text:
# Equivariant mirrors and the Virasoro conjecture for flag manifolds

## 1. Introduction

A general quintic hypersurface in $`P^4`$ is a compact Calabi-Yau threefold. Its rational Gromov-Witten invariants had been predicted by mirror symmetry discovered in string theory . The prediction was proven by Givental , which is to be explained as follows. Let $`n_d`$ be the virtual number of degree $`d`$ rational curves in the quintic threefold and let $`F(q)=1+\frac{1}{5}_{d=1}^{\mathrm{}}n_dd^3\frac{q^d}{1q^d}`$. The Givental $`J`$-function $`J`$ for the quintic hypersurface, satisfies the so-called quantum differential equation

$$(\mathrm{}\frac{d}{dt})^2\frac{1}{F(q)}(\mathrm{}\frac{d}{dt})^2J=0$$

where $`t=\mathrm{ln}q`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ is a formal parameter. The prediction was that the solutions to the quantum differential equation coincide with those to the Picard-Fuchs differential equation of the mirror family after the explicit mirror transformation. The periods I, the solutions to the Picard-Fuchs differential equation, are

$$I=_\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{_{i=1}^5dx_i}{d(x_1+\mathrm{}+x_51)d(x_1\mathrm{}.x_5q)}$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are real 3-cycles in the affine varieties $`\{x_1+\mathrm{}+x_5=1,x_1\mathrm{}x_5=q\}`$ birational to the mirror manifolds.

In 1993 Givental proposed a generalization of this mirror phenomenon to non-Calabi-Yau manifolds. A mirror family of a Fano manifold $`X`$ is by definition a stationary phase integral representation

$$I=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }Y_q}e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q$$

of solutions to the quantum differential equations of $`X`$ up to change of coordinates, where $`qH^2(X,)/2\pi \sqrt{1}H^2(X,)`$. Here $`f_q`$ is a holomorphic function on a possibly noncompact variety $`Y_q`$ and $`\omega _q`$ is a holomorphic volume form on $`Y_q`$. The mirror theorem has been established for Calabi-Yau or Fano complete intersections $`X`$ in a projective space  and further generalized to the case when the ambient space is a Fano toric projective manifold .

The quantum differential operators for the flag manifolds have been found in  to be “quantum Toda operators”which are by definition nonconstant integrals of motions for quantum Toda lattice. Moreover a mirror family of the flag manifold has been constructed in . In this paper we build the equivariant mirror of the flag manifold, that is, a stationary phase integral representation of complete spectra of quantum Toda operators (see theorem 3). Using the equivariant mirror construction we confirm the so-called “R-conjecture”which leads to a proof of a formula for any genus gravitational descendent potential for flag manifolds and as a corollary we obtain the Virasoro conjecture for the manifolds (see theorem 4, theorem 7, and corollary 3). The equivariant version of the formula was obtained in .

Finally we remark that the integral representation that we found gives another explicit description of all $`GL(n,)`$-Whittaker functions .

## 2. Quantum Differential Operators for Flag Manifolds

### 2.1. Quantum Toda Operators

Denote by $`t_i`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$, the standard coordinate functions on $`^{n+1}`$, and let $`q_i=e^{t_it_{i1}}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Consider a matrix

$$A=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}p_0& q_1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 1& p_1& q_2& 0& \mathrm{}\\ & .& .& .& \\ 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 1& p_n\end{array}\right]$$

of size $`(n+1)\times (n+1)`$. If

$$det(A+xI)=x^{n+1}+\underset{i=1}{\overset{n+1}{}}D_i(p_0,\mathrm{},p_n,q_1,\mathrm{},q_n)x^{n+1i},$$

denote $`D_i(\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_0},\mathrm{},\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_n},q_1,\mathrm{},q_n)`$ simply by $`D_i`$ unless stated otherwise. Let

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}\underset{i=0}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{^2}{t_i^2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}e^{t_it_{i1}}$$

which is a quantization of the Hamiltonian of non-periodic Toda lattice. The quantum Toda lattice is a completely integrable system with quantum integrals $`D_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$. We include an elementary proof of the commutativity of $`D_i`$’s which is known.

###### Proposition 1.

Let $`D`$ be a linear holomorphic differential operator on $`^{n+1}`$ with coefficients in the Laurent polynomial ring $`[\mathrm{},e^{\pm t_0},\mathrm{},e^{\pm t_n}]`$ over $`[\mathrm{}]`$. Suppose that $`[H,D]=0`$, then the coefficients of the principal part of $`D`$ are contained in $`[\mathrm{}]`$.

Proof.  Let $`m`$ be the order of the differential operator $`D`$ and for multiple index $`\alpha `$, let $`^\alpha =\frac{^{\alpha _0}}{t_0^{\alpha _0}}\mathrm{}\frac{^{\alpha _n}}{t_n^{\alpha _n}}`$. Then $`D=_{|\alpha |=m}a_\alpha ^\alpha +D^{}`$ where $`a_\alpha `$ are some polynomials in $`e^{\pm t_0}`$,…,$`e^{\pm t_n}`$ over $`[\mathrm{}]`$ and $`D^{}`$ is a differential operator with order less than $`m`$. In the bracket $`[H,D]`$, the degree $`m+1`$ part is created only in $`[\mathrm{\Delta },_{|\alpha |=m}a_\alpha ^\alpha ]`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the Laplace operator $`\frac{^2}{t_i^2}`$. It is enough to prove that if $`[\mathrm{\Delta },_{|\alpha |=m}a_\alpha ^\alpha ]`$ has no order $`m+1`$ part then $`a_\alpha [\mathrm{}]`$ for all $`\alpha `$. To prove the claim, use induction on $`n`$. When $`n=0`$, it is clear. Let $`n>0`$. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $`a_\alpha `$ are not in $`[\mathrm{}]`$ for all $`\alpha `$. Let $`k`$ be the maximum of $`\alpha _0`$ for all $`\alpha `$. Decompose $`_{|\alpha |=m}a_\alpha ^\alpha =_{\alpha _0=k}a_\alpha ^\alpha +\mathrm{the}\mathrm{rest}`$. When $`\alpha _0`$ is $`k`$, $`a_\alpha `$ does not have terms in $`e^{\pm t_0}`$ since $`[\mathrm{\Delta },_{|\alpha |=m}a_\alpha ^\alpha ]`$ has no order $`m+1`$. If $`[\mathrm{\Delta },\mathrm{the}\mathrm{rest}]=_{\beta _0=k}b_\beta ^\beta +D^{\prime \prime }`$, then every $`b_\beta `$ depends on $`e^{\pm t_0}`$. So, $`[\mathrm{\Delta },_{\alpha _0=k}a_\alpha ^\alpha ]`$ has no order $`m+1`$ part. Now we apply the induction hypothesis to $`_{\alpha _0=k}a_\alpha ^\alpha `$ whose coefficients do not depend on $`t_0`$ and conclude that $`a_\alpha [\mathrm{}]`$ if $`\alpha _0=k`$. The conclusion is contradictory to the assumption that for all $`\alpha `$, $`a_\alpha `$ is not in $`[\mathrm{}]`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 1.

$`[D_i,D_j]=0`$ for all $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$.

Proof. The commutativity of $`H`$ and $`D_i`$ is proven in . Since $`[H,[D_i,D_j]]=0`$, by the above proposition, the highest order part of $`[D_i,D_j]`$ has coefficients in $`[\mathrm{}]`$. Now it is enough to prove the following claim. For any multi-indices $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ and any $`a`$ and $`b`$ in the polynomial ring $`[\mathrm{},q_1,\mathrm{},q_n]`$, if we let $`[a^\alpha ,b^\beta ]=c_\gamma ^\gamma `$, then any $`c_\gamma `$ cannot be in $`[\mathrm{}]`$ unless $`c_\gamma =0`$. Notice that $`[a^\alpha ,b^\beta ]`$ is

$$\underset{\alpha ^{}+\alpha ^{\prime \prime }=\alpha ,\alpha ^{}0}{}\left(\begin{array}{c}\alpha \\ \alpha ^{}\end{array}\right)a(^\alpha ^{}b)^{\alpha ^{\prime \prime }+\beta }\underset{\beta ^{}+\beta ^{\prime \prime }=\beta ,\beta ^{}0}{}\left(\begin{array}{c}\beta \\ \beta ^{}\end{array}\right)b(^\beta ^{}a)^{\beta ^{\prime \prime }+\beta }.$$

However the polynomials $`a(^\alpha ^{}b)`$ and $`b(^\beta ^{}a)`$ in $`q_i`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$, over $`[\mathrm{}]`$ have no constant coefficients of $`[\mathrm{}]`$. So, $`c_\gamma `$ are zeros or in $`[\mathrm{},q_1,\mathrm{},q_n][\mathrm{}]`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 2.2. Givental’s $`J`$-functions for flag manifolds

Recall that the (resp. equivariant) quantum differential operators are defined to be operators which annihilate the (resp. equivariant) $`J`$-functions. For the flag manifolds they are generated by the quantum Toda operators.

Let $`Fl(n+1)`$ be the set of all complete flags $`V_1V_2\mathrm{}V_n^{n+1}`$ of subspaces of $`^{n+1}`$, where $`dimV_i=i`$. It is the flag manifold of dimension $`n(n+1)/2`$. Consider the torus $`T=(^\times )^{n+1}`$ action on $`Fl(n+1)`$ induced from the standard $`T`$ action on $`^{n+1}`$. Denote by $`𝕍_i`$ the universal subbundle over $`Fl(n+1)`$ with fiber $`V_i`$ at point $`(V_1,\mathrm{},V_n)`$. Let $`p_i`$ be the equivariant first Chern class $`c_1^T(𝕍_{i+1}/𝕍_i)`$, $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$. Here $`𝕍_0`$ is by definition rank 0 bundle. Denote $`H_T^{}(\mathrm{point},)=H^{}(^{\mathrm{}})^{n+1}=[\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n]`$. Here the following convention is used: the $`i`$-th equivariant Chern class $`c_i^T(𝕍_{n+1})`$ is the $`i`$-th elementary symmetric polynomial $`\sigma _i`$ in $`\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n`$. Then it is known that the equivariant small quantum cohomology ring of $`Fl(n+1)`$ is generated by $`p_i`$ with relations $`D_i(p,q)=\sigma _i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$. From now on take a torus $`T`$ as the subgroup $`\{(a_0,\mathrm{},a_n)|_ia_i=1\}`$ of $`(^\times )^{n+1}`$ so that $`\sigma _1=0`$.

Let $`\overline{M}_{g,m}(Fl(n+1),d)`$ be the moduli of degree $`d`$ stable maps $`(f,C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_m)`$ to $`Fl(n+1)`$ from $`m`$ pointed prestable genus $`g`$ curves $`C`$ and let $`ev_i`$ be the evaluation map at the $`i`$-th marked point. Thus, $`f:CFl(n+1)`$ is a morphism such that $`f_{}[C]=dH_2(Fl(n+1),)`$ and $`ev([(f,C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_m)])`$ is by definition $`f(x_i)`$. Let $`\psi _i`$ be the first Chern class of the universal cotangent orbi-line bundle, whose fiber at $`[(f,C,x_1,\mathrm{},x_m)]`$ is $`T_{x_i}^{}C`$. Fix a basis $`\{\varphi _\alpha \}`$ of the free $`H_T^{}(\mathrm{point})`$-module $`H_T^{}(Fl(n+1),)`$.

