format: text

text:
# Cohomology of symplectic reductions of generic coadjoint orbits

## 1. Introduction

Let $`K`$ be a compact semisimple Lie group, $`TK`$ a maximal torus and $`𝔱𝔨`$ their Lie algebras. Pick a fundamental chamber in $`𝔱^{}`$ and a point $`\lambda `$ in the interior. Let $`𝒪_\lambda `$ be the orbit of $`\lambda `$ under the coadjoint representation of $`K`$ on $`𝔨^{}`$. $`𝒪_\lambda `$ is diffeomorphic to the flag variety $`K/T`$ and it has a naturally occurring symplectic form $`\omega `$ known as the Kirillov-Kostant-Souriau form. The action of $`T`$ on $`𝒪_\lambda `$ is Hamiltonian, which means that there is an invariant map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒪_\lambda 𝔱^{}$$

satisfying $`\omega (X_\eta ,)=d\mathrm{\Phi }^\eta `$, where $`\eta 𝔱`$, $`X_\eta `$ the vector field on $`𝒪_\lambda `$ generated by $`\eta `$, and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^\eta (m)=\mathrm{\Phi }(m)(\eta )`$ defined by the natural pairing between $`𝔱`$ and $`𝔱^{}`$. We call $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ a moment map for this action.

The image of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the convex hull of $`W\lambda `$, the Weyl group orbit of $`\lambda `$. Let $`\mu \mathrm{\Phi }(𝒪_\lambda )`$ be a regular value of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. We define the symplectic reduction at $`\mu `$ by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^1(\mu )/T=𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu ).$$

The goal of this note is to give a presentation of the cohomology111Only cohomology with coefficients in the field $``$ of rational numbers will be considered throughout this paper. ring of $`𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu )`$ in terms of the root system of $`K`$. We present $`H^{}(𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu ))`$ as a quotient of the $`T`$-equivariant cohomology ring $`H_T^{}(𝒪_\lambda )`$ by a certain ideal. We rely on the following fundamental result.

###### Theorem 1.1 (Kirwan).

Let $`M`$ be a compact symplectic manifold with a Hamiltonian $`T`$ action, where $`T`$ is a compact torus. If $`\mu 𝔱^{}`$ is a regular value of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, then the restriction map in equivariant cohomology

$$\kappa :H_T^{}(M)H_T^{}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1(\mu ))$$

is surjective.

As the $`T`$ action is locally free on level sets of the moment map at regular values, $`H_T^{}(\mathrm{\Phi }^1(\mu ))=H^{}(M//T(\mu ))`$. The resulting map $`\kappa :H_T^{}(M)H^{}(M//T(\mu ))`$ is called the Kirwan map. Kirwan’s result is of particular importance because the equivariant cohomology can be described in terms of the equivariant cohomology of the fixed point sets of the $`T`$ action. In the case of isolated fixed points, this is just a sum of polynomial rings.

###### Theorem 1.2 (Kirwan).

Let $`M`$ be a compact Hamiltonian $`T`$-space. Let $`M^T`$ denote the fixed point set of the $`T`$ action. The restriction map

$$i^{}:H_T^{}(M)H_T^{}(M^T)$$

is injective. In the case that $`M^T`$ is a finite set of points, $`H_T^{}(M^T)=_{pM^T}[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ where $`n=dimT`$.

A presentation of the cohomology ring of the reduced space $`M//T(\mu )`$ can be obtained by using the following description of the kernel of the Kirwan map, which is due to Tolman and Weitsman \[TW\]. If $`\alpha `$ is in $`H_T^{}(M)`$ we denote

$$\text{s}upp(\alpha )=\{pM^T:\alpha |_p0\}$$

Fix an arbitrary inner product $`,`$ on $`𝔱^{}`$.

###### Theorem 1.3 (Tolman-Weitsman).

The kernel of the Kirwan map $`\kappa `$ is the ideal of $`H_T^{}(M)`$ generated by all $`\alpha H_T^{}(M)`$ with the property that there exists $`\xi 𝔱^{}`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\text{s}upp(\alpha ))\{x𝔱^{}|\xi ,x\xi ,\mu \}.$$

In other words, $`\alpha `$ is in $`\mathrm{ker}\kappa `$ if and only if all points of $`\text{s}upp(\alpha )`$ are mapped by $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to the same side of an affine hyperplane in $`𝔱^{}`$ which passes through $`\mu `$.

The $`T`$-equivariant cohomology ring of the coadjoint orbit $`𝒪_\lambda =K/T`$ is well understood. Kostant and Kumar constructed in a basis $`\{x_w\}_{wW}`$ of $`H_T^{}(K/T)`$ as a $`H_T^{}(pt)`$-module, which we refer to as the Schubert basis \[KK\]. Let $`B`$ be a Borel in $`G:=K^{}`$, and $`B_{}`$ an opposite Borel. For any $`vW`$, let $`X_v=\overline{B_{}\stackrel{~}{v}B}/B`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{v}`$ is any choice of lift of $`vW`$ in the normalizer of the torus. These opposite Schubert varieties are $`T`$-invariant subvarieties of $`G/BK/T`$. The basis $`\{x_w\}`$ is uniquely defined by the property that

$$_{X_v}x_w=\delta _{vw}.$$

Theorem 1.2 suggests the importance of knowing how to restrict the classes $`x_w`$ to fixed points $`W\lambda `$. This formula was worked out for general $`K`$ by S. Billey \[Bi\]. In particular, it is easy to show that $`x_w|_v=0`$ if $`vw`$ in the Bruhat order.222The class $`x_w`$ differs from the $`\xi ^w`$ constructed in \[KK\] by the relationship $`x_w:=w_0\xi ^{w_0w}`$, where $`w_0`$ is the longest element of $`W`$. In other words,

$$supp(x_w)=\{v\lambda :vw\}.$$

To each $`\tau W`$ we can associate the new basis

$$\{x_w^\tau =\tau x_{\tau ^1w}\}_{wW},$$

whose elements have the property

$$supp(x_w^\tau )=\{v\lambda :\tau ^1v\tau ^1w\}.$$

Let $`\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _l𝔱^{}`$ denote the fundamental weights associated to the chosen fundamental chamber of $`𝔱^{}`$. Let $`,`$ be the restriction to $`𝔱^{}`$ of a $`K`$-invariant product on $`𝔨^{}`$. Our main result is:

###### Theorem 1.4.

The cohomology ring $`H^{}(𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu ))`$ is isomorphic to the quotient of $`H_T^{}(K/T)`$ by the ideal generated by

$$\{x_v^\tau :\text{t}hereexistsj\text{s}uchthat\lambda _j,\tau ^1v\lambda \lambda _j,\tau ^1\mu \}.$$

Remarks.

1. One can take the description of $`H_T^{}(K/T)`$ (see for instance \[Br\]) and deduce a precise presentation of the cohomology ring $`H^{}(𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu ))`$ in terms of generators and relations.

2. For $`K=SU(n)`$ this result was proven by the first author in \[Go1\].

Acknowledgement. The second author would like to thank Lisa Jeffrey for introducing him to the topic of the paper. Both authors would like to thank her for a careful reading of the manuscript and for suggesting several improvements.

## 2. Primary description of $`\mathrm{ker}\kappa `$

For any $`\xi 𝔱^{}`$ we denote by $`f_\xi `$ the corresponding height function on $`𝒪_\lambda `$,

$$f_\xi (x)=\xi ,x.$$

Under the pairing between $`𝔱^{}`$ and $`𝔱`$, the function $`f_\xi `$ is a component of the moment map. In fact, it is well known that $`f_\xi `$ is Morse-Bott for all $`\xi 𝔱^{}`$. Denote by $`C𝔱^{}`$ the fundamental (positive) Weyl chamber, which can be described by

$$C=\{r_1\lambda _1+\mathrm{}+r_l\lambda _l:\text{ }allr_j>0\},$$

and let $`\overline{C}`$ be its closure.

###### Lemma 2.1.

Let $`\tau `$ be in $`W`$ and $`\xi `$ in $`\tau \overline{C}`$. If $`\tau ^1v<\tau ^1w`$ in the Bruhat order, then $`f_\xi (v\lambda )f_\xi (w\lambda )`$.

###### Proof.

The result follows immediately from the fact that if $`\xi C`$, then the unstable manifold of $`f_\xi `$ through $`v\lambda `$ with respect to the Kähler metric on

$$𝒪_\lambda =K/T=G/B$$

is just the Bruhat cell $`BvB/B`$ (see for instance \[Ko\]). ∎

The main result of this section is:

###### Theorem 2.1.

Suppose that $`\alpha H_T^{}(𝒪_\lambda )`$ has the property that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\text{s}upp(\alpha ))\{x𝔱^{}:\xi ,x\xi ,\mu \}.$$

Then $`\alpha `$ can be decomposed as

$$\alpha =\underset{wW}{}a_w^\tau x_w^\tau $$

with $`a_w^\tau H_T^{}(pt)`$, such that if $`a_w^\tau 0`$ then

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(supp(x_w^\tau ))\{x𝔱^{}:\xi ,x\xi ,\mu \}.$$

###### Proof.

Take $`\tau W`$ such that $`\xi \tau \overline{C}`$. Suppose that the decomposition of $`\alpha `$ with respect to the basis $`\{x_w^\tau \}_{wW}`$ is of the form

(1)
$$\alpha =\underset{wW}{}a_w^\tau x_w^\tau +a_{v_1}^\tau x_{v_1}^\tau +\mathrm{}+a_{v_r}^\tau x_{v_r}^\tau ,$$

where the first sum contains only $`w`$ with

$$\xi ,w\lambda \xi ,\mu ,$$

whereas

$$\xi ,v_j\lambda >\xi ,\mu ,a_{v_j}^\tau S(𝔱^{}),a_{v_j}^\tau 0,$$

for any $`1jl`$. We may assume that $`v_1`$ has the property that there exists no $`j>1`$ with $`\tau ^1v_1<\tau ^1v_j`$. Now let us evaluate both sides of (1) at $`v_1\lambda `$. Since

$$\xi ,w\lambda \xi ,\mu <\xi ,v_1\lambda ,$$

by Lemma 2.1 we must have

$$x_w^\tau |_{v_1\lambda }=0$$

for any $`w`$ corresponding to a term in the first sum in (1). It follows that

$$\alpha |_{v_1\lambda }=a_{v_1}^\tau x_{v_1}^\tau |_{v_1\lambda }0$$

so $`v_1\lambda `$ is in $`supp(\alpha )`$ even though $`\xi ,v_1\lambda >\xi ,\mu `$. This is a contradiction. ∎

## 3. Proof of the main result

We now prove Theorem 1.4. Let $`v`$ and $`\tau `$ in $`W`$ be such that

(2)
$$\lambda _j,\tau ^1v\lambda \lambda _j,\tau ^1\mu ,$$

for some $`1jl`$. We show that $`x_v^\tau `$ is in the kernel of the Kirwan map

$$\kappa :H_T^{}(𝒪_\lambda )H^{}(𝒪_\lambda //T(\mu )).$$

Let $`\xi =\tau \lambda _j`$ be in $`\tau \overline{C}`$. Note that if $`wsupp(x_v^\tau )`$, then $`\tau ^1w\tau ^1v`$ implies by Lemma 2.1

$$\xi ,w\lambda \xi ,v\lambda \xi ,\mu .$$

Thus $`x_v^\tau \mathrm{ker}\kappa `$.

