format: text

text:
# Hopf algebras with trace and representations

## Introduction

Irreducible representations of quantized universal enveloping algebra were classified in \[DKP1\]D2. These algebras are finite dimensional over their center and are Cayley-Hamilton algebras \[P2\].

Here we study the restriction representations of Cayley-Hamilton algebras to subalgebras. This theory is applied to the tensor product of two generic representations of $`U_ϵ(𝔤)`$, and of $`U_ϵ(𝔟)`$, and to the branching of generic irreducible representations when $`U_ϵ(𝔟)U_ϵ(𝔤)`$. here $`ϵ`$ is an primitive root of 1 of an odd degree.

The center of $`U_ϵ(𝔤)`$ has the central Hopf subalgebra $`Z_0`$ generated by $`\mathrm{}`$-th powers of root generators of and by $`\mathrm{}`$-th powers of generators of the Cartan subalgebra \[DKP1\]. This central Hopf subalgebra $`Z_0`$ is isomorphic to the algebra of polynomial functions on $`G^{}`$ which is a Poisson Lie dual to $`G`$. Let $`\pi :Spec(Z)Spec(Z_0)=G^{}`$ be the natural projection induced by the inclusion of $`Z_0`$ to the center $`Z`$ of $`U_ϵ(𝔤)`$. According to the general theory of Cayley-Hamilton algebras there exist a Zariski open subvariety $`SSpec(Z_0)`$ such that $`\pi `$ is a finite covering map and the algebra is semisimple over $`S`$. In case of $`U_ϵ(𝔤)`$ this projection has $`\mathrm{}^r`$ fibers where $`r`$ is the rank of the Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. Thus, each central character $`\chi Spec(Z)`$ with $`\pi (\chi )S`$ defines an irreducible representation $`V_\chi `$.

The tensor product $`V_\chi V_\chi ^{}`$ is completely reducible if the product $`\pi (\chi )\pi (\chi ^{})`$ ( in $`G^{}`$) is generic, i.e. belongs to $`S`$. Our results imply:

(1)
$$V_\chi V_\chi ^{}_{\chi ^{\prime \prime }Spec(Z),//\pi (\chi ^{\prime \prime })=\pi (\chi )\pi (\chi ^{})}(V_{\chi ^{\prime \prime }})^m$$

where $`m=\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|r}`$. Here $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|`$ is the number of positive roots.

Similar decompositions hold for the restriction of $`V_\chi `$ to $`U_ϵ(𝔟)`$ and for the tensor product of $`U_ϵ(𝔟)`$-modules.

In sections 1 to 4 we recall the general theory of semisimple representations of Cayley-Hamilton algebras (CH-algebras for short). Then in sections 5 to 7 we study how a semisimple representation of a CH-algebra restricts to a CH-subalgebra. Then we apply this theory to the decomposition of tensor product of semisimple representations of the special class of Hopf algebras that we call CH-Hopf algebras. Finally we study examples of such Hopf algebras which are quantum groups at roots of 1. The special form of the multiplicities suggests that for many natural varieties related to the corresponding Poisson Lie groups the Poisson tensor is constant in certain birational coordinate system. Such coordinates are known in many cases.

The work of N.R. was supported by NSF grant DMS-0070931, C.P. and N.R. would like to thank V. Toledano for interesting discussions.

## 1.  $`n`$dimensional representations.

In this paper by ring we mean an associative ring with 1. An algebra over a commutative ring $`A`$ will be an associative and unital algebra.

In this section we remind some basic facts of universal algebra. We will use the following categories (we denote by $`A`$ a commutative ring):

* $`\underset{¯}{Set}`$ is the category of sets,
* $`C`$ and $`C(A)`$ are categories of commutative rings and commutative $`A`$-algebras respectively,
* $`N`$ and $`N(A)`$ are categories of non commutative rings and of non commutative $`A`$-algebras respectively.

### 1.1. The universal $`n`$-dimensional representation

Given a ring $`B`$ one denotes by $`M_n(B)`$ the full ring of $`n\times n`$ matrices over $`B`$. If $`f:BC`$ is a ring homomorphism we can construct $`M_n(f):M_n(B)M_n(C)`$ the homomorphism induced on matrices. We will use systematically the following simple well known Lemma.

