i}$$

for all $`\xi ,\eta H`$ and for an orthonormal basis $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ in $`H`$. The following definition looks very much like the Hopf algebraic definition above, but has an exact operator algebraic meaning.

###### Definition 1.23.

Let $`N`$ be a von Neumann algebra, $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ a l.c. quantum group and $`\theta :N\widehat{M}N`$ an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`N`$. Then the extension $`N^\theta N`$ is called a cleft extension of von Neumann algebras if there exists a complete contraction

$$\gamma :M_{}N$$

such that

* $`\gamma `$ is a comodule map, which means that

$$(\lambda _{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega )=\theta (\gamma (\omega ))\text{for all}\omega M_{}$$

where $`\lambda _{\text{eh}}\gamma `$ is the natural complete contraction from $`M_{}_{\text{eh}}M_{}`$ to $`\widehat{M}N`$.
* $`\gamma `$ is convolution unitary, which means that

$$\mathrm{m}(\gamma ^{}_{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega )=\omega (1)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}=\mathrm{m}(\gamma _{\text{eh}}\gamma ^{})\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega )\text{for all}\omega M_{}$$

where $`\gamma ^{}(\omega )=\gamma (\overline{\omega })^{}`$ for all $`\omega M_{}`$, $`\gamma ^{}_{\text{eh}}\gamma `$ maps $`M_{}_{\text{eh}}M_{}`$ into $`N_{\text{eh}}N`$ completely contractively and where $`\mathrm{m}:N_{\text{eh}}NN`$ is the completely contractive multiplication map.

The following result sheds some light on Proposition 1.22 from an algebraic point of view.

###### Proposition 1.24.

Let $`N`$ be a von Neumann algebra, $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ a l.c. quantum group and $`\theta :N\widehat{M}N`$ an action of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op})`$ on $`N`$. Then the extension $`N^\theta N`$ is a cleft extension of von Neumann algebras if and only if one of the equivalent statements of Proposition 1.22 is satisfied.

###### Proof.

Denoting by $`_{\text{max}}`$ the maximal operator space tensor product, it follows from , Proposition 5.4 that the completely bounded maps from $`M_{}`$ to $`N`$ can be identified with $`(M_{}_{\text{max}}N_{})^{}`$. Combining this with , Theorem 2.5 it follows that the completely bounded maps $`\gamma `$ from $`M_{}`$ to $`N`$ are in (completely isometric) one-to-one correspondence with elements $`XMN`$ by the formula

$$\gamma (\omega )=(\omega \iota )(X)\text{for all}\omega M_{}.$$

Let first one of the statements of Proposition 1.22 be satisfied. Then take such a unitary $`XMN`$ satisfying $`(\iota \theta )(X)=W_{12}X_{13}`$. Define $`\gamma (\omega )=(\omega \iota )(X)`$ for all $`\omega M_{}`$. Let $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H`$ and $`\xi ,\eta H`$. Then

$`(\lambda _{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega _{\xi ,\eta })`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}\lambda (\omega _{e_i,\eta })\gamma (\omega _{\xi ,e_i})`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}(\omega _{e_i,\eta }\iota )(W)(\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )(X)`$
$`=(\omega _{\xi ,\eta }\iota \iota )(W_{12}X_{13})=\theta \left((\omega _{\xi ,\eta }\iota )(X)\right)`$
$`=\theta \left(\gamma (\omega _{\xi ,\eta })\right),`$
so

$$(\lambda _{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega )=\theta (\gamma (\omega ))\text{for all}\omega M_{}.$$

Further we have

$`\mathrm{m}(\gamma ^{}_{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega _{\xi ,\eta })`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}\gamma ^{}(\omega _{e_i,\eta })\gamma (\omega _{\xi ,e_i})`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{iI}{}}(\omega _{e_i,\eta }\iota )(X^{})(\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )(X)`$
$`=(\omega _{\xi ,\eta }\iota )(X^{}X)=\omega _{\xi ,\eta }(1)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}.`$
Thus,

$$\mathrm{m}(\gamma ^{}_{\text{eh}}\gamma )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(\omega )=\omega (1)\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\text{for all}\omega M_{},$$

which concludes the first part of the proof, because the remaining equality can be obtained in a similar way.

Vice versa, let us have a map $`\gamma `$. Then there exists an element $`XMN`$ such that $`\gamma (\omega )=(\omega \iota )(X)`$ for all $`\omega M_{}`$. The same computations as above prove that $`(\iota \theta )(X)=W_{12}X_{13}`$, and that $`X`$ is a unitary. ∎

## 2 Cocycle bicrossed products of l.c. quantum groups

We introduce cocycle matched pairs of l.c. quantum groups, give the cocycle bicrossed product construction for them and show that the result is again a l.c. quantum group.

### 2.1 Cocycle matched pairs of l.c. quantum groups

###### Definition 2.1.

A pair $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1),(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ is said to be a matched pair of l.c. quantum groups if a triple $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ (called a cocycle matching) satisfies the following conditions:

$`𝒰M_1M_1M_2\text{and}𝒱M_1M_2M_2\text{are both unitaries and}`$
$`\tau :M_1M_2M_1M_2\text{is a faithful }\text{-homomorphism;}`$
denoting by $`\sigma `$ the flip map and defining

$$\alpha :M_2M_1M_2:\alpha (y)=\tau (1y)\text{and}\beta :M_1M_1M_2:\beta (x)=\tau (x1)$$

we have

* $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ on the von Neumann algebra $`M_2`$ :

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (y)`$ $`=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\alpha (y)𝒰^{}`$
$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰).`$
* $`(\sigma \beta ,𝒱_{321})`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ on the von Neumann algebra $`M_1`$ :

$`(\beta \iota )\beta (x)`$ $`=𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\beta (x)𝒱^{}`$
$`(\beta \iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱)`$ $`=(𝒱1)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}\iota )(𝒱).`$
* $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ and $`(\beta ,𝒱)`$ are matched in the following sense:

$`\tau _{13}(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(y)`$ $`=𝒱_{132}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2)\alpha (y)𝒱_{132}^{}`$
$`\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x)`$ $`=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\beta (x)𝒰^{}`$
$`(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})`$ $`=(𝒰^{}1)(\iota \tau \sigma \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(1𝒱).`$

If both $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ are commutative, i.e., are generated by l.c. groups, the above conditions split into two parts: 1) we have two ordinary actions $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ which are matched:

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (y)`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\alpha (y)`$
$`(\beta \iota )\beta (x)`$ $`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\beta (x)`$
$`\tau _{13}(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(y)`$ $`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2)\alpha (y)`$
$`\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x)`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\beta (x)`$
2) we have two cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ which are matched:
$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰)`$
$`(\beta \iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱)`$ $`=(𝒱1)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}\iota )(𝒱)`$
$`(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})`$ $`=(𝒰^{}1)(\iota \tau \sigma \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(1𝒱).`$
So to construct examples of cocycle matched pairs of l.c. groups, we first have to construct matched pairs without cocycles, and then to solve the above cocycle equations. Sections 4 and 5 are devoted to the analysis of this special case. Let us also stress that Definition 2.1 is an operator algebraic version of the Hopf algebraic definition , Chapter 6.

Suppose that $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ are l.c. quantum groups and that $`\tau :M_1M_2M_1M_2`$ is a faithful -homomorphism. Then we put $`\tau ^{}=\tau \sigma `$. It is easy to check that $`(\tau ,1,1)`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ (with trivial cocycles) if and only if

$$(\tau ^{}\iota )(\iota \tau ^{})(\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}\iota )=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\tau ^{}\text{and}(\iota \tau ^{})(\tau ^{}\iota )(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1)=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\tau ^{}.$$

So, a matching $`\tau `$ of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ with trivial cocycles is a von Neumann algebraic version of the notion of an inversion of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})`$ and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, introduced in , Définition 8.1. Moreover, in the notation of , $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})`$ is the von Neumann algebraic counterpart of $`(S_{\widehat{W}_2},\delta _{\widehat{W}_2})`$ and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ is the von Neumann algebraic counterpart of $`(\widehat{S}_{W_1},\widehat{\delta }_{W_1})`$, and hence the multiplicative unitary $`T`$ of , Proposition 8.7 agrees with the multiplicative unitary $`\widehat{W}`$ that we will define in Definition 2.2. Observe that our framework is wider than the one of , so we do not need to impose extra conditions on $`\tau `$ as it was done in .

### 2.2 Cocycle bicrossed products

Let $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ be a cocycle matching of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2),\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ as in Definition 2.1. Let $`W_1`$,$`(H_1,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1)`$ and $`W_2`$, $`(H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)`$ denote the multiplicative unitaries and GNS-constructions of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ respectively. We write $`H=H_1H_2`$ and denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the flip map on $`HH`$. As in Notation 1.2, we also write $`\stackrel{~}{W}=(W_11)𝒰^{}.`$ Let us define the major ingredients of the cocycle bicrossed product $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

###### Definition 2.2.

Define unitaries $`W`$ and $`\widehat{W}`$ on $`HH`$ by

$`\widehat{W}`$ $`=(\beta \iota \iota )\left((W_11)𝒰^{}\right)(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)\right)andW=\mathrm{\Sigma }\widehat{W}^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$
Let $`M=M_1\text{α,U}M_2`$ be the von Neumann subalgebra of $`B(H_1)M_2`$ generated by

$$\alpha (M_2)\text{and}\{(\omega \iota \iota )\left((W_11)𝒰^{}\right)\omega M_1\}.$$

Further we define the faithful $``$-homomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Delta }:MB(HH):\mathrm{\Delta }(z)=W^{}(1z)W.$$

In the following propositions we will gradually prove that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a l.c. quantum group, that $`W`$ is the associated multiplicative unitary and we will describe the dual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$.

The proof of the following formula is obvious.

###### Lemma 2.3.

We have $`MB(H_1)M_2`$ and for all $`zM`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(z)=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(z)𝒱^{}\right)(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{}).$$

The definition of $`M`$ makes it natural to give formulas for $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha (x))`$ and $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })(\stackrel{~}{W})`$.

###### Proposition 2.4.

For all $`xM_2`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha (x))=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x).$$

###### Proof.

Choose $`xM_2`$. We will prove that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(\alpha (x))=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)`$. Observe that

$`(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\alpha (x)𝒱^{}\right)`$ $`=(\iota \iota \alpha )\sigma _{23}\tau _{13}(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x)`$
$`=(\tau \iota \iota )\left((\iota \alpha \iota )(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x)_{1342}\right)`$
$`=(\tau \iota \iota )\left(\left((\stackrel{~}{W}^{}1)(1(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x))(\stackrel{~}{W}1)\right)_{1342}\right)`$
$`=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}).`$
Using the previous lemma we immediately get that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(\alpha (x))=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)`$. ∎

###### Proposition 2.5.

We have

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\left((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱).$$

###### Proof.

Using the lemma we get

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\right)(\iota \iota \iota \alpha )\left((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})\right)\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right).$$

The definition of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ and the fact that $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ are matched imply

$`(1𝒱)`$ $`(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})`$
$`=(1𝒱)(W_111)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})(1𝒱^{})`$
$`=(W_111)(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})(1𝒱^{})`$
$`=(W_111)(𝒰^{}1)(\iota \tau \sigma \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right).`$
From this we may conclude that

$`(\iota `$ $`\iota \iota \alpha )((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{}))`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota (\iota \alpha )\alpha )(𝒱)\right)`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(11\stackrel{~}{W}^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)_{1245}(11\stackrel{~}{W})\right)`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota \iota \iota )\left((\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(1\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})).`$
Using the first formula of the proof we get

$`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})`$ $`=(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}))(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota \iota \iota )\left((\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(1\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)`$
$`(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱).`$ (2.1)
Because for all $`xM_1`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\beta (x))\stackrel{~}{W}=\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x),$$

we get

$$(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}))(\stackrel{~}{W}11)=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota \iota \iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}).$$

Combining this with Eq. (2.1) we get

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota \iota \iota )\left((\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(1\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱).$$

Finally

$`(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(1\stackrel{~}{W}^{})`$ $`=W_{1,13}W_{1,23}(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(1\stackrel{~}{W}^{})`$
$`=W_{1,13}W_{1,23}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰^{})(1𝒰^{}\stackrel{~}{W}^{})`$
$`=W_{1,13}W_{1,23}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰^{})W_{1,23}^{}`$
$`=W_{1,13}𝒰_{134}^{}=\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}`$
and hence we get

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\left((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱).$$

###### Corollary 2.6.

* $`\mathrm{\Delta }(M)MM`$.
* $`(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )(W)=W_{13}W_{23}`$.
* $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{\Delta }=(\mathrm{\Delta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }`$.
* The unitaries $`W`$ and $`\widehat{W}`$ defined on $`HH`$ are multiplicative.

###### Proof.

The first inclusion follows from Propositions 2.4 and 2.5 and from the definition of $`M`$.

The second equality is equivalent to $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\widehat{W})=\widehat{W}_{12}\widehat{W}_{13}`$. Propositions 2.4 and 2.5 imply

$$\begin{array}{c}(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\widehat{W})=(\beta \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha \alpha )(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))\hfill \\ \hfill =(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1234}\left((\beta \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})(\beta \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \alpha \alpha )\left((\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱)\widehat{W}_{2,23}\widehat{W}_{2,24}\right).\end{array}$$

But we know that

$`(\beta \iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱)\widehat{W}_{2,23}\widehat{W}_{2,24}`$ $`=(𝒱1)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}\iota )(𝒱)\widehat{W}_{2,23}\widehat{W}_{2,24}`$
$`=(𝒱1)\widehat{W}_{2,23}𝒱_{124}\widehat{W}_{2,24}.`$
So,

$$\begin{array}{c}(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\widehat{W})\hfill \\ \hfill =(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1234}\left((\beta \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))_{1234}(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))_{1256}.\end{array}$$
(2.2)
Finally we use the equality

$$\left((\beta \iota )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})=(𝒱11)\widehat{W}_{2,23}(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1245}\widehat{W}_{2,23}^{}(𝒱^{}11)$$

to conclude that

$$\left((\beta \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))_{1234}(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1256}(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))_{1234}^{}.$$

Combining this with Eq. (2.2) we get

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\widehat{W})=\widehat{W}_{12}\widehat{W}_{13}.$$

The third and fourth statement of the corollary immediately follow from the second one. ∎

So at the moment we have at our disposal a von Neumann algebra $`M`$, a coassociative comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }:MMM`$ and a multiplicative unitary $`W`$. Next we define a left invariant weight $`\phi `$ on $`M`$ and show that $`W`$ is the associated multiplicative unitary (the left regular representation).

###### Definition 2.7.

We denote by $`\phi `$ the dual weight on the cocycle crossed product $`M=M_1\text{α,U}M_2`$ of the weight $`\phi _2`$ on $`M_2`$, as defined in Definition 1.13 and by $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ the canonical GNS-construction for $`\phi `$ as defined in Terminology 1.17, given the GNS-construction $`(H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2)`$ for $`\phi _2`$. This means that

* $`\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _{\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\eta H_1,b𝒯_{\phi _1},x𝒩_{\phi _2}\}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.
* $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)=\xi _1(\omega )\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x)`$ for all $`\omega _1`$ and $`x𝒩_{\phi _2}`$.

The following result is important.

###### Proposition 2.8.

The weight $`\phi `$ is left invariant, which means that

$$(\iota \phi )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)=\phi (z)\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}\text{for all}z_\phi ^+.$$

Further we have, for all $`z𝒩_\phi `$ and $`\omega M_{}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\right)=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

###### Proof.

It suffices to prove the second equality, then the first one follows as usual. Choose $`\mu H_1`$, $`b𝒯_{\phi _1}`$ and $`x𝒩_{\phi _2}`$. Let $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H_1`$. It follows from Propositions 2.4 and 2.5 that, with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}((\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x))={\displaystyle }_{iI}((\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})11)`$
$`(\alpha \iota \iota )\left((\omega _{\mu ,e_i}\iota \iota \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(\iota \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)\right).`$
Next choose $`\eta ,\rho H`$ and an orthonormal basis $`(f_j)_{jJ}`$ for $`H`$. Then with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence we have

$`(\iota \iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}\left((\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{(i,j)I\times J}{}}(\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{\mu ,e_i}\iota \omega _{f_j,\rho })\left((\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(\iota \omega _{\eta ,f_j}\alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)\right).`$
Denote by $`z_{I_0\times J_0}`$ the above expression summed over $`I_0\times J_0`$ where $`I_0I`$ and $`J_0J`$ are finite subsets. Then it follows from Definition 2.7 and , Proposition 7.1 that all $`z_{I_0\times J_0}`$ belong to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z_{I_0\times J_0})=\underset{(i,j)I_0\times J_0}{}J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1e_i(\omega _{\mu ,e_i}\iota \omega _{f_j,\rho })\left((\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(\iota \omega _{\eta ,f_j}\alpha )(\widehat{W}_2)\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x).$$

Taking the limit over $`J_0J`$ and using the fact that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed we get that for all finite subsets $`I_0I`$ the element $`z_{I_0}`$ defined by

$$z_{I_0}:=\underset{iI_0}{}(\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{\mu ,e_i}\iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })\left((\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)(1(\iota \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x))\right)\right)$$

belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z_{I_0})=\underset{iI_0}{}J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1e_i(\omega _{\mu ,e_i}\iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })(\widehat{W})\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x).$$

Taking the limit over $`I_0I`$ we get that the element $`z`$ defined by

$$z:=(\iota \iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}\left((\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right)$$

belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=(J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_11)(\iota \iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })(\widehat{W})(\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x)).$$

Because $`\widehat{W}M_1B(H_2H)`$ we get

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=(\iota \iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })(\widehat{W})(\xi _1(\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)})\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x))=(\iota \iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })(\widehat{W})\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)\right).$$

By Definition 2.7 the elements $`(\omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (x)`$ span a core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. So we can conclude that for all $`\eta ,\rho H`$ and all $`z𝒩_\phi `$ the element $`(\iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(z)`$ belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(z)\right)=(\iota \omega _{\eta ,\rho })(\widehat{W})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

From this it follows that for all $`z𝒩_\phi `$ and $`\omega M_{}`$ we have $`(\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\right)=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

If we would already know that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a l.c. quantum group there would exist a $``$-anti-automorphism $`R:z\widehat{J}z^{}\widehat{J}`$ of $`M`$ (where $`\widehat{J}`$ is the modular conjugation of the left invariant weight on the dual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$) satisfying

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R=\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }.$$
(2.3)
So, because $`\phi `$ is left invariant, we get that $`\phi R`$ is right invariant. Thus we will first construct this dual l.c. quantum group and its modular conjugation $`\widehat{J}`$ and then prove Eq. (2.3).

For a cocycle matching $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ define $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }=\sigma \tau \sigma `$, $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}=𝒱_{321}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒱}=𝒰_{321}`$. Then one can check that $`(\stackrel{~}{\tau },\stackrel{~}{𝒰},\stackrel{~}{𝒱})`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$. As above we can then define a von Neumann algebra with comultiplication, a multiplicative unitary (both acting on $`H_2H_1`$) and a left invariant weight with GNS-construction. Using the flip map from $`H_2H_1`$ onto $`H=H_1H_2`$ one has the following result.

###### Proposition 2.9.

Define $`\widehat{M}`$ as the von Neumann subalgebra of $`M_1B(H_2)`$ generated by

$$\beta (M_1)\text{and}\{(\iota \iota \omega )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))\omega M_2\}.$$

For all $`z\widehat{M}`$, define

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(z)=\widehat{W}^{}(1z)\widehat{W}.$$

Then, $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}`$ is a normal and faithful $``$-homomorphism of $`\widehat{M}`$ into $`\widehat{M}\widehat{M}`$ satisfying

$$(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}=(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\iota )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}.$$

There exists on $`\widehat{M}`$ a n.s.f. weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ such that

* $`\mathrm{span}\{(\iota \iota \omega _{\mu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(b)})((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)\mu H_2,b𝒯_{\phi _2},x𝒩_{\phi _1}\}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$.
* $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\iota \iota \omega )((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)\right)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(x)\xi _2(\omega )`$ for all $`\omega _2`$ and $`x𝒩_{\phi _1}`$.
* $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is left invariant on $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ and we have, for all $`z𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$ and $`\omega \widehat{M}_{}`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(z)\right)=(\iota \omega )(W)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z).$$

Later on we will prove that $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is the dual of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. The following two lemmas are known to be valid when $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is indeed a l.c. quantum group with dual $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, see , Corollary 2.2 and , equation (4.2).

###### Lemma 2.10.

Let $`J`$ and $`\widehat{J}`$ be the modular conjugations of the weights $`\phi `$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$ in the GNS-constructions $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Then

$$(\widehat{J}J)W=W^{}(\widehat{J}J).$$

###### Proof.

Let us introduce the notations $``$ and $`\widehat{}`$ for the modular operators of the weights $`\phi `$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$. We first claim that for all $`\omega B(H)_{}`$

$$(\omega \iota )(W^{})J^{1/2}J^{1/2}(\overline{\omega }\iota )(W^{}).$$
(2.4)
To prove this claim, choose $`\omega B(H)_{}`$ and $`z𝒩_\phi 𝒩_\phi ^{}`$. Then, using Proposition 2.8, one gets

$$(\overline{\omega }\iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\mathrm{\Lambda }((\overline{\omega }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)).$$

Because $`(\overline{\omega }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)`$ belongs to $`𝒩_\phi 𝒩_\phi ^{}`$ we have that $`(\overline{\omega }\iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)`$ belongs to the domain of $`^{1/2}`$ and

$$J^{1/2}(\overline{\omega }\iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\mathrm{\Lambda }((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z^{}))=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z^{})=(\omega \iota )(W^{})J^{1/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

Because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒩_\phi 𝒩_\phi ^{})`$ is a core for $`^{1/2}`$ we get the first claim.