Now let us consider $`\alpha H_T^{}(K/T)`$ with the property that there exists $`\xi 𝔱^{}`$ with

$$supp(\alpha )\{x𝔱^{}|\xi ,x\xi ,\mu \}.$$

Take $`\tau W`$ such that $`\xi \tau \overline{C}`$. By Theorem 2.2, we can decompose $`\alpha `$ as

(3)
$$\alpha =\underset{wW}{}a_w^\tau x_w^\tau $$

where $`a_w^\tau `$ can be nonzero only if

$$supp(x_w^\tau )\{x𝔱^{}|\xi ,x\xi ,\mu \}.$$

In particular, if $`a_w^\tau 0`$, then

(4)
$$\xi ,w\lambda \xi ,\mu .$$

Since $`\xi `$ is in $`\tau \overline{C}`$, it can be written as

(5)
$$\xi =\tau \underset{j=1}{\overset{l}{}}r_j\lambda _j,$$

where all $`r_j`$ are non-negative. So (4) and (5) imply that there exists $`j\{1,\mathrm{},l\}`$ such that

$$\tau \lambda _j,w\lambda \tau \lambda _j,\mu .$$

In other words, each nonzero term in the right hand side of (3) is a multiple of a $`x_w^\tau `$ of the type claimed in Theorem 1.4. ∎

Remark. It follows that, in the particular situation of generic coadjoint orbits, in order to cover the whole Tolman-Weitsman kernel of the Kirwan map it is sufficient to consider affine hyperplanes through $`\mu `$ which are perpendicular to vectors of the type $`\tau \lambda _j`$, with $`\tau W`$ and $`j\{1,\mathrm{},l\}`$. But these are just the hyperplanes parallel to the walls of the moment polytope. This result concerning a “sufficient set of hyperplanes” has been proved by the first author in \[Go2\], for an arbitrary Hamiltonian torus action on a compact manifold.


text:
# HST images of B2 radio galaxies: a link between circum-nuclear dust and radio properties? Based on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by AURA, Inc., under NASA contract NAS 5-26555 and by STScI grant GO-3594.01-91A

## 1 Introduction

A long standing question in radio astronomy has been why some elliptical galaxies host strong radio sources and others not. The reason may have something to do with the physical conditions near the active nucleus from which the radio source emanates. Although attempts have been made in the past to link the presence of optical features like dust lanes and a radio source these have always been inconclusive due to the lack of adequate angular resolution especially in the optical images. The quality of optical imaging has now dramatically improved: imaging with the Hubble Space Telescope (HST) has provided valuable new information on the optical structure near the nucleus of radio galaxies. In particular, the HST/WFPC2 snapshot survey of the 3CR sample has produced a large and uniform database of images essential for a statistical analysis of their host galaxies (Martel et al. martel99 (1999), De Koff et al. dekoff96 (1996)). These studies revealed the presence of new and interesting features, some of them almost exclusively associated to low luminosity FR I radio galaxies. For example, the HST observations have shown the presence of dust in a large fraction of weak (FR I) radio galaxies which takes the form of extended nuclear disks (Jaffe et al. jaffe (1993), De Koff et al. dekoff96 (1996), De Juan, Colina & Golombek dejuan (1996), Verdoes Kleijn et al. verdoes (1999)). Such structures have been naturally identified with the reservoir of material which will ultimately accrete into the central black hole. The symmetry axis of the nuclear disk may be a useful indicator of the the rotation axis of the central black hole (see e.g. Capetti & Celotti capetti99 (1999)), although it must be admitted that the precise relationship between these two axes remains uncertain. FR I sources represent an essential ingredient in the Unified Schemes of radio-loud AGNs as the mis-oriented counter part of BL Lac objects (see Urry and Padovani urry95 (1995) for a review). Indeed, recent radio studies have provided strong evidence in favour of relativistic beaming in their jets (Laing et al. laing99 (1999)). Host galaxies of BL Lacs have been studied with the HST by Urry et al. (urry99 (1999)), and a similar analysis of galaxies hosting FR I sources should clarify if there is continuity in the properties of the respective nuclear regions, i.e. if any differences are due solely to orientation effects. Furthermore, it was shown by Chiaberge, Capetti and Celotti (chiaberge99 (1999), chiaberge00 (2000)) that the optical nuclear sources commonly found in FR I might represent the counterpart of the synchrotron radio cores. If this picture is correct, one expects that the dust features found in FR I sources may provide further indications on the orientation of the radio source, provided that these features have something to do with the radio properties. As many of the most extensively studied FR I radio galaxies are part of the B2 sample of low luminosity radio galaxies (Fanti et al. fanti87 (1987)), this prompted us to perform a complete, high resolution optical study of these $`100`$ sources. The radio characteristics of the B2 sample are different and in some sense complementary to those of the 3CR already studied with HST and they can fill the gap between the ”radio quiet & normal” and the ”radio loud” ellipticals. Although only part (almost 60 %) of the B2 sample has been observed with the HST, the high resolution optical data can be considered as representative and unbiased with respect to the entire B2 sample. The new HST data were presented in Capetti et al. (capetti00 (2000)). A statistical study of such a large sample of low luminosity radio galaxies enables us to establish how frequently we can detect optical jets, optical nuclear sources, circum-nuclear disks and dust lanes and if there is any relationship with the radio properties. The organization of this paper is as follows: in Sect. 2 we briefly describe the HST data of the B2 sample and give some general information; in Sect. 3 we describe how we produced images in which the properties of the circum-nuclear dust can be analyzed; a discussion of the dust properties in given in Sect. 4. Throughout this paper we use a Hubble constant $`H_0=100`$ km s-1Mpc-1 and $`q_0=0.5`$.

## 2 HST observations of the the Sample

A brief description of the B2 sample of low luminosity radio galaxies and its present status was given in Capetti et al. (capetti00 (2000)). The B2 sample of low luminosity radio galaxies has been extensively studied at radio wavelengths, especially since the 1980’s (see Fanti et al. fanti87 (1987), Parma et al. parma (1987), De Ruiter et al. deruiter (1990), Morganti et al. morg97 (1997)). Comparison with Einstein Satellite X-ray data was done by Morganti et al. (morg88 (1988)). A number of B2 radio galaxies were subsequently observed with ROSAT (Feretti et al. feretti (1995), Massaglia et al. massaglia (1996), Trussoni et al. trussoni (1997), Canosa et al. canosa99 (1999)).

Optical work on the entire B2 sample has somewhat lagged behind, but a complete broad band imaging survey of the B2 sample was carried out by Gonzalez-Serrano et al. (gonz93 (1993)) and Gonzalez-Serrano & Carballo (gonz00 (2000)), while narrow band Ha images were obtained by Morganti et al. (morg92 (1992)). The IRAS properties of the sample were studied by Impey & Gregorini (impey (1993)).

In the course of our HST program observations were obtained for 41 B2 galaxies, while public archive data exist for 16 additional objects, usually because these sources are also part of the 3C catalog (see De Koff et al. dekoff96 (1996), Martel et al. martel99 (1999), Verdoes Kleijn et al. verdoes (1999)). Therefore up till the present HST imaging has been done for 57 of the 100 radio galaxies. In the following we will speak loosely of the B2 sample, when we discuss the sample of these 57 radio galaxies, while in the following the term 3C sample refers to 3C radio galaxies used by de Koff et al. (dekoff00 (2000)) that are not part of the B2 sample.

Our program observations were obtained between April 9th and September 1st 1999, using the Wide Field and Planetary Camera 2 (WFPC2). The pixel size of the Planetary Camera, in which all targets are located, is 0.0455 arcsec and the $`800\times 800`$ pixels cover a field of view of $`36\times 36`$ arcsec. Two broad band filters were used, namely F555W and F814W, which cover the spectral regions $`45006500`$ Å and $`70009500`$ Å respectively. Although their transmission curves do not match exactly those of standard filters we will usually refer to them as $`V`$ and $`I`$ filters. The data have been processed through the PODPS (Post Observation Data Processing System) pipeline for bias removal and flat fielding (Biretta et al. biretta (1996)). One image was taken through each filter and the exposure time was always set to 300 s (with the exception of B2 2116+26, which was observed for 350 s in the $`V`$ band, as $`I`$ band images were already available in the archive).

## 3 Circum-nuclear dust in low luminosity radio galaxies

In order to study the dust in detail, we made use of the fact that we have both $`V`$ and $`I`$ images (at least for the sources that were observed in our program). Since the galaxy color $`VI`$ has only very small gradients the images in $`V`$ and $`I`$ are very similar and differ only by a constant. However, the dust features are more prominent in the $`V`$ image, and this suggests we can fit the galaxy in the $`I`$ image by a regular elliptical distribution and use this, to a first approximation, as a dust-free model. Taking into account the constant offset between $`V`$ and $`I`$, the $`V`$ image was divided by the galaxy model as obtained from the $`I`$ image. The resulting image of ratios will clearly show any dust features and thus can be easily analyzed; in regions without absorption the pixel values will be close to unity, while absorption results in values $`<1`$.

The dust features were classified as disks, lanes (presumably edge-on disks), filaments (irregularly curved features, possibly eccentric with respect to the galaxy nucleus), or complex (patchy structures). The classification of structures can be checked with the help of the album of images given in Capetti et al. (capetti00 (2000)). In Figs. 1 and 2 we give two of the best examples of disk-like structures found. These residual images (or ”ratio maps”) were analyzed using the software package SYNAGE++ recently developed by Murgia (murgia (2000)). The arrows give the direction of the main jet. White colors represent absorption and therefore dust features.

By no means all objects show absorption features: almost half (42 %) of the observed galaxies have a very smooth light distribution without any sign of circum-nuclear dust. When dust is seen it is in most cases in the form of lanes or disks. Only in a minority of the B2 galaxies do we see more complicated structures, like distorted filaments. A good example of complex dust structures is B2 1350+31 (see Capetti et al. capetti00 (2000)).

## 4 Discussion

### 4.1 The detection of dust

We tried to make quantitative estimates of the amount of dust present, by considering a positive detection of dust only if in nine pixels that form a single area in the ratio maps the pixel value was less than 0.85, (see also de Koff et al. dekoff00 (2000)). We calculated the masses of the clumpy dust features in the usual way, following Sadler & Gerhard (sadler85 (1985)) and de Koff et al. (dekoff00 (2000)), by determining the covering factor of the dust; this was done by summing all pixels in the ratio maps which had a value $`<`$0.85, such that the dust mass is: $`M_{\mathrm{dust}}=\mathrm{\Sigma }\times A_\lambda \times \mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$, where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is the area covered by the dust, $`A_\lambda `$ the mean absorption of the area under consideration and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the mass absorption coefficient, taken as $`6\times 10^6`$mag kpc$`{}_{}{}^{2}M_{\mathrm{}}^{1}`$ (see de Koff et al. dekoff00 (2000)). The mass is based on the absorption in the $`V`$ images (see Sect. 3). The mean visual absorption is in the range 0.2–0.5 mag for all objects. The observed properties of the dust features (morphology, mean absorption and total area) are given in Table 1. Since 3C sources already had been analyzed by de Koff et al. (dekoff00 (2000)), we did not repeat the calculation of $`A_\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and this is accounted for by an asterisk in the respective columns of Table 1. A non-detection of dust means that less than nine pixels were found with value $`<0.85`$ in a single area. Corresponding upper limits are based on this. In Table 2 we list the upper limits to the dust masses for those sources in which no dust was detected.