Define equivariant Givental’s $`J`$-functions $`J_\alpha (t_0,\mathrm{},t_n;\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n)`$ to be

$$\underset{dH_2(Fl(n+1),)}{}q^d_{\overline{M}_{0,1}(Fl(n+1),d)}\frac{ev_1^{}(\varphi _\alpha \mathrm{exp}(p_it_i/\mathrm{}))}{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}\psi _1)},$$

where $`q^d=\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^nq_i^{<d,c_1(𝕍_i^{})>}`$ with $`q_i=e^{t_it_{i1}}`$.

###### Theorem 2.

()

$$D_iJ_\alpha =\sigma _iJ_\alpha $$

for all $`i`$ and $`\alpha `$.

## 3. Equivariant mirrors of flag manifolds

In this section we find a stationary phase integral representation of all solutions $`I`$ to $`D_iI=\sigma _iI`$, where $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$. To do so, we shall make use of Givental’s construction $`I^{}=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }Y_q}e^{f_q^{}/\mathrm{}}\omega `$ of the mirror of the flag manifold . It satisfies differential equations $`D_iI^{}=0`$. From such $`I^{}`$, in order to build spectrum solutions, we shall add appropriate weight factors to the phase function $`f^{}`$ and show that if $`I=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }Y_q}e^{(f_q^{}+\text{ the weight factors})/\mathrm{}}\omega _q`$, then $`D_iI=\sigma _iI`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$.

Introduce a graph and coordinates for vertices in the graph:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}\hfill (0,0)& & & & & & & & & & \\ \hfill & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hfill (1,0)& & \hfill (0,1)& & & & & & & & \\ \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & & & & & & & & \\ \hfill (2,0)& & \hfill (1,1)& & \hfill (0,2)& & & & & & \\ \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & & & & & & \\ \hfill & & \hfill & & & & & & & & \\ & & \hfill \mathrm{}& & & & & & & & \\ \hfill (n,0)& & \hfill (n1,1)& \hfill \mathrm{}& & & \hfill (1,n1)& & \hfill (0,n)& & \\ \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill \mathrm{}& & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & & \end{array}$$

For each edge introduce edge variables: $`u_{ij}`$ denotes the vertical edge variable such that whose head vertex has coordinate $`(i=\text{diagonal},j=\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}x\text{-axis}\mathrm{"})`$. Also $`v_{ij}`$ denotes the parallel edge variable whose tail vertex has coordinate $`(i,j)`$. Edges will be identified with corresponding variables.

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& \hfill & & & \\ \hfill u_{ij}& \hfill & & & \\ \hfill (i,j)& \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \\ & & \hfill v_{ij}& & \end{array}$$

For each box

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & v_{i,j}& & \\ & & & & \\ u_{i+1,j}& & & & u_{i,j+1}\\ & & & & \\ & & v_{i+1,j}& & \end{array}$$

in the graph, impose “box”relation

$$v_{i,j}u_{i,j+1}u_{i+1,j}v_{i+1,j}=0.$$

For each roof

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ u_{1,i}& & & \\ & & & \\ & & v_{1,i}& \end{array}$$

in the graph, impose “roof”equation

$$u_{1,i}v_{1,i}=q_i.$$

For nonzero complex numbers $`q_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, define $`Y_q`$ to be the affine variety

$$\mathrm{Spec}[𝐮,𝐯]/(\mathrm{},v_{i,j}u_{i,j+1}u_{i+1,j}v_{i+1,j},\mathrm{},u_{1,i}v_{1,i}q_i,\mathrm{}),$$

given by all box equations and all roof equations. It is a complex torus $`(^\times )^{n(n+1)/2}`$. The fact follows from the interpretation of each edge variable as the fractions of “voltages”at vertices of the edge. To each vertex, assign free vertex variables $`T_{ij}`$ with one condition $`_{i=0}^nT_{0i}=0`$. Then it is natural to let $`u_{i,j}=e^{T_{i,j}T_{i1,j}}`$ and $`v_{i,j}=e^{T_{i1,j+1}T_{i,j}}`$.

Now introduce a stationary phase integral

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }(t_0,\mathrm{},t_n)=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }Y_q}e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q.$$

It is a complex valued function on $`(t_0=T_{00},t_1=T_{0,1},\mathrm{},t_n=T_{0n})`$ with $`t_0+\mathrm{}+t_n=0`$. Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a descending Morse cycle of $`\mathrm{Re}f_q`$ with a suitable Riemannian metric on $`Y_q`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ varies covariant constantly with the Gauss-Manin connection on the relative homology bundle with fibers $`H_{n(n+1)/2}(Y_q,\mathrm{Re}f_q=\mathrm{})`$. Let

$$\omega _q=\underset{\text{all vertices not on the main diagonal}}{}dT_v.$$

Observe that the form $`\omega _q`$ can be defined on $`Y_q`$ since it is translation invariant.

To outer edges $`ϵ`$, that is, edges whose targets are $`(i,0)`$ or sources are $`(i,ni)`$, assign weights $`\lambda _\epsilon `$ by

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\{\begin{array}{cc}\lambda _{i1}\frac{1}{2}_{j<i1}\lambda _j& \text{if }\epsilon =v_{i,ni}\text{ }\\ \lambda _{i1}+\frac{1}{2}_{j<i1}\lambda _j& \text{if }\epsilon =u_{i,0}\end{array}.$$

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}\hfill & & & & & & & \\ \hfill \lambda _0& & & & & & & \\ \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & & & & & \\ \hfill \lambda _1+\frac{1}{2}\lambda _0& & \hfill & & & & & \\ \hfill \mathrm{}& & \hfill \mathrm{}& & & & & \\ \hfill \lambda _{n1}+\frac{1}{2}_{i<n1}\lambda _i& & \hfill & \hfill \mathrm{}& & \hfill & & \\ \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill \mathrm{}& \hfill & \hfill & \hfill & \hfill \\ & \hfill \lambda _{n1}\frac{1}{2}_{i<n1}\lambda _i& & \hfill \mathrm{}& \hfill \lambda _1\frac{1}{2}\lambda _0& & \hfill \lambda _0& \end{array}$$

For each edge $`\epsilon `$ which are neither at the far left nor at the bottom of the graph, let

$$\lambda _\epsilon =\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{2}\lambda _{i1}& \text{if }\epsilon =v_{i,j}\\ \frac{1}{2}\lambda _{i1}& \text{if }\epsilon =u_{i,j}\end{array}.$$

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ \frac{1}{2}\lambda _{i1}& & & \\ & & & \\ (i,j)& & \frac{1}{2}\lambda _{i1}& \end{array}$$

The assignment of weights on edges is given to satisfy the condition that the sum of outgoing weights minus the sum of incoming weights at each vertex at diagonal level $`k`$ is exactly $`\lambda _k\lambda _{k1}`$, if we set $`\lambda _1=0`$. This property will enable us to prove the equivariant mirror theorem for flag manifolds.

Now define a phase function $`f_q`$ by

$`f_q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i>0,j}{}}(u_{i,j}+v_{i,j})+{\displaystyle \underset{i>0,j}{}}(\lambda _{u_{i,j}}\mathrm{ln}u_{i,j}+\lambda _{v_{i,j}}\mathrm{ln}v_{i,j})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i>0,j}{}}(e^{T_{i,j}T_{i1,j}}+e^{T_{i1,j+1}T_{i,j}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i>0,j}{}}(\lambda _{u_{i,j}}(T_{i,j}T_{i1,j})+\lambda _{v_{i,j}}(T_{i1,j+1}T_{i,j})).`$
The first and second summation terms are respectively $`f_q^{}`$ and the weight factor that we mentioned in the beginning of this section.

Define $`\sigma _i`$ by equation $`x^{n+1}+\sigma _1x^n+\mathrm{}+\sigma _{n+1}=_{i=0}^n(x\lambda _i)`$. We state the equivariant mirror theorem for flag manifolds and shall prove it in section 3.1 and 3.2.

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a descending Morse cycle of $`\mathrm{Re}f_q`$ at a nondegenerate critical point of $`f_q`$. Then the stationary phase integral

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }(t_0,\mathrm{},t_n)=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }Y_q}e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q$$

satisfies eigenvalue differential equations $`D_1=\sigma _1`$, $`D_2=\sigma _2`$ , …, $`D_{n+1}=\sigma _{n+1}`$.

###### Corollary 1.

Let $`q`$ be a general point in $`^n`$. Then there are $`(n+1)!`$ critical points of $`f_q`$ . Furthermore they are all nondegenerate.

Remark. When $`\lambda _i=0`$ for all $`i`$, the above theorem is proven in .

### 3.1. Proof of theorem 3

Since $`\frac{f_q}{t_i}`$ does not depend on $`t_j`$ if $`ji`$, the amplitude created by operating $`D_i`$ on $`_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are the corresponding coefficients of the characteristic polynomial of $`A_1\lambda _0I`$, where

$$A_k=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}u_{k0}& u_{k0}v_{k0}& 0& \mathrm{}& & \\ 1& v_{k0}u_{k1}& u_{k1}v_{k1}& \mathrm{}& & \\ & & \mathrm{}& & & \\ & & & & & u_{k,nk}v_{k,nk}\\ & & & & 1& v_{k,nk}\end{array}\right]$$

for $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Hence

$`(x^{n+1}+D_1x^n+\mathrm{}+D_{n+1}){\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}det(A_1\lambda _0I+xI)e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q.`$
To prove the theorem it is enough to show the following.

###### Proposition 2.

For $`k=1,\mathrm{},n`$

$$_\mathrm{\Gamma }det(A_k\lambda _{k1}I+xI)e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q=(x\lambda _{k1})_\mathrm{\Gamma }det(A_{k+1}\lambda _kI+xI)e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q,$$

where $`A_{n+1}=0`$.

Proof. As noticed in , $`A_k=U_kV_k`$ where

$$U_k=\left[\begin{array}{ccccccc}u_{k0}& 0& & \mathrm{}& & & \\ 1& u_{k1}& 0& \mathrm{}& & & \\ & 1& u_{k2}& \mathrm{}& & & \\ & & \mathrm{}& & & & \\ & & & & 1& u_{k,nk}& 0\\ & & & & & 1& 0\end{array}\right]$$

and

$$V_k=\left[\begin{array}{cccccc}1& v_{k0}& 0& \mathrm{}& & \\ 0& 1& v_{k1}& \mathrm{}& & \\ 0& 0& 1& \mathrm{}& & \\ & & \mathrm{}& & & \\ & & & & & v_{k,nk}\\ & & & & 0& 1\end{array}\right].$$

Since $`V_k`$ is invertible, the characteristic polynomial of $`A_k\lambda _{k1}I`$ is equal to that of $`V_kU_k\lambda _{k1}I`$. Using the critical point conditions

$$\frac{f_q}{T_{k,i}}=u_{ki}v_{ki}+v_{k+1,i1}u_{k+1,i}+\lambda _{k1}\lambda _k$$

and box relations $`u_{k,i+1}v_{ki}=u_{k+1,i}v_{k+1,i}`$, we see that

$$V_kU_k\lambda _{k1}I=\left[\begin{array}{cc}A_{k+1}\lambda _kI& 0\\ 0,\mathrm{},0,1& \lambda _{k1}\end{array}\right]\mathrm{diag}(\frac{f_q}{T_{k,0}},\mathrm{},\frac{f_q}{T_{k,nk}},0).$$

Note that the terms in $`det(V_kU_k\lambda _{k1})`$ which involve the derivatives of $`\frac{f_q}{T_{k,i}}`$ might have extra multiples of edge variables whose vertices are not $`(k,i)`$. However if $`P`$ is a polynomial of edge variables except whose vertices are not $`(k,i)`$, the following holds:

$`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\displaystyle \frac{f_q/\mathrm{}}{T_{k,i}}}Pe^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\displaystyle \frac{}{T_{k,i}}}(Pe^{f_q/\mathrm{}})\omega _q`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}L_{\frac{}{T_{k,i}}}(Pe^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _\mathrm{\Gamma }}𝑑i_{\frac{}{T_{k,i}}}Pe^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega _q`$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
This completes the proof.