Using Proposition 2.9 rather then 2.8 one has, for all $`\omega B(H)_{}`$:

$$(\iota \omega )(W)\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}(\iota \overline{\omega })(W).$$
(2.5)
Rewriting Eq. (2.4) we get, for all $`\xi ,\eta H`$, $`\mu 𝒟(^{1/2})`$ and $`\rho 𝒟(^{1/2})`$:

$$W^{}(\xi J^{1/2}\mu ),\eta \rho =W(\xi ^{1/2}J\rho ),\eta \mu .$$
(2.6)
Rewriting Eq. (2.5) we get, for all $`\mu ,\rho H`$, $`\xi 𝒟(\widehat{}^{1/2})`$ and $`\eta 𝒟(\widehat{}^{1/2})`$:

$$W(\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\xi \mu ),\eta \rho =W^{}(\widehat{}^{1/2}\widehat{J}\eta \mu ),\xi \rho .$$
(2.7)
Next we claim that $`W(\widehat{})=(\widehat{})W`$. To prove this, choose $`\xi ,\eta 𝒟(\widehat{})`$ and $`\mu ,\rho 𝒟()`$. Using the two previous equations one has

$`W(\xi \mu ),\widehat{}\eta \rho `$ $`=W^{}(\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\eta \mu ),\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\xi \rho `$
$`=W(\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\eta J^{1/2}\rho ),\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}\xi J^{1/2}\mu `$
$`=W^{}(\widehat{}\xi J^{1/2}\rho ),\eta J^{1/2}\mu `$
$`=W(\widehat{}\xi \mu ),\eta \rho .`$
From this chain of equalities the second claim follows. Then $`W(\widehat{}^{1/2}^{1/2})=(\widehat{}^{1/2}^{1/2})W`$. Using this and Eq. (2.6) and (2.7) we get

$`W(\xi \mu ),\eta \rho `$ $`=W^{}(\widehat{}^{1/2}\widehat{J}\eta \mu ),\widehat{}^{1/2}\widehat{J}\xi \rho `$
$`=W^{}(\widehat{}^{1/2}^{1/2})(\widehat{J}\eta ^{1/2}\mu ),\widehat{}^{1/2}\widehat{J}\xi \rho `$
$`=W^{}(\widehat{J}\eta ^{1/2}\mu ),\widehat{J}\xi ^{1/2}\rho `$
$`=W(\widehat{J}\eta J\rho ),\widehat{J}\xi J\mu `$
$`=(\widehat{J}J)W^{}(\widehat{J}J)(\xi \mu ),\eta \rho .`$
for every $`\xi 𝒟(\widehat{}^{1/2})`$, $`\eta 𝒟(\widehat{}^{1/2})`$, $`\mu 𝒟(^{1/2})`$ and $`\rho 𝒟(^{1/2})`$. This means that

$$(\widehat{J}J)W^{}(\widehat{J}J)=W.$$

###### Lemma 2.11.

We have

$$\{(\iota \omega )(W)\omega B(H)_{}\}^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}=M.$$

###### Proof.

Define the following subspaces of $`M`$.

$`𝒪_1`$ $`=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\iota \omega )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\omega M_{},zM\}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}`$
$`𝒪_2`$ $`=\{(\iota \omega )(W^{})\omega B(H)_{}\}^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.`$
Using , Section 4 we get

$`𝒪_1`$ $`=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\iota \omega _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(a),\mathrm{\Lambda }(b)})\mathrm{\Delta }(x)a,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\phi \}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}`$
$`=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\iota \phi )\left((1\sigma _i(a)b^{})\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right)a,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\phi \}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}`$
$`=\left(\mathrm{span}\{(\iota \omega _{\mathrm{\Lambda }(x),\mathrm{\Lambda }(b\sigma _i(a^{}))})(W^{})a,b𝒯_\phi ,x𝒩_\phi \}\right)^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}=𝒪_2.`$
It is clear that $`𝒪_1`$ is self-adjoint. Because $`W`$ is a multiplicative unitary we get that $`𝒪_2`$ is an algebra. Using the previous computation we get that $`𝒪_1=𝒪_2:=𝒪`$ is a $``$-algebra, closed in $`\sigma `$-strong topology. We have

$$(\iota \omega )\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha (x))=\alpha ((\iota \omega \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x))\text{for all}xM_2\text{and}\omega M_{}$$

and because $`\alpha `$ is faithful we may conclude that $`\alpha (M_2)𝒪`$. In particular $`1M`$ and hence $`𝒪`$ is a von Neumann subalgebra of $`M`$. Then the bicommutant theorem gives, for all $`zM_1M`$:

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(z)M_1M𝒪.$$

In particular, we get that $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})`$ belongs to $`M_1M𝒪`$. Proposition 2.5 implies

$$(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\left((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)M_1M𝒪.$$

Because $`\alpha (M_2)𝒪`$ it follows that

$$\left((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota \right)(\stackrel{~}{W})M_1M𝒪.$$

Because $`(\iota \alpha )\beta `$ is faithful we may conclude that $`(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})`$ belongs to $`𝒪`$ for all $`\omega M_1`$. Together with $`\alpha (M_2)𝒪`$ we get that $`𝒪=M`$. But then also $`𝒪^{}=M`$ which concludes the proof. ∎

Then we can finally prove the needed formula.

###### Proposition 2.12.

The map $`R(z)=\widehat{J}z^{}\widehat{J}(zM)`$ is a $``$-anti-automorphism of $`M`$ satisfying

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R=\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }.$$

###### Proof.

$`R`$ is a $``$-anti-homomorphism from $`M`$ into $`B(H)`$. Lemma 2.10 gives

$$R\left((\iota \omega _{\xi ,\eta })(W)\right)=(\iota \omega _{J\eta ,J\xi })(W)$$

for all $`\xi ,\eta H`$. Because $`R`$ is continuous in $`\sigma `$-strong topology, it follows from Lemma 2.11 that $`R(M)M`$. But clearly $`R(R(M))=M`$ and so $`R(M)=M`$. Hence $`R`$ is a $``$-anti-automorphism of $`M`$.

Let $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H`$. Because $`W`$ is a multiplicative unitary we get for all $`\xi ,\eta H`$, with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left((\iota \omega _{\xi ,\eta })(W)\right)=(\iota \iota \omega _{\xi ,\eta })(W_{13}W_{23})=\underset{iI}{}(\iota \omega _{e_i,\eta })(W)(\iota \omega _{\xi ,e_i})(W).$$

So we also get for all $`\xi ,\eta H`$

$$\begin{array}{c}\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }\left((\iota \omega _{\xi ,\eta })(W)\right)=\underset{iI}{}(\iota \omega _{Je_i,J\xi })(W)(\iota \omega _{J\eta ,Je_i})(W)=(\iota \iota \omega _{J\eta ,J\xi })(W_{13}W_{23})\hfill \\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Delta }\left((\iota \omega _{J\eta ,J\xi })(W)\right)=\mathrm{\Delta }R\left((\iota \omega _{\xi ,\eta })(W)\right).\end{array}$$

Because both $`\mathrm{\Delta }R`$ and $`\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are continuous in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology, it follows from Lemma 2.11 that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R=\sigma (RR)\mathrm{\Delta }.$$

We have now gathered enough results to prove the main result of this section.

###### Theorem 2.13.

$`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a l.c. quantum group. The weight $`\phi `$ is left invariant and $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ is a GNS-construction for $`\phi `$. The multiplicative unitary of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ in this GNS-construction is $`W`$. The associated dual l.c. quantum group is $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. We call $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ the cocycle bicrossed product of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`R`$ be as above, then $`\phi R`$ is a n.s.f. weight on $`M`$ which is right invariant. So $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a l.c. quantum group, and Proposition 2.8 gives that $`W`$ is its multiplicative unitary. It follows from , Definition 1.5 that the underlying von Neuman algebra of the dual locally compact quantum group is

$$\{(\omega \iota )(W)\omega M_{}\}^{\sigma \text{-strong}\text{}}.$$

Applying Lemma 2.11 to the cocycle matching $`(\stackrel{~}{\tau },\stackrel{~}{𝒰},\stackrel{~}{𝒱})`$ of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, we get that the dual l.c. quantum group is precisely $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. ∎

Now we have at our disposal the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and the GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ for the left invariant weight $`\phi `$. From , Section 1 we get in a canonical way a left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }_0`$ on $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_0)`$. In the remaining part of this subsection we prove that $`\widehat{\phi }_0=\widehat{\phi }`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_0=\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$.

Whenever $`K`$ is a Hilbert space and $`\rho K`$, we denote by $`\theta _\rho `$ the rank-one operator in $`B(,K)`$ given by $`\theta _\rho (\lambda )=\lambda \rho `$ for all $`\lambda `$.

###### Lemma 2.14.

For all $`\xi H_1H_2`$, $`\rho H_2`$, $`b𝒯_{\phi _1}`$ and $`x𝒩_{\phi _2}`$ the element $`zM`$ defined by

$$z:=(\omega _{\xi ,U_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\rho )}\iota \iota )(\widehat{W})\alpha (x),$$

where $`U_\beta =\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)`$ is the canonical implementation of $`\beta `$ as in Proposition 1.19, belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\left((J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}1\right)𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)(\xi \mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x)).$$

Here $`(\sigma _t^1)`$ denotes the modular group of the weight $`\phi _1`$ on $`M_1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ be an orthonormal basis for $`H_1H_2`$. Then we have, with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence

$$z=\underset{iI}{}(\omega _{e_i,U_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\rho )}\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))x\right).$$

Denote by $`z_{I_0}`$ the same expression summed over a finite subset $`I_0I`$. We claim that for all $`\eta H_1H_2`$ the normal functional $`\mu :=\omega _{\eta ,U_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\rho )}\beta `$ belongs to $`_1`$ and

$$\xi _1(\mu )=(J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}\eta .$$

To prove this claim, we choose $`y𝒩_{\phi _1}`$. Then

$$\mu (y^{})=\beta (y^{})\eta ,U_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\xi )=(y^{}1)U_\beta ^{}\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\rho =(J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}\eta ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(y).$$

But then for all finite subsets $`I_0I`$ we have $`z_{I_0}𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z_{I_0})=\underset{iI_0}{}(J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}e_i(\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x).$$

Because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed the claim of the lemma follows. ∎

Before we can prove the announced result, we need a general lemma on l.c. quantum groups.

###### Lemma 2.15.

Let $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ be a l.c. quantum group with left invariant weight $`\phi `$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ the associated dual l.c. quantum group with canonical left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ and $`(\widehat{\sigma }_t)`$ the modular group of the weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ on $`\widehat{M}`$.

Suppose that $`y𝒟(\widehat{\sigma }_{i/2})`$ and that there exist elements $`(p_i)_{iI}`$ and $`(q_i)_{iI}`$ in $`\widehat{M}`$ such that $`p_ip_i^{}`$ and $`q_i^{}q_i`$ are bounded and

$$1y=\underset{iI}{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(p_i)(q_i1).$$

Then there exists a unique linear map $`P:MM`$ continuous in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology and such that for every $`x𝒩_\phi `$ the element $`P(x)`$ belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(P(x))=\widehat{J}\widehat{\sigma }_{i/2}(y)\widehat{J}\mathrm{\Lambda }(x).$$

Moreover, whenever $`\omega M_{}`$ and $`(\omega \iota )(W)y𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$ we have, for all $`x𝒩_\phi `$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}((\omega \iota )(W)y),\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)=\omega \left(P(x)^{}\right).$$

###### Proof.

Denote, for all $`iI,a_i=\widehat{R}(q_i)`$ and $`b_i=\widehat{R}(p_i)`$. Then $`a_ia_i^{}`$ and $`b_i^{}b_i`$ are bounded and

$$1\widehat{R}(y)=\underset{iI}{}(a_i1)\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(b_i).$$

So we can define for every $`xM`$ an operator $`P(x)B(H)`$ as

$$P(x)=\underset{iI}{}\widehat{J}a_i\widehat{J}x\widehat{J}b_i\widehat{J}.$$

Considering $`A=(\widehat{J}a_i\widehat{J})_{iI}`$ as an operator in $`B(H\mathrm{}^2(I),H)`$ and $`B=(\widehat{J}b_i\widehat{J})_{iI}`$ as an operator in $`B(H,H\mathrm{}^2(I))`$, we get $`P(x)=A(x1)B`$ for all $`xM`$, so $`P`$ is continuous in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology. We claim that

$$P\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right)=(\iota \mu y^{})(W^{})$$

for all $`\mu \widehat{M}_{}`$. Indeed, using the formula $`(\widehat{J}J)W=W^{}(\widehat{J}J)`$, proved in , Corollary 2.2, we have

$$\underset{iI}{}(\widehat{J}a_i\widehat{J}1)W^{}(\widehat{J}b_i\widehat{J}1)=\underset{iI}{}(\widehat{J}J)(a_i1)\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}(b_i)(\widehat{J}J)W^{}=(\widehat{J}J)(1\widehat{R}(y))(\widehat{J}J)W^{}=(1y^{})W^{},$$

from where the claim follows. For all $`\mu \widehat{}`$ we have $`\mu y^{}\widehat{}`$, hence $`P\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right)𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(P\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right)\right)=\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \mu y^{})(W^{})\right)=\widehat{J}\widehat{\sigma }_{i/2}(y)\widehat{J}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right).$$

If now $`x𝒩_\phi `$, there is a net $`(\mu _\alpha )`$ in $`\widehat{}`$ such that $`(\iota \mu _\alpha )(W^{})x`$ in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \mu _\alpha )(W^{})\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)`$ in norm. Because $`P`$ is continuous in $`\sigma `$-strong topology and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed, we get $`P(x)𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(P(x)\right)=\widehat{J}\widehat{\sigma }_{i/2}(y)\widehat{J}\mathrm{\Lambda }(x).$$

This concludes the first part of the proof. Now suppose that we also have $`\omega M_{}`$ such that $`(\omega \iota )(W)y𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$. Then we get, for all $`\mu \widehat{}`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota )(W)y\right),\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right)=\overline{\mu }\left((\omega \iota )(W)y\right)=\omega \left(P\left((\iota \mu )(W^{})\right)^{}\right).$$

If $`x𝒩_\phi `$ we take the same net $`(\mu _\alpha )`$ in $`\widehat{}`$ as above and obtain that

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}((\omega \iota )(W)y),\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)=\omega \left(P(x)^{}\right).$$

Now we are ready to prove the following nice result.

###### Proposition 2.16.

We have $`\widehat{\phi }_0=\widehat{\phi }`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}_0=\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. Hence the left invariant weight with GNS-construction obtained by considering $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ as a cocycle bicrossed product, as in Proposition 2.9, is the same as the left invariant weight with GNS-construction obtained by considering $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ as the dual of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$, as in , Proposition 8.14.

###### Proof.

Consider the l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$, GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ for $`\widehat{\phi }`$ and multiplicative unitary $`\widehat{W}`$. Applying , Propositions 8.14 and 8.15 to the l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ we obtain a canonical left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}`$ on the dual $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, with canonical GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}})`$. In view of , Proposition 8.30 it suffices to prove that $`\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}=\phi `$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

By the uniqueness of left invariant weights, there exists a positive number $`\nu >0`$ such that $`\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}=\nu \phi `$. So $`𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}}=𝒩_\phi `$. Then we can define a unitary operator $`u`$ on $`H`$ such that $`u\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}(x)=\nu ^{1/2}\mathrm{\Lambda }(x)`$ for all $`x𝒩_\phi `$. Because both GNS-representations involved are the identical representations, we get $`uM^{}`$. From the dual version of , Proposition 8.16 we get, for all $`x𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}}`$ and $`\omega M_{}`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}\left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right)=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}(x).$$

But from Proposition 2.8 it follows, for all $`x𝒩_\phi `$ and $`\omega M_{}`$:

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\right)=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(x).$$

Both formulas together imply $`u\widehat{M}^{}`$. Because we already have $`uM^{}`$, it follows that $`u1`$. Hence we can take $`\lambda \{0\}`$ such that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}=\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We have to prove that $`\lambda =1`$. We can already conclude that the modular group $`(\widehat{\sigma }\widehat{\text{}}_t)`$ of $`\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}`$ equals the modular group $`(\sigma _t)`$ of $`\phi `$ and that $`\widehat{J}\widehat{\text{}}=\lambda /\overline{\lambda }J`$.

Choose now $`\xi H_1H_2`$, $`\rho H_2,b𝒯_{\phi _1}`$ and $`y𝒩_{\phi _2}𝒟(\sigma _{i/2}^2)`$ such that there exist elements $`(p_i)_{iI}`$ and $`(q_i)_{iI}`$ in $`M_2`$ with $`p_ip_i^{}`$ and $`q_i^{}q_i`$ bounded and

$$1y=\underset{iI}{}\mathrm{\Delta }_2(p_i)(q_i1).$$
(2.8)
Remark that such elements $`y`$ form a dense subspace of $`M_2`$ in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology. Because $`\psi _2\sigma _t^2=\nu _2^t\psi _2`$ and $`\psi _2\tau _t^2=\nu _2^t\psi _2`$ we can take elements $`a,bM_2`$ such that $`a`$ is analytic w.r.t. $`(\sigma _t^2)`$, $`b`$ is analytic w.r.t. $`(\tau _t^2)`$ and $`\sigma _z^2(a)𝒩_{\psi _2}^{}𝒩_{\phi _2}`$, $`\tau _z^2(b)𝒩_{\psi _2}`$ for all $`z`$. Now , Result 2.6 gives that

$$y:=(\psi _2\iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }(a)(b1))𝒩_{\phi _2}.$$

Using the relation $`(\tau _t^2\sigma _t^2)\mathrm{\Delta }_2=\mathrm{\Delta }_2\sigma _t^2`$ we get that $`y`$ is analytic w.r.t. $`(\sigma _t^2)`$ and

$$\sigma _z^2(y)=\nu _2^z(\psi _2\iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }(\sigma _z^2(a))(\tau _z^2(b)1)).$$

Finally observe that $`y=(\omega _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(b),\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(a^{})}\iota )(V_2^{})`$, so defining $`p_i=(\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(a^{})}\iota )(V_2^{})`$ and $`q_i=(\omega _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_2(b),e_i}\iota )(V_2)`$, where $`(e_i)`$ is an orthonormal basis for $`H`$, we have (2.8).

Because $`y𝒩_{\phi _2}`$, it follows from Lemma 2.14 that the element $`zM`$ defined by

$$z:=(\omega \iota \iota )(\widehat{W})\alpha (y),\text{with}\omega =\omega _{\xi ,U_\beta (\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)\rho )}$$

belongs to $`𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\left((J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}1\right)𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)(\xi \mathrm{\Lambda }_2(y)).$$

Choose now $`\mu _2`$ and $`x𝒩_{\phi _1}`$. Then

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)`$ $`,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\iota \iota \mu )((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)\right)`$
$`=\left((J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1\theta _\rho ^{})U_\beta ^{}1\right)𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)(\xi \mathrm{\Lambda }_2(y)),\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(x)\xi _2(\mu )`$
$`=(\omega \beta (x^{})\iota )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(y),\xi _2(\mu )=\overline{\mu }\left((\omega \iota )((\beta (x^{})1)𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))y\right)`$
$`=\omega \left(\left((\iota \iota \mu y^{})((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)\right)^{}\right).`$ (2.9)
Now apply Lemma 2.15 to the l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. Because $`\widehat{\sigma }\widehat{\text{}}_t\alpha =\sigma _t\alpha =\alpha \sigma _t^2`$ for all $`t`$, and because $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ we get that $`\alpha (y)`$ satisfies the conditions of this lemma. Hence there exists a $`\sigma `$-strong continuous map $`P`$ from $`\widehat{M}`$ to $`\widehat{M}`$, such that for all $`v𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$ we get $`P(v)𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$ and

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(P(v))=\widehat{J}\widehat{\text{}}\widehat{\sigma }\widehat{\text{}}_{i/2}(\alpha (y))\widehat{J}\widehat{\text{}}\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v).$$

Because $`\widehat{J}\widehat{\text{}}=\lambda /\overline{\lambda }J,\widehat{\sigma }\widehat{\text{}}_t\alpha =\alpha \sigma _t^2`$ and $`\alpha `$ is implemented by $`J(\widehat{J}_1J_2)`$ we get, for all $`v𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$:

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(P(v))=(1J_2\sigma _{i/2}^2(y)J_2)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v).$$

Since $`z=(\omega \iota \iota )(\widehat{W})\alpha (y)𝒩_\phi =𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }\widehat{\text{}}}`$, it follows from Lemma 2.15 that

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}(z),\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v)=\omega (P(v)^{})\text{for all}v𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}.$$
(2.10)
If we now take $`v=(\iota \iota \mu )((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)`$, then

$$(1J_2\sigma _{i/2}^2(y)J_2)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(x)J_2\sigma _{i/2}^2(y)J_2\xi _2(\mu )=\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(x)\xi _2(\mu y^{})=\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\iota \iota \mu y^{})((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)\right).$$

So $`P(v)=(\iota \iota \mu y^{})((1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{})\beta (x)`$. Now combine Eq. (2.9) and Eq. (2.10) to get

$$\omega (P(v)^{})=\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\widehat{\text{}}(z),\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v)=\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }(z),\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(v)=\lambda \omega (P(v)^{}).$$

Because this is valid for enough elements $`v`$ and $`\omega `$ we get that $`\lambda =1`$ which concludes the proof. ∎

We characterize compact and discrete cocycle bicrossed products as follows.

###### Proposition 2.17.

The l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is compact if and only if $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ is compact and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ is discrete. $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is discrete if and only if $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ is discrete and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ is compact.

###### Proof.

From Definition 1.13 it follows that $`\phi (1)=\widehat{\phi }_1(1)\phi _2(1)`$ from where the first statement follows. The second statement follows from the first one and from the observation that $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is a cocycle bicrossed product of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$. ∎

## 3 Extensions and cocycle bicrossed products

We define and study extensions of l.c. quantum groups and prove that there is a one-to-one correspondence between cleft extensions and cocycle bicrossed products.

### 3.1 Extensions and cleft extensions of l.c. quantum groups

Let us start with the following result which can be deduced from , but we prefer to give a direct proof.

###### Proposition 3.1.

Let $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ be l.c. quantum groups and $`\beta :M_1\widehat{M}`$ a normal $``$-homomorphism satisfying $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\beta =(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$. Define the unitaries $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_2`$ on $`H_1H`$ by

$$Z_1=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})\text{and}Z_2=(J_1\widehat{J})(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})(J_1\widehat{J})$$

and then the maps $`\mu `$ and $`\theta `$ on $`M`$ by

$$\mu (z)=Z_1(1z)Z_1^{}\text{and}\theta (z)=Z_2(1z)Z_2^{}.$$

Then $`\mu `$ is an action of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ on $`M`$ and $`\theta `$ is an action of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\text{op})`$ on $`M`$ such that

$`\theta (z)`$ $`=(\widehat{R}_1R)\mu (R(z))\text{for all}zM`$
$`(\mu \iota )(W)`$ $`=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1)_{13}W_{23}`$
$`(\theta \iota )(W)`$ $`=W_{23}(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1)_{13}`$
$`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mu =(\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }`$ $`\text{and}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})\theta =(\theta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}.`$
Finally, for all $`z𝒩_\phi `$ and $`\omega \widehat{M}_1`$ we have $`(\omega \iota )\mu (z)𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota )\mu (z)\right)=\beta \left((\iota \omega )(W_1)\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

###### Proof.

Observe that

$`(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})_{12}W_{23}(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1)_{12}`$ $`=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})_{12}(\iota \widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\text{op}\beta )(\widehat{W}_1)W_{23}`$
$`=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})_{12}(\iota \beta \beta )(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\text{op})(\widehat{W}_1)W_{23}`$
$`=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1)_{13}W_{23}.`$
Then one can conclude that $`\mu (M)\widehat{M}_1M`$ and

$$(\mu \iota )(W)=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1)_{13}W_{23}.$$

Now one can check that $`(\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\iota )\mu =(\iota \mu )\mu `$, i.e., $`\mu `$ is an action of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ on $`M`$, and $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mu =(\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We get similar formulas for $`\theta `$ from

$$\theta (z)=(\widehat{R}_1R)\mu (R(z))\text{for all}zM$$

and $`\widehat{R}\beta =\beta R_1`$ (this follows from the von Neumann algebraic version of , Proposition 5.45). So it remains to prove the final statement. Using , choose $`\omega \widehat{M}_1`$ and $`\eta \widehat{}`$. Then

$$(\omega \iota )\mu \left((\iota \eta )(W^{})\right)=(\iota \rho )(W^{})\text{where}\rho (z)=(\omega \eta )\left((1z)(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})\right)\text{for all}z\widehat{M}.$$
(3.1)
We claim that $`\rho \widehat{}`$. For this we choose $`z𝒩_{\widehat{\phi }}`$ and compute

$$\begin{array}{c}\rho (z^{})=(\omega \eta )\left((1z^{})(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})\right)=\eta \left(z^{}\beta ((\iota \omega )(W_1))\right)\hfill \\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \eta )(W^{})\right),\beta \left((\iota \omega )(W_1)^{}\right)\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)=\beta \left((\iota \omega )(W_1)\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \eta )(W^{})\right),\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z).\end{array}$$

From this the claim follows, so $`(\iota \rho )(W^{})𝒩_\phi `$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \rho )(W^{})\right)=\beta \left((\iota \omega )(W_1)\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\iota \eta )(W^{})\right).$$

Combining this with Eq. (3.1) and the fact that the elements $`(\iota \eta )(W^{})`$ form a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we get the final statement. ∎

The starting point of Proposition 3.1 is the von Neumann algebraic morphism $`\beta `$. If all algebras are finite dimensional, we can dualize $`\beta `$ to a morphism $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }:M\widehat{M}_1`$ such that

$$(\stackrel{~}{\beta }\iota )(W)=(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1).$$

The link between $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ and the action $`\mu `$ is now given by the formula

$$\mu (z)=(\stackrel{~}{\beta }\iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\text{for all}zM,$$

and the action $`\mu `$ also makes sense in general case. The action $`\mu `$ satisfies $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mu =(\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }`$, and in  there is established a natural one-to-one correspondence between actions of this special type and morphisms.

