text:
# The spaces of curvature tensors for holonomy algebras of Lorentzian manifolds

## Introduction

The connected irreducible holonomy groups of pseudo-Riemannian manifolds have been classified by M. Berger, see . The classification problem for not irreducible holonomy groups is still open. The main difficulty is that the holonomy group can preserve an isotropic subspace of the tangent space.

We tackle the classification problem for the holonomy algebras of Lorentzian manifolds, i.e. the Lie algebras of the holonomy groups. There are some partial results in this direction (see ). In  the classification of holonomy algebras for 4-dimensional Lorentzian manifolds was given.

Wu’s theorem (see ) reduces the classification problem for holonomy algebras to the classification of weakly-irreducible holonomy algebras (i.e. algebras that preserve no nondegenerate proper subspace of the tangent space).

If a holonomy algebra is irreducible, then it is weakly-irreducible. The Berger list () of irreducible holonomy algebras of pseudo-Riemannian manifolds shows that the only irreducible holonomy algebra of Lorentzian manifolds is $`𝔰𝔬(1,m1)`$, see also .

We study weakly-irreducible holonomy algebras that are not irreducible.

Let $`(V,\eta )`$ be an $`(n+2)`$-dimensional Minkowski vector space, where $`\eta `$ is a metric of signature $`(1,n+1)`$. Using $`\eta `$ we identify the space $`V`$ with the dual space $`V^{}`$. Then the Lorentzian algebra $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ is identified with the space $`VV`$ of bivectors. Denote by $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ the subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ that preserves an isotropic line $`p`$, where $`pV`$. Denote by $`E`$ a vector subspace $`EV`$ such that $`(p)^_\eta =pE`$. The vector space $`E`$ is an Euclidean space with respect to the inner product $`\eta |_E.`$ Denote by $`q`$ an isotropic vector $`qV`$ such that $`\eta (q,E)=0`$ and $`\eta (p,q)=1`$. We have

$$𝔰𝔬(V)_p=pq+pE+𝔰𝔬(E).$$

Any weakly-irreducible and not irreducible subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ is conjugated to a subalgebra $`𝔤`$ of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$. We denote by $`𝔥^𝔤`$ the projection of such subalgebra $`𝔤`$ to $`𝔰𝔬(E)`$ with respect to the above decomposition and call $`𝔥^𝔤`$ the orthogonal part of the Lie algebra $`𝔤`$.

Conversely, for any subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ we construct two Lie algebras

$$𝔤_1^𝔥=pq+𝔥+pE$$

and

$$𝔤_2^𝔥=𝔥+pE$$

with the orthogonal part $`𝔥`$. Moreover, if the center $`𝔷(𝔥)`$ of $`𝔥`$ is non-trivial, then any non-zero linear map

$$\phi :𝔷(𝔥)$$

defines the Lie algebra

$$𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }=pE+\{A+\phi (A)pq:A𝔥\}$$

with the orthogonal part $`𝔥`$. Here $`\phi `$ is considered as the linear map $`\phi :𝔥=𝔷(𝔥)𝔥^{}`$ that vanishes on the commutant $`𝔥^{}`$ of $`𝔥`$.

Suppose moreover that the subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ acts trivially on a subspace $`E_0\{0\}`$, such that we can consider $`𝔥`$ as a subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(E_1)`$, where $`E=E_0E_1`$ is the orthogonal decomposition. Then any surjective linear map

$$\psi :𝔷(𝔥)E_0$$

extended to $`𝔥`$ by $`\psi (𝔥^{})=0`$ defines the Lie algebra

$$𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }=pE_1+\{A+p\psi (A):A𝔥\}$$

with the orthogonal part $`𝔥`$. We call Lie algebras $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ with the orthogonal part $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ the algebras of type 1,2,3 and 4 respectively.

These Lie algebras were considered by L. Berard Bergery and A. Ikemakhen , who proved that the Lie algebras of the form $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$, and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exhaust all weakly-irreducible subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ (theorem 1). The other result is that the orthogonal part of the holonomy algebra of a Lorentzian manifold satisfies a Borel-Lichnerowicz-type decomposition property (theorem 2).

Remark. Note that the Lie algebra $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p=pq+pE+𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is isomorphic to the tangent Lie algebra for the Lie group $`\text{Sim}E`$ of similarity transformations of $`E`$, the elements $`\lambda pq`$ and $`pu`$ correspond to the homothetic transformation $`v\lambda v`$ and to the shift $`vv+u`$ respectively, here $`\lambda `$ and $`u,vE`$. In another paper we will give a geometrical interpretation to the result of L. Berard Bergery and A. Ikemakhen.

Let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ be a subalgebra. Recall that the space of curvature tensors of type $`𝔤`$ is defined as the space $`(𝔤)`$ of $`𝔤`$-valued 2-forms on $`V`$ that satisfy the Bianchi identity. We denote by

$$L((𝔤))=\text{span}(\{R(uv):RR(𝔤),u,vV\})$$

the vector subspace of $`𝔤`$ spanned by curvature operators from $`(𝔤)`$. If $`𝔤`$ is the holonomy algebra of an indecomposable Lorentzian manifold, then

$$L((𝔤))=𝔤.()$$

A weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ that satisfies (\*) is called a Berger algebra.

In this paper we give a description of the spaces $`(𝔤)`$ of curvature tensors for weakly-irreducible subalgebras $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ of each type in terms of the orthogonal part $`𝔥^𝔤𝔰𝔬(E)`$ and we reduce the classification of Berger algebras to the classification of irreducible subalgebras $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ that satisfy some conditions (weak-Berger algebras).

More precisely, for any subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ we define the space

$$𝒫(𝔥)=\{P\text{Hom}(E,𝔥):\eta (P(u)v,w)+\eta (P(v)w,u)+\eta (P(w)u,v)=0\text{ for all }u,v,wE\}$$

of $`𝔥`$-valued 1-forms on $`E`$ that satisfy the Bianchi identity and denote by

$$L(𝒫(𝔥))=\text{span}(\{P(u):P𝒫(𝔥),uE\})$$

the vector subspace of $`𝔥`$ spanned by tensors $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$. We call $`𝒫(𝔥)`$ the space of weak-curvature tensors of type $`𝔥`$.

A subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is called a weak-Berger algebra if $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$.

We give a description of the spaces of curvature tensors $`(𝔤)`$ for algebras of each type associated with a given orthogonal part $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ in terms of the space $`𝒫(𝔥)`$ of weak-curvature tensors (theorem 3).

Corollary 1 shows that a weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ is a Berger algebra iff $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is a weak-Berger algebra.

Note that the direct sum $`𝔥_1𝔥_2𝔰𝔬(E_1)𝔰𝔬(E_2)`$ of two weak-Berger algebras $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬(E_i),i=1,2`$ is a weak-Berger algebra.

In part (I) of theorem 4 we prove that
if a subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is a weak-Berger algebra, then there exists an orthogonal decomposition $`E=E_0E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ and the corresponding decomposition into the direct sum of ideals $`𝔥=\{0\}𝔥_1𝔥_2\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$ such that $`𝔥_i(E_j)=0`$ if $`ij,`$ $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬(E_i),`$ and $`𝔥_i`$ acts irreducibly on $`E_i.`$  This result is stronger than theorem 2, without this it was necessary to suppose that a Berger algebra satisfies the conclusion of theorem 2. My attention to this statement was taken by A.J. Di Scala.

Part (II) of theorem 4 states that if $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is a weak-Berger algebra, then we have

$$𝒫(𝔥)=𝒫(𝔥_1)\mathrm{}𝒫(𝔥_r).$$

This implies that $`𝔥_i`$ is a weak-Berger algebra for $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$.

Thus the classification problem for the Berger algebras $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ is reduced to the classification of irreducible weak-Berger algebras $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$.

We prove that if $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold, then it is a weak-Berger algebra.

Using theory of representation of compact Lie algebras, we prove the converse statement in the case when $`dimE9`$. Theorem 5 states that if $`dimV11,`$ then a weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ is a Berger algebra iff the algebra $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold. This gives a classification of Berger algebras for Lorentzian manifolds of dimension $`11`$, which can be stated in the following way.

Let $`n_0,n_1,\mathrm{},n_r`$ be positive integers such that $`2n_1\mathrm{}n_r`$ and $`n_0+n_1+\mathrm{}+n_r=n`$. Let $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬_{n_i}`$ be the holonomy algebra of an irreducible Riemannian manifold ($`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$). The Lie algebras of the form $`𝔥=𝔥_1\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$ exhaust all weak-Berger subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$. The Lie algebras of the form $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ (if $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exist) exhaust all Berger algebras for Lorentzian manifolds of dimension $`n+2`$. Note that for each $`n>1`$ there exists infinite number of weakly-irreducible Berger subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$.

The full list of irreducible holonomy algebras of Riemannian manifolds of dimension $`9`$ is given in the table below. In the table $``$ stands for the tensor product of representations; $`\underset{¯}{}`$ stands for the highest irreducible component of the corresponding product.

| $`n`$ | Irreducible weak-Berger subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$ |
| --- | --- |
| $`n=1`$ |  |
| $`n=2`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_2`$ |
| $`n=3`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_3`$ |
| $`n=4`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_4`$, $`𝔰𝔲_2`$, $`𝔲_2`$ |
| $`n=5`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_5`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^2𝔰𝔬_3`$ |
| $`n=6`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_6`$, $`𝔰𝔲_3,`$ $`𝔲_3`$ |
| $`n=7`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_7`$, $`𝔤_2`$ |
| $`n=8`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_8`$, $`𝔰𝔲_4`$, $`𝔲_4`$, $`𝔰𝔭_2`$, $`𝔰𝔭_2𝔰𝔭_1`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^3𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^2𝔰𝔲_3`$ |
| $`n=9`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_9`$, $`𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3`$ |

Recall that the holonomy group of an indecomposable Lorentzian manifold can be not closed. In  it was shown that the connected Lie subgroups of $`SO_{1,n+1}`$ corresponding to Lie algebras of type 1 and 2 are closed; the connected Lie subgroup of $`SO_{1,n+1}`$ corresponding to a Lie algebra of type 3 (resp. 4) is closed if and only if the connected subgroup of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$ corresponding to the subalgebra $`\mathrm{ker}\phi 𝔷(𝔥)`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{ker}\psi 𝔷(𝔥)`$) is closed. We give a criteria for Lie groups corresponding to Lie algebras of type 3 and 4 to be closed in terms of the Lie algebras $`\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{ker}\psi `$.

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬_n`$ be a weak-Berger algebra such that $`𝔷(𝔥)\{0\}`$. We have $`𝔥=𝔥_1\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$, where $`𝔥_i`$ are irreducible weak-Berger algebras. We see that $`𝔷(𝔥)=𝔷(𝔥_1)\mathrm{}𝔷(𝔥_r)`$ and $`dim𝔷(𝔥_i)=0`$ or $`1`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Hence we can identify $`𝔷(𝔥)`$ with $`R^m`$, where $`m=dim𝔷(𝔥)`$.

We prove that
the connected Lie group corresponding to a Lie algebra of type 3 (resp. 4) is closed if and only if there exists a basis $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_l`$ ($`l=dim\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ or $`dim\mathrm{ker}\psi `$) of the vector space $`\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ (resp. $`\mathrm{ker}\psi `$) such that the coordinates of the vector $`v_i`$ with respect to the canonical basis of $`^m`$ are integer for $`i=1,\mathrm{},l`$.

Remark. Recently Thomas Leistner proved that a subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is a weak-Berger algebra iff $`𝔥`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold, see .

From this result and corollary 1 it follows that a weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ is a Berger algebra iff $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to D.V. Alekseevsky for introducing me to holonomy algebras of Lorentzian manifolds and for his helpful suggestions. I also thank my teacher M.V. Losik for long hours of discussions and help in preparation of this paper.

## 1 Preliminaries

Let $`(V,\eta )`$ be a Minkowski space of dimension $`n+2`$, where $`\eta `$ is a metric on $`V`$ of signature $`(1,n+1)`$. We fix a basis $`p,e_1,\mathrm{},e_n,q`$ of $`V`$ such that the Gram matrix of $`\eta `$ has the form $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& 0& 1\\ 0& E_n& 0\\ 1& 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$, where $`E_n`$ is the $`n`$-dimensional identity matrix.

Let $`EV`$ be the vector subspace spanned by $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$. We will consider $`E`$ as an Euclidean space with the metric $`\eta |_E.`$

Denote by $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ the Lie algebra of all $`\eta `$-skew symmetric endomorphisms of $`V`$ and by $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ the subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ that preserves the line $`p`$.

The algebra $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ can be identified with the following matrix algebra:

$$𝔰𝔬(V)_p=\{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& X^t& 0\\ 0& A& X\\ 0& 0& a\end{array}\right):a,X^n,A𝔰𝔬(n)\}.$$

We identify the dual vector space $`V^{}`$ with $`V`$ using $`\eta `$. Hence we can identify $`\text{End}V=VV^{}`$ with $`VV`$. In particular, we identify $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ with $`VV=\text{span}(\{uv=uvvu:u,vV\}).`$ Similarly, we identify $`𝔰𝔬(E)`$ with $`EE`$ and consider $`𝔰𝔬(E)`$ as a subspace of $`𝔰𝔬(V)`$ that acts trivially on $`pq`$.

For $`a`$, the endomorphism $`apq`$ has the matrix $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& a\end{array}\right)𝔰𝔬(V)_p;`$ for $`XE`$, the endomorphism $`pX`$ has the matrix $`\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& X^t& 0\\ 0& 0& X\\ 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)𝔰𝔬(V)_p.`$ Thus we see that

$$𝔰𝔬(V)_p=EE+pE+pq\text{ is a direct sum of the subalgebras.}$$

Definition 1. A subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)`$ is called irreducible if it preserves no proper subspace of $`V`$; $`𝔤`$ is called weakly-irreducible if it preserves no nondegenerate proper subspace of $`V`$.