### 3.2. Proof of Corollary 1

Let

$$Y=\{(\mathrm{},u_{ij},v_{i,j},\mathrm{})|\text{all }u_{i,j}0,\text{all }v_{i,j}0,\text{all box relations}\}.$$

$`Y`$ is a complex torus $`(^\times )^{n(n+1)/2+n}`$. For $`\lambda =(\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n)`$ with $`\lambda _i=0`$, denote by $`Z_\lambda `$ the closed subscheme in $`Y`$ defined by the ideal generated by $`\frac{f_q}{T_{ij}}`$, $`i>0`$, $`j`$. Let $`X_\lambda =\mathrm{Spec}[p_0,\mathrm{},p_n,q_1^{\pm 1},\mathrm{},q_n^{\pm 1}]/(D_1(p,q)\sigma _1,\mathrm{},D_{n+1}(p,q)\sigma _{n+1})`$, which is an irreducible nonsingular rational variety . Since $`det(A_1\lambda _0I+xI)=\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=0}^n(x\lambda _i)`$ on $`Z_\lambda `$ as shown in the proof of proposition 2, a morphism $`\varphi :Z_\lambda X_\lambda `$ is defined by $`p_0=u_{1,0}`$, $`p_1=v_{1,0}u_{1,1}`$, …, $`p_n=v_{1,n1}`$, $`q_1=u_{1,0}v_{1,0}`$,…,$`q_n=u_{1,n1}v_{1,n1}`$. Direct inverting of $`\varphi `$ shows that $`\varphi `$ is a birational morphism. Let $`\pi `$ be the projection from $`X_\lambda `$ to $`(^\times )^n`$ defined by $`\pi (p,q)=q`$. The projection is a finite map of degree $`(n+1)!`$ which is verified by the dimension of the algebra $`[p,q]/D_1(p,q)\sigma _1,\mathrm{},D_{n+1}(p,q)\sigma _{n+1})`$ at $`q=0`$. Now the proof of the corollary follows from the irreducibility of $`X_\lambda `$, the degree of the projection $`\pi `$ and Sard’s lemma.

### 3.3. Study of the phase function $`f_q`$

Given a sequence $`\sigma =(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ of integers where $`0k_ini+1`$, let $`w_{ij}^\sigma =u_{ij}`$ if $`j<k_i`$, otherwise let $`w_{ij}^\sigma =v_{ij}`$. We shall express $`f_q`$ in terms of these independent variables $`w_{ij}^\sigma `$.

We associate a sequence $`\rho _{ij}^\sigma `$ of weights to $`\sigma `$, inductively on $`ni`$ and then $`j`$, where $`i=1,\mathrm{},n+1`$ and $`j=1,0,\mathrm{},ni+1`$. First, let $`\rho _{n,1}^\sigma =0`$, $`\rho _{i,ni+1}^\sigma =_{k=i1}^n\lambda _k`$. And let $`\rho _{ij}^\sigma =\rho _{i+1,j}^\sigma `$ if $`w_{ij}^\sigma =u_{ij}`$, otherwise let $`\rho _{ij}^\sigma =\rho _{i+1,j1}^\sigma +\lambda _{i1}`$. It is easy to see inductively that $`\{\rho _{ij}^\sigma \rho _{i,j1}^\sigma |j=0,1,..,ni+1\}=\{\lambda _{i1},\mathrm{},\lambda _n\}`$.

###### Proposition 3.

The phase function $`f_q`$ is, in terms of $`w_{ij}^\sigma `$,

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,\mathrm{},n}{}}\rho _{1,i1}^\sigma \mathrm{ln}q_i+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,\mathrm{},n,j=0,\mathrm{},ni}{}}(w_{ij}^\sigma +r_{ij}(\mathrm{},w_{ab}^\sigma ,\mathrm{},q_1,\mathrm{},q_n)`$
$`+`$ $`\sigma (i,j)\mathrm{ln}w_{ij}^\sigma ),`$
where $`\sigma (i,j)`$ is $`\lambda _{i1}(\rho _{i,j}^\sigma \rho _{i,j1}^\sigma )`$ if $`j<k_i`$ and $`\sigma (i,j)`$ is $`\lambda _{i1}+(\rho _{i,j+1}^\sigma \rho _{i,j}^\sigma )`$ otherwise. Here $`r_{ij}`$ are monomials in $`(w_{ab}^\sigma )^{\pm 1}`$ and $`q_k`$ with at least one factor among $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_n`$.

Proof. To apply induction on $`n`$, let $`L`$ be the triangular graph introduced in the beginning of section 3 and let $`L_k`$ be the triangular sublattice of $`L`$ whose vertices $`(i,j)`$ satisfy inequalities $`ki`$. The edges of $`L_k`$ are by definition the edges of $`L`$, connecting neighboring vertices of $`L_k`$. Note that $`L_0`$ is the full lattice $`L`$. Introduce new variables associated to the sublattice $`L_k`$ as follows,

$$Q_{j+1}^k=u_{k+1,j}v_{k+1,j}\mathrm{\Delta }_k=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}\lambda _j.$$

Moreover let $`Q_j^0=q_j,\mathrm{\Delta }_0=0`$. Consider

$$(f_k)_{Q^k}=\underset{\mathrm{vertices}L_k}{}(u_{i,j}+v_{i,j})+\underset{\mathrm{vertices}L_k}{}(\lambda _{u_{i,j}}\mathrm{ln}u_{i,j}+\lambda _{v_{i,j}}\mathrm{ln}v_{i,j}).$$

By the induction hypothesis, we can assume that

$`(f_k)_{Q^k}=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,\mathrm{},nk}{}}(\rho _{k+1,i1}^\sigma +{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_k}{2}})\mathrm{ln}Q_i^k`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,\mathrm{},nk;j=0,\mathrm{},ni}{}}(w_{ij}+r_{ij}^k(\mathrm{},w_{ab}^\sigma ,\mathrm{},Q_1^k,\mathrm{},Q_{nk}^k)`$
$`+`$ $`\sigma (i,j)\mathrm{ln}w_{ij}^\sigma ),`$
where $`r_{ij}^k`$ are monomials in $`(w_{ab}^\sigma )^{\pm 1}`$ and $`Q_1^k`$, …, $`Q_{nk}^k`$. Then substitute $`v_{k,i}u_{k,i+1}`$ for $`Q_{i+1}^k`$. Then derive $`(f_{k1})_{Q^{k1}}`$ in terms of $`w_{i,j}^\sigma `$ and $`Q_j^{k1}`$. The rest is straightforward. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`f_q^\sigma =f_q_i\rho _{1,i1}^\sigma \mathrm{ln}q_i`$. Then $`f_q^\sigma `$ is regular at $`q_1=\mathrm{}=q_n=0`$ and has exactly one simple critical point at the origin $`q=0`$. Therefore there is exactly one critical point of $`f_q`$ whose limit as $`q`$ goes to 0 is the simple critical point of $`f_0^\sigma `$. Let us denote by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma `$ the descending Morse cycle of $`f_q`$, whose limit is the Morse cycle $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\sigma ,0}`$ of $`f_0^\sigma `$. Now we obtain a corollary which will be applied to the proof of theorem 4.

###### Corollary 2.

$$\underset{q0}{lim}e^{_{j=0}^n(\rho _{1,j1}^\sigma \rho _{1j}^\sigma )t_j}_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma }=\underset{i=1,\mathrm{},n;j=0,\mathrm{},ni}{}_{C_{\sigma (i,j)}}e^{w_{ij}/\mathrm{}}w_{ij}^{\sigma (i,j)/\mathrm{}}\frac{dw_{ij}}{w_{ij}},$$

where $`\sigma (i,j)`$ is defined as in the previous proposition and $`C_{\sigma (i,j)}`$ is the descending Morse cycle of an one-variable function $`x+\sigma (i,j)\mathrm{ln}x`$.

For later use, for a given sequence $`\sigma =(k_1,\mathrm{},k_n)`$ of integers $`0k_ini+1`$, we define $`\sigma (i)\{0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ by the requirement

$$\lambda _{\sigma (j)}=\rho _{1,j}^\sigma \rho _{1,j1}^\sigma ,$$

so that we may identify $`\sigma `$ as a permutation element of the symmetric group $`S_{n+1}`$ of $`n+1`$ letters.

## 4. the Virasoro Conjecture

### 4.1. The fundamental solution of the form $`\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}}`$

Now we recall the equivariant big quantum cohomology of a projective algebraic manifold $`X`$ with a Hamiltonian torus $`T`$-action. Fix a homogeneous basis $`\{\varphi _\alpha \}`$ of $`H_T^{}(X,)`$. For simplicity assume that $`H^{}(X,)=H^{\mathrm{even}}(X,)`$ (i.e. there are no odd classes) and there is a basis $`\omega _i`$ of $`H^2(X,)`$ such that $`<\omega _i,[C]>`$ is nonnegative for any curve (effective) class $`[C]`$. Introduce formal parameters $`Q_i`$ and for $`dH_2(X,)`$ let $`Q^d=Q_i^{d_i}`$ where $`d_i=<\omega _i,d>`$. A potential function $`F(t)`$ is by definition

$`F(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m,d}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{Q^d}{m!}}{\displaystyle _{[\overline{M}_{0,m}(X,d)]^{\mathrm{virt}}}}ev_1^{}(t)\mathrm{}ev_m^{}(t).`$
Here is an explanation of notation in the equation. First, $`[\overline{M}_{g,m}(X,d)]^{\mathrm{virt}}`$ denotes the virtual fundamental class of the moduli space $`\overline{M}_{g,m}(X,d)`$ of stable maps to $`X`$ with genus $`g`$, $`m`$ marked points and degree $`dH_2(X,)`$. Secondly, $`tH_T^{}(X)`$ is considered as $`t=t_\alpha \varphi _\alpha `$ and the integral is taken as the equivariant pushforward so that the value is in $`H^{}(BT)`$. The potential function defines the equivariant big quantum cohomology of $`X`$ as following. Let $`H=H_T^{}(X,[[Q]])`$. The quantum cohomology is a certain multiplication structure on the tangent space $`T_tH`$. The quantum product $`\frac{}{t_\alpha }_t\frac{}{t_\beta }`$ is defined by equation

$$(\frac{}{t_\alpha }_t\frac{}{t_\beta },\frac{}{t_\gamma })=\frac{}{t_\alpha }\frac{}{t_\beta }\frac{}{t_\gamma }F(t).$$

Here $`(,)`$ is the equivariant Poincaré pairing on $`T_tH`$ defined by $`(\frac{}{t_\alpha },\frac{}{t_\beta }):=_X\varphi _\alpha \varphi _\beta =:g_{\alpha \beta }`$. There is a pencil of flat connections $`_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{}d_\alpha dt_\alpha \frac{}{t_\alpha }`$ with parameter $`\mathrm{}`$. Here $`d`$ is the Levi-Civita connection with respect to the vector space structure of $`H`$. (Strictly speaking, $`_{\mathrm{}}/\mathrm{}`$ are connections.)

