text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In performing a definitive analysis of the Gilbert-Shannon-Reeds model of card-shuffling, Bayer and Diaconis \[BaD\] defined a one-parameter family of probability measures on the symmetric group $`S_n`$ called $`k`$-shuffles. Given a deck of $`n`$ cards, one cuts it into $`k`$ piles with probability of pile sizes $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_k`$ given by $`\frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{j_1,\mathrm{},j_k}\right)}{k^n}`$. Then cards are dropped from the packets with probability proportional to the pile size at a given time (thus if the current pile sizes are $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_k`$, the next card is dropped from pile $`i`$ with probability $`\frac{A_i}{A_1+\mathrm{}+A_k}`$). They proved that $`\frac{3}{2}log_2(n)`$ $`2`$-shuffles are necessary and suffice to mix up a deck of $`n`$ cards. Aldous \[A\] had previously obtained this bound asymptotically in $`n`$; the paper \[F4\] shows that the use of cuts does not help to speed things up.

One motivation for the current paper is the fact that GSR measures are well-studied and appear in many mathematical settings. The paper \[Han\] is a good reference for applications to Hochschild homology (tracing back to Gerstenhaber and Schack \[Ger\]), and the paper \[BW\] describes the relation with explicit versions of the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem. Section 3.8 of \[SSt\] describes GSR shuffles in the language of Hopf algebras. In recent work, Stanley \[Sta\] has related biased riffle shuffles with the Robison-Schensted-Knuth correspondence, thereby giving an elementary probabilistic interpretation of Schur functions and a different approach to some work of interest to the random matrix community. He recasts many of the results of \[BaD\] and \[F1\] using quasisymmetric functions. Connections of riffle shuffling with dynamical systems appear in \[BaD\], \[La1\], \[La2\]. Generalizations of the GSR shuffles to other Coxeter groups, building on the papers \[BBHT\],\[BiHaRo\] appear in \[F2\] and \[F3\].

For further motivation, it is useful to recall one of the most remarkable yet mysterious properties of these $`k`$-shuffles. Since $`k`$-shuffles induce a probability measure on conjugacy classes of $`S_n`$, they induce a probability measure on partitions $`\lambda `$ of $`n`$. Consider the factorization of random degree $`n`$ polynomials over a field $`F_q`$ into irreducibles. The degrees of the irreducible factors of a randomly chosen degree $`n`$ polynomial also give a random partition of $`n`$. The fundamental result of Diaconis-McGrath-Pitman (DMP) \[DMP\] is that this measure on partitions of $`n`$ agrees with the measure induced by card shuffling when $`k=q`$. This allowed natural questions on shuffling to be reduced to known results on factors of polynomials and vice versa.

There are three different proofs of the DMP result, each of them mysterious in its own way. The first proof, in \[DMP\], is combinatorial and makes use of a magical bijection of Gessel and Reutenauer \[GesR\]; they include a self-contained proof of this bijection. The second proof, in \[Han\], proves an equivalent assertion about induced characters, but also uses the Gessel/Reutenauer bijection. (The equivalence between the DMP theorem and the results on induced characters is not completely obvious; see Section 4 of \[F4\] for explanation). The third, and perhaps most principled proof of the equivalent assertion about induced characters appears in \[BBGar\], using facts about free Lie algebras \[Gar\]. But it is unclear how to generalize free Lie Algebras to arbitrary types. Motivated by the observation that degree $`n`$ polynomials over $`F_q`$ are the semisimple orbits of $`GL(n,q)`$ on its Lie algebra, the paper \[F3\] gave Lie theoretic reformulations and generalizations of the DMP result. However the proofs still strike one as unnatural, and it is not clear when the generalizations hold. We should in fairness point out that there is hope of a uniform generalization of the Gessel/Reutenauer bijection, at least for the conjugacy class of Coxeter elements \[Rei1\],\[Rei2\] and that there is an analog of the Free Lie algebra in type $`B`$ \[B\].

The goal of the current article is to study a setting where these complications vanish and an analog (Theorem 1) of the DMP result holds in all types, and can be proved in a uniform and natural way. The key idea is to study semisimple conjugacy classes in groups such as $`SL(n,q)`$ rather than $`GL(n,q)`$; then these polynomials can be viewed as points in Euclidean space, and the extra geometric structure forces natural choices.

The precise contents of this paper are as follows. Section 2 begins by describing the algebraic groups set-up and the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ from semisimple conjugacy classes to conjugacy classes of the Weyl group, giving examples. It makes a connection with the Gessel/Reutenauer map, demystifying it somewhat. Section 3 gives a probabilistic version of a construction of Cellini \[Ce1\] and states the analog of the DMP theorem, which will be proved in Section 7.

Section 4 focuses on understanding Cellini’s construction in types $`A`$. It emerges that in type $`A`$ the probability of a permutation involves both its number of cyclic descents and major index. This is interesting because while combinatorialists have thoroughly studied the joint distribution of permutations by descents, major index, and cycle structure \[Ges\], problems involving cyclic descents have not been treated and are regarded by the experts as harder. It is also shown that the type $`A`$ construction leads to new models of card shuffling. Section 4 then shows that even for the identity conjugacy class in type $`A`$, Theorem 1 gives an interesting result–a number theoretic reciprocity law. For more general conjugacy classes, Theorem 1 is given a formulation in terms of generating functions which highlights the connections with number theory.

Section 5 studies Cellini’s construction in type $`C`$. Unlike the type $`A`$ case, formulas for type $`C`$ follow easily from work of Cellini (this is one of the few times in mathematics when the hyperoctahedral group is easier to understand than the symmetric group). Thus the main point of this section is to give interpretations in terms of card shuffling. This unifies work of \[BaD\] and \[BB\] and implies a simple formula for Bayer-Diaconis hyperoctahedral shuffles. Some work of Bob Beals on total variation distance of hyperoctahedral shuffles to uniform is understood is a new way.

Section 6 gives applications of the type $`C`$ analog of the DMP theorem to dynamical systems. Specifically, an alternate solution to a problem posed by Rogers \[Ro\]–the enumeration of unimodal permutations by cycle structure–is given. The mathematics in this section was accepted by J. Algebra in 1/01, prior to the appearance of the preprint \[T\]; hence Section 6 gives the first derivation of the cycle index of unimodal permutations. (The proof in \[T\], however, gives the first derivation using only symmetric functions and the Gessel-Reutenauer machine, generalizing reasoning here for $`n`$-cycles). The cycle index leads to interesting asymptotic results. The section closes by giving a more conceptual proof of a combinatorial result of Reiner. Further generalizations of the DMP theorem based on symmetric functions are in \[F5\].

Section 7 uses the Brauer complex (an object originally introduced in modular representation theory) to prove Theorem 1, conjectured in an early version of this paper. The proof presented here is definitive and was provided by Professor Roger Carter in October 2000; he selflessly declined to be a coauthor. His work supersedes the author’s type $`C`$ odd characteristic proof and unsuccessful efforts to exploit the viewpoint of semisimple conjugacy classes as points in Euclidean space; these partial results remain at http://xxx.lanl.gov/ in the paper “Cellini’s …” but have been cut from this final version.

## 2 Algebraic Groups

Notation about algebraic groups will conform to that in \[C1\], which together with \[Hu1\] contains all the relevant background for this paper. The book \[Hu2\] is a good reference for information about Coxeter groups. Throughout $`G`$ is a semisimple, simply connected group defined over a finite field of $`q`$ elements. Letting $`F`$ be a Frobenius automorphism of $`G`$, we suppose that $`G`$ is $`F`$-split. Pages 39-41 of \[C1\] list these groups. For instance in type $`A_{n1}`$ the group is $`SL(n,q)`$ and in type $`C_n`$ the group is $`Sp(2n,q)`$. Let $`W`$ denote the Weyl group. This is the symmetric group in the first example and the hyperoctahedral group in the second example.

There is a natural map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ from semisimple conjugacy classes $`c`$ of $`G^F`$ to conjugacy classes of the Weyl group. Let $`x`$ be an element in the class $`c`$. Theorem 2.11 of \[Hu1\] implies that the centralizers of semisimple elements of $`G`$ are connected. Consequently $`C_G(x)`$, the centralizer in $`G`$ of $`x`$, is determined up to $`G^F`$ conjugacy. As is possible from page 33 of \[C1\], let $`T`$ be an $`F`$-stable maximally split maximal torus in $`C_G(x)`$; $`T`$ is determined up to $`G^F`$ conjugacy. Proposition 3.3.3 of \[C1\] gives that the $`G^F`$ conjugacy classes of $`F`$-stable maximal tori of $`G`$ are in bijection with conjugacy classes of $`W`$. Define $`\mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$ to be the corresponding conjugacy class of $`W`$.

