text:
# References

Flavor changing neutrino interactions

and CP violation in neutrino oscillations

Toshihiko Hattori$`,^{a),}`$111e-mail: hattori@ias.tokushima-u.ac.jp Tsutom Hasuike$`,^{b),}`$222e-mail: hasuike@anan-nct.ac.jp and Seiichi Wakaizumic),333e-mail: wakaizum@cue.tokushima-u.ac.jp

a)Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Tokushima, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan

b)Department of Physics, Anan College of Technology, Anan 774-0017, Japan

c)Center for University Extension, University of Tokushima, Tokushima 770-8502, Japan

Abstract

We investigate the interference effects of non-standard neutrino-matter interactions (NSNI) with the mass-induced neutrino oscillations. The NSNI is composed of flavor-changing neutrino interactions (FCNI) and flavor-diagonal neutrino interactions (FDNI). Both of the interactions are introduced in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector and the $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector in order to study their effects in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations, respectively. The FCNI effect proves to possibly dominate the CP violating effect and significantly survive as a fake CP violating effect in the neutrino energy region where the pure CP violating effect, ordinary matter effect and FDNI effect fall, for example, above 4 GeV at the baseline of $`L=730`$ km in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation for the maximum parameter values of FCNI and FDNI allowed by the atmospheric neutrino oscillation data. The FCNI and FDNI effects on CP violation in $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation are negligibly small due to the stringent constraints on FCNI from the bounds on lepton flavor violating processes and on FDNI from the limits on lepton universality violation.

I Introduction

In the framework of massive neutrinos and leptonic mixing, the atmospheric neutrino anomaly  is resolved by the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation with nearly maximal mixing  and the solar neutrino deficit  is interpreted by the oscillation of $`\nu _e`$ into another neutrino state with large mixing angle solution  in the Mikheyev-Smirnov-Wolfenstein (MSW) mechanism of neutrino interactions with matter  in the three-neutrino scheme, where the neutrino flavor eigenstates $`\nu _\alpha (\alpha =e,\mu ,\tau )`$ are expressed by a superposition of their mass eigenstates $`\nu _i(i=1,2,3)`$ with mass $`m_i`$ as follows:

$$\nu _\alpha =\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}U_{\alpha i}\nu _i,$$
(1)
where $`U`$ is the $`3\times 3`$ unitary mixing matrix, which is called as Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) matrix . The reactor experiment of search for $`\overline{\nu _e}`$ oscillations, CHOOZ, gives an upper limit on the element $`U_{e3}`$, which is very small as $`|U_{e3}|<0.22`$ . The liquid scintillation experiment, LSND, claims a discovery of $`\overline{\nu _\mu }\overline{\nu _e}`$ oscillations , which requires a fourth sterile neutrino.

The above situation seems to convince us of a scheme of massive neutrinos and lepton mixing. In addition to this scheme, it is interesting to investigate non-standard neutrino-matter interactions in the neutrino oscillations in order to search for new physics beyond the standard model. The non-standard neutrino-matter interaction (NSNI) is originated from Wolfenstein’s work  and the flavor-changing neutrino-matter interaction (FCNI) and flavor-diagonal neutrino-matter interaction (FDNI) were used in order to study the solar neutrino problem, not by relying on the mass-induced neutrino oscillations , and then by considering them as sub-leading effects to the standard mass-induced oscillations . For the atmospheric neutrino problem, the FDNI alone  and both of the FCNI and FDNI were applied . The mere NSNI, however, has proved not to be able to solve the atmospheric neutrino problem .

After that, the FCNI has been studied as sub-leading effects to the standard mass-induced neutrino oscillations by considering FCNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector and in $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ sector  and its detectability at a future neutrino factory is discussed in Refs. . In Ref.19, it is shown that the FCNI dominates the $`\nu _e`$ oscillation probability at sufficiently high neutrino energies. Moreover, the NSNI with the netrino masses can induce some fake CP violating effect in matter in the long-baseline oscillation experiments . There are also combined analyses with new flavor-changing neutrino interactions occuring in the neutrino production and detection processes in addition to the above-mentioned non-standard interactions with matter during neutrino propagation, of which effects are enhanced by the interference with the ordinary weak interactions in the oscillation phenomena .

In this paper, we analyze the non-standard neutrino-matter interaction effects (NSNI) to the CP violating effects in the neutrino oscillations by considering them in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector and $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector in the three-neutrino scheme. The NSNI consists of the above-mentioned FCNI and flavor-diagonal neutrino-matter interactions (FDNI). The evolution equation of the neutrino flavor states is solved analytically by using Arafune-Koike-Sato’s perturbative method  and we calculate the neutrino oscillation probability for the general $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ oscillation. We apply this analytic expression of the probability to calculate the CP violating effects in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations, i.e. the difference between the neutrino and the antineutrino oscillation probabilities. We find that the FCNI matter effect survives and dominates the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation even after both the pure CP violating effect due to the phase of $`U`$ and the fake CP violating ones due to the ordinary and FDNI matter effects fall. This shows that the non-standard flavor changing neutrino-matter interaction could be detected in the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation at the neutrino energies where both the pure CP violating effect and the ordinary matter effect become sufficiently small and undetectable. For $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation, the FCNI and FDNI effects on the CP violating effect are negligibly small due to the stringent constraints  on FCNI from the bounds on lepton flavor violating processes and on FDNI from the limits on lepton universality violation.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II the oscillation probability is derived by solving analytically the evolution equation of the neutrino flavor states with the non-standard neutrino-matter interactions in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector. The effect of the NSNI is studied in the CP violating effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation. In Sect. III the same will be done for the NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector and the effect of the NSNI is studied in the CP violating effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation. Section IV is devoted to the conclusions and discussions.

II Oscillation probability and CP violating effect

with NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector

Here and in the next section we calculate the neutrino oscillation probabilities and CP violating effects with the inclusion of the NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector and in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector, respectively, in the three-neutrino scheme by solving analylitically the evolution equation for neutrino flavor states in the perturbative method.

If we consider the effect of NSNI in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector, the evolution equation in matter is given as

$$i\frac{d}{dx}\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _e\\ \nu _\mu \\ \nu _\tau \end{array}\right)=H\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _e\\ \nu _\mu \\ \nu _\tau \end{array}\right),$$
(2)
and

$$H=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\end{array}\right)U^{}+\left(\begin{array}{ccc}V_e(x)& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f(x)\\ 0& ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f(x)& ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f(x)\end{array}\right),$$
(3)
where $`E`$ is the neutrino energy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2=m_i^2m_j^2`$, $`m_i`$ being the mass of $`i`$-th neutrino, $`U`$ is the MNS leptonic mixing matrix, $`V_f(x)=\sqrt{2}G_Fn_f(x)`$, $`x`$ being the position of the running neutrino, $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f(x)`$ is the flavor-changing $`\nu _\mu +f\nu _\tau +f`$ forward scattering amplitude due to the flavor-changing neutrino-matter interaction(FCNI), and $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f(x)`$ is the difference between the flavor-diagonal $`\nu _\mu f`$ and $`\nu _\tau f`$ elastic forward scattering amplitudes due to the flavor-diagonal neutrino-matter interaction(FDNI), with $`n_f(x)`$ being the number density of the fermion $`f(f=u,d,e)`$ which induces such processes. In Eq.(3), $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^f`$ and $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^f`$ are the phenomenological parameters which characterize the strength of FCNI and FDNI, respectively. The fermion number density $`n_f(x)`$ can be written in terms of the matter density $`\rho `$ as $`n_f(x)=\rho (x)Y_f`$, where $`Y_f`$ is the fraction of the fermion $`f`$ per nucleon, $`1/2`$ for electrons and $`3/2`$ for $`u`$ or $`d`$ quarks. In the following, we consider interactions only with either $`u`$ or $`d`$ quarks, since for the NSNI with electrons the same effects presented in this paper can be obtained simply by increasing the parameters $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^{u,d}`$ and $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^{u,d}`$ by a factor 3.

For the evolution equation of the antineutrinos, the replacement of $`UU^{},V_{e,f}(x)V_{e,f}(x)`$ and $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^fϵ_{\mu \tau }^f`$ should be done in Eq.(3).

We use here Arafune-Koike-Sato’s perturbative method to solve analytically the evolution equation . The solution of Eq.(2) is given by

$$\nu (x)=S(x)\nu (0),$$
(4)
with

$$S(x)=T\mathrm{exp}\left(i_0^x𝑑sH(s)\right),$$
(5)
where

$$\nu (x)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\nu _e(x)\\ \nu _\mu (x)\\ \nu _\tau (x)\end{array}\right)$$
(6)
and $`T`$ is the time ordering operator. In the following, the oscillation probability and the CP violating effect are calculated for the baseline of $`L=300`$ and 730 km so that we assume $`n_f(x)`$ and $`\rho (x)`$ to be independent of $`x`$. Then we have

$$S(x)=e^{iHx}.$$
(7)
The oscillation probability for $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ at the distance $`L`$ from the neutrino production point is given in terms of $`S`$ in Eq.(5) as follows:

$$P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;L)=\left|S_{\beta \alpha }(L)\right|^2.$$
(8)
We express the Hamiltonian $`H`$ of Eq.(3) for simplicity as

$$H=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\end{array}\right)U^{}+\frac{1}{2E}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& ϵb\\ 0& ϵ^{}b& ϵ^{}b\end{array}\right),$$
(9)
where