$`\mathrm{Spec}(Vect(H))`$ defines a Lagrangian formal scheme $`LT^{}H`$ over the ground ring $`[\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n][[Q]]`$, where $`H^{}(BT)=[\lambda _0,\mathrm{},\lambda _n]`$. Let $`\mathrm{rank}H^{}(X)=N`$ and let $`u`$ be a semi-simple point in $`H`$, that is, $`T_uH`$ is a semi-simple algebra. Then $`L_uT_u^{}H`$ consists of $`N`$ many simple points and there are $`N`$ many local functions $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_N`$ at $`u`$ such that the canonical 1-form $`_\alpha P_\alpha dt_\alpha `$ restricted to $`L_i`$ coincides with $`du_i:=\frac{u_i}{t_\alpha }dt_\alpha `$, where $`L_i`$ are branches of $`L`$. Since $`\{du_i\}`$ is linearly independent, $`\{u_i\}`$ forms a local coordinate system of $`H`$ and the dual vector fields $`\frac{}{u_i}`$ can be defined. Notice that $`\frac{}{u_i}_t\frac{}{u_j}=\delta _{ij}\frac{}{u_j}`$. We call $`u_i`$ canonical coordinates. These coordinates are unique up to order and additions by constants.

Let $`U`$ be $`\mathrm{diag}(u_1,\mathrm{},u_N)`$ and $`A^1`$ be the connection 1-form matrix of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ so that $`_{\mathrm{}}\frac{}{t_\alpha }=_\beta A_{\beta ,\alpha }^1\frac{}{t_\beta }`$. Let $`1/\mathrm{\Delta }_\beta `$ be the length of $`\frac{}{u_\beta }`$ with respect to the Poincare paring metric and let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha \frac{}{u_\alpha }=_\beta \mathrm{\Psi }_{\beta ,\alpha }\frac{}{t_\beta }`$. Then the computation of connection 1-form $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Psi }^1d\mathrm{\Psi }dU`$ with respect to frame $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha \frac{}{u_\alpha }`$ using the expression $`_{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{}ddu_\beta \frac{}{u_\beta }`$ shows that

$$A^1\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }dU.$$

Notice that $`u_i`$ linearly depends on $`t_\alpha `$’s modulo $`Q`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is constant modulo $`Q`$.

Example. Let $`X=Fl(2)=P^1`$. Consider $`T=^\times `$ action as $`t[x_0,x_1]=[tx_0,t^1x_1]`$ where $`tT`$ and $`[x_0,x_1]P^1`$. The Lagrangian scheme $`LT^{}H`$ is defined by equation $`p^2=\lambda ^2+e^tQ`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}=1`$ where $`p`$ is the cotangent direction variable associated to $`t_0=t_1`$ and $`\mathrm{𝟏}`$ is the cotangent direction variable associated to the identity element of $`H_T^{}(P^1)`$. The fiber $`L_{(t_0,t)}`$ of $`L`$ over a point $`(t_0,t)`$ of $`H`$ consists of two points $`\{(1,\pm \sqrt{\lambda ^2+e^tQ})\}`$. Then $`du_\pm =dt_0+p_\pm dt=dt_0\pm \sqrt{\lambda ^2+e^tQ}dt`$ so that we may set $`u_\pm =t_0\pm \sqrt{\lambda ^2+e^tQ}𝑑t`$. The canonical vector fields are $`\frac{}{u_\pm }=\frac{1}{2p_\pm }(p_\pm \frac{}{t_0}+\frac{}{t})`$. Let $`v=\sqrt{p_+}`$. Then with respect to the ordered basis $`\{1,p\}`$ of $`H^{}(P^1)`$

$$A^1=\left[\begin{array}{cc}dt_0& v^4dt\\ dt& dt_0\end{array}\right],\mathrm{\Psi }=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[\begin{array}{cc}v& iv\\ 1/v& i/v\end{array}\right].$$

On the other hand, we have shown that $`\{(p,q)|\frac{f_q}{y_\epsilon }=0,p=\frac{f_q}{t}\}`$ is the Lagrangian scheme $`L^{}=\mathrm{Spec}[p,q^{\pm 1}]/(p^2q\lambda ^2)`$. At critical points of $`f_q`$, $`df_q=pdt`$, so that $`u_\pm (\lambda ,q)=t_0+f_q(p_\pm (\lambda ,q),q)`$ (up to constant addition). Thus, $`e^{t_0/\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\pm }e^{u_\pm /\mathrm{}}`$ (up to constant multiplication). In fact a direct computation shows that at critical points

$$f_q(p_\pm ,q)=2p_\pm +\lambda _0\mathrm{ln}(\lambda _1+p_\pm )+\lambda _1\mathrm{ln}(\lambda _0+p_\pm )$$

and $`\frac{f_q(p_\pm ,q)}{t}=p_\pm `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Near a semi-simple point $`u`$, due to the papers  there is a fundamental solution of form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}}$$

such that $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`U`$ are defined as above and

$$R(\mathrm{})=1+R_1\mathrm{}+R_2\mathrm{}^2+\mathrm{},$$

with $`R^t(\mathrm{})R(\mathrm{})=1`$. Since $`Q_i\frac{}{Q_i}F(t)=q_i\frac{}{q_i}F(t)`$, we require that $`Q_i\frac{}{Q_i}R=q_i\frac{}{q_i}R`$, where $`e^{t_i}=q_i`$. Such matrix $`R`$ exists uniquely up to right multiplication by diagonal matrices $`\mathrm{exp}(_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}a_k\mathrm{}^{2k1})`$ where $`a_k=\mathrm{diag}(a_k^{(1)},\mathrm{},a_k^{(N)})`$ are constants.

Suppose $`T`$ acts on $`X`$ with isolated fixed points and let $`w_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$ be $`T`$\- fixed points of $`X`$ and let $`N_l^{(i)}=_j\frac{1}{\chi _j(w_i)^l}`$ where $`\chi _j(w_i)`$ are the weights of the induced torus action on the cotangent space $`T_{w_i}^{}X`$ at $`w_i`$.

Let $`u`$ be a semi-simple point of $`H_T^{}(X)`$. There is an unique asymptotic fundamental solution of type $`\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}}`$ of the connection $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ satisfying the following four conditions on $`R=1+R_1\mathrm{}+R_2\mathrm{}^2+\mathrm{}`$:

0. the divisor condition: $`Q_i\frac{}{Q_i}R=q_i\frac{}{q_i}R`$ for all $`i`$,

1. the orthogonal condition: $`R^t(\mathrm{})R(\mathrm{})=1`$,

2. the classical limit condition: its classical limit of letting $`Q0`$ is $`\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{diag}(b_1,\mathrm{},b_N))`$ where

$$b_i(\mathrm{})=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}N_{2k1}^{(i)}\frac{B_{2k}}{2k}\frac{\mathrm{}^{2k1}}{2k1}.$$

Here $`B_{2k}`$ are Bernoulli numbers defined by $`x/(1e^x)=1+x/2+_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}B_{2k}x^{2k}/(2k)!`$,

3. the equivariant homogeneity condition: $`(\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{}}+u_\alpha _\alpha +\lambda _i_{\lambda _i})R(\mathrm{})=0`$.

R-Conjecture () The matrix $`R`$ has the nonequivariant limit of letting $`\lambda _00,\mathrm{},\lambda _n0`$ and thus the nonequivariant limit satisfies the homogeneity condition $`(\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{}}+u_\alpha _\alpha )R(\mathrm{})=0`$ where $`u_\alpha `$ denote the corresponding nonequivariant canonical coordinates.

We shall prove the $`R`$-conjecture restricted to $`H_T^2(X)`$ when $`X`$ is a flag manifold. In such restriction the homogeneity condition is replaced by $`(\mathrm{}\frac{}{\mathrm{}}+_i<c_1(T_X),d>\frac{}{t_i})R(\mathrm{})|_{H_T^2(X)}=0`$. There are two known ways to obtain fundamental solutions of form $`\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}}`$ restricted to $`H_T^2(X)`$. One is the localization expansion of the construction by two-pointed gravitational Gromov-Witten invariants and the other one is the stationary phase approximation of the mirror construction . We use both. There is a natural 1-1 correspondence between the fixed points $`w_\alpha `$ and canonical coordinates $`u_\alpha `$ since the points can be identified with points $`L_t`$ of the Lagrangian variety $`L`$ (first with $`Q=0`$ and general $`\lambda `$ and then continuously). So we use the same label. If

$$S_{\beta ,\alpha }=\underset{d}{}\frac{Q^d}{m!}_{[\overline{M}_{0,m+2}(Fl(n+1),d)]^{\mathrm{virt}}}ev_1^{}(\varphi _\beta )(\underset{i=2}{\overset{m+1}{}}ev_i^{}(t))\frac{ev_{m+2}^{}(\varphi _\alpha )}{\mathrm{}\psi _{m+2}}$$

then

$$s_\alpha =\underset{\beta ,\gamma }{}S_{\beta ,\alpha }g^{\beta \gamma }\varphi _\gamma $$

is a flat section for all $`\alpha `$ . Recall if $`\varphi _\beta =1`$, $`t=t_i\omega _iH_T^2(X)`$ then

$$S_{\beta ,\alpha }=\underset{d}{}Q^dq^d_{[\overline{M}_{0,1}(X,d)]^{\mathrm{virt}}}\frac{ev_1^{}(\varphi _\alpha \mathrm{exp}(t/\mathrm{})))}{\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}\psi _1)},$$

which is denoted by $`S_{1,\alpha }`$. We see the equality using the string and divisor axioms.

Suppose that $`X`$ is a Fano manifold. Let $`T`$ act on $`X`$ and assume that $`H_T^{}(X)`$ is generated by the second cohomology classes $`\{\omega _i\}`$. Here $`T`$ could be just the trivial action. Let $`𝒟`$ be the algebra of differential operators $`\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_\alpha }`$ over $`[\lambda ,Qq,\mathrm{}]`$. Then the following lemma holds.

###### Lemma 1.

For each $`\varphi H^{}(X)`$, there is a differential operator $`D_\varphi `$ in $`𝒟`$ such that $`(s_\alpha ,\varphi )=D_\varphi S_{1,\alpha }(t)`$ for every $`\alpha `$, $`tH_T^2(X)`$.