Turning now to the definition of extensions of l.c. quantum groups, let us note that we use the notation $`\beta `$ first of all for a morphism $`M_1\widehat{M}`$, but also symbolically on the arrow pointing from $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ to $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ for, in a sense, the dual morphism which does not necessarily exist on the von Neumann algebra level.

###### Definition 3.2.

Let $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ be l.c. quantum groups. We call

$$(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{𝛼}{}(M,\mathrm{\Delta })\stackrel{𝛽}{}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)$$

a short exact sequence, if

$$\alpha :M_2M\text{and}\beta :M_1\widehat{M}$$

are normal, faithful $``$-homomorphisms satisfying

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{and}\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\beta =(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1$$

and if $`\alpha (M_2)=M^\theta `$, where $`\theta `$ is the action of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\text{op})`$ on $`M`$ defined in Proposition 3.1 starting with the morphism $`\beta `$. In this situation we call $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ an extension of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$.

The faithfulness of the morphisms $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ reflects the exactness of the sequence in the first and third place. The formula $`\alpha (M_2)=M^\theta `$ reflects its exactness in the second place. In terms of the above morphism $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }:M\widehat{M}_1`$ the exactness of the sequence in the second place is formally expressed by

$$\alpha (M_2)=\{zM(\iota \stackrel{~}{\beta })\mathrm{\Delta }(z)=z1\}.$$

This formula is precisely the one used in Hopf algebra theory, see .

If $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ give rise to a short exact sequence as in the previous definition, then the dual sequence

$$(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)\stackrel{𝛽}{}(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})\stackrel{𝛼}{}(\widehat{M}_2,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2)$$

is also a short exact sequence. This follows from the argument in part 1.a) of the proof of Theorem 3.5.

###### Definition 3.3.

An extension $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ of l.c. quantum groups is said to be a cleft extension of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ if the extension $`\alpha (M_2)=M^\theta M`$ is a cleft extension of von Neumann algebras.

From part 1.b) of the proof of Theorem 3.5 it follows that the dual extension of a cleft extension is again cleft.

### 3.2 From cocycle bicrossed products to cleft extensions

###### Proposition 3.4.

Let $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ be the cocycle bicrossed product of l.c. quantum groups $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, which is also a l.c. quantum group by Theorem 2.13. Let $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ be as in Definition 2.1. Then

$$\alpha :M_2M\text{and}\beta :M_1\widehat{M}$$

and $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a cleft extension of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$.

###### Proof.

Theorem 2.13 shows that $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, defined in Proposition 2.9, is the dual l.c. quantum group of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$, so $`\beta `$ maps $`M_1`$ faithfully into $`\widehat{M}`$. Definition 2.2 implies that $`\alpha `$ maps $`M_2`$ faithfully into $`M`$ and Proposition 2.4 shows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$. Because the construction of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ corresponds to the cocycle matching $`(\stackrel{~}{\tau },\stackrel{~}{𝒰},\stackrel{~}{𝒱})`$, Proposition 2.4 also shows that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\beta =(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$. Let $`J`$ and $`\widehat{J}`$ be the modular conjugations of $`\phi `$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$ in the GNS-constructions $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$ respectively (see Definition 2.7 and Proposition 2.9). From Proposition 2.16 we know that $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is the canonical left invariant weight on the dual $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with canonical dual GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. So, the action $`\theta `$ of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\text{op})`$ on $`M`$ constructed in Proposition 3.1 satisfies $`\theta (z)=Z(1z)Z^{}`$ for all $`zM`$ where

$$Z=(J_1\widehat{J})(\iota \beta )(\widehat{W}_1^{})(J_1\widehat{J}).$$

Up to a flip map, $`\widehat{M}`$ is the cocycle crossed product $`M_2_{\sigma \beta ,𝒱_{321}}M_1`$ and $`\widehat{\phi }`$ is the dual weight of $`\phi _1`$ with accompanying dual weight GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Hence it follows from Proposition 1.19 that $`\beta `$ is implemented by $`\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)`$. Then we get

$$Z=(J_1J_1)\mathrm{\Sigma }W_1\mathrm{\Sigma }(J_1J_1)1.$$

So it follows from Proposition 1.4 that $`\theta =\widehat{\alpha }`$, therefore Theorem 1.11 gives

$$M^\theta =(M_1\text{α,U}M_2)^{\widehat{\alpha }}=\alpha (M_2).$$

Since $`\theta =\widehat{\alpha }`$, Propositions 1.22 and 1.24 show that $`M^\theta M`$ is a cleft extension. ∎

### 3.3 From cleft extensions to cocycle bicrossed products

###### Theorem 3.5.

Let $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ be l.c. quantum groups, $`\rho :M_2N`$ and $`\gamma :M_1\widehat{N}`$ normal and faithful $``$-homomorphisms turning $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into a cleft extension of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$.

Then there exists a cocycle matching $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and an isomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })(M,\mathrm{\Delta })$$

of $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ onto the cocycle bicrossed product $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$, satisfying

$$\mathrm{\Phi }\rho =\alpha \text{and}\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}\gamma =\beta $$

where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are as in Definition 2.1 and where $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}:(\widehat{N},\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }})(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is the isomorphism canonically associated with $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and characterized by

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }})(𝒲)=W,$$

where $`𝒲`$ is the multiplicative unitary of $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and $`W`$ is the one of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

###### Proof.

1. The definition of $`\alpha ,𝒰,\beta ,𝒱`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$.

a) Represent $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ on the GNS-space of a left Haar weight and denote by $`K`$ the Hilbert space on which $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ acts, by $`𝒲`$ the multiplicative unitary of $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and by $`J_N`$ and $`\widehat{J}_N`$ the modular conjugations of the invariant weights on $`N`$ and $`\widehat{N}`$.

Let $`\theta :N\widehat{M}_1N`$ be the action of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\text{op})`$ on $`N`$ constructed with $`\gamma `$, as in Proposition 3.1, then

$$\theta (z)=Z(1z)Z^{}\text{for all}zN\text{and}Z=(J_1\widehat{J}_N)(\iota \gamma )(\widehat{W}_1^{})(J_1\widehat{J}_N).$$

One also has

$$(\iota \theta )(\widehat{𝒲})=(\gamma \iota )(W_1)_{12}\widehat{𝒲}_{13}.$$

Applying now Proposition 3.1 to $`\rho :M_2N`$ we get an action $`\eta :\widehat{N}\widehat{M}_2\widehat{N}`$ of $`(\widehat{M}_2,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_2\text{op})`$ on $`\widehat{N}`$ by

$$\eta (z)=\stackrel{~}{Z}(1z)\stackrel{~}{Z}^{}\text{for all}z\widehat{N}\text{and}\stackrel{~}{Z}=(J_2J_N)(\iota \rho )(\widehat{W}_2^{})(J_2J_N).$$
(3.2)
The action $`\eta `$ satisfies

$$(\eta \iota )(\widehat{𝒲})=\widehat{𝒲}_{23}(\iota \rho )(\widehat{W}_2)_{13}.$$

Because $`\gamma `$ and $`\rho `$ turn $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into an extension, one has $`N^\theta =\rho (M_2)`$. We claim that also $`\widehat{N}^\eta =\gamma (M_1)`$. Indeed, (3.2) gives

$$\widehat{N}^\eta =\widehat{N}J_N\rho (M_2)^{}J_N.$$

Similarly we have

$$N^\theta =N\widehat{J}_N\gamma (M_1)^{}\widehat{J}_N.$$

So

$$\rho (M_2)=N\widehat{J}_N\gamma (M_1)^{}\widehat{J}_N.$$

But for all $`xM_2`$ we have $`\widehat{J}_N\rho (x)\widehat{J}_N=R(\rho (x)^{})=\rho (R_2(x^{}))`$ and so $`\widehat{J}_N\rho (M_2)\widehat{J}_N=\rho (M_2)`$. Therefore,

$$\rho (M_2)=N\gamma (M_1)^{}.$$

Since $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\gamma =(\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ we get that $`\gamma (M_1)`$ is a two-sided coideal in $`(\widehat{N},\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }})`$ in the sense of , Définition 3.1. Then it follows from , Théorème 3.3 that

$$\gamma (M_1)=\widehat{N}(N\gamma (M_1)^{})^{}=\widehat{N}\rho (M_2)^{}.$$

Because $`J_N\gamma (M_1)J_N=\gamma (M_1)`$ one has

$$\gamma (M_1)=\widehat{N}J_N\rho (M_2)^{}J_N=\widehat{N}^\eta $$

which proves the claim.

Since $`\gamma `$ and $`\rho `$ turn $`(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ into a cleft extension, there exists a unitary $`XM_1N`$ satisfying

$$(\iota \theta )(X)=W_{1,12}X_{13}.$$

From Proposition 1.22 it follows that $`(\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{𝒰})`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ on $`N^\theta `$, where

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }(z)=X^{}(1z)X\text{for all}zN^\theta \text{and}\stackrel{~}{𝒰}=X_{23}^{}X_{13}^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(X).$$

Because $`N^\theta =\rho (M_2)`$, we can define

$$\alpha =(\iota \rho ^1)\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\rho \text{and}𝒰=(\iota \iota \rho ^1)(𝒰)$$

and then $`\alpha :M_2M_1M_2`$ is a faithful and normal $``$-homomorphism, $`𝒰M_1M_1M_2`$ is a unitary and

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)`$ $`=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\alpha (x)𝒰^{}\text{for all}xM_2`$
$`(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰)(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰)`$ $`=(1𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰).`$
Still using Proposition 1.22 we can define a $``$-isomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:NM_1\text{α,U}M_2$$

satisfying

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho (x))=\alpha (x)\text{for all}xM_2\text{and}(\iota \mathrm{\Phi })(X)=W_{1,12}𝒰^{}.$$

From now on, we denote $`M=M_1\text{α,U}M_2`$.

b) To show that also $`\widehat{N}`$ has a cocycle crossed product structure we will find a cocycle action of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ on $`M_1`$. Let us define a unitary $`\stackrel{~}{Y}`$ in $`\widehat{N}N`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{Y}=(\gamma \iota )(X^{})\widehat{𝒲}.$$
(3.3)
Then we have

$$(\iota \theta )(\stackrel{~}{Y})=(\gamma \theta )(X^{})(\iota \theta )(\widehat{𝒲})=(\gamma \iota )(X^{})_{13}(\gamma \iota )(W_1^{})_{12}(\gamma \iota )(W_1)_{12}\widehat{𝒲}_{13}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{13}.$$

So $`\stackrel{~}{Y}\widehat{N}N^\theta `$ and we define $`Y=(\iota \rho ^1)(\stackrel{~}{Y})\widehat{N}M_2`$. Observe now that

$$(\eta \iota )(\stackrel{~}{Y})=(\gamma \iota )(X^{})_{23}(\eta \iota )(\widehat{𝒲})=(\gamma \iota )(X^{})_{23}\widehat{𝒲}_{23}(\iota \rho )(\widehat{W}_2)_{13}=\stackrel{~}{Y}_{23}(\iota \rho )(\widehat{W}_2)_{13}.$$

From this we may conclude that

$$(\iota \eta )(\mathrm{\Sigma }Y^{}\mathrm{\Sigma })=W_{2,12}(\mathrm{\Sigma }Y^{}\mathrm{\Sigma })_{13}.$$

Hence Proposition 1.22 shows that $`\widehat{N}`$ has a cocycle crossed product structure and we can define

$`\stackrel{~}{\beta }:\widehat{N}^\eta \widehat{N}^\eta M_2:\stackrel{~}{\beta }(z)=Y(z1)Y^{}`$
$`\stackrel{~}{𝒱}=Y_{12}Y_{13}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(Y^{})\widehat{N}^\eta M_2M_2.`$
Then $`\beta =(\gamma ^1\iota )\stackrel{~}{\beta }\gamma :M_1M_1M_2`$ is a faithful and normal $``$-homomorphism, $`𝒱=(\gamma ^1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{𝒱})`$ is a unitary in $`M_1M_2M_2`$ and

$`(\beta \iota )\beta (x)`$ $`=𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\beta (x)𝒱^{}\text{for all}xM_1`$
$`(\beta \iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒱)`$ $`=(𝒱1)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}\iota )(𝒱).`$
If $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ is the von Neumann algebra acting on $`H_1H_2`$ generated by $`\beta (M_1)`$ and the elements $`(\iota \iota \omega )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2))`$, it also follows from Proposition 1.22 that there is a unique $``$-isomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}:\widehat{N}\stackrel{~}{M}`$ satisfying

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}(\gamma (x))=\beta (x)\text{for all}xM_1\text{and}(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\iota )(Y)=𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2).$$

2. The definition of $`\tau `$.

a) The comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }=(\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi })\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Phi }^1`$ on $`M`$ makes of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ a l.c. quantum group and then, $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is an isomorphism. We claim that, writing $`\stackrel{~}{W}=W_{1,12}𝒰^{}`$ one has

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱).$$

Indeed, observe that, by definition of $`Y`$ and Eq. (3.3), we have

$$\widehat{𝒲}=(\gamma \iota )(X)(\iota \rho )(Y).$$

From this it follows that

$`(\iota \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(\widehat{𝒲})`$ $`=(\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(X)(\iota \rho \rho )(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(Y)`$
$`=(\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(X)(\iota \rho \rho )(\stackrel{~}{𝒱}^{}Y_{12}Y_{13})`$
$`=(\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(X)(\gamma \rho \rho )(𝒱^{})(\iota \rho )(Y)_{12}(\iota \rho )(Y)_{13}.`$
On the other hand,

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(\widehat{𝒲})=\widehat{𝒲}_{12}\widehat{𝒲}_{13}=(\gamma \iota )(X)_{12}(\iota \rho )(Y)_{12}(\gamma \iota )(X)_{13}(\iota \rho )(Y)_{13}.$$

Both computations together yield

$$(\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(X)=(\gamma \iota )(X)_{12}(\iota \rho )(Y)_{12}(\gamma \iota )(X)_{13}(\iota \rho )(Y^{})_{12}(\gamma \rho \rho )(𝒱).$$
(3.4)
But

$`(\iota \rho )(Y)_{12}(\gamma \iota )(X)_{13}(\iota \rho )(Y^{})_{12}`$ $`=(\iota \rho \iota )\left(Y_{12}(\gamma \iota )(X)_{13}Y_{12}^{}\right)`$
$`=(\iota \rho \iota )(\stackrel{~}{\beta }\gamma \iota )(X)=(\gamma \rho \iota )(\beta \iota )(X).`$
Then one can conclude, applying $`\gamma ^1\iota \iota `$ to Eq. (3.4), that

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Gamma }\text{op})(X)=X_{12}(\iota \rho \iota )(\beta \iota )(X)(\iota \rho \rho )(𝒱).$$

Apply $`\iota \mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to this expression, then

$$(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)$$
(3.5)
and that is precisely the claim. The formula $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\rho =(\rho \rho )\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ implies

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2.$$
(3.6)
which together with the previous formula determines completely the comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ on $`M`$.

b) Repeating the proof of Proposition 2.8 and using (3.5), (3.6), we prove that the dual weight $`\phi `$ on $`M=M_1\text{α,U}M_2`$ of the weight $`\phi _2`$ on $`M_2`$, with canonical GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ in the sense of Terminology 1.17, is left invariant on the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Defining

$$\widehat{W}=(\beta \iota \iota )\left((W_11)𝒰^{}\right)(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)\right)\text{and}W=\mathrm{\Sigma }\widehat{W}^{}\mathrm{\Sigma },$$

where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ flips $`HH`$ and $`H=H_1H_2`$, we get that

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\right)=(\omega \iota )(W^{})\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)\text{for all}z𝒩_\phi ,\omega M_{}.$$

So $`W`$ is the multiplicative unitary associated with the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and the GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ for its left invariant weight $`\phi `$.

c) The comultiplication $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}^1`$ makes $`(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ a l.c. quantum group and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}:(\widehat{N},\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }})(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is an isomorphism. Exactly as above for $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, now starting from

$$\widehat{𝒲}=(\gamma \iota )(X)(\iota \rho )(Y)\text{and}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\iota )(\widehat{𝒲})=\widehat{𝒲}_{13}\widehat{𝒲}_{23},$$

one can prove that

$$(\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\iota )(\stackrel{ˇ}{W})=(11\stackrel{ˇ}{W})(\iota \iota (\beta \iota )\alpha )(\stackrel{ˇ}{W})(\beta \beta \iota )(𝒰)\text{and}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\beta =(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1,$$

where $`\stackrel{ˇ}{W}=(1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{}`$. Analogously as above, we get that the dual weight $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ on $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ of the weight $`\phi _1`$ on $`M_1`$, with canonical GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$, is left invariant on $`(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, and

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}\left((\omega \iota )\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }}(z)\right)=(\iota \omega )(W)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}(z)\text{for all}z𝒩_{\stackrel{~}{\phi }},\omega \stackrel{~}{M}_{}.$$

Then we may conclude that $`(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is precisely the dual of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

d) Apply , Propositions 8.14 and 8.15 to the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ to get a canonical left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ on $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with canonical GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. We already have $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})=(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ and we have the left invariant weight $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ on $`(\stackrel{~}{M},\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Just as in the beginning of the proof of Proposition 2.16, we get $`\lambda \{0\}`$ such that $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=\lambda \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. Denote by $`\widehat{J}`$ the modular conjugation of $`\widehat{\phi }`$ in the GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Putting $`u=\overline{\lambda }/\lambda `$ we get that $`u\widehat{J}`$ is the modular conjugation of $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }`$ in the GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Combining this with Proposition 1.19, we have

$$\beta (x)=u\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)(x1)(J_1\widehat{J}_2)\widehat{J}\overline{u}=\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)(x1)(J_1\widehat{J}_2)\widehat{J}$$

for all $`xM_1`$. Further we get $`\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)B(H_1)M_2`$. If $`J`$ is the modular conjugation of $`\phi `$ in the GNS-construction $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$, it follows from Proposition 1.19 that

$$\alpha (x)=J(\widehat{J}_1J_2)(1x)(\widehat{J}_1J_2)J$$

for all $`xM_2`$. Further we get $`J(\widehat{J}_1J_2)M_1B(H_2)`$. Define a unitary $``$ on $`H_1H_2`$ by

$$=J\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_1\widehat{J}_2J_2).$$

For all $`xM_2`$ one has, using that $`\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)B(H_1)M_2`$,

$`(1x)^{}`$ $`=J\widehat{J}(J_1\widehat{J}_2)(1J_2xJ_2)(J_1\widehat{J}_2)\widehat{J}J`$
$`=J(1J_2xJ_2)J=\alpha (x).`$
From , Corollary 2.12 we get the existence of a complex number $`\nu `$ such that

$$=\nu \widehat{J}J(\widehat{J}_1J_1J_2\widehat{J}_2).$$

Using this and the fact that $`J(\widehat{J}_1J_2)M_1B(H_2)`$ we get, for all $`xM_1`$,

$`(x1)^{}`$ $`=\widehat{J}J(\widehat{J}_1J_2)(J_1xJ_11)(\widehat{J}_1J_2)J\widehat{J}`$
$`=\widehat{J}(J_1xJ_11)\widehat{J}=\beta (x)`$
Taking both computations together we can define a faithful $``$-homomorphism $`\tau `$

$$\tau :M_1M_2M_1M_2:\tau (z)=z^{}$$

satisfying $`\alpha (x)=\tau (1x)`$ for all $`xM_2`$ and $`\beta (x)=\tau (x1)`$ for all $`xM_1`$.

3. The proof of the compatibility relations.

First we prove the relation

$$𝒱_{132}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2)\alpha (x)𝒱_{132}^{}=\tau _{13}(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x)$$

for all $`xM_2`$. Recall that

$$\widehat{W}=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(\stackrel{ˇ}{W}^{})\text{where}\stackrel{~}{W}=(W_11)𝒰^{}\text{and}\stackrel{ˇ}{W}=(1\widehat{W}_2^{})𝒱^{}.$$

Hence we obtain, for all $`zM`$,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(z)=\widehat{W}(z1)\widehat{W}^{}=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(z)𝒱^{}\right)(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{}).$$

Using that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\alpha (x))=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(x)`$ for all $`xM_2`$, and using the previous formula, we get for all $`xM_2`$

$`(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\alpha (x))𝒱^{}\right)`$ $`=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}(\alpha (x))(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})`$
$`=(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})`$
$`=(\tau \iota \iota )\left(\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}^{}\left((\iota \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)\right)_{234}\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\right).`$
Because $`(\alpha ,𝒰)`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ on $`M_2`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\alpha (y))\stackrel{~}{W}=(\iota \alpha )\alpha (y)\text{for all}yM_2.$$

Using this, we can continue the previous computation as

$`(\iota \iota \alpha )\left(𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\alpha (x))𝒱^{}\right)`$ $`=(\tau \iota \iota )\left((\iota (\iota \alpha )\alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)_{2134}\right)`$
$`=(\iota \iota \alpha )\tau _{12}\sigma _{12}(\iota \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x).`$
Because $`\alpha `$ is faithful we may conclude that

$$𝒱(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\alpha (x)𝒱^{}=\tau _{12}\sigma _{12}(\iota \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(x)$$

for all $`xM_2`$, from where the needed relation follows.