Obviously, if $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)`$ is irreducible, then it is weakly-irreducible. If $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)`$ preserves a degenerate proper subspace $`UV`$, then it preserves the isotropic line $`UU^{}`$; any such algebra is conjugated to a subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$.

Definition 2. Let $`W`$ be a vector space and $`𝔣𝔤𝔩(W)`$ a subalgebra. Put

$$(𝔣)=\{R\text{Hom}(WW,𝔣):R(uv)w+R(vw)u+R(wu)v=0\text{ }\text{for all }u,v,wW\}.$$

The set $`(𝔣)`$ is called the space of curvature tensors of type $`𝔣.`$ Denote by $`L((𝔣))`$ the vector subspace of $`𝔣`$ spanned by $`R(uv)`$ for all $`R(𝔣),`$ $`u,vW,`$

$$L((𝔣))=\text{span}(\{R(uv):R(𝔣),u,vW\}).$$

Let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)`$ be a subalgebra. Recall that a curvature tensor $`R(𝔤)`$ satisfies the following property

$$\eta (R(uv)z,w)=\eta (R(zw)u,v)\text{ for all }u,v,z,wV.$$
(1)
Let $`(M,g)`$ be a Lorentzian manifold of dimension $`n+2`$ and $`𝔤`$ the holonomy algebra (that is the Lie algebra of the holonomy group) at a point $`x`$. By Wu’s theorem (see ) $`(M,g)`$ is locally indecomposable, i.e. is not locally a product of two pseudo-Riemannian manifolds if and only if the holonomy algebra $`𝔤`$ is weakly-irreducible. If the holonomy algebra $`𝔤`$ is irreducible , then $`𝔤=𝔰𝔬(1,n+1)`$. So we may assume that it is reducible and weakly-irreducible. Then it preserves an isotropic line $`\mathrm{}T_xM`$. We can identify the tangent space $`T_xM`$ with $`V`$ such that $`\mathrm{}`$ corresponds to the line $`p`$. Then $`𝔤`$ is identified with weakly-irreducible subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$.

We need the following

Proposition 1. Let $`𝔤`$ be the holonomy algebra of a Lorentzian manifold. Then

$$L((𝔤))=𝔤.$$

Proof. The inclusion $`L((𝔤))𝔤`$ is obvious.

Let $`R`$ be the curvature tensor of $`(M,g).`$ Theorem of Ambrose and Singer () states that the vector space $`𝔤`$ is generated by all endomorphisms

$$(\tau (\lambda ))^1R_{\lambda (b)}(\tau (\lambda )(X),\tau (\lambda )(Y))\tau (\lambda ):T_xMT_xM,$$

where $`\lambda :[a,b]M`$ is a piecewise smooth curve in $`M`$ such that $`\lambda (a)=x`$, $`\tau (\lambda )`$ is the parallel transport along $`\lambda `$, and $`X,YT_{\lambda (a)}M`$. Obviously, the above transformations are curvature tensors of type $`𝔤,`$ hence, $`𝔤L((𝔤)).`$ Thus, $`𝔤=L((𝔤)).`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

Definition 3. A weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ is called a Berger algebra if $`L((𝔤))=𝔤`$.

Definition 4. Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. Put

$$𝒫(𝔥)=\{P\text{Hom}(E,𝔥):\eta (P(u)v,w)+\eta (P(v)w,u)+\eta (P(w)u,v)=0\text{ }\text{for all }u,v,wE\}.$$

We call $`𝒫(𝔥)`$ the space of weak-curvature tensors of type $`𝔥`$. A subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is called a weak-Berger algebra if $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$, where

$$L(𝒫(𝔥))=\text{span}(\{P(u):P𝒫(𝔥),uE\})$$

is the vector subspace of $`𝔥`$ spanned by $`P(u)`$ for all $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ and $`uE`$.

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. Since $`𝔥`$ is a compact Lie algebra, we have $`𝔥=𝔥^{}𝔷(𝔥)`$ (the direct sum of ideals), where $`𝔥^{}`$ is the commutant of $`𝔥`$ and $`𝔷(𝔥)`$ is the center of $`𝔥`$.

Consider a weakly-irreducible subalgebra $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$. Let $`𝔥^𝔤`$ be the projection of $`𝔤`$ to $`𝔰𝔬(E)`$ with respect to the decomposition $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p=𝔰𝔬(E)+pE+pq`$.

Definition 5. The Lie algebra $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is called the orthogonal part of $`𝔤`$.

Conversely, with any subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ we associate two Lie algebras

$$𝔤_1^𝔥=pq+𝔥+pE$$

and

$$𝔤_2^𝔥=𝔥+pE.$$

Moreover, suppose $`𝔷(𝔥)\{0\}`$. Let

$$\phi :𝔷(𝔥)$$

be a non-zero linear map. Extend $`\phi `$ to the linear map $`\phi :𝔥`$ by putting $`\phi |_𝔥^{}=0.`$ Then

$$𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }=pE+\{A+\phi (A)pq:A𝔥\}$$

is a Lie algebra with the orthogonal part $`𝔥`$.

Suppose moreover that we have an orthogonal decomposition $`E=E_0E_1`$ such that
$`E_0\{0\}`$, $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E_1)`$, and $`dim𝔷(𝔥)dimE_0`$. Let

$$\psi :𝔷(𝔥)E_0$$

be a surjective linear map. As above, we extend $`\psi `$ to a linear map $`\psi :𝔥E_0`$ by putting $`\psi |_𝔥^{}=0.`$ Then

$$𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }=pE_1+\{A+p\psi (A):A𝔥\}$$

is a Lie algebra with the orthogonal part $`𝔥`$.

We call the Lie algebras $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ the Lie algebras of type 1,2,3 and 4 respectively.

These Lie algebras were considered by L. Berard Bergery and A. Ikemakhen, who proved the following fundamental results (see ).

Theorem 1. Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. Then (if $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exist) the subalgebras $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$, $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ are weakly-irreducible. Moreover, Lie algebras of the form $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exhaust all weakly-irreducible subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$.

Theorem 2. Let $`𝔤`$ be the holonomy algebra of a Lorentzian manifold. Then there exists an orthogonal decomposition $`E=E_0E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ and the corresponding decomposition into the direct sum of ideals $`𝔥^𝔤=\{0\}𝔥_1𝔥_2\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$ such that $`𝔥_i(E_j)=0`$ if $`ij,`$ $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬(E_i),`$ and $`𝔥_i`$ acts irreducibly on $`E_i.`$

The metric $`\eta `$ on $`V`$ induces the metrics on $`VV`$ and $`VV`$. Denote those metrics by $`\eta \eta `$ and $`\eta \eta `$ respectively.

Let $`\theta :VV`$ be an endomorphism, $`u,vV.`$ Then $`\eta (\theta (u),v)=\eta \eta (\theta ,uv).`$ In particular, for $`\theta VV`$ we have

$$\eta (\theta (u),v)=1/2\eta \eta (\theta ,uv).$$
(2)
Let $`R(𝔤).`$ Combining (1) and (2), we see that $`\eta \eta (R(uv),zw)=\eta \eta (R(zw),uv)`$ for all $`u,v,z,wV`$. This means that the linear map $`R:VV𝔤VV`$ is $`\eta \eta `$-symmetric.

Let $`(E_1,\mu _1)`$ and $`(E_2,\mu _2)`$ be two Euclidean spaces. Let $`f:E_1E_2`$ be a linear map. Denote by $`f^{}:E_2E_1`$ the dual linear map for $`f`$. We identify the symmetric square $`S^2(E)`$ of $`E`$ with the space of all $`\eta `$-symmetric endomorphisms of $`E`$.

## 2 Main results

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. We will define some sets of endomorphisms, in theorem 3 we will see that those sets consist of the curvature tensors for appropriate algebras.

For any $`\lambda ,`$ $`L\text{Hom}(E,),`$ $`TS^2(E)`$ and $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ we define the endomorphisms

$$R^\lambda \text{Hom}(VV,𝔤_1^𝔥),R^L\text{Hom}(VV,𝔤_1^𝔥),R^T\text{Hom}(VV,pE)\text{ and }R^P\text{Hom}(VV,𝔤_2^𝔥)$$

by conditions

$$R^\lambda (pq)=\lambda pq,R^\lambda |_{pE+qE+EE}=0,$$

$$R^L(q)=L()pq,R^L(pq)=pL^{}(1),R^L|_{pE+EE}=0,$$

$$R^T(q)=pT(),R^T|_{pq+pE+EE}=0$$

and

$$R^P(q)=P(),R^P|_{EE}=1/2pP^{},R^P|_{pq+pE}=0,$$

and define by

$$(,),(E,),(E,E)\text{ and }(E,𝔥)$$

respectively the vector spaces of all such endomorphisms.

We have the isomorphisms $`(,),`$ $`(E,)E,`$ $`(E,E)S^2(E)`$ and $`(E,𝔥)𝒫(𝔥)`$.

Moreover, if a Lie algebra $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ exists, then for any $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ we define the endomorphism $`R^P\text{Hom}(VV,𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi })`$ by conditions

$$R^P(q)=P()+\phi (P())pq,R^P|_{EE}=1/2pP^{},$$

$$R^P(pq)=1/2pP^{}(\phi ^{}(1)),R^P|_{pE}=0$$

and denote by $`(E,𝔥,\phi )`$ the vector space of all such endomorphisms.

If a Lie algebra $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exists, then for any $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ we define the endomorphism $`R^P\text{Hom}(VV,𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi })`$ by conditions

$$R^P(qu_1)=P(u_1)+p\psi (P(u_1))\text{ for all }u_1E_1,R^P|_{EE}=1/2pP^{},$$

$$R^P(qu_0)=1/2pP^{}(\psi ^{}(u_0))\text{ for all }u_0E_0,R^P|_{pq+pE}=0$$

and denote by $`(E_1,𝔥,\psi )`$ vector space of all such endomorphisms.

We have the isomorphisms $`(E,𝔥,\phi )𝒫(𝔥)`$ and $`(E_1,𝔥,\psi )𝒫(𝔥)`$.

Let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ be a weakly-irreducible subalgebra, $`𝔥^𝔤`$ be the orthogonal part of $`𝔤`$ and $`𝔥𝔥^𝔤`$ be a subalgebra. Suppose $`R(𝔥)`$. Extend the linear map $`R:EE𝔥`$ to the linear map $`R:VV𝔥`$ by putting $`R^P|_{pq+pE+qE}=0`$. It is obvious that $`R(𝔤)`$. We can write $`(𝔥)(𝔤)`$.

Theorem 3. Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. Then we have
(I) $`(𝔤_1^𝔥)=(𝔤_2^𝔥)(E,)(,);`$
(II) $`(𝔤_2^𝔥)=(𝔥)(E,𝔥)(pE)`$ and $`(pE)=(E,E);`$
(III) if a Lie algebra $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ exists, then

$`R(𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi })=(\mathrm{ker}\phi )(E,𝔥,\phi )(pE);`$
(IV) if a Lie algebra $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exists, then

$`(𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi })=(\mathrm{ker}\psi )(E_1,𝔥,\psi )(pE_1).`$

Remark. It is known (see ) that the holonomy algebra of a weakly irreducible, non-irreducible locally symmetric Lorentzian manifold equals $`pE=𝔤_2^{\{0\}}`$ but this algebra can also be the holonomy algebra of a nonlocally symmetric Lorentzian manifold (see ).

Corollary 1. Let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ be a weakly-irreducible subalgebra. Then $`𝔤`$ is a Berger algebra if and only if $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is a weak-Berger algebra.

Corollary 2. Let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ be a weakly-irreducible subalgebra such that $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold. Then $`𝔤`$ is a Berger algebra.

Theorem 4. Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a weak-Berger algebra. Then
(I) There exists an orthogonal decomposition $`E=E_0E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ and the corresponding decomposition into the direct sum of ideals $`𝔥=\{0\}𝔥_1𝔥_2\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$ such that $`𝔥_i(E_j)=0`$ if $`ij,`$ $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬(E_i),`$ and $`𝔥_i`$ acts irreducibly on $`E_i.`$
(II) We have a decomposition

$$𝒫(𝔥)=𝒫(𝔥_1)\mathrm{}𝒫(𝔥_r).$$

In particular, $`𝔥_i`$ is a weak-Berger algebra for $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$.

Corollary 1 and theorem 4 reduce the classification problem for the weakly-irreducible, non-irreducible holonomy algebras of Lorentzian manifolds to the classification of irreducible weak-Berger algebras.

In section 4 we will obtain the following theorem.

Theorem 5. Let $`dimV11`$, let $`𝔤𝔰𝔬(V)_p`$ be a weakly-irreducible subalgebra. Then $`𝔤`$ is a Berger algebra if and only if $`𝔥^𝔤`$ is the holonomy algebra of a Riemannian manifold.

## 3 Proof of the results

### 3.1 Proof of part (II) of theorem 3

Let $`R(𝔤_2^𝔥)`$. Above we saw that $`R:VV𝔤_2^𝔥VV`$ is a $`\eta \eta `$-symmetric linear map. It is clear that $`VV=EE+pE+qE+pq`$.

Lemma 1. $`R|_{(pE+pq)}=0.`$

Proof. By (1), we have $`\eta (R(pv)z,w)=\eta (R(zw)p,v)`$ for all $`v,z,wV`$. Since $`R(wz)𝔥`$, we obtain $`R(wz)p=0`$ and $`\eta (R(pv)z,w)=0`$. Since $`\eta `$ is nondegenerate, we have $`R(pv)z=0`$. Thus, $`R(pv)=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We see that $`R`$ is a linear map from $`EE+qE`$ to $`𝔥+pE`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }VV`$ be one of the subspaces $`EE`$, $`pE`$, $`qE`$ and $`pq`$. Denote by $`p_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the projection of $`VV`$ onto $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with respect to the decomposition $`VV=EE+pE+qE+pq`$.