$`a`$ $``$ $`2EV_e=2\sqrt{2}G_Fn_eE=7.60\times 10^5{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{[\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{[\mathrm{GeV}]}}\mathrm{eV}^2,`$ (10)
$`ϵb`$ $``$ $`2Eϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f=15.2\times 10^5ϵY_f{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{[\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{[\mathrm{GeV}]}}\mathrm{eV}^2,`$ (11)
$`ϵ^{}b`$ $``$ $`2Eϵ_{\mu \tau }^fV_f=15.2\times 10^5ϵ^{}Y_f{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{[\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{[\mathrm{GeV}]}}\mathrm{eV}^2,`$ (12)
where $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^f`$ and $`ϵ_{\mu \tau }^f`$ are denoted as $`ϵ`$ and $`ϵ^{}`$, respectively, and $`2EV_f`$ is denoted as $`b`$, for brevity. In general, $`ϵ`$ is complex and $`ϵ^{}`$ is real from the hermeticity of the Hamiltonian. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ and $`a,|ϵ|b,|ϵ^{}|b\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ because of $`|ϵ|<0.02`$ and $`|ϵ^{}|<0.05`$ from the analysis of the atmospheric neutrino problem , we decompose $`H`$ of Eq.(9) as $`H=H_0+H_1`$ with

$$H_0=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\end{array}\right)U^{},$$
(13)
and

$$H_1=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)U^{}+\frac{1}{2E}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& ϵb\\ 0& ϵ^{}b& ϵ^{}b\end{array}\right),$$
(14)
and treat $`H_1`$ as a perturbation and calculate Eq.(7) up to the first order in $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,a,ϵb`$ and $`ϵ^{}b`$. Then, $`S(x)`$ is given by

$$S(x)e^{iH_0x}ie^{iH_0x}_0^x𝑑sH_1(s),$$
(15)
where $`H_1(x)=e^{iH_0x}H_1e^{iH_0x}`$. The approximation in Eq.(15) requires

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2L}{2E}1,\frac{|ϵ|bL}{2E}1,\frac{ϵ^{}bL}{2E}1.$$
(16)
The requirements of Eq.(16) are satisfied for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2=(10^510^4)`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2,E=120`$ $`\mathrm{GeV},L=(300730)`$ km, $`\rho =3\mathrm{g}/\mathrm{cm}^3,|ϵ|0.02`$ and $`|ϵ^{}|0.05`$ as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2L}{2E}}`$ $``$ $`4\times 10^40.2,{\displaystyle \frac{|ϵ|bL}{2E}}(12.5)\times 10^2,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{|ϵ^{}|bL}{2E}}`$ $``$ $`(2.56)\times 10^2.`$ (17)
Equation (16) also shows that the approximation becomes better as the energy $`E`$ increases. If we express $`S_{\beta \alpha }(x)`$ as

$$S_{\beta \alpha }(x)=\delta _{\beta \alpha }+iT_{\beta \alpha }(x),$$
(18)
then $`iT_{\beta \alpha }(x)`$ is obtained as follows:

$`iT_{\beta \alpha }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`2i\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{4E}})\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{4E}}\right)[U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}\{1{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{e3}|^2`$ (19)
$`\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})i{\displaystyle \frac{ax}{2E}}|U_{e3}|^2{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{\tau 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau })`$
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}bx}{2E}}|U_{\tau 3}|^2\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{4U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})`$
$`ϵ^{}b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\mu 3}\delta _{\beta \tau }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\tau 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \mu })ϵb(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\tau 3}\delta _{\beta \mu }`$
$`+U_{\beta 3}U_{\mu 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}2i{\displaystyle \frac{x}{2E}}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})]`$
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{2E}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}U_{\beta 2}U_{\alpha 2}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e}+U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}(2|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e}`$
$`\delta _{\beta e})\}+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}(2|U_{\tau 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau })\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{ϵ^{}b\delta _{\beta \tau }\delta _{\alpha \mu }+ϵb\delta _{\beta \mu }\delta _{\alpha \tau }+4U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})`$
$`ϵ^{}b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\mu 3}\delta _{\beta \tau }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\tau 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \mu })ϵb(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\tau 3}\delta _{\beta \mu }`$
$`+U_{\beta 3}U_{\mu 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}].`$
We use Eq.(19) in Eq.(18) and calculate the oscillation probability for $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ by Eq.(8). The complete expression of $`P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;L)`$ with the NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector is given in the Appendix A.

Now we will study the effects due to the NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector on the oscillation probability and the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation at the baseline of $`L=730`$ km. For the MNS mixing matrix $`U`$, we take the standard parametrization given by

$$U=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}e^{i\delta }\\ s_{12}c_{23}c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}c_{23}s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& s_{23}c_{13}\\ s_{12}s_{23}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}s_{23}s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{23}c_{13}\end{array}\right),$$
(20)
where $`c_{ij}=\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij},s_{ij}=\mathrm{sin}\theta _{ij}`$ and $`\delta `$ is the CP violating phase. From the Super-Kamiokande data for the atmospheric neutrino oscillation , $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{\mathrm{atm}}>0.82`$ and $`5\times 10^4<\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\mathrm{atm}}^2<6\times 10^3`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$, we take in the following $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{23}=0.707`$ for the mixing angle $`s_{23}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2=2.5\times 10^3`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$ as a typical value. For $`s_{12}`$, we take $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{12}=0.54`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2=7.3\times 10^5`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$ from the presently most probable large-mixing angle solution (LMA) to the solar neutrino oscillation . For $`s_{13}`$, we tentatively assume $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _{13}=0.14`$ from the CHOOZ data on $`\overline{\nu _e}`$ oscillation , $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{\mathrm{CHOOZ}}<0.18`$ for $`3\times 10^3<\mathrm{\Delta }m^2<1.0\times 10^2`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$, which means $`0<\mathrm{sin}\theta _{13}<0.22`$. For the phenomenological parameters of the NSNI, the constraints are derived to be $`0.03<ϵ<0.02`$ and $`|ϵ^{}|<0.05`$ from the analyses of the atmospheric neutrino data by Fonengo et al. . They assumed $`ϵ`$ to be real. Here we generally take $`ϵ`$ to be complex. For the numerical calculations we take $`|ϵ|=0.01`$ and $`ϵ^{}=\pm 0.02`$, and the effects of the FCNI on CP violation have proved to be maximum at $`\varphi =0`$ and $`\pi `$ for the phase of $`ϵ`$, $`ϵ=|ϵ|e^{i\varphi }`$.

In the following, we present the numerical results for the oscillation probabilities and CP violating effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation. The effect of NSNI in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector is not so significant in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ and $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ oscillations as in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation. Fig.1 and Fig.2 show the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation probabilities for $`|ϵ|=0.01,ϵ^{}=0.02,\delta =\pi /2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2>0`$ for the neutrino energy range of $`E=120`$ GeV at the baseline of $`L=730`$ km for $`\varphi =0`$ (Fig.1) and $`\varphi =\pi `$ (Fig.2), respectively, where the solid line represents the oscillation probability including all the three matter effects, i.e. ordinary matter effect (denoted as $`a`$ in Eq.(14)), flavor-changing neutrino-matter interaction (FCNI, denoted as $`ϵb`$) and flavor-diagonal neutrino-matter interaction (FDNI, denoted as $`ϵ^{}b`$), and the dashed line represents the one without any matter effects. These two Figures show that the matter effects due to the NSNI are small for the oscillation probability.

Figs.3-6 show the CP violating effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation, calculated as the difference between the neutrino and the antineutrino oscillation probabilities, for the energy range of $`E=120`$ GeV at the baseline of $`L=730`$ km. The phase of the MNS mixing matrix $`U`$ is taken as $`\delta =\pi /2`$. The dash-dotted line is the pure CP violating effect due to the phase of $`U`$. The long-dashed, short-dashed and dotted lines are the fake CP violating effects due to the ordinary, FCNI and FDNI matter effects, respectively. The solid line represents the total CP violating effect with the sum of the pure and fake ones. For Fig.3-6, we have taken $`|ϵ|=0.01,|ϵ^{}|=0.02`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2|=2.5\times 10^3`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$. In Fig.3, the phase of $`ϵ`$ is taken as $`\varphi =0`$ and $`ϵ^{}=+0.02`$ $`(>0)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2>0`$. In Fig.4, $`\varphi =\pi ,ϵ^{}=+0.02`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2>0`$. In Fig.5, $`\varphi =0,ϵ^{}>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2<0`$, and in Fig.6, $`\varphi =\pi ,ϵ^{}>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2<0`$. As can be seen from these Figures, the FCNI matter effect dominates the CP violating effect in the whole range of $`E=120`$ GeV, and all the other contributions of pure CP violation, ordinary matter effect and FDNI effect rapidly fall around 4 GeV and the FCNI effect survives significantly above this energy. When the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ is changed, the contributions of all the matter effects including FCNI and FDNI change the sign, as can be seen from the comparison of Fig.3 and Fig.5 and from Fig.4 and Fig.6.

Next we will show how much the predicted CP violation depends on the oscillation parameters in their allowed ranges. Fig.7 and Fig.8 give the dependence of the total CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation at $`L=730`$ km on the mass-squared differences $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2=1.5\times 10^3,2.5\times 10^3,3.5\times 10^3`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2=6\times 10^5,7\times 10^5,8\times 10^5`$ $`\mathrm{eV}^2`$, respectively. The dependence on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2`$ is large and that on $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2`$ is very small, because the baseline of $`L=730`$ km corresponds to the atmospheric neutrino mass scale. The dash-dotted curve in both Figures represents the pure CP violating effect without the FCNI and FDNI. Figs. 9, 10 and 11 give the dependence of the total CP violating effect on the mixing angles $`s_{23},s_{12}`$, and $`s_{13}`$ for $`s_{23}=0.55,0.60,0.65,s_{12}=0.50,0.55,0.60`$ and $`s_{13}=0.05,0.10,0.15`$, respectively. The dependence on the mixing angles is evidently small. Again, the dash-dotted curve represents the pure CP violating effect without the FCNI and FDNI. These Figures 7-11 show that the new CP violating effects are significantly larger than the pure CP violating one coming from the standard model.

III NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector

In this section, we consider the NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector and study its effect on the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation at the baselines of $`L=300`$ km.

The Hamiltonian of the evolution equation of the flavor neutrino states is given as

$$H=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\end{array}\right)U^{}+\left(\begin{array}{ccc}V_e(x)& ϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f(x)& 0\\ ϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f(x)& ϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f(x)& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(21)
where $`ϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f(x)`$ is the flavor-changing $`\nu _e+f\nu _\mu +f`$ forward scattering amplitude due to the FCNI and $`ϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f(x)`$ is the difference between the flavor-diagonal $`\nu _ef`$ and $`\nu _\mu f`$ elastic forward scattering amplitudes due to the FDNI. As in the previous section, we assume the matter density to be constant for the baseline of $`L=300`$ km and reexpress Eq.(21) as

$$H=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2\end{array}\right)U^{}+\frac{1}{2E}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& \eta b& 0\\ \eta ^{}b& \eta ^{}b& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(22)
where $`a`$ is the same as in Eq.(10) and

$`\eta b`$ $``$ $`2Eϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f=15.2\times 10^5\eta Y_f{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{[\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{[\mathrm{GeV}]}}\mathrm{eV}^2,`$ (23)
$`\eta ^{}b`$ $``$ $`2Eϵ_{e\mu }^fV_f=15.2\times 10^5\eta ^{}Y_f{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{[\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3]}}{\displaystyle \frac{E}{[\mathrm{GeV}]}}\mathrm{eV}^2,`$ (24)
where $`ϵ_{e\mu }^f`$ and $`ϵ_{e\mu }^f`$ are denoted as $`\eta `$ and $`\eta ^{}`$, respectively, and $`2EV_f`$ is denoted as $`b`$, for brevity. In general, $`\eta `$ is complex and $`\eta ^{}`$ is real. The experimental limits on various lepton flavor violating processes and $`SU(2)_L`$ breaking effects give a stringent constraint on the FCNI parameter as $`|\eta |<7\times 10^5`$  and the upper bounds on lepton universality violation give a constraint on the FDNI parameter as $`|\eta ^{}|<0.1`$ . So, we can decompose $`H`$ of Eq.(22) as $`H=H_0+H_1`$ with

$$H_1=\frac{1}{2E}U\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 0\\ 0& \mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)U^{}+\frac{1}{2E}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& \eta b& 0\\ \eta ^{}b& \eta ^{}b& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),$$
(25)
and treat $`H_1`$ as a perturbation. $`H_0`$ is the same as in Eq.(13). In the same way as for the NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector, we calculate $`S(x)`$ of Eq.(7) up to the first order in $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,a,\eta b`$ and $`\eta ^{}b`$ to obtain the expression of $`iT_{\beta \alpha }(x)`$ in Eq.(18):

$`iT_{\beta \alpha }(x)`$ $`=`$ $`2i\mathrm{exp}(i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{4E}})\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{4E}}\right)[U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}\{1{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{e3}|^2`$ (26)
$`\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})i{\displaystyle \frac{ax}{2E}}|U_{e3}|^2{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{\mu 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu })`$
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}bx}{2E}}|U_{\mu 3}|^2\}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{4U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})`$
$`\eta ^{}b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{e3}\delta _{\beta \mu }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\mu 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha e})\eta b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\mu 3}\delta _{\beta e}`$
$`+U_{\beta 3}U_{e3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \mu })\}2i{\displaystyle \frac{x}{2E}}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})]`$
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2x}{2E}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}U_{\beta 2}U_{\alpha 2}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e}+U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}(2|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e}`$
$`\delta _{\beta e})\}+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m2_{31}}}\{\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\alpha 3}^{}(2|U_{\mu 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu })\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\eta ^{}b\delta _{\beta \mu }\delta _{\alpha e}+\eta b\delta _{\beta e}\delta _{\alpha \mu }+4U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\beta 3}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})`$
$`\eta ^{}b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{e3}\delta _{\beta \mu }+U_{\beta 3}U_{\mu 3}^{}\delta _{\alpha e})\eta b(U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\mu 3}\delta _{\beta e}`$
$`+U_{\beta 3}U_{e3}^{}\delta _{\alpha \mu })\}].`$
Using Eq.(26) in Eq.(18), we calculate the oscillation probability for $`\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta `$ by Eq.(8). The complete expression of $`P(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;L)`$ with the NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector is given in the Appendix B.

Now we will study the effects due to the NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector on the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation at the baseline of $`L=300`$ km. The values of the parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2,\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2,s_{23},s_{12}`$ and $`s_{13}`$ are taken to be the same as in the previous section. The effect of the FCNI on CP violation has proved to be maximum at $`\gamma =\pi /2`$ and $`3\pi /2`$ for the phase of $`\eta ,\eta =|\eta |\mathrm{e}^{i\gamma }`$. We present the numerical results for the CP violating effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation for the parameters satisfying the constraints. In Fig.12 we show the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation for $`|\eta |=7\times 10^5,\gamma =\pi /2,\eta ^{}=0.01`$ in the neutrino energy range of $`E=0.32`$ GeV at the baseline of $`L=300`$ km for $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2>0`$ and $`\delta =\pi /2`$ for the phase of $`U`$. The dash-dotted line represents the pure CP violating effect due to the phase of $`U`$. The long-dashed and short-dashed lines are the fake CP violating effects due to the ordinary and FCNI matter effects, respectively. The solid line represents the total CP violating effect, which is the sum of the pure and fake ones. The FCNI effect turns out to be negligibly small, so that the total CP violating effect is just given by the pure CP violating effect and the ordinary matter effect. The FDNI effect is negligibly small just as the FCNI effect and is not shown in Fig.12.

IV Conclusions and discussions

In this paper we have studied the effects of non-standard neutrino-matter interactions on the standard mass-induced oscillation probabilities and the CP violating effects. The non-standard interactions are introduced in the flavor-changing neutrino interaction (FCNI) and the flavor-diagonal one (FDNI) as sub-leading effects in the $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector and $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector in order to investigate their effects in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillations, respectively, at the baselines of $`L=730`$ and 300 km. By using the values of FCNI and FDNI parameters allowed by the atmospheric neutrino oscillation analyses, in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation at $`L=730`$ km the FCNI contribution has proved to dominate the CP violating effect and survive significantly in the energy region where all the others of pure CP violating effect, ordinary matter effect and FDNI contribution fall. In $`\nu _\mu \nu _e`$ oscillation at $`L=300`$ km, the FCNI and FDNI contributions are negligibly small due to the stringent constraints on FCNI from the bounds on various lepton flavor violating processes and on FDNI from the limits on lepton universality violation.

These results show that the non-standard neutrino-matter interations, especially the flavor-changing neutrino interaction, could be detected in the CP violating effect in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ oscillation at the neutrino energies where both the pure CP violating effect and the ordinary matter effect fall, for example, above 4 GeV at $`L=730`$ km.111After the completion of this work, Prof. Branco informed us that they studied the effect of the addition of a new isosinglet charged lepton inspired by extra dimensions to the standard spectrum on the CP asymmetries in neutrino oscillations in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ and $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ channels and its detectability at future neutrino factories.

Appendix A: Oscillation probability

with NSNI in $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ sector

Here we present the oscillation probability of Eq.(8) with Eq.(19) taken in Eq.(18).

$`P`$ $`(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;L)`$
$`=`$ $`\delta _{\beta \alpha }[\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}4\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}}\right)\{|U_{\alpha 3}|^2[\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}2{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e})`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(|U_{\tau 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \tau })]{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})(2|U_{\alpha 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}`$
$`2\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\right)|U_{\alpha 3}|^2\{{\displaystyle \frac{aL}{2E}}|U_{e3}|^2+2{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2E}}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}bL}{2E}}|U_{\tau 3}|^2\}]`$
$`+4\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}}\right)[|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2\{12{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{\tau 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau })\}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})\{4|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2`$
$`|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta \mu }+\delta _{\beta \tau })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha \mu }+\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}]+2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}})`$
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(U_{\beta 3}U_{\beta 2}^{}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\alpha 2})+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e}|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2(2|U_{e3}|^2`$
$`\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})\}+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau }|U_{\tau 3}|^2+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2(2|U_{\tau 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \tau })\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})\{\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \tau }+\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \mu }+4|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2`$
$`|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta \mu }+\delta _{\beta \tau })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha \mu }+\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}]+4{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\mathrm{sin}^2({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}})`$
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Im}(U_{\beta 3}U_{\beta 2}^{}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\alpha 2})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Im}(ϵbU_{\mu 3}^{}U_{\tau 3})\{\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \tau }\delta _{\alpha \tau }\delta _{\beta \mu }`$
$`+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta \mu }\delta _{\beta \tau })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\alpha \tau })\}].(\mathrm{A1})`$
Appendix B: Oscillation probability

with NSNI in $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ sector

Here we present the oscillation probability of Eq.(8) with Eq.(26) taken in Eq.(18).