###### Lemma 1.1.

If $`I`$ is a 2-sided ideal in $`M_n(B)`$ then $`I=M_n(J)`$ for a (unique) 2-sided ideal $`J`$ in $`B`$ (and $`M_n(B)/I=M_n(B/J)`$).

Furthermore, if $`f:BC`$ is such that $`M_n(f):M_n(B)M_n(C)`$ annihilates $`I`$, then there is a morphism $`\overline{f}:B/JC`$ such that the following diagram commutes

$$\begin{array}{ccc}M_n(B)\hfill & \stackrel{f}{}& M_n(C)\hfill \\ \hfill & & _{M_n(\overline{f})}\hfill \\ & M_n(B/J)& \end{array}$$

Let $`R`$ be a ring, by an $`n`$dimensional representation of $`R`$ over a commutative ring $`B`$ one means a homomorphism

$$\varphi :RM_n(B)$$

We will use notation $`_R^n(B):=\mathrm{hom}_N(R,M_n(B))`$ for the set of all these representations. It is clear that it defines a functor $`_R^n:𝒞\underset{¯}{Set}`$. The image of a given ring homomorphism $`f:BC`$ under this functor is the map $`_R^n(B)_R^n(C)`$ obtained by composing with

$$M_n(B)\stackrel{M_n(f)}{}M_n(C).$$

###### Lemma 1.2.

The functor $`_R^n`$ is representable.

###### Proof.

We should prove that there is a commutative ring $`A_n(R)`$ such that $`_R^n(B)=Hom_C(A_n(R),B)`$.

Let $`a_\alpha `$ be a set of generators for the ring $`R`$. This gives a presentation of it as a quotient ring of the free (non commutative) algebra $`x_\alpha `$:

$$\pi :x_\alpha R=x_\alpha /K,K:=Ker\pi .$$

with generators $`a_\alpha `$ being images of $`x_\alpha `$.

For each $`\alpha `$ choose a set of $`n^2`$ variables $`\xi _{i,j}^\alpha `$. Let $`A:=[\xi _{i,j}^\alpha ]`$ be the polynomial ring in all these variables.

Define the generic matrices $`\xi _\alpha `$ in $`M_n(A)`$ by setting $`\xi _\alpha `$ to be the matrix which, in the $`i,j`$ entry, has coefficient $`\xi _{i,j}^\alpha `$.

Let $`j:x_\alpha M_n(A)`$ be the algebra homomorphism defined by $`j(x_\alpha )=\xi _\alpha .`$ Let finally $`I`$ be the 2-sided ideal in $`M_n(A)`$ generated by $`j(K)`$. By the previous Lemma, $`I=M_n(J)`$ for some ideal $`J`$ of $`A`$ and thus we have the mapping $`j_R:RM_n(A/J)`$ and the commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}x_\alpha \hfill & \stackrel{j}{}& M_n(A)\hfill \\ _\pi \hfill & & _{M_n(p)}\hfill \\ R\hfill & \stackrel{j_R}{}& M_n(A/J)\hfill \end{array}$$

Here $`p:AA/J`$ is the quotient map.

Let $`\varphi :RM_n(B)`$ be any representation $`\varphi (a_\alpha )=(f_{i,j}^\alpha )`$. It gives the homomorphism of commutative rings $`AB`$, $`\xi _{i,j}^\alpha f_{i,j}^\alpha `$ . This homomorphism induces the required map $`\overline{\varphi }:A/JB`$ for which the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R\hfill & \stackrel{j_R}{}& M_n(A/J)\hfill \\ {}_{\varphi }{}^{}\hfill & & _{M_n(\overline{\varphi })}\hfill \\ & M_n(B)& \end{array}$$

commutes. This proves representability of $`_R^n`$.