Denote by $`𝔥^{}`$ the orthogonal complement of $`𝔥`$ in $`EE`$, $`𝔥^{}=\{\xi EE:\eta \eta (\xi ,𝔥)=\{0\}\}.`$ Denote by $`p_𝔥`$ the projection of $`VV`$ onto $`𝔥`$ with respect to the decomposition $`VV=𝔥+𝔥^{}+pE+qE+pq`$.

We associate with $`R`$ the following linear maps:

$$R_𝔥=p_{EE}R|_{EE}:EE𝔥,$$

$$R_E^𝔥=p_{pE}R|_{EE}:EEpE,$$

$$R_𝔥^E=p_{EE}R|_{qE}:qE𝔥,$$

$$R_E=p_{pE}R|_{qE}:pEqE$$

and extend these maps to $`VV`$ mapping the natural complement to zero. Then $`R=R_𝔥+R_E^𝔥+R_𝔥^E+R_E`$.

Lemma 2. $`R_E^𝔥|_𝔥^{}=0`$; $`R_𝔥|_𝔥^{}=0`$.

Proof. Let $`\theta 𝔥^{}`$ and $`\xi 𝔥`$. Since the linear map $`R`$ is $`\eta \eta `$-symmetric, we have $`\eta \eta (R(\theta ),\xi )=\eta \eta (R(\xi ),\theta )`$. Hence, $`\eta \eta (R_𝔥(\theta )+R_E^𝔥(\theta ),\xi )=\eta \eta (R_𝔥(\xi )+R_E^𝔥(\xi ),\theta )`$. Since $`(pE)(EE)`$, $`\theta R_𝔥(\xi )`$, and $`R_𝔥(\xi )𝔥`$, we obtain $`\eta \eta (R_𝔥(\theta ),\xi )=0`$. Since the restriction of the form $`\eta \eta `$ to $`EE`$ is nondegenerate, we have $`R_𝔥(\theta )=0`$.

Similarly, suppose $`\xi qE`$; then $`R(\xi )=R_𝔥^E(\xi )+R_E(\xi )`$. Since $`(qE)(EE)`$ and the restriction of the form $`\eta \eta `$ to $`pE+qE`$ is nondegenerate, we see that $`R_E^𝔥(\theta )=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We define the linear maps $`Q:𝔥E`$, $`T:EE`$ and $`P:E𝔥`$ by conditions

$$R_E^𝔥(uv)=1/2(pQ(uv)),$$
(3)
$$R_E(qu)=pT(u)$$
(4)
and

$$P(u)=R_𝔥^E(qu)$$
(5)
for all $`u,vE`$.

Lemma 3. $`P^{}=Q`$, $`T^{}=T`$.

Proof. By (1) we have $`\eta (R(uv)q,w)=\eta (R(qw)u,v)`$ for all $`u,v,wE`$. Hence, $`\eta (R_E^𝔥(uv)q,w)=\eta (R_𝔥^E(qw)u,v)`$. Using (3) and (5), we get

$$1/2\eta (pQ(uv))q,w)=\eta (P(w)u,v).$$

Hence, $`1/2\eta (Q(uv),w)=\eta (P(w)u,v)`$. Identity (2) implies

$$\eta (Q(uv),w)=\eta \eta (P(w),uv).$$

We have proved the first part of the lemma. The second part follows from the equality $`\eta (R(qu)q,v)=\eta (R(qv)q,u)`$ for all $`u,vE`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

For the tensor $`R`$ we must check the Bianchi identity $`R(uv)w+R(vw)u+R(wu)v=0`$ for all $`u,v,wV`$. It is sufficient to check the Bianchi identity only for the basis vectors. If two of the vectors $`u`$, $`v`$, $`w`$ are equal or one of the vectors $`u`$, $`v`$, $`w`$ equals $`p`$, the identity holds trivially. Thus it is sufficient to check the Bianchi identity in the two cases: $`u,v,wE`$; $`u,vE`$, $`w=q`$. We do this in the following lemma.

Lemma 4. $`R_𝔥(𝔥),`$ $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$.

Proof. Let us write the Bianchi identity for $`u,v,wE`$; $`R(uv)w+R(vw)u+R(wu)v=0`$. From the equalities like $`R(uv)=R_𝔥(u,v)+R_E^𝔥(u,v)`$ and (3) it follows that $`R_𝔥(uv)w+R_𝔥(vw)u+R_𝔥(wu)v1/2(pQ(uv))w1/2(pQ(vw))u1/2(pQ(wu))v=0`$. Since $`(pQ(uv))w=\eta (Q(uv),w)pp`$ and $`R_𝔥(uv)wE`$, we obtain

$$R_𝔥(uv)w+R_𝔥(vw)u+R_𝔥(wu)v=0$$
(6)
and

$$\eta (Q(uv),w)+\eta (Q(vw),u)+\eta (Q(wu),v)=0.$$
(7)
Identity (6) shows that $`R_𝔥(𝔥)`$.

Now write the Bianchi identity for $`u,vE`$ and $`q`$; $`R(uv)q+R(vq)u+R(qu)v=0`$. Hence, $`R_E^𝔥(uv)q+R_𝔥^E(vq)u+R_𝔥^E(qu)v=0`$. Combining this with (3) and (5), we obtain $`1/2(pQ(uv))qP(v)u+P(u)v=0`$. Hence, $`1/2Q(uv)q+P(v)uP(u)v=0`$. Combining this with (7) and using the fact that for $`zE`$ the endomorphism $`P(z)`$ is $`\eta `$-skew symmetric, we obtain

$$\eta (P(u)v,w)+\eta (P(v)w,u)+\eta (P(w)u,v)=0\text{ }\text{for all }u,v,wE.$$
(8)
Identity (8) implies $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We put $`R^P=R_E^𝔥+R_𝔥^E`$, $`R^T=R_E`$. Then $`R^P(E,𝔥),`$ $`R^T(pE)`$, and $`R=R_𝔥+R^P+R^T`$. We have proved that $`(𝔤_2^𝔥)(𝔥)(E,𝔥)(pE).`$ Now we check the inverse inclusion.

Suppose $`TS^2(E)`$, i.e. $`T:EE`$ is a linear map such that $`T^{}=T`$. Put $`R^T(qu)=pT(u)`$, $`R^T(pq)=R^T(pu)=R^T(uv)=0`$ for all $`u,vE`$. Then $`R^T(pE)(𝔤_2^𝔥)`$.

Let $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ and $`R^P(E,𝔥)`$. We must check the Bianchi identity for the tensor $`R^P`$. For $`u,v,wE`$ the identity follows from (8).

Suppose $`u,vE`$; then $`R^P(uv)q+R^P(vq)u+R^P(qu)v=`$ $`1/2(pP^{}(uv))qP(v)u+P(u)v=1/2P^{}(uv)P(v)u+P(u)v.`$

Suppose $`wE`$; then $`\eta (1/2P^{}(uv)P(v)u+P(u)v,w)=\eta (1/2P^{}(uv),w)\eta (P(v)u,w)+\eta (P(u)v,w)=`$ $`1/2\eta (P^{}(uv),w)+\eta (P(v)w,u)+\eta (P(u)v,w)=`$ $`1/2\eta (P^{}(uv),w)\eta (P(w)u,v)=`$ $`1/2(\eta (P^{}(uv),w))+\eta \eta (P(w),uv)=0.`$ Above we used the fact that $`P(v)𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$, (2) and (1). Since the restriction of $`\eta `$ to $`E`$ is nondegenerate, we obtain $`R^P(uv)q+R^P(vq)u+R^P(qu)v=0`$.

Now we have $`(𝔥)(E,𝔥)(pE)(𝔤_2^𝔥).`$ Thus, $`(𝔤_2^𝔥)=(𝔥)(E,𝔥)(pE).`$

### 3.2 Proof of part (I) of theorem 3

Let $`R(𝔤_1^𝔥)`$. Similarly to lemma 1, we can prove that $`R|_{pE}=0.`$ Hence $`R`$ is a linear map from $`EE+qE+pq`$ to $`𝔥+pE+pq.`$

We can define the linear maps $`R_𝔥,R_E^𝔥,R_𝔥^E`$ and $`R_E`$ as in section 3.1. It is easily shown that the map $`R_2=R_𝔥+R_E^𝔥+R_𝔥^E+R_E`$ is a curvature tensor of type the Lie algebra $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$.

We define the following linear maps:

$$R_{}^𝔥=p_{pq}R|_{EE}:EEpq,$$

$$R_𝔥^{}=p_{EE}R|_{pq}:pqEE,$$

$$R_E^{}=p_{pE}R|_{pq}:pqpE,$$

$$R_{}^E=p_{pq}R|_{qE}:qEpq,$$

$$R_{}=p_{pq}R|_{pq}:pqpq$$

and extend these maps to $`VV`$ sending the natural complement to zero.

We have $`R=R_2+R_{}^𝔥+R_𝔥^{}+R_E^{}+R_{}^E+R_{}`$

Lemma 5. $`R_{}^𝔥=0,`$ $`R_𝔥^{}=0.`$

Proof. Let as write the Bianchi identity for vectors $`u,vE`$ and $`p`$; $`R(uv)p+R(v,p)u+R(pu)v=0.`$ Since $`R(vp)=R(pu)=0`$ and $`R(uv)p=R_{}^𝔥(uv)p,`$ we see that $`R_{}^𝔥(uv)=0`$.

Using (1), we get $`\eta (R(pq)u,v)=\eta (R(uv)p,q)=0.`$ Since $`u`$ and $`v`$ are arbitrary and the restriction of $`\eta `$ to $`E`$ is not degenerate, we obtain $`R_𝔥^{}=R(pq)|_E=0.`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

Define the linear maps $`L:E`$ and $`K:E`$ by conditions

$$R_{}^E(qu)=L(u)pq\text{ for all }uE,$$
(9)
$$R_E^{}(apq)=pK(a)\text{ for all }a.$$
(10)
Lemma 6. $`K=L^{}.`$

The proof is similar to the proof of lemma 3. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`\lambda `$ be a real number such that $`R_{}(pq)=\lambda pq`$. Put $`R^L=R_{}^E+R_E^{}`$ and $`R^\lambda =R_{}`$. We see that $`R^L(E,)`$, $`R^\lambda (,)`$, and $`R=R_2+R^L+R^\lambda (𝔤_2^𝔥)(E,)(,)`$. Thus we have $`(𝔤_1^𝔥)(𝔤_2^𝔥)(E,)(,)`$. The inverse inclusion is obvious.

### 3.3 Proof of part (III) of theorem 3

We have $`𝔤_2^𝔥𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }𝔤_1^h.`$ Suppose $`R(𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }),`$ then we have $`R(𝔤_1^𝔥).`$ From section 3.2 it follows that $`R=R_2+R_{}^E+R_E^{}+R_{},`$ where $`R_2=R_𝔥+R_E^𝔥+R_𝔥^E+R_E(𝔤_2^𝔥).`$

We claim that $`R_{}=0.`$ Indeed, there exists a $`\lambda `$ such that $`R_{}(pq)=\lambda pq;`$ we have $`R(pq)=R_{}(pq)+R_E^{}(pq)=\lambda pq+R_E^{}(pq).`$ Since $`R_E^{}(pq)pE𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`pq𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }=\{0\}`$, we see that $`\lambda =0.`$

For any $`uE`$ we have $`R(qu)=R_𝔥^E(qu)+R_{}^E(qu)𝔥+pq.`$ Since $`R(qu)𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi },`$ we see that $`R_{}^E(qu)=\phi (R_𝔥^E(qu))pq.`$ Hence, $`R_{}^E=pq\phi R_𝔥^E.`$ Using (5) and (9), we get $`L(u)=\phi (P(u)).`$ Hence for any $`a`$ we have $`L^{}(a)=P^{}(\phi ^{}(a)).`$ Using this, (10) and lemma 6, we obtain $`R_E^{}(apq)=pL^{}(a)=pP^{}(\phi ^{}(a)).`$ Using (3), we obtain $`R_E^{}(apq)=R_E^𝔥\phi ^{}(a)`$ for all $`a`$.

Suppose $`u,vE;`$ then we have $`R(uv)=R_𝔥(uv)+R_E^𝔥(uv)𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }.`$ Hence, $`R_𝔥(uv)\mathrm{ker}\phi .`$ We see that $`R_𝔥(\mathrm{ker}\phi ).`$ Put $`R_{\mathrm{ker}\phi }=R_𝔥.`$

Put $`R^P=R_𝔥^E+R_E^𝔥+R_{}^E+R_E^{}`$. We see that $`R^P(E,𝔥,\phi )`$. Thus, $`R=R_{\mathrm{ker}\phi }+R^P+R_E(\mathrm{ker}\phi )(E,𝔥,\phi )(pE).`$

Conversely, let $`R=R_{\mathrm{ker}\phi }+R^P+R_E(\mathrm{ker}\phi )(E,𝔥,\phi )(pE).`$ From section 3.2 it follows that $`R(𝔤_1^𝔥).`$ Since for any $`u,vV`$ we have $`R(uv)𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi },`$ we see that $`R(𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }).`$

### 3.4 Proof of part (IV) of theorem 3

By definition, $`𝔤_2=𝔥+pE_1`$ is a Lie algebra of type 2. We have $`𝔤_2𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }𝔤_2^𝔥.`$ Suppose that $`R(𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi })`$, then we have $`R(𝔤_2^𝔥).`$ From section 3.1 it follows that $`R=R_𝔥+R_𝔥^E+R_E^𝔥+R_E`$. There exists a $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ such that $`R_𝔥^E(qu)=P(u)`$ for all $`uE`$. Let $`u_1,v_1E_1`$, $`u_0E_0`$. We have $`\eta (P(u_1)v_1,u_0)+\eta (P(v_1)u_0,u_1)+\eta (P(u_0)u_1,v_1)=0.`$ Since $`𝔥(E_0)=\{0\}`$ and $`𝔥(E_1)E_1`$, we see that $`\eta (P(u_0)u_1,v_1)=0`$ for all $`u_1,v_1E_1`$, $`u_0E_0`$. Hence, $`P(E_0)=\{0\}`$, $`P^{}(𝔥)E_1`$. We can write $`R_𝔥^E=R_𝔥^{E_1}`$ and $`R_E^𝔥=R_{E_1}^𝔥`$.