Proof. We may set $`D_{\omega _i}=\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_i}`$. If $`D_\varphi S_{1,\alpha }=(s_\alpha ,\varphi )`$ and $`D_{\varphi \omega _i\varphi \omega _i}S_{1,\alpha }=(s_\alpha ,\varphi \omega _i\varphi \omega _i)`$, then $`(\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_i}D_\varphi D_{\varphi \omega _i\varphi \omega _i})S_{1,\alpha }=(s_\alpha ,\varphi \omega _i)`$ by the flatness of the section $`s_\alpha `$, where the vector fields on the affine space $`H^{}(X)`$ are identified with classes in $`H^{}(X)`$. Notice that the degree of each homogeneous term of the $`q`$-linear combination class $`\varphi \omega _i\varphi \omega _i`$ is less than $`\mathrm{deg}\varphi \omega _i`$ since $`X`$ is a Fano manifold. This completes the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. When $`X=Fl(n+1)`$, since the oscillatory integrals $``$ and $`S_{1,\beta }`$ with $`Q=1`$ generated the same $`D`$-module, we conclude that the matrix $`(D_\alpha _j)`$ is a fundamental solution of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`Q=1`$ for some $`D_\alpha 𝒟`$.

###### Theorem 4.

The $`R`$-conjecture restricted to $`H_T^2(X)`$ is true for $`X=Fl(n+1)`$ with the $`T`$-action.

Proof. We may let $`Q=1`$ by the requirement 0 of the conjecture. Recall that $`s_i=_{\alpha ,\beta }(D_\alpha _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i})g^{\alpha ,\beta }\frac{}{t_\beta }`$ is a flat section by remark above. Since

$$D_\alpha _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}=_{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\varphi _{\alpha ,q}\omega $$

for some polynomial $`\varphi _{\alpha ,q}`$ in $`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{}`$, and $`q_i`$ (see Proposition 3), we have the asymptotic expansion

$$e^{u_i/\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{}^{(n+1)!/2}\varphi _{\alpha ,q}(\mathrm{crit}_\sigma )}{\sqrt{det\mathrm{Hessian}f_q(\mathrm{crit}_\sigma )}}(1+o(\mathrm{}))$$

of the integral. From the expansion we obtain the fundamental solution $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}e^{U/\mathrm{}}`$ where $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}=1+(R_1)_{\mathrm{osc}}\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$ and

$$(\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}})_{\alpha ,\sigma }=\frac{\varphi _{\alpha ,q}(\mathrm{crit}_\sigma )}{\sqrt{det\mathrm{Hessian}f_q(\mathrm{crit}_\sigma )}}.$$

We shall see that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ coincides with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ up to left multiplication by a constant matrix (not depending on $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`q`$). Also we shall show that $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ is the $`R`$ satisfying all the properties in the theorem/conjecture.

First we prove that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ coincides with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ modulo right multiplication of a constant diagonal matrix, using the symmetry of the differential equation. Since $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}e^{U/\mathrm{}}`$ is a fundamental solution, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ is an eigenvector matrix of the connection matrix $`A^1`$. However there is a symmetry of the differential equation:

$`\mathrm{}d(s_i(\mathrm{}),s_j(\mathrm{}))=(\mathrm{}ds_i(\mathrm{}),s_j(\mathrm{}))+(s_i(\mathrm{}),\mathrm{}ds_j(\mathrm{}))`$
$`=`$ $`(A^1\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})e^{U/\mathrm{}})^tG\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})e^{U/\mathrm{}}`$
$`+(\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})e^{U/\mathrm{}})^tGA^1\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})e^{U/\mathrm{}}=0`$
since $`GA`$ is symmetric, where $`G=(g_{\alpha ,\beta })`$. This shows that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}^tG\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ is constant in $`q`$ and so the claim is true. Now considering $`c_iD_\alpha _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_i}`$ for some constant $`c_i`$ not depending on $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`q`$, we conclude that $`\mathrm{\Psi }R_{\mathrm{osc}}e^{U/\mathrm{}}`$ is a fundamental solution matrix.

We investigate $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ modulo $`q`$. In order to select $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ not $`\mathrm{\Psi }R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ from the phase integrals we remove $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ by expressing the fundamental solution with respect to the basis $`\{\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha \frac{}{u_\alpha }\}`$. If $`s`$ is a flat section of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$, then $`(\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_i})^j(s,1)=(s,p_i^j)`$ modulo $`q`$. So, if $`s=b_i\mathrm{\Delta }_i\frac{}{u_i}`$, then $`b_\sigma =\widehat{L}_\sigma (s,1)`$ modulo $`q`$ where

$$\widehat{L}_\sigma =\underset{i>j}{}\frac{\mathrm{}\frac{}{t_{\sigma (i)}}\lambda _j}{\sqrt{\lambda _i\lambda _j}}.$$

(Here $`\sigma `$ as an element of permutation is defined in the remark below of corollary 2.) Therefore, the entries of $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ that we obtained above satisfy

$$(\widehat{L}_\tau c_\sigma _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma }e^f\omega )_{\tau ,\sigma }R_{\mathrm{osc}}e^{U/\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{mod}q).$$

By corollary 2

$$\widehat{L}_\tau c_\sigma _{\mathrm{\Gamma }_\sigma }|_{q=0}\delta _{\sigma ,\tau }e^{{\scriptscriptstyle \lambda _{\sigma \left(i\right)}t_i/\mathrm{}}}\underset{ni>j0}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}(\lambda _{\sigma (i)}\lambda _{\sigma (j)}))$$

up to an irrelevant multiplication factor. However, for large $`z`$,

$$\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)(z\frac{1}{2})\mathrm{ln}zz+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}2\pi +\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{B_{2i}}{2i(2i1)z^{2i1}}$$

shown in p.252 of . (The convention of Bernoulli numbers in  is different from us.) So $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ satisfies the classical limit condition.

Also from the symmetry of the differential equation we see that the orthogonal condition $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})^tR_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})=1`$ since $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})^tR_{\mathrm{osc}}(\mathrm{})=1`$ mod $`q`$.

Since $`\varphi _{\alpha ,q}`$ has the nonequivariant limit obviously, $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$ has the nonequivariant limit of $`\lambda =0`$. Finally, we prove the equivariant homogeneity of $`R_{\mathrm{osc}}`$. First notice that $`f_q`$ is quasi-homogeneous of degree 1, if we assign degree 1 to the integration variables and assign degree 2 (resp. degree 1) to $`q_i`$ (resp. $`\lambda _i`$). Expand $`f_q^\sigma `$ at critical point $`u_\sigma `$ and so that after a coordinate change $`f_q^\sigma =u_\sigma y_j^2`$ for some local variables $`y_j`$. Now we see that

$$e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\omega =e^{u_i/\mathrm{}}e^{_jy_j^2/\mathrm{}}(k_0+k_1y^2+k_2y^4\mathrm{})\underset{j}{}dy_j$$

where $`y_j`$ has degree $`1/2`$ and $`k_m`$ has degree $`m\frac{1}{2}dimX`$. Now using the asymptotic formula of the last integral and also of $`e^{f_q/\mathrm{}}\varphi _{\alpha ,q}\omega `$, we conclude that the degree of $`R_k`$ is $`k`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 4.2. The Virasoro constraints for flag manifolds

In this section we explain in short how to prove the Virasoro conjecture for flag manifolds, applying Givental’s theory .

Let $`X`$ be a complex projective algebraic manifold with $`H^{\mathrm{odd}}(X)=0`$. To study the so-called gravitational descendent Gromov-Witten invariants, consider a generating function called the genus $`g`$ descendent potential

$$F_X^g(𝐭:=(t_0,t_1,\mathrm{}))=\underset{m,dH_2(X,)}{}\frac{Q^d}{m!}_{[\overline{M}_{g,m}(X,d)]^{virt}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}(\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\psi _i^kev_i^{}t_k)$$

and the total descendent potential

$$Z_X=\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{g=0,1,..}{}ϵ^{g1}F_X^g\right).$$

Here $`t_i`$ are in $`H^{}(X)`$. The potential will be considered as a formal function on $`𝐭(\mathrm{})=t_0+t_1\mathrm{}+t_2\mathrm{}^2+\mathrm{}`$. Define $`q`$-coordinates by the dilaton shift $`𝐪(\mathrm{})=q_0+q_1\mathrm{}+q_2\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}:=𝐭(\mathrm{})1\mathrm{}`$. Here $`1`$ is the identity class in $`H^{}(X)`$.

When $`X`$ is a point, Kontsevich proved the Witten conjecture that the total descendent potential $`Z_{pt}`$ is annihilated by specific quadratic differential operators $`\widehat{L}_m+\delta _{m,0}/16`$, $`m=1,0,1,\mathrm{}`$ with commuting relation $`[\widehat{L}_m+\delta _{m,0}/16,\widehat{L}_m^{}+\delta _{m^{},0}/16]=(mm^{})(\widehat{L}_{m+m^{}}+\delta _{m+m^{},0}/16)`$. The commutation relation is the Lie algebra of vector fields $`x^{m+1}\frac{d}{dx}`$ on the line. The first four of them are as follows.

$`\widehat{L}_1`$ $`=`$ $`q_0^2/2ϵ+{\displaystyle \underset{m0}{}}q_{m+1}_m,`$
$`\widehat{L}_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m0}{}}(m+1/2)q_m_m,`$
$`\widehat{L}_1`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ_0^2/8+{\displaystyle \underset{m0}{}}(m+1/2)(m+3/2)q_m_{m+1},`$
$`\widehat{L}_2`$ $`=`$ $`3ϵ_0_1/4+{\displaystyle \underset{m0}{}}(m+1/2)(m+3/2)(m+5/2)q_m_{m+2}.`$
Eguchi - Hori - Jinzenji - Xiong and Katz  extended the Witten conjecture for Grassmannians $`X`$ and for all target spaces $`X`$, respectively. The extended conjecture is called the Virasoro conjecture: $`(_m^X+\delta _{m,0}/16)Z_X=0`$ where $`_m^X`$ are defined by data of cohomology of $`X`$ and Chern classes of $`X`$, which will be specified later in theorem 5. However $`_1^X=_{\alpha ,\beta }\frac{1}{2ϵ}q_0^\alpha q_0^\beta \eta _{\alpha \beta }+_{m1,\alpha }q_m^\alpha \frac{}{q_{m1}^a}`$ and $`_1^XZ_X=0`$ means the string equation. Here $`\eta _{\alpha \beta }`$ is the Poincare metric and $`𝐭(\mathrm{})=_\alpha t_0^\alpha \varphi _\alpha +_\alpha t_1^\alpha \varphi _\alpha \mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$ with a fixed basis $`\{\varphi _\alpha \}`$ of $`H^{}(X)`$.