Lemma 1 makes the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ explicit. Recall from Proposition 3.7.3 of \[C1\] that there is a bijection between the semisimple conjugacy classes of $`G^F`$ and the $`F`$-stable orbits in $`T/W`$.

###### Lemma 1

Let $`T_0`$ be a maximally split torus of $`G`$ and let $`t_0T_0`$ be a representative for the semisimple conjugacy class $`c`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ be the root system of $`C_G(t_0)`$, i.e. all roots $`\alpha `$ such that $`\alpha (t_0)=1`$. Suppose that $`F(t_0)=t_0^w`$ and that $`w^1(\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+)=\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+`$ for some positive system of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$ is the conjugacy class of $`w`$.

Proof: Let $`T`$ be an $`F`$-stable maximal torus of $`G`$ obtained by twisting $`T_0`$ by $`w`$. Let $`t`$ be the image of $`t_0`$ under the corresponding conjugation map. Then $`T`$ is a maximally split torus in $`C(t)`$ if and only if there is an $`F`$-stable Borel subgroup of $`C(t)`$ containing $`T`$, which happens if and only if there is a positive system of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ such that $`w^1(\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+)=\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Next we give two examples, which will be used later in this paper.

1. The first example is $`SL(n,q)`$ with Weyl group the symmetric group on $`n`$ symbols. The semisimple conjugacy classes $`c`$ correspond to monic degree $`n`$ polynomials over $`F_q`$ with constant term $`1`$. Such a polynomial factors into irreducible polyomials. Let $`n_i`$ be the number (counted with multiplicity) of these irreducible factors of degree $`i`$. Then the corresponding conjugacy class $`\mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$ has $`n_i`$ cycles of length $`i`$.

To see this from the lemma, note that $`t`$ takes the form of a diagonal matrix, where the entries along the diagonal are the roots of the characteristic polynomial in the algebraic closure. The Frobenius map $`F`$ acts by raising elements to the $`q`$th power, thus permuting the elements along the diagonal. (This permutation is unique if for instance all of the irreducible factors of the characteristic polynomial are distinct. If the irreducible factors aren’t all distinct, then the root system $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ is non-trivial, since the root $`e_ie_j`$ sends a diagonal matrix with diagonal entries $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ to $`x_i/x_j`$, and hence some roots send $`t`$ to $`1`$). If one considers the particular positive subsystem $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0\{e_ie_j:i<j\}`$ of $`\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$, it is easy to see explicitly that there is a unique $`w`$ satisfying $`F(t_0)=t_0^w`$, $`w^1(\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+)=\mathrm{\Psi }_0^+`$ and that $`w`$ has $`n_i`$ cycles of length $`i`$.

We remark that the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is closely related to the Gessel/Reutenauer map. The Gessel/Reutenauer map associates to each multiset of primitive (i.e. not equal to any of its proper rotations) necklaces on the symbols $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},q1\}`$ a permutation $`w`$. This map is carefully exposited in \[GesR\] and was used in shuffling work in \[DMP\]; we omit its definition here.

If one fixes generators for the multiplicative group of each finite extension of $`F_q`$, the monic degree $`n`$ polynomials $`\varphi `$ correspond to multisets of primitive necklace \[Go\]. For example suppose that $`\theta `$ is a generator of the multiplicative group of $`F_{q^3}`$. Then a degree $`3`$ monic irreducible polynomial corresponds to an orbit of $`\theta ^i`$ under the Frobenius map, for some $`i`$. Writing this $`i`$ base $`q`$ gives a size 3 primitive necklace. To each necklace entry one can associate a root of $`\varphi `$, by taking $`\theta ^j`$ where $`j`$ is a number base $`q`$ obtained by rotating $`i`$ so that the specified necklace entry is the leftmost digit of $`j`$. For example if the necklace is $`(01011)`$ and one is working base $`2`$ then the middle $`0`$ would correspond to $`\theta ^j`$ where $`j`$ is $`01101`$ base $`2`$. For what follows it is helpful to make $`01101`$ an infinite word by repeating it $`0110101101\mathrm{}`$ Now associated to $`\varphi `$ one can form a diagonal matrix whose elements are the roots of $`\varphi `$, ordered lexicographically by their associated infinite word. Then the permutation associated to this matrix through Lemma 1 is equal to the permutation which the Gessel-Reutenauer map associated to the corresponding multiset of primitive necklaces.
2. The second example is type $`C`$. The group in question is $`Sp(2n,q)`$ with Weyl group $`C_n`$ the group of signed permutations. The semisimple conjugacy classes $`c`$ correspond to monic degree $`2n`$ polynomials $`\varphi (z)`$ with non-zero constant term that are invariant under the involution sending $`\varphi (z)`$ to $`\overline{\varphi }(z)=\frac{z^{2n}\varphi (1/z)}{\varphi (0)}`$. Such polynomials can be more simply described as monic degree $`2n`$ polynomials which are palindromic in the sense that the coefficient of $`z^i`$ is equal to the coefficient of $`z^{2ni}`$. These factor uniquely into irreducibles as

$$\underset{\{\varphi _j,\overline{\varphi _j}\}}{}[\varphi _j\overline{\varphi _j}]^{r_{\varphi _j}}\underset{\varphi _j:\varphi _j=\overline{\varphi _j}}{}\varphi _j^{s_{\varphi _j}}$$

where the $`\varphi _j`$ are monic irreducible polynomials and $`s_{\varphi _j}\{0,1\}`$. The conjugacy classes of $`C_n`$ correspond to pairs of vectors $`(\stackrel{}{\lambda },\stackrel{}{\mu })`$ where $`\stackrel{}{\lambda }=(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _n)`$, $`\stackrel{}{\mu }=(\mu _1,\mathrm{},\mu _n)`$ and $`\lambda _i`$ (resp. $`\mu _i`$) is the number of positive (resp. negative) $`i`$ cycles of an element of $`C_n`$, viewed as a signed permutation. From Lemma 1 one can see that the conjugacy class of $`C_n`$ corresponding to $`c`$ is then determined by setting $`\lambda _i=_{\varphi :deg(\varphi )=i}r_\varphi `$ and $`\mu _i=_{\varphi :deg(\varphi )=2i}s_\varphi `$.

## 3 Cellini’s Work

Next we recall the work of Cellini \[C1\] (the definition which follows differs slightly from hers, being inverse, making use of her Corollary 2.1, and renormalizing so as to have a probability measure). We follow her in supposing that $`W`$ is a Weyl group (i.e. a finite reflection group which arises from a Chevalley group). Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r\}`$ be a simple root system for $`W`$. Letting $`\alpha _0`$ denote the negative of the highest root, let $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}=\mathrm{\Pi }\alpha _0`$. Define the cyclic descent $`Cdes(w)`$ to be the elements of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ mapped to negative roots by $`w`$, and let $`cd(w)=|Cdes(w)|`$. For future use we remark that the descent set of $`w`$ is defined as the subset of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ mapped to negative roots by $`w`$.

For instance for $`S_n`$ the simple roots with respect to a basis $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ are $`e_ie_{i+1}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$ and $`\alpha _0=e_ne_1`$. Thus the permutation $`\mathrm{4\; 1\; 3\; 2\; 5}`$ (in 2-line form) has 3 cyclic descents and 2 descents. Type $`C`$ examples will be treated in Section 5.

Now we use cyclic descents to define shuffles. For $`I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$, put

$$U_I=\{wW|Cdes(w)I=\mathrm{}\}.$$

Let $`Y`$ be the coroot lattice. Then define $`a_{k,I}`$ by

$$|\{yY|<\alpha _0,y>=k,<\alpha _i,y>=0for\alpha _iI\alpha _0,<\alpha _i,y>>0for\alpha _i\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}I\}|if\alpha _0I$$

$$|\{yY|<\alpha _0,y><k,<\alpha _i,y>=0for\alpha _iI,<\alpha _i,y>>0for\alpha _i\mathrm{\Pi }I\}|if\alpha _0I.$$

Finally, define an element $`x_k`$ of the group algebra of $`W`$ by

$$x_k=\frac{1}{k^r}\underset{I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}}{}a_{k,I}\underset{wU_I}{}w.$$

Equivalently, the coefficient of an element $`w`$ in $`x_k`$ is

$$\frac{1}{k^r}\underset{I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}Cdes(w)}{}a_{k,I}.$$

This coefficient will be denoted by $`x_k(w)`$ throughout the paper. We will refer to these $`x_k`$ as Affine $`k`$-shuffles.