We consider the following linear maps:

$$R_{E_1}=p_{pE_1}R_E|_{qE_1}:qE_1pE_1,$$

$$R_{E_1}^{E_0}=p_{pE_1}R_E|_{qE_0}:qE_0pE_1,$$

$$R_{E_0}^{E_1}=p_{pE_0}R_E|_{qE_1}:qE_1pE_0,$$

$$R_{E_0}=p_{pE_0}R_E|_{qE_0}:qE_0pE_0$$

and extend these maps to $`VV`$ mapping the complementary subspace to zero. Obviously, $`R_E=R_{E_1}+R_{E_1}^{E_0}+R_{E_0}^{E_1}+R_{E_0}`$.

We claim that $`R_{E_0}=0.`$ Indeed, for $`u_0E_0`$ we have $`R(qu_0)=R_E(q,u_0)=R_{E_1}^{E_0}(qu_0)+R_{E_0}(qu_0)𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi };`$ since $`R_{E_1}^{E_0}(qu_0)pE_1𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$, $`R_{E_0}(qu_0)pE_0`$, and $`pE_0𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }=\{0\}`$, we obtain $`R_{E_0}(qu_0)=0,`$ hence, $`R_{E_0}=0.`$

As in section 3.3, we can prove that $`R_𝔥(\mathrm{ker}\psi ),`$ $`R_{E_0}^{E_1}=p\psi R_𝔥^{E_1}`$, and $`R_{E_1}^{E_0}(qu_0)=R_{E_1}^𝔥\psi ^{}(u_0)`$ for all $`u_0E_0`$.

Put $`R^P=R_𝔥^{E_1}+R_{E_1}^𝔥+R_{E_0}^{E_1}+R_{E_1}^{E_0}`$. Thus we have $`R=R_{\mathrm{ker}\psi }+R^P+R_{E_1}(\mathrm{ker}\psi )(E_1,𝔥,\psi )(pE_1).`$

Conversely, let $`R=R_{\mathrm{ker}\psi }+R^P+R_{E_1}(\mathrm{ker}\psi )(E_1,𝔥,\psi )(pE_1).`$ From section 3.1 it follows that $`R(𝔤_2^𝔥).`$ Since for any $`u,vV`$ we have $`R(uv)𝔤_4^𝔥,`$ we see that $`R(𝔤_4^𝔥).`$

This concludes the proof of theorem 3. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 3.5 Proof of theorem 4

(I) Suppose $`𝔥`$ preserves a proper subspace $`E_1E`$, then $`𝔥`$ preserves the orthogonal complement $`E_1^{}`$ to $`E_1`$ in $`E`$. Put $`E_2=E_1^{}`$. We have $`E=E_1E_2`$, $`𝔥(E_1)E_1`$, and $`𝔥(E_2)E_2`$. Put $`𝔥_1=\{\xi 𝔥:\xi (E_2)=\{0\}\}`$ and $`𝔥_2=\{\xi 𝔥:\xi (E_1)=\{0\}\}`$. Obviously, $`𝔥_1`$ and $`𝔥_2`$ are ideals in $`𝔥`$ and $`𝔥_1𝔥_2=\{0\}`$.

Let $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$. Let $`u_1,v_1E_1`$, $`u_2E_2`$. We have $`\eta (P(u_1)v_1,u_2)+\eta (P(v_1)u_2,u_1)+\eta (P(u_2)u_1,v_1)=0.`$ Since $`𝔥(E_1)E_1`$ and $`𝔥(E_2)E_2`$, we have $`\eta (P(u_2)u_1,v_1)=0`$ for all $`u_1,v_1E_1`$, $`u_2E_2`$. We see that $`P(E_1)𝔥_1`$ and $`P(E_2)𝔥_2`$. Hence, $`L(𝒫(𝔥))𝔥_1𝔥_2.`$ Combining this with the equality $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$, we obtain $`𝔥=𝔥_1𝔥_2`$.

(II) Let $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$. As above, we can prove that $`P(E_1)𝔥_1`$ and $`P(E_2)𝔥_2`$. By definition, put $`P_1=P|_{E_1},`$ $`P_2=P|_{E_2}.`$ It is clearly that $`P_1𝒫(𝔥_1)`$, $`P_2𝒫(𝔥_2)`$, and $`P=P_1+P_2`$.

Conversely, for any $`P_1𝒫(𝔥_1)`$ and $`P_2𝒫(𝔥_2)`$ we have $`P=P_1+P_2𝒫(𝔥).`$

The proof of the theorem follows easily by induction over the number of the summands. $`\mathrm{}`$

### 3.6 Proof of corollaries

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra and $`R(𝔥)`$. We claim that for any $`zE`$ the tensor $`P`$ defined by $`P()=R(z)`$ belongs to $`𝒫(𝔥)`$. Indeed, we have $`R(uv)w+R(vw)u+R(wu)v=0`$ for all $`u,v,wE.`$ Multiplying both sides innerly by $`zE,`$ we obtain $`\eta (R(uv)w,z)+\eta (R(vw)u,z)+\eta (R(wu)v,z)=0`$ for all $`u,v,w,zE.`$ Using (1), we get $`\eta (R(wz)u,v)+\eta (R(uz)v,w)+\eta (R(vz)w,u)=0.`$

From theorem 3 and the claim it follows that for any weakly-irreducible algebra $`𝔤`$ we have $`p_{𝔰𝔬(E)}(L((𝔤)))=L(𝒫(𝔥^𝔤))`$.

Corollary 1 follows from the following obvious facts: $`L((pE))=pE`$ and $`L((,))=pq`$.

Corollary 2 follows from corollary 1 and the above claim. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Examples

Above we have reduced the classification problem for Berger algebras of Lorentzian manifolds to the classification of irreducible weak-Berger algebras.

Suppose we have the full list of irreducible weak-Berger algebras. Corollary 1 and theorem 4 imply that the full list of Berger algebras of Lorentzian manifolds can be obtained in the following way.

For each Euclidean space $`E`$ we must consider all orthogonal decompositions $`E=E_0E_1\mathrm{}E_r`$ such that $`2dimE_1\mathrm{}dimE_r`$, and for each Euclidean space $`E_i`$ all the irreducible weak-Berger algebras $`𝔥_i𝔰𝔬(E_i)`$. From theorem 4 it follows that the algebras $`𝔥=𝔥_1\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$ exhaust all weak-Berger algebras. Corollary 1 implies that the Lie algebras $`𝔤_1^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_2^𝔥`$, $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ (if $`𝔤_3^{𝔥,\phi }`$ and $`𝔤_4^{𝔥,\psi }`$ exist) exhaust all Berger algebras.

Below we list all the irreducible subalgebras $`𝔥𝔰𝔬_n`$ for $`n9`$ and state the result of computing of the spaces $`𝒫(𝔥)`$ for algebras that are not the holonomy algebras of Riemannian manifolds.

Since $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$, the Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ is compact. Hence, $`𝔥=𝔥^{}𝔷(𝔥),`$ where $`𝔥^{}`$ is a compact semisimple ideal, $`𝔷(𝔥)`$ is an Abelian ideal. Since the subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is irreducible, by Schur lemma the center $`𝔷(𝔥)`$ has dimension $`0`$ or $`1`$.

It is known that if a subalgebra $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is irreducible, the subalgebra $`𝔥^{}𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is irreducible too (see ). Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a semisimple irreducible subalgebra. Denote by $`𝔷_{𝔰𝔬(E)}(𝔥)`$ the centralizer of $`𝔥`$ in $`𝔰𝔬(E).`$ If $`𝔷_{𝔰𝔬(E)}(𝔥)\{0\},`$ then for each one-dimensional subspace $`𝔱𝔷_{𝔰𝔬(E)}(𝔥)`$ the Lie algebra $`𝔥𝔱`$ is a compact non-semisimple irreducible subalgebra of $`𝔰𝔬(E).`$ Hence it is sufficient to get the list of all semisimple irreducible subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬(E).`$

The classification of irreducible representations of compact semisimple Lie algebras is well known, see for example . Any irreducible real representation $`\pi :𝔥𝔤𝔩(E)`$ of a real semisimple Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ can be obtained in the following way.

Suppose we have a complex irreducible representation $`\rho :𝔣𝔤𝔩(U)`$ of a complex semisimple Lie algebra $`𝔣`$. Let $`𝔥𝔣`$ be a compact real form of $`𝔣`$ ($`𝔥`$ is unique up to conjugation).

There are the following three cases:

1) The representation $`\rho `$ is self-dual and orthogonal (i.e. $`\rho \rho ^{},`$ where $`\rho ^{}:𝔣𝔤𝔩(U^{})`$ is the dual representation for $`\rho `$ and $`\rho `$ admits an invariant not degenerate symmetric bilinear form)

2) The representation $`\rho `$ is self-dual and symplectic (i.e. $`\rho `$ admits an invariant not degenerate skew symmetric bilinear form)

3) The representation $`\rho `$ is not self-dual.

The first condition holds if and only if the representation $`\rho `$ admits a real form $`J,`$ i.e. $`J:UU`$ is a $``$-linear map such that $`J(iu)=iJ(u)`$ for all $`uU,`$ $`J^2=\text{id},`$ and $`J\rho (\xi )=\rho (\xi )J`$ for all $`\xi 𝔣.`$ In this case the real representation $`\pi =\rho |_𝔥`$ in the realificated vector space $`U^{}`$ preserves the space $`U^J=\{uU:J(u)=u\}`$ and acts irreducibly on $`U^J.`$ We get an irreducible real representation $`\pi :𝔥𝔤𝔩(U^J).`$

In the cases 2) and 3) the real representation $`\pi =\rho |_𝔥:𝔥𝔤𝔩(U^{})`$ is irreducible. In the case 2) we have $`\pi (𝔥)𝔰𝔭_m,`$ in the case 3) we have $`\pi (𝔥)𝔰𝔲_n,`$ where $`2n=4m=dim_CU.`$

Let $`\pi :𝔥𝔤𝔩(E)`$ be an irreducible real representation of a compact Lie algebra $`𝔥`$ in a real vector space $`E.`$ Since $`𝔥`$ is compact, we see that $`\pi `$ admits an invariant symmetric positively definite bilinear form. This form is unique up to non-zero real factor. The linear space $`E`$ is an Euclidean space with respect to this form and we can write $`\pi (𝔥)𝔰𝔬(E).`$

Any irreducible complex representation of a complex semisimple Lie algebra $`𝔣`$ is uniquely defined (up to equivalence of representations) by its highest weight $`\mathrm{\Lambda }.`$ The highest weight $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be given by the labels $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l`$ on the Dynkin diagram of the Lie algebra $`𝔣`$ ($`l=\text{rk}(𝔣`$)). There exists a criteria for a complex representation to be orthogonal, symplectic or self-dual in terms of the highest weight.

In the table 1 we list all irreducible subalgebras $`\pi (𝔥)𝔰𝔬_n`$ for $`n9`$.

The second column of the table contains the irreducible holonomy algebras of Riemannian manifolds. The third column of the table contains algebras that are not the holonomy algebras of Riemannian manifolds.

Let $`𝔥`$ be a compact semisimple Lie algebra. We denote by $`\pi _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l}^𝐊:𝔥^n`$ the real irreducible representation that is obtained as above from the complex representation $`\rho _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l}:𝔥(𝐂)𝔤𝔩(U)`$ with the highest weight $`\mathrm{\Lambda },`$ here $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l`$ are the labels of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`𝐊=,𝐂`$ or $`𝐇`$ if the representation $`\rho _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l}`$ is orthogonal, not self-dual or symplectic respectively. If the representation $`\rho _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_l}`$ is orthogonal, then $`n=dim_𝐂U,`$ otherwise we have $`n=2dim_𝐂U.`$ We denote by $`𝔱`$ the 1-dimensional Lie algebra $``$.

Table 1. Irreducible subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$

| $`n`$ | irreducible holonomy algebras of $`n`$-dimensional | other irreducible |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | Riemannian manifolds | subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$ |
| $`n=1`$ |  |  |
| $`n=2`$ | $`𝔰𝔬_2`$ |  |
| $`n=3`$ | $`\pi _2^{}(𝔰𝔬_3)`$ |  |
| $`n=4`$ | $`\pi _{1,1}^{}(𝔰𝔬_3+𝔰𝔬_3)`$, $`\pi _1^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_2)`$, $`\pi _1^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_2)𝔱`$ |  |
| $`n=5`$ | $`\pi _{1,0}^{}(𝔰𝔬_5)`$, $`\pi _4^{}(𝔰𝔬_3)`$ |  |
| $`n=6`$ | $`\pi _{1,0,0}^{}(𝔰𝔬_6)`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_3)`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_3)𝔱`$ |  |
| $`n=7`$ | $`\pi _{1,0,0}^{}(𝔰𝔬_7)`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^{}(𝔤_2)`$ | $`\pi _6^{}(𝔰𝔬_3)`$ |
| $`n=8`$ | $`\pi _{1,0,0,0}^{}(𝔰𝔬_8)`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_4)`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐂(𝔰𝔲_4)𝔱`$, $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)`$, | $`\pi _3^𝐂(𝔰𝔬_3)`$, $`\pi _3^𝐂(𝔰𝔬_3)𝔱`$ |
|  | $`\pi _{1,0,1}^{}(𝔰𝔭_2𝔰𝔭_1),`$ $`\pi _{1,3}^{}(𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3)`$, $`\pi _{1,1}^{}(𝔰𝔲_3)`$ | $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)𝔱`$ |
| $`n=9`$ | $`\pi _{1,0,0,0}^{}(𝔰𝔬_9)`$, $`\pi _{2,2}^{}(𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3)`$ | $`\pi _8^{}(𝔰𝔬_3)`$ |

Now we must verify the equality $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$ for algebras from the third column of the table.