$`P`$ $`(\nu _\alpha \nu _\beta ;L)`$
$`=`$ $`\delta _{\beta \alpha }[\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}4\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}}\right)\{|U_{\alpha 3}|^2[\mathrm{\hspace{0.25em}1}2{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e})`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(|U_{\mu 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu })]{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})(2|U_{\alpha 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\alpha e})\}`$
$`2\mathrm{sin}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\right)|U_{\alpha 3}|^2\{{\displaystyle \frac{aL}{2E}}|U_{e3}|^2+2{\displaystyle \frac{L}{2E}}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}bL}{2E}}|U_{\mu 3}|^2\}]`$
$`+4\mathrm{sin}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}}\right)[|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2\{12{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{e3}|^2\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}(2|U_{\mu 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu })\}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})\{4|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2`$
$`|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta e}+\delta _{\beta \mu })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha e}+\delta _{\alpha \mu })\}]+2{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\mathrm{sin}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}})`$
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(U_{\beta 3}U_{\beta 2}^{}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\alpha 2})+{\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e}|U_{e3}|^2+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2(2|U_{e3}|^2`$
$`\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta e})\}+{\displaystyle \frac{\eta ^{}b}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\{\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu }|U_{\mu 3}|^2+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2(2|U_{\mu 3}|^2\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta \mu })\}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Re}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta \mu }+\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta e}+4|U_{\alpha 3}|^2|U_{\beta 3}|^2`$
$`|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta e}+\delta _{\beta \mu })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha e}+\delta _{\alpha \mu })\}]+4{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{2E}}\mathrm{sin}^2({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2L}{4E}})`$
$`\times [{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{21}^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Im}(U_{\beta 3}U_{\beta 2}^{}U_{\alpha 3}^{}U_{\alpha 2})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{31}^2}}\mathrm{Im}(\eta bU_{e3}^{}U_{\mu 3})\{\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\beta \mu }\delta _{\alpha \mu }\delta _{\beta e}`$
$`+|U_{\alpha 3}|^2(\delta _{\beta e}\delta _{\beta \mu })|U_{\beta 3}|^2(\delta _{\alpha e}\delta _{\alpha \mu })\}].(\mathrm{B1})`$


format: text

text:
# The first cohomology group of the trivial extension of a monomial algebra

## 1 Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to study the first Hochschild cohomology group $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ of the trivial extension of a finite–dimensional monomial algebra $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ where $`k`$ is a field, $`Q`$ a finite quiver and $`Z`$ a set of paths of length at least two.

Given an algebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$–bimodule $`X`$, the Hochschild cohomology groups $`H^i(\mathrm{\Lambda },X)`$, introduced in , are the groups $`Ext_{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}^i(\mathrm{\Lambda },X)`$. In particular if $`X=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ we write $`HH^i\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=H^i(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. Analogously, the Hochschild homology groups $`H_i(\mathrm{\Lambda },X)`$ are the groups $`Tor_i^{\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }}(\mathrm{\Lambda },X)`$ and we write $`HH_i\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=H_i(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Lambda })`$. Although these groups are not easy to compute in general, some approaches have been successful when the algebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by a quiver with relations. For instance, explicit formulae for the dimensions of $`HH^i\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$ in terms of those combinatorial data have been found in .

The first Hochschild cohomology group plays an important role in the representation theory of algebras since it is related to the separation properties of the vertices of the quiver of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and to the notion of (strong) simple connectedness (see ). The importance of simply connected algebras follows from the fact that we may often reduce the study of indecomposable modules over an algebra to that of the corresponding simply connected algebras.

Given an algebra $`A`$ we consider $`DA`$, the dual $`AA`$–bimodule of $`A`$. The trivial extension $`TA`$ is the algebra whose underlying vector space is $`ADA`$, and the product is given by $`(a,f)(b,g)=(ab,ag+fb)`$ for any $`a,bA`$, $`f,gDA`$. In other words, $`A`$ is a subalgebra of $`TA`$ and $`DA`$ is a two–sided ideal endowed with the zero multiplicative structure.

In  it has been shown that if $`A`$ is a finite–dimensional algebra, $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ is a direct sum of four vector spaces. More precisely,

$$HH^1\left(TA\right)=Z\left(A\right)HH^1\left(A\right)HH_1\left(A\right)^{}Alt\left(DA\right),$$

where $`Z\left(A\right)`$ is the center of $`A`$ and $`Alt\left(DA\right)=\{\phi Hom_{AA}(DA,A):\phi +\phi ^{}=0\}`$. As an immediate consequence we have that $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ never vanishes. The first and second summands have been studied in , when $`A`$ is a monomial algebra, and explicit formulae for their dimensions are obtained. The Lie algebra structure of $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ with respect to this decomposition is described in .

In this paper we compute the third and the fourth summands for a given monomial algebra $`A`$ in terms of the combinatorics of the quiver and of the set of path relations. In particular we provide precise criteria for the vanishing of those summands.

An important tool for the computations is given by the circuits of a quiver, which are equivalence classes of cycles under rotation, see Definition 2.2. Each circuit has a well defined multiplicity; in characteristic $`p`$, the circuits which are relevant have a multiplicity that is not divisible by $`p`$. We call them $`p^{}`$-circuits by analogy with the $`p^{}`$-conjugacy classes of a group.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce some notations and definitions, and we provide formulae for the dimension of the first Hochschild homology group $`HH_1\left(A\right)`$ when the field $`k`$ has characteristic zero. In Section 3 we extend the previous results for any field $`k`$ of positive characteristic. In Section 4 we obtain a dimension formula for the vector space $`Alt\left(DA\right)`$ and, as an application of the formulae obtained in the paper, we describe the monomial algebras $`A`$ for which $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ is minimal, that is, $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1\left(TA\right)=1`$. It turns out that this condition is equivalent to $`HH^1\left(A\right)=0`$. We do not know if this equivalence holds for a wider class of algebras – this question has been pointed out by the referee.

All the algebras considered here are finite–dimensional, but results in Section 2 and 3 hold also for infinite–dimensional monomial algebras.

## 2 Degree one Hochschild homology of a monomial algebra

Let $`k`$ be a field, $`Q`$ a finite quiver with set of vertices $`Q_0`$, set of arrows $`Q_1`$ and $`s,t:Q_1Q_0`$ be the maps providing each arrow $`a`$ with its source vertex $`s\left(a\right)`$ and its terminal vertex $`t\left(a\right)`$. A path $`\alpha `$ of length $`l`$ is a sequence of $`l`$ arrows $`a_l\mathrm{}a_1`$ such that $`t\left(a_i\right)=s\left(a_{i+1}\right)`$. We put $`s\left(\alpha \right)=s\left(a_1\right)`$ and $`t\left(\alpha \right)=t\left(a_l\right)`$. Any vertex $`u`$ is a trivial path of length zero and we put $`s\left(u\right)=t\left(u\right)=u`$. A cycle is a path $`\alpha `$ such that $`s\left(\alpha \right)=t\left(\alpha \right)`$; vertices are always cycles. The corresponding path algebra $`kQ`$ is the vector space with basis all the paths in $`Q`$ and whose product on the basis elements is defined by the concatenation of the sequences of arrows of the paths $`\beta `$ and $`\alpha `$ if they form a path (namely, if $`t\left(\alpha \right)=s\left(\beta \right)`$) and zero otherwise. Vertices form a complete set of orthogonal idempotents. Note that $`\alpha s\left(\alpha \right)=\alpha `$ while $`\alpha u=0`$ if $`us\left(\alpha \right)`$. We have also $`t\left(\alpha \right)\alpha =\alpha `$ and $`u\alpha =0`$ if $`ut\left(\alpha \right)`$. Since all summands in $`HH^1\left(TA\right)`$ are additive with respect to the decomposition of $`A`$ into a finite direct product of algebras, it is not restrictive for our purposes to assume that $`Q`$ is connected, something that we do from now on.

Next consider $`Z`$ a set of paths of length at least two which is minimal with respect to the subpath order relation, namely, for each $`\gamma Z,`$ strict subpaths of $`\gamma `$ are not in $`Z`$. We denote $`<Z>`$ the two-sided ideal generated by $`Z`$, and $`kQ/<Z>`$ is by definition a monomial algebra. We fix $`Q`$ and $`Z`$ and put $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ in the sequel.

The purpose of this section is to provide a combinatorial formula computing the dimension of the first Hochschild homology vector space of a monomial algebra, when $`chark`$ = $`0`$.

We need some notation in order to describe a chain complex computing Hochschild homology. Let $`B`$ be the set of paths of $`Q`$ which do not contain any path of $`Z`$. In other words, $`B`$ is a basis of a subvector space of $`kQ`$ complementing $`<Z>`$ and $`B`$ is identified with a $`k`$–basis of the monomial algebra. Product of paths in $`B`$ is given by usual concatenation, which can be zero if it contains a path from $`Z`$. Paths containing a path from $`Z`$ are called zero paths.

Now we describe the set of cyclic pairs of paths. Let $`X`$ and $`Y`$ be sets of paths. Then

$$XY=\{(\alpha ,\beta ):t\left(\beta \right)=s\left(\alpha \right)\text{and}t\left(\alpha \right)=s\left(\beta \right)\}.$$

Note that $`Q_0X`$ is just the set of cycles in $`X`$.

We denote by $`k\left(XY\right)`$ the vector space with basis the set $`XY`$. This notation is very convenient to describe a chain complex whose homology is $`HH_{}\left(A\right)`$. We denote by $`Z_n`$ instead of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_n`$ the set of n-chains defined in  (hence, $`Z_2=Z`$, $`Z_1=Q_1`$ and $`Z_0=Q_0`$). This set is independent of whether we consider left or right modules (cf \[Lemma 3.1\]) and, as proved in \[Theorem 4.1\], the minimal projective resolution $`P_{}`$ of $`A`$ as an $`AA`$–bimodule is defined as follows: $`P_n=_{p^nZ_n}Ae_{t\left(p^n\right)}e_{s\left(p^n\right)}A`$, and the differential $`d:P_{n+1}P_n`$ maps $`e_{t\left(p^{n+1}\right)}e_{s\left(p^{n+1}\right)}`$ onto $`_{1ir}\left(1\right)^{e_i}\theta _ie_{t\left(p_i^n\right)}e_{s\left(p_i^n\right)}\mu _i`$, provided $`\{p_1^n,\mathrm{},p_r^n\}`$ is the set of subpaths of $`p^{n+1}`$ which are n-chains and $`p^{n+1}=\theta _ip_i^n\mu _i`$ is the corresponding (unique) factorization (here $`e_i\{0,1\}`$ is a convenient exponent introduced in order to avoid distinction between the even and odd cases of ). Now $`HH_{}\left(A\right)`$ is the homology of the chain complex $`P_{}_{AA}A`$ and we leave it as an exercise for the reader to check that $`P_n_{AA}A`$ is isomorphic to $`k\left(Z_nB\right)`$ as a $`k`$-vector space. Viewing that isomorphism as an identification, the following is now straightforward.