In type $`A_{n1}`$ this says that the coefficient of $`w`$ is $`x_k`$ is equal to $`\frac{1}{k^{n1}}`$ multiplied by the number of integers vectors $`(v_1,\mathrm{},v_n)`$ satisfying the conditions

1. $`v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n=0`$
2. $`v_1v_2\mathrm{}v_n,v_1v_nk`$
3. $`v_i>v_{i+1}`$ if $`w(i)>w(i+1)`$ (with $`1in1`$)
4. $`v_1<v_n+k`$ if $`w(n)>w(1)`$

From Cellini (loc. cit.), it follows that the $`x_k`$ satisfy the following two desirable properties:

1. (Measure) The sum of the coefficients in the expansion of $`x_k`$ in the basis of group elements is 1. Equivalently,

$$\underset{I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}}{}a_{k,I}|U_I|=k^r.$$

In probabilistic terms, the element $`x_k`$ defines a probability measure on the group $`W`$.
2. (Convolution) $`x_kx_h=x_{kh}`$.

The above definition of $`x_k`$ is computationally convenient for this paper. We note that Cellini (loc. cit.) constructed the $`x_k`$ in the following more conceptual way, when $`k`$ is a positive integer. Let $`W_k`$ be the index $`k^r`$ subgroup of the affine Weyl group that is generated by reflections in the hyperplanes corresponding to $`\{\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r\}`$ and also the hyperplane $`\{<x,\alpha _0>=k\}`$. There are $`k^r`$ unique minimal length coset representatives for $`W_k`$ in the affine Weyl group, and $`x_k`$ is obtained by projecting them to the Weyl group.

The following problem is very natural. We remark that for GSR riffle shuffles, Problem 1 was studied by Hanlon \[Han\]. Diaconis has been a vigorous advocate of such questions, emphasizing the link with convergence rates of Markov chains \[D\].

Problem 1: Determine the eigenvalues (and multiplicities) of $`x_k`$ acting on the group algebra by left multiplication. More generally, recall that the Fourier transform of a probability measure $`P`$ at an irreducible representation $`\rho `$ is defined as $`_{wW}P(w)\rho (w)`$. For each $`\rho `$, what are the eigenvalues of this matrix?

To close the section, we state the analog of the DMP theorem.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`G`$ be a semisimple, simply connected group defined over a finite field of $`q`$ elements. Letting $`F`$ be a Frobenius automorphism of $`G`$, suppose that $`G`$ is $`F`$-split. Let $`c`$ be a semisimple conjugacy class of $`G^F`$ chosen uniformly at random. Then for all conjugacy classes $`C`$ of the Weyl group $`W`$,

$$\underset{wC}{}Probability(\mathrm{\Phi }(c)=C)=\underset{wC}{}Coef.ofwinx_q.$$

## 4 Type $`A`$ Affine Shuffles

To begin, we derive four expressions for $`x_k`$ in type $`A_{n1}`$. For this recall that the major index of $`w`$ is defined by $`maj(w)=_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i:1in1}{w(i)>w(i+1)}}i`$. It is the sum of the positions of the descents of $`w`$. The notation $`\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{k}\right]`$ denotes the $`q`$-binomial coefficient $`\frac{(q^n1)\mathrm{}(q1)}{(q^k1)\mathrm{}(q1)(q^{nk}1)\mathrm{}(q1)}`$. Let $`C_m(n)`$ denote the Ramanujan sum $`_ke^{\frac{2\pi ikn}{m}}`$ where $`k`$ runs over integers prime to $`m`$ satisfying $`1km`$.

The following lemma of Von Sterneck (see \[Ram\] for a proof in English) will be helpful. We emphasize that it is only used in the derivation of the fourth formula for $`x_k`$; the first three expressions will not require it.

###### Lemma 2

(\[V\]) The number of ways of expressing $`n`$ as the sum mod $`m`$ of $`k1`$ integers of the set $`0,1,2,\mathrm{},m1`$ repetitions being allowed is

$$\frac{1}{m}\underset{d|m,k}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{m+kd}{d}}{\frac{k}{d}}\right)C_d(n).$$

Recall that $`x_k(w)`$ is the coefficient of $`w`$ in $`x_k`$. For us partitions have the standard number theoretic meaning as in \[HarW\].

###### Theorem 2

In type $`A_{n1}`$, $`x_k(w)`$ is equal to any of the following:

1. $`\frac{1}{k^{n1}}`$ multiplied by the number of partitions with $`n1`$ parts of size at most $`kcd(w)`$ such that the total number being partitioned has size congruent to $`maj(w)modn`$.
2. $`\frac{1}{k^{n1}}`$ multiplied by the number of partitions with $`kcd(w)`$ parts of size at most $`n1`$ such that the total number being partitioned has size congruent to $`maj(w)modn`$.
3. $$\frac{1}{k^{n1}}\underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}Coeff.ofq^{rn}in\left(q^{maj(w)}\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k+ncd(w)1}{n1}\right]\right).$$
4. $$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{nk^{n1}}_{d|n,kcd(w)}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{n+kcd(w)d}{d}}{\frac{kcd(w)}{d}}\right)C_d(maj(w))\hfill & \text{if }kcd(w)>0\hfill \\ \frac{1}{k^{n1}}\hfill & \text{if }kcd(w)=0,maj(w)=0\text{ mod n}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof: From the definition of $`x_k`$,

$`x_k(w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}Cdes(w)}{}}a_{k,I}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n=0,v_1\mathrm{}v_{n1}v_n,v_1v_nk,\stackrel{}{v}Z^n,}{v_i>v_{i+1}ife_ie_{i+1}Cdes(w),andv_1v_n<kif\alpha _0Cdes(w)}}{}}1`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}Coeff.ofq^0in{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{v_1\mathrm{}v_{n1}v_n,v_1v_nk,\stackrel{}{v}Z^n,}{v_i>v_{i+1}ife_ie_{i+1}Cdes(w),andv_1v_n<kif\alpha _0Cdes(w)}}{}}q^{v_1+\mathrm{}+v_n}.`$
Given a vector $`(v_1,\mathrm{},v_n)`$ with $`_iv_i=0`$, one can translate it to $`(v_1v_n,v_2v_n,\mathrm{},0)`$. The last coordinate of the new vector is $`0`$ and the sum of the coordinates in this new vector is a multiple of $`n`$. Abusing notation, we call this new vector $`(v_1,\mathrm{},v_n)`$. Thus

$`x_k(w)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Coeff.ofq^{rn}in{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{kv_1\mathrm{}v_{n1}v_n=0,\stackrel{}{v}Z^n}{v_i>v_{i+1}ife_ie_{i+1}Cdes(w),andv_1<kif\alpha _0Cdes(w)}}{}}q^{{\scriptscriptstyle v_i}}.`$
Now let $`v_i^{}=v_i|\{j:ijn1,w(j)>w(j+1)\}|`$. Then the expression for $`x_k(w)`$ simplifies to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Coeff.ofq^{rn}in{\displaystyle \underset{kcd(w)v_1^{}\mathrm{}v_{n1}^{}v_n^{}=0,\stackrel{}{v}Z^n}{}}q^{{\scriptscriptstyle v_i^{}}+_i|\{j:ijn1,w(j)>w(j+1)\}|}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^{n1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}Coeff.ofq^{rn}inq^{maj(w)}{\displaystyle \underset{kcd(w)v_1^{}\mathrm{}v_{n1}^{}v_n^{}=0,\stackrel{}{v}Z^n}{}}q^{{\scriptscriptstyle v_i^{}}}.`$
This proves the first assertion of the theorem. The second assertion follows from the first by viewing partitions diagramatically and taking transposes. The third assertion follows from either the first or second assertions together with the well-known fact that the generating function for partitions with at most $`a`$ parts of size at most $`b`$ is the q-binomial coefficient $`\left[\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{a+b}{a}\right]`$. The fourth assertion follows from the second and Lemma 2. $`\mathrm{}`$

Next we connect $`x_k`$ in type $`A`$ with card shuffling. First we consider the case $`k=2`$. Writing $`x_k=c_ww`$ in the group algebra, the notation $`x_k^1`$ will denote $`c_ww^1`$.

###### Theorem 3

When $`W`$ is the symmetric group $`S_{2n}`$, the element $`(x_2)^1`$ has the following probabilistic interpretation:

Step 1: Choose an even number between $`1`$ and $`2n`$ with the probability of getting $`2j`$ equal to $`\frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{2j}\right)}{2^{2n1}}`$. From the stack of $`2n`$ cards, form a second pile of size $`2j`$ by removing the top $`j`$ cards of the stack, and then putting the bottom $`j`$ cards of the first stack on top of them.

Step 2: Now one has a stack of size $`2n2j`$ and a stack of size $`2j`$. Drop cards repeatedly according to the rule that if stacks $`1,2`$ have sizes $`A,B`$ at some time, then the next card comes from stack $`1`$ with probability $`\frac{A}{A+B}`$ and from stack 2 with probability $`\frac{B}{A+B}`$. (This is equivalent to choosing uniformly at random one of the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{2j}\right)`$ interleavings preserving the relative orders of the cards in each stack).