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra. We claim that $`L(𝒫(𝔥))`$ is an ideal in $`𝔥`$. Indeed, let $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ and $`\xi 𝔥`$; put $`P_\xi (u)=\xi P(u)+P(u)\xi +P(\xi u)`$ for all $`uE`$. It can be easily checked that $`P_\xi 𝒫(𝔥)`$. We see that $`[P(u),\xi ]=P_\xi (u)P(\xi u)`$ for all $`uE`$, $`\xi 𝔥`$.

Suppose $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ is an irreducible subalgebra. We have $`𝔥=𝔥^{}𝔷(𝔥)`$ and $`dim𝔷(𝔥)=0`$ or $`1`$. Since $`𝔥^{}`$ is semisimple, we have $`𝔥^{}=𝔥_1\mathrm{}𝔥_r`$, where $`𝔥_i𝔥^{}`$ are simple ideals. Any ideal $`\stackrel{~}{𝔥}𝔥`$ is a sum of some of the ideals $`𝔥_1,\mathrm{},𝔥_r`$ and, may be, $`𝔷(𝔥)`$. From the above claim and the obvious equality $`𝒫(𝔥)=𝒫(L(𝒫(𝔥)))`$ it follows that $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$ if and only if $`𝒫(𝔥)\{0\}`$ and there is no proper ideal $`\stackrel{~}{𝔥}𝔥`$ such that $`𝒫(𝔥)=𝒫(\stackrel{~}{𝔥})`$. In particular, if $`𝔥`$ is simple, then $`L(𝒫(𝔥))=𝔥`$ if and only if $`𝒫(𝔥)\{0\}`$.

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬(E)`$ be a subalgebra and $`N=dim𝔥`$. Denote by $`C^1,\mathrm{},C^N`$ a basis of the vector space $`𝔥`$. Let $`P\text{Hom}(E,𝔥)`$ and $`P_{\alpha i}`$ ($`\alpha =1,\mathrm{},N;i=1,\mathrm{},n`$) be real numbers such that $`P(e_i)=_{\alpha =1}^NP_{\alpha i}C^\alpha `$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. We have $`P𝒫(𝔥)`$ if and only if

$$\underset{\alpha =1}{\overset{N}{}}(P_{\alpha i}C_{jk}^\alpha +P_{\alpha j}C_{ki}^\alpha +P_{\alpha k}C_{ij}^\alpha )=0$$

for all $`i,j,k`$ such that $`1i<j<kn`$ ($`\{C_{ij}^\alpha \}_{i,j=1}^n`$ is the matrix of the endomorphism $`C^\alpha `$).

Thus the space $`𝒫(𝔥)`$ can be found as the solution of the system of $`n(n1)(n2)/6`$ equations in $`nN`$ unknowns. We used computer program Mathematica 4.1 to solve such systems for algebras from the third column of table 1.

The result is
$`𝒫(\pi _6^{}(𝔰𝔬_3))=\{0\},`$ $`𝒫(\pi _3^𝐂(𝔰𝔬_3))=\{0\},`$ $`𝒫(\pi _3^𝐂(𝔰𝔬_3)𝔱)=\{0\},`$ $`dim(𝒫(\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)𝔱))=40`$, $`𝒫(\pi _8^{}(𝔰𝔬_3))=\{0\}`$. We also have $`dim(𝒫(\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)))=40`$.

Since $`𝒫(\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2))=𝒫(\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)𝔱),`$ we see that $`L(𝒫(\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)𝔱))=\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)`$. Hence the algebra $`\pi _{1,0}^𝐇(𝔰𝔭_2)𝔱`$ is not a weak-Berger algebra.

In table 2 we list all irreducible weak-Berger algebras $`𝔥𝔰𝔬_n`$ $`(n9)`$. This list coincides with the list of the irreducible holonomy algebras of Riemannian manifolds. We use the standard notation. In the table $``$ stands for the tensor product of representations; $`\underset{¯}{}`$ stands for the highest irreducible component of the corresponding product.

Table 2. Irreducible weak-Berger algebras

| n | Irreducible weak-Berger subalgebras of $`𝔰𝔬_n`$ |
| --- | --- |
| n=1 |  |
| n=2 | $`𝔰𝔬_2`$ |
| n=3 | $`𝔰𝔬_3`$ |
| n=4 | $`𝔰𝔬_4`$, $`𝔰𝔲_2`$, $`𝔲_2`$ |
| n=5 | $`𝔰𝔬_5`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^2𝔰𝔬_3`$ |
| n=6 | $`𝔰𝔬_6`$, $`𝔰𝔲_3,`$ $`𝔲_3`$ |
| n=7 | $`𝔰𝔬_7`$, $`𝔤_2`$ |
| n=8 | $`𝔰𝔬_8`$, $`𝔰𝔲_4`$, $`𝔲_4`$, $`𝔰𝔭_2`$, $`𝔰𝔭_2𝔰𝔭_1`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^3𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3`$, $`\underset{¯}{}^2𝔰𝔲_3`$ |
| n=9 | $`𝔰𝔬_9`$, $`𝔰𝔬_3𝔰𝔬_3`$ |

Recall that the holonomy group of an indecomposable Lorentzian manifold can be not closed. In  it was shown that the connected Lie subgroups of $`SO_{1,n+1}`$ corresponding to Lie algebras of type 1 and 2 are closed; the connected Lie subgroup of $`SO_{1,n+1}`$ corresponding to a Lie algebra of type 3 (resp. 4) is closed if and only if the connected Lie subgroup of $`SO_n`$ corresponding to the subalgebra $`\mathrm{ker}\phi 𝔷(𝔥)`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{ker}\psi 𝔷(𝔥)`$) is closed. We give a criteria for Lie groups corresponding to Lie algebras of type 3 and 4 to be closed in terms of the Lie algebras $`\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{ker}\psi `$.

Let $`𝔥𝔰𝔬_n`$ be a weak-Berger algebra such that $`𝔷(𝔥)\{0\}`$. Denote by $`T`$ the connected Lie subgroup of $`SO_n`$ corresponding to the Lie subalgebra $`𝔷(𝔥)𝔰𝔬_n`$. Since $`𝔥`$ is a sum of irreducible weak-Berger algebras, we see that the Lie subgroup $`T`$ is closed. Hence $`T`$ is compact and $`T`$ is isomorphic to the torus of dimension $`k=dim𝔷(𝔥)`$. Thus, $`T=S_1\times \mathrm{}\times S_k`$, where $`S_i`$ is a closed Lie subgroup of $`T`$ isomorphic to the unit circle $`S^1`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$). Denote by $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_k`$ the tangent vectors to $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_k`$ respectively corresponding to a unit tangent vector at the unity element of the circle. The vectors $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_k`$ form a basis of $`𝔷(𝔥)`$.

Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝔱}𝔷(𝔥)`$ be a subalgebra and $`\stackrel{~}{T}T`$ the corresponding connected Lie subgroup. We claim that the subgroup $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ is closed if and only if there exists a basis $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_l`$ ($`l=dim\stackrel{~}{𝔱}`$) of the vector space $`\stackrel{~}{𝔱}`$ such that the coordinates of the vector $`v_i`$ with respect to the basis $`u_1,\mathrm{},u_k`$ are integer for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},l`$.

For $`l=1`$ this statement was proved in .

Let $`l>1`$. Suppose that there exists a basis of $`\stackrel{~}{𝔱}`$ as above. Denote by $`\stackrel{~}{S_1}`$,…,$`\stackrel{~}{S_l}`$ the connected Lie subgroups of $`T`$ corresponding to the subalgebras $`v_1,\mathrm{},v_l𝔷(𝔥)`$. The Lie subgroups $`\stackrel{~}{S_1}`$,…,$`\stackrel{~}{S_l}`$ are closed. Hence the Lie groups $`\stackrel{~}{S_1}`$,…,$`\stackrel{~}{S_l}`$ are compact and isomorphic to the unit circle. Denote these isomorphisms by $`f_1`$,…,$`f_l`$. Put $`T^l=S^1\times \mathrm{}\times S^1`$. Define a map $`f:T^lT`$ by putting $`f(x_1,\mathrm{},x_l)=f_1(x_1)\mathrm{}f_l(x_l)`$, where $`x_iS^1`$. We have $`f(T^l)=\stackrel{~}{T}`$, hence $`\stackrel{~}{T}`$ is closed in $`T`$. The inverse statement is obvious.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

It is a longstanding problem to describe low energy behavior of QCD in terms of string-like extended objects. Naive identification of standard string theory spectrum with hadronic spectrum encounters a number of conceptual problems connected with the appearance of massless states containing graviton in the string spectrum, soft behavior of high energy scattering amplitudes, opposite to what one should expect in parton-like picture of asymptotically free gauge theories and, not the least, higher dimensional space-time.

Essential progress was achieved in  where the AdS/CFT correspondence was proposed relating the classical supergravity approximation $`R_{AdS}^2/\alpha ^{}1`$ of closed IIB strings moving on ten-dimensional curved space-time background $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ with large t’Hooft coupling regime of $`𝒩=4`$ supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory $`R_{AdS}^4/\alpha ^2=\lambda g_{YM}^2N`$. In this duality map one side is weakly coupled, the other is strongly coupled and there is a natural prescription relating physical quantities in string and gauge theories, in particular, identifying stringy states corresponding to the leading Regge trajectory with highly excited gauge theory operators . The conjecture was applied to calculate Wilson loops, anomalous dimensions, etc. on the gauge theory side at strong coupling regime.

If one adopts the strong form of the Maldacena conjecture stating that two theories are exactly the same for all values of coupling constants, then it is important to understand what string theory is like in the opposite limit when the gauge theory is in the weak coupling regime  . In that regime the string tension $`T=1/2\pi \alpha ^{}=\sqrt{\lambda }/R_{AdS}^2`$ effectively tends to zero and it is natural to assume that free gauge theory, $`\lambda 1`$, corresponds to zero tension string theory, that is to the string theory at extreme energies . The dual description of weakly interacting gauge theory states on the boundary, in particular, operators with minimal twist, consisting of bilinear high spin tensors, on the $`AdS_5`$ side are supposed to be expressed in terms of locally interacting massless gauge fields of arbitrarily high spin . The gauge theory correlation functions on the boundary define a high spin field theory in the bulk with nontrivial interaction vertices , and the resulting holographically dual classical gauge field theory would be the effective description of the desirable string theory in the bulk, celebrated symmetric phase of string theory .

This development initiates a fresh interest to the old problem of tensionless limit of the standard string theory and to the description of its genuine symmetries . In recent publications we approached this problem formulating tensionless strings by means of geometrical concept of surface perimeter, or its length . The perimeter action uniquely leads to tensionless theory. It was suggested that nonlinear world-sheet sigma model which describes tensionless limit is defined by the following action:

$$S=mL=md^2\zeta \sqrt{h}\sqrt{K_a^{ia}K_b^{ib}},$$
(1)
here $`m`$ has dimension of mass, $`h_{ab}`$ is the induced metric and $`K_{ab}^i`$ is the second fundamental form (extrinsic curvature) 222This action is essentially different in its geometrical meaning from the action considered in previous studies  where it is proportional to the spherical angle and has dimensionless coupling constant.. Instead of being proportional to the area of the surfaces, as it is the case in the standard string theory:

$$A\frac{1}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}\sqrt{1V_{}^2}𝑑s𝑑t,$$

the perimeter action (1) is proportional to the length of the surface. Due to the last property the model has two desirable features. First of all, when the surface degenerates into a single world line, the perimeter action (1) becomes proportional to the length of the world line

$$Sm\sqrt{1V_{}^2}K(s,t)𝑑s𝑑tm\sqrt{1V_{}^2}2\pi 𝑑t,$$
(2)
where $`K(s,t)=d\phi /ds`$ is a string curvature. Thanks to this property the functional integral over surfaces simply transforms into the Feynman path integral for a point-like relativistic particle, naturally extending it to relativistic strings. Secondly, the action is equal to the perimeter of the flat Wilson loop $`S=m(R+T)`$, where R is space distance between quarks, therefore at the classical level string tension is equal to zero. The action(1) can be written in the equivalent form

$$S=\frac{m}{\pi }d^2\zeta \sqrt{h}\sqrt{\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(h)X_\mu \right)^2},$$
(3)
where $`h_{ab}=_aX_\mu _bX_\mu `$ is the induced metric, $`\mathrm{\Delta }(h)=1/\sqrt{h}_a\sqrt{h}h^{ab}_b`$ is Laplace operator, 333The equivalence follows from the relations: $`K_a^{ia}n_\mu ^i=\mathrm{\Delta }(h)X_\mu `$, where $`n_i^\mu `$ are the normals and $`K_a^{ia}K_b^{ib}=\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(h)X_\mu \right)^2,i,j=1,2,\mathrm{},D2`$ $`a,b=1,2;\mu =0,1,2,\mathrm{},D1`$.

In the present work I shall consider so called model B , in which two fields $`h_{ab}`$\- the world-sheet metric and $`X^\mu `$ \- the embedding field are considered as independent, that is we abandon the relation $`h_{ab}=_aX_\mu _bX_\mu `$ between them. At this stage there is no direct relation of the model with embedding into space-time and the model can be considered as two-dimensional quantum gravity interacting with scalar fields $`X^\mu `$. We shall refer to the original theory, where fields are not independent, as to model A. The interrelation between them is considered in .