We should remark that the detection of dust lanes or disks around galactic nuclei suffers from a number of selection effects, which are not so easily quantifiable. First, if the circum-nuclear dust takes, as we believe, the form of disks, then its detection will clearly depend on orientation of the disk with respect to the line of sight. Dust disks will be more easily seen if they are close to edge-on (in which case they will be called ”lanes”); up till now the only counter example in the B2 sample is B2 0104+32 (3C 31), in which we are able to see fairly complete ellipses of dust around the nucleus. Another obvious selection effect is due to redshift: since we require a minimum of nine pixels with significant absorption in a contiguous area, the detectable dust mass depends on redshift (see Sect. 4.3). This effect is shown in Fig. 3, where we plot the dust masses as derived for B2 sources, including the upper limits, as a function of redshift. Is should also be noted that the distribution of detected masses and upper limits appears to be discontinuous.

Using the criterion for detection we find that dust is frequently present: 30/57 (53 %) of the galaxies show dust features, either in the form of bands or disk-like structures, or more irregular patches. A summary of some general properties derived for these thirty sources is given in Table 3. Most columns of the table are obvious; it should only be mentioned that we give two determinations of dust masses; the first, in Col. 6, is the mass calculated from the absorption map as explained in this paper, while Col. 7 gives the dust mass (or an upper limit) derived from the IRAS IR fluxes (if available). A ”J” in Col. 8 means that the source has a radio jet. The percentage of dust detections in the B2 sample may be slightly higher than in the 3C sources, which in 33 % of the cases show dust (De Koff et al. dekoff00 (2000)). However, it does not appear that there is any difference between FR I and FR II objects in the B2 sample: the FR I sources with dust are 20/35 (57 %), against 6/12 (50 %) of the FR I-II and FR II sources (for the FR classification see Capetti et al. capetti00 (2000)). Note that nine B2 sources are either compact nuclei or non-classifiable.

Our data strengthen the findings by Martel et al. (martel99 (1999)) who noted that disk-like structures are preferentially associated to FR I type radio sources. Since FR I sources often have detected radio jets, it is expected that the presence of disklike structures is also related to the presence of jets. This is indeed the case, but we can even make a more detailed statement: if a source has complex dust features, i.e. no disk or lane, then most of the sources have no radio jet (7/9), while a majority of objects with a disk-like feature also have a radio jet (16/21). Another way of saying this is that the large majority (16/18) of the B2 galaxies with a radio jet also have a disk or lane (see Table 4). Fisher’s exact probability test (see e.g. Siegel siegel56 (1956)) gives a probability of 0.9 % that the distribution in Table 4 is due to chance.

It should also be mentioned that if we limit ourselves to sources with a jet and with redshift $`z<0.03`$ (like the objects discussed by Verdoes Kleijn et al. verdoes (1999)), then dust is detected even in 80 % of the cases, against the 53 % overall. This increase in the detection of dust features in more nearby galaxies regards only sources with a radio jet: if no jet is present the fraction of sources with dust is close to 50 %, both for nearby sources and for the sources with $`z>0.03`$.

We find no connection between dust content and radio size: the sources with dust have a median linear size of $`94\pm 35`$ kpc, against $`76\pm 30`$ for the sources without dust.

Table 5 gives the relation between the detection of dust and the presence of an optical core. The data on the optical cores were taken from Capetti et al. (capetti02 (2002)). It is quite obvious that there is no significant preference for sources with dust to have no detected optical core, or, reading the table differently, for galaxies without optical core to be more dusty. Although one would expect that the possibility to detect an optical core is negatively influenced by the presence of dust, in line with the usual picture of the optical core being surrounded by a dusty disk or torus which obscures the core when the disk is seen close to edge-on, the absence of any significant effect may be influenced by the strong selection effects discussed earlier: the detection of dust and the optical core in the standard model both depend on the orientation with respect to the observer. Especially the detection of dust may be sensitive, in a complicated way, to the redshift of the galaxy as well. However, perhaps most important of all, Chiaberge, Capetti & Celotti (chiaberge99 (1999)) concluded that the optical nucleus is very often not obscured even if dust is present, so that the dust must be optically thin. This provides a natural explanation for the absence of a correlation between dust and optical nucleus. In fact, all objects present a mean absorption consistent with an optical depth $`\tau <1`$.

### 4.2 Orientation of dust features and the direction of the radio axis

Alignment effects involving the radio axis and some optical axis (for example the major axis of the galaxy) have been searched for in the past, but the results were mostly inconclusive. However in nearby galaxies harbouring a (weak) radio source an alignment between the central dust feature and the radio axis was found (Kotanyi & Ekers kotanyi (1979)). Naively one would expect that the directions of the radio axis and the disk or lane are strongly correlated. Indeed, there is a general tendency for the radio axis to be perpendicular to the disk or lane, as can be seen in Fig. 4. There may also be a tendency for a more prominent alignment if a radio jet is detected (see Fig. 5), however, the effect, if it exists at all, is weak.

According to de Koff et al. (dekoff96 (1996)), who used recent HST images of 3C sources, the alignment is most pronounced in sources with (small) disk structures. Figure 6 partly confirms this statement. Indeed the difference between simple (i.e. disk-like) and more complex structures in non-B2 3C galaxies (lower panel) is significant at a confidence level of 98.5 %. However in our data on the B2 galaxies (upper panel) no significant difference is seen (confidence level $`<90\%`$). The mean alignment angles are $`62\mathrm{°}`$ for both simple and complex dust features in B2 sources, and $`68\mathrm{°}`$ and $`38\mathrm{°}`$ for simple and complex 3C sources respectively. In this and other figures we have defined disklike structures (including straight lanes) as simple, and all other dust features (including distorted lanes) as complex.

As we remarked in the previous Section, the simple structures tend to be found in sources with radio jets. It is well known that jets are more easily detected in weaker radio sources of type FR I and it is therefore to be expected that dusty disks and lanes are more frequently present in the weaker radio sources with jets; any alignment between radio axis and dust-disks should be sought there. This is illustrated in Fig. 7, where we plot the alignment angle against radio power. Clearly many sources, and actually all of the weak ones with $`P10^{24}`$WHz-1, have an alignment angle $`60\mathrm{°}`$. For the FR II sources (coinciding mostly with the non-B2 3C sources in Fig. 7) there are quite a few sources with small angles ($`<60\mathrm{°}`$). The mean alignment angle is $`75.3\pm 8.7\mathrm{°}`$ for the B2 sources with $`P10^{24}`$WHz-1, against $`57.3\pm 25\mathrm{°}`$ for the stronger B2 sources. The difference between the average angles is not significant, but the variance of the distributions is different (confidence level $`>99`$ % from Fisher’s F-distribution). This of course reflects the fact that all the weak sources are clustered towards high alignment angles.

### 4.3 Dust masses

As explained in Sect. 4.1, we calculated the masses of the dust features in the usual way, following Sadler & Gerhard (sadler85 (1985)). In Fig. 8 we show the derived dust masses against the alignment angle. No correlation is seen.

A confirmation that the simple structures have on average lower masses is shown in Fig. 9: the lower masses correspond to the disk and lane structures. For the B2 galaxies with simple dust structures we find an average $`<\mathrm{log}(M/M\mathrm{}>=3.9`$, with a standard deviation of the mean of 0.20, while complex structures have an average of 5.0 with standard deviation 0.36. According to Student’s t-test this difference is significant at the 99.5 % level. A similar difference is obtained for the 3C galaxies: $`<\mathrm{log}(M/M\mathrm{}>=4.68\pm 0.25`$ for simple dust and $`5.2\pm 0.13`$ for complex dust. This difference is significant at a confidence level of 98 %. The higher mass values of the 3C galaxies reflect the fact that they are generally stronger radio sources. Anyway, it is possible that the objects classified as containing complex dust structures also have small disks, hidden in the complexity of the dust features.

Most striking, however, is the correlation shown in Fig. 10, between the total radio power and the detected dust masses. A linear regression between $`\mathrm{log}P`$ and $`\mathrm{log}M/M_{\mathrm{}}`$ gives a slope of $`0.61\pm 0.16`$. We can reject (using the recipe given in e.g. Haber & Runyon haber73 (1973)) the hypothesis that radio power and dust mass are uncorrelated at the 99.9 % level. However, it is known that radio power and redshift are correlated in flux limited samples; using the test discussed by Macklin (macklin82 (1982)), we can reject the hypothesis that the apparent correlation between power and dust mass is due exclusively to a correlation between P and z and M and z, at the level of $`4.3\sigma `$. We may illustrate this strong correlation (independent of redshift), by dividing our sample in four redshift intervals ($`z<0.02`$, $`0.02<z<0.05`$, $`0.05<z<0.08`$ and $`z>0.08`$). The correlation remains in three of the four redshift interval (see Fig. 10); although it is formally not significant in the lowest redshift bin ($`0.45\sigma `$) the correlation is very strong indeed in the other redshift bins, even if the number of objects involved is only of the order of 7 or 8 per bin: the significance levels are 3.1, 4.3 and 4.9 $`\sigma `$ in order of increasing redshift. The location of the upper limits in Fig. 10 strongly suggests that the distribution in the $`\mathrm{log}P\mathrm{log}M`$ plane is bimodal, that is, if there is dust detected in the form of disks or lanes, then the amount of dust depends on radio power (or vice-versa), but in addition to this there are radio sources in which no dust is detected, practically independently of the radio power (the slow rising of the upper limits in Fig. 10 with radio power is due to increasing redshift).

No correlation is found between detected dust masses and the absolute magnitude of the galaxy and this is in line with the result of de Koff et al. (dekoff00 (2000)); therefore the relation dust mass against power stands on its own, and does not appear to be induced by other possible correlations between galaxy properties.

In order to compare the correlation derived from the B2 sample with other data we show in Fig. 11 the same plot as in Fig. 10, but now with non-B2 3C sources added and also an optically selected sample of nearby ($`z<0.011`$) E and S0 galaxies described in Tran et al. (tran01 (2001)). For clarity no upper limits were plotted. The galaxies in which both radio emission (based on the NVSS) and dust were detected are 18 of the 107 galaxies discussed by Tran et al. (tran01 (2001)). Since the selection criteria of the Tran et al. (tran01 (2001)) are rather complicated no statistical conclusions should be drawn from the location of these galaxies in Fig. 11; we just remark that they roughly fall in the region were we would expect them to be according to the correlation based on the B2 sample.