The description of $`x_2^1`$ is the same for the symmetric group $`S_{2n+1}`$, except that at the beginning of Step 1, the chance of getting $`2j`$ is $`\frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n+1}{2j}\right)}{2^{2n}}`$ and at the beginning of Step 2, one has a stack of size $`2n+12j`$ and a stack of size $`2j`$.

Proof: We argue for the case $`S_{2n}`$, the case of $`S_{2n+1}`$ being similar. Recall that in type $`A_{2n1}`$ the coroot lattice is all vectors with integer components and zero sum with respect to a basis $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_{2n}`$, that $`\alpha _i=e_ie_{i+1}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},2n1`$ and that $`\alpha _0=e_{2n}e_1`$. The elements of the coroot lattice contributing to some $`a_{2,I}`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}(0,0,\mathrm{},0,0)\hfill & I=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\alpha _0\hfill \\ (1,0,0,\mathrm{},0,0,1)\hfill & I=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\{\alpha _1,\alpha _{2n1}\}\hfill \\ (1,1,0,0,\mathrm{},0,0,1,1)\hfill & I=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\{\alpha _2,\alpha _{2n2}\}\hfill \\ \mathrm{}\hfill & \mathrm{}\hfill \\ (1,1,\mathrm{},1,0,0,1,\mathrm{},1,1)\hfill & I=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\{\alpha _{n1},\alpha _{n+1}\}\hfill \\ (1,1,\mathrm{},1,1,1,1,\mathrm{},1,1)\hfill & I=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\alpha _n\hfill \end{array}$$

One observes that the inverses of the permutations in the above card shuffling description for a given $`j`$ contribute to $`u_I`$ where

$$I=\{\begin{array}{cc}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\alpha _0\hfill & \text{if }2j=0\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\{\alpha _k,\alpha _{2nk}\}\hfill & \text{if }2j=2min(k,2nk)\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}\alpha _n\hfill & \text{if }2j=2n\hfill \end{array}$$

The total number of such permutations for a fixed value of $`j`$ is $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{2j}\right)`$, the number of interleavings of $`2n2j`$ cards with $`2j`$ cards preserving the relative orders in each pile. Since $`_{j=0}^n\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2n}{2j}\right)=2^{2n1}`$, and $`_{I\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Pi }}}a_{2,I}|U_I|=2^{2n1}`$, the proof is complete. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that when $`n`$ is prime and $`k`$ is a power of $`n`$, the only contribution in the fourth formula comes from $`d=1`$. Using this observation, the follow-up paper \[F4\] shows that under these conditions, the element $`x_k^1`$ is the same as a $`k`$ riffle shuffle followed by a cut at a uniform position. This observation (and Theorem 3) suggest the following

Problem 2: Is there a useful “physical” description of the elements $`x_k`$ in type $`A`$ for integer $`k>2`$, which renders some of its algebraic properties more transparent? Such a description exists for GSR riffle shuffles \[BaD\] and explains why a $`k_1`$ shuffle followed by a $`k_2`$ shuffle is a $`k_1k_2`$ shuffle.

Next we observe that for the identity conjugacy class in type $`A`$, Theorem 1 has the following consequence.

###### Corollary 1

For any positive integer $`n`$ and prime power $`q`$, the number of ways (disregarding order and allowing repetition) of writing $`0`$ mod $`q1`$ as the sum of $`n`$ integers from the set $`0,1,\mathrm{},q1`$ is equal to the number of ways (disregarding order and allowing repetition) of writing $`0`$ mod $`n`$ as the sum of $`q1`$ integers from the set $`0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$.

Proof: Consider $`k^{n1}`$ multiplied by the coefficient of the identity in $`x_q`$ in type $`A_{n1}`$. By part 2 of Theorem 2, this is the number of ways of writing $`0`$ mod $`n`$ as the sum of $`q1`$ integers from the set $`0,1,\mathrm{},n1`$. Theorem 1 states that this is the number of monic degree $`n`$ polynomials over $`F_q`$ with constant term 1 which factor into linear terms. Working in the multiplicative group of $`F_q`$, this is clearly the number of ways of writing $`0`$ mod $`q1`$ as the sum of $`n`$ integers from the set $`0,1,\mathrm{},q1`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We remark that Corollary 1 holds for any positive integers $`n,q`$. This can be seen from Lemma 2. It independently appeared in an invariant theoretic setting in \[EJP\].

Next we reformulate Theorem 1 in type $`A`$ in terms of generating functions. This makes its number theoretic content more visible, because one side is mod $`n`$ and the other side is mod $`k1`$. For its proof, Lemma 3 will be helpful. We use the notation that $`f_{m,k,i,d}`$ is the coefficient of $`z^m`$ in $`(\frac{z^{kd}1}{z^d1})^{i/d}`$.

###### Lemma 3

The number of size $`i`$ aperiodic necklaces on the symbols $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},k1\}`$ with total symbol sum $`m`$ is $`1/i_{d|i}\mu (d)f_{m,k,i,d}`$ .

Proof: This is an elementary Mobius inversion running along the lines of a result in \[Rei1\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 4

Let $`n_i(w)`$ be the number of $`i`$-cycles in a permutation $`w`$. Then Theorem 1 in type $`A`$ implies the assertion (which we intentionally do not simplify) that for all $`n,k`$,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0modn}{}}Coef.ofq^mu^nt^kin{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^n}{(1tq)\mathrm{}(1tq^n)}}{\displaystyle \underset{wS_n}{}}t^{cd(w)}q^{maj(w)}{\displaystyle x_i^{n_i(w)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0modk1}{}}Coef.ofq^mu^nt^kin{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}t^k{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1q^mx_iu^i}})^{1/i_{d|i}\mu (d)f_{m,k,i,d}}.`$
Proof: The left hand side is equal to

$`{\displaystyle \underset{wS_n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0modn}{}}Coef.ofq^mt^{kcd(w)}in{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1tq)\mathrm{}(1tq^n)}}q^{maj(w)}{\displaystyle x_i^{n_i(w)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{wS_n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0modn}{}}Coef.ofq^min\left[{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+kcd(w)1}{n1}}\right]q^{maj(w)}{\displaystyle x_i^{n_i(w)}},`$
where the last step uses Theorem 349 on page 280 of \[HarW\]. Note by part 3 of Theorem 2 that this expression is precisely the cycle structure generating function under the measure $`x_k`$, multiplied by $`k^{n1}`$.

To complete the proof of the theorem, it must be shown that the right hand side gives the cycle structure generating function for degree $`n`$ polynomials over a field of $`k`$ elements with constant term $`1`$. Let $`\varphi `$ be a fixed generator of the multiplicative group of the field $`F_k`$ of $`k`$ elements, and let $`\tau _i`$ be a generator of the multiplicative group of the degree $`i`$ extension of $`F_k`$, with the property that $`\tau _i^{(k^i1)/(k1)}=\varphi `$. Recall Golomb’s correspondence \[Go\] between degree $`i`$ polynomials over $`F_k`$ and size $`i`$ aperiodic necklaces on the symbols $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},k1\}`$. This correspondence goes by taking any root of the polynomial, expressing it as a power of $`\tau _i`$ and then writing this power base $`k`$ and forming a necklace out of the coefficients of $`1,k,k^2,\mathrm{},k^{i1}`$. It is then easy to see that the norm of the corresponding polynomial is $`\varphi `$ raised to the sum of the necklace entries. The result now follows from Lemma 3. Note that there is no $`m=0`$ term because the polynomial $`z`$ can not divide a polynomial with constant term 1. $`\mathrm{}`$

It is perhaps interesting to compare the generating function in Theorem 4 with a generating function of a similar flavor. For $`wS_n`$ let $`d(w)=1+|\{i:w(i)>w(i+1),1in1|`$. Thus $`d(w)`$ is one more than the number of linear descents. Gessel \[Ges\] proved that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^n}{(1t)(1tq)\mathrm{}(1tq^n)}}{\displaystyle \underset{wS_n}{}}t^{d(w)}q^{maj(w)}{\displaystyle x_i^{n_i(w)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}t^k{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1q^mx_iu^i}})^{1/i_{d|i}\mu (d)f_{m,k,i,d}}.`$
This raises the following

Problem 3: What is the joint generating function for permutations by cyclic descents, major index, and cycle structure? Can it be used to resolve Statement 1 in Section 5 of \[F4\]?

We remark that Theorem 8 in \[F4\] is equivalent to a generating function for permutations by cyclic descents and cycle strcuture.