We shall fix the conformal gauge $`h_{ab}=\rho \eta _{ab}`$ using the reparametrization invariance of the action (3) and represent it in two equivalent forms

$$S=\frac{m}{\pi }d^2\zeta \sqrt{\left(^2X\right)^2}\stackrel{´}{S}=\frac{1}{\pi }d^2\zeta \{\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ^2X^\mu \mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)\},$$
(4)
where we have introduced the independent field $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$ and the Lagrange multiplier $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The system of equations which follows from $`\stackrel{´}{S}`$

$`(I)^2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,^2X^\mu 2\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Pi }_\mu =m^2`$ (5)
is equivalent to the original equation for $`X^\mu `$ which follows from $`S`$

$$(I^{})^2\left(m\frac{^2X_\mu }{\sqrt{\left(^2X\right)^2}}\right)=0.$$
(6)
The $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$ field has the form $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =m^2X^\mu /\sqrt{\left(^2X\right)^2}.`$ In addition to the reparametrization invariance the system exhibits a new gauge symmetry. For a given parametrization the additional invariance has the form

$$^2X^\mu ^2X^\mu +2\omega \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ,\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ,\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }+\omega $$

where $`\omega =_a\omega ^a`$ and $`\omega ^a`$ is arbitrary vector field on the world-sheet. The above gauge transformation

$$^2X_\mu ^{^{}}=\left(1+\frac{2\omega }{\sqrt{\left(^2X\right)^2}}\right)^2X_\mu $$
(7)
defines a set of fields $`X_\mu `$ describing the same physics and can be seen as the gauge orbit of this extra symmetry. Notice that fields on a given gauge orbit are not related by reparametrization. This gauge symmetry renders the string space-time coordinate $`X^\mu `$ ”less” physical, not gauge invariant observable. Instead, the string momentum $`P^\mu =_0\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$ is a gauge invariant quantity because $`\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu ^{^{}}=\mathrm{\Pi }_\mu `$.

Quantization of the bosonic string B and its massless spectrum has been derived in . The absence of conformal anomaly requires the space-time to be 13-dimensional $`D_c=13`$. In this string theory all particles, with arbitrary large integer spin, are massless. This pure massless spectrum is consistent with the tensionless character of the model and it was conjectured in  that it may describe unbroken phase of standard string theory when $`\alpha ^{^{}}\mathrm{}`$ and all masses tend to zero $`M_n^2=\frac{1}{\alpha ^{^{}}}(n1)0`$  .

Supersymmetric extension of the model B with $`𝒩=1`$ world-sheet supersymmetry was constructed in . Here I shall demonstrate that actually it possesses enhanced fermionic symmetry which elevates $`𝒩=1`$ world-sheet supersymmetry to $`𝒩=2`$ world-sheet supersymmetry. Indeed quantization of the supersymmetric model shows that its gauge algebra is identical with the well known $`𝒩=2`$ world-sheet superalgebra . This new field theory realization of the $`𝒩=2`$ algebra is free from old problem  connected with the introduction of second space-time coordinate $`Y^\mu `$, which was introduced in addition to the coordinates $`X^\mu `$ . Instead, in this model we have naturally two left-movers $`q_1^\mu `$ and $`q_2^\mu `$ and two right-movers $`\stackrel{~}{q}_1^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{q}_1^\mu `$ of the $`X^\mu `$ field

$`X_L^\mu =x^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\pi ^\mu \zeta ^++{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{nm^2}}}\{q_{1n}^\mu \mathrm{sin}(n\zeta ^+)+q_{2n}^\mu \mathrm{cos}(n\zeta ^+)\},`$
$`X_R^\mu =x^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\pi ^\mu \zeta ^{}+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{nm^2}}}\{\stackrel{~}{q}_{1n}^\mu \mathrm{sin}(n\zeta ^{})+\stackrel{~}{q}_{2n}^\mu \mathrm{cos}(n\zeta ^{})\}.`$
The conjugate field is described by a separate field $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$,

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu =me^\mu +k^\mu \zeta ^++{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2m^2}{n}}}\{p_{1n}^\mu \mathrm{cos}(n\zeta ^+)+p_{2n}^\mu \mathrm{sin}(n\zeta ^+)\},`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu =me^\mu +k^\mu \zeta ^{}+{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{2m^2}{n}}}\{\stackrel{~}{p}_{1n}^\mu \mathrm{cos}(n\zeta ^{})+\stackrel{~}{p}_{2n}^\mu \mathrm{sin}(n\zeta ^{})\},`$
therefore we have two times more degrees of freedom than in the standard bosonic string theory. This result can be qualitatively understood if one takes into account the fact that the field equations here are of the fourth order (6). Notice that there is also doubling of zero modes, the new zero mode coordinates are $`e^\mu `$ and their conjugate variables are $`\pi ^\mu `$, they describe transversal polarizations .

In the first part of this article I shall review the quantization of the bosonic tensionless string and shall describe its symmetries. In the second part I shall present oscillator representation of the supersymmetric extension of the model and its quantization. In the last section the twisted topological string model will be constructed in analogy with the standard prescription for $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal field theories .

## 2 Closed Bosonic Strings

In this section I shall review some facts concerning solution and quantization of the closed bosonic string which was defined in the previous section and shall discuss algebraic structure of the corresponding gauge symmetries (13),(2) and (15). As we shall see they naturally contain Virasoro algebra as its subalgebra and additional new generators $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{nk}`$ associated with new gauge symmetry (7) forming an Abelian subalgebra. The conformal algebra has here its classical form with twice larger central charge $`2\times \frac{D}{12}=\frac{D}{6}`$. This result can be qualitatively understood if one takes into account the fact that the field equations here are of the fourth order and therefore we have two left and two right movers of $`X^\mu `$ field, two times more degrees of freedom than in the standard bosonic string theory. Therefore it is not surprising that the absence of conformal anomaly requires the space-time to be 13-dimensional: $`D_c=13`$.

For the closed bosonic strings the mode expansion of $`X`$ field (1) can be written in the form :

$`X_L^\mu =x^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\pi ^\mu \zeta ^++i{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\beta _n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^+},`$
$`X_R^\mu =x^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\pi ^\mu \zeta ^{}+i{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\stackrel{~}{\beta }_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^{}},`$
where $`X^\mu =\frac{1}{2}(X_L^\mu (\zeta ^+)+X_R^\mu (\zeta ^{})),`$ and in similar manner $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu (\zeta ^+)+\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu (\zeta ^{}))`$

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu =me^\mu +k^\mu \zeta ^++i{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\alpha _n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^+},`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu =me^\mu +k^\mu \zeta ^{}+i{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^{}}.`$ (8)
The nonzero commutator is $`[_\pm X_{L,R}^\mu (\zeta ),_\pm \mathrm{\Pi }_{L,R}^\nu (\zeta ^{^{}})]=2\pi i\eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta ^{^{}}(\zeta \zeta ^{^{}}),`$ with all others equal to zero. The momentum density operator is $`2P^\mu =_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu +_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu =P_L^\mu +P_R^\mu `$. This canonical commutation among the fields imply also the following commutation relations among the coefficients of the Fourier expansion (2):

$`[e^\mu ,\pi ^\nu ]=[x^\mu ,k^\nu ]=i\eta ^{\mu \nu },[\alpha _n^\mu ,\beta _k^\nu ]=n\eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta _{n+k,0}`$ (9)
and similar ones for $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_n^\mu `$. All other commutators are equal to zero. They are connected with the creation and annihilation operators in the following way

$`\alpha _n^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`m\sqrt{n}a_n^\mu ,n>0,\alpha _0^\mu =k^\mu ;\beta _n^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\sqrt{n}b_n^\mu ,n>0,\beta _0^\mu =\pi ^\mu /m`$
$`\alpha _n^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`m\sqrt{n}a_n^{+\mu },n>0,\beta _n^\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{m}}\sqrt{n}b_n^{+\mu },n>0,`$ (10)
with nonzero commutator $`[a_n^\mu ,b_m^{+\mu }]=\eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta _{nm}.`$

The Virasoro operators $`L_n`$ and new operators $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,k}`$ are defined as

$$L_n=<e^{in\zeta ^+}:P_L^\mu _+X_L^\mu :>,\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,l}=<e^{in\zeta ^++il\zeta ^{}}:\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu m^2:>$$
(11)
and have the form

$`L_n`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:\alpha _{nl}\beta _l:\stackrel{~}{L}_n={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{nl}\stackrel{~}{\beta }_l:`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,0}`$ $`=`$ $`m^2(e^21)+{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4n^2}}:(\alpha _n\alpha _n+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n):`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,0}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{im}{n}}e\alpha _n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{l0,n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(nl)l}}:\alpha _{nl}\alpha _l:n=\pm 1,\pm 2,..`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,n}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{im}{n}}e\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \underset{l0,n}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(nl)l}}:\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{nl}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_l:n=\pm 1,\pm 2,..`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,k}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2nk}}:\alpha _n\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_k:n,k=\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}.`$ (12)
The conformal algebra has here its classical form but with twice larger central charge

$$[L_n,L_k]=(nk)L_{n+k}+\frac{D}{6}(n^3n)\delta _{n+k,0}$$
(13)
and with the similar expression for right movers $`\stackrel{~}{L}_n`$. The reason that the central charge is twice bigger than in the standard bosonic string theory $`2\times \frac{D}{12}=\frac{D}{6}`$ is simply because we have two left and two right movers of $`X_\mu `$ field. Such doubling of modes is reminiscent to the bosonic part of the $`𝒩=2`$ superstring . In the last model there was an essential problem in identifying the $`Y^\mu `$ coordinates which are introduced in addition to the normal coordinates $`X^\mu `$ . In our model the coordinate field $`X`$ has simply two sets of commuting oscillators and the conjugate fields are described by the separate field $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ .

The full extended gauge symmetry algebra of constraints (11) takes the form

$`[L_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,0}]`$ $`=`$ $`2n\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,0}[\stackrel{~}{L}_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,0}]=2n\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,n}`$
$`[L_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,0}]`$ $`=`$ $`(n+k)\mathrm{\Theta }_{n+k,0}[\stackrel{~}{L}_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,0}]=2n\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,n}`$
$`[L_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,k}]`$ $`=`$ $`2n\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,k}[\stackrel{~}{L}_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,k}]=(n+k)\mathrm{\Theta }_{0,n+k}`$
$`[L_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,l}]`$ $`=`$ $`(n+k)\mathrm{\Theta }_{n+k,l}[\stackrel{~}{L}_n,\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,l}]=(n+l)\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,n+l}`$
and one should stress that it is an essentially Abelian extension

$$[\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,k},\mathrm{\Theta }_{l,p}]=0,n,k,l,p=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}$$
(15)
One can easily check that Jacobi identities between all these operators are satisfied, therefore the relations (13), (2) and (15) define Abelian extension of Virasoro algebra. The equations (2) suggest its oscillator representation.

To define the physical Hilbert space we should first impose the Virasoro constraints

$`(L_0+a)\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (16)
$`L_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n=1,2..`$
and then our new constraint $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. The last operator has a linear and quadratic $`\tau `$ dependence which in fact uniquely define the spectrum of this string theory

$$(\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)=k^2\tau ^2+2\{mek+k\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}\}\tau +\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}^2+2me\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}+m^2(e^21).$$

Indeed the first operator diverges quadratically with $`\tau `$ and the second one linearly. Therefore in order to have normalizable states in physical Hilbert-Fock space one should impose corresponding constraints. We are enforced to define the physical Hilbert space as

$$k^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,ek\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,k\alpha _n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,k\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,n>0.$$
(17)
The first equation states that all physical states with different spins are massless. This is consistent with the tensionless character of the theory. The rest of the constraints take the form

$`\mathrm{\Theta }_{n,k}\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0n,k=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.`$ (18)
Thus the the physical Hilbert space is defined by the equations (16), (17) and (18). In the next section we shall consider $`𝒩=1`$ world-sheet supersymmetric extension of the above model  and shall demonstrate that it actually exhibits the $`𝒩=2`$ world-sheet supersymmetry.