In a number of cases we can also derive dust masses from IRAS data, although most B2 sources have only upper limits. We use the 100 $`\mu `$m data given by Impey & Gregorini (impey (1993)), if available. The dust masses were calculated using a dust temperature $`T_\mathrm{d}=30`$ K (see de Koff et al. dekoff00 (2000)); the results are shown in Fig. 12. The derived IRAS masses are typically a factor $``$100 higher than the masses derived from our absorption analysis. To bring the masses down to the level of the masses determined here from the absorption analysis, we would need to increase the dust temperature in most cases to unrealisticly high values ($`>>100`$ K). Only for B2 0104+32 (3C 31), B2 1350+31 and B2 2116+26 can we bring the dust masses in agreement with $`T_\mathrm{d}<100`$ K. We therefore conclude that the detected IRAS dust masses are in general one or two orders of magnitude higher than the masses derived from the absorption analysis. The upper limits in Fig. 12 are consistent with this. It is of course not surprising that the IRAS masses are larger, as the IRAS fluxes measure the overall presence of dust (including diffuse components), while the absorption analysis is only sensitive to sharp and well defined features, which in many cases means only the dusty disk close to the nucleus. Apparently the circumnuclear features measured by us represent not much more than about between 1 and 10 % of the overall dust.

## 5 Summary

1. Dust features are detected in slightly over 50 % (30/57) of the B2 sources, which is a bit higher than was found for 3C sources by de Koff et al. (dekoff00 (2000)). Although this would suggest a difference between FRI (majority of B2) and FRII (majority in 3C) sources no significant effect is found.
2. If a B2 radio source has jets, then in 16/18 sources the dust around the galactic nucleus comes in the form of disks or lanes, i.e. of simples structures; this correlation is very strong: the probability that the distribution is only due to chance is 0.9 % . Conversely, in seven of the nine sources with complex dust structures no radio jet is seen.
3. The radio jets tend to be perpendicular to the dust lanes or disks, in particular the weaker FR I radio sources, with $`P<10^{24}`$WHz-1. Moreover small dust masses (with $`\mathrm{log}M/M_{\mathrm{}}<3`$) are found mostly in these weaker sources. In part this may be a selection effect, because the weakest sources are also the most nearby, in which small dust masses are more easily detected.
4. We have shown that if circum-nuclear dust is present in low luminosity radio sources, then its amount and its morphology are linked to the properties of the radio sources. In other words the radio source ”knows” about the presence of dust. We base this conclusion on the fact that there is a well established correlation between the dust mass and the total (or core) radio power, as described in the previous Section. Since the radio and optical properties are (in observational sense) only indirectly dependent via the distance, the only way to explain this correlation away is through a selection effect that works both on the derived dust masses and on the radio power. The fact that the correlation between radio power and dust mass remains valid also within different redshift intervals strongly suggests that the correlation is intrinsic. However this correlation holds only if a significant amount of dust is present, and there may be a discontinuity (or bimodality in the mass distribution), as is also clear from Fig. 10.

###### Acknowledgements.

This research has made use of the NASA/IPAC Extragalactic Database (NED) which is operated by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.


text:
# Components of the Springer Fiber and Domino Tableaux

## 1. Introduction

Let $`𝔤`$ be a complex semisimple Lie algebra with adjoint group $`G`$ and write $`𝒪_f=Gf`$ for the coadjoint orbit of $`G`$ through $`f`$ in $`𝔤^{}`$. Fix a Borel subgroup $`B`$ of $`G`$ and let $``$ be the flag variety $`G/B.`$ For a unipotent element $`uG`$, $`_u`$ is the variety of flags in $``$ fixed by the action of $`u`$. The orbit $`𝒪_f`$ has a natural $`G`$-invariant symplectic structure and the Kostant-Kirillov method seeks to attach representations of $`G`$ to certain Lagrangian subvarieties of $`𝒪_f`$ (see \[GV98\], \[Mih96\], and \[Pie01\]). Of particular importance is the set of orbital varieties, Lagrangian subvarieties of $`𝒪_f`$ that are fixed by a given Borel subgroup of G.

A result of Spaltenstein identifies the set of orbital varieties for a given nilpotent orbit with the orbits of a finite group on the irreducible components of the corresponding unipotent variety \[Spa77\]. The main purpose of this paper is to provide new parameterizations of both, the orbital varieties contained in a given nilpotent orbit, as well as the irreducible components of the unipotent variety $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$.

In the case of classical groups, nilpotent coadjoint orbits are classified by partitions. Because the number of orbital varieties contained in a given orbit is finite, one expects that both orbital varieties and the components of the unipotent variety should also admit combinatorial descriptions \[Ger61\]. This is most apparent when $`G`$ is of type $`A`$.

###### Theorem (\[Spa82\]).

Suppose that $`G=GL_n()`$ and the nilpotent orbit $`𝒪_f`$ corresponds to the partition $`\lambda `$ of $`n`$. Then the orbital varieties contained in $`𝒪_f`$ as well as the set of components $`\text{Irr(}_u\text{)}`$ are both parameterized by the family of standard Young tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$.

In the setting of other classical groups, a method similar to the one used to obtain the above can also be employed to describe both families of objects. However, the resulting parametrization by subsets of signed domino tableaux is somewhat cumbersome (see \[Spa82\] and \[vL89\]). The following argument suggests a more appealing parameter set.

Let $`S`$ be the set of partitions indexing the unitary dual of $`W`$, the Weyl group of $`G`$ \[May75\] and write $`\lambda `$ for a partition lying in $`S`$. The dimension of the representation given by $`\lambda `$ is precisely the number of standard domino tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$. If we choose a unipotent representative $`u_\lambda G`$ in the conjugacy class corresponding to $`\lambda `$, then Springer’s characterization of the representations $`\widehat{W}`$ in the top degree cohomology of $`_u`$ \[Spr78\] indicates that

$$\mathrm{\#}SDT(n)=\underset{\lambda S}{}dimH^{top}(_{u_\lambda },)=\mathrm{\#}\{\text{Irr}(_{u_\lambda })|\lambda S\}$$

This suggests that $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ should correspond to a set of standard domino tableaux in a natural way. Indeed, this is the case. The precise relationship between van Leeuwen’s parameter set for $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ \[vL89\] and the set of domino tableaux can be described in terms of Garfinkle’s notions of cycles and moving-through maps \[Gar90\]. After defining the notion of a distinguished cycle for a cluster of dominos, we show that moving through sets of distinguished cycles of open and closed clusters in van Leeuwen’s parameter set defines a bijection with the set of all domino tableaux of a given size.

###### Theorem 1.1.

Suppose that $`G`$ is a complex classical simple Lie group not of type $`A`$. Then the collection of irreducible components of the unipotent varieties for $`G`$ as the unipotent element ranges over all conjugacy classes is parameterized by $`SDT(n)`$, the set of standard domino tableaux of size $`n`$.

The action of the finite group $`A_u`$ on the irreducible components $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ is described by \[vL89\]. In the signed domino parametrization, it acts by changing the signs of open clusters. We exploit this to obtain a parametrization of orbital varieties by standard domino tableaux. This time, moving through the distinguished cycles of just the closed clusters in van Leeuwen’s parameter set defines the required bijection. The result is a little simpler to state if we consider nilpotent orbits of the isometry group of a nondegenerate bilinear form, $`G_ϵ`$.

###### Theorem 1.2.

Suppose that $`G`$ is a complex classical simple Lie group not of type $`A`$ and $`𝒪`$ is the nilpotent orbit of $`G_ϵ`$ that corresponds to the partition $`\lambda `$ . Then the set of orbital varieties contained in $`𝒪`$ is parameterized by the set of standard domino tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$.

Parameterizations of orbital varieties by domino tableaux have been obtained in \[McG99\], by describing equivalence classes in the Weyl group of $`G`$, as well as in \[Tra\]. We will address the compatibility of these parameterizations with the one above in another paper.

## 2. Preliminaries

We first describe unipotent and orbital varieties, the relationship between them, and the combinatorial objects we will use in the rest of the paper.

### 2.1. Unipotent and Orbital Varieties

Let $`G`$ be a connected complex semisimple algebraic group, $`B`$ a Borel subgroup fixed once and for all, and $`=G/B`$ the flag manifold of $`G`$. We consider the fixed point set $`_u`$ of a unipotent transformation $`u`$ on $``$. It has a natural structure of a projective algebraic variety, called the unipotent variety. We write $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ for the set of its irreducible components. The stabilizer $`G_u`$ of $`u`$ in $`G`$ acts on $`_u`$ and gives an action of its component group $`A_u=G_u/G_u^{}`$ on $`\text{Irr}(_u).`$

Now consider a nilpotent element $`f`$ of the dual of the Lie algebra $`𝔤^{}`$ of $`G`$. Write $`𝒪_f^{ad}`$ for the orbit of $`f`$ under the coadjoint action of $`G`$ on $`𝔤^{}.`$ Using the non-degeneracy of the Killing form, we can identify $`𝒪_f^{ad}`$ with a subset of $`𝔤`$. If $`𝔟`$ is the Lie algebra of $`B`$ and $`𝔫`$ its unipotent radical, then the set $`𝒪_f^{ad}𝔫`$ inherits the structure of a locally closed algebraic variety from the orbit $`𝒪_f^{ad}`$. Its components are Lagrangian submanifolds of $`𝒪_f^{ad}`$ and are known as orbital varieties \[Gin86\]. There is a simple relationship between the set of orbital varieties contained in a given nilpotent orbit and the irreducible components of the corresponding unipotent variety. Suppose that the unipotent element $`u`$ of $`G`$ and the nilpotent element $`f`$ of $`𝔤^{}`$ correspond to the same partition.

###### Theorem 2.1 (\[Spa77\]).

There is a natural bijection

$$\text{Irr}(𝒪_f^{ad}𝔫)\text{Irr}(_u)/A_u$$

between the orbital varieties contained in the nilpotent orbit $`𝒪_f^{ad}`$ and the orbits of the finite group $`A_u`$ on $`Irr(_u).`$

The set of nilpotent orbits for a classical $`G`$ admits a combinatorial description by partitions. Write $`𝒫(n)`$ for the set of partitions $`\lambda =[\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{},\lambda _k]`$ of $`n`$, ordered so that $`\lambda _i\lambda _{i+1}`$.

###### Theorem 2.2.

Nilpotent orbits in $`𝔤𝔩_n`$ are in one-to-one correspondence with the set $`𝒫(n).`$

The corresponding statement for the other classical groups is not much more difficult. To obtain slightly cleaner statements, we will state it in terms of the nilpotent orbits of the sightly larger isometry groups of nondegenerate bilinear forms. Let $`ϵ=\pm 1`$ and consider a nondegenerate bilinear form on $`^m`$ satisfying $`(x,y)_ϵ=ϵ(y,x)_ϵ`$ for all $`x`$ and $`y`$. Let $`G_ϵ`$ be the isometry group of this form and $`𝔤_ϵ`$ be its Lie algebra. Define a subset $`𝒫_ϵ(m)`$ of $`𝒫(m)`$ as the partitions $`\lambda `$ satisfying $`\mathrm{\#}\{j|\lambda _j=i\}`$ is even for all $`i`$ with $`(1)^i=ϵ`$. The classification of nilpotent orbits now takes the form:

###### Theorem 2.3 (\[Ger61\]).

Let $`m`$ be the dimension of the standard representation of $`G_ϵ`$. Nilpotent $`G_ϵ`$-orbits in $`𝔤_ϵ`$ are in one to one correspondence with the partitions of $`m`$ contained in $`𝒫_ϵ(m).`$

The nilpotent $`G_ϵ`$ orbits in $`𝔤_ϵ`$ can be identified with the nilpotent orbits of the corresponding adjoint group with one exception. In type $`D`$, precisely two nilpotent orbits of the adjoint group correspond to every very even partition. We will write $`𝒪_f`$ for the $`G_ϵ`$-orbit through the nilpotent element $`f`$ and $`𝒪_\lambda `$ for the $`G_ϵ`$-orbit that corresponds to the partition $`\lambda `$ in this manner.