Using now the formula $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}(\beta (x))=(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x)`$ for all $`xM_1`$ and the fact that $`(\sigma \beta ,𝒱_{321})`$ is a cocycle action of $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ on $`M_1`$ we obtain similarly, for all $`xM_1`$,

$$𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\beta (x)𝒰^{}=\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x).$$

b) Let us prove the relation

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})=(𝒰^{}1)(\iota \tau \sigma \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(1𝒱).$$

From Eq. (3.5) one has

$`(\stackrel{~}{W}`$ $`11)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})`$
$`=\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\right)(\iota \iota \iota \alpha )\left((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})\right)\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)`$
and so

$$\begin{array}{c}(\iota \iota \iota \alpha )\left((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})\right)\hfill \\ \hfill =\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)(\stackrel{~}{W}11)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\right).\end{array}$$

Using now that for all $`xM_1`$ we have

$$\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\beta (x))\stackrel{~}{W}=𝒰(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\beta (x)𝒰^{}=\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(x)$$

we obtain

$`(\iota `$ $`\iota \iota \alpha )((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{}))`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota \iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\right)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)`$
$`\left(1(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\right)`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota \iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1245}(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)_{1245}\stackrel{~}{W}_{345}\right).`$
Using now that

$$\stackrel{~}{W}^{}(1\alpha (x))\stackrel{~}{W}=(\iota \alpha )\alpha (x)$$

for all $`xM_1`$ we get

$`(\iota `$ $`\iota \iota \alpha )((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{}))`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota \iota )(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})(\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})_{1245}\stackrel{~}{W}_{345}(\iota \iota (\iota \alpha )\alpha )(𝒱)\right)`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota \iota )\left((\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}\right)(\iota \iota (\iota \alpha )\alpha )(𝒱)\right).`$
Before we continue this computation, we use the cocycle property of $`𝒰`$ to obtain

$`(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}^{})\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰)W_{1,23}^{}W_{1,13}^{}W_{1,13}𝒰_{134}^{}W_{1,23}𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒰)(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰^{})𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{}).`$
Then we can continue the computation above and obtain

$`(\iota \iota \iota \alpha )`$ $`\left((1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})\right)`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{W}11)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota (\iota \alpha )\alpha )(𝒱)\right)`$
$`=(\iota \iota \iota \alpha )\left((\stackrel{~}{W}1)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)\right).`$
Because $`\alpha `$ is faithful it now follows that

$$(1𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(\stackrel{~}{W})(1𝒱^{})=(\stackrel{~}{W}1)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right).$$

Because $`\stackrel{~}{W}=(W_11)𝒰^{}`$ this gives us

$$(1𝒱)W_{1,12}(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})(1𝒱^{})=W_{1,12}(𝒰^{}1)\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right)$$

so that finally

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(𝒱)(\iota \iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(𝒰^{})(1𝒱^{})=(𝒰^{}1)(\iota \tau \sigma \iota )\left((\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒱)\right).$$

c) It follows from Eq. (3.5) and (3.6) that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is indeed the cocycle bicrossed product of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$. We also have the isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:(N,\mathrm{\Gamma })(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ satisfying $`\mathrm{\Phi }\rho =\alpha `$. Let $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ be the canonically associated isomorphism $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}:(\widehat{N},\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }})(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ characterized by

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }})(𝒲)=W.$$

Since $`\widehat{𝒲}=(\gamma \iota )(X)(\iota \rho )(Y)`$, one has

$$(\mathrm{\Phi }\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }})(𝒲)=W.$$

So we obtain $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}=\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Phi }}\gamma =\beta `$, which concludes the proof. ∎

### 3.4 Isomorphisms of cleft extensions

###### Definition 3.6.

Let $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$, $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ be l.c. quantum groups. Extensions

$$(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{\alpha _a}{}(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)\stackrel{\beta _a}{}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)\text{and}(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{\alpha _b}{}(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)\stackrel{\beta _b}{}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)$$

are said to be isomorphic, if there exists an isomorphism of l.c. quantum groups

$$\pi :(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)$$

satisfying $`\pi \alpha _a=\alpha _b`$ and $`\widehat{\pi }\beta _a=\beta _b`$, where $`\widehat{\pi }`$ is the canonical isomorphism of $`(\widehat{M}_a,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_a)`$ onto $`(\widehat{M}_b,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_b)`$ associated with $`\pi `$.

Then we can prove the following result.

###### Proposition 3.7.

Let $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ be l.c. quantum groups, let $`(\tau _a,𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ and $`(\tau _b,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ be two cocycle matchings of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ with corresponding actions $`\alpha _a,\alpha _b,\beta _a`$ and $`\beta _b`$, and let $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ be the respective cocycle bicrossed products. If the extensions

$$(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{\alpha _a}{}(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)\stackrel{\beta _a}{}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)\text{and}(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{\alpha _b}{}(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)\stackrel{\beta _b}{}(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)$$

are isomorphic through the isomorphism $`\pi `$, then there exists a unitary $``$ in $`M_1M_2`$ satisfying

$`\tau _b(z)`$ $`=\tau _a(z)^{}\text{for all}zM_1M_2`$
$`𝒰_b`$ $`=(1)(\iota \alpha _a)()𝒰_a(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(^{})`$
$`𝒱_b`$ $`=(1)(\beta _a\iota )()𝒱_a(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(^{})`$
$`\pi (z)`$ $`=z^{}\text{for all}zM_a`$
$`\widehat{\pi }(z)`$ $`=z^{}\text{for all}z\widehat{M}_a.`$
If conversely $`(\tau _a,𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, and if $``$ is a unitary in $`M_1M_2`$, then the formulas above define a cocycle matching $`(\tau _b,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$. If $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ are the corresponding cocycle bicrossed products, one can define an isomorphism

$$\pi :(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b):\pi (z)=z^{}$$

of l.c. quantum groups such that $`\pi \alpha _a=\alpha _b`$ and $`\widehat{\pi }\beta _a=\beta _b`$.

Observe that when both $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ are commutative, the extensions given by cocycle matchings $`(\tau _a,𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ and $`(\tau _b,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`\tau _a=\tau _b`$ and there exists a unitary $``$ in $`M_1M_2`$ satisfying

$`𝒰_b`$ $`=(1)(\iota \alpha _a)()𝒰_a(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(^{})`$
$`𝒱_b`$ $`=(1)(\beta _a\iota )()𝒱_a(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(^{}).`$
We will come back to this situation in Subsection 4.3.

###### Proof.

First let $`\pi `$ be an isomorphism of $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ onto $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ satisfying $`\pi \alpha _a=\alpha _b`$ and $`\widehat{\pi }\beta _a=\beta _b`$. Recall that $`\widehat{\pi }`$ satisfies $`(\pi \widehat{\pi })(W_a)=W_b`$ where $`W_a`$ and $`W_b`$ denote the multiplicative unitaries of $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ respectively. Concerning the dual actions $`\widehat{\alpha }_a`$ and $`\widehat{\alpha }_b`$ of $`(\widehat{M}_1,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\text{op})`$ on $`M_a`$ and $`M_b`$ respectively, it follows from Proposition 1.4 and Definition 2.2 that

$$(\iota \iota \widehat{\alpha }_a)(\widehat{W}_a)=(\beta _a\iota )(W_1)_{123}\widehat{W}_{a,1245}\text{and}(\iota \iota \widehat{\alpha }_b)(\widehat{W}_b)=(\beta _b\iota )(W_1)_{123}\widehat{W}_{b,1245}.$$

Hence we get

$`(\iota \iota (\iota \pi )\widehat{\alpha }_a)(\widehat{W}_a)`$ $`=(\beta _a\iota )(W_1)_{123}(\iota \iota \pi )(\widehat{W}_a)_{1245}=(\widehat{\pi }^1\iota \iota \iota )\left((\beta _b\iota )(W_1)_{123}\widehat{W}_{b,1245}\right)`$
$`=(\widehat{\pi }^1\widehat{\alpha }_b)(\widehat{W}_b)=(\iota \iota \widehat{\alpha }_b\pi )(\widehat{W}_a).`$
So $`\widehat{\alpha }_b\pi =(\iota \pi )\widehat{\alpha }_a`$.

As before we define the unitaries $`\stackrel{~}{W}_a`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}_b`$ as

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_a=(W_11)𝒰_a^{}\text{and}\stackrel{~}{W}_b=(W_11)𝒰_b^{}.$$

Then we define a unitary $`Y:=\stackrel{~}{W}_b^{}(\iota \pi )(\stackrel{~}{W}_a)M_1M_b`$. Proposition 1.4 and the formula above imply

$$(\iota \widehat{\alpha }_b)(Y)=\stackrel{~}{W}_{b,134}^{}W_{1,12}^{}(\iota \iota \pi )(W_{1,12}\stackrel{~}{W}_{a,134})=Y_{134}.$$

Therefore, $`YM_1M_b^{\widehat{\alpha }_b}`$. Theorem 1.11 shows that there is a unitary $`M_1M_2`$ such that $`Y=(\iota \alpha _b)()`$, hence

$$(\iota \pi )(\stackrel{~}{W}_a)=\stackrel{~}{W}_b(\iota \alpha _b)().$$
(3.7)
Let $`\phi _a`$ and $`\phi _b`$ be the canonical left invariant weights on $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ with GNS-constructions $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_a)`$ and $`(H_1H_2,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_b)`$. We claim that for all $`z𝒩_{\phi _a}`$ we have $`\pi (z)𝒩_{\phi _b}`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(\pi (z))=\mathrm{\Lambda }_a(z).$$

To prove this, choose $`\xi H_1,b𝒯_{\phi _1},x𝒩_{\phi _2}`$ and an orthonormal basis $`(e_i)_{iI}`$ in $`H_1`$. Define the element

$$z:=(\omega _{\xi ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_a)\alpha _a(x)𝒩_{\phi _a}.$$

So, with $`\sigma `$-strong convergence $`\pi (z)`$ is given by

$$\pi (z)=\underset{iI}{}(\omega _{e_i,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1(b)}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_b)\alpha _b\left((\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )()x\right).$$

If we denote by $`y_{I_0}`$ the sum over a finite subset $`I_0I`$, we get that $`y_{I_0}𝒩_{\phi _b}`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(y_{I_0})=\underset{iI_0}{}J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_1e_i(\omega _{\xi ,e_i}\iota )()\mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x).$$

Since $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b`$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed, we get that $`\pi (z)𝒩_{\phi _b}`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(\pi (z))=(J_1\sigma _{i/2}^1(b)J_11)(\xi \mathrm{\Lambda }_2(x))=\mathrm{\Lambda }_a(z).$$

Because such elements $`z`$ form a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_a`$, the claim is proved. Similarly $`z𝒩_{\phi _a}`$ if and only if $`\pi (z)𝒩_{\phi _b}`$. From the formula $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_b(\pi (z))=\mathrm{\Lambda }_a(z)`$ for all $`z𝒩_{\phi _a}`$ one can conclude that

$$\pi (z)=z^{}\text{for all}zM_a\text{and}\widehat{\pi }(z)=z^{}\text{for all}z\widehat{M}_a.$$

Then also $`\alpha _b(x)=\pi (\alpha _a(x))=\alpha _a(x)^{}`$ for all $`xM_2`$ and $`\beta _b(y)=\widehat{\pi }(\beta _a(x))=\beta _a(x)^{}`$ for all $`xM_1`$. Therefore, $`\tau _b(z)=\tau _a(z)^{}`$ for all $`zM_1M_2`$. So it follows from Eq. (3.7) that

$$𝒰_b(W_1^{}1)=\stackrel{~}{W}_b^{}=(\iota \alpha _b)()(\iota \pi )(\stackrel{~}{W}_a^{})=(1)(\iota \alpha _a)()𝒰_a(W_1^{}1)(1^{})$$

and hence

$$𝒰_b=(1)(\iota \alpha _a)()𝒰_a(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(^{}).$$

It remains to prove the formula for $`𝒱_b`$. We have that

$$\widehat{W}_a=(\beta _a\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_a)(\iota \iota \alpha _a)(𝒱_a(1\widehat{W}_2))\text{and}\widehat{W}_b=(\beta _b\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_b)(\iota \iota \alpha _b)(𝒱_b(1\widehat{W}_2)).$$

Because $`\widehat{W}_b=(\widehat{\pi }\pi )(\widehat{W}_a)`$ and because of Eq. (3.7), we get that

$`(\beta _b\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_b)(\iota \iota \alpha _b)(𝒱_b(1\widehat{W}_2))`$ $`=(\widehat{\pi }\pi )(\widehat{W}_a)`$
$`=(\beta _b\iota \iota )\left(\stackrel{~}{W}_b(\iota \alpha _b)()\right)(\iota \iota \alpha _b)(\widehat{\pi }\iota )(𝒱_a(1\widehat{W}_2)).`$
From the faithfulness of $`\alpha _b`$ it follows that

$$𝒱_b(1\widehat{W}_2)=(\beta _b\iota )()(\widehat{\pi }\iota )(𝒱_a(1\widehat{W}_2))$$

and so

$$𝒱_b=(1)(\beta _a\iota )()𝒱_a(1\widehat{W}_2)(^{}1)(1\widehat{W}_2^{})=(1)(\beta _a\iota )()𝒱_a(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})(^{}).$$

This concludes the proof of the first statement. Vice versa, let $`(\tau _a,𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ be a cocycle matching of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, let $``$ be a unitary in $`M_1M_2`$ and define $`(\tau _b,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ by the formulas mentioned in the proposition. Then it is straightforward to check that $`(\tau _b,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$. Let $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ be the corresponding cocycle bicrossed products and let $`\widehat{W}_a`$ and $`\widehat{W}_b`$ be the corresponding multiplicative unitaries. Then one can check that

$$()\widehat{W}_a(^{}^{})=\widehat{W}_b.$$

So, defining $`\pi (z)=z^{}(zM_a)`$, we get an isomorphism of the l.c. quantum groups $`(M_a,\mathrm{\Delta }_a)`$ and $`(M_b,\mathrm{\Delta }_b)`$ such that $`\widehat{\pi }(z)=z^{}(z\widehat{M}_a)`$. Hence we get that $`\pi \alpha _a=\alpha _b`$ and $`\widehat{\pi }\beta _a=\beta _b`$, which concludes the proof. ∎

## 4 Extensions of l.c. groups

In this section we study extensions of l.c. groups, i.e., short exact sequences of the form

$$(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{𝛼}{}(M,\mathrm{\Delta })\stackrel{𝛽}{}((G_1),\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1),$$

where $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are usual l.c. groups.

### 4.1 Extensions of discrete groups

If both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are finite, G.I. Kac , Theorem 3 showed that every extension has a cocycle bicrossed product structure (later it was shown in  that it follows from H.-J. Schneider’s work  that every extension of finite-dimensional Hopf algebras is cleft). We generalize the result of G.I. Kac as follows.

###### Theorem 4.1.

Any extension

$$(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{𝛼}{}(M,\mathrm{\Delta })\stackrel{𝛽}{}((G_1),\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1),$$

where $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are discrete groups is automatically cleft; applying then Theorem 3.5, we have that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a cocycle bicrossed product of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$.

The proof of this theorem will consist of several lemmas, very much inspired by .

Define, as in the section of Preliminaries, quantum groups $`(M_1,\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(M_2,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, their duals and all their ingredients related to $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$. For $`gG_i`$ denote by $`\delta _g`$ the element in $`M_i(i=1,2)`$ determined by

$$\delta _g(h)=\delta _{g,h},$$

where $`\delta _{g,h}`$ is the Kronecker symbol; the elements $`\delta _g`$ form an orthonormal basis in $`H_i(i=1,2)`$. Next define for all $`gG_1`$ the functional $`\omega _g\widehat{M}_1`$ by

$$\omega _g(x)=x\delta _e,\delta _g\text{for all}x\widehat{M}_1$$

and observe that

$$(\iota \omega _g)(W_1)=\delta _g\text{and}\omega _g(\lambda _h)=\delta _{g,h}$$

for all $`g,hG_1`$. Further, $`\overline{\omega _g}=\omega _{g^1}`$ and

$$(\iota \omega _g)\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1(x)=\omega _g(x)\lambda _g\text{for all}x\widehat{M}_1.$$

Let $`\alpha :M_2M`$ and $`\beta :M_1\widehat{M}`$ be normal and faithful $``$-homomorphisms satisfying $`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}\beta =(\beta \beta )\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$. Denote by $`\mu `$ the action defined in Proposition 3.1 such that $`\mu =(\widehat{R}_1R)\theta R`$, $`M^\mu =\alpha (M_2)`$ and $`(\iota \mathrm{\Delta })\mu =(\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We fix a left invariant weight $`\phi `$ on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ with GNS-construction $`(H,\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$.

###### Lemma 4.2.

For all $`gG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$ there exists a $`zM`$ such that

$$(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)0.$$

###### Proof.

We first claim that there exist $`z𝒩_\phi `$ and $`kG_2`$ such that $`\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)0`$. If this is not the case, then for every $`z𝒩_\phi `$ and $`kG_2`$ we have $`\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)=0`$. Hence, using Proposition 3.1

$$0=\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\right)=\alpha (\delta _k)\beta ((\iota \omega _g)(W_1))\mathrm{\Lambda }(z)=\alpha (\delta _k)\beta (\delta _g)\mathrm{\Lambda }(z).$$

Summing over $`kG_2`$, it then follows that $`\beta (\delta _g)=0`$ which contradicts the faithfulness of $`\beta `$. So one can take $`kG_2`$ and $`z𝒩_\phi `$ such that $`Z:=\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)0`$. Since $`Z𝒩_\phi `$, we have $`0<\phi (Z^{}Z)<\mathrm{}`$. Fix $`gG_1`$ and define

$$I_g=\{sG_2\text{There exists a}zM\text{with}(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)0\}.$$

Suppose $`sG_2I_g`$. One has $`(\omega _g\iota )\mu (y)\alpha (\delta _s)=0`$ for all $`yM`$. We claim that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z)(\alpha (\delta _s)1)=0`$. Indeed,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(Z)=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(\delta _k)\mathrm{\Delta }\left((\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\right)=(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(\delta _k)((\omega _g\iota )\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z).$$

For all $`\eta M_{}`$

$$(\iota \eta )\left(((\omega _g\iota )\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\right)\alpha (\delta _s)=(\omega _g\iota )\mu \left((\iota \eta )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)\right)\alpha (\delta _s)=0$$

and so

$$((\omega _g\iota )\mu \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }(z)(\alpha (\delta _s)1)=0.$$

From this the claim follows. But then

$$(\alpha (\delta _s)1)\mathrm{\Delta }(Z^{}Z)(\alpha (\delta _s)1)=0.$$

Applying $`\iota \phi `$ we obtain

$$\phi (Z^{}Z)\alpha (\delta _s)=0$$

i.e., a contradiction with the faithfulness of $`\alpha `$. Therefore, $`G_2=I_g`$, which concludes the proof. ∎

###### Lemma 4.3.

Let $`gG_1`$. Then

$$\{(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)zM\}=\{zM\mu (z)=\lambda _gz\}.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`zM`$. Then

$$\mu \left((\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\right)=((\omega _g\iota )\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1\iota )\mu (z)=\lambda _g(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z).$$

This proves the inclusion $``$. Vice versa, let $`zM`$ and suppose $`\mu (z)=\lambda _gz`$. Then $`z=(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)`$, which gives the converse inclusion. ∎

###### Lemma 4.4.

Let $`gG_1,s,kG_2`$ and $`zM`$. If the element $`uM`$ defined by

$$u:=\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)$$

is different from $`0`$, then $`\frac{u}{u}`$ is a partial isometry with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _k)`$.

###### Proof.

Define

$$v:=(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)^{}\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)=(\omega _{g^1}\iota )\mu (z^{})\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z).$$

Then $`u^{}u=\alpha (\delta _s)v\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and further, using the previous lemma,

$$\mu (v)=\left(\lambda _{g^1}(\omega _{g^1}\iota )\mu (z^{})\right)\left(1\alpha (\delta _k)\right)\left(\lambda _g(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\right)=1v.$$

Hence $`vM^\mu =\alpha (M_2)`$ and one can take $`xM_2`$ such that $`v=\alpha (x)`$. Then

$$u^{}u=\alpha (\delta _sx\delta _s)=x(s)\alpha (\delta _s).$$

From this we have $`u^{}u=u^2\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and similarly $`uu^{}=u^2\alpha (\delta _k)`$, which concludes the proof. ∎

###### Lemma 4.5.

Let $`gG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$. Then there exists at most one $`kG_2`$ such that

$$\{\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)zM\}\{0\}.$$

###### Proof.

If there are $`k,lG_2`$, both satisfying the condition above, one can take $`y,zM`$ such that

$$u:=\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (y)\alpha (\delta _s)0\text{and}v:=\alpha (\delta _l)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)0.$$

We may suppose that $`u=v=1`$. By Lemma 4.4 $`u`$ (resp., $`v`$) is a partial isometry with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _k)`$ (resp., $`\alpha (\delta _l)`$). Hence $`uv^{}`$ is a partial isometry with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _l)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _k)`$. On the other hand, Lemma 4.3 gives

$$\mu (u)=\lambda _gu\text{and}\mu (v)=\lambda _gv,$$

so $`uv^{}M^\mu =\alpha (M_2)`$. Choose $`xM_2`$ with $`\alpha (x)=uv^{}`$. Then

$$\alpha (\delta _l)=(uv^{})^{}uv^{}=\alpha (x^{}x)=\alpha (xx^{})=uv^{}(uv^{})^{}=\alpha (\delta _k),$$

so $`l=k`$. ∎

The following proposition is the main ingredient to prove Theorem 4.1.

###### Proposition 4.6.

Let $`gG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$. Then the subspace of $`M`$

$$E_{g,s}=\{(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _s)zM\}$$

is one-dimensional and spanned by a partial isometry $`u_{g,s}`$ with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)})`$, where $`P_g(s)G_2`$. For every $`gG_1`$, the map $`sP_g(s)`$ is a bijection of $`G_2`$. Further

$$\mu (u_{g,s})=\lambda _gu_{g,s}.$$

###### Proof.

By the previous lemma there is at most one $`kG_2`$ such that $`\alpha (\delta _k)E_{g,s}\{0\}`$. On the other hand, if such a $`k`$ does not exist, then $`\alpha (\delta _k)E_{g,s}=\{0\}`$ for all $`kG_2`$ and summing over $`k`$ we get $`E_{g,s}=\{0\}`$, which contradicts Lemma 4.2. So, let $`P_g(s)`$ be the unique element in $`G_2`$ satisfying

$$\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)})E_{g,s}\{0\}.$$

Then $`y=\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)})y`$ for all $`yE_{g,s}`$. Suppose now that $`u,vE_{g,s}`$ and $`u=v=1`$. By Lemma 4.4, both $`u`$ and $`v`$ are partial isometries with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)})`$. Lemma 4.3 shows that all elements $`yE_{g,s}`$ satisfy $`\mu (y)=\lambda _gy`$, and hence $`v^{}uM^\mu =\alpha (M_2)`$. But $`v^{}u`$ is a partial isometry with initial and final projection equal to $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$. Hence $`v^{}u=\pm \alpha (\delta _s)`$ and so $`u=\pm v`$. Hence $`E_{g,s}`$ is one-dimensional and generated by a partial isometry $`u_{g,s}`$ with initial projection $`\alpha (\delta _s)`$ and final projection $`\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)})`$. Also we get $`\mu (u_{g,s})=\lambda _gu_{g,s}`$.