If $`H`$ denotes the vector space $`H^{}(X)`$ with Poincaré pairing $`(,)`$, then the quotient ring $`H((\mathrm{}))`$, of formal power series of $`\mathrm{}`$ over $`H`$, is endowed with a symplectic form $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ defined by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(f,g)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}(f(\mathrm{}),g(\mathrm{}))𝑑\mathrm{}$$

for $`f`$ and $`g`$ in $`H((\mathrm{}))`$. So, $`=H((\mathrm{}))`$ is an infinite dimensional symplectic vector space. Given a transformation $`T`$ of $``$ which is infinitesimally symplectic, that is $`\mathrm{\Omega }(Tf,g)+\mathrm{\Omega }(f,Tg)=0`$, define a differential operator $`\widehat{T}`$ as a quantization of $`T`$ as follows. First, consider a quadratic function $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ associated with $`T`$ by assignment $`f\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }(f,Tf)`$. Then take a quantization $`\widehat{T}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ by the rule: $`p_ip_jϵ\frac{}{q_i}\frac{}{q_j}`$, $`p_iq_jq_j\frac{}{q_i}`$, $`q_iq_jq_iq_j/ϵ`$ with Daboux coordinates $`(p,q)`$ of polarization $`=_++_{}`$ where $`_+`$ is the subspace of nonnegative power series of $`\mathrm{}`$. For example, if $`H=^2`$ with the standard inner product and $`T`$ is the multiplication operator by $`1/\mathrm{}`$, i.e., $`Tf=f/\mathrm{}`$ with

$$f=\mathrm{}(p_2^1+p_2^2)/\mathrm{}^3+(p_1^1+p_1^2)/\mathrm{}^2(p_0^1+p_0^2)/\mathrm{}+(q_0^1+q_0^2)+(q_1^1+q_2^2)\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}$$

(here superscripts are indices), then

$$\widehat{T}=\underset{i=1,2}{}\left(\frac{(q_0^i)^2}{2ϵ}+\underset{m0}{}q_{m+1}^i\frac{}{q_m^i}\right).$$

In fact, when $`H=`$, and $`D=\mathrm{}\frac{d}{d\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}`$, the quantization of $`D_m=\mathrm{}^{1/2}D^{m+1}\mathrm{}^{1/2}`$ are exactly the Virasoro operators $`\widehat{L}_m`$ for $`X=`$point.

Define a transformation $`S_t`$ on $`H[[\mathrm{}^1]]`$ by $`(a,S_tb)=<<a,\frac{b}{\mathrm{}\psi }>>`$, where

$`<<a,{\displaystyle \frac{b}{\mathrm{}\psi }}>>=(a,b)+`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{0dH_2(X),m=0,l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{},\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{Q^d}{\mathrm{}^{l+1}m!}}{\displaystyle _{[\overline{M}_{0,m+2}(X,d)]^{virt}}}(ev_1^{}a)({\displaystyle \underset{i=2}{\overset{m}{}}}ev_i^{}t)(ev_{m+2}^{}b)\psi _{m+2}^l.`$
As introduced for $`X=Fl(n+1)`$, for general $`X`$ we have notions of semi-simple quantum cohomology, canonical coordinates $`u_\alpha `$, a pencil of flat connections and an asymptotic fundamental solution $`\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}}`$. Here $`R`$ is form of $`1+R_1\mathrm{}+\mathrm{}`$ satisfying the orthogonality condition $`R^{}(\mathrm{})R(\mathrm{})=1`$. Such $`R`$ is unique up to right multiplication by diagonal matrices. However $`R`$ is uniquely determined if the homogeneity condition is imposed. Now if $`T`$ is $`S`$ or $`R(\mathrm{})`$, then $`T`$ could be viewed as a symplectic transformation of suitable completions of $``$ since $`T^{}(\mathrm{})T(\mathrm{})=1`$. Let $`\widehat{T}=\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{ln}T)^\widehat{}`$. Denote $`(q^1(\mathrm{}),\mathrm{},q^N(\mathrm{}))=\mathrm{\Psi }^1𝐪(\mathrm{})`$ for $`𝐪(\mathrm{})_+`$ and define an operator $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}`$ by $`f(\mathrm{\Psi }^1𝐪)f(𝐪)`$. Notice that $`q^i(\mathrm{})`$-coordinate system is based on the orthonormal frame $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha \frac{}{u_\alpha }`$. The homogeneity condition of $`R`$ is $`E(\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}})=\mu (\mathrm{\Psi }Re^{U/\mathrm{}})`$, where $`E=\mathrm{}_{\mathrm{}}+u_\alpha _{u_\alpha }`$ and $`\mu =\mathrm{diag}(\mathrm{deg}(\varphi _1)dim_{}X/2,\mathrm{}.,\mathrm{deg}(\varphi _N)dim_{}X/2)`$. On the other hand $`S`$ satisfies the homogeneity condition of $`ES=\mu S+S(\mu +\rho /\mathrm{})^{}`$, where $`\rho `$ is the operator of multiplication by $`c_1(T_X)`$ in ordinary cohomology ring. Define

$$_m^X=\widehat{S}_u^1\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}\widehat{R}\widehat{L}_m\widehat{R}^1\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}^1\widehat{S}_u$$

for $`m=1,0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. where $`L_m`$ is taken as $`D_m`$ with $`H=H^{}(X)`$.

The following theorem in  explicitly shows that the operator $`_m^X`$ is completely determined by topological terms.

###### Theorem 5.

The operator $`_m^X`$ is $`\widehat{L}_m^{\mu ,\rho }+\frac{\delta _{m,0}}{4}\mathrm{tr}(\mu \mu ^{})`$, where $`L_m^{\mu ,\rho }=\mathrm{}^\mu \mathrm{}^\rho L_m\mathrm{}^\rho \mathrm{}^\mu =\mathrm{}^{1/2}(\mathrm{}\frac{d}{d\mathrm{}}\mu \mathrm{}+\rho )^{m+1}\mathrm{}^{1/2},m1.`$

The Virasoro operators $`\widehat{L}_m^{\mu ,\rho }+\frac{\delta _{m,0}}{4}\mathrm{tr}(\mu \mu ^{})`$ agree with the operators in . The theorem holds for a conformal semi-simple Frobenius manifolds.

Let a projective manifold $`X`$ have a Hamiltonian torus $`T`$ action with isolated fixed points and let $`u`$ be a semisimple point of $`H_T^{}(X)`$. The previous potentials have the obvious equivariant counterpart. The following is shown in  and is reformulated in  as stated here.

###### Theorem 6.

In the equivariant setting of Gromov-Witten theory,

$$Z_X^T(𝐭(\mathrm{}))=e^{C(u)}\widehat{S}_u^1\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}\widehat{R}e^{(U/\mathrm{})^\widehat{}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}Z_{pt}(q^i(\mathrm{}))$$

if $`R(z)`$ is normalized by the classical limit condition in theorem 4 and

$$C(u)=\frac{1}{2}^u\underset{i}{}(R_1)_{ii}du^i$$

is defined up to addition of constant.

Remark. According to  the right side of the equation of the above theorem does not depend on the choices of a semi-simple point $`u`$, even though each term may depend on the choices.

The theorem shows

$$(_m^{X,T}+N\delta _{m,0}/16)Z_X^T=0,$$

where $`_m^{X,T}`$ is the equivariant counterpart of $`_m^X`$.

###### Theorem 7.

The total descendent potential $`Z_X`$ of a flag manifold $`X`$ coincides with $`e^{C(u)}\widehat{S}_u^1\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}\widehat{R}e^{(U/\mathrm{})^\widehat{}}_{i=1}^NZ_{pt}(q^i(\mathrm{}))`$.

Proof. Take the nonequivariant limit of the equation of theorem 6 at a semi-simple point $`u`$ in $`H_T^2(X)`$. The left side of the equation is specialized to the ordinary total descendent potential. The limit of $`R`$ on the right side exits. The limit is the homogeneous ordinary $`R`$ due to theorem 4 combined with the uniqueness of homogeneous $`R|_{H_T^2(X)}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Combined with theorem 5, the above theorem shows the following corollary.

###### Corollary 3.

The Virasoro conjecture for flag manifolds $`X`$ holds: $`(_m^X+N\delta _{m,0})Z_X=0`$, $`m1`$.

Acknowledgment. B.K. would like to thank A. Givental, D. van Straten for useful discussions and J.-H. Yang for informing the existence of the paper . The authors also thank J. Byeon for numerous discussions on oscillatory integrals. B.K. thanks staffs in ESI for their warm hospitality while his visit to the institute, being writing the paper. D.J. is supported by KOSEF 2000-2-10100-002-3. B.K. is supported by KOSEF 1999-2-102-003-5 and R03-2001-00001.

Department of Mathematics
Pohang University of Science and Technology
Pohang, 790-784
Republic of Korea
joe@euclid.postech.ac.kr
bumsig@postech.edu


format: text

text:
# Quasiparticle excitations and hierarchies of 4-dimensional quantum Hall fluid states in the matrix models

## Abstract

We investigate the condensate mechanism of the low-lying excitations in the matrix models of 4-dimensional quantum Hall fluids recently proposed by us. It is shown that there exist some hierarchies of 4-dimensional quantum Hall fluid states in the matrix models, and they are similar to the Haldane’s hierarchy in the 2-dimensional quantum Hall fluids. However, these hierarchical fluid states appear consistently in our matrix models without any requirement of modifications of the matrix models.

PACS: 11.90.+t, 11.25.-w, 73.43.-f
Keywords: matrix model, non-commutative field theory, 4-dimensional quantum Hall fluid.

Recently, Susskind  proposed a description of quantum Hall effect (QHE) on the plane in terms of a non-commutative $`U(1)`$ Chern-Simons theory. Susskind’s non-commutative Chern-Simons theory on the plane describes a spatially infinite quantum Hall system. The fields of this theory are infinite matrices that act on an infinite Hilbert space, appropriate to account for an infinite number of electrons. Polychronakos  proposed a matrix regularized version of Susskind’s non-commutative Chern-Simons theory in effort to describe finite systems with a finite number of electrons in the limited spatial extent. This matrix model was shown to reproduce the basic properties of the quantum Hall fluid (QHF).

In the four dimensions, Zhang and Hu  have found a generalization of the quantum Hall effect on $`S^4`$. Elvang and Polchinski  have recently formulated the $`SU(2)`$ quantum Hall system on $`R^4`$, as the limit of Zhang’ and Hu’s that in the limit of $`I\mathrm{}`$. The authors in have developed the idea of Zhang and Hu in other directions. In my recent paper, I have established the effective description of non-commutative non-abelian Chern-Simons theories for the 4-dimensional QHF on the space of quaternions and Zhang-Hu’s 4-dimensional QHF on $`S^4`$.

It is well known that the 2-dimensional QHF states with filling factor that are not of Laughlin type can be described by the hierarchical QHF states in Haldane’s hierarchy or in Jain’s hierarchy. The hierarchical QHF states can be described by a (2+1)-dimensional gauge system of several $`U(1)`$ coupled Chern-Simons fields. The non-commutative generalization of such gauge system was considered in .

Obviously, one want to ask whether the hierarchy of the QHF states exists in th four dimensions or not. If it does, how does one describe it? The goal of this paper is to answer the above problems. We shall show that there exist consistently the corresponding hierarchies of the 4-dimensional QHF states in our matrix models, and they can be built up by means of the Fock basis’ of the matrix models.