The group $`A_u`$ is always finite, and in the setting of classical groups, it is always a two-group. More precisely:

###### Theorem 2.4 (\[vL89\](2.4.1)).

The group $`A_u`$ is always trivial when $`G`$ is of type $`A`$. In the other classical types, let $`B_\lambda `$ be the set of the distinct parts of $`\lambda `$ satisfying $`(1)^{\lambda _i}=ϵ`$. Then $`A_u`$ is a 2-group with $`|B_\lambda |`$ components.

### 2.2. Standard Tableaux

A partition of of an integer $`m`$ corresponds naturally to a Young diagram consisting of $`m`$ squares. We call the partition underlying a Young diagram its shape. Recall the definitions of the sets of standard Young tableaux and standard domino tableaux from, for instance, \[Gar90\]. We will write $`SYT(\lambda )`$ and $`SDT(\lambda )`$ respectively for the sets of Young and domino tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$. We refer to both objects generically as standard tableaux of shape $`\lambda `$, or $`ST(\lambda ),`$ hoping that the precise meaning will be clear from the context. Also, we will write $`ST(n)`$ for the set of all standard tableaux with largest label $`n`$.

We view each standard tableau $`T`$ as a set of ordered pairs $`(k,S_{ij})`$, denoting that the square in row $`i`$ and column $`j`$ of $`T`$ is labelled by the integer $`k`$. When $`T`$ is a domino tableau, the domino with label $`k`$, or $`D(k,T)`$, is a subset of $`T`$ of the form $`\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i+1,j})\}`$ or $`\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i,j+1})\}`$. We call these vertical and horizontal dominos, respectively. For convenience, we will refer to the set $`\{(0,S_{11})\}`$ as the zero domino when in type $`B`$. Whenever possible, we will omit labels of the squares and write $`S_{ij}`$ for $`(k,S_{ij})`$. In that case, define $`labelS_{ij}=k`$.

###### Definition 2.5.

For a standard tableau $`T`$, let $`T(i)`$ denote the tableau formed by the squares of $`T`$ with labels less than or equal to $`i`$. A domino tableau $`T`$ is admissible of type $`X`$ = $`B`$, $`C`$, or $`D`$, if the shape of each $`T(i)`$ is a partition of a nilpotent orbit of type $`X`$.

The dominos that appear within admissible tableaux fall into three categories. Following \[vL89\] , we call these types $`I^+,`$ $`I^{},`$ and $`N`$.

###### Example 2.6.

Suppose that $`G`$ is of type $`C`$ and consider the tableaux

$`T=`$        $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$          $`4`$          $`5`$          $`T^{}=`$        $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$          $`5`$              $`4`$
Then $`T`$ is admissible of type $`C`$ but $`T^{}`$ is not, since $`shapeT^{}(2)=[3,1]`$ is not the partition of a nilpotent orbit in type $`C`$. The dominos $`D(1,T)`$ and $`D(3,T)`$ are of type $`I^{}`$, $`D(2,T)`$ and $`D(4,T)`$ are of type $`I^+,`$ and $`D(5,T)`$ is of type $`N`$.

We also recall the notions of a cycle in a domino tableau and moving through such a cycle, as defined in \[Gar90\]. We will think of cycles as both, subsets of dominos of $`T`$, as well as just sets of their labels. Write $`MT(D(k,T),T)`$ for the image of the domino $`D(k,T)`$ under the moving through map and $`MT(k,T)`$ for the image of $`T`$ under moving through the cycle containing the label $`k`$. If $`U`$ is a set of cycles of $`T`$ that can be moved through independent of one another, we will further abuse notation by writing $`MT(U,T)`$ for the tableau obtained by moving through all the cycles in $`U`$. Recall the definition of $`X`$-fixed and $`X`$-variable squares for $`X`$ = $`B`$, $`C`$, $`D`$, or $`D^{}`$ \[Gar90\]. Under the moving through map, the labels of the fixed squares are preserved while those of variable ones may change. We will call a cycle whose fixed squares are $`X`$-fixed an $`X`$-cycle. Note also that the $`B`$\- and $`C`$-cycles as well as the $`D`$\- and $`D^{}`$-cycles in a given tableau $`T`$ coincide.

###### Example 2.7.

Consider the domino tableaux $`T`$ and $`T^{}`$ from the previous example. The $`C`$-cycles in $`T`$ are {1}, {2,3}, and {4,5} while those in $`T^{}`$ are {1} and {2,3,4,5}. We have

$`MT(2,T)=`$        $`1`$          $`2`$          $`4`$          $`5`$              $`3`$      $`MT(4,T)=`$        $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$          $`4`$          $`5`$
The $`D`$-cycles in $`T`$ are {1,2}, {3,4}, and {5}, while there is only one in $`T^{}`$, mainly {1,2,3,4,5}.

## 3. Signed Domino Tableaux Parameterizations

The irreducible components of the unipotent variety $`_u`$ for classical $`G`$ were described by N. Spaltenstein in \[Spa82\]. We summarize this parametrization as interpreted by M.A. van Leeuwen \[vL89\]. Its advantage lies in a particularly translucent realization of the action of $`A_u`$ on $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$.

Fix a unipotent element $`uG`$ and let $`\lambda _u`$ be the partition of the corresponding nilpotent orbit. Define a map

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_u:_uST(\lambda _u)$$

by the following procedure. Fix a flag $`F_u`$. Adopting notation of \[vL89\], let $`\lambda ^{(i)}`$ be the shape of the Jordan form of the unipotent operator induced by $`u`$ on $`F^{(i)}`$. The difference between the Young diagrams $`\lambda ^{(i)}`$ and $`\lambda ^{(i+1)}`$ is one square in type A and a domino in the other classical types \[Spa82\]. By assigning the label $`i+1`$ to the set $`\lambda ^{(i+1)}\lambda ^{(i)}`$ for each $`i`$, we obtain a standard tableau of shape $`\lambda _u.`$

###### Theorem 3.1.

When $`G`$ is of type $`A`$, the map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_u`$ defines a surjection onto $`SYT(\lambda _u)`$ that separates points of $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$. That is, it defines a bijection

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_u:\text{Irr}(_u)SYT(\lambda _u).$$

###### Corollary 3.2.

When $`G`$ is of type $`A`$, the orbital varieties $`\text{Irr}(𝒪_\lambda 𝔫)`$ are parameterized by the set $`SYT(\lambda )`$.

In the other classical types, any domino tableau in the image of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_u`$ is admissible. Admissible tableaux, however, do not fully separate the components of $`_u`$. If two flags give rise to different domino tableaux in this way, they lie in different components of $`_u`$. However, the converse is not true. The inverse image $`_{u,T}`$ of a given admissible tableau $`T`$ under this identification is in general not connected. Nevertheless, the irreducible components of $`_{u,T}`$ are precisely its connected components \[vL89\](3.2.3). Accounting for this disconnectedness yields a parametrization of $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$.

###### Definition 3.3.

A signed domino tableau $`T`$ of shape $`\lambda `$ is an admissible domino of shape $`\lambda `$ with a choice of sign for each domino of type $`I^+`$. The set of signed domino tableaux is denoted $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT(\lambda )`$.

The set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT(\lambda _u)`$ is too large to parameterize $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ and we follow \[vL89\] in defining equivalence classes. We recall the notion of a cluster of dominos.

###### Definition 3.4.

Write $`cl(0)`$ for the cluster containing $`D(1,T)`$ in types $`B`$ and $`C`$. A cluster is open if it contains an $`I^+`$ or $`N`$ domino along its right edge and is not $`cl(0)`$. A cluster that is neither $`cl(0)`$ nor open is closed. Denote the set of open clusters of $`T`$ by $`OC(T)`$ and the set of closed clusters as $`CC(T)`$. For a cluster $`𝒞`$, let $`I_𝒞`$ be the domino in $`𝒞`$ with the smallest label and take $`S_{ij}`$ as its left and uppermost square. For $`X`$ equal to $`B`$ or $`C`$, we say that $`𝒞`$ is an $`X`$-cluster iff $`i+j`$ is odd. For $`X`$ equal to $`D`$ or $`D^{}`$, we say that $`𝒞`$ is an $`X`$-cluster iff $`i+j`$ is even.

The definition of open and closed differs from \[vL89\] as we do not call $`cl(0)`$ an open cluster. The open clusters of $`T`$ correspond to the parts of $`\lambda `$ contained in $`B_\lambda `$, the set parameterizing the $`_2`$ factors of $`A_\lambda .`$

###### Definition 3.5.

If $`T,T^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }DT(\lambda )`$, let $`T_{op,cl}T^{}`$ iff the underlying tableaux are the same and the products of signs in all corresponding open and closed clusters of $`T`$ and $`T^{}`$ agree. Denote the equivalence classes by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda ).`$ Define the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )`$ similarly. We represent the elements of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda )`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )`$ as admissible tableaux with a choice of sign for each of the appropriate clusters.

There is a considerable amount of freedom in how a flag of $`_{u,T}`$ can be assigned an equivalence class of signed admissible domino tableaux. A particular choice is presented in \[vL89\](3.4), defining a map

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_u:_u\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda _u).$$

We describe an action of $`A_u`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda _u).`$ For $`rB_\lambda `$, let $`b_T(r)`$ be the cluster that contains a domino ending a row of length $`r`$ in $`T`$. Let $`\xi _r`$ act trivially if $`b_T(r)=cl(0)`$ and by changing the sign of the open cluster $`b_T(r)`$ otherwise. For each $`rB_\lambda `$, let $`g_r`$ denote the generator of the corresponding $`_2`$ factor of $`A_u`$. One can now define the action of $`g_r`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda _u)`$ by $`g_r[T]=\xi _r[T].`$

###### Theorem 3.6 (\[vL89\]).

Suppose that $`G`$ is a classical group not of type A and $`u`$ is a unipotent element of $`G`$ corresponding to the partition $`\lambda `$ . The map $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_u`$ defines an $`A_u`$-equivariant bijection between the components $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda ).`$

Since $`A_u`$ acts by changing the signs of the open clusters of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(\lambda ),`$ it is simple to parameterize the $`A_u`$ orbits on $`\text{Irr}(_u).`$

###### Corollary 3.7.

Suppose that $`G`$ is a classical group not of type A and $`𝒪_\lambda ^{}`$ is the nilpotent orbit corresponding to the partition $`\lambda `$ . The orbital varieties $`\text{Irr}(𝒪_\lambda 𝔫)`$ are parameterized by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda ).`$

## 4. Domino Tableaux Parameterizations

We show how to index the components $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ and $`\text{Irr}(𝒪_\lambda 𝔫)`$ by families of standard tableaux. In type $`A`$, this is Theorem Theorem. For the other classical types, we define maps from domino tableaux with signed clusters to the set of standard domino tableaux by applying Garfinkle’s moving through map to certain distinguished cycles.