Fix now $`gG_1`$ and consider the map $`sP_g(s)`$. First of all this map is injective. Take $`st`$ and suppose that $`P_g(s)=P_g(t)`$. Writing $`P_g(s)=k`$, we can take $`y,zM`$ such that

$$\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (y)\alpha (\delta _s)0\text{and}\alpha (\delta _k)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (z)\alpha (\delta _t)0.$$

Taking the adjoint we get

$$\alpha (\delta _s)(\omega _{g^1}\iota )\mu (y^{})\alpha (\delta _k)0\text{and}\alpha (\delta _t)(\omega _{g^1}\iota )\mu (z^{})\alpha (\delta _k)0$$

and this contradicts Lemma 4.5. Therefore, the map $`sP_g(s)`$ is injective. To prove its surjectivity, choose $`tG_2`$. By the above reasoning we can take $`sG_2`$ and $`yN`$ such that

$$\alpha (\delta _s)(\omega _{g^1}\iota )\mu (y)\alpha (\delta _t)0.$$

Taking the adjoint we get

$$\alpha (\delta _t)(\omega _g\iota )\mu (y^{})\alpha (\delta _s)0$$

and this implies that $`P_g(s)=t`$. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 4.1.

Recall that the action $`\theta `$ introduced in Proposition 3.1 satisfies $`\theta (z)=(\widehat{R}_1R)\mu (R(z))`$ for all $`zM`$. In order to prove that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a cleft extension, it suffices, by Proposition 1.24, to show the existence of a unitary $`XM_1M`$ satisfying $`(\iota \theta )(X)=W_{1,12}X_{13}`$. Applying $`R_1\widehat{R}_1R`$ we have to prove the existence of a unitary $`Y`$ in $`M_1M`$ satisfying $`(\iota \mu )(Y)=Y_{13}W_{1,12}`$.

Choose partial isometries $`u_{g,s}`$ as in the previous proposition. Fix $`gG_1`$. Then $`(u_{g,s})_{sG_2}`$ is a family of partial isometries in $`M`$ with initial projections $`(\alpha (\delta _s))_{sG_2}`$ and final projections $`(\alpha (\delta _{P_g(s)}))_{sG_2}`$. Because the map $`sP_g(s)`$ is a bijection of $`G_2`$ we can define a unitary $`Y_g`$ in $`M`$ by the sum

$$Y_g=\underset{sG_2}{}u_{g,s}$$

converging in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology. Since $`\mu (u_{g,s})=\lambda _gu_{g,s}`$ for all $`sG_2`$, we get $`\mu (Y_g)=\lambda _gY_g`$. Identifying $`M_1M`$ with $`\mathrm{}^{\mathrm{}}(G_1,M)`$ we can define $`YM_1M`$ by $`Y(g)=Y_g`$. Then $`Y`$ is unitary and

$$(\iota \mu )(Y)=Y_{13}W_{1,12}.$$

This concludes the proof. ∎

### 4.2 Extensions of l.c. groups

In this subsection we discuss the particular situation of a (cocycle) matched pair of locally compact groups. Our starting point, Definition 4.7, is the same as in . Also, but in the absence of cocycles, S. Baaj and G. Skandalis  state the same formulas for the ingredients of the bicrossed product as we do in Propositions 4.14 and 4.15.

Here we consider regular Borel measures on l.c. spaces. By the product measure, we mean the regular Borel product, see e.g. , Section 7.6. We say that a statement is valid almost everywhere if it is valid everywhere except on a set whose intersection with an arbitrary compact set is a Borel set of measure zero, see e.g. , Section 3.3 where they use the terminology locally almost everywhere. A function is called measurable when it is Borel measurable on every compact set. Given a l.c. space $`X`$ with a regular Borel measure $`\mu `$, we denote by $`K(X)`$ the space of continuous compactly supported $``$-valued functions on $`X`$ and by $`^{\mathrm{}}(X)`$ the space of measurable functions from $`X`$ to $``$ such that there exist a number $`M>0`$ satisfying $`|f(x)|M`$ for almost all $`xX`$. Denote by $`L^2(X)`$ the usual Hilbert space of (equivalence classes of) square integrable functions. For every $`f^{\mathrm{}}(X)`$ one can define a multiplication operator $`M_f`$ on $`L^2(X)`$ in the usual way, and then we have a von Neumann algebra (this follows e.g. from , Theorem 7.5.3)

$$L^{\mathrm{}}(X)=\{M_ff^{\mathrm{}}(X)\}.$$

###### Definition 4.7.

Let $`G,G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ be l.c. groups with fixed left invariant Haar measures and let a homomorphism $`i:G_1G`$ and an anti-homomorphism $`j:G_2G`$ have closed images and be homeomorphisms onto these images. Let finally

$$\theta :G_1\times G_2\mathrm{\Omega }G:(g,s)i(g)j(s)$$

be a homeomorphism of $`G_1\times G_2`$ onto an open subset $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of $`G`$ having a complement of measure zero. Then we call $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ a matched pair of l.c. groups.

From this data we will construct actions $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ and a map $`\tau `$ to obtain a cocycle matching of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, with trivial cocycles, in the sense of Definition 2.1.

Denote by $`\delta ,\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ the modular functions of $`G,G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ and define the homeomorphism

$$\rho :G_1\times G_2\mathrm{\Omega }^1:(g,s)j(s)i(g).$$

We put

$$𝒪=\theta ^1(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }^1)\text{and}𝒪^{}=\rho ^1(\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }^1).$$

So $`𝒪`$ and $`𝒪^{}`$ are open subsets of $`G_1\times G_2`$ and $`\rho ^1\theta `$ is a homeomorphism of $`𝒪`$ onto $`𝒪^{}`$. For all $`(g,s)𝒪`$ we define $`\beta _s(g)G_1`$ and $`\alpha _g(s)G_2`$ such that

$$\rho ^1(\theta (g,s))=(\beta _s(g),\alpha _g(s)).$$

Hence we get $`j\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)i\left(\beta _s(g)\right)=i(g)j(s)`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$.

Let us first prove an easy lemma.

###### Lemma 4.8.

Let $`(g,s)𝒪`$ and $`hG_1`$. Then $`(hg,s)𝒪`$ if and only if $`(h,\alpha _g(s))𝒪`$, and in that case

$$\alpha _{hg}(s)=\alpha _h\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)\text{and}\beta _s(hg)=\beta _{\alpha _g(s)}(h)\beta _s(g).$$

Let $`(g,s)𝒪`$ and $`tG_2`$. Then $`(g,ts)𝒪`$ if and only if $`(\beta _s(g),t)𝒪`$ and in that case

$$\beta _{ts}(g)=\beta _t\left(\beta _s(g)\right)\text{and}\alpha _g(ts)=\alpha _{\beta _s(g)}(t)\alpha _g(s).$$

Finally, for all $`gG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$ we have $`(g,e)𝒪`$, $`(e,s)𝒪`$, and

$$\alpha _g(e)=e,\alpha _e(s)=s,\beta _s(e)=e\text{and}\beta _e(g)=g.$$

###### Proof.

Let $`(g,s)𝒪`$ and $`(h,\alpha _g(s))𝒪`$. Then we know that

$$j\left(\alpha _h(\alpha _g(s))\right)i\left(\beta _{\alpha _g(s)}(h)\right)=i(h)j\left(\alpha _g(s)\right).$$

So we get that

$$j\left(\alpha _h(\alpha _g(s))\right)i\left(\beta _{\alpha _g(s)}(h)\right)i\left(\beta _s(g)\right)=i(h)j\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)i\left(\beta _s(g)\right)=i(hg)j(s).$$

From this we may conclude that $`(hg,s)𝒪`$ and $`\beta _s(hg)=\beta _{\alpha _g(s)}(h)\beta _s(g)`$, $`\alpha _{hg}(s)=\alpha _h\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)`$. The other statements of the lemma are proved analogously. ∎

###### Lemma 4.9.

The Haar measures on $`G,G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ can be normalized in such a way that for all positive Borel functions $`f`$ on $`G`$ we have

$$f\left(i(g)j(s)\right)\delta (j(s))𝑑g\times 𝑑s=f(x)𝑑x=f\left(j(s)i(g)\right)\delta (i(g))\delta _1(g^1)\delta _2(s^1)𝑑g\times 𝑑s.$$

###### Proof.

For any $`fK(G_1\times G_2)`$ we define $`\stackrel{~}{f}K(G_1\times G_2)`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{f}(g,s)=f(g,s)\delta (j(s)^1)`$ and

$$I(f)=_\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{~}{f}(\theta ^1(x))𝑑x.$$

We claim that $`I`$ is a left invariant integral on $`K(G_1\times G_2)`$. To prove this, choose $`(h,t)G_1\times G_2`$. Choose $`fK(G_1\times G_2)`$ and define $`FK(G_1\times G_2)`$ by $`F(g,s)=f(hg,ts)`$. We have to prove that $`I(F)=I(f)`$.

Choose $`x\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Let $`x=i(g)j(s)`$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{F}(\theta ^1(x))=\stackrel{~}{F}(g,s)=f(hg,ts)\delta (j(s)^1)=\stackrel{~}{f}(hg,ts)\delta (j(t)).$$

Because $`\theta (hg,ts)=i(h)xj(t)`$ we get that $`\stackrel{~}{F}(\theta ^1(x))=\stackrel{~}{f}\left(\theta ^1(i(h)xj(t))\right)\delta (j(t))`$ for all $`x\mathrm{\Omega }`$. Hence

$$I(F)=_\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{~}{F}(\theta ^1(x))𝑑x=_\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{~}{f}\left(\theta ^1(i(h)xj(t))\right)\delta (j(t))𝑑x=_\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{~}{f}(\theta ^1(x))𝑑x=I(f).$$

Hence it follows that $`I`$ is a left invariant integral on $`K(G_1\times G_2)`$. Then we can normalize the Haar measure on $`G`$ in such a way that the first equality of the lemma holds for all continuous functions on $`G`$ with compact support in $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The same equality then follows for all positive Borel functions as usual. The second equality follows from the first and the formula

$$f(x)𝑑x=f(x^1)\delta (x^1)𝑑x.$$

This lemma implies in particular that a Borel set $`AG_1\times G_2`$ has measure zero if and only if $`\theta (A)`$ has measure zero in $`G`$. Because $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$ has complement of measure zero in $`G`$, $`𝒪`$ and $`𝒪^{}`$ have complements of measure zero in $`G_1\times G_2`$. Hence we can define a $``$-isomorphism $`\tau `$ by

$$\tau :L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2):\tau (f)(g,s)=f(\beta _s(g),\alpha _g(s)).$$
(4.1)
Lemma 4.8 guarantees that, defining

$`\alpha :L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2):\alpha (f)=\tau (1f)\text{and}`$
$`\beta :L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2):\beta (f)=\tau (f1)`$
we have

$`(\iota \alpha )\alpha (f)`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\alpha (f)`$ $`(\beta \iota )\beta (f)`$ $`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op})\beta (f)`$
$`\tau _{13}(\alpha \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_2(f)`$ $`=(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_2)\alpha (f)`$ $`\tau _{23}\sigma _{23}(\beta \iota )\mathrm{\Delta }_1(f)`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )\beta (f).`$
Therefore, $`\tau `$ gives a cocycle matching with trivial cocycles of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ in the sense of Definition 2.1. Then we can introduce cocycles by the following obvious lemma.

###### Lemma 4.10.

Suppose that

$$𝒰:G_1\times G_1\times G_2\text{and}𝒱:G_1\times G_2\times G_2$$

are measurable maps with values in the unit circle $`U(1)`$, satisfying

$`𝒰(g,h,\alpha _k(s))𝒰(gh,k,s)`$ $`=𝒰(h,k,s)𝒰(g,hk,s),`$ (4.2)
$`𝒱(\beta _s(g),t,r)𝒱(g,s,rt)`$ $`=𝒱(g,s,t)𝒱(g,ts,r),`$
$`𝒱(gh,s,t)\overline{𝒰}(g,h,ts)`$ $`=\overline{𝒰}(g,h,s)\overline{𝒰}(\beta _{\alpha _h(s)}(g),\beta _s(h),t)𝒱(g,\alpha _h(s),\alpha _{\beta _s(h)}(t))𝒱(h,s,t)`$
nearly everywhere. Then $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$.

Fixing cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ as above and using Definition 2.2 and Theorem 2.13 we get the cocycle bicrossed product $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$, which is a l.c. quantum group.

Let $`\phi _2`$ be the n.s.f. weight on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)`$ coming from the Haar measure on $`G_2`$ and $`\phi `$ the left invariant weight on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ according to Definition 2.7. The obvious GNS-construction for $`\phi _2`$ gives also the canonical GNS-construction $`(L^2(G_1\times G_2),\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ for $`\phi `$. Let $`W_1`$ be the multiplicative unitary of $`G_1`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{W}=(W_11)𝒰^{}`$. Recall that $`M`$ is generated by $`\alpha (L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2))`$ and the elements $`(\omega \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})`$, $`\omega L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)_{}`$.

For every function $`FK(G_1)`$ we define the normal functional $`\omega _FL^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)_{}`$ by $`\omega _F(g)=F(x)g(x)𝑑x`$ for all $`gL^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)`$. It follows from Definition 2.7 that

$$\mathrm{span}\{(\omega _F\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (G)FK(G_1),GK(G_2)\}$$
(4.3)
is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left((\omega _F\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (G)\right)=FG.$$

###### Lemma 4.11.

Let $`kG_1`$. Define

$$𝒪_k=\{sG_2(k,s)𝒪\}.$$

Then $`𝒪_k`$ is an open subset of $`G_2`$ with complement of measure zero and $`\alpha _k`$ is a homeomorphism of $`𝒪_k`$ onto $`𝒪_{k^1}`$ satisfying, for all positive Borel functions $`h`$ on $`G_2`$,

$$_{𝒪_k}h\left(\alpha _k(s)\right)𝑑s=_{𝒪_{k^1}}h(s)F(k^1,s)𝑑s$$

Here $`F`$ is the strictly positive continuous function on $`𝒪`$ defined by

$$F(k,s)=\delta \left(i(\beta _s(k)^1)\right)\delta _1\left(\beta _s(k)\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _k(s)s^1\right).$$

###### Proof.

Lemma 4.9 shows that $`\rho ^1`$ preserves Borel sets of measure zero. Now $`i(k^1)\mathrm{\Omega }^1\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$ has complement of measure zero in $`G`$ and its image under $`\rho ^1`$ is $`G_1\times 𝒪_k`$. Hence $`𝒪_k`$ is an open subset of $`G_2`$ with complement of measure zero. Using twice Lemma 4.9, we get for every continuous function $`h`$ on $`G`$ with compact support in $`\mathrm{\Omega }^1i(k)\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$

$`{\displaystyle h\left(j(s)i(g)\right)}`$ $`\delta (i(g))\delta _1(g^1)\delta _2(s^1)dg\times ds={\displaystyle h(x)𝑑x}={\displaystyle h(i(k)x)𝑑x}`$
$`={\displaystyle _{G_1\times 𝒪_k}}h\left(i(k)j(s)i(g)\right)\delta (i(g))\delta _1(g^1)\delta _2(s^1)𝑑g\times 𝑑s`$
$`={\displaystyle _{G_1\times 𝒪_k}}h\left(j(\alpha _k(s))i(\beta _s(k)g)\right)\delta (i(g))\delta _1(g^1)\delta _2(s^1)𝑑g\times 𝑑s`$
$`={\displaystyle _{G_1\times 𝒪_k}}h\left(j(\alpha _k(s))i(g)\right)\delta \left(i(\beta _s(k)^1g)\right)\delta _1\left(g^1\beta _s(k)\right)\delta _2(s^1)𝑑g\times 𝑑s,`$
where we have used twice the Fubini theorem and the invariance of the Haar measure on $`G_2`$ to obtain the last equality. The Fubini theorem can be applied because the integrand has compact support in $`G_1\times 𝒪_k`$.

Then the same equality is valid for all positive Borel functions $`h`$ on $`G`$. Taking $`h`$ of the form $`(h_1h_2)\rho ^1`$ we get the result. ∎

###### Lemma 4.12.

Suppose that $`f`$ is a bounded Borel function on $`G_1\times G_2`$ whose support has compact closure. Suppose that $`\xi K(G_1\times G_2)`$. Define, for nearly all $`(k,s)G_1\times G_2`$

$$(\pi (f)\xi )(k,s)=\overline{𝒰}(g,g^1k,s)f(g,\alpha _{g^1k}(s))\xi (g^1k,s)𝑑g.$$

Then $`\pi (f)`$ defines a bounded operator on $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ belonging to $`𝒩_\phi M`$ and such that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pi (f))=f`$.

Observe that $`\pi (f)\xi `$ is a bounded Borel function having a support with compact closure.

###### Proof.

If $`|f(g,s)|M`$ for all $`g`$ and $`s`$ and $`f`$ has its support in $`L_1\times L_2`$ for certain compact sets $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$, then $`\pi (f)\xi L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ and $`\pi (f)\xi M\mu _1(L_1)\xi `$, where $`\mu _1`$ is the Haar measure on $`G_1`$. Hence $`\pi (f)`$ defines a bounded operator. If now $`f=FG`$ with $`FK(G_1)`$ and $`GK(G_2)`$, then

$$\pi (f)=(\omega _F\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (G)$$

and the result follows in this special case. When $`f`$ is continuous on $`L_1\times L_2`$ and equals $`0`$ elsewhere we can find a sequence $`f_n`$ of linear combinations of functions $`FG`$ where $`F`$ is continuous on $`L_1`$ and $`G`$ is continuous on $`L_2`$, converging uniformly to $`f`$. It is clear from the inequality above that $`\pi (f_n)`$ converges in norm to $`\pi (f)`$ and that $`f_n`$ converges in $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ to $`f`$. Hence $`\pi (f)𝒩_\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\pi (f))=f`$, because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is closed. Finally, if $`f`$ is Borel, if its support is contained in $`L_1\times L_2`$ and if $`|f(g,s)|M`$ for all $`g`$ and $`s`$, we can use the Lusin theorem to obtain a sequence $`f_n`$ of functions continuous on $`L_1\times L_2`$ and equal to $`0`$ elsewhere, satisfying $`|f_n(g,s)|M`$ for all $`g,s`$ and $`n`$, and such that

$$(\mu _1\times \mu _2)\left(\{(g,s)f_n(g,s)f(g,s)\}\right)0,$$

where $`\mu _i`$ is the Haar measure on $`G_i(i=1,2)`$. Using Lemma 4.11 one can check that $`\pi (f_n)\pi (f)`$ in the $`\sigma `$-strong topology and $`f_nf`$ in $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$. Because $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is $`\sigma `$-strong– norm closed, the result follows. ∎

###### Lemma 4.13.

There exist unique elements $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰},\stackrel{~}{𝒱}L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)`$ such that, for almost all $`(g,k,s)G_1\times G_1\times G_2`$,

$$(\iota \alpha )(\stackrel{~}{𝒰})(g,k,s)=𝒰(g,g^1k,s)𝒰(g^1,k,s)$$

and such that, for almost all $`(g,s,t)G_1\times G_2\times G_2`$,

$$(\beta \iota )(\stackrel{~}{𝒱})(g,s,t)=𝒱(g,s,t^1)𝒱(g,t^1s,t).$$

Also we have $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g,\alpha _g(s))=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(\beta _s(g),s)=\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(g,s^1)`$ for almost all $`(g,s)G_1\times G_2`$.

###### Proof.

Define a unitary $`ZL^{\mathrm{}}(G_1\times G_1\times G_2)`$ by

$$Z(g,k,s)=𝒰(g,g^1k,s)𝒰(g^1,k,s)\text{for almost all}(g,k,s)G_1\times G_1\times G_2.$$

We claim that $`ZL^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)\alpha (L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2))`$. In view of Corollary 1.21 and Theorem 1.11 it suffices to prove that

$$(1V_1^{}1)(\iota \iota \alpha )(Z)(1V_11)=Z_{124},$$

which amounts to prove, for almost all $`(g,h,k,s)`$, the equality

$$Z(g,h,\alpha _k(s))=Z(g,hk,s).$$

But applying (4.2) to $`(g,g^1h,k,s)`$ and to $`(g^1,h,k,s)`$ we obtain this last formula.

Now we can take $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}=(\iota \alpha ^1)(Z)`$. The second statement can be proved similarly. Finally, to prove that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g,\alpha _g(s))=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)`$ for almost all $`(g,s)`$ it suffices to check that $`\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g,\alpha _{gh}(s))=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,\alpha _h(s))`$ for almost all $`(g,h,s)`$, which is clear. Similarly we get $`\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(\beta _s(g),s)=\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(g,s^1)`$ for almost all $`(g,s)`$. ∎

Then we can finally prove the main result.

###### Proposition 4.14.

Denote by $`X=J^{1/2}`$ the modular operator of the left invariant weight $`\phi `$ on the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ with GNS-construction $`(L^2(G_1\times G_2),\iota ,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ and by $`\widehat{X}=\widehat{J}\widehat{}^{1/2}`$ the modular operator of the left invariant weight $`\widehat{\phi }`$ on the the dual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ with GNS-construction $`(L^2(G_1\times G_2),\iota ,\widehat{\mathrm{\Lambda }})`$. Then, for every bounded measurable function $`\xi `$ on $`G`$ whose support is contained in a compact subset of $`𝒪`$, we get that $`\xi 𝒟(X)`$, $`\xi 𝒟(\widehat{X})`$, and

$`(X\xi )(g,s)`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\delta _1(g^1)\overline{\xi }(g^1,\alpha _g(s))`$
$`(\widehat{X}\xi )(g,s)`$ $`=\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(g,s^1)\delta _2(s^1)\overline{\xi }(\beta _s(g),s^1)`$
$`(J\xi )(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(i(\beta _s(g))\right)^{1/2}\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)g^1\right)^{1/2}\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s^1\right)^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\overline{\xi }(g^1,\alpha _g(s))`$
$`(\widehat{J}\xi )(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(j(\alpha _g(s))\right)^{1/2}\delta _1(\beta _s(g)g^1)^{1/2}\delta _2(\alpha _g(s)s^1)^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{𝒱}(g,s^1)\overline{\xi }(\beta _s(g),s^1).`$
Moreover these elements $`\xi `$ form a core for both $`X`$ and $`\widehat{X}`$.

The operators $``$ and $`\widehat{}`$ are strictly positive multiplication operators with the functions

$`(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(i(\beta _s(g))\right)^1\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)g\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s^1\right)`$
$`\widehat{}(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(j(\alpha _g(s))\right)\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)g^1\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s\right).`$
The scaling constant of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ equals $`1`$.