###### Lemma 2.1.

The Hochschild homology of $`A`$ is the homology of the complex having $`k(Z_nB)`$ in the n-th position and differential $`d:k(Z_{n+1}B)k(Z_nB)`$ given by $`d(p^{n+1},b)=_{1ir}(1)^{e_i}(p_i^n,\mu _ib\theta _i)`$, if we make the convention that a summand is zero when $`\mu _ib\theta _i`$ is a zero path.

This complex will be referred to as Bardzell’s complex and its initial part is:

$$\mathrm{}k\left(ZB\right)\stackrel{d_1}{}k\left(Q_1B\right)\stackrel{d_0}{}k\left(Q_0B\right)0$$

where

$`d_0(a,\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`(t\left(a\right),a\beta )(s\left(a\right),\beta a)`$
$`d_1(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(a_i,a_{i1}\mathrm{}a_1\beta a_n\mathrm{}a_{i+1})`$
for $`\alpha =a_n\mathrm{}a_1`$ any path in $`Z`$.

Next we show that the above complex decomposes along the circuits of $`Q`$ that we define below.

###### Definition 2.2.

Among the set of cycles of a quiver, consider the equivalence relation generated by

$$\gamma _n\mathrm{}\gamma _1\gamma _1\gamma _n\mathrm{}\gamma _2.$$

The second path is called the rotated of the first path. An equivalence class for this relation is by definition a circuit, and we denote by $`𝒞`$ the set of circuits. A circuit is said to be trivial if it corresponds to a vertex.

Cyclic pairs of paths provide circuits by concatenation, namely we have a map

$`XY`$ $``$ $`𝒞`$
$`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $``$ $`\overline{\alpha \beta }=\overline{\beta \alpha }.`$
If $`C`$ is a fixed circuit we denote by $`\left(XY\right)_C`$ the fiber over $`C`$ of this map, namely

$$\left(XY\right)_C=\{(\alpha ,\beta )XY:\alpha \beta C\}.$$

###### Proposition 2.3.

There exists a decomposition $`k(Z_nB)=_{C𝒞}k(Z_nB)_C`$ which is preserved by the differentials of Bardzell’s complex. In particular,

$$HH_n\left(A\right)=_{C𝒞}HH_{n,C}\left(A\right),$$

where $`HH_{,C}(A)`$ is the homology of the $`C`$-split part of the complex.

###### Proof.

The decomposition is clear. If $`(p^{n+1},b)(Z_{n+1}B)_C`$, then $`d(p^{n+1},b)=_{1ir}(1)^{e_i}(p_i^n,\mu _ib\theta _i)`$ has the property that $`(p_i^n,\mu _ib\theta _i)(Z_nB)_C`$, due to the fact that $`p^{n+1}=\theta _ip_i^n\mu _i`$.

###### Remark 2.4.

The above decomposition also holds for cyclic homology. In , relations between cyclic homology and global dimension for monomial algebras are obtained; see also .

We will compute for each circuit $`C`$ the corresponding first homology group $`H_{1,C}:=HH_{1,C}\left(A\right)`$. Of course if $`\left(Q_1B\right)_C=\mathrm{}`$ then $`H_{1,C}=0`$. Hence we concentrate on the set of circuits $`C`$ such that $`\left(Q_1B\right)_C\mathrm{}`$. In the sequel we will need the following definitions.

###### Definition 2.5.

*
* A circuit $`C`$ is said to be useful if $`\left(Q_1B\right)_C\mathrm{}`$.
* A circuit $`C`$ is said to be strong if each cycle of $`C`$ is a basis vector. In other words there is no zero cycle belonging to the circuit $`C`$.
* A circuit $`C`$ is said to be efficient if it is a useful (non strong) circuit satisfying $`\left(ZB\right)_C\mathrm{}`$.

While computing $`H_1`$ we will need an evaluation of the differences $`\left|Q_1B\right|\left|Q_0B\right|`$.

###### Definition 2.6.

Let $`W`$ be the set of cycles in $`Q`$ containing precisely one path of $`Z`$ located at its end. In other words, a cycle $`\gamma `$ is in $`W`$ if $`\gamma =\xi \alpha `$ with $`\xi Z`$ and no other subpath of $`\gamma `$ belongs to $`Z`$. Let $`w=|W|`$ and $`w_C=|WC|`$ for $`C`$ a given circuit.

###### Lemma 2.7.

$`\left|Q_1B\right|\left|Q_0B\right|`$ $`=`$ $`w\left|Q_0\right|,\text{and}`$
$`\left|\left(Q_1B\right)_C\right|\left|\left(Q_0B\right)_C\right|`$ $`=`$ $`w_C\text{if }C\text{ is a non trivial circuit.}`$
###### Proof.

Let $`B^+`$ denote the set $`BQ_0`$ of non zero paths of positive length, and consider the map

$$Q_0B^+\stackrel{\phi }{}Q_1B$$

which removes the last arrow of a path of $`B^+`$ and inserts it as a first component:

$$\phi (s,a_n\mathrm{}a_1)=(a_n,a_{n1}\mathrm{}a_1).$$

This map is clearly injective. The complement of its image consists of cyclic pairs $`(a,\beta )Q_1B`$ such that $`a\beta `$ is no longer in $`B`$. Since $`\beta B`$, we have that $`a\beta `$ contains paths from $`Z`$ whose last arrow is $`a.`$ Moreover, since $`Z`$ is minimal, $`a\beta `$ contains exactly one path of $`Z`$ located at its end, which means that $`a\beta W`$.

Conversely, each cycle $`\gamma W`$ has positive length and if $`\gamma =a_n\mathrm{}a_1`$ then $`(a_n,a_{n1}\mathrm{}a_1)(Q_1B)Im\phi `$. We have proved that $`|Q_1B||Q_0B^+|=w`$. Note that $`Q_0B=(Q_0B^+)Q_0`$ and this provides the complete formula. The specialized formula for a non trivial circuit is clear. ∎

Recall from 2.5 the definition of strong and useful circuits, and note that any non trivial strong circuit is useful.

###### Proposition 2.8.

Let $`C`$ be a useful strong circuit, that is, a non trivial strong circuit. Then $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=1`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`C`$ is strong, $`(ZB)_C=\mathrm{}`$, otherwise there would be a zero cycle in the strong circuit $`C`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Kerd_{0,C}`$. Moreover, $`C`$ being strong also implies $`WC=\mathrm{}`$, consequently the preceding lemma shows that $`|(Q_0B)_C|=|(Q_1B)_C|`$. Hence $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Cokerd_{0,C}`$. Recall that $`d_{0,C}(a,\beta )=a\beta \beta a`$. Since $`C`$ is strong, $`a\beta `$ and $`\beta a`$ are in $`B`$ for each $`(a,\beta )(Q_1B)_C`$. So each difference of a cycle of $`C`$ with its rotated cycle is in $`Imd_{0,C}`$. In fact the image of the basis elements of $`(Q_1B)_C`$ are precisely those. Now the square matrix of $`d_{0,C}`$ is

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}1& 0& 0& & 1& \\ 1& 1& 0& & & \\ 0& 1& 1& & & \\ & & & \mathrm{}& & \\ & & & & 1& \end{array}\right)$$

which shows that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Cokerd_{0,C}=1`$. ∎

We turn now to useful circuits which are not strong in order to complete the computation of $`HH_1`$ along the circuits.

###### Lemma 2.9.

Let $`C`$ be a useful circuit which is not strong. Then $`d_{0,C}`$ is surjective.

###### Proof.

Consider the equivalence relation on circuits restricted to $`BC`$. Since $`C`$ is not strong there is at least one zero cycle in $`C`$, which implies that each equivalence class in $`BC`$ is now totally ordered, with the elementary step for this ordering given by rotation. The first and the last element of each of those totally ordered classes are attained by $`d_{0,C}`$, as well as all the successive differences. This shows that each element of the class is in the image of $`d_{0,C}`$. ∎

###### Proposition 2.10.

Let $`C`$ be a useful circuit which is not strong, satisfying $`(ZB)_C=\mathrm{}`$. Then $`H_{1,C}=0`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`d_{1,C}=0`$ we have that $`H_{1,C}=Kerd_{0,C}`$. By the preceding result $`d_{0,C}`$ is surjective, hence

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=\left|\left(Q_1B\right)_C\right|\left|\left(Q_0B\right)_C\right|=w_C$$

where $`w_C`$ is the number of cycles in $`C`$ which have only one subpath from $`Z`$ located at its end. But if there exists such a path, then $`(ZB)_C`$ would be non empty. Hence $`w_C=0`$. ∎

We focus now on efficient circuits, see Definition 2.5.

###### Proposition 2.11.

Let $`C`$ be an efficient circuit. If $`k`$ has characteristic zero we have $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=w_C1`$.

In order to prove this result we will define a canonical element $`K_C`$ in $`k\left(Q_1B\right)_C`$ which will be also useful in positive characteristic. First notice that if $`\gamma =a_m\mathrm{}a_1`$ is a cycle in the quiver, each $`a_i`$ arising in the sequence of arrows has a well defined complement path in the cycle, namely

$$a_i^{co}=a_{i1}\mathrm{}a_1a_m\mathrm{}a_{i+1}.$$

Moreover $`(a_i,a_i^{co})`$ is a cyclic pair of paths. Note that $`a_i`$ and $`a_j`$ can coincide as arrows, but in general $`a_i^{co}a_j^{co}`$. Note however that $`a_i^{co}=a_j^{co}`$ can also occur for $`ij`$.