### 4.1. Definition of Bijections

Consider an $`X`$-cluster $`𝒞`$ and let $`I_C`$ be the domino in $`𝒞`$ with the smallest label. Let $`𝒴_𝒞`$ be the X-cycle through $`I_C`$. We call it the initial cycle of the cluster $`𝒞`$.

###### Proposition 4.1.

A cluster of an admissible domino tableau $`T`$ that is either open or closed contains its initial cycle.

We defer the proof to another section. Armed with this fact, we can propose a map

$$\mathrm{\Phi }:\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n)SDT(n)$$

by moving through the distinguished cycles of all open and closed clusters with positive sign. More explicitly, for a tableau $`T\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl},`$ let $`C^+(T)`$ denote the set of open and closed clusters of $`T`$ labelled by a $`(+)`$ and let $`\sigma (T)=\{𝒴_𝒞|𝒞C^+(T)\}`$ be the set of their distinguished cycles. Write $`|T|`$ for the standard domino tableau underlying $`T`$. We define

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(T)=MT(\sigma (T),|T|).$$

###### Lemma 4.2.

The map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n)SDT(n)`$ is a bijection. We can view the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(n)`$ as a subset of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n)`$ by assigning a negative sign to each unsigned open cluster of a domino tableau in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(n).`$ Restricted to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(n)`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ preserves the shapes of tableaux and defines a bijection $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )SDT(\lambda )`$ for each $`\lambda `$ a shape of a nilpotent orbit.

###### Proof.

We check that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is well-defined, that its image lies in $`SDT(n)`$, and then construct its inverse. We first need to know that the definition of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ does not depend on which order we move through the cycles in $`\sigma (T)`$. It is enough to check that if $`𝒴_𝒞`$ and $`𝒴_𝒞^{}\sigma (T)`$, then $`𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ is also lies in $`\sigma (MT(|T|,𝒴_𝒞))`$. While this statement is not true for arbitrary cycles, in our setting, this is Lemma 4.4.

The image of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ indeed lies in $`SDT(n)`$. That $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T)`$ is itself a domino tableau follows from the fact that moving through any cycle of $`|T|`$ yields a domino tableau. Hence $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T)SDT(n)`$ and if $`T\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )`$ then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T)SDT(\lambda )`$ since in this case $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ moves through only closed cycles.

The definition of a cluster forces the initial domino $`I_𝒞`$ of every closed cluster to be of type $`I^+`$. By the definition of moving through, the image of $`MT(I_𝒞,T)`$ in $`MT(𝒴_𝒞,T)`$ is inadmissible, i.e. it is a horizontal domino not of type $`N`$. In general, all the inadmissible dominos in $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T)`$ appear within the image of distinguished cycles under moving through. Furthermore, the lowest- numbered domino within each cycle is the image of the initial domino of some distinguished cycle. With this observation, we can construct the inverse of $`\mathrm{\Phi }.`$ We define a map

$$\mathrm{\Psi }:\mathrm{\Phi }(\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n))\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n)$$

that satisfies $`\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Phi }=\text{Identity}`$. Let $`\iota (\mathrm{\Phi }(T))`$ be the set of cycles in $`\mathrm{\Phi }(T)`$ that contain inadmissible dominos. We define $`\mathrm{\Psi }(\mathrm{\Phi }(T))=MT(\mathrm{\Phi }(T),\iota (\mathrm{\Phi }(T))).`$ By the above discussion, $`\iota (\mathrm{\Phi }(T))`$ contains precisely the images of cycles in $`\sigma (T)`$. Hence

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\mathrm{\Phi }(T))=MT(\mathrm{\Phi }(T),\iota (\mathrm{\Phi }(T)))=MT(MT(|T|,\sigma (T)))=T$$

as desired. Thus $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a bijection onto its image in $`SDT(n)`$ and restricted to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )`$, it is a bijection with its image in $`SDT(\lambda )`$. As we already know that the sets $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}(\lambda )`$ and $`SDT(\lambda )`$ both parameterize the same set of orbital varieties, and that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}(n)`$ and $`SDT(n)`$ both parameterize the same set of irreducible components of unipotent varieties, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ must provide bijections between these two sets. ∎

Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are immediate consequences.

###### Example 4.3.

Let $`G`$ be of type $`D`$ and suppose that both $`u`$ and $`𝒪_\lambda `$ correspond to the partition $`\lambda =[3^2]`$. The van Leeuwen parameter set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}([3^2])`$ for $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ is:

$`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{+}`$          $`2`$          $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{3}{+}`$                  $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{}`$          $`2`$          $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{3}{+}`$                  $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{+}`$          $`2`$          $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{3}{}`$                  $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{}`$          $`2`$          $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{3}{}`$                  $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{+}`$          $`2`$              $`3`$              $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{}`$          $`2`$              $`3`$
The image of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{op,cl}([3^2])`$ under $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the following set of standard domino tableaux. We write the image of a given tableau in the same relative position. Note that this parameter set for $`\text{Irr}(_u)`$ consists of all tableaux of shapes $`[3^2]`$ and $`[4,2]`$.

$`1`$          $`3`$           $`2`$              $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$                  $`1`$          $`3`$           $`2`$              $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$                  $`1`$          $`2`$           $`3`$              $`1`$          $`2`$              $`3`$
The van Leeuwen parameter set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }DT_{cl}([3^2])`$ for the orbital varieties contained in $`𝒪_\lambda `$ is:

$`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{+}`$          $`2`$          $`3`$                  $`\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{1}{}`$          $`2`$          $`3`$                  $`1`$          $`2`$              $`3`$
Its image under $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the set of all domino tableaux of shape $`[3^2]`$. Again, we write the image of a tableau in the same relative position.

$`1`$          $`3`$           $`2`$              $`1`$          $`2`$          $`3`$                  $`1`$          $`2`$              $`3`$
### 4.2. Independence of Moving Through Initial Cycles

###### Lemma 4.4.

Consider open or closed clusters $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ and their initial cycles $`𝒴_𝒞`$ and $`𝒴_𝒞^{}.`$ Then $`𝒴_𝒞`$ is again a cycle in $`MT(|T|,𝒴_𝒞^{})`$.

###### Proof.

If $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ are clusters of the same type, then so are their initial cycles and the lemma is \[Gar90\](1.5.29). Otherwise, without loss of generality, take $`𝒞`$ to be a $`C`$-cluster and $`𝒞^{}`$ to be a $`D`$-cluster. As the proof in the other cases is similar, we can also assume that $`𝒴_𝒞`$ is $`C`$-boxed while $`𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ is $`D`$-boxed.

Suppose that the dominos $`D(r)𝒴_𝒞`$ and $`D(s)𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ lie in relative positions compatible with the diagram

$`s`$           $`r`$
where the box labelled by $`r`$ is fixed. The same squares in $`MT(|T|,𝒴_𝒞^{})`$ have the labels

$`s^{}`$           $`r`$
for some $`s^{}`$.

To prove the lemma, we need to show that $`s<r`$ implies $`s^{}<r`$ and $`s>r`$ implies $`s^{}>r.`$ Since our choice of $`r`$ and $`s`$ was arbitrary, this will show that $`𝒴_𝒞`$ remains a cycle. There are two possibilities for the domino $`D(s)`$. It is either horizontal or vertical and must occupy the following squares:

$`s`$          $`s`$           $`r`$                       $`s`$                     $`s`$           $`r`$

Case (i) Case (ii)

Case (i). In this case, $`s<r`$ always. Garfinkle’s rules for moving through imply that $`MT(|T|,D(r))𝒞^{}\mathrm{}.`$ This is a contradiction since we know by hypothesis that $`𝒴_𝒞𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ . Hence this case does not occur.

Case (ii). First suppose $`s>r`$. Then the our squares within $`MT(|T|,𝒴_𝒞^{})`$ must look like

$`s`$                     $`s^{}`$           $`r`$
for some $`s^{}s.`$ Since the tableau $`MT(𝒴_𝒞^{},T)`$ is standard, this requires that $`s^{}>s`$ implying $`s^{}>r`$ which is what we desired. Now suppose $`s<r`$ and suppose the squares in our diagram look like

$`s`$           $`t`$          $`s`$           $`r`$          $`u`$
As in Case (i), we find that $`D(t)𝒞^{}`$. Since $`D(t)𝒞`$, type $`D(s)=I^+`$ implies type $`D(t)=I^{}`$, type $`D(r)=I^{},`$ and type $`D(u)=I^+`$. Otherwise, the rules defining clusters would force $`s`$ to lie in the cluster $`𝒞`$. Now $`D(u)`$ lies in the initial cycle of a closed cluster of same type as $`𝒞^{}`$. Since it lies on the periphery and its type is $`I^+`$, then its top square must be fixed. In particular, $`D(u)𝒞`$. But $`s<r`$ implies $`MT(D(r))D(u)\mathrm{}`$. This is a contradiction, implying that this case does not arise.

To finish the proof, we must examine the possibility that $`D(s)`$ and $`D(r)`$ lie in the relative positions described by

r

 s

.

 r

 s

\tiny{\vbox{\offinterlineskip
\hbox{$\vbox to6.45831pt{\par\hbox to6.45831pt{\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}\vbox to6.45831pt{\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\vfil\hbox to6.8583pt{\hss$$\hss}\vfil\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}}\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}}\vspace{-\tabheightx}}\vbox to6.45831pt{\par\hbox to6.45831pt{\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}\vbox to6.45831pt{\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\vfil\hbox to6.8583pt{\hss$r$\hss}\vfil\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}}\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}}\vspace{-\tabheightx}}$}
\hbox{$\vbox to6.45831pt{\par\hbox to6.45831pt{\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}\vbox to6.45831pt{\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\vfil\hbox to6.8583pt{\hss$s$\hss}\vfil\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}\hrule width=6.8583pt,height=0.4pt\vspace{-0.5\tabrule}}\rule{0.4pt}{6.45831pt}}\vspace{-\tabheightx}}$}
}}.
This case is completely analogous and we omit the proof. ∎

This lemma shows that the image of moving though a subset of distinguished cycles is independent of the order in which these cycles are moved though. Note, however, that a similar result is not true for subsets of arbitrary cycles.

### 4.3. Nested Clusters and the Periphery of a Cluster

We aim to show that closed and open clusters contain their distinguished cycles. The proof has two parts. First, we show that $`𝒴_𝒞`$ is contained in a larger set of clusters $`\overline{𝒞}`$, defined as the union of $`𝒞`$ with all of its nested clusters. Then, we show that $`𝒴_𝒞`$ intersects each of the nested clusters trivially.

Let $`𝒞`$ be a cluster of a tableau $`T`$ and denote by $`row_kT=\{S_{k,j}|j0\}`$ the $`k`$th row of $`T`$. Define $`col_kT`$ similarly. If $`row_kT𝒞\mathrm{}`$, let $`inf_k𝒞=inf\{j|S_{k,j}row_kT𝒞\}`$ and $`sup_k𝒞=sup\{j|S_{k,j}row_kT𝒞\}`$.