###### Proof.

Let $``$ be the set of bounded Borel functions on $`G_1\times G_2`$ whose support is contained in a compact subset of $`𝒪`$ and let $`f`$. Using Lemmas 4.12 and 4.13 one can check that for all $`\xi K(G_1\times G_2)`$

$`(\pi (f)^{}\xi )(k,s)`$ $`={\displaystyle 𝒰(g,k,s)\overline{f}(g,\alpha _k(s))\xi (gk,s)𝑑g}`$
$`={\displaystyle \overline{𝒰}(g,g^1k,s)\delta _1(g^1)𝒰(g,g^1k,s)𝒰(g^1,k,s)\overline{f}(g^1,\alpha _k(s))\xi (g^1k,s)𝑑g}`$
$`=(\pi (h)\xi )(k,s)`$
where $`h(g,s)=\delta _1(g^1)\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\overline{f}(g^1,\alpha _g(s))`$. Because $`(g,s)(g^1,\alpha _g(s))`$ is a homeomorphism of $`𝒪`$ we get $`h`$. Then it follows that $`f𝒟(X)`$ and $`Xf=h`$. When both $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ belong to $``$, one can check that $`\pi (f_1)\pi (f_2)=\pi (f_3)`$ where

$$f_3(h,s)=\overline{𝒰}(g,g^1h,s)f_1(g,\alpha _{g^1h}(s))f_2(g^1h,s)𝑑g.$$

We see that $`f_3`$. From Definition 2.7 and Lemma 4.12 it follows that $`\{\pi (f)f\}`$ is a $`\sigma `$-strong– norm core for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The computations above show that it is also a $``$-algebra, so $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ is a core for $`X`$. Let now $`f`$ and $`h`$ be in $``$. Then we get, using Lemma 4.11 and the notation $`F`$ introduced there,

$`Xf,h`$ $`={\displaystyle \delta _1(g^1)\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\overline{f}(g^1,\alpha _g(s))\overline{h}(g,s)𝑑g\times 𝑑s}`$
$`={\displaystyle \left(\delta _1(g^1)\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\overline{f}(g^1,\alpha _g(s))\overline{h}(g,s)𝑑s\right)𝑑g}`$
$`={\displaystyle \left(F(g^1,s)\delta _1(g^1)\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,\alpha _{g^1}(s))\overline{f}(g^1,s)\overline{h}(g,\alpha _{g^1}(s))𝑑s\right)𝑑g}`$
$`={\displaystyle F(g,s)\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)\overline{f}(g,s)\overline{h}(g^1,\alpha _g(s))𝑑g\times 𝑑s}.`$
In this computation we used twice the Fubini theorem on a bounded Borel function whose support has compact closure. Since the functions $`f`$ form a core for $`X`$, the computation above shows that $`h𝒟(X^{})`$ and

$$(X^{}h)(g,s)=\stackrel{~}{𝒰}(g^1,s)F(g,s)\overline{h}(g^1,\alpha _g(s)).$$

Then for all $`f`$ we get $`f𝒟(X^{}X)`$ and, with $`(g,s)`$ as in the statement of the proposition,

$$(X^{}Xf)(g,s)=(g,s)f(g,s).$$

Denote by $`A`$ the strictly positive multiplication operator with the function $`(g,s)(g,s)`$. Because $`X^{}X=`$ we see that $`Af=f`$ for all $`f`$. Because the subspace $``$ of $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ is invariant under $`A^{it}`$ for all $`t`$, it is a core for $`A`$. Hence it follows that $`A`$, and so $`A=`$ because both are self-adjoint. From the formulas for $`X`$ and $``$ we get the formula for $`J`$.

Next Proposition 2.9 and Proposition 2.16 give that $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is also a cocycle bicrossed product. If we define

$$\stackrel{~}{i}:G_2G:\stackrel{~}{i}(s)=j(s)^1\text{and}\stackrel{~}{j}:G_1G:\stackrel{~}{j}(g)=i(g)^1$$

then $`G_2`$ and $`G_1`$ become a matched pair of groups and the maps $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }`$ are given by

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_s(g)=\beta _s(g)\text{and}\stackrel{~}{\beta }_g(s)=\alpha _g(s).$$

The maps $`(s,t,g)𝒱(g,t,s)`$ and $`(s,g,h)𝒰(h,g,s)`$ satisfy (4.2). Hence we can make the cocycle bicrossed product, and Proposition 2.9 shows that this equals, up to a flip map, $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. Then the formulas for $`\widehat{X},\widehat{J}`$ and $`\widehat{}`$ follow from the formulas for $`X`$, $`J`$ and $``$.

Finally, we get immediately that $``$ and $`\widehat{}`$ commute strongly. Hence it follows from , Proposition 2.13 that the scaling constant equals $`1`$. ∎

Now one could write explicit formulas for $`\tau _t(\pi (f))`$ and $`R(\pi (f))`$ where $`f`$ is a bounded Borel function whose support has compact closure. Let us give concrete formulas for the remaining operators related to $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and its dual.

###### Proposition 4.15.

Let $`P`$ be the unitary implementation of $`\tau `$ , Definition 6.9, $`\delta _M`$ the modular element of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`\delta _{\widehat{M}}`$ the modular element of $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. Then $`P`$ is the multiplication operator with the function

$`P(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(i(g\beta _s(g)^1)\right)\delta _1\left(g^1\beta _s(g)\right)\delta _2\left(s^1\alpha _g(s)\right),`$
$`\delta _M`$ is the multiplication operator with the function
$`\delta _M(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(j(\alpha _g(s))\right)^1\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)^2`$
and $`\delta _{\widehat{M}}`$ is the multiplication operator with the function
$`\delta _{\widehat{M}}(g,s)`$ $`=\delta \left(i(\beta _s(g))\right)\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)^2.`$
###### Proof.

Using , Definition 6.9 and Proposition 8.23 we get that $`\tau _t(x)=P^{it}xP^{it}`$ and $`\widehat{\tau }_t(y)=P^{it}yP^{it}`$ for all $`t`$, $`xM`$ and $`y\widehat{M}`$. From , Proposition 2.13 it follows that $`JPJ=P^1`$. If $`A`$ is the multiplication operator with the function $`(g,s)P(g,s)`$ defined in the proposition, one can compute that the closure of $`A^1`$ is the multiplication operator with the function

$$(g,s)\delta (i(g))\delta _1(g)^2$$

which commutes with $`\widehat{M}`$. Hence $`A^{it}yA^{it}=\widehat{\tau }_t(y)`$ for all $`t`$ and $`y\widehat{M}`$. Similarly we prove that $`A^{it}`$ implements $`\tau _t`$ for all $`t`$. Because $`M`$ and $`\widehat{M}`$ generate $`B(L^2(G_1\times G_2))`$, the operators $`A`$ and $`P`$ are proportional. Because $`JAJ=A^1`$, it follows that $`A=P`$.

From , Lemma 8.8 it follows that $`\widehat{}`$ is the closure of $`PJ\delta _M^1J`$, from where the formula for $`\delta _M`$ follows. The formula for $`\delta _{\widehat{M}}`$ can be obtained in the same way. ∎

Lemma 4.11 shows that the transformation $`\alpha _g`$ of $`G_2`$ preserves Borel sets of measure zero, and we get the following concrete formula for the Radon-Nikodym derivative.

$$\frac{d\alpha _g(s)}{ds}=\delta \left(i(\beta _s(g)^1)\right)\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s^1\right).$$

Following  we use the notation

$$\chi (g,s):=\frac{d\alpha _g(s)}{ds}\text{and}\mathrm{\Psi }(s,g):=\frac{d\beta _s(g)}{dg}.$$

Then we see that

$$\frac{\chi (g,s)}{\chi (g,e)}=\delta \left(i(g\beta _s(g)^1)\right)\delta _1\left(g^1\beta _s(g)\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s^1\right).$$
(4.4)
By symmetry, we obtain that

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }(s,g)}{\mathrm{\Psi }(s,e)}=\delta \left(j(s^1\alpha _g(s))\right)\delta _1\left(g^1\beta _s(g)\right)\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)s^1\right).$$
(4.5)
Because $`i(g)j(s)=j\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)i\left(\beta _s(g)\right)`$ we get that

$$\delta \left(i(g\beta _s(g)^1)\right)=\delta \left(j(s^1\alpha _g(s))\right).$$

From this it follows that

$$\frac{\chi (g,s)}{\chi (g,e)}=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }(s,g)}{\mathrm{\Psi }(s,e)}$$

and using the S. Majid’s notation, we put

$$\xi (g,s):=\frac{\chi (g,s)}{\chi (g,e)}.$$

The following proposition characterizes all cocycle bicrossed products of l.c. groups which are Kac algebras. Its final statement generalizes , Theorem 2.12.

###### Proposition 4.16.

The scaling group $`\tau `$ of the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is trivial if and only if

$$\xi (g,s)=1\text{for all}(g,s)𝒪.$$

The modular element $`\delta _M`$ is affiliated to the centre of $`M`$ if and only if

$$\delta \left(j(s^1\alpha _g(s))\right)\delta _2\left(s^1\alpha _g(s)\right)^2=1\text{for all}(g,s)𝒪.$$

The l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra if and only if

$$\xi (g,s)=1\text{and}\frac{\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)}{\delta _1(g)}=\frac{\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)}{\delta _2(s)}.$$

###### Proof.

$`\tau `$ is trivial if and only if $`P=1`$ or if and only if $`\xi (g,s)=1`$ almost everywhere. The continuity of $`\xi `$ on $`𝒪`$ gives the first statement.

Proposition 4.15 shows that $`\delta _M=\alpha (H)`$ where the function $`H`$ on $`G_2`$ is defined by $`H(s)=\delta (j(s))^1\delta _2(s)^2`$. Then $`\delta _M`$ is affiliated to the center of $`M`$ if and only if $`\alpha (H)=1H`$ (Proposition 1.6), and the second statement follows.

To prove the final statement, observe that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra if and only if $`\tau `$ is trivial and $`\delta _M`$ is affiliated to the center of $`M`$. If $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra, then by the previous statements, $`\xi (g,s)=1`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$ and

$$\delta \left(j(s^1\alpha _g(s))\right)\delta _2\left(s^1\alpha _g(s)\right)^2=1\text{for all}(g,s)𝒪.$$

Dividing this equation by the formula for $`\xi =1`$ (4.5) we get

$$\delta _1\left(g\beta _s(g)^1\right)\delta _2\left(s^1\alpha _g(s)\right)=1\text{for all}(g,s)𝒪.$$

Rewriting this we get the equality

$$\frac{\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)}{\delta _1(g)}=\frac{\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)}{\delta _2(s)}.$$

Clearly we can also go the other way around to complete the proof. ∎

###### Corollary 4.17.

If $`\alpha `$ or $`\beta `$ is trivial, $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ are Kac algebras.

###### Proof.

Let us suppose that $`\alpha `$ is trivial. Then for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$ we have $`j(s)i(\beta _s(g))=i(g)j(s)`$. Hence we get that $`\delta \left(i(g^1\beta _s(g))\right)=1`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$. Because $`\alpha `$ is trivial, we also have

$$\frac{d\alpha _g(s)}{ds}=1\text{for all}(g,s)𝒪.$$

Applying this equation to $`(g,s)`$ and $`(g,e)`$ we get $`\xi (g,s)=1`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$. Combining (4.4) with the equality $`\delta \left(i(g^1\beta _s(g))\right)=1`$ we get that $`\delta _1\left(g^1\beta _s(g)\right)=1`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$. Because $`\alpha `$ is trivial this gives the equation

$$\frac{\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)}{\delta _1(g)}=\frac{\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)}{\delta _2(s)}.$$

Using the previous proposition we obtain that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Kac algebra. ∎

###### Corollary 4.18.

If both $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ preserve modular functions and Haar measures, then $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ are Kac algebras.

###### Proof.

Because $`\alpha `$ preserves the Haar measure of $`G_2`$ we get $`\xi (g,s)=1`$ for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$. Because $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ preserve the modular functions, we get

$$\frac{\delta _1\left(\beta _s(g)\right)}{\delta _1(g)}=1=\frac{\delta _2\left(\alpha _g(s)\right)}{\delta _2(s)}$$

for all $`(g,s)𝒪`$. Then we can apply Proposition 4.16. ∎

Remark that the conditions of this corollary are fulfilled if both groups are discrete. Indeed, any discrete group is unimodular and the Haar measure is constant at an arbitrary point of such a group.

###### Corollary 4.19.

If $`(G_1,G_2)`$ is a fixed matched pair of groups and if cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ satisfy (4.2), we get a cocycle bicrossed product $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. If one of these cocycle bicrossed products is a Kac algebra, then all of them are Kac algebras.

###### Proof.

The necessary and sufficient conditions for $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ to be a Kac algebra given in Proposition 4.16 are independent of $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$. ∎

### 4.3 The group of extensions

If $`(G_1,G_2)`$ is a fixed matched pair of l.c. groups and if $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ are measurable functions satisfying (4.2), we get by the previous subsection a cocycle matching $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$, and hence, by Proposition 3.4, an extension

$$(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)\stackrel{𝛼}{}(M,\mathrm{\Delta })\stackrel{𝛽}{}((G_1),\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1).$$

We will say that such an extension $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is associated with the matched pair $`(G_1,G_2)`$. Proposition 3.7 and the remark following its statement show that the extensions given by two cocycle matchings $`(\tau ,𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ and $`(\tau ,𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$, are isomorphic if and only if there exists a measurable map $``$ from $`G_1\times G_2`$ to $`U(1)`$, satisfying

$`𝒰_b(g,h,s)`$ $`=𝒰_a(g,h,s)(h,s)(g,\alpha _h(s))\overline{}(gh,s)`$
$`𝒱_b(g,s,t)`$ $`=𝒱_a(g,s,t)(g,s)(\beta _s(g),t)\overline{}(g,ts)`$
almost everywhere. If this is the case, the pairs $`(𝒰_a,𝒱_a)`$ and $`(𝒰_b,𝒱_b)`$ will be called cohomologous. Then the set of equivalence classes of cohomologous pairs of cocycles $`(𝒰,𝒱)`$ satisfying (4.2), exactly corresponds to the set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of classes of isomorphic extensions associated with $`(G_1,G_2)`$.

The set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be given the structure of an abelian group by defining

$$\pi (𝒰_a,𝒱_a)\pi (𝒰_b,𝒱_b)=\pi (𝒰_a𝒰_b,𝒱_a𝒱_b)$$

where $`\pi (𝒰,𝒱)`$ denotes the equivalence class containing the pair $`(𝒰,𝒱)`$.

###### Terminology 4.20.

The group $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is called the group of extensions of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`((G_1),\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ associated with the matched pair of l.c. groups $`(G_1,G_2)`$. The unit of this group corresponds to the equivalence class of cocycles cohomologous to the trivial cocycles. The corresponding extension is called the split extension; all other extensions are called non-trivial extensions.

### 4.4 Cocycles in the sense of S. Baaj and G. Skandalis

Consider the split extension $`(M_0,\mathrm{\Delta }_0)`$ of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ by $`((G_1),\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_1)`$ associated with the matched pair of l.c. groups $`(G_1,G_2)`$. The associated (dual) multiplicative unitary, acting on $`L^2(G_1\times G_2\times G_1\times G_2)`$, is given by

$$\widehat{W}_0=((\beta \iota )(W_1)1)(1(\iota \alpha )(\widehat{W}_2)).$$

Similarly to , Définition 8.24 we call a function $`\mathrm{\Theta }:G_1\times G_2\times G_1\times G_2U(1)`$ a $`\widehat{W}_0`$-cocycle, if $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is measurable and the unitary $`\mathrm{\Theta }\widehat{W}_0`$ is multiplicative. Here we consider $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ as a unitary in $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1\times G_2\times G_1\times G_2)`$.

Let us discuss the link between $`\widehat{W}_0`$-cocycles $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ and cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$. Let first $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ be cocycles in the sense of Lemma 4.10. Then $`(\tau ,𝒰,𝒱)`$ is a cocycle matching of $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1),\mathrm{\Delta }_1)`$ and $`(L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2),\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ and hence we obtain the multiplicative unitary

$$\widehat{W}=(\alpha \iota \iota )((W_11)𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \beta )(𝒱(1\widehat{W}_2)).$$

One can check that for $`\xi L^2(G_1\times G_2\times G_1\times G_2)`$ we have

$`(\widehat{W}_0\xi )(g,s,h,t)`$ $`=\xi (g,\alpha _{\beta _s(g)^1h}(t)s,\beta _s(g)^1h,t)`$
$`(\widehat{W}\xi )(g,s,h,t)`$ $`=\overline{𝒰}(\beta _s(g),\beta _s(g)^1h,t)𝒱(g,s,\alpha _{\beta _s(g)^1h}(t))\xi (g,\alpha _{\beta _s(g)^1h}(t)s,\beta _s(g)^1h,t)`$
nearly everywhere. Hence, defining

$$\mathrm{\Theta }(g,s,h,t)=\overline{𝒰}(\beta _s(g),\beta _s(g)^1h,t)𝒱(g,s,\alpha _{\beta _s(g)^1h}(t))$$
(4.6)
we get that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a $`\widehat{W}_0`$-cocycle.

Vice versa, if $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is a $`\widehat{W}_0`$-cocycle, the multiplicativity of $`\mathrm{\Theta }\widehat{W}_0`$ amounts, almost everywhere, to the equation

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Theta }(g,s,h,t)\mathrm{\Theta }(g,\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _h(t)\alpha _g(s)),k,r)\mathrm{\Theta }(\beta _s(g)^1h,t,\beta _{\alpha _h(t)\alpha _g(s)}(g^1)k,r)\hfill \\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Theta }(h,t,k,r)\mathrm{\Theta }(g,s,h,\alpha _{\beta _t(h)^1k}(r)t).\end{array}$$
(4.7)
If we know that the previous equality holds whenever its arguments make sense (by this we mean whenever $`(h,t)`$, $`(g,s)`$, $`(g^1,\alpha _h(t)\alpha _g(s)),\mathrm{}𝒪`$), then we can define

$$𝒰(g,h,t)=\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}(g,e,gh,t)\mathrm{\Theta }(g,e,g,e)\text{and}𝒱(g,s,t)=\mathrm{\Theta }(g,s,\beta _s(g),t)\overline{\mathrm{\Theta }}(e,e,e,t).$$

Some computations reveal that $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ are cocycles, i.e. they satisfy (4.2), and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is given by Eq. (4.6). We cannot prove the same result when we only know that (4.7) holds almost everywhere. Nevertheless the formulas for the cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ given above are sufficient to find these cocycles starting from a $`\widehat{W}_0`$-cocycle $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. If both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are discrete, the extra assumption is redundant because then ’nearly everywhere’ means everywhere.

## 5 Examples of cocycle bicrossed products

### 5.1 A brief survey of known examples

1. The Kac algebra case: applications of Corollary 4.17.

Let l.c. quantum groups $`G_1`$, $`G_2`$ form a matched pair and let one of the actions, say $`\beta `$, be trivial. Then $`G_2`$ is a normal subgroup of $`G`$ (see the proof of Corollary 4.17) and $`G_1`$ acts on $`G_2`$ by (inner in $`G`$) automorphisms (this is seen from Lemma 4.8). Now, as it was explained in , the corresponding split extension is nothing but a semidirect product of the commutative Kac algebra $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)`$ with the group $`G_1`$ acting on it (the construction of a semidirect product of a Kac algebra with a l.c. group is due to J. De Canniere ). In the above situation, there is also the induced action of $`G_1`$ on $`(G_2)`$, and the dual Kac algebra of the above split extension can be again computed following J. De Canniere (for a detailed explanation see ).

Turning now to cocycles, the second equation (4.2) shows that $`𝒱(g,t,s)`$ can be viewed as a function $`\eta ^g(t,s)`$ on $`G_1`$ with values in the group $`Z_2(G_2;U(1))`$ of $`U(1)`$-valued 2-cocycles on $`G_2`$. Let us try to find a non-trivial solution for (4.2) under the hypothesis that $`𝒰()=1`$. Then the third equation (4.2) gives

$$\eta ^{gh}(t,s)=h\eta ^g(t,s)\eta ^h(t,s),$$

where $`h\eta ^g(t,s):=\eta ^g(\alpha _h(t),\alpha _h(s))`$, which means, by definition, that $`g\eta ^g`$ is an equivariant map from $`G_1^{\text{op}}`$ to $`Z_2(G_2;U(1))`$.

Such an equivariant map can be found at least in some special cases when both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are either finite abelian groups or finite-dimensional real vector spaces. Indeed, in , 8.26 the Kac-Paljutkin example , where $`G_1=/2`$ acts on $`G_2=/2\times /2`$ by permutations, has been treated this way. It turns out that this way we find the unique non-trivial extension, so the group of extensions here is $`/2`$ (,). More generally, if $`G_1=/2`$ acts on $`G_2=/m\times /m`$ ($`m2`$ is natural) by permutations, the group of extensions is $`/m`$ (), concrete examples of non-trivial extensions can be found in . Let us mention some other matched pairs of finite groups that fit into this framework and for which the group of extensions is non-trivial: a) $`G_1=/m`$ ($`m2`$ is natural) acts on $`G_2=/m\times /m`$ as follows: $`xa^ib^j=a^{i+j}b^j`$ ($`x,a,b`$ are the corresponding generators, $`i,j=0,1,\mathrm{},m1`$) (see ); b) $`G_1=/2`$ acts on $`G_2=/2m`$ ($`m2`$ is natural) by inversion, then $`G`$ is the dihedral group (see ).

In , 8.26, concerning the other Kac-Paljutkin example  with $`G_1=`$ acting on $`^2`$ by $`\alpha _g(x)=exp(gK)(x)`$ (where $`K`$ is a real $`2\times 2`$ matrix), the above equivariant map $`g\eta ^g`$ was computed as well as for the Rieffel’s example , where $`G_1=^2`$ acts on $`G_2=^3`$ by $`(a,b)(x,y,z)=(x+ay+bz,y,z)`$. So, in both cases the group of extensions is non-trivial. The same is true for some other matched pairs where both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are finite-dimensional real vector spaces: a) $`G_1=^n`$ acting on $`G_2=^{n+1}`$ by $`\alpha _a(b,t)=(b,t+a,b)`$, where $`a,b^n,t,n2`$ is natural (see ,); b) $`G_1=^n`$ acting on $`G_2=^m`$ by certain family of linear operators .

Another situation when non-trivial solutions of (4.2) can be easily found, is the one with both actions trivial. Then $`𝒰()`$ can be choosen as a multiplicative function $`\zeta :G_2Z_2(G_1;U(1))`$ (i.e., $`\zeta ^{ts}=\zeta ^t\zeta ^s`$) and $`𝒱()`$ as a multiplicative function $`\eta :G_1Z_2(G_2;U(1))`$ (i.e., $`\eta ^{gh}=\eta ^g\eta ^h`$). If both $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are finite, the whole group of extensions has been computed in , 3.5.

2. The Kac algebra case: application of Corollary 4.18.

a) Let $`G=S_n`$ be the symmetric group of order $`n4,G_1=S_{n1}`$ its subgroup which fixes the point $`n`$ and $`G_2=/n`$ the subgroup generated by the cyclic permutation. Then it is shown in , 8.23b that $`G_1,G_2`$ form a matched pair with two non-trivial actions (for instance, the action of $`sG_1`$ on $`a^iG_2`$ is given by $`\alpha _s(a^i)=a^{s(i)},i=0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$). The corresponding group of extensions is trivial , 4.1, and the split extension is clearly a Kac algebra.

b) Following , 6.2.16, consider the pair $`G_1=T_+(n,),G_2=T_{}(n,)`$, formed by the groups of upper (resp., lower) triangular matrices over $``$ with 1 on the diagonal and equipped with the actions

$$\alpha _g(s)=1+(s1)g^\text{T},\beta _s(g)=(1+\theta (s)(g^11))^1,$$

where $`\theta `$ is the composition of inversion and matrix transposition and $`^\text{T}`$ is matrix transposition. These formulas slightly differ from , 6.2.16 because there another convention on a matched pair is adopted. Being connected nilpotent groups, both $`G_1,G_2`$ are unimodular , I.1.6 (morover, one can check that their Haar measures are in fact the product measures of the Lebesgue measures of all non-diagonal entries $`g_{ij}`$), so the actions preserve modular functions. Then one can check that for $`i>j`$ we have

$$(\alpha _g(s))_{ij}=s_{ij}+\underset{j<k<i}{}s_{ik}\theta (g)_{kj},$$

from where it is clear that the transformation $`\alpha _g`$ preserves the Haar measure of $`G_2`$. So the corresponding split extension is a Kac algebra because of Corollary 4.18. We do not know if other extensions exist in this situation, but if they exist, they are all Kac algebras (see Corollary 4.19).