Notice that in the proof we constructed the commutative ring $`A_n(R):=A/J.`$

Notice that, for a finitely generated ring $`R`$ also $`A_n(R)`$ is finitely generated. This construction is functorial. Indeed, for each ring homomorphism $`f:RS`$ we have a corresponding homomorphism of commutative rings $`A_n(f):A_n(R)A_n(S)`$ defined naturally. It is clear that the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R\hfill & \stackrel{j_R}{}& M_n(A_n(R))\hfill \\ _f\hfill & & _{M_n(A_n(f))}\hfill \\ S\hfill & \stackrel{j_S}{}& M_n(A_n(S))\hfill \end{array}$$

is commutative.

###### Definition 1.3.

We shall denote by $`A_n(R)`$ the universal ring $`A/J`$ and shall refer to the mapping

(2)
$$R\stackrel{j_R}{}M_n(A_n(R))$$

as the universal $`n`$dimensional representation.

Universality of the ring $`A_n(R)`$ means the commutativity of the diagram above.

###### Remark 1.4.

The commutative ring $`A_n(R)`$ may be zero. This means that the ring $`R`$ does not have any $`n`$-dimensional representation.

Instead of working with rings we can work with algebras over a commutative ring $`A`$. Clearly all the discussion from above carries over. Moreover if $`R`$ is a finitely generated algebra so is the universal ring $`A_n(R)`$. The universality of $`A_n(R)`$ implies the following theorem

###### Theorem 1.5.

The functor $`BM_n(B)`$ from the category $`𝒞(A)`$ of commutative $`A`$algebras to the category $`𝒩(A)`$ of non commutative $`A`$algebras has a right adjoint

$$hom_𝒩(R,M_n(B))=hom_𝒞(A_n(R),B).$$

for each $`R`$ in $`𝒩`$.

###### Example 1.6.

Consider the ring $`U`$ generated by three elements $`H,X,Y`$ with defining relations

(3)
$$HXXH=Y$$

In this case the ring $`A_n(U)`$ is the polynomial ring in the $`2n^2`$ variables $`h_{ij},x_{ij}`$.

###### Example 1.7.

Consider the commutative polynomial ring $`[x,y]`$ generated by two elements $`x`$ and $`y`$.

In this case the ring $`A_n([x,y])`$ is generated by the $`2n^2`$ variables $`x_{ij},y_{ij}`$ modulo the quadratic equations $`_sx_{is}y_{sj}_sy_{is}x_{sj}`$. It is not known if these equations generate in general a prime ideal!

###### Example 1.8.

Consider the $``$ algebra $`U`$ generated by two elements $`X,Y`$ with defining relations

(4)
$$XYYX=1$$

In this case the ring $`A_n(U)`$ is 0. If instead we work over $``$ we get not trivial rings, since the matrix equation $`XYYX=1`$ can be solved in some characteristic $`p>0`$.

###### Example 1.9.

Let $`k`$ be a field and $`R:=M_m(k)`$ the algebra of $`m\times m`$ matrices. Then $`A_n(R)=0`$ unless $`m`$ divides $`n`$; in the case $`n=mr`$, let $`\overline{k}`$ be an algebraic closure of $`k`$. Consider the embedding $`GL(r,\overline{k})`$ into $`GL(mr,\overline{k})`$ given by the tensor product $`1A:\overline{k}^m\overline{k}^r\overline{k}^m\overline{k}^r`$. $`A_n(R)`$ is the coordinate algebra of the homogeneous space $`GL(mr,\overline{k})/GL(r,\overline{k})`$ (cf. \[LP1\]\[LP2\])

### 1.2. Equivalence between universal $`n`$-dimensional representations

When one studies representations one has a natural equivalence given by changing the basis. 111In the arithmetic theory one needs a little care, one has to define the automorphism group of matrices as group scheme. We shall not describe this theory for general rings (cf. \[P\]), but assume now that all rings are algebras over a field $`k`$. Let $`B`$ be a $`k`$-algebra. An invertible matrix $`gGL(n,k)`$ defines a $`B`$automorphism by conjugation:

$$M_n(B)\stackrel{C(g)}{}M_n(B),C(g)(A):=gAg^1$$

Let $`R`$ be an algebra over $`k`$. From the universal property of the universal $`n`$-dimensional representation, every matrix $`gGL(n,k)`$ defines a homomorphism, $`\overline{g}:A_n(R)A_n(R)`$ making the following diagram commutative

$$\begin{array}{ccc}R\hfill & \stackrel{j_R}{}& M_n(A_n(R))\hfill \\ j_R\hfill & & M_n(\overline{g})\hfill \\ M_n(A_n(R))\hfill & \stackrel{C(g)}{}& M_n(A_n(R))\hfill \end{array}$$

Notice that such $`\overline{g}`$ is unique due to the universality of $`A_n`$.