###### Example 4.5.

Consider the following tableau of type $`D.`$ It has two closed clusters given by the sets $`𝒞=\{1,2,3,4,5,8,9,10,11,12\}`$ and $`𝒞^{}=\{6,7\}`$.

$`1`$          $`3`$          $`5`$          $`11`$              $`4`$          $`6`$          $`7`$          $`8`$           $`2`$                      $`12`$              $`9`$          $`10`$
$`𝒞`$ is a $`D`$-cluster while $`𝒞^{}`$ is a $`B`$-cluster. $`𝒴_𝒞`$ is then a $`D`$-cycle and consists of the dominos in the set $`\{1,3,5,11,12,10,9,2\}.`$ $`T`$ has two other $`D`$-cycles, $`\{4,6\}`$ and $`\{7,8\}.`$ Both intersect $`𝒞`$, but are not contained within it. The $`B`$-cycle $`𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ equals $`\{6,7\}`$ and is contained in $`𝒞^{}`$. Hence an $`X`$-cluster may not contain all the X-cycles through its dominos. However, it always contains its initial cycle. Also notice that $`𝒞`$ completely surrounds $`𝒞^{}`$. We call such interior clusters nested.

Nested clusters complicate the description of clusters. To simplify our initial results, we would like to consider the set formed by a cluster together with all of its nested clusters. To be more precise:

###### Definition 4.6.

Let $`𝒞^{}`$ be a cluster of $`T`$. It is nested in $`𝒞`$ if all of the following are satisfied:

$`inf\{k|row_kT𝒞^{}\mathrm{}\}`$ $`>inf\{k|row_kT𝒞\mathrm{}\}`$
$`sup\{k|row_kT𝒞^{}\mathrm{}\}`$ $`<sup\{k|row_kT𝒞\mathrm{}\}`$
$`inf\{k|col_kT𝒞^{}\mathrm{}\}`$ $`>inf\{k|col_kT𝒞\mathrm{}\}`$
$`sup\{k|col_kT𝒞^{}\mathrm{}\}`$ $`<sup\{k|col_kT𝒞\mathrm{}\}`$
Define $`\overline{𝒞}`$ to be the union of $`𝒞`$ together with all clusters nested within it. We will write $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ for the set of dominos in $`\overline{𝒞}`$ that are adjacent to some square of $`T`$ that does not lie in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Note that $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ is a subset of the original cluster $`𝒞`$.

###### Example 4.7.

In the above tableau, $`𝒞^{}`$ is nested in $`𝒞`$. Furthermore, $`𝒞𝒞^{}=\overline{𝒞}=T,`$ and $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})=𝒴_𝒞`$ $`𝒞`$.

The next two propositions describe properties of dominos that occur along the left and right edges of $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Recall that our definition of the cycle $`𝒴_𝒞`$ endows $`𝒞`$ as well as $`\overline{𝒞}`$ with a choice of fixed and variable squares by defining the left and uppermost square of $`I_𝒞`$ as fixed.

###### Proposition 4.8.

Suppose that $`𝒞`$ is a non-zero cluster of a domino tableau $`T`$ and that the intersection of the $`k`$-th row of $`T`$ with $`𝒞`$ is not empty. Then the dominos $`D(label(T_{k,inf_k𝒞}),T)`$ and $`D(label(T_{k,inf_k\overline{𝒞}}),T)`$ are both of type $`I^+.`$ If $`𝒞`$ is also closed, then the dominos $`D(label(T_{k,sup_k𝒞}),T)`$ and $`D(label(T_{k,sup_k\overline{𝒞}}),T)`$ are of type $`I^{}.`$

###### Proof.

The first statement is true for all non-zero clusters by \[vL89\](3.3). The second statement is the defining property of closed clusters. ∎

###### Proposition 4.9.

Suppose that $`𝒞`$ is a non-zero cluster of a domino tableau $`T`$. If the domino $`D`$ consisting of the squares $`S_{pq}`$ and $`S_{p+1,q}`$ lies in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$, then

1. $`S_{pq}`$ is fixed if $`type`$ $`D=I^+`$ and
2. $`S_{p+1,q}`$ is fixed if $`type`$ $`D=I^{}`$

###### Proof.

Case $`(i)`$. Assume that there is a $`D^{}`$ in the $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ of type $`I^+`$ whose uppermost square is not fixed. Then $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ must contain two type $`I^+`$ dominos $`E=\{S_{kl},S_{k+1,l}\}`$ and $`E^{}=\{S_{k+1,m},S_{k+2,m}\}`$ with the squares $`S_{kl}`$ and $`S_{k+2,m}`$ fixed and $`|ml|`$ minimal.

Assume $`m<l`$. The opposite case can be proved by a similar argument. Because $`E^{}`$ is of type $`I^+`$, there is an integer $`t`$ such that $`m<t<l`$, $`S_{k+1,t}periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$, and $`t`$ is maximal with these properties. Let $`F`$ be the domino containing $`S_{k+1,t}`$. $`F`$ has to be $`\{S_{k+1,t},S_{k+2,t}\}`$ and of type $`I^{}`$. If its type was $`I^{}`$ or $`N`$, \[vL89\](3.3 (17)) would force $`S_{k+1,t+1}`$ to be in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ as well. If $`F`$ on the other hand was $`\{S_{k+1,t},S_{k,t}\}`$, this would contradict the minimality of $`|ml|`$. We now consider two cases.

* Assume $`t=l1`$. Because $`E`$ and $`F`$ lie in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ and hence in $`𝒞`$, $`𝒞`$ must contain a domino of type $`N`$ of the form $`\{S_{u,l1},S_{u,l}\}`$ with $`u>k+2`$ and $`u`$ minimal with this property. The set of squares $`\{S_{p,l1}|k+2<p<u\}\{S_{pl}|k+1<p<u\}`$ must be tiled by dominos, which is impossible, as its cardinality is odd.
* Assume $`t<l1`$. We will contradict the maximality of $`t`$. Because $`E`$ and $`F`$ both lie in $`𝒞`$, $`𝒞`$ must contain a sequence $`H_\alpha `$ of dominos of type $`N`$ satisfying

$$H_\alpha =\{S_{k+1+f(\alpha ),t+2\alpha },S_{k+1+f(\alpha ),t+2\alpha +1}\}$$

where $`0\alpha \frac{lt+1}{2}`$. We choose each $`H_\alpha `$ such that for all $`\alpha ,`$ $`f(\alpha )`$ is minimal with this property. Because the sets $`\{S_{k+p,l}|k+1<p<k+1+f(\frac{lt+1}{2})\}`$ and $`\{S_{k+p,t}|k+2<p<k+1+f(0)\}`$ have to be tiled by dominos of type $`I^+`$ and $`I^{}`$ respectively, $`f(0)`$ has to be even and $`f(\frac{lt+1}{2})`$ has to be odd. Hence there is a $`\beta `$ such that $`f(\beta )`$ is even and $`f(\beta +1)`$ is odd.

Assume $`f(\beta )<f(\beta +1)`$, but the argument in the other case is symmetric. Let $`G`$ be the domino containing the square $`S_{k+1+f(\beta ),t+2\beta +2}.`$ $`G`$ must belong to $`𝒞`$, as $`H_\beta `$ and $`G`$ is either of type $`I^{}`$ or $`N`$. The type of $`G`$ cannot be $`N`$, however, as this would contradict the condition on $`f`$. Hence $`G`$ must be of type $`I^{}`$. If $`G`$ equals $`\{S_{k+1+f(\beta ),t+2\beta +2},S_{k+f(\beta ),t+2\beta +2}\}`$. Then by successive applications of \[vL89\](3.3 (17)), the set of dominos

$$\{\{S_{k+f(\beta )\gamma ϵ,t+2\beta +ϵ},S_{k+1+f(\beta )\gamma ϵ,t+2\beta +ϵ}\}\}$$

with $`ϵ=1\text{ or }2\text{ and }0\gamma f(\beta )2`$ is contained in $`𝒞`$ as well. But this means that $`t+2\beta +ϵ`$ for $`ϵ=1\text{ or }2`$ satisfies the defining property of $`t`$, contradicting its maximality.

Case $`(ii)`$. We would like to show that the bottom square is fixed for every $`I^{}`$ domino in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$. It is enough to show that this is true for one such domino, as an argument similar to that in case $`(i)`$ can be repeated for the others. Let $`l=inf\{k|row_kT\overline{𝒞}=\mathrm{}\}`$. Then by 4.8 and the definition of fixed, we know that $`S_{l,inf_l\overline{𝒞}}`$ is fixed. As $`\{S_{l,sup_l\overline{𝒞}},S_{l+1,sup_l\overline{𝒞}}\}`$ is a domino of type $`I^{}`$ in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$, we have found the desired domino. ∎

###### Lemma 4.10.

The following inclusions hold when $`𝒞`$ is an open or closed cluster: $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})𝒴_𝒞\overline{𝒞}`$.

###### Proof.

Recall that our choice of a fixed square in $`I_𝒞`$ defines the fixed squares in all of $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Define $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ as $`\overline{𝒞}`$ when $`𝒞`$ is closed and $`\overline{𝒞}`$ union with all empty holes and corners of $`|T|`$ adjacent to $`𝒞`$ when $`𝒞`$ is open \[Gar90\](1.5.5). We show that the image $`MT(D,T)`$ of $`D`$ in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ lies in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$. This shows the second inclusion, as if any domino in $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$ stays in $`\overline{𝒞}`$ under moving through, then so must the cycle $`𝒴_𝒞`$. The first inclusion is a consequence of the argument and the definitions of moving through and clusters. We differentiate cases accounting for different domino positions along $`periphery(\overline{𝒞}).`$

Case $`(i)`$. Take $`D=\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i+1,j})\}`$ and suppose $`typeD=I^+`$. Because $`D`$ lies on $`periphery(\overline{𝒞})`$, Proposition 4.9 implies that $`S_{ij}`$ is fixed. Due to \[vL89\](3.3.17(ii)) and 3.4, $`S_{i,j+1}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$.

* Suppose $`S_{i1,j+1}`$ in not in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Then $`r=label(S_{i1,j+1})<k`$. Otherwise $`S_{i1,j}`$ and $`S_{ij}`$ would both belong to the same cluster by \[vL89\](3.3.17(ii)). Since $`S_{i1,j}`$ and $`S_{i1,j+1}`$ are in the same cluster by \[vL89\](3.3.17(i)) or (3.3.17(iii)), this contradicts our assumption. Now \[Gar90\](1.5.26) forces $`MT(D,T)=\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i,j+1})\},`$ and since $`S_{ij}`$ and $`S_{i,j+1}`$ both belong to $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$, so must $`MT(D,T).`$
* Suppose now that $`S_{i1,j+1}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$. Then the square $`S_{i1,j}\overline{𝒞}`$ as well since by \[vL89\](3.3.17(i)) or (3.3.17(iii)), they both belong to the same cluster. Now \[Gar90\](1.5.26) implies $`MT(D,T)\{S_{ij},S_{i1,j},S_{i,j+1}\}.`$ As all of these squares lie in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$, we must also have $`MT(D,T)\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$.