3. The S. Majid’s example

Using the Iwasawa decomposition of a complex semisimple Lie group $`G=KAN`$ , I.5.1, one can take $`G_1=K,G_2=AN`$, where $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are respectively the maximal compact and the maximal solvable subgroups of $`G`$. For instance, for $`SL(2,)`$ viewed as a real Lie group we have $`G_1=SU(2,)`$ ($`gG_1`$ is defined by a pair $`x,y`$ such that $`|x|^2+|y|^2=1`$) and $`G_2=\{s^3|s_3>1\}`$ with the operation $`st=s+(s_3+1)t`$ (see , 8.3.13). Here and in what follows $`s_i`$ and $`e_i`$ denote the $`ith`$ coordinate of the vector $`s`$ and $`i`$-th coordinate vector in $`^3,i=1,2,3`$. Then the mutual actions of $`G_1,G_2`$ are

$`\alpha _g(s)`$ $`=\text{Rot}_g(s{\displaystyle \frac{|s|^2}{2(s_3+1)}}e_3)+{\displaystyle \frac{|s|^2}{2(s_3+1)}}e_3,`$
$`\beta _s(x,y)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{((s_3+1)x+(s_1+is_2)\overline{y},y)}{\sqrt{|(s_3+1)x+(s_1+is_2)\overline{y}|^2+|y|^2}}}`$
(see , 8.3.18), where Rot is the usual 3-vector rotation associated to an element of $`SU(2,)`$. Now we are able to construct the corresponding split extension, and to decide if it is a Kac algebra, using Proposition 4.16. One can compute (see ) that the function $`\xi (g,s)`$ from this Proposition differs from 1, so the split extension is not a Kac algebra. Again, we do not know if there exist other extensions, but if they exist, they are all not Kac algebras (see Corollary 4.19).

### 5.2 On infinitesimal objects of l.c. quantum groups

In order to give concrete examples of cocycle bicrossed products we have to take concrete matched pairs of groups $`(G_1,G_2)`$ and to solve Eq. (4.2) to find cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$. Then one can perform the cocycle bicrossed product construction to get a l.c. quantum group.

If $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are Lie groups, we also want to describe, at least formally, a Hopf algebra consisting of generators of the l.c. quantum group coming from the matched pair $`(G_1,G_2)`$ with cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$. This infinitesimal Hopf algebra is, in fact, an algebraic cocycle bicrossed product Hopf algebra.

We assume that the cocycles $`𝒰`$ and $`𝒱`$ satisfy (4.2) and we require additionally $`𝒰(g,e,s),𝒰(e,g,s)`$ and $`𝒱(e,s,r)`$ to be well defined measurable functions in $`sG_2`$ for all $`gG_1`$ (resp., in $`s,rG_2`$). These extra requirements will always be fulfilled in the concrete examples that we study below. Then one can choose in the class of cohomologous cocycles such representatives that $`𝒰(e,e,s)=1`$ and, taking in the first equation (4.2) subsequently $`h=k=e`$ and $`g=h=e`$, we get $`𝒰(g,e,s)=𝒰(e,g,s)=1.`$ Now taking in the third equation (4.2) $`g=h=e`$, we get $`𝒱(e,s,r)=1.`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ be the coproduct on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ the coproduct on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_2)`$ and $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ the cocycle bicrossed product. Let $`𝔤_1`$ be the Lie algebra of $`G_1`$ and $``$ its universal enveloping algebra which is a Hopf algebra with the usual symmetric coproduct

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{}(X)=X1+1X(X𝔤_1).$$

We consider $``$ as acting on smooth functions on $`G_1`$ by left invariant differential operators (see , II.4), i.e.,

$$H_g[A]=H_e[A(g)]$$

for all $`gG_1`$, $`H`$ and all smooth functions $`A`$ on $`G_1`$. Using Sweedler notation, it is clear that, for $`H,G`$ and $`A`$ a smooth function on $`G_1`$, we have

$$H_{(1)e}[A]H_{(2)e}[B]=H_e[AB]$$

and

$$(HG)_e[A]=H_e[gG_g[A]]=H_e[gG_e[\mathrm{\Delta }_1(A)(g,)]]=(H_eG_e)[\mathrm{\Delta }_1(A)].$$

To make the link with the von Neumann algebra setting, we define formally, for $`H`$, the unbounded functional $`\omega _H`$ on $`L^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)`$ by

$$\omega _H(A)=H_e[A].$$

By the previous computation we get, for all $`H,G`$ and $`a,bL^{\mathrm{}}(G_1)`$,

$$(\omega _H\omega _G)\mathrm{\Delta }_1=\omega _{HG}\text{and}\omega _H(ab)=\omega _{H_{(1)}}(a)\omega _{H_{(2)}}(b).$$

Next suppose that we have some natural algebra $`𝒜`$ of functions on $`G_2`$ such that $`(𝒜,\mathrm{\Delta }_2)`$ is a Hopf algebra. We compute how to match the Hopf algebras $``$ and $`𝒜`$, in the sense of \[32, Section 6.3\]. Then we will construct their algebraic cocycle bicrossed product in the sense of S. Majid.

An arbitrary element $`HA`$ of the algebraic tensor product $`𝒜`$ can be considered formally as an unbounded operator affiliated to the von Neumann algebra $`M`$ by the identification

$$HA(\omega _H\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (A)$$

where, as before, $`\stackrel{~}{W}=(W_11)𝒰^{}`$.

In order to compute the algebra structure that $`M`$ brings into the vector space $`𝒜`$, let us observe that

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})=\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}.$$
(5.1)
This can be verified by the following computation.

$`(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})`$ $`=(\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(W_{1,12}𝒰^{})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{})`$
$`=W_{1,13}W_{1,23}(\iota \mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota )(𝒰^{})𝒰_{234}^{}`$
$`=W_{1,13}𝒰_{134}^{}W_{1,23}𝒰_{234}^{}=\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}`$
where we used the cocycle equation for $`𝒰`$. Taking $`H,G`$ and $`A,B𝒜`$ we get

$`(\omega _H\iota \iota )`$ $`(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (A)(\omega _G\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (B)=(\omega _H\omega _G\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\alpha (A)_{34}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234})\alpha (B)`$
$`=(\omega _H\omega _G\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W}_{134}\stackrel{~}{W}_{234}(\iota \alpha )\alpha (A)_{234})\alpha (B)`$
$`=(\omega _H\omega _G\iota \iota )\left((\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \iota \alpha )(𝒰^{}\alpha (A)_{23})\right)\alpha (B)`$
$`={\displaystyle ((\omega _{H_{(1)}}\omega _{G_{(1)}})\mathrm{\Delta }_1\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha \left((\omega _{H_{(2)}}\omega _{G_{(2)}}\iota )(𝒰^{})(\omega _{G_{(3)}}\iota )\alpha (A)B\right)}`$
where we used Eq. (5.1) and that $`\alpha `$ is an action. Identifying again with $`𝒜`$, we get

$$(HA)(GB)=H_{(1)}G_{(1)}\chi (H_{(2)}G_{(2)})(G_{(3)}A)B$$
(5.2)
where

$`:𝒜𝒜:HA=(\omega _H\iota )\alpha (A)`$
$`\chi :𝒜:\chi (HG)=(\omega _H\omega _G\iota )(𝒰^{}).`$
More specifically, we get that $`(HA)(r)=H_e[A(\alpha _{\mathbf{}}(r))]`$ and $`\chi (HG)(r)=(H_eG_e)[𝒰^{}(,,r)]`$ for all $`rG_2`$. We see that, up to some left/right conventions, the algebra $`𝒜`$ becomes this way a cocycle $``$-module algebra, and that $`𝒜`$ is the cocycle cross product algebra (compare (5.2) with the formulas appearing in , Proposition 6.3.7). We can go further and describe generators and relations for the algebra $`𝒜`$.

One can check that for $`X,Y𝔤_1`$ we have

$$(X1)(Y1)=XY1+1\chi (XY)$$

and for $`X𝔤_1`$ and $`A𝒜`$ we have

$$(X1)(1A)=XA\text{and}(1A)(X1)=XA+1(XA).$$

For this we use the relations $`\chi (X1)=\chi (1X)=0`$ for all $`X𝔤_1`$ and $`\chi (11)=1`$ which follow from $`𝒰(g,e,s)=𝒰(e,g,s)=1`$ for all $`gG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$. So the algebra $`𝒜`$ is the algebra generated by

$$\{AA𝒜\}\text{and}\{XX𝔤_1\}$$

with commutation relations

$`[A,B]=0\text{when}A,B𝒜`$ (5.3)
$`[A,X]=XA\text{when}X𝔤_1,A𝒜`$
$`[X,Y]=[X,Y]_{𝔤_1}+\chi (XYYX)\text{when}X,Y𝔤_1`$
where $`[X,Y]_{𝔤_1}`$ denotes the Lie bracket of the Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$.

Next we want to compute the coproduct on the algebra $`𝒜`$ inherited from the quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Using Propositions 2.4 and 2.5 we get, for all $`H`$ and $`A𝒜`$,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\text{op}`$ $`\left((\omega _H\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})\alpha (A)\right)`$
$`=(\omega _H\iota \iota \iota \iota )\left((\stackrel{~}{W}11)((\iota \alpha )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})(\iota \alpha \alpha )(𝒱)\right)(\alpha \alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }_2\text{op}(A)`$
$`={\displaystyle ((\omega _{H_{(1)}}\iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})11)(\alpha \iota \iota )((\omega _{H_{(2)}}\iota )\beta \iota \iota )(\stackrel{~}{W})}`$
$`(\alpha \alpha )(\omega _{H_{(3)}}\iota \iota )(𝒱)\left(\alpha (A_{(2)})\alpha (A_{(1)})\right).`$
Using the chain rule one sees that it is possible to define a linear map

$$\widehat{\beta }:𝒜:\widehat{\beta }(H)=H^{(\overline{1})}H^{(\overline{2})}$$

such that for all smooth functions $`B`$ on $`G_1`$, $`rG_2`$ and $`H`$ we have

$$\left((\omega _H\iota )\beta (B)\right)(r)=H_e[B(\beta _r())]=H_e^{(\overline{1})}[B]H^{(\overline{2})}(r).$$

Fix some coordinates in the neighbourhood of the unit element $`e`$ of $`G_1`$ and let $`X^i`$ be the vector field in this neighbourhood which takes the derivative to the $`i`$-th coordinate. Let $`Y^i𝔤_1`$ be such that $`Y^i`$ and $`X^i`$ agree at $`e`$. If now $`X𝔤_1`$ then

$$\widehat{\beta }(X)=\underset{i}{}Y^i\widehat{\beta }_i(X)\text{where}\widehat{\beta }_i(X)(r)=X_e[\beta _r^i()]$$

where $`\beta _r^i(g)`$ denotes the $`i`$-th coordinate of $`\beta _r(g)`$. Also define

$$\mathrm{\Psi }:𝒜𝒜:\mathrm{\Psi }(H)=\sigma (\omega _H\iota \iota )(𝒱)$$

where $`\sigma `$ is the flip. Observe that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(H)(r,s)=H_e[𝒱(,s,r)]`$ for all $`r,sG_2`$. Using the notation

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(H)=\mathrm{\Psi }(H)^{(1)}\mathrm{\Psi }(H)^{(2)}$$

and using Sweedler notation for $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2(A)`$ we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(HA)=\left(H_{(2)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(\overline{1})}\mathrm{\Psi }(H_{(3)})^{(1)}A_{(1)}\right)\left(H_{(1)}H_{(2)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(\overline{2})}\mathrm{\Psi }(H_{(3)})^{(2)}A_{(2)}\right).$$

Comparing this formula with the formula in , Proposition 6.3.8, we get that this coproduct turns $`𝒜`$ into a cocycle cross coproduct coalgebra (again, up to some left/right conventions).

In terms of the generators $`A𝒜`$ and $`X𝔤_1`$ for the algebra $`A`$ we get more specifically

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=\mathrm{\Delta }_2(A)\text{for all}A𝒜`$ (5.4)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=1X+\widehat{\beta }(X)+\mathrm{\Psi }(X)\text{for all}X𝔤_1.`$
To obtain these formulas we use that $`\mathrm{\Psi }(1)=11`$ which follows from $`𝒱(e,r,s)=1`$ for all $`r,sG_2`$.

###### Remark 5.1.

When $`G_1,G_2`$ is a matched pair of Lie groups, it is helpful to look also at the corresponding matched pair of Lie algebras $`𝔤_1,𝔤_2`$ (two Lie algebras form a matched pair if the direct sum of their linear spaces is again a Lie algebra - see , 8.3). On the other hand, a Lie algebra (resp., dual vector space to a Lie algebra) can be viewed as a Lie bialgebra with zero cobracket (resp., bracket). Recall that the notion of a Lie bialgebra is due to Drinfel’d . Now for any pair of Lie bialgebras of the form $`𝔤_1,𝔤_2^{}`$ (where $`𝔤_1,𝔤_2`$ is a matched pair of Lie algebras) all the Lie bialgebra extensions, i.e., exact sequences $`0𝔤_2^{}𝔥𝔤_10`$ of Lie bialgebras, are described in , 1.12 in terms of compatible actions of $`𝔤_1`$ and $`𝔤_2`$ on each other, as on vector spaces, and a pair of compatible 2-cocycles for these actions. Here 2-cocycles are defined as linear maps $`𝔤_1𝔤_1𝔤_2^{}`$ (resp., $`𝔤_2𝔤_2𝔤_1^{}`$) verifying certain cocycle identities , 2.3.

We consider this theory of Lie bialgebra extensions as an infinitesimal version of our theory and, even if there is no any strict claim in this direction, we believe it helps to understand better some concrete situations. For instance, if one of the Lie groups forming the matched pair is $``$, the corresponding cocycle on the Lie bialgebra level must be cohomologous to zero, according to the above definition. From , Theorem 4.11 it follows that the same picture holds for Hopf algebras. This suggests that the situation is similar for l.c. quantum groups. If both $`G_1=G_2=`$, there should only exist the split extension.

### 5.3 The S. Baaj and G. Skandalis’ example

In this subsection we discuss an example which was already presented by S. Baaj and G. Skandalis in a talk in Oberwolfach . We nevertheless include this example explicitly, because we want to compute the associated infinitesimal Hopf algebra and show how this example is a deformation of the $`ax+b`$-group.

Consider the group

$$G=\{(a,b)a\{0\},b\}\text{with}(a,b)(c,d)=(ac,d+cb).$$

Define $`G_1=G_2=\{0\}`$, with multiplication as group operation. Then define

$$i:G_1G:i(g)=(g,g1)j:G_2G:j(s)=(s,0).$$

This way $`(G_1,G_2)`$ is a matched pair of groups in the sense of Definition 4.7. A direct computation then gives, for $`g,s\{0\}`$ and $`s(g1)+10`$,

$$\alpha _g(s)=\frac{gs}{s(g1)+1}\beta _s(g)=s(g1)+1.$$

Taking $`𝒰=𝒱=1`$, we can construct the bicrossed product l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ having the following nice property.

###### Proposition 5.2.

The l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is self-dual, i.e., $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

###### Proof.

Proposition 2.9 and Theorem 2.13 show that the dual $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is again a bicrossed product, obtained by interchanging $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. Now defining the isomorphism $`u:G_1G_2:u(g)=g^1`$, one verifies that

$$u(\beta _s(g))=\alpha _{u^1(s)}(u(g))$$

for all $`g,s\{0\}`$. Hence, interchanging $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$, we get an isomorphic matched pair and so an isomorphic l.c. quantum group. ∎

###### Proposition 5.3.

The l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is not a Kac algebra, it is non-compact, non-discrete and non-unimodular. The scaling group is non-trivial and the left and right Haar weights are not traces.

###### Proof.

Proposition 2.17 shows that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is non-compact and non-discrete. The modular functions of $`G_1`$ and $`G_2`$ are trivial and $`\delta (a,b)=|a|`$. Using the notation introduced in Propositions 4.14 and 4.15 we get

$$P(g,s)=\left|\frac{g}{s(g1)+1}\right|\text{and}(g,s)=\left|\frac{1}{s(g1)+1}\right|.$$

Because $`P`$ is non-trivial, the scaling group of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is non-trivial, so $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is not a Kac algebra. Because $``$ is non-trivial, the modular automorphism group of the left Haar weight $`\phi `$ is non-trivial. Hence $`\phi `$ is not a trace. Because the right Haar weight $`\psi `$ on $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is given by $`\psi =\phi R`$, also $`\psi `$ is not a trace. Finally, Proposition 4.15 gives

$$\delta _M(g,s)=\left|\frac{s(g1)+1}{gs}\right|$$

and hence $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is non-unimodular. ∎

Let us now describe, following the scheme of the previous subsection, the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of the l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Let $`𝒜`$ be the algebra of polynomials on $`G_2`$ in the variable $`s`$, generated by $`A(s)=s`$ for all $`sG_2`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2(A)=AA`$. Let $`X`$ denote the generator of the Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$ of $`G_1`$ given by

$$X_x[B]=\frac{d}{dy}B(xy)|_{y=1}.$$

From (5.3) and (5.4), we get that this infinitesimal Hopf algebra is generated by elements $`A`$ and $`X`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$[A,X]=XA,\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=1X+\widehat{\beta }(X).$$

Now we get that

$$(XA)(r)=\frac{d}{dx}\alpha _x(r)|_{x=1}=r(1r)\text{and}\widehat{\beta }(X)=X\left(r\frac{d}{dx}\beta _r(x)|_{x=1}\right)=XA.$$

Hence the infinitesimal Hopf algebra is generated by elements $`A`$ and $`X`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$[A,X]=A(1A),\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=XA+1X.$$

###### Remark 5.4.

a) From Remark 5.1 it follows that, on the level of Lie bialgebras, in the above situation there is no non-trivial extension. The same is true on the level of Hopf algebras (see , 4.11).

b) The above example is closely related to , 6.2.17, where $`G_1=G_2=(,+)`$ and the mutual actions are only defined in the neighbourhood of the origin $`(0,0)`$. This suffices to compute the corresponding infinitesimal Hopf algebra , 6.2.18; the last one coincides with our infinitesimal Hopf algebra.

c) Let $`q>0`$ and consider the automorphism of $`G_1`$ given by $`\mu _q(g)=g^q`$. Here we define $`g^q=(g)^q`$ whenever $`g<0`$. Putting $`i_q=i\mu _q`$ and keeping $`j`$ as above, we get an isomorphic matched pair of groups, with mutual actions $`\alpha ^q`$ and $`\beta ^q`$ given by

$$\alpha _g^q(s)=\frac{g^qs}{s(g^q1)+1}\text{and}\beta _s^q(g)=\left(s(g^q1)+1\right)^{\frac{1}{q}}.$$

If now $`q0`$ we observe that for $`g>0`$, $`\alpha _g^q(s)s`$ and $`\beta _s^q(g)g^s`$. For every $`q>0`$ we can construct the bicrossed product l.c. quantum group with associated multiplicative unitary $`W^q`$ on $`L^2(G_1)L^2(G_2)`$, and they are all isomorphic. Denoting by $`P`$ the orthogonal projection of $`L^2(G_1)`$ onto the space of vectors $`\xi L^2(G_1)`$ satisfying $`\xi (g)=0`$ whenever $`g<0`$, we get that $`(P1P1)W^q(P1P1)`$ converges in $`\sigma `$-strong topology to a multiplicative unitary which is isomorphic (using Fourier transformation) with the multiplicative unitary of the $`ax+b`$-group. In this sense our example is a deformation of the $`ax+b`$-group.

This can also be seen on the Hopf algebraic level. Writing $`\stackrel{~}{X}=qX`$ we see that the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of our example is the Hopf algebra generated by elements $`A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{X}`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$[A,\stackrel{~}{X}]=qA(1A),\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{X})=\stackrel{~}{X}A+1\stackrel{~}{X}.$$

If we now formally take the limit $`q0`$ we get the Hopf algebra of polynomials on the $`ax+b`$-group.

d) In  S.L. Woronowicz constructs, on the operator algebra level, another deformation of the $`ax+b`$-group. Let $`qU(1)`$. The underlying Hopf algebra of Woronowicz’ example is generated by elements $`A`$ and $`B`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$AB=qBA,\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(B)=BA+1B.$$

Let now $`r`$ and define $`\stackrel{~}{B}=B+r(1A)`$. Then the Hopf algebra of Woronowicz is generated by $`A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$A\stackrel{~}{B}=q\stackrel{~}{B}A+r(1q)A(1A),\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{B})=\stackrel{~}{B}A+1\stackrel{~}{B}.$$

If we now take $`q=\mathrm{exp}(i\lambda )`$ and $`r=\frac{1}{\lambda }`$ and let $`\lambda 0`$ we formally obtain the Hopf algebra generated by $`A`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, where $`A`$ is invertible and

$$A\stackrel{~}{B}=\stackrel{~}{B}AiA(1A),\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA\text{and}\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{B})=\stackrel{~}{B}A+1\stackrel{~}{B}.$$

Identifying $`X`$ with $`i\stackrel{~}{B}`$ this Hopf algebra is the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$.

It should be remarked that Woronowicz’ example cannot be obtained as the cocycle bicrossed product of two l.c. groups, because it follows from the work of A. Van Daele  that the scaling constant of Woronowicz’ example is different from $`1`$, contradicting Proposition 4.14.

### 5.4 Example: split extension

Define $`H=SL_2()`$. Consider $`/2`$ as a normal subgroup $`K`$ of $`H`$ by identifying it with $`\{1,1\}`$ and define $`G=H/K`$. Then we define

$`G_1`$ $`=\{(a,b)a>0,b\}\text{with}(a,b)(c,d)=(ac,ad+{\displaystyle \frac{b}{c}})`$
$`G_2`$ $`=(,+)`$
and

$$i(a,b)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& \frac{1}{a}\end{array}\right)\mathrm{mod}Kj(x)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ x& 1\end{array}\right)\mathrm{mod}K.$$

This way $`(G_1,G_2)`$ is a matched pair of groups. A direct computation gives that, whenever $`a+bx0`$

$$\alpha _{(a,b)}(x)=\frac{x}{a(a+bx)}\beta _x(a,b)=\{\begin{array}{cc}(a+bx,b)\text{if}a+bx>0\hfill & \\ (abx,b)\text{if}a+bx<0\hfill & \end{array}.$$

Taking $`𝒰=𝒱=1`$, we can construct the bicrossed product l.c. quantum group $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and its dual $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$. The following result is similar to Proposition 5.3.

###### Proposition 5.5.

The l.c. quantum groups $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ are not Kac algebras, they are non-compact, and non-discrete. The scaling groups are non-trivial. The left and right Haar weights of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ are not traces. Finally $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is unimodular, but $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is non-unimodular.