###### Definition 2.12.

Let $`C`$ be a circuit and $`\gamma =a_m\mathrm{}a_1`$ be any cycle belonging to $`C`$. Let $`K_C=_{i=1}^m(a_i,a_i^{co})k(Q_1B)_C`$.

###### Remark 2.13.

*
* Our convention is in force, namely if for some $`i`$ we have $`a_i^{co}B`$ then the pair $`(a_i,a_i^{co})`$ is considered as zero in $`k\left(Q_1B\right)`$.
* It is clear that $`K_C`$ does not depend on the choice of the cycle in $`C`$.

###### Lemma 2.14.

If $`k`$ has characteristic zero and $`C`$ is a useful cycle, then $`K_C0`$.

###### Proof.

Since $`(Q_1B)_C\mathrm{}`$ there exists at least one arrow $`a_i`$ of a cycle $`\gamma `$ of $`C`$ such that $`a_i^{co}B`$. Note that all the coefficients appearing in the definition of $`K_C`$ are equal to one, and no sum of them can be zero in characteristic zero. ∎

###### Proposition 2.15.

Let $`C`$ be an efficient circuit. Then $`Imd_{1,C}=kK_C`$.

###### Remark 2.16.

This result does not depend on the characteristic. Note however that in positive characteristic $`K_C`$ can be zero.

###### Proof.

Since $`C`$ is efficient, there exists a cyclic pair $`(\alpha ,\beta )(ZB)_C`$ and we use the cycle $`\beta \alpha =b_n\mathrm{}b_1a_m\mathrm{}a_1`$ in order to construct $`K_C`$:

$$K_C=(a_1,\beta a_m\mathrm{}a_2)+(a_2,a_1\beta a_m\mathrm{}a_3)+\mathrm{}+(a_m,a_{m1}\mathrm{}a_1\beta ).$$

Indeed each term of the form $`(b_j,b_{j1}\mathrm{}b_1\alpha b_n\mathrm{}b_{j+1})`$ is zero since its second component is not in $`B`$. Note that some of the written terms in $`K_C`$ can also be zero, but this has no incidence in this proof. By definition of $`d_{1,C}`$ we obtain $`d_{1,C}(\alpha ,\beta )=K_C`$. ∎

###### Proof.

of Proposition 2.11. The proof is now obvious since $`C`$ is efficient, useful and not strong, hence $`d_{0,C}`$ is surjective. In characteristic zero we have proved that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Imd_{1,C}=1`$, while $`|(Q_1B)_C||(Q_0B)_C|=w_C`$. ∎

The results we have obtained show that in characteristic zero the contributing circuits for $`HH_1`$ are the non trivial strong circuits and the efficient ones. The following statement is obtained by assembling the previous results.

###### Corollary 2.17.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, with $`k`$ a field of characteristic zero and $`Q`$ a finite connected quiver. The following assertions are equivalent:

1. $`HH_1\left(A\right)=0.`$
2. Every non trivial circuit of $`Q`$ contains a zero cycle and, whenever $`C`$ is a circuit such that $`\left(Q_1B\right)_C\mathrm{}\left(ZB\right)_C`$, there is exactly one pair $`(\xi ,\beta )\left(ZB\right)_C`$ such that the cycle $`\xi \beta `$ contains no zero relation apart from $`\xi `$.

More generally, the following formula holds as a direct consequence of the previous discussion.

###### Theorem 2.18.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, with $`k`$ a field of characteristic zero and $`Q`$ a finite connected quiver. We have

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH_1\left(A\right)=s+\underset{C}{}w_Ce$$

where $``$ is the set of efficient circuits, $`e=||`$, $`s`$ is the number of non trivial strong circuits and $`w_C`$ is defined in Definition 2.6.

A formula avoiding the integers $`w_C`$ can also be obtained as follows.

###### Corollary 2.19.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, with $`k`$ a field of characteristic zero and $`Q`$ a finite connected quiver. Then

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH_1\left(A\right)=\left|Q_1B\right|\left|Q_0B\right|+\left|Q_0\right|e+s.$$

###### Proof.

We compute $`_Cw_C`$ in order to replace it in the previous result. Note that if $`C`$ is trivial then $`w_C=0`$. We assert that also if $`C`$ is not efficient then $`w_C=0`$. Indeed, if $`(ZB)_C=\mathrm{}`$ then clearly $`w_C=0`$, while if $`(Q_1B)_C=\mathrm{}`$ and $`C`$ is not trivial then $`(Q_0B)_C=\mathrm{}`$ since there is an injective map $`\phi _C:(Q_0B^+)_C(Q_1B)_C`$, as in the proof of Lemma 2.7. This implies that $`w_C=|(Q_1B)_C||(Q_0B)_C|=0`$. Consequently

$$\underset{C}{}w_C=\underset{C𝒞}{}w_C=\left|Q_1B\right|\left|Q_0B\right|+\left|Q_0\right|.$$

###### Example 2.20.

The algebra with quiver $`Q`$ whose set of vertices is $`Q_0=𝐙_5`$, with arrows $`a_i:ii+1`$, for $`iQ_0`$, subject to the relations $`a_4a_3a_2=0=a_3a_2a_1`$, satisfies $`HH_1(A)=0`$, whereas for the canonical circuit $`C`$ we have $`2=|(ZB)_C|>w_C=1`$. This shows that in Corollary 2.17 the last condition cannot be replaced by $`|(ZB)_C|=1`$.

## 3 Degree one Hochschild homology of a monomial algebra in positive characteristic

Let $`C`$ be a circuit and $`\gamma =a_n\mathrm{}a_1`$ be a cycle in $`C`$. Among the possible iterated rotated cycles of $`\gamma `$ clearly the $`n`$-th one coincides with $`\gamma `$. Let $`l`$ be the smallest integer such that the $`l`$-th rotated of $`\gamma `$ coincides with $`\gamma `$. We have $`ln`$ and $`l`$ is called the period of the circuit while $`m=\frac{n}{l}`$ is its multiplicity.

Recall that $`K_C`$ is defined using any cycle $`\gamma =a_n\mathrm{}a_1`$ of the circuit $`C`$,

$$K_C=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}(a_i,a_i^{co})k\left(Q_1B\right)_C.$$

Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C=_{(a,\beta )\left(Q_1B\right)_C}(a,\beta )`$. Clearly if $`C`$ is useful then $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C0`$ for $`k`$ a field of any characteristic since $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$ is the sum of all the basis vectors, a non empty set.

The following result follows from the above considerations.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`C`$ be a circuit of multiplicity $`m`$. Then $`K_C=m\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$.

###### Definition 3.2.

Let $`p`$ be a prime number. A circuit is called a $`p^{}`$-circuit if its multiplicity is not divisible by $`p`$.

###### Proposition 3.3.

Let $`C`$ be an efficient circuit. If $`C`$ is a $`p^{}`$-circuit then $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=w_C1`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}H_{1,C}=w_C`$ otherwise.

###### Proof.

For an efficient circuit we have proved that $`Imd_{1,C}=kK_C=km\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$. If $`C`$ is a $`p^{}`$-circuit, $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Imd_{1,C}=1`$. Otherwise $`d_{1,C}=0`$. ∎

The next result computes the dimension of $`HH_1\left(A\right)`$ for a field $`k`$ of positive characteristic using the same decomposition as in characteristic zero but considering $`p^{}`$-circuits.

###### Theorem 3.4.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, with $`k`$ a field of characteristic $`p>0`$ and $`Q`$ a finite connected quiver, and let $`e_p^{}`$ be the number of efficient $`p^{}`$-circuits in $`Q`$. Then

$`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH_1\left(A\right)`$ $`=`$ $`s+{\displaystyle \underset{C}{}}w_Ce_p^{}`$
$`=`$ $`\left|Q_1B\right|\left|Q_0B\right|+\left|Q_0\right|e_p^{}+s,`$
where $``$ is the set of efficient circuits, $`s`$ is the number of non trivial strong circuits and $`w_C`$ is defined in Definition 2.6.

###### Corollary 3.5.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, with $`k`$ a field of characteristic $`p>0`$ and $`Q`$ a finite connected quiver. Then $`HH_1(A)=0`$ if and only if every non trivial circuit contains a zero cycle and every circuit $`C`$ with $`(Q_1B)_C\mathrm{}(ZB)_C`$ is a $`p^{}`$-circuit such that there is exactly one pair $`(\xi ,\beta )(ZB)_C`$ for which the cycle $`\xi \beta `$ contains no zero relation apart from $`\xi `$.

## 4 The vector space $`Alt(DA)`$

Recall that $`Alt\left(DA\right)=\{\phi Hom_{AA}(DA,A):\phi +\phi ^{}=0\}`$, where $`\phi ^{}:DADDAA`$ is the transpose of $`\phi `$ . We start this section by describing a basis for the vector space $`Hom_{AA}(DA,A)`$. Since by adjointness we have

$$Hom_{AA}(DA,A)=\left(DA_{AA}DA\right)^{},$$

we describe first a set of generators of $`DA_{AA}DA`$, which will allow us to find the desired basis.