Case $`(ii)`$. Suppose $`D=\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i,j+1})\}`$ and that the square $`S_{i,j+1}`$ is fixed. By \[vL89\](3.3.17(ii)) and 3.4, $`S_{i,j+2}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$.

* Suppose $`S_{i1,j+1}`$ is not in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Then $`S_{i1,j+2}`$ lies in $`|T|`$ but not in $`\overline{𝒞}`$, as by \[vL89\](3.3.17(i)) or (3.3.17(iii)) they both belong to the same cluster. The definition of a cluster forces $`r=label(S_{i1,j+2})<k`$ and \[Gar90\](1.5.26(ii)) implies $`MT(D,T)=\{S_{i,j+1},S_{i,j+2}\}.`$ Since the squares $`S_{i,j+1}`$ as well as $`S_{i,j+2}`$ are both contained in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$, so is $`MT(D,T).`$
* Suppose $`S_{i1,j+1}`$ lies in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. Then because the domino $`MT(D,T)`$ must be a subset of $`\{S_{i,j+1},S_{i,j+2},S_{i1,j+1}\}`$, it must also be a subset of $`\overline{𝒞}`$.

Case $`(iii)`$. Suppose $`D=\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i,j+1})\}`$ and that the square $`S_{ij}`$ is fixed. Then $`S_{i,j1}\overline{𝒞}`$ by \[vL89\](3.3.17(iii)).

* Suppose first that $`S_{i+1,j1}`$ is not in $`\overline{𝒞}.`$ Then $`r=label(S_{i+1,j1})>k`$ by either \[vL89\](3.3.17(ii)) or (3.3.17(iii)). But \[Gar90\](1.5.26(iii)) forces $`MT(D,T)`$ to be precisely $`\{S_{ij},S_{i,j1}\}`$ which is a subset of $`\overline{𝒞}`$.
* If $`S_{i+1,j1}\overline{𝒞},`$ then $`S_{i+1,j}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$ as well, since by \[vL89\](3.3.17(i)) or (3.3.17(iii)) they either must belong to the same cluster or $`S_{i+1,j}`$ is an empty hole or corner. But by \[Gar90\](1.5.26(iii)(iv)), $`MT(D,T)`$ is a subset of $`\{S_{ij},S_{i+1,j},S_{i,j1}\}`$, all of whose squares lie in $`\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$.

Case $`(iv)`$. Suppose $`D=\{(k,S_{ij}),(k,S_{i+1,j})\}`$ and that the domino $`D`$ is of type $`I^{}`$. The square $`S_{i+1,j}`$ is then fixed and $`S_{i+1,j1}\overline{𝒞}`$.

* Assume that $`S_{i+2,j1}\overline{𝒞}`$. Then $`S_{i+2,j}\stackrel{~}{𝒞}`$. Since $`MT(D,T)`$ is the domino $`\{S_{i+1,j},S_{i+1,j1}\}`$ or $`\{S_{i+1,j},S_{i+2,j}\}`$. Hence $`MT(D,T)\overline{𝒞}`$ as both possibilities are contained in $`\overline{𝒞}`$.
* Assume $`S_{i+2,j1}`$ is not in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. We have $`r=label(S_{i+2,j1})>k`$, for otherwise $`D(r,T)`$ and hence $`S_{i+2,j1}`$ would lie in $`\overline{𝒞}`$. But then $`MT(D,T)=\{S_{i+1,j},S_{i+1,j1}\}`$, so it is contained in $`\overline{𝒞}`$.

These cases describe all possibilities by 4.9. ∎

What remains is to see that the initial cycle $`𝒴_𝒞`$ is contained within the cluster $`𝒞`$ itself. It is enough to show that its intersection with any closed cluster nested in $`𝒞`$ is empty, as open clusters cannot be nested. Our proof relies on the notion of $`X`$-boxing \[Gar90\](1.5.2). We restate the relevant result.

###### Proposition 4.11 (\[Gar90\](1.5.9) and (1.5.22)).

Suppose that the dominos $`D(k,T)`$ and $`D(k^{},T)`$ both belong to the same $`X`$-cycle. Then

1. $`D(k,T)`$ is $`X`$-boxed iff $`MT(D(k,T),T)`$ is not $`X`$-boxed.
2. $`D(k,T)`$ and $`D(k^{},T)`$ are both simultaneously $`X`$-boxed or not $`X`$-boxed.

###### Lemma 4.12.

If $`𝒞^{}\overline{𝒞}`$ is a closed cluster nested in $`𝒞`$, then $`𝒴_𝒞𝒞^{}=\mathrm{}.`$

###### Proof.

It is enough to show that $`periphery(𝒞^{})𝒴_𝒞=\mathrm{}`$, as this forces $`𝒞^{}𝒴_𝒞=\mathrm{}`$. We divide the problem into a few cases.

Case $`(i)`$. Suppose $`\{type𝒴_𝒞,type𝒴_𝒞^{}\}=\{C,D^{}\}.`$ We investigate the intersection of $`periphery(𝒞^{})`$ with $`𝒴_𝒞`$. It cannot contain dominos of types $`I^+`$ and $`I^{}`$; because the boxing property is constant on cycles according to Proposition 4.11(ii), such dominos would have to be simultaneously $`C`$ and $`D`$-boxed, which is impossible. If $`D(k,T)periphery(𝒞^{})𝒴_𝒞^{}`$ is of type $`(N)`$, $`D(k,T)`$ and $`MT(D(k,T),T)`$ are both $`C`$ and $`D`$’-boxed. This contradicts Proposition 4.11(i), forcing $`periphery(𝒞^{})𝒴_𝒞=\mathrm{}`$. The proof is identical when the set $`\{type𝒴_𝒞,type𝒴_𝒞^{}\}`$ equals $`\{B,D\}`$ instead.

Case $`(ii)`$. Suppose $`\{type𝒴_𝒞,type𝒴_𝒞^{}\}=\{C,D\}.`$ The proof is similar to the first case, except this time, dominos of type $`N`$ cannot be simultaneously $`C`$ and $`D`$-boxed. Again, the proof is identical when the set $`\{type𝒴_𝒞,type𝒴_𝒞^{}\}`$ equals $`\{B,D^{}\}`$ instead.

Case $`(iii)`$. Suppose $`\{type𝒴_𝒞,type𝒴_𝒞^{}\}\{B,C\}`$ or $`\{D,D^{}\}`$. Then by by the definition of cycles, $`𝒴_𝒞𝒴_𝒞^{}=\mathrm{}`$. We know $`periphery(𝒞^{})𝒴_𝒞^{}\overline{𝒞}^{}`$ by Lemma 4.10, implying again that $`periphery(𝒞^{})𝒴_𝒞=\mathrm{}.`$

## 5. The $`\tau `$-Invariant for Orbital Varieties

A natural question is whether our method of describing orbital varieties by standard tableaux gives the same parametrization as \[McG99\]. More precisely, if $`\pi :\text{Irr}(_u)/A_u\text{Irr}(𝒪_u𝔫)`$ is the bijection of \[Spa77\], does the same tableau parameterize both $`𝒞\text{Irr}(_u)/A_u`$ and its image $`𝒱=\pi (𝒞)`$? Write $`𝒯(𝒞)`$ for the domino tableau corresponding to the $`A_u`$-orbit $`𝒞\text{Irr}(_u)/A_u`$ via the map of the previous section and $`𝒯(𝒱)`$ for the domino tableau used to parameterize $`𝒱`$ in \[McG99\].

Let $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ be the set of simple roots in $`𝔤`$. The $`\tau `$ invariant, a subset of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, is defined for orbital varieties in \[Jos84\] and for components of the Springer fiber in \[Spa82\]. It is constant on each $`A_u`$ orbit. For a standard domino tableau $`T`$, it can be defined in terms of the relative positions of the dominos. We say that a domino $`D`$ lies higher than $`D^{}`$ in a tableau $`T`$ iff the rows containing squares of $`D`$ have indices strictly smaller than the indices of the rows containing squares of $`D^{}`$. Then $`\tau (T)`$ consists of precisely the simple roots $`\alpha _i`$ whose indices satisfy:

1. $`i=1`$ and the domino $`D(1,T)`$ is vertical,
2. $`i>1`$ and $`D(i1,T)`$ lies higher than $`D(i,T)`$ in $`T`$.

According to \[Gar93\], there is a unique tableau of a given shape within each equivalence class of tableaux generated by the generalized $`\tau `$-invariant. We show

###### Theorem 5.1.

Suppose that $`𝒞\text{Irr}(_u)/A_u`$ and that $`𝒱=\pi (𝒞).`$ Then

$$\tau (𝒯(𝒞))=\tau (𝒯(𝒱)).$$

###### Proof.

In fact, we show that all of following sets are equal.

$$\tau (𝒯(𝒱))=\tau (𝒱)=\tau (𝒞)=\tau (𝒯(𝒞)).$$

The first equality follows from \[McG99\] and \[Jos84\]. The second from the definition of $`\pi `$. We verify the third.

Recall the map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:SDT_{op,cl}SDT`$ defined in the previous section. We prove that if $`\stackrel{~}{T}SDT_{op,cl}`$ parameterizes the irreducible component $`𝒞\text{Irr}_u`$ in \[vL89\], then its $`\tau `$-invariant $`\tau (𝒞)`$ is precisely the $`\tau `$-invariant of the standard domino tableau $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{~}{T})=𝒯(𝒞)`$ as defined above. The content of the proof is a description of the effect of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ on the characterization of the $`\tau `$-invariant of the components of the Springer fiber given in \[Spa82\].

That $`\alpha _1\tau (𝒞)`$ iff $`\alpha _1\tau (\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{~}{T})`$ is clear in types $`B`$ and $`C`$ since $`D(1,T)`$ never lies within a closed cluster and hence remains unaltered by $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$. In type $`D`$, the conditions for $`\alpha _i,`$ when $`i2`$, to lie in $`\tau (𝒞)`$ described by Spaltenstein translate exactly to our conditions for $`\alpha _i`$ to lie in $`\tau (\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{~}{T})`$.

For $`i>1`$, suppose that either $`D(i,T)`$ or $`D(i1,T)`$ lies in some $`𝒦CC^+(T)`$. If $`𝒦`$ contains more than two dominos, then \[Gar93\](III.1.4) implies that $`\alpha _i\tau (𝒞)`$ iff $`\alpha _i\tau (\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{~}{T})).`$

So suppose that $`𝒦`$ contains exactly two dominos. If, in fact, $`𝒦=\{D(i),D(i1)\}`$, the simple root $`\alpha _i`$ must lie in $`\tau (𝒞)`$. But $`D(i1)`$ is higher than $`D(i)`$ in $`MT(𝒞,T)`$ , implying by the definition of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ that $`\alpha _i\tau (\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{~}{T}))`$ as well. The remaining possibility is that only one of the dominos $`D(i)`$ and $`D(i1)`$ lies in the two-domino cluster $`𝒦`$. Then the fact that $`\alpha _i\tau (𝒞)`$ iff $`\alpha _i(\stackrel{~}{T})`$ follows by inspection. ∎