###### Proof.

The proof is completely similar to the one of Proposition 5.3 and uses again Propositions 4.14 and 4.15. Let us mention only that the groups $`G`$ and $`G_2`$ are unimodular, $`\delta _1(a,b)=\frac{1}{a^2}`$ and we get that

$$\widehat{}(a,b,s)=P(a,b,s)=\frac{a^2}{(a+bs)^2},(a,b,s)=\frac{1}{a^2(a+bs)^2},\delta _M=1\text{and}\delta _{\widehat{M}}(a,b,s)=(a+bs)^4.$$

Let us now describe the infinitesimal Hopf algebras of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, following again the strategy of Subsection 5.2. Let $`𝒜`$ be the algebra of polynomials on $`G_2`$ in the variable $`x`$ generated by $`A(x)=x`$. Take generators $`X,Y`$ for the Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$ of $`G_1`$ given by

$$X_{(a,b)}[B]=\frac{d}{dx}B((a,b)(x,0))|_{x=1}Y_{(a,b)}[B]=\frac{d}{dx}B((a,b)(1,x))|_{x=0}$$

whenever $`(a,b)G_1`$ and when $`B`$ is a smooth function on $`G_1`$. So we observe that $`[X,Y]_{𝔤_1}=2Y`$. To determine the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ we compute

$$(XA)(x)=\frac{d}{da}\alpha _{(a,0)}(x)|_{a=1}=2x(YA)(x)=\frac{d}{db}\alpha _{(1,b)}(x)|_{b=0}=x^2$$

and taking the obvious coordinates on $`G_1`$ we see that

$`\widehat{\beta }_1(X)(x)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{da}}\beta _x^1(a,0)|_{a=1}=1\widehat{\beta }_2(X)(x)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{da}}\beta _x^2(a,0)|_{a=1}=0`$
$`\widehat{\beta }_1(Y)(x)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{db}}\beta _x^1(1,b)|_{b=0}=x\widehat{\beta }_2(Y)(x)={\displaystyle \frac{d}{db}}\beta _x^2(1,b)|_{b=0}=1.`$
So we get that

$$XA=2A,YA=A^2,\widehat{\beta }(X)=X1\text{and}\widehat{\beta }(Y)=XA+Y1.$$

So this Hopf algebra has generators $`A,X`$ and $`Y`$ with relations

$`[X,A]=2A,[Y,A]=A^2\text{and}[X,Y]=2Y`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=A1+1A`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=X1+1X`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(Y)=Y1+XA+1Y.`$
To obtain the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of the dual l.c. quantum group $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$, interchange $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. We take as $`𝒜`$ the algebra of polynomials on $`G_1`$ in the variables $`a`$ and $`b`$ generated by $`A(a,b)=a`$ and $`B(a,b)=b`$. We denote by $`X`$ the generator of the Lie algebra $`𝔤_2`$ of $`G_2`$ given by

$$X_x[B]=\frac{d}{dy}B(x+y)|_{y=0}$$

whenever $`xG_1`$ and when $`B`$ is a smooth function on $`G_1`$. Similar computations as above yield that

$$XA=B,XB=0\text{and}\widehat{\beta }(X)=XA^2.$$

So this Hopf algebra is generated by elements $`X,A`$ and $`B`$, with $`A`$ invertible and

$`[A,X]=B,[A,B]=0\text{and}[B,X]=0`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(B)=AB+BA^1`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=XA^2+1X.`$
###### Remark 5.6.

In the same spirit as in Remark 5.4.c) we show that $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ are deformations of usual groups. Let again $`q>0`$, and define the l.c. group $`G_1^q`$ on the same space as $`G_1`$, but with multiplication given by $`(a,b)_q(c,d)=(ac,a^qd+\frac{b}{c^q})`$. Then we have a natural isomorphism $`\mu _q:G_1^qG_1`$ given by $`\mu _q(a,b)=(a^q,qb)`$. Defining $`i_q=i\mu _q`$ and putting $`j`$ as above we get a matched pair $`G_1^q,G_2`$ of l.c. groups which is isomorphic with our original matched pair. The mutual actions are given by

$$\alpha _{(a,b)}^q(x)=\frac{x}{a^q(a^q+qbx)}\beta _x^q(a,b)=\{\begin{array}{cc}((a^q+qbx)^{\frac{1}{q}},b)\text{if}a^q+qbx>0\hfill & \\ ((a^qqbx)^{\frac{1}{q}},b)\text{if}a^q+qbx<0\hfill & \end{array}.$$

So we observe that for $`q0`$ we get $`\alpha _{(a,b)}^q(x)x`$ and $`\beta _x^q(a,b)(a\mathrm{exp}(bx),b)`$. Having at hand the matched pair $`G_1^q,G_2`$ we get a bicrossed product l.c. quantum group, isomorphic with $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and, using the obvious unitary from $`L^2(G_1^q)`$ onto $`L^2(G_1)`$, the associated multiplicative unitaries $`W_q`$ all can act on the Hilbert space $`L^2(G_1)L^2(G_2)`$. Then we see that for $`q0`$, $`W_q`$ converges in $`\sigma `$-strong topology to a multiplicative unitary which is isomorphic (using Fourier transformation) with the multiplicative unitary of the Heisenberg group. In this sense $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a deformation of the Heisenberg group.

Again this can be seen on the Hopf algebra level by putting $`\stackrel{~}{X}=qX`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{Y}=qY`$, in the description of the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(M,\mathrm{\Delta })`$. Taking formally the limit $`q0`$, we get the Hopf algebra of polynomials on the Heisenberg group.

But there is more. We can also consider the automorphism $`\nu _q`$ of $`G_2`$ given by $`\nu _q(x)=qx`$. Keeping $`i`$ as above and putting $`j_q=j\nu _q`$, we can proceed in exactly the same way as in the first part of this remark. We get again a family of isomorphic l.c. quantum groups, such that the associated dual multiplicative unitaries $`\widehat{W}_q`$ converge in $`\sigma `$-strong topology to a multiplicative unitary which is isomorphic with the multiplicative unitary of the following group $`H`$. The space of $`H`$ is $`\{(a,b,x)a>0,b,x\}`$, and $`(a,b,x)(c,d,y)=(ac,ad+\frac{b}{c},\frac{x}{c^2}+y)`$. Hopf algebraically we obtain the same result by putting $`\stackrel{~}{X}=qX`$ in the description of the infinitesimal Hopf algebra for $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ and then taking $`q0`$. Hence $`(\widehat{M},\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }})`$ is a deformation of some generalized $`ax+b`$-group.

### 5.5 Example: non-trivial extensions

Let $`(G_1,G_2)`$ and $`\alpha ,\beta `$ be as in the previous subsection. We look for a cocycle $`𝒰`$ and Remark 5.1 suggests to take $`𝒱=1`$. Referring to Lemma 4.10 we look for a measurable function $`𝒰`$ on $`G_1\times G_1\times G_2`$ such that

$`𝒰(g,h,\alpha _k(s))𝒰(gh,k,s)`$ $`=𝒰(h,k,s)𝒰(g,hk,s),`$
$`𝒰(g,h,s)𝒰(\beta _{\alpha _h(s)}(g),\beta _s(h),t)`$ $`=𝒰(g,h,t+s)`$
almost everywhere. Define a function $`A()`$ by

$$𝒰(g,h,s)=\mathrm{exp}(iA(g,h,s)).$$

So $`A()`$ should satisfy

$`A(g,h,\alpha _k(s))+A(gh,k,s)`$ $`=A(h,k,s)+A(g,hk,s)(\text{mod}2\pi ),`$ (5.5)
$`A(g,h,s)+A(\beta _{\alpha _h(s)}(g),\beta _s(h),t)`$ $`=A(g,h,t+s)(\text{mod}2\pi )`$ (5.6)
almost everywhere. For $`sG_2`$ and $`g,hG_1`$, we define

$$\varphi _s(g,h)=(\beta _{\alpha _h(s)}(g),\beta _s(h)).$$

Then $`\varphi _{t+s}=\varphi _t\varphi _s`$ almost everywhere, and Eq. (5.6) becomes

$$A(g,h,s)+A(\varphi _s(g,h),t)=A(g,h,t+s)(\text{mod}2\pi ).$$
(5.7)
It is natural to look for a solution of this equation of the form

$$A(g,h,s)=P_0^sf(\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r,$$
(5.8)
with a function $`f`$ on $`G_1\times G_1`$ such that for almost all $`g,hG_1`$ the function

$$rf(\varphi _r(g,h))$$

has a principal value integral over any interval in $``$. So in order to fulfill Eq. (5.5), our function $`f`$ should satisfy, for almost all $`g,h,kG_1`$ and $`sG_2`$

$$P_0^{\alpha _k(s)}f(\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r+P_0^sf(\varphi _r(gh,k))𝑑r=P_0^sf(\varphi _r(h,k))𝑑r+P_0^sf(\varphi _r(g,hk))𝑑r(\text{mod}2\pi ).$$
(5.9)
Differentiating to $`s`$ we should look for a function $`f`$ satisfying

$$\frac{d}{ds}\alpha _k(s)f(\stackrel{~}{g},\stackrel{~}{h})+f(\stackrel{~}{g}\stackrel{~}{h},\stackrel{~}{k})=f(\stackrel{~}{h},\stackrel{~}{k})+f(\stackrel{~}{g},\stackrel{~}{h}\stackrel{~}{k})$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{g}=\beta _{\alpha _{hk}(s)}(g),\stackrel{~}{h}=\beta _{\alpha _k(s)}(h),\stackrel{~}{k}=\beta _s(k)`$. Observing that

$$\alpha _{\beta _s(k)}(t)+\alpha _k(s)=\alpha _k(t+s)$$

and differentiating to $`t`$ at $`t=0`$ we get that

$$\frac{d}{ds}\alpha _k(s)=\frac{d}{dt}\alpha _{\stackrel{~}{k}}(t)|_{t=0}.$$

Hence, $`f`$ should satisfy

$$\frac{d}{dt}\alpha _k(t)|_{t=0}f(g,h)+f(gh,k)=f(h,k)+f(g,hk)$$

for almost all $`g,h,kG_1`$. Putting $`g=(a,b)`$, $`h=(c,d)`$ and $`k=(l,m)`$ we see that $`f`$ should satisfy

$$\frac{1}{l^2}f(a,b,c,d)+f(ac,ad+\frac{b}{c},l,m)=f(c,d,l,m)+f(a,b,cl,cm+\frac{d}{l})$$
(5.10)
where $`f`$ is defined on $`_0^+\times \times _0^+\times `$.

###### Proposition 5.7.

A general sufficiently smooth solution $`f(a,b,c,d)`$ of (5.10) is given by

$$f(a,b,c,d)=\lambda \frac{b\mathrm{log}c}{ac^2}+\frac{1}{c^2}B(a,b)+B(c,d)B(ac,ad+\frac{b}{c})$$

where $`\lambda `$ and $`B`$ is a smooth function on $`G_1`$.

###### Proof.

First, one can compute directly that

$$f(a,b,c,d)=\frac{1}{c^2}B(a,b)+B(c,d)B(ac,ad+\frac{b}{c})$$
(5.11)
where $`B`$ is an arbitrary function on $`G_1`$, is a solution of Eq. (5.10). We will call such a solution trivial. Because the solutions of (5.10) form a linear space, we will only determine a general solution of (5.10) modulo a trivial solution.

In the course of the proof we use the subscript notations $`f_2`$, $`f_{13}`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ to denote the partial derivative of $`f`$ to the first variable and to the first and third variable respectively. Take the derivative to $`b`$ of a sufficiently smooth solution $`f`$ of Eq. (5.10) and evaluate it in $`a=1`$ and $`b=0`$. Then we get

$$f_2(c,d,l,m)=ch(cl,cm+\frac{d}{l})\frac{c}{l^2}h(c,d)$$

where $`h(c,d)=f_2(1,0,c,d)`$. If $`H()`$ is a smooth function such that $`H_2(c,d)=h(c,d)`$, this gives

$$f(c,d,l,m)=clH(cl,cm+\frac{d}{l})\frac{c}{l^2}H(c,d)+k(c,l,m)$$

where $`k`$ is some smooth function. Hence, modulo a trivial solution,

$$f(c,d,l,m)=lH(l,m)+k(c,l,m),$$

i.e., $`f`$ does not depend on its second variable:

$$f(a,b,c,d)=g(a,c,d).$$

Now Eq. (5.10) gives

$$\frac{1}{l^2}g(a,c,d)+g(ac,l,m)=g(c,l,m)+g(a,cl,cm+\frac{d}{l}).$$

Taking the derivative to $`a`$ and evaluating it in $`a=1`$ we get

$$g_1(c,l,m)=\frac{1}{c}g_1(1,cl,cm+\frac{d}{l})\frac{1}{cl^2}g_1(1,c,d).$$
(5.12)
Taking the derivative to $`d`$ it follows that

$$\frac{1}{cl}g_{13}(1,cl,cm+\frac{d}{l})=\frac{1}{cl^2}g_{13}(1,c,d).$$
(5.13)
With $`l=1`$ we get that $`g_{13}(1,c,cm+d)=g_{13}(1,c,d)`$ and hence $`g_{13}(1,c,d)=q(c)`$ for some smooth function $`q()`$. Plugging this into Eq. (5.13) we get

$$\frac{1}{cl}q(cl)=\frac{1}{cl^2}q(c)$$

and so there exists a number $`\lambda `$ such that $`q(c)=\frac{\lambda }{c}`$. Then it follows that

$$g_1(1,c,d)=\frac{\lambda d}{c}+r(c)$$

for some smooth function $`r()`$. Using Eq. (5.12) we have

$$g_1(c,l,m)=\frac{\lambda m}{cl}+\frac{1}{c}r(cl)\frac{1}{cl^2}r(c).$$

If $`R()`$ is a primitive for the function $`\frac{1}{x}r(x)`$ we get

$$g(c,l,m)=\frac{\lambda m}{l}\mathrm{log}c+R(cl)\frac{1}{l^2}R(c)+t(l,m)$$

for some smooth function $`t()`$. Since $`f(a,b,c,d)=g(a,c,d)`$, we have, modulo a trivial solution,

$$f(c,d,l,m)=\frac{\lambda m}{l}\mathrm{log}c+t(l,m)+R(l)$$

or

$$f(c,d,l,m)=\frac{\lambda m}{l}\mathrm{log}c+v(l,m)$$

for some smooth function $`v()`$. Plugging this into Eq. (5.10) we get

$$\frac{1}{l^2}v(c,d)=v(cl,cm+\frac{d}{l}).$$

With $`l=1`$ it follows that $`v`$ does not depend on its second variable. Then there is a number $`\nu `$ such that $`v(c,d)=\frac{\nu }{c^2}`$. But also $`f(a,b,c,d)=\frac{\nu }{c^2}`$ is a trivial solution with $`B(a,b)=\nu `$. Hence we may conclude that

$$f(a,b,c,d)=\lambda \frac{d}{c}\mathrm{log}a$$

modulo a trivial solution, where $`\lambda `$. One can check directly that this is indeed a solution.

It will be more convenient, taking $`B_0(a,b)=\lambda \frac{b}{a}\mathrm{log}a`$, to get a general sufficiently smooth solution of Eq. (5.10) of the form

$$f(a,b,c,d)=\lambda \frac{b\mathrm{log}c}{ac^2}+\frac{1}{c^2}B(a,b)+B(c,d)B(ac,ad+\frac{b}{c})$$

where $`\lambda `$ and $`B()`$ is an arbitrary smooth function. ∎

Since two solutions differing with a trivial solution, give rise to cohomologous cocycles, we can work on with the solution

$$f_\lambda (a,b,c,d)=\lambda \frac{b\mathrm{log}c}{ac^2}$$

where $`\lambda `$ is some parameter. Making an easy computation one observes that

$$f_\lambda (\varphi _r(a,b,c,d))=\frac{\lambda b}{(c+dr)(ac+(ad+\frac{b}{c})r)}\mathrm{log}|c+dr|.$$

As a function of $`r`$ we indeed have a principal value integral over any interval in $``$, for almost all $`a,b,c,d`$. One verifies that

$$P_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(a,b,c,d))𝑑r=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\lambda }{2}\pi ^2\text{if}\frac{d}{b}(ad+\frac{b}{c})>0\hfill & \\ \frac{\lambda }{2}\pi ^2\text{if}\frac{d}{b}(ad+\frac{b}{c})<0\hfill & \end{array}.$$

Define $`A_\lambda ()`$ with $`f_\lambda ()`$ by (5.8) and check Eq. (5.9). When $`s=0`$ this equation is trivially true. When $`s`$ grows, the equation remains true, because the differentiated equation is fulfilled. Also, passing a pole is not a problem because the substitution rule can be applied to this principal value integrals. The only problem arises when $`s`$ passes the pole where $`\alpha _k(s)`$ grows to infinity. Then the principal value integral

$$P_0^{\alpha _k(s)}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r$$

changes to

$`P{\displaystyle _{0+\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\alpha _k(s)}}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r`$ $`=P{\displaystyle _0^{\alpha _k(s)}}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r+P{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r`$
$`=P{\displaystyle _0^{\alpha _k(s)}}f_\lambda (\varphi _r(g,h))𝑑r\pm {\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\pi ^2.`$
Hence, Eq. (5.9) remains true iff $`\lambda `$ has the form

$$\lambda =\frac{4n}{\pi }\text{with}n.$$

Thus, for any $`n`$, the functions

$$𝒰_n(g,h,s)=\mathrm{exp}(iA_{\frac{4n}{\pi }}(g,h,s))$$

and $`𝒱=1`$ satisfy (4.2), so they give the necessary data to perform the cocycle bicrossed product construction. Let us describe the corresponding l.c. quantum group $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ and its dual $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$.

Clearly $`(M_0,\mathrm{\Delta }_0)`$ and $`(\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0)`$ are precisely the examples studied in the previous subsection, because $`𝒰_0=1`$. Thanks to Propositions 4.14 and 4.15, Proposition 5.5 remains valid for $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ and $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$, also when $`n0`$. Let us mention the relations between $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ and $`(M_0,\mathrm{\Delta }_0)`$, and between $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$ and $`(\widehat{M}_0,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0)`$. Represent $`\widehat{M}_n`$ on $`L^2(G_1\times G_2)`$ as in Proposition 2.9. Because $`𝒱=1`$, we get $`\widehat{M}_n=\widehat{M}_0`$ for all $`n`$. Further we have

$$\widehat{W}_n^{}=𝒞_n\widehat{W}_0^{}\text{where}𝒞_n=(1(\iota \alpha )(\widehat{W}_2^{}))(\beta \iota \iota )(𝒰_n)(1(\iota \alpha )(\widehat{W}_2)).$$

An easy computation shows that $`𝒞_n`$ is the multiplication operator with the function

$$𝒞_n(g,s,h,t)=𝒰_n(\beta _{\alpha _h(t)s}(g),h,t).$$

It is also clear that

$$\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n(z)=𝒞_n\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_0(z)𝒞_n^{}\text{for all}z\widehat{M}_n=\widehat{M}_0.$$

From Proposition 2.9 it follows that the left Haar weight $`\widehat{\phi }_n`$ equals $`\widehat{\phi }_0`$. Propositions 4.14 and 4.15 imply that $`\widehat{J}_n=\widehat{J}_0`$ for all $`n`$ and they also give us that the operators $`_n,\widehat{}_n,P_n,\delta _{M_n}`$ and $`\delta _{\widehat{M}_n}`$ do not depend on $`n`$. In particular it follows that $`\widehat{\tau }_n=\widehat{\tau }_0`$, but we see that $`J_nJ_0`$ and then also $`\widehat{R}_n\widehat{R}_0`$ for $`n0`$.

As in the previous examples we want to compute the infinitesimal Hopf algebras of $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ and $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$. We start with $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ and we follow the strategy of Subsection 5.2. In the previous subsection we already defined the algebra $`𝒜`$ of polynomials on $`G_2`$, with generator $`A`$, and we defined the generators $`X`$ and $`Y`$ for the Lie algebra $`𝔤_1`$ of $`G_1`$. If $``$ denotes the universal enveloping algebra of $`𝔤_1`$, we have to look at the map

$$\chi _n:A:\chi _n(HG)(r)=(H_eG_e)[𝒰_n^{}(,,r)].$$
(5.14)
An easy computation yields that, for all $`\lambda `$ and $`rG_2`$, we have

$$(X_eY_e)[f_\lambda (\varphi _r(,))]=0\text{and}(Y_eX_e)[f_\lambda (\varphi _r(,))]=\lambda $$

and then it follows that

$$\chi _n(XYYX)=i\frac{4n}{\pi }A.$$

So, the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(M_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_n)`$ has generators $`X,Y`$ and $`A`$ and relations

$`[X,A]=2A,[Y,A]=A^2\text{and}[X,Y]=2Yi{\displaystyle \frac{4n}{\pi }}A`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=A1+1A`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=X1+1X`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(Y)=Y1+XA+1Y.`$
To obtain the infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$ we have to interchange $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ and we have to use the cocycle $`𝒱_n(s,g,h)=𝒰_n(h,g,s)`$ and take $`𝒰=1`$. Now we take for $`𝒜`$ the algebra of polynomials on $`G_1`$ in the variables $`a,\mathrm{log}a`$ and $`b`$ generated by $`A(a,b)=a`$, $`(\mathrm{log}A)(a,b)=\mathrm{log}a`$ and $`B(a,b)=b`$. As before we denote by $`X`$ the generator of the Lie algebra $`𝔤_2`$ of $`G_2`$. If $``$ denotes the universal enveloping algebra of $`𝔤_2`$ we have to look at the map

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_n:𝒜𝒜:\mathrm{\Psi }_n(H)(g,h)=H_e[𝒱_n(,h,g)].$$
(5.15)
So we immediately get that

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_n(X)(g,h)=\frac{d}{ds}𝒰_n(g,h,s)|_{s=0}=if_{\frac{4n}{\pi }}(g,h)$$

and hence

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_n(X)=i\frac{4n}{\pi }A^1BA^2\mathrm{log}A.$$

The infinitesimal Hopf algebra of $`(\widehat{M}_n,\widehat{\mathrm{\Delta }}_n)`$ has generators $`A,\mathrm{log}A,B`$ and $`X`$ with $`A`$ invertible and with relations

$`B\text{is central},[A,\mathrm{log}A]=0,[A,X]=B\text{and}[\mathrm{log}A,X]=A^1B`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=AA,\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{log}A)=\mathrm{log}A1+1\mathrm{log}A`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(B)=AB+BA^1`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }(X)=XA^2+1X+i{\displaystyle \frac{4n}{\pi }}A^1BA^2\mathrm{log}A.`$
###### Remark 5.8.

One can show, using the Lie bialgebra version of the G.I. Kac’ exact sequence , (3.14) obtained by Masuoka (see , 2.10), that the group of extensions for the above example, on the level of Lie bialgebras or Hopf algebras, is exactly $``$. In Eq. (5.14) and (5.15) above we see that the maps $`\chi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ can be defined for an arbitrary real parameter $`\lambda `$, and also the infinitesimal Hopf algebras make sense for an arbitrary real parameter $`\lambda `$ instead of $`\frac{4n}{\pi }`$. But, as we have seen, on the level of l.c. quantum groups only for the extensions with $`\lambda =\frac{4n}{\pi }(n)`$, the cocycles make sense on the operator algebra level.