Recall that $`B`$ is the set of paths in $`Q`$ which do not contain any path of $`Z`$. The dual basis $`B^{}`$ is a basis of the vector space $`DA`$ whose $`AA`$–bimodule structure is given by $`\left(afb\right)\left(x\right)=f\left(bxa\right)`$ for any $`a,b,xA`$, $`fDA`$. This means that for any $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma B`$, $`\alpha \gamma ^{}\beta 0`$ if and only if $`\gamma =\beta \xi \alpha `$, for some $`\xi B`$. In this case, $`\alpha \gamma ^{}\beta =\xi ^{}`$. In particular, $`u\gamma ^{}v=\left(v\gamma u\right)^{}`$ for any $`u,vQ_0`$, $`\gamma B`$. This implies that the set of cyclic pairs of paths

$$BB=\{(\alpha ,\beta ):t\left(\beta \right)=s\left(\alpha \right)\text{and}t\left(\alpha \right)=s\left(\beta \right)\}$$

provides a set of generators for $`DA_{AA}DA`$, that is, the set $`\{\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}:(\alpha ,\beta )BB\}`$.

###### Definition 4.1.

A cyclic pair $`(\alpha ,\beta )BB`$ is said to be neat if the following conditions hold:

* if $`\beta aB`$ ($`a\beta B`$) for some $`aQ_1`$ then $`a`$ is the last (first) arrow in $`\alpha `$;
* if $`\alpha bB`$ ($`b\alpha B`$) for some $`bQ_1`$ then $`b`$ is the last (first) arrow in $`\beta `$.

We denote by $``$ the equivalence relation on $`BB`$ generated by the elementary relations

$`(a\alpha ,\beta )`$ $``$ $`(\alpha ,\beta a)`$
$`(\alpha b,\beta )`$ $``$ $`(\alpha ,b\beta ),a,bQ_1.`$
An equivalence class for this relation will be called neat when all its elements are neat cyclic pairs. Let $`𝒩`$ be the set of neat equivalence classes.

###### Lemma 4.2.

There is a bijective map between $`𝒩`$ and a set of generators of the vector space $`DA_{AA}DA`$.

###### Proof.

We know that $`BB`$ provides a set of generators. We assert that $`\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}=0`$ if $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ is not neat, and, $`\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}=\gamma ^{}\delta ^{}`$ if $`(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta )`$. Clearly these facts will prove the Lemma.

Let $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ be a cyclic pair which is not neat. We may assume that there exists an arrow $`aQ_1`$ such that $`\beta aB`$ and $`a`$ is not the last arrow in $`\alpha `$. Then

$$\alpha ^{}\beta ^{}=\alpha ^{}a\left(\beta a\right)^{}=\alpha ^{}a\left(\beta a\right)^{}=0.$$

The proof for the other cases is analogous.

To finish the proof we have to check the asserted equality for the elementary relation used to define $``$. If $`(a\alpha ,\beta )(\alpha ,\beta a)`$ then

$$\left(a\alpha \right)^{}\beta ^{}=\left(a\alpha \right)^{}a\left(\beta a\right)^{}=\alpha ^{}\left(\beta a\right)^{}.$$

We are now in a position to describe a basis for $`Hom_{AA}(DA,A)`$. Let $`N𝒩`$ be a neat equivalence class and consider the map $`\psi _NHom_k(DA,A)`$ defined by

$$\psi _N\left(\gamma ^{}\right)=\underset{(\gamma ,\delta )N}{}\delta $$

for any $`\gamma ^{}B^{}`$.

###### Lemma 4.3.

The map $`\psi _N`$ is a morphism of $`AA`$–bimodules.

###### Proof.

We shall prove only that $`\psi _N`$ is a morphism of left $`A`$-modules, since the proof that it is a morphism of right $`A`$–modules is similar.

It is clear that $`\psi _N(u\gamma ^{})=u\psi _N(\gamma ^{})`$ for any $`uQ_0`$, $`\gamma B`$. In order to finish the proof we have to see that $`\psi _N(a\gamma ^{})=a\psi _N(\gamma ^{})`$ for any $`aQ_1`$, $`\gamma B`$. Suppose first that $`a\gamma ^{}=0`$. This means that $`a`$ is not the first arrow in $`\gamma `$. If $`\psi _N(\gamma ^{})=0`$ we are done. If not, $`a\psi _N(\gamma ^{})=_{(\gamma ,\delta )N}a\delta =0`$ because the cyclic pairs $`(\gamma ,\delta )`$ are neat. Now suppose that $`a\gamma ^{}0`$. Hence $`\gamma =\xi aB`$ and $`a\gamma ^{}=\xi ^{}`$. It is clear that $`(\xi ,\mu )N`$ if and only if $`\mu =a\delta `$, for some $`\delta B`$ such that $`(\gamma ,\delta )N`$. Then

$$\psi _N\left(a\gamma ^{}\right)=\psi _N\left(\xi ^{}\right)=\underset{(\xi ,\mu )N}{}\mu =\underset{(\xi a,\delta )N}{}a\delta =a\underset{(\gamma ,\delta )N}{}\delta =a\psi _N\left(\gamma ^{}\right).$$

###### Proposition 4.4.

The set $`\{\psi _N\}_{N𝒩}`$ is a basis of the vector space $`Hom_{AA}(DA,A)`$.

###### Proof.

By the adjunction isomorphism

$$\theta :Hom_{AA}(DA,A)\left(DA_{AA}DA\right)^{}$$

and Lemma 4.2 we conclude that $`\{\psi _N\}_{N𝒩}`$ is a generating set. Considering now the canonical bases $`B^{}`$ and $`B`$ of $`DA`$ and $`A`$, we can identify every $`k`$-linear map $`\phi :DAA`$ with its associated matrix, i.e., with the map $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:B\times Bk`$ determined by $`\phi (\alpha ^{})=_{\beta B}\stackrel{~}{\phi }(\alpha ,\beta )\beta `$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_N`$ is the characteristic function of $`N`$, i.e., $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_N(\alpha ,\beta )=1`$ if $`(\alpha ,\beta )N`$ and $`0`$ otherwise. From that the $`k`$-linear independence of the $`\psi _N`$’s follows.

We are now in a position to compute the dimension of the vector space $`Alt\left(DA\right)`$.

###### Lemma 4.5.

The set $`𝒩`$ has an involution provided by the flip of pairs.

###### Proof.

Observe that the flip of a cyclic pair provides a cyclic pair. Moreover neat pairs are preserved and the flip is compatible with the equivalence relation, namely it is clear that the flips of elementary equivalent pairs provide elementary equivalent pairs. ∎

###### Theorem 4.6.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, where $`Q`$ is a finite connected quiver. Then

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Alt\left(DA\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{rs}{2}\hfill & \text{if }chark2\hfill \\ \frac{r+s}{2}\hfill & \text{if }chark=2\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`r`$ is the number of neat equivalence classes and $`s`$ is the number of symmetric ones.

###### Proof.

With the same terminology as in the proof of Proposition 4.4, if $`\sigma `$ is the above mentioned involution of $`𝒩`$, we clearly have $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }_{\sigma (N)}(\alpha ,\beta )=\stackrel{~}{\psi }_N(\beta ,\alpha )`$ for all $`(\alpha ,\beta )\sigma (N)`$, and hence $`\psi _{\sigma (N)}=\psi _N^{}`$. Therefore a generic element $`\phi =_{N𝒩}\lambda _N\psi _N`$ is in $`Alt(DA)`$ if and only if $`\lambda _N+\lambda _{\sigma (N)}=0`$, for all $`N𝒩`$. From that the formulae follow at once.

###### Remark 4.7.

In order facilitate the identification of the neat equivalence classes, the following comments are helpful. First observe that the elementary relations of Definition 4.1 preserve the circuit, i.e., if $`(\alpha ,\beta )(\gamma ,\delta )`$ then $`\overline{\alpha \beta }=\overline{\gamma \delta }`$. Hence, identification of neat equivalence classes can be done circuit by circuit and, in particular, $`r=r_C`$, with the sum indexed by the set of circuits in $`Q`$ and $`r_C`$ being the number of neat equivalence classes $`(\overline{\alpha ,\beta })`$ such that $`\alpha \beta C`$. On the other hand, each neat equivalence class has a representative $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ such that $`\alpha a`$ and $`a\alpha `$ are zero paths, for all $`aQ_1`$. In particular, one should only consider circuits $`C`$ containing a pair $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ with the latter property. We illustrate this in the examples at the end of this section.

###### Corollary 4.8.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra, where $`k`$ is a field of characteristic different from $`2`$ and $`Q`$ is a finite connected quiver. Then $`Alt(DA)=0`$ if and only if the involution considered in Lemma 4.5 is the identity.

If $`k`$ is a field of characteristic two, $`Alt(DA)=0`$ if and only if the set of neat cyclic pairs is empty.

###### Corollary 4.9.

Let $`A=kQ/<Q_2>`$ be a connected $`2`$-nilpotent algebra . Then, unless $`Q`$ is a loop, we have

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Alt\left(DA\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{\left|Q_1Q_1\right|\left|Q_1Q_0\right|}{2}\hfill & \text{if }chark2\hfill \\ \frac{\left|Q_1Q_1\right|+\left|Q_1Q_0\right|}{2}\hfill & \text{if }chark=2\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

In the case where $`Q`$ is a loop, $`Alt(DA)`$ is zero when $`chark2`$, and has dimension 2 when $`chark=2`$.