## 5 Type $`C`$ Affine Shuffles

This section studies the $`x_k`$ in type $`C_n`$. We recall that the elements of $`C_n`$ can be viewed as signed permutations $`w`$ on the symbols $`1,\mathrm{},n`$. From the description of the root system of page 42 of \[Hu2\], it follows that (ordering the integers $`1<2<3<\mathrm{}<\mathrm{}<3<2<1`$ as in \[Rei1\])

1. $`w`$ has a descent at position $`i`$ for $`1in1`$ if $`w(i)>w(i+1)`$.
2. $`w`$ has a descent at position $`n`$ if $`w(n)<0`$.
3. $`w`$ has a cyclic descent at position $`1`$ if $`w(1)>0`$.

For example the permutation $`\mathrm{3\; 1}\mathrm{2\; 4\; 5}`$ has a cyclic descent at position 1 and descents at positions 1 and 3.

Lemma 4, which follows easily from Theorem 1 of \[Ce2\], gives a formula for $`x_k`$.

###### Lemma 4

Let $`d(w)`$ and $`cd(w)`$ denote the number of descents and cyclic descents of $`wC_n`$. Then the coefficient of $`w`$ in $`x_k`$ is

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{k^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k1}{2}+nd(w)}{n}\right)\hfill & k\text{ odd}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{k^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k}{2}+ncd(w)}{n}\right)\hfill & k\text{ even}\hfill \end{array}$$

Proof: For the first assertion, from Theorem 1 of \[Ce2\], the coefficient of $`w`$ in $`x_k`$ is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=d(w)}{\overset{n}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k1}{2}}{l}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nd(w)}{ld(w)}}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=d(w)}{\overset{n}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k1}{2}}{l}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nd(w)}{nl}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{n}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k1}{2}}{l}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{nd(w)}{nl}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k1}{2}+nd(w)}{n}}\right).`$
The second assertion is similar and involves two cases. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proposition 1 shows that the elements $`x_k`$ in type $`C`$ arise from physical models of card-shuffling (a careful reading of \[Ce2\] suggests that Cellini knew this for $`k=2`$). The models which follow were considered previously in the literature for the special cases $`k=2`$ in \[BaD\] and for $`k=3`$ (and implicitly for higher odd $`k`$) in \[BB\]. The higher $`k`$ models and the implied formulas for card shuffling resulting from combining Propositions 4 and 1 may be of interest (no formula is given for the $`k=2`$ case in \[BaD\]).

###### Proposition 1

The element $`x_k^1`$ in type $`C_n`$ has the following description:

Step 1: Start with a deck of $`n`$ cards face down. Choose numbers $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_k`$ multinomially with the probability of getting $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_k`$ equal to $`\frac{\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{j_1,\mathrm{},j_k}\right)}{k^n}`$. Make $`k`$ stacks of cards of sizes $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_k`$ respectively. If $`k`$ is odd, then flip over the even numbered stacks. If $`k`$ is even, the flip over the odd numbered stacks.

Step 2: Drop cards from packets with probability proportional to packet size at a given time. Equivalently, choose uniformly at random one of the $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{j_1,\mathrm{},j_k}\right)`$ interleavings of the packets.

Proof: The proof proceeds in several cases, the goal being to show that the inverse of the above processes generate $`w`$ with the probabilities in Lemma 4. We give details for one subcase–the others being similar–namely even $`k`$ when $`w`$ satisfies $`cd(w)=d(w)`$. (The other case for $`k`$ even is $`cd(w)=d(w)+1`$). The inverse of the probabilistic description in the theorem is as follows:

Step 1: Start with an ordered deck of $`n`$ cards face down. Successively and independently, cards are turned face up and dealt into one of $`k`$ uniformly chosen random piles. The odd piles are then flipped over (so that the cards in these piles are face down).

Step 2: Collect the piles from pile 1 to pile $`k`$, so that pile 1 is on top and pile $`k`$ is on the bottom.

Consider for instance the permutation $`w`$ given in 2-line form by $`\mathrm{2\; 3\; 1\; 4}6\mathrm{5\; 7}`$. Note that this satisfies $`cd(w)=d(w)`$ because the top card has a negative value (i.e. is turned face up). It is necessary to count the number of ways that $`w`$ could have arisen from the inverse description. This one does using a bar and stars argument as in \[BaD\]. Here the stars represent the $`n`$ cards, and the bars represent the $`k1`$ breaks between the different piles. It is easy to see that each descent in $`w`$ forces the position of two bars, except for the first descent which only forces one bar. Then the remaining $`(k1)(2d(w)1)=k2d(w)`$ bars must be placed among the $`n`$ cards as $`\frac{k2d(w)}{2}`$ consecutive pairs (since the piles alternate face-up, face-down). This can be done in $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{k}{2}+ncd(w)}{n}\right)`$ ways, proving the result. $`\mathrm{}`$

We remark that Proposition 1 leads to a direct proof of the convolution property in type $`C`$.

Next recall the notion of total variation distance $`P_1P_2`$ between two probability distributions $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ on a finite set $`X`$. It is defined as

$$\frac{1}{2}\underset{xX}{}|P_1(x)P_2(x)|.$$

The book \[D\] explains why this is a natural and useful notion of distance between probability distributions. The remainder of this section computes the total variation distance of an Affine type $`C`$ $`k`$-shuffle to uniform in the case that $`k`$ is even. The paper \[BaD\] attributes an equivalent result to Bob Beals when $`k`$ is a power of 2 (unpublished), but with a quite different method of proof. We omit the case of odd $`k`$ as the convergence rate to randomness has been determined in \[BB\].

###### Lemma 5

Let $`N_r`$ be the number of $`w`$ in $`C_n`$ with $`r`$ cyclic descents. Let $`A_r`$ be the number $`w`$ in $`S_n`$ with $`r`$ descents. Then $`N_{r+1}=2^nA_r`$.

Proof: Lemma 4 shows that the chance that an Affine Type $`C`$ $`k`$ shuffle gives a signed permutation $`w`$ is

$$\frac{1}{k^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+ncd(w)}{n}\right).$$

Using the fact that these shuffles are a probability measure and dividing both sides of the resulting equation by $`2^n`$, it follows that

$$\underset{r=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{N_r}{2^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+nr}{n}\right)=(k/2)^n.$$

This can be rewritten as

$$\underset{r=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\frac{N_{r+1}}{2^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+nr1}{n}\right)=(k/2)^n.$$

Since this is true for all $`k`$, the relation can be inverted to solve for $`N_{r+1}`$. In the theory riffle shuffles \[BaD\] one gets the equation (Worpitzky’s identity)

$$\underset{r=0}{\overset{n1}{}}A_r\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k+nr1}{n}\right)=k^n$$

for all $`k`$. Thus $`N_{r+1}=2^nA_r`$ as desired. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 5

The total variation distance of an Affine type $`C`$ $`k`$ shuffle with $`k`$ even to uniform is equal to the total distance of a Bayer-Diaconis $`k/2`$ riffle shuffle on $`S_n`$ to uniform.

Proof: Lemma 4 shows that the chance that an Affine type $`C`$ $`k`$ shuffle gives a signed permutation $`w`$ is

$$\frac{1}{k^n}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+ncd(w)}{n}\right).$$

Thus the total variation distance is equal to

$`{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}N_{r+1}\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+nr1}{n}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^nn!}}\right|`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}2^nA_r\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^n}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+nr1}{n}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2^nn!}}\right|`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=0}{\overset{n1}{}}}A_r\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(k/2)^n}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{k/2+nr1}{n}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!}}\right|.`$
From \[BaD\], one recognizes this last expression as the total variation distance between a $`k/2`$ riffle shuffle and uniform. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Dynamical Systems

Much of this section relates to the enumeration of unimodal permutations by cycle structure. This problem is given two solutions: one using a more fundamental result of Gannon \[Ga\] and symmetric functions, and another using Theorem 1 and the factorization theory of palindromic polynomials (which actually proves a more general result). Some asymptotic consequences are derived. We give a new proof of a result of Reiner \[Rei1\].

A unimodal permutation $`w`$ on the symbols $`\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ is defined by requiring that there is some $`i`$ with $`1in`$ such that the following two properties hold:

1. If $`a<bi`$, then $`w(a)<w(b)`$.
2. If $`ia<b`$, then $`w(a)>w(b)`$.

Thus $`i`$ is where the maximum is achieved, and the permutations $`12\mathrm{}n`$ and $`nn1\mathrm{}1`$ are counted as unimodal. For each fixed $`i`$ there are $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1}{i1}\right)`$ unimodal permutations with maximum $`i`$, hence a total of $`2^{n1}`$ such permutations. As noted in \[Ga\], unimodal permutations are those which avoid the patterns $`213`$ and $`312`$.