Let us first recall the matrix models of the 4-dimensional QHFs proposed by us. The 4-dimensional QHF on the space of quaternions is described by the matrix model with the action

$`S`$ $`=`$ $`S[Z^\alpha ,\mathrm{\Psi }^\alpha ,A_0]`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H}{4}}{\displaystyle }dtTr\{\overline{Z}^\alpha i(_tZ^\alpha +[A_0^{\alpha \beta },Z^\beta ])2i\theta \sigma _3A_0`$ (2)
$``$ $`\omega \overline{Z}^\alpha Z^\alpha \}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }dt\mathrm{\Psi }^\alpha i(_t\mathrm{\Psi }^\alpha +A_0^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{\Psi }^\beta )+h.c.`$ (3)
Here, we consider the system composed of $`N`$ particles. The complex coordinates $`Z^\alpha `$, which can be expressed as $`Z^1=Q^1+iQ^2`$ and $`Z^2=Q^3+iQ^4`$ in terms of four real coordinates, are represented by finite $`N\times N`$ matrices. The $`2\times 2`$ matrix built up by the gauge fields $`A_0^{\alpha \beta }`$ with the indices $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ is anti-hermitian and traceless except for that each element of them is a $`N\times N`$ matrix. The constant $`H`$ plays the role similar to the constant magnetic field in 2-dimensional QHE. $`\theta `$ is the positive parameter characterizing the non-commutativity of the coordinates of particles, and $`\sigma _3`$ the third component of Pauli matrix. After the quantization of the system, the matrix elements $`Z_{ij}^\alpha `$, $`Z_{ij}^\alpha `$ and the components $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i^\alpha `$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_i^\alpha `$ become the operators satisfy the canonical commutation relations. Based on the construction of solutions obeying the constraint equations of the physical states, we have determined the Fock basis of the physical states of the matrix model as

$`|\{c_i\},`$ $`\{`$ $`c_i^{}\},k={\displaystyle }_{j=1}^N(TrZ^{1j})^{c_j}(TrZ^{2j})^{c_j^{}}`$ (4)
$`(`$ $`ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nn}Z^{2n1})_{i_n})^k|0,`$ (5)
where, $`_{i=1}^Ni(c_ic_i^{})=lN`$, and $`l=0,1,\mathrm{},k`$.

In order to establish the effective description of non-commutative field theory for Zhang’ and Hu’s 4-dimensional QHF on $`S^4`$, we introduced the action of $`SO(4)`$ matrix Chern-Simons model as following

$$S_M=S[Z^\alpha ,\mathrm{\Psi }^\alpha ,A_0]+S[Z^{\overline{\alpha }},\mathrm{\Psi }^{\overline{\alpha }},\overline{A}_0]$$
(6)
with the geometrically restricted condition $`Tr(\overline{Z}^aZ^a)=G`$, where $`G`$ is a parameter dependent on the model. The Fock basis of physical states of this $`SO(4)`$ matrix Chern-Simons model are given by

$`|`$ $`\{`$ $`c_i^a\},k;I={\displaystyle }_{j=1}^N(TrZ^{1j})^{c_j^1}(TrZ^{2j})^{c_j^2}`$ (7)
$`(`$ $`TrZ^{3j})^{c_j^3}(TrZ^{4j})^{c_j^4}(ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_{N=d_{(2I,0)_5}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{I}{}}}`$ (8)
$`[`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^aZ^a]_{i_{_{m=1}^{n1}d_{(Im,m)_4}+1}\mathrm{}i_{_{m=1}^nd_{(Im,m)_4}}}^{(In,n)_4})^k|0,`$ (9)
where, $`_{i=1}^Ni(c_i^1c_i^2)=l_1(2j_1+1)`$ for $`l_1=0,1,\mathrm{},k`$ and $`_{i=1}^Ni(c_i^3c_i^4)=l_2(2j_2+1)`$ for $`l_2=0,1,\mathrm{},k`$, in which $`j_1+j_2=I,2j_1=0,1,\mathrm{},2I`$. The number $`N`$ of particles is equal to the dimensionality $`d_{(2I,0)_5}`$ of the $`SO(5)`$ irrep. $`(2I,0)_5`$. The elements $`[\mathrm{\Psi }^aZ^a]_{i_1\mathrm{}i_{d_{(j_1,j_2)_4}}}^{(j_1,j_2)_4}`$ in (4) are defined by

$`[\mathrm{\Psi }^aZ^a]_{i_1\mathrm{}i_{d_{(j_1,j_2)_4}}}^{(j_1,j_2)_4}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0,m=0}{\overset{2j_1,2j_2}{}}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{12j_1n}Z^{2n}`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^3`$ $`Z^{32j_2m}Z^{4m})_{i_{(n+1)(m+1)}}.`$ (11)
As pointed by Polychronakos, the classical value of the inverse filling fraction is shifted quantum mechanically if one use the finite matrix Chern-Simons theory to describe the fractional quantum Hall states. This can be equivalently viewed as a renormalization of the Chern-Simons coefficient. In fact, this level shift of the matrix Chern-Simons model can be read off from the well known quantum mechanically level shift of the corresponding Chern-Simon theory. The renormalization of the level of Chern-Simons theory has been finished by using a biparameter family of BRS invariant regularization methods of Chern-Simons theory . This renormalization leads to the level shift being $`kk+sign(k)c_V`$, where $`k`$ is the bare Chern-Simons level parameter and $`c_V`$ the quadratic Casimir operator in the adjoint representation of the gauge group of Chern-Simons theory. This implies that the $`SU(2)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model at level $`k`$ should be identified with the 4-dimensional quantum Hall states on the space of quaternions at the filling fraction $`1/(k+2)`$, rather than $`1/k`$. That is, the Laughlin type wavefunction of the 4-dimensional QHF for filling fraction $`1/(k+2)`$ can be equivalently described by the physical ground state of the $`SU(2)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model

$$|\{0\},\{0\},k=(ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}\underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nn}Z^{2n1})_{i_n})^k|0.$$
(12)
The description of Zhang’ and Hu’s 4-dimensional QHF on $`S^4`$ is prvovided by the $`SO(4)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model (3) in which $`S^7`$ is from the second fibration of $`S^4`$. The action (3) is the sum of two $`SU(2)`$ Chern-Simons matrix actions. The physical quantum states of this model are given by all admissible $`SO(4)`$ blocks, which sre built up by the direct products of two $`SU(2)`$ fundamental blocks. So the filling fraction of Zhang’ and Hu’s 4-dimensional quantum Hall states is also shifted to $`k+2`$ if one use the $`SO(4)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model at the level $`k`$ to describe the 4-dimensional QHF on $`S^4`$. This means that the quantum Hall states on $`S^4`$ at filling fraction $`1/(k+2)`$ should be identified with the $`SO(4)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model at the level $`k`$. The Laughlin type wavefunction of this QHF at filling fraction $`1/(k+2)`$ corresponds to the physical ground state of the $`SO(4)`$ matrix model

$`|`$ $`\{`$ $`c_i^a=0\},k;I=(ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_{N=d_{(2I,0)_5}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{I}{}}}`$ (13)
$`[`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^aZ^a]_{i_{_{m=1}^{n1}d_{(Im,m)_4}+1}\mathrm{}i_{_{m=1}^nd_{(Im,m)_4}}}^{(In,n)_4})^k|0,`$ (14)
where, $`_{i=1}^Ni(c_i^1c_i^2)=l_1(2j_1+1)`$ for $`l_1=0,1,\mathrm{},k`$ and $`_{i=1}^Ni(c_i^3c_i^4)=l_2(2j_2+1)`$ for $`l_2=0,1,\mathrm{},k`$, in which $`j_1+j_2=I,2j_1=0,1,\mathrm{},2I`$.

The low-lying excitations in our matrix models can be described in terms of quasiparticles and quasiholes . A quasiparticle state is obtained by peeling a ’particle’ from the surface of the Fermi sea. That is, one quasiparticle obtained by exciting a ’particle’ at Fermi level by energy amount $`n\omega `$ is described by

$`p_n^1|\{0`$ $`\}`$ $`,\{0\},k=(ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nm}`$ (15)
$`Z^{2m1}`$ $`)`$ $`{}_{i_m}{}^{})^{k1}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1N1+n}Z^{20})_{i_1}`$ (16)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m=2}{\overset{N}{}}}`$ $`(`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nm}Z^{2m1})_{i_m}|0.`$ (17)
The quasiholes correspond to the minimal excitations of the ground state inside the QHF. One quasihole excitation is obtained by creating a gap inside the QHF with the energy increase $`m\omega `$

$`h_m^1|\{0`$ $`\}`$ $`,\{0\},k=(ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nn}`$ (18)
$`Z^{2n1}`$ $`)`$ $`{}_{i_n}{}^{})^{k1}ϵ^{i_1\mathrm{}i_N}{\displaystyle }_{n=1}^m(\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nn+1}Z^{2n1})_{i_n}`$ (19)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=m+1}{\overset{N}{}}}`$ $`(`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^1Z^{1Nn}Z^{2n1})_{i_n}|0.`$ (20)
Obviously, $`p_1^1=h_1^1`$. So there is no fundamental distinction between ’particles’ and ’holes’ in the matrix model. Similarly, one can describe the quasiparticle $`p_n^2`$ and quasihole $`h_m^2`$ of excitations corresponding to the oscillator field $`Z^2`$. Although all of these excitations are the fundamental excitations in the matrix Chern-Simons model, however, they can not be regarded directly as the physical low-lying excitations in the matrix model. The physical exciting states must obey the constraint condition of physical states of the matrix model. By using of the techniques in , one can find that all of the fundamental excitations as mentioned above can be expressed by the following states

$`P_{n_1,n_2}^{}`$ $`|\{0\},\{0\},k=`$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}`$ $`(TrZ^{1j})^{c_j}(TrZ^{2j})^{c_j^{}}|\{0\},\{0\},k,`$ (22)
where, $`n_1=_{i=1}^Nic_i`$ and $`n_2=_{i=1}^Nic_i^{}`$. The quasiparticle excitations associated with the oscillator field $`Z^1`$ are more than those associated with the field $`Z^2`$ if $`n_1`$ is larger than $`n_2`$. If $`n_1=n_2+lN`$ for $`l=1,\mathrm{},k`$, $`P_{n_1,n_2}^{}|\{0\},\{0\},k`$ describe the physical excitations of the matrix model. The existence of hierarchy of the 4-dimensional QHF states is just due to the condesation of these physical excitations.