Composing with some other $`hG`$ we get:

$`M_n(\overline{hg}))j_R`$ $`=C(hg)j_R=C(h)C(g)j_R=`$
$`C(h)M_n(\overline{g})j_R`$ $`=M_n(\overline{g})C(h)j_R=M_n(\overline{g})M_n(\overline{h})j_R=M_n(\overline{g}\overline{h})j_R`$
and therefore

$$M_n((\overline{hg}))=M_n(\overline{g}\overline{h})$$

which implies $`\overline{hg}=\overline{g}\overline{h}`$. In other words we get an action of $`GL(n,k)`$ on $`A_n(R)`$ $`g:a\overline{g}^1(a)`$, an action of $`GL(n,k)`$ on $`M_n(k)`$ by conjugation and the diagonal action $`m_kaC(g)m_k\overline{g^1}(a)`$ on $`M_n(A_n(R))=M_n(k)_kA_n(R).`$

The identity $`C(g)j_R=M_n(\overline{g})j_R`$ means that $`M_n(\overline{g})^1C(g)j_R=j_R`$ or that $`j_R`$ maps $`R`$ into the elements which are $`GL(n,k)`$ invariant:

$$R\stackrel{j_R}{}M_n(A_n(R))^{GL(n,k)}.$$

One of the aims of the theory is to understand better the previous map; it is clear that in the algebra of invariants we find all the characters $`Tr(j_R(a)),aR`$ or even all coefficients of characteristic polynomials. This justifies introducing such characters formally as will be done in the next section. In the meantime let us interpret the construction for the free algebra. So let us assume that $`k`$ is an infinite field which allows us to identify formal polynomials with functions.

For the free (non commutative) algebra $`kx_\alpha _{\alpha I}`$, we have seen that for each $`\alpha `$ we choose a set of $`n^2`$ variables $`x_{i,j}^\alpha `$ and let $`A_{n,I}:=k[x_{i,j}^\alpha ]`$ be the polynomial ring in all these variables.

We have seen that the universal map is the map $`j(x_\alpha )=\xi _\alpha `$ sending each variable $`x_\alpha `$ to the corresponding generic matrix $`\xi _\alpha `$, the matrix which, in the $`i,j`$ entry, has value $`x_{i,j}^\alpha `$.

The ring $`A_{n,I}`$ is best thought of as the ring $`k[M_n(k)^I]`$ of polynomial functions on $`M_n(k)^I`$ and the ring $`M_n(A_{n,I})`$ is best thought of as the ring of polynomial maps $`f:M_n(k)^IM_n(k)`$.

Now assume that $`I`$ is a set with $`m`$ elements. Choose it to be $`I=\{1,\mathrm{},m\}`$. Then

$$M_n(k)^I=M_n(k)^m=\{(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m),\xi _iM_n(k)\}$$

Define

$$A_{n,m}=k[M_n(k)^m]=k[\xi _i^{hk}]$$

The generic matrix $`\xi _i`$ is thus a coordinate function mapping $`(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)\xi _i`$. The $`GL(n,k)`$ action is identified to the obvious action on functions:

$$(gf)(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m):=gf(g^1\xi _1g,\mathrm{},g^1\xi _mg)g^1$$

Finally the ring $`M_n(A_{n,m})^{GL(n,k)}`$ can be identified to the ring of $`GL(n,k)`$ equivariant maps:

$$f:M_n(k)^nM_n(k)|f(g\xi _1g^1,\mathrm{},g\xi _mg^1)=gf(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)g^1.$$

Let us denote by $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m):=M_n(A_{n,m})^{GL(n,k)}`$ the ring of equivariant maps.