Motivated by biology and dynamical systems, Rogers \[Ro\] posed the problem of counting unimodal permutations by cycle structure. This problem was solved by Gannon who gave a constructive proof of the following elegant (and more fundamental) result. For its statement, one defines the shape $`s`$ of a cycle $`(i_1\mathrm{}i_k)`$ on some $`k`$ distinct symbols (call them $`\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$) to be the cycle $`(\tau (i_1)\mathrm{}\tau (i_k))`$ where $`\tau `$ is the unique order preserving bijection between $`\{i_1,\mathrm{},i_k\}`$ and $`\{1,\mathrm{},k\}`$. Thus the shape of $`(523)`$ is $`(312)`$.

###### Theorem 6

(\[Ga\]) Let $`s_1,s_2,\mathrm{}`$ denote the possible shapes of transitive unimodal permutations. Then the number of unimodal permutations with $`n_i`$ cycles of shape $`s_i`$ is $`2^{l1}`$, where $`l`$ is the number of $`i`$ for which $`n_i>0`$.

Theorem 6 can be rewritten in terms of generating functions.

###### Corollary 2

Let $`n_s(w)`$ be the number of cycles of $`w`$ of shape $`s`$. Let $`|s|`$ be the number of elements in $`s`$. Then

$$1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{u^n}{2^{n1}}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{wS_n}{wunimodal}}{}\underset{sshape}{}x_s^{n_s(w)}=\underset{sshape}{}(\frac{2^{|s|}+x_su^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}x_su^{|s|}})$$

$$(1u)+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1u)u^n}{2^{n1}}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{wS_n}{wunimodal}}{}\underset{sshape}{}x_s^{n_s(w)}=\underset{sshape}{}(\frac{2^{|s|}+x_su^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}+u^{|s|}})(\frac{2^{|s|}u^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}x_su^{|s|}})$$

Proof: For the first equation, consider the coefficient of $`_sx_s^{n_s}u^{{\scriptscriptstyle |s|n_s}}`$ on the left hand side. It is the probability that a uniformly chosen unimodal permutation on $`|s|n_s`$ symbols has $`n_s`$ cycles of shape $`s`$. The coefficient on the right hand side is $`2^{|\{s:n_s>0\}|n}`$. These are equal by Theorem 6. To deduce the second equation, observe that setting all $`x_s=1`$ in the first equation gives that

$$\frac{1}{1u}=\underset{sshape}{}\frac{2^{|s|}+u^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}u^{|s|}}.$$

Taking reciprocals and multiplying by the first equation yields the second equation. $`\mathrm{}`$

The second equation in Corollary 2 has an attractive probabilistic interpretation. Fix $`u`$ such that $`0<u<1`$. Then choose a random symmetric group so that the chance of getting $`S_n`$ is equal to $`(1u)u^n`$. Choose a unimodal $`wS_n`$ uniformly at random. Then the random variables $`n_s(w)`$ are independent, each having distribution a convolution of a binomial$`(\frac{u^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}+u^{|s|}})`$ with a geometric$`(1\frac{u^{|s|}}{2^{|s|}})`$.

As another illustration of the second equation in Corollary 2, we deduce the following corollary, extending the asymptotic results in \[Ga\] that asymptotically $`2/3`$ of all unimodal permutations have fixed points and $`2/5`$ have $`2`$-cycles.

###### Corollary 3

In the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit, the random variables $`n_s`$ converge to the convolution of a binomial$`(\frac{1}{2^{|s|}+1})`$ with a geometric$`(1\frac{1}{2^{|s|}})`$ and are asymptotically independent.

Proof: The result follows from the claim that if $`f(u)`$ has a Taylor series around 0 and $`f(1)<\mathrm{}`$, then the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit of the coefficient of $`u^n`$ in $`\frac{f(u)}{1u}`$ is $`f(1)`$. To verify the claim, write the Taylor expansion $`f(u)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}a_nu^n`$ and observe that the coefficient of $`u^n`$ in $`\frac{f(u)}{1u}=_{i=0}^na_i`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Rogers and Weiss \[RogW\] used dynamical systems to count the number of transitive unimodal permutation on $`n`$ symbols. We offer a proof using symmetric function theory. The paper \[T\] generalizes this argument to arbitrary cycle types.

Some notation is needed. A subset $`D=\{d_1,\mathrm{},d_k\}`$ of $`\{1,2,\mathrm{},n1\}`$ defines a composition $`C(D)`$ of $`n`$ with parts $`d_1,d_2d_1,\mathrm{},nd_k`$. A standard Young tableau is said to have a descent at position $`i`$ if $`i+1`$ occurs in a row lower than $`i`$. The descent set of a standard Young tableau thus defines a composition of $`n`$.

###### Lemma 6

The number of transitive unimodal permutations on $`n`$ symbols is

$$\frac{1}{2n}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|n}{dodd}}{}\mu (d)2^{\frac{n}{d}}.$$

Proof: Symmetric function notation from Chapter 1 of Macdonald \[Mac\] is used. Thus $`p_\lambda ,h_\lambda `$ $`,e_\lambda ,s_\lambda `$ are the power sum, complete, elementary, and Schur symmetric functions parameterized by a partition $`\lambda `$. From Theorem 2.1 of \[GesR\], the number of $`n`$ cycles with descent set $`D`$ is the inner product of a Lie character $`L_n=\frac{1}{n}_{d|n}\mu (d)p_d^{\frac{n}{d}}`$ and a Foulkes character $`F_{C(D)}`$. From the proof of Corollary 2.4 of \[GesR\], $`F_{C(D)}=_{|\lambda |=n}\beta _\lambda s_\lambda `$ where $`\beta _\lambda `$ is the number of standard tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$ with descent composition $`C(D)`$. Thus the sought number is

$$<\frac{1}{n}\underset{d|n}{}\mu (d)p_d^{\frac{n}{d}},e_n+\underset{i=2}{\overset{n1}{}}s_{i,(1)^{ni}}+h_n>.$$

Expanding these Schur functions using exercise 9 on page 47 of \[Mac\], using the fact that the $`p_\lambda `$ are an orthogonal basis of the ring of symmetric functions with known normalizing constants (page 64 of \[Mac\]), and using the expansions of $`e_n`$ and $`h_n`$ in terms of the $`p_\lambda `$’s (page 25 of \[Mac\]) it follows that

$`<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{d|n}{}}\mu (d)p_d^{\frac{n}{d}},e_n+{\displaystyle \underset{i=2}{\overset{n1}{}}}s_{i,(1)^{ni}}+h_n>`$
$`=`$ $`<{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{d|n}{}}\mu (d)p_d^{\frac{n}{d}},{\displaystyle \underset{ieven}{}}h_ie_{ni}>`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{d|n}{}}\mu (d)<p_d^{\frac{n}{d}},{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1,\mathrm{},\frac{n}{d}}{dieven}}{}}h_{di}e_{ndi}>`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{d|n}{}}\mu (d)<p_d^{\frac{n}{d}},p_d^{\frac{n}{d}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1,\mathrm{},\frac{n}{d}}{dieven}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{ndi\frac{n}{d}+i}}{d^{\frac{n}{d}}i!(\frac{n}{d}i)!}}>`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle \underset{d|n}{}}\mu (d)(1)^{n\frac{n}{d}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1,\mathrm{},\frac{n}{d}}{dieven}}{}}(1)^i\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{n}{d}}{i}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2n}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|n}{dodd}}{}}\mu (d)2^{\frac{n}{d}}.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

Corollary 2 and Lemma 6 have the following immediate consequence.

###### Corollary 4

Let $`n_i(w)`$ be the number of $`i`$-cycles of a permutation $`w`$. Then

$$1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{u^n}{2^{n1}}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{wS_n}{wunimodal}}{}\underset{i}{}x_i^{n_i(w)}=\underset{i}{}(\frac{2^i+x_iu^i}{2^ix_iu^i})^{\frac{1}{2i}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|i}{dodd}}\mu (d)2^{\frac{i}{d}}}.$$

Theorem 1 will yield a second proof of the enumeration of unimodal permutations by cycle structure by relating the problem to the factorization theory of palindromic polynomials over finite fields. The first step is to reformulate Theorem 1 in type $`C`$. The following lemmas, the first of which is well known, will be helpful. The symbol $`\mu `$ denotes the Moebius function of elementary number theory.

###### Lemma 7

The number of degree $`n`$ irreducible polynomials over $`F_q`$ is equal to

$$\frac{1}{n}\underset{d|n}{}\mu (d)q^{n/d}.$$

###### Lemma 8

(\[FNP\]) Let $`e=1`$ if $`q`$ is even and $`e=2`$ if $`q`$ is odd. Then the number of monic, degree $`n`$ polynomials $`f(z)`$ over $`F_q`$ with non-zero constant coefficient and invariant under the involution $`f(z)f(0)^1z^nf(\frac{1}{z})`$ is

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}e\hfill & \text{if }n=1\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }n\text{ is  odd  and }n>1\hfill \\ \frac{1}{n}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|n}{dodd}}\mu (d)(q^{\frac{n}{2d}}+1e)\hfill & \text{Otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

Recall that $`x_q(w)`$ denotes the coefficient of $`w`$ in $`x_q`$.