## 3 $`𝒩=1`$ World-sheet Supersymmetry

In the recent article  the authors constructed the $`𝒩=1`$ supersymmetric extension of the above model using world-sheet superfields . Both forms of the action (4) can be extended to the supersymmetric case as follows. For the basic fields $`(X,\mathrm{\Pi },\mathrm{\Omega })`$ in (4) one should introduce the corresponding superfields

$`\widehat{X}^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`X^\mu +\overline{\vartheta }\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\vartheta }\vartheta F^\mu `$
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu +\overline{\vartheta }\eta ^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\vartheta }\vartheta \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu `$
$`\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega +\overline{\vartheta }\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\vartheta }\vartheta \mathrm{\Omega },`$ (19)
where $`\vartheta `$ is an anti-commuting variable and shall define the supersymmetric action simply exchanging basic fields $`(X,\mathrm{\Pi },\mathrm{\Omega })`$ in (4) by corresponding superfields as follows

$$S=\frac{i}{2\pi }d^2\zeta d^2\theta \{\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^\mu \overline{D}D\widehat{X}^\mu 2\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}(\widehat{\mathrm{\Pi }}^2m^2)\},$$
(20)
where

$$D_A=\frac{}{\overline{\vartheta }^A}i(\rho ^a\vartheta )_A_a,\mathrm{\Psi }_A^\mu (\zeta )\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu (\zeta )\\ \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu (\zeta )\end{array}\right),\eta _A^\mu (\zeta )\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta _{}^\mu (\zeta )\\ \eta _+^\mu (\zeta )\end{array}\right),\xi _A(\zeta )\left(\begin{array}{c}\xi _{}(\zeta )\\ \xi _+(\zeta )\end{array}\right),$$
(21)
$`\mu `$ is a space-time vector index, $`A=1,2`$ is a two-dimensional spinor index. $`\overline{\mathrm{\Psi }}^\mu =\mathrm{\Psi }^{+\mu }\rho ^0=\mathrm{\Psi }^{T\mu }\rho ^0`$ and $`\rho ^\alpha `$ are two-dimensional Dirac matrices

$$\{\rho ^a,\rho ^b\}=2\eta ^{ab}.$$
(22)
In Majorana basis the $`\rho ^{}s`$ are given by

$$\rho ^0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& i\\ i& 0\end{array}\right),\rho ^1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& i\\ i& 0\end{array}\right)$$
(23)
and $`i\rho ^\alpha _\alpha `$ is a real operator. The two-dimensional chiral fields are defined as $`\rho ^3\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^\mu =\mathrm{\Psi }_\pm ^\mu ,`$ where $`\rho ^3=\rho ^0\rho ^1`$. Substituting superfields one can get the following expression for the action

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta \{\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ^2X^\mu +i\overline{\eta ^\mu }\rho ^a_a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu F^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu `$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)\omega (2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu +\overline{\eta ^\mu }\eta ^\mu )2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \overline{\eta ^\mu }\xi \}.`$ (24)
The equations of motion are:

$`(I)\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =0`$
$`^2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0`$
$`i\rho ^a_a\eta ^\mu =0`$
$`2\omega \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu +F^\mu =0`$
$`^2X^\mu 2\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu 2\omega \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu 2\overline{\eta ^\mu }\xi =0`$
$`i\rho ^a_a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu 2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \xi 2\omega \eta ^\mu =0,`$ (25)
and the variation over Lagrange multipliers gives constraints

$`(II)\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2=0`$
$`2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu +\overline{\eta ^\mu }\eta ^\mu =0`$
$`2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta ^\mu =0.`$ (26)
The first equation represents the constrain which appears in bosonic tensionless string theory and the last equation represents its fermionic partners. As we shall see the first one is the analog of Klein-Gordon equation and the second one is the analog of the Dirac equation. In some sense they are more important relations than the motion equations (I). The SUSY transformation is:

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\delta X^\mu =\overline{ϵ}\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Psi }^\mu =i\rho ^a_aX^\mu ϵ+F^\mu ϵ,\hfill & & \\ \delta F^\mu =i\overline{ϵ}\rho ^a_a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu ,\hfill & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\delta \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =\overline{ϵ}\eta ^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \eta ^\mu =i\rho ^a_a\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ϵ+\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu ϵ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =i\overline{ϵ}\rho ^a_a\eta ^\mu ,\hfill & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\delta \omega =\overline{ϵ}\xi ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \xi ^\mu =i\rho ^a_a\omega ϵ+\mathrm{\Omega }ϵ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Omega }=i\overline{ϵ}\rho ^a_a\xi ,\hfill & & \end{array}`$ (36)
where the anti-commuting parameter $`ϵ`$ is a two-dimensional spinor

$`ϵ\left(\begin{array}{c}ϵ_{}\\ ϵ_+\end{array}\right).`$ (39)
The action (3), equations (3) and the constraints (3) completely define the system which exhibits the supersymmetry (36).

As we shall see bellow the action (3) possesses enhanced fermionic symmetry which elevates $`𝒩=1`$ world-sheet supersymmetry up to $`𝒩=2`$ world-sheet supersymmetry. It is convenient to work in light-cone coordinates. In the light-cone coordinates the action takes the form

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta \{2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+_{}X^\mu +i\eta _+^\mu _{}\psi _+^\mu +i\eta _{}^\mu _+\psi _{}^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}F^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu `$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)\omega (\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu +i\eta _+^\mu \eta _{}^\mu )i\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta _+^\mu \xi _{}+i\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta _{}^\mu \xi _+\}.`$ (40)
and equations of motion can be solved. As one can see the SUSY solution of equations (3) is:

$$i)\mathrm{\Omega }=\omega =\xi =0$$

and the rest of the equations (I) reduce to the following form

$`(I)^2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,i\rho ^a_a\eta ^\mu =0,^2X^\mu =0,i\rho ^a_a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu =0,F^\mu =\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =0`$ (41)
and should be accompanied by the constraints

$`(II)\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2=0,\overline{\eta ^\mu }\eta ^\mu =0,\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta ^\mu =0.`$ (42)
In the light-cone coordinates these equations are easy to solve since they take the from

$`_+_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,_\pm \eta _{}^\mu =0,_+_{}X^\mu =0,_\pm \psi _{}^\mu =0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2=0,\eta _+^\mu \eta _{}^\mu \eta _{}^\mu \eta _+^\mu =0\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta _\pm ^\mu =0.`$ (43)
The mode expansion of $`X`$ field with the appropriate boundary conditions for closed strings was given above (2). The solution of fermionic fields can be represented in the form of mode expansion as well

$`\eta _+^\mu ={\displaystyle c_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^+}},\psi _+^\mu ={\displaystyle d_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^+}}`$
$`\eta _{}^\mu ={\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{c}_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^{}}},\psi _{}^\mu ={\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{d}_n^\mu e^{in\zeta ^{}}}`$ (44)
with the basic anti-commutators

$`\begin{array}{ccc}\{\eta _\pm ^\mu (\zeta ),\psi _\pm ^\nu (\zeta ^{^{}})\}=2\pi \eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta (\zeta \zeta ^{^{}}),\hfill & & \end{array}`$ (46)
and all others equal to zero: $`\{\eta _\pm ^\mu (\zeta ),\eta _\pm ^\nu (\zeta ^{^{}})\}=0,\{\psi _\pm ^\mu (\zeta ),\psi _\pm ^\nu (\zeta ^{^{}})\}=0`$. Substituting the mode expansion into the anti-commutators requires following relations between modes

$`\{c_n^\mu ,d_k^\nu \}=\eta ^{\mu \nu }\delta _{n+k,0},\{c_n^\mu ,c_k^\nu \}=0,\{d_n^\mu ,d_k^\nu \}=0,`$ (47)
and similar ones for $`\stackrel{~}{c}_n^\mu `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{d}_n^\mu `$.

## 4 Enhanced $`𝒩=2`$ World-sheet supersymmetry

Let us now consider conserved currents: energy momentum tensor and supercurrent

$`T_{ab}`$ $`=`$ $`_{\{a}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{b\}}X^\mu +i\overline{\eta ^\mu }\rho _{\{a}_{b\}}\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu trace`$
$`J_a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\rho ^b\rho _a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu _b\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\rho ^b\rho _a\eta ^\mu _bX^\mu `$ (48)
or in the light-cone coordinates

$`T_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+X^\mu +i\eta _+^\mu _+\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_+(\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ),`$
$`T_{}`$ $`=`$ $`2_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{}X^\mu +i\eta _{}^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_{}(\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ),`$
$`J_+`$ $`=`$ $`2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +2\eta _+^\mu _+X^\mu ,`$
$`J_{}`$ $`=`$ $`2_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu +2\eta _{}^\mu _{}X^\mu ,`$ (49)
Substituting solution (2) into the last formulas one can get

$`T_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu _+X_L^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\eta _+^\mu _+\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_+\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,`$
$`T_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu _{}X_R^\mu +{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\eta _{}^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_{}\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,`$
$`J_+`$ $`=`$ $`_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +\eta _+^\mu _+X_L^\mu ,`$
$`J_{}`$ $`=`$ $`_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu +\eta _{}^\mu _{}X_R^\mu .`$ (50)
The mode expansion of these currents is equal to

$`L_n`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}T_{++}>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:\alpha _{nl}\beta _l:+{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:(l{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}})c_{nl}d_l:`$
$`F_n`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}J_+>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\alpha _{nl}d_l+{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\beta _{nl}c_l.`$ (51)
The standard computation of quantum commutation relations between these currents gives

$`[L_n,L_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)L_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{D}{4}}m^3\delta _{n+m}`$
$`[L_n,F_m]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}m)F_{n+m}`$
$`\{F_n,F_m\}`$ $`=`$ $`2L_{n+m}+Dn^2\delta _{n+m}.`$ (52)
This is a standard $`𝒩=1`$ superalgebra with the central charge twice larger than in the standard superstring theory. It is also clear from the expression for the full supercurrent $`J_a`$ that its two separate pieces $`G_a^1=\frac{1}{2}\rho ^b\rho _a\eta ^\mu _bX^\mu `$ and $`G_a^2=\frac{1}{2}\rho ^b\rho _a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu _b\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$ also represent conserved currents and therefore pointing to the fact that there should exist a higher symmetry group. In the light-cone coordinates these currents have the form

$`G_+^1`$ $`=`$ $`2\eta _+^\mu _+X^\mu ,G_+^2=2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,`$
$`G_{}^1`$ $`=`$ $`2\eta _{}^\mu _{}X^\mu ,G_{}^2=2_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu .`$ (53)
Mode expansion of these currents is defined as:

$`G_n^1`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}G_+^1>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\beta _{nl}c_l`$
$`G_n^2`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}G_+^2>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\alpha _{nl}d_l`$ (54)
therefore

$$F_n=G_n^1+G_n^2$$

These conserved currents form the following algebra

$`[L_n,G_m^1]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}m)G_{n+m}^1,(J=3/2)`$
$`[L_n,G_m^2]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}m)G_{n+m}^2,(J=3/2)`$
$`\{G_n^1,G_m^1\}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\{G_n^2,G_m^2\}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (55)
Here J denotes the conformal spin of the corresponding operators. The anti-commutator $`\{G_n^1,G_m^2\}`$ cannot be computed in closed form unless we introduce additional current

$`T_a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\overline{\eta }^\mu \rho _a\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu `$ (56)
which appears to be also conserved as it is easy to check using equations of motion. This conserved current is connected with the $`U(1)`$ invariance of the action which rotates fermionic fields. Its components are $`T_+=\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,T_{}=\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,_{}T_+=_+T_{}=0,`$ and mode expansion is

$`T_n=<e^{in\zeta ^+}T_+>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:c_{nl}d_l:.`$ (57)
Then we can compute the anti-commutator:

$$\{G_n^1,G_m^2\}=L_{n+m}+\frac{1}{2}(nm)T_{n+m}+\frac{D}{2}n^2\delta _{n+m,0}$$

and the rest of the algebra will take the form:

$`[L_n,T_m]`$ $`=`$ $`mT_{n+m},(J=1)`$
$`[T_n,T_m]`$ $`=`$ $`Dn\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[T_n,G_m^1]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{n+m}^1`$
$`[T_n,G_m^2]`$ $`=`$ $`+G_{n+m}^2`$ (58)
It is clear now that this is a well known $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal algebra  and that initially implemented $`𝒩=1`$ SUSY transformation has been naturally enhanced to $`𝒩=2`$ world-sheet supersymmetry. This symmetry can also be seen if one introduces the $`𝒩=2`$ superfield as follows

$`\widehat{X}^\mu (\zeta ,\vartheta _1,\vartheta _2)=X^\mu +\vartheta _1\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu +\vartheta _2\eta ^\mu +\vartheta _2\vartheta _1\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu `$
$`=X^\mu +\vartheta _1\mathrm{\Psi }^\mu +\vartheta _2(\eta ^\mu +\vartheta _1\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ).`$ (59)
The important point is that there is no natural extensions of the superfield $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Omega }}`$ to $`𝒩=2`$ superfield, simply because the constrain $`\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2=0`$ breaks the symmetry between $`X`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ fields. This can be seen as a sign that actually the whole system together with constraints breaks the $`𝒩=2`$ down to $`𝒩=1`$. This observation makes the computation of critical dimension more subtle here. In particular it is not obvious at all that it should be two, as it is the case for $`𝒩=2`$ strings.

Let us now consider the new superconstraints (II) (3) which appear in our case : $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta _\pm ^\mu `$

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,l}^\pm =<e^{in\zeta ^++il\zeta ^{}}:\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \eta _\pm ^\mu :>$$
(60)
or in terms of oscillators

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{0,0}^+`$ $`=`$ $`mec_0+{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}\alpha _nc_n,\mathrm{\Delta }_{0,0}^{}=me\stackrel{~}{c}_0+{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\stackrel{~}{c}_n,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,0}^+`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \underset{l0,n}{}}\alpha _{nl}c_l,\mathrm{\Delta }_{0,n}^{}=i{\displaystyle \underset{l0,n}{}}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{nl}\stackrel{~}{c}_l,n=\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,l}^+`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha _n\stackrel{~}{c}_l,\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,l}^{}=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_nc_l,n,l=\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$ (61)
The important fact which uniquely defines the spectrum of this superstring theory is again the $`\tau `$ dependence of the operators $`\mathrm{\Pi }^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }\eta _\pm `$

$`(\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)=k^2\tau ^2+2\{mek+k\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}\}\tau +m^2(e^21)+2me\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}^2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }\eta _+=(c_0k+k\eta _{+oscil})\tau +mec_0+me\eta _{+oscil}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}\eta _{+oscil},`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }\eta _{}=(\stackrel{~}{c}_0k+k\eta _{oscil})\tau +me\stackrel{~}{c}_0+me\eta _{oscil}+\mathrm{\Pi }_{oscil}\eta _{oscil}.`$ (62)
The first operator diverges quadratically with $`\tau `$ and the second one linearly in bosonic sector and we have linear divergency of first operators in fermionic sector. Therefore in order to have normalizable states in physical Hilbert space one should impose corresponding constraints. We are enforced to define the physical Hilbert space as

$`k^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,c_0k\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,\stackrel{~}{c}_0k\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,`$
$`k\alpha _n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,k\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,kc_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,k\stackrel{~}{c}_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0,n>0,`$
$`ek\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}=0.`$ (63)
All these constraints can naturally be grouped into three systems of equations. The first three equations are nothing else but massless Klein-Gordon and Dirac equations and uniquely define the spectrum of the theory. We conclude that all physical states with integer and half integer spins are massless. This is consistent with tensionless character of the theory. The second system of equations imposes important condition of transversality on fermion and boson oscillators. Finally the last equation suggests that the vector $`e_\mu `$ should be interpreted as polarization vector transverse to the momentum vector $`k_\mu `$.