If we denote the quantum number of the $`SU(2)`$ representation as $`J`$ and noticing $`Z^1`$ and $`Z^2`$ associated with ’spin up’ and ’spin down’ respectively, we can find that the number of particles $`N=2J+1`$ for the case of full filling. That is, the particles of this 4-dimensional QHF are filled in the representation of the $`SU(2)`$ level $`J`$. For the case of general $`\stackrel{~}{k}=k+2`$ from the level shifting, the degeneracy given by the representation of $`SU(2)`$ is $`2J^{}+1=\stackrel{~}{k}(N1)+1`$, while the particle number is still $`N`$. The filling factor in this case is $`\nu =N/N\stackrel{~}{k}=1/\stackrel{~}{k}`$ in the thermodynamic limit. Hence, the state $`|\{0\},\{0\},k`$ is equivalent to the Laughlin type wavefunction of the 4-dimensional QHF on the space of quaternions for the filling fraction $`1/\stackrel{~}{k}=1/(k+2)`$. The particles are filled in the degenerate states fixed by the representation of the $`SU(2)`$ level $`\stackrel{~}{k}`$. So the condition of the physical states $`n_1=n_2+lN`$ for $`l=1,\mathrm{},k`$ implies that these states describe the collective excitations with the total ’spin’ $`lN/2`$ of the primary 4-dimensional QHF described by the state $`|\{0\},\{0\},k`$. Following Haldane, we can construct the collective ground state of the 4-dimensional excitation fluid by the condensing of the quasiparticle and quasihole excitations. The Laughlin-type fluid state including the excitations is given by

$`|\{0\}`$ $`,\{0\},p_1,k=(ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_1}}`$ (23)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N_1}{}}}`$ $`(P^{1N_1n}P^{2n1})_{i_n}))^{p_1}|\{0\},\{0\},k,`$ (24)
where $`N_1=N/p_1+1`$ and $`N`$ is divisible by $`p_1`$. $`P^{1i}`$ and $`P^{2i}`$ represent $`P_{i,0}^{}`$ and $`P_{0,i}^{}`$ respectively. One can construct the excitation states of the 4-dimensional excitation fluid in the similar way of the construction of the excitation states in the 4-dimensional QHF. The result is

$`|`$ $`\{c_{1i}\}`$ $`,\{c_{1i}^{}\},p_1,k=`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N_1}{}}}`$ $`(P_1^{1j})^{c_{1j}}(P_1^{2j})^{c_{1j}^{}}|\{0\},\{0\},p_1,k,`$ (26)
where, $`P_1^{\alpha j}=_{i=1}^{N_1}P_i^{\alpha j}`$. Although these states do not satisfy generally all of constraint conditions of the physical states in the matrix model, they are the mediate states to construct the ground state of the 4-dimensional excitation fluid obeying the constraint conditions.

Similar to the 2-dimensional QHFs, the procedure of constructing the 4-dimensional excitation fluids can be iterated, and leads to the hierarchy of the 4-dimensional QHF states. We give the result of the iterated construction of the QHF states as following

$`|`$ $`\{0\},\{0\},p_m,\mathrm{},p_1,k={\displaystyle }_{q=1}^m(ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_q}}`$ (27)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N_q}{}}}(P_{q1}^{1N_qn}P_{q1}^{2n1})_{i_n})^{p_q}|\{0\},\{0\},k,`$ (28)
where $`p_q(N_q1)+N_{q+1}=N_{q1}`$ with $`N_q=0`$ for $`q>m`$ and $`N_0=N`$. Remember that the degeneracy of the 4-dimensional QHF states is determined by the level of the $`SU(2)`$ representation. For the hierarchical states of the 4-dimensional QHF, the level is given by $`\frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{k}(N1)+\frac{1}{2}N_1`$. Solving the iteration relations of the hierarchical states, we obtain the filling factor of the m-th hierarchical fluid state in the thermodynamic limit

$$\nu =\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{k}+\frac{1}{p_1+\frac{1}{p_2+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{p_m}}}}.$$
(29)
This has clearly shown Haldane’s hierarchical structure in the matrix model of the 4-dimensional QHF. However, (13) describes the hierarchical fluid states from the condensation of the excitations for the case of $`l=1`$ in the physical states (2). In fact, there exist the corresponding hierarchical fluid states for each $`l`$. Based on the above discussion, one can easily write off these hierarchical states. The result is

$`|`$ $`\{`$ $`0\},\{0\},p_m^l,\mathrm{},p_1^l,l,k={\displaystyle }_{q=1}^m(ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_q}}`$ (30)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{N_q}{}}}(P_{q1}^{1N_qn}P_{q1}^{2n1})_{i_n})^{p_q^l}|\{0\},\{0\},k,`$ (31)
where $`p_q^l(N_q1)+lN_{q+1}=lN_{q1}`$ with $`N_q=0`$ for $`q>m`$ and $`N_0=N`$. The filling factors corresponding to the states (15) are

$$\nu =\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{k}+\frac{l}{p_1^l+\frac{l}{p_2^l+\mathrm{}+\frac{l}{p_m^l}}}}$$
(32)
for $`l=1,2,\mathrm{},k`$. It should be emphasized that we have exihibited the rich hierarchical structures of the 4-dimensional QHF by means of the fundamental fields $`Z^\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^\alpha `$ of the matrix model rather than adding to extra fields. This implies that the matrix model not only describes the 4-dimensional Laughlin type QHF but also does the hierarchy of the excitation fluids derived from it.

As mentioned above, the physical quantum states of the $`SO(4)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model are given in terms of all admissible $`SO(4)`$ blocks built up by the direct products of two $`SU(2)`$ fundamental blocks. So the collective excitations of the 4-dimensional QHF described by the matrix model must be built up in the same way. The exciting states of quasiparticles and quasiholes in this model are given by

$$P_{n_1,n_2,n_3,n_4}^{}|\{0\},I,k=\underset{a=1}{\overset{4}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}(TrZ^{aj})^{c_j^a}|\{0\},I,k,$$
(33)
where, $`n_a=_{i=1}^Nic_i^a`$. Now we can use the result of the $`SU(2)`$ Chern-Simons matrix model to construct the hierarchical fluid states from the condensation of the excitations in the present matrix model. In order to do this, we denote $`P_{i,0,0,0}^{}`$ and $`P_{0,i,0,0}^{}`$ as $`P^{1i}`$ and $`P^{2i}`$ respectively. Thus $`P^{1i}`$ and $`P^{2i}`$ describe the fundamental excitations of the 4-dimensional Laughlin type QHF associated with one $`SU(2)`$ of $`SO(4)`$. Those associated with the other $`SU(2)`$ of $`SO(4)`$ are described by $`P^{3i}=P_{0,0,i,0}^{}`$ and $`P^{4i}=P_{0,0,0,i}^{}`$. The excitation condensation of Zhang’ and Hu’s 4-dimensional QHF on $`S^4`$ results in the 4-dimensional excitation fluid. The ground state of it is read as

$`|`$ $`\{0\},p_1,I,k=({\displaystyle \underset{N_1^1,N_1^2}{}}ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_1^1\times N_1^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1,m=1}{\overset{N_1^1,N_1^2}{}}}(P^{1N_1^1n}`$ (34)
$`P^{2n1}P^{3N_1^2m}P^{4m1})_{i_{n\times m}})^{p_1}|\{0\},I,k,`$ (35)
where $`N_1^1=N^1/p_1+1=(2j_1+1)/p_1+1`$ and $`N_1^2=N^2/p_1+1=(2j_2+1)/p_1+1`$. Since the particles or quasiparticles of the matrix model are filled in the representation of $`SU(2)\times SU(2)`$, i.e., $`SO(4)`$, we can calculate the number of the extra quasiparticles according to the total ’spin’ contributed by these quasiparticles. So $`N^{ex}/4=_{N_1^1,N_1^2}\frac{1}{2}(N_1^11)\times \frac{1}{2}(N_1^21)=\frac{1}{4}_{j_1,j_2}\frac{2j_1+1}{p_1}\times \frac{2j_2+1}{p_1}`$ for $`j_1+j_2=I`$ and $`2j_1=0,1,\mathrm{},2I`$. Noticing both $`N^1=2j_1+1`$ and $`N^2=2j_2+1`$ should be divisible by $`p_1`$, we finish the above sum to get $`N^{ex}=d_{(2I/p_1,0)_5}`$.

Paralleling with the construction of the hierarchical fluid states of the $`SU(2)`$ matrix model, the hierarchical fluid states of Zhang’ and Hu’s 4-dimensional QHF can be constructed as the following

$`|`$ $`\{0\},p_m,\mathrm{},p_1,k={\displaystyle }_{q=1}^m{\displaystyle }_{N_q^1,N_q^2}(ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_q^1\times N_q^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1,m=1}{\overset{N_q^1,N_q^2}{}}}`$ (36)
$`(`$ $`P_{q1}^{1N_q^1n}P_{q1}^{2n1}P_{q1}^{3N_q^2m}P_{q1}^{4m1})_{i_{n\times m}})^{p_q}|\{0\},I,k,`$ (37)
where $`p_q(N_q^i1)+N_{q+1}^i=N_{q1}^i`$ with $`N_q^i=0`$ for $`q>m`$ and $`N_0^i=2j_i+1`$, $`i=1,2`$. The excitation operators $`P_q^a`$ in (19) are given by

$$|\{c_{qi}^a\},p_q,\mathrm{},p_1,I,k=\underset{a=1}{\overset{4}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N_q}{}}(P_q^{aj})^{c_{qj}^a}|\{0\},p_q,\mathrm{},p_1,I,k,$$
(38)
where, $`P_q^{aj}=_{i=1}^{N_1}P_{qi}^{aj}`$. From the solution of iteration relations, we can read off the filling factor of the 4-dimensional hierarchical fluid state on $`S^4`$. In the thermodynamic limit, which can be taken by setting $`I\mathrm{}`$ since the number of particles is equal to $`N=d_{(2I,0)_5}=\frac{1}{6}(2I+1)(2I+2)(2I+3)`$, the filling factor of the m-th hierarchical fluid state is

$$\nu =\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{k}^3+(\frac{1}{p_1+\frac{1}{p_2+\mathrm{}+\frac{1}{p_m}}})^3}.$$
(39)
For the general $`l`$ in the solutions of the physical states, we can also construct the hierarchical fluid states from the condensation of the $`l`$-th excitations of the 4-dimensional Laughlin type QHF. They are given by

$`|`$ $`\{0\},p_m^l,\mathrm{},p_1^l,l,I,k={\displaystyle }_{q=1}^m{\displaystyle }_{N_q^1,N_q^2}(ϵ^{i_1,\mathrm{},i_{N_q^1\times N_q^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1,m=1}{\overset{N_q^1,N_q^2}{}}}`$ (40)
$`(`$ $`P_{q1}^{1N_q^1n}P_{q1}^{2n1}P_{q1}^{3N_q^2m}P_{q1}^{4m1})_{i_{n\times m}})^{p_q^l}|\{0\},I,k,`$ (41)
where $`p_q^l(N_q^i1)+lN_{q+1}^i=lN_{q1}^i`$ with $`N_q^i=0`$ for $`q>m`$ and $`N_0^i=2j_i+1`$, $`i=1,2`$. Their filling factors are read as

$$\nu =\frac{1}{\stackrel{~}{k}^3+(\frac{l}{p_1+\frac{l}{p_2+\mathrm{}+\frac{l}{p_m}}})^3},$$
(42)
for $`l=1,2,\mathrm{},k`$.

In summary, we have found the hierarchical structures of the 4-dimensional QHF states in the matrix models of 4-dimensional QHFs. The arguements of the renormalization of the Chern-Simons coefficient result in the conclusion that the classical values of the inverse filling fractions are shifted quantum mechanically by two units in the matrix models, i.e., $`1/k1/(k+2)`$. We have given the constructions of the hierarchical states of the 4-dimensional QHFs (15) and (22) corresponding to the QHF of the space of quaternions and the QHF on $`S^4`$, respectively. This implies that our matrix models can effectively describe not only the 4-dimensional QHFs but also their hierarchies.

I would like to thank Dimitra Karabali for many valuable suggestions and comments. The work was partly supported by the NNSF of China (Grant No.90203003) and by the Foundation of Education Ministry of China (Grant No.010335025).