###### Theorem 7

Let $`e=1`$ if $`q`$ is even and $`e=2`$ if $`q`$ is odd. Let $`\lambda _i(w)`$ and $`\mu _i(w)`$ be the number of positive and negative $`i`$-cycles of a signed permutation $`w`$ in $`C_n`$. Then

$`1+{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}u^nq^n{\displaystyle \underset{wC_n}{}}x_q(w){\displaystyle \underset{i1}{}}x_i^{\lambda _i(w)}y_i^{\mu _i(w)}`$
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{1x_1u}})^{e1}{\displaystyle \underset{m1}{}}({\displaystyle \frac{1+y_mu^m}{1x_mu^m}})^{\frac{1}{2m}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|m}{dodd}}\mu (d)(q^{\frac{m}{d}}+1e)}.`$
Proof: One argues separately for odd and even characteristic and first for prime powers. Taking the coefficient of $`u^n_ix_i^{\lambda _i}y_i^{\mu _i}`$ on the left hand side of this equation and dividing by $`q^n`$ gives by Lemma 4 the probability that $`w`$ chosen according to the $`x_q`$ probability measure is in a conjugacy class with $`\lambda _i`$ positive $`i`$-cycles and $`\mu _i`$ negative $`i`$-cycles for each $`i`$. By Theorem 1, to verify the theorem for even prime powers it is enough to show that the coefficient of $`u^n_ix_i^{\lambda _i}y_i^{\mu _i}`$ on the right hand side of this equation is the number of degree $`2n`$ monic self-conjugate polynomials over $`F_q`$ which factor as

$$\underset{\{\varphi _j,\overline{\varphi _j}\}}{}[\varphi _j\overline{\varphi _j}]^{r_{\varphi _j}}\underset{\varphi _j:\varphi _j=\overline{\varphi _j}}{}\varphi _j^{s_{\varphi _j}}$$

(with $`\varphi _j`$ where $`s_{\varphi _j}\{0,1\}`$) and $`\lambda _i=_{\varphi :deg(\varphi )=i}r_\varphi `$ and $`\mu _i=_{\varphi :deg(\varphi )=2i}s_\varphi `$. This follows readily from Lemmas 7 and 8. The theorem now follows for arbitrary $`q`$ since two functions analytic in a region and agreeing on a set with an accumulation point ($`q=\mathrm{}`$) in that region must be equal. $`\mathrm{}`$

Corollary 5 deduces the enumeration of unimodal permutations by cycle structure.

###### Corollary 5

Let $`n_i(w)`$ be the number of $`i`$-cycles of $`wS_n`$. Then

$$1+\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{u^n}{2^{n1}}\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{wS_n}{wunimodal}}{}\underset{i}{}x_i^{n_i(w)}=\underset{i}{}(\frac{2^i+x_iu^i}{2^ix_iu^i})^{\frac{1}{2i}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|i}{dodd}}\mu (d)2^{\frac{i}{d}}}.$$

Proof: Given Theorem 7 with $`q=2`$, it is enough to define a $`2`$ to $`1`$ map $`\eta `$ from the $`2^n`$ type $`C_n`$ characteristic 2 shuffles to unimodal elements of $`S_n`$, such that $`\eta `$ preserves the number of $`i`$-cycles for each $`i`$, disregarding signs. To define $`\eta `$, recalling Proposition 1 observe that the $`2`$ shuffles are all ways of cutting a deck of size $`n`$, then flipping the first pack, and choosing a random interleaving. For instance if one cuts a 12 card deck at position 6, such an interleaving could be

$$[6,5,7,8,4,9,3,10,2,11,1,12].$$

Observe that taking the inverse of this permutation and disregarding signs gives

$$[11,9,7,5,2,1,3,4,6,8,10,12].$$

Next one conjugates by the involution transposing each $`i`$ with $`n+1i`$, thereby obtaining a unimodal permutation. Note that this map preserves cycle structure, and is $`2`$ to $`1`$ because the first symbol (in the example $`6`$, can always have its sign reversed yielding a possible shuffle). $`\mathrm{}`$

The following corollary describes the $`n\mathrm{}`$ asymptotics of cycle structure for type $`C`$ affine $`q`$ shuffles. We omit the proof, which is essentially the same as Corollary 3.

###### Corollary 6

Let $`\lambda _i(w)`$ and $`\mu _i(w)`$ be the number of positive and negative $`i`$-cycles of a signed permutation $`w`$ in $`C_n`$.

1. Fix $`u`$ such that $`0<u<1`$. Then choose a random hyperoctahedral group so that the chance of getting $`C_n`$ is equal to $`(1u)u^n`$. Choose $`wC_n`$ according to the affine $`q`$ shuffle measure. Then the random variables $`\{\lambda _m,\mu _m\}`$ are independent. The $`\lambda _m`$ ($`m2`$) are distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2m}_{d|m}\mu (d)(q^{m/d}+1e)`$ many geometrics with parameter $`1\frac{u^m}{q^m}`$ and $`\lambda _1`$ is distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2}(q+e1)`$ many geometrics with parameter $`1\frac{u}{q}`$. The $`\mu _m`$ are distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2m}_{d|m}\mu (d)(q^{m/d}+1e)`$ many binomials with parameter $`\frac{u^m/q^m}{1+u^m/q^m}`$.
2. Choose $`wC_n`$ according to the affine $`q`$ shuffle measure. Then in the $`n\mathrm{}`$ limit, the random variables $`\{\lambda _m,\mu _m\}`$ are independent. The $`\lambda _m`$ ($`m2`$) are distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2m}_{d|m}\mu (d)(q^{m/d}+1e)`$ many geometrics with parameter $`1\frac{1}{q^m}`$ and $`\lambda _1`$ is distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2}(q+e1)`$ many geometrics with parameter $`1\frac{1}{q}`$. The $`\mu _m`$ are distributed as the convolution of $`\frac{1}{2m}_{d|m}\mu (d)(q^{m/d}+1e)`$ many binomials with parameter $`\frac{1/q^m}{1+1/q^m}`$.

Remark: Type $`C_n`$ shuffles also relate to dynamical systems in another way, analogous to the type $`A`$ construction for Bayer-Diaconis shuffles \[BaD\]. Here we describe the case $`k=2`$. One drops $`n`$ points in the interval $`[1,1]`$ uniformly and indepedently. Then one applies the map $`x2|x|1`$. The resulting permutation can be thought of as a signed permutation, since some points preserve and some reverse orientation. From Proposition 1, this signed permutation obtained after iterating this map $`r`$ times has the distribution of the type $`C_n`$ shuffle with $`k=2^r`$. Lalley \[La1\] studied the cycle structure of random permutations obtained by tracking $`n`$ uniformly dropped points after iterating a map a large number of times. His results applied to piecewise monotone maps, and he proved that the limiting cycle structure is a convolution of geometrics. Hence Corollary 6 shows that Lalley’s results do not extend to functions such as $`x2|x|1`$.

As a final result, we deduce a new proof of the following result of Reiner. Here $`d(w)`$ denotes the number of descents of $`wC_n`$.

###### Corollary 7

(\[Rei1\])

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u^n}{(1t)^{n+1}}}{\displaystyle \underset{wC_n}{}}t^{d(w)+1}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}x_i^{\lambda _i(w)}y_i^{\mu _i(w)}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k0}{}}t^k{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1x_1u}}{\displaystyle \underset{m1}{}}({\displaystyle \frac{1+y_mu^m}{1x_mu^m}})^{\frac{1}{2m}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|m}{modd}}\mu (d)((2k1)^{m/d}1)}.`$
Proof: Taking coefficients of $`t^k`$ on both sides of the equation under question and then setting $`q=2k1`$ gives the equation

$$\underset{n0}{}u^n\underset{wC_n}{}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\frac{q1}{2}+nd(w)}{n}\right)\underset{i}{}x_i^{\lambda _i(w)}y_i^{\mu _i(w)}=\frac{1}{1x_1u}\underset{m1}{}(\frac{1+y_mu^m}{1x_mu^m})^{\frac{1}{2m}_{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{d|m}{modd}}\mu (d)(q^{m/d}1)}.$$

However this equation follows from Theorem 7 for odd $`q`$ and Lemma 4. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 7 Proof of Theorem 1: The Brauer Complex

The purpose of this section is to report a proof, due to Professor Roger Carter, of Theorem 1. The proof uses a geometric object called the Brauer complex. All relevant background (including pictures) can be found in Section 3.8 of \[C1\].