We should impose the constraints of $`𝒩=2`$ superconformal algebra

$`(L_0+a)\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`L_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n=1,2,..`$
$`T_0\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`T_n\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n=1,2,..`$
$`G_n^1\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n=1,2,..`$
$`G_n^2\mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n=1,2,..`$ (64)
together with the additional constraints $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{k,l}`$ (18) and fermionic constraints (4)

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{n,l}^\pm \mathrm{\Psi }_{phys}`$ $`=`$ $`0,n,l=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ (65)
One should study in great details this Hilbert space in order to learn more about content of the theory and to prove the absence of the negative norm states. We cannot also say anything certain about critical dimension of the model because we have additional symmetries and the corresponding constraints, the influence of which on the calculation of the critical dimension at the moment is not quite well understood.

In the rest of the article we shall consider a close topological model which can be constructed by twisting . Indeed the redefinition of the energy momentum tensor by the total derivative of the U(1) current, leads to the topological theory. By this twisting operation the above $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry transforms into BRST symmetry as in .

## 5 Twisted Topological Strings

We shall obtain the topological version of the above $`𝒩=2`$ theory by the redefinition of the energy momentum tensor T by $`\widehat{T}`$ as follows:

$$\widehat{T}_{ab}=T_{ab}\frac{i}{2}_aJ_b,$$

where $`J_b`$ is the U(1) current (56). In light-cone components we have

$`\stackrel{~}{T}_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+X^\mu +i\eta _+^\mu _+\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,\stackrel{~}{T}_{}=2_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{}X^\mu +i\eta _{}^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,`$
$`F_+`$ $`=`$ $`2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +2\eta _+^\mu _+X^\mu ,F_{}=2_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu +2\eta _{}^\mu _{}X^\mu ,`$
$`J_+`$ $`=`$ $`\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,J_{}=\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,`$ (66)
Substituting solutions (2) into the last formulas one can get

$`\stackrel{~}{T}_{++}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu _+X_L^\mu +i\eta _+^\mu _+\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu _{}X_R^\mu +i\eta _{}^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,`$
$`F_+^1`$ $`=`$ $`_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +\eta _+^\mu _+X_L^\mu ,`$ (67)
$`F_{}^1`$ $`=`$ $`_{}\mathrm{\Pi }_R^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu +\eta _{}^\mu _{}X_R^\mu ,`$
$`J_+`$ $`=`$ $`\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,`$
$`J_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,`$ (68)
Mode expansion of these currents is defined as:

$`L_n`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}\stackrel{~}{T}_{++}>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:\alpha _{nl}\beta _l:+{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:lc_{nl}d_l:`$
$`F_n^1`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}F_+>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\alpha _{nl}d_l+{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\beta _{nl}c_l`$
$`F_n^2`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}F_+^2>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\alpha _{nl}d_l{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}\beta _{nl}c_l`$
$`J_n`$ $`=`$ $`<e^{in\zeta ^+}J_+>={\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}:c_{nl}d_l:`$ (69)
where we have introduced a new operator $`F_+^2`$ which is equal to the following expression

$$F_+^2=_+\mathrm{\Pi }_L^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu \eta _+^\mu _+X_L^\mu .$$
(70)
The necessity of introducing this operator comes from the fact that again when we compute the algebra between operators $`T,F^1,J`$ the algebra is closed only if we introduce this new operator. For these four operators the algebra is closed

$`[L_n,L_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)L_{n+m},`$
$`[L_n,F_m^1]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}m)F_{n+m}^1{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}F_{n+m}^2,`$
$`[L_n,F_m^2]`$ $`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}m)F_{n+m}^2{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}F_{n+m}^1,`$
$`[L_n,J_m]`$ $`=`$ $`mJ_{n+m}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{2}}n(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0},`$
$`[J_n,J_m]`$ $`=`$ $`Dn\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[J_n,F_m^1]`$ $`=`$ $`F_{n+m}^2`$
$`[J_n,F_m^2]`$ $`=`$ $`F_{n+m}^1`$
$`\{F_n^1,F_m^1\}`$ $`=`$ $`2L_{n+m}+(n+m)J_{n+m}+Dn^2\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`\{F_n^1,F_m^2\}`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)J_{n+m}+Dn\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`\{F_n^2,F_m^2\}`$ $`=`$ $`2L_{n+m}(n+m)J_{n+m}Dn^2\delta _{n+m,0}`$ (71)
There is no defined conformal dimensions for the fermion operators $`F^1`$ and $`F^2`$, they also do not have defined charges with respect to the $`U(1)`$ group. As it is easy to see the linear combination of these operators do have defined charges. Indeed we should introduce the linear combination of supercurrents as we did in the previous model

$$2G_n=F_n^1F_n^2,2Q_n=F_n^1+F_n^2,$$
(72)
in order to have diagonal form of supercurrent with respect to the conformal operator $`L_n`$. In coordinate space they look as (4). For these conserved currents the algebra takes the form

$`[L_n,L_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)L_{n+m},(J=2)`$
$`[L_n,G_m]`$ $`=`$ $`(nm)G_{n+m},(J=2)`$
$`[L_n,Q_m]`$ $`=`$ $`mQ_{n+m},(J=1)`$
$`[L_n,J_m]`$ $`=`$ $`mJ_{n+m}{\displaystyle \frac{D}{2}}n(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0}(J=1)`$
$`[J_n,J_m]`$ $`=`$ $`Dm\delta _{n+m,0}`$
$`[J_n,G_m]`$ $`=`$ $`G_{n+m}`$
$`[J_n,Q_m]`$ $`=`$ $`+Q_{n+m}`$
$`\{G_n,G_m\}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\{Q_n,Q_m\}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\{G_n,Q_m\}`$ $`=`$ $`L_{n+m}+mJ_{n+m}+{\displaystyle \frac{D}{2}}n(n+1)\delta _{n+m,0}`$ (73)
which is well known in topological conformal field theory . One can see that we have here zero central charge and two nilpotent fermion operators $`G`$ and $`Q`$ which form the N=2 world-sheet supersymmetry. Two conserved supercurrents which appear above should have come from the explicit fermion symmetry of the theory. As we shall see in a moment these symmetries can be justified. One can check that the system is invariant under fermion transformation laws $`\delta `$ and $`\overline{\delta }`$ defined as follows :

$`\begin{array}{cccccc}\delta X^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu =2ϵ_+_{}X^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta F^\mu =2iϵ_+_{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =iϵ_+\eta _{}^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \eta _{}^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \eta _+^\mu =ϵ_+\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\overline{\delta }X^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu =2ϵ_{}_+X^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }F^\mu =2iϵ_{}_+\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =iϵ_{}\eta _+^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\eta _{}^\mu =ϵ_{}\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\eta _+^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =0,\hfill & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\delta \omega =iϵ_+\xi _{},\hfill & & \\ \delta \xi _{}=0,\hfill & & \\ \delta \xi _+=ϵ_+\mathrm{\Omega },\hfill & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Omega }=0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\omega =iϵ_{}\xi _+,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\xi _{}=ϵ_{}\mathrm{\Omega },\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\xi _+=0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Omega }=0,\hfill & & \end{array}`$ (98)
The algebra of these fermionic symmetries is nilpotent and is very similar to BRST transformations

$$\delta _ϵ\delta _{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}(H)=\overline{\delta }_ϵ\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}(H)=0,(\delta _ϵ\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}\delta _ϵ)(H)=0.$$
(99)
where H is any of the fields $`(X,\mathrm{\Psi },F,\mathrm{\Pi },\eta ,\mathrm{\Phi },\omega ,\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega })`$. From (99) it follows that the action is invariant under fermionic symmetries (98). We can compute the current corresponding to this fermion symmetry. The variation of the action is

$`\delta S={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta \{2iϵ_+\eta _{}^\mu _+_{}X^\mu iϵ_+\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +i\eta _{}^\mu _+(2ϵ_+_{}X^\mu )`$
$`(1/2)(2iϵ_+_{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu )\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu \}={\displaystyle \frac{2i}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta G_{}_+(ϵ_+)`$ (100)
and supercurrent $`G_{}=2\eta _{}^\mu _{}X^\mu `$ coincides with the one which appeared in the previous section. The important fact now is that the Lagrangian is a variation of the super-potentials $`W`$ and $`\overline{W}`$

$$W=\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu +\frac{1}{2}\eta _+^\mu F^\mu ,\overline{W}=\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu \frac{1}{2}\eta _{}^\mu F^\mu ,$$
(101)
so that

$$\delta W=ϵ_+,\overline{\delta }\overline{W}=ϵ_{}.$$
(102)
It is also true that there exists a potential $`V`$ such that

$`\delta V=iϵ_+\overline{W},\overline{\delta }V=iϵ_{}W,V={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu F^\mu ,`$ (103)
thus

$$i\delta \overline{\delta }V=ϵ_+ϵ_{},i\overline{\delta }\delta V=ϵ_+ϵ_{}.$$

The constrains (II) can also be represented by the $`\overline{\delta }\delta `$ transformation and therefore the full Lagrangian in (3) can be represented as

$$2ϵ_+ϵ_{}_{tot}=i\overline{\delta }\delta \left(\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu F^\mu +\omega (\mathrm{\Pi }^2m^2)\right).$$
(104)
Thus the action can be represented as BRST commutator $`=\{G_+,W\}=\{G_{},\overline{W}\}`$. The above fermion symmetry allows to express some important operators as variation of others. In particular the energy momentum tensor is a variation of second supercurrent $`Q`$, but only up to the total derivative of $`U(1)`$ current $`J_a`$

$`\overline{\delta }Q_+`$ $`=`$ $`2ϵ_{}T_{++}+2iϵ_{}_+J_+,`$
$`\delta Q_{}`$ $`=`$ $`2ϵ_+T_{}+2iϵ_+_{}J_{},`$ (105)
Instead, the supercurrent $`G`$ introduced above is total variation of the vector $`v_a=\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _aX^\mu `$

$`\overline{\delta }v_+`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_{}G_+,v_+=2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+X^\mu `$
$`\delta v_{}`$ $`=`$ $`iϵ_+G_{},v_{}=2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{}X^\mu .`$ (106)
Let us consider the second fermion symmetry of the action

$`\begin{array}{cccccc}\delta X^\mu =iϵ_{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu =ϵ_{}F^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta F^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \eta _{}^\mu =0,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \eta _+^\mu =2ϵ_{}_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =2iϵ_{}_+\eta _{}^\mu ,\hfill & & & & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\overline{\delta }X^\mu =iϵ_+\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu =ϵ_+F^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }F^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\eta _{}^\mu =2ϵ_+_{}\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\eta _+^\mu =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Phi }^\mu =2iϵ_+_{}\eta _+^\mu ,\hfill & & \end{array}\begin{array}{ccc}\delta \omega =0,\hfill & & \\ \delta \xi _{}=ϵ_{}\omega ,\hfill & & \\ \delta \xi _+=0,\hfill & & \\ \delta \mathrm{\Omega }=iϵ_{}\xi _+,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\omega =0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\xi _{}=0,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\xi _+=ϵ_+\omega ,\hfill & & \\ \overline{\delta }\mathrm{\Omega }=iϵ_+\xi _{},\hfill & & \end{array}`$ (131)
The algebra of these fermionic symmetries is nilpotent and is very similar to BRST transformations

$$\delta _ϵ\delta _{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}(H)=\overline{\delta }_ϵ\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}(H)=0,(\delta _ϵ\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}\overline{\delta }_{\stackrel{´}{ϵ}}\delta _ϵ)(H)=0.$$
(132)
where H is any of the fields $`(X,\mathrm{\Psi },F,\mathrm{\Pi },\eta ,\mathrm{\Phi },\omega ,\xi ,\mathrm{\Omega })`$. Let us compute the corresponding current. The variation of the action is

$`\delta S={\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta \{2\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _+_{}(iϵ_{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu )+2iϵ_{}_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu _{}\mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu +`$
$`i\eta _{}^\mu _+(ϵ_{}F^\mu )(1/2)F^\mu (2iϵ_{}_+\eta _{}^\mu )\}={\displaystyle \frac{2i}{\pi }}{\displaystyle }d^2\zeta Q_+(_{}ϵ_{})`$ (133)
and $`Q_+=2_+\mathrm{\Pi }^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu `$ also appeared in the previous section. The important fact now is that the energy momentum tensor is BRST commutator with respect to the second fermion symmetry

$`\delta G_+`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (2\eta _+^\mu _+X^\mu )=2ϵ_{}T_{++},`$
$`\delta G_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (2\eta _{}^\mu _{}X^\mu )=2ϵ_+T_{},`$ (134)
and supercurrent $`Q`$ ia a variation of $`U(1)`$ current $`J_a`$

$`\delta J_+`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\eta _+^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_+^\mu )=ϵ_{}Q_+,`$
$`\delta J_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\delta (\eta _{}^\mu \mathrm{\Psi }_{}^\mu )=ϵ_+Q_{}`$ (135)
Thus the energy momentum tensor is a BRST commutator $`T_{++}=\{Q_+,G_+\}`$ and its central charge vanishes, the model transforms into topological theory.

The author wishes to thank A. D’Adda, I.Bakas, L.Brink, E.Floratos, M.Vasiliev, R.Manvelyan, A.Nichols and R.Fazio for stimulating discussions. This work was supported in part by the EEC Grant no. HPRN-CT-1999-00161 and NATO Grant PST.CLG.978154.