###### Proof.

If the quiver $`Q`$ is a loop with vertex $`u`$ and loop $`a`$, then $`(\overline{a,u})=(\overline{u,a})`$ and $`(\overline{a,a})`$ are the only neat equivalence classes, both of which are symmetric. Then $`r=s=2`$ and the result follows in this case. If $`Q`$ is not a loop then $`Q_1Q_1`$ is the set of neat cyclic pairs, and the equivalence relation is just the equality. In particular, $`(\overline{a,b})`$ is symmetric if and only if $`a=b`$ is a loop. Then $`r=|Q_1Q_1|`$ and $`s=|Q_1Q_0|`$ and we are done. ∎

Using \[Theorem 5.5\], the combination of the formulae in \[Theorem 1 and Proposition 2\] and our Theorems 2.18 (resp. 3.4) and 4.6 gives a precise formula for the dimension of $`HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$, when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=TA`$ is the trivial extension of the monomial algebra $`A`$. We don’t write down that formula in order to avoid excessive technicalities. Our final result is a consequence of this (unwritten) formula: we describe the monomial algebras $`A`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=TA`$ has minimal $`HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$, see Corollary 4.13. But, motivated by a question pointed out by the referee, we present this result in as much generality as we know. Recall that if $`c=a_r^{ϵ_r}\mathrm{}a_1^{ϵ_1}`$ is a walk in $`Q`$, with $`a_i`$ an arrow and $`ϵ_i\left\{\pm 1\right\}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, then the integer $`\left|_{1ir}ϵ_i\right|`$ is called the weight of the walk $`c`$. For the terminology used in the following proposition, see .

###### Proposition 4.10.

Let $`Q`$ be a finite oriented quiver, $`A=kQ/I`$ be a finite dimensional algebra with $`I`$ homogeneous, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=TA`$ be its trivial extension. The following assertions are equivalent:

1. There is a $`k`$-linear isomorphism $`Z\left(A\right)HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$.
2. $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=1`$.
3. $`HH^1\left(A\right)=0`$.
4. The abelianization $`\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ of the fundamental group $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\pi _1(Q,I)`$ is a finite group of order coprime to $`char\left(K\right)`$, and $`l(Q,I)d(Q,I)`$.

If these conditions are satisfied, the quiver $`Q`$ has no oriented cycles and the weight of every closed walk in $`Q`$ is zero.

###### Proof.

$`2)1)`$ is clear and $`1)3)`$ follows from \[Theorem 5.5\].

$`3)4)`$ It follows from \[Corollary 4(2)\].

$`4)2)`$ If $`c=a_r^{ϵ_r}\mathrm{}a_1^{ϵ_1}`$ is a closed walk in $`Q`$, with $`a_i`$ an arrow and $`ϵ_i\{\pm 1\}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, then we put $`\xi (c)=_{1ir}ϵ_i`$. In this way, we get a map from the set of closed walks in $`Q`$ to the integers, which is compatible with the relations of the group $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\pi _1(Q,I)`$. Hence, we get a map $`\xi :\mathrm{\Pi }𝐙`$ which is clearly a group homomorphism. Since $`\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ is finite, $`Hom(\mathrm{\Pi },𝐙)=0`$ and in particular $`\xi =0`$. From that one gets that $`\xi (c)=0`$ for every closed walk $`c`$. This is equivalent to say that every closed walk in $`Q`$ has zero weight, and it implies that $`Q`$ has no oriented cycles. Hence, one gets that $`Z(A)=k`$, $`HH_1(A)=0`$ (see ,  and ) and, since $`Alt_A(DA)`$ is generated by cyclic pairs of paths, we also infer that $`Alt_A(DA)=0`$. To see that $`HH^1(A)=0`$ we have to prove condition (\*) of \[Corollary 4(2)\]. Indeed, every nilpotent derivation maps an arrow onto a linear combination of parallel paths of length greater than one. But the existence of such parallel path would imply the existence of a closed walk with nonzero weight. So the unique nilpotent derivation is the trivial one, and \[Corollary 4(2)\] applies to give that $`HH^1(A)=0`$. Now assertion 2) follows from \[Theorem 5.5\]. ∎

###### Remark 4.11.

We do not know if conditions 2 and 3 might be equivalent in general for arbitrary finite dimensional algebras. The referee has pointed out this question.

The following result is immediate.

###### Corollary 4.12.

Let $`A=kQ/I`$ be a finite dimensional algebra with $`I`$ homogeneous such that $`HH^1(A)=0`$. Then $`HH_1(A)=0`$ and $`Alt_A(DA)=0`$.

Recall that if $`Q`$ is a finite quiver, then $`\overline{Q}`$ is the graph obtained from $`Q`$ by forgetting the orientation of the arrows. In the particular case of monomial algebras we can replace condition 4) in Proposition 4.10 by the following.

###### Corollary 4.13.

Let $`Q`$ be a finite oriented quiver, $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be a monomial algebra and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=TA`$ be its trivial extension. The following assertions are equivalent:

1. There is a $`k`$-linear isomorphism $`Z\left(A\right)HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$.
2. $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=1`$.
3. $`HH^1\left(A\right)=0`$.
4. $`Q`$ is a quiver without double arrows such that $`\overline{Q}`$ is a tree.

###### Proof.

We only have to prove that for monomial algebras condition 4) is equivalent to the last condition in Proposition 4.10. Indeed, if $`A`$ is monomial, $`\mathrm{\Pi }=\pi _1(Q,Z)`$ is the fundamental group of the graph $`\overline{Q}`$, which is always free. Consequently, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Pi }}`$ is finite if and only if $`\mathrm{\Pi }=1`$, which is equivalent to condition 4). ∎

###### Example 4.14.

Let us consider the algebra $`A`$ given as follows. Its quiver $`Q`$ is a crown with $`Q_0=𝐙_7`$ and arrows $`a_i:ii+1`$, for all $`iQ_0`$. The set of relations is $`Z=\{a_3a_2a_1a_0,a_4a_3a_2a_1,a_5a_4a_3a_2,a_2a_1a_0a_6a_5\}`$. In this case, the only relevant circuit is the canonical one and, clearly, all cyclic pairs in $`BB`$ are neat. To determine the neat equivalence classes, observe that the only paths $`\alpha `$ such that $`\alpha a`$ and $`a\alpha `$ are zero paths for all $`aQ_1`$, are exactly $`\{a_3a_2a_1,a_4a_3a_2,a_1a_0a_6a_5a_4a_3,a_2a_1a_0a_6\}`$. A direct computation then shows that the elements of $`𝒩`$, i.e., the (neat) equivalence classes are $`\{(\overline{a_3a_2a_1,a_0a_6a_5a_4})=(\overline{a_4a_3a_2,a_1a_0a_6a_5})=(\overline{a_2a_1a_0a_6,a_5a_4a_3}),(\overline{a_1a_0a_6a_5a_4a_3,a_2})\}`$ and the involution of Lemma 4.5 is just the transposition. Hence $`r=2`$, $`s=0`$ and we have $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Hom_{AA}(DA,A)=2`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Alt(DA)=1`$, in any characteristic.

We also see that there are no non trivial strong circuits, that the only efficient (not strong) circuit is the canonical one, denoted by $`C`$ in the sequel, which is also a $`p^{}`$-circuit when $`chark=p>0`$. We have $`w_C=|(Q_1B)_C||(Q_0B)_C|=10=1`$. Therefore $`HH_1(A)=0`$.

On the other hand, we have $`Z(A)k`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1(A)=1`$, the latter being easily deducible from \[Corollary 2(3)\] or \[Theorem 1\]. As a result, we conclude that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1(TA)=3`$, independently of the characteristic.

###### Example 4.15.

Let $`A=kQ/<Z>`$ be the algebra given by a crown $`Q`$ of length $`n>1`$, that is, $`Q_0=𝐙_n`$, $`Q_1=\{a_i:ii+1,iQ_0\}`$, and take $`Z=\{a_0\gamma ^{m1}\}`$ where $`\gamma =\beta a_0`$ and $`\beta =a_{n1}\mathrm{}a_1`$, for some $`m>1`$.

The set of non trivial circuits in $`Q`$ is $`\{C_i=\overline{\gamma ^i}\}_{i>0}`$. It is clear that $`\{C_i\}_{0<i<m}`$ is the set of non trivial strong circuits, and $`C_m`$ is the unique efficient circuit. Moreover, $`C_m`$ has multiplicity $`m`$, so it is an efficient $`p^{}`$–circuit in $`Q`$ if and only if $`m`$ is not divisible by $`p`$. Now, $`w_{C_m}=|(Q_1B)_{C_m}||(Q_0B)_{C_m}|=10=1`$, so Theorems 2.18 and 3.4 imply that

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH_1\left(A\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}m\hfill & \text{if }chark=p>0\text{ and }p\text{ divides }m\text{,}\hfill \\ m1\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

By Remark 4.7, the neat equivalence classes are represented by the cyclic pairs $`(\gamma ^{m1}\beta ,a_0\gamma ^i)`$ for $`i`$ with $`0im2`$, and they are all symmetric and non equivalent. So $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Alt(DA)=0`$ if $`chark2`$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Alt(DA)=m1`$ if $`chark=2`$.

Using the terminology in \[Theorem 1\] we have that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1(A)=\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Z(A)|Q_0//B|+|Q_1//B|`$, because all the elements in $`Q_1//B`$ are glued and admissible. By \[Proposition 2\], we have $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}Z(A)=m`$. Finally, one easily sees that $`|Q_0//B|=mn`$, $`|Q_1//B|=mn1`$ and, hence, $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1(A)=mmn+mn1=m1`$.

We conclude that

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{k}HH^1\left(TA\right)=\{\begin{array}{cc}4m2\hfill & \text{if }chark=2\text{ and }m\text{ is even,}\hfill \\ 4m3\hfill & \text{if }chark=2\text{ and }m\text{ is odd,}\hfill \\ 3m1\hfill & \text{if }chark=p>2\text{ and }m\text{ is divisible by }p\text{,}\hfill \\ 3m2\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

C.C.:
Département de Mathématiques, Université de Montpellier 2,
F–34095 Montpellier cedex 5, France.
Claude.Cibils@math.univ-montp2.fr

M.J.R:
Departamento de Matemática, Universidad Nacional del Sur,
Av. Alem 1253
8000 Bahía Blanca, Argentina.
mredondo@criba.edu.ar

M.S.:
Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad de Murcia,
Aptdo. 4021
30100 Espinardo, Murcia, Spain.
msaorinc@um.es