Let $`Y`$ be the coroot lattice and $`W`$ the Weyl group, so that $`<Y,W>`$ is the affine Weyl group. The group $`<Y,W>`$ acts on the vector space $`YR`$ with $`Y`$ acting by translations $`T_y:vv+y`$ and $`W`$ acting by orthogonal transformations. The affine Weyl group has a fundamental region in $`YR`$ given by

$$\overline{A_1}=\{vYR|<\alpha _i,v>0fori=1,\mathrm{},r,<\alpha _0,v>1\}.$$

Let $`Q_p^{}`$ be the additive group of rational numbers $`\frac{s}{t}`$ where $`s,tZ`$ and $`t`$ is not divisible by $`p`$ (the characteristic). Proposition 3.8.1 of \[C1\] shows that there is an action of $`F`$ on $`\overline{A_p^{}}=\overline{A_1}(YQ_p^{})`$ given by taking the image of $`v\overline{A_p^{}}`$ to be the unique element of $`\overline{A_p^{}}`$ equivalent to $`F(v)`$ under $`<Y,W>`$.

We highlight the following facts.

Fact 1: (Proposition 3.7.3 of \[C1\]) The $`q^r`$ semisimple conjugacy classes of $`G^F`$ are in bijection with the $`q^r`$ elements of $`\overline{A_p^{}}`$ which are stable under the action of $`F`$.

As an example, for type $`A_2`$ with $`q=3`$, the 9 stable points are

1. $`(0,0,0)`$,$`(1/2,0,1/2)`$ corresponding to polynomials that factor into linear pieces
2. $`(1/4,0,1/4),(4/8,1/8,5/8),(5/8,1/8,4/8)`$ corresponding to polynomials that are a product of a linear and a degree 2 factor
3. $`(6/26,2/26,8/26),(8/26,2/26,6/26),(10/26,4/26,14/26),(14/26,4/26,10/26)`$ corresponding to irreducible polyomials.

The point $`v=(4/8,1/8,5/8)`$ for instance is stable because $`3v=v^{(23)}+(1,1,2)`$.

We remark that this bijection is not entirely canonical, because the isomorphism between the multiplicative group of the algebraic closure of $`F_q`$ and $`Q_p^{}/Z`$ (Proposition 3.1.3 of \[C1\]) is not entirely canonical. In other words, we have chosen (a consistent set of) generators of the multiplicative groups of all of the finite extensions of $`F_q`$. The bijection in Fact 1 is canonical only after this choice.

Fact 2: (Corollary 3.8.3 of \[C1\]) There is a bijection between semisimple conjugacy classes in $`G^F`$ and simplices of maximal dimension in the Brauer complex.

For all that follows,

$$\overline{A_q}=\{vYR:<\alpha _i,v>0fori=1,\mathrm{},r,<\alpha _0,v>q\}$$

Let $`I(y)`$ be the set of $`\alpha _i`$ with $`i\{0,1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ such that $`y`$ lies on the $`i`$-boundary wall of $`\overline{A_q}`$.

We now prove Theorem 1.

Proof: The proof proceeds in two steps. Step 1 is to show that there is a bijection between semisimple classes $`c`$ in $`G^F`$ and pairs $`(y,w)Y\times W`$ such that $`yY\overline{A_q}`$ and $`I(y)Cdes(w^1)=\mathrm{}`$. Step 2 is to show that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(c)`$ is conjugate to $`w`$. The theorem then follows from the definition of $`x_q`$.

Step 1: It is known that there is a bijection between simplices of maximal dimension in the Brauer complex and elements $`\omega `$ in the affine Weyl group such that $`\omega (\overline{A_1})\overline{A_q}`$. The alcoves $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$ are all obtained by first transforming by $`wW`$ to give $`w(\overline{A_1})`$ and then translating by $`T_y`$ for some $`yY`$. Let $`S`$ be the union of the alcoves $`w(\overline{A_1})`$ for $`wW`$; $`S`$ is called the basic star. The sets $`T_y(S)`$ are called the stars and the centers of the stars are the elements of $`Y`$.

Each alcove $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$ which lies in $`\overline{A_q}`$ lies in some star whose center lies in $`Y\overline{A_q}`$. Conversely, if $`yY\overline{A_q}`$ we wish to know which alcoves in the star $`T_y(S)`$ lie in $`\overline{A_q}`$. If $`y`$ does not lie on any boundary wall of $`\overline{A_q}`$ all alcoves in $`T_y(S)`$ lie in $`\overline{A_q}`$. If $`y`$ lies on the boundary wall corresponding to $`i\{0,1,\mathrm{},r\}`$ then the alcove $`T_yw(\overline{A_1})`$ lies on the $`\overline{A_q}`$-side of this boundary wall if and only if $`w^1(\alpha _i)`$ is a positive root. This can be seen by looking at the star $`S`$. Thus there is a bijection between semisimple classes $`c`$ in $`G^F`$ and pairs $`(y,w)Y\times W`$ such that $`yY\overline{A_q}`$ and $`I(y)Cdes(w^1)=\mathrm{}`$.

Step 2: Let $`T_0`$ be a maximal split torus of $`G`$ and let $`Y_0=Hom(Q_p^{}/Z,T_0)`$ be its co-character group. Let $`T`$ be an $`F`$-stable maximal torus of $`G`$ obtained from $`T_0`$ by twisting with $`wW`$. We have conjugation maps $`TT_0,YY_0`$. Under these maps $`F:YY`$ maps to $`w^1F:Y_0Y_0`$.

Let $`\omega `$ be an element of the affine Weyl group such that $`\omega (\overline{A_1})\overline{A_q}`$. From Section 3.8 of \[C1\], $`\overline{A}`$ contains a unique $`p`$ satisfying $`F^1\omega (p)=p`$ i.e. $`F(p)=p^w+y_0`$. Let the walls of $`\overline{A_q}`$ be $`H_0,H_1,\mathrm{},H_n`$. Let $`J=\{i:pH_i\}`$. $`J`$ is a proper subset of $`\{0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$. The roots $`\alpha _i,iJ`$ form a simple system $`\mathrm{\Pi }_J`$ in a subsystem $`\mathrm{\Phi }_J\mathrm{\Phi }`$. From page 102 of \[C1\] the point $`p`$ maps to an element $`t_0T_0`$. Then $`F(t_0)=t_0^w`$ and $`t_0`$ lies in the semisimple conjugacy class of $`G^F`$ corresponding to the point $`p`$. $`\mathrm{\Phi }_J`$ can be identitied with the root system of the centralizer of the semisimple conjugacy class of $`G^F`$ corresponding to the point $`t_0`$.

To complete the proof of Step 2, it suffices to show (by Lemma 1) that $`w(\mathrm{\Phi }_J^+)=\mathrm{\Phi }_J^+`$. The construction of the point $`p`$ as the intersection of a sequence of increasingly small alcoves, each obtained from the previous one by a map $`F^1\omega `$ which preserves the type of the walls, shows that $`p`$ lies in the $`J`$-face of $`\overline{A_q}`$ and of $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$ (the $`J`$-face of $`\overline{A_q}`$ is the intersection of the $`H_i`$ for $`iJ`$). For $`iJ`$ let the wall $`H_i`$ of $`\overline{A_q}`$ coincide with the wall of type $`j`$ of $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$. The root orthogonal to $`H_i`$ pointing into $`\overline{A_q}`$ is $`\alpha _i`$. Consider the root orthogonal to the wall of type $`j`$ for $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$ pointing into $`\omega (\overline{A_1})`$. Since $`\omega (\overline{A_1})=T_{y_0}(w(\overline{A_1}))`$ this is the root orthogonal to the wall of type $`j`$ for $`w(\overline{A_1})`$ pointing into $`w(\overline{A_1})`$. This is the root $`w(\alpha _j)`$ since the wall of type $`j`$ for $`w(\overline{A_1})`$ is the image under $`w`$ of the wall of type $`j`$ for $`\overline{A_1}`$. Hence $`\alpha _i=w(\alpha _j)`$. This shows, since $`i,jJ`$, that $`w(\mathrm{\Pi }_J)=\mathrm{\Pi }_J`$. Hence $`w(\mathrm{\Phi }_J^+)=\mathrm{\Phi }_J^+`$, as desired. $`\mathrm{}`$

The results of this section raise

Problem 4: Is there an analog of the Brauer complex that sheds light on the problems in \[F3\], or gives a general type Gessel/Reutenauer bijection?

## 8 Acknowledgements

This research was supported by an NSF Postdoctoral Fellowship. The author is very indebted to Roger Carter for proving conjectures stated in an early version of this paper, superseding the author’s partial results on the problem. Persi Diaconis offered expository feedback and motivated the author to seek a new proof of Beals’ work on total variation distance.