## 2. Cayley-Hamilton algebras.

### 2.1. Algebras with trace.

We start with a formal definition which belongs to universal algebra.

###### Definition 2.1.

An associative algebra with trace, over a commutative ring $`A`$ is an associative algebra $`R`$ with a 1-ary operation

$$t:RR$$

which is assumed to satisfy the following axioms:

1. $`t`$ is $`A`$linear.
2. $`t(a)b=bt(a),a,bR.`$
3. $`t(ab)=t(ba),a,bR.`$
4. $`t(t(a)b)=t(a)t(b),a,bR.`$

This operation is called a formal trace. We denote $`t(R):=\{t(a),aR\}`$ the image of $`t`$.

###### Remark 2.2.

We have the following implications:

Axiom 1) implies that $`t(R)`$ is an $`A`$submodule.

Axiom 2) implies that $`t(R)`$ is in the center of $`R`$.

Axiom 3) implies that $`t`$ is 0 on the space of commutators $`[R,R]`$.

Axiom 4) implies that $`t(R)`$ is an $`A`$subalgebra and that $`t`$ is also $`t(R)`$linear.

The basic example of algebra with trace is of course the algebra of $`n\times n`$ matrices over a commutative ring $`B`$ with the usual trace.

Notice that we have made no special requirements on the value of $`t(1)`$.

Algebras with trace form a category, where objects are algebras with trace and morphisms algebra homomorphisms which commute with trace mappings. An ideal in a trace algebra is a trace ideal i.e. one which is stable under the trace. Then the usual homomorphism theorems are valid.

The subalgebra $`t(R)`$ is called the trace algebra.

###### Example 2.3.

As usual in universal algebra the category of algebras with trace has free algebras. Given a set $`I`$ it is easily seen that the free algebra with trace in the variables $`x_i,iI`$, is obtained as follows:

First one constructs the free algebra $`Ax_i`$ in the variables $`x_i,iI`$ whose basis over $`A`$ are the free monomials in these variables. Next one defines cyclic equivalence of monomials where when we decompose a monomial $`M=AB`$ we set $`ABBA`$.

Finally for every equivalence class of monomials we pick a commutative variable $`t(M)`$ and form finally the polynomial algebra:

$$Fx_i:=Ax_i[t(M)],iI,$$

where $`M`$ a monomial up to cyclic equivalence.

We set $`Tx_i:=A[t(M)]`$ the commutative polynomial algebra in the variables $`t(M)`$. The trace is defined as the unique $`Tx_i`$linear map for which $`t:Mt(M)`$. It is easily verified that this gives the free algebra with trace.

###### Remark 2.4.

There is an obvious base change construction on algebras with trace. If $`R`$ is an $`A`$ algebra with trace and $`B`$ a commutative $`A`$ algebra then $`R_AB`$ has the natural trace $`t(rb):=t(r)b`$. We have $`t(R_AB)=t(R)_AB`$.

### 2.2. $`n`$-dimensional representations of algebras with traces

We can now apply the theory of §1 to algebras with traces. The only difference is now that, if $`R`$ is an algebra with trace, by an $`n`$dimensional representation over a commutative ring $`B`$ one means a homomorphism $`\varphi :RM_n(B)`$ which is compatible with traces, where matrices have the standard trace. The discussion of §1 can be repeated verbatim, we have again a representable functor, a universal (trace preserving) map $`R\stackrel{i_R}{}M_n(B_n(R))`$, an action of $`GL(n,k)`$ on $`B_n(R)`$ and a map

$$R\stackrel{i_R}{}M_n(B_n(R))^{GL(n,k)}$$

We shall call $`B_n(R)`$ the coordinate ring of the $`n`$dimensional representations of $`R`$ and the map $`i_R`$ the generic $`n`$dimensional representation of $`R`$.

We shall see that, under suitable assumptions, this map $`i_R`$ is an isomorphism. For this we first point out some elements which are always in the kernel of $`i_R`$.

### 2.3. Cayley Hamilton algebras.

At this point we will restrict the discussion to the case in which $`A`$ is a field of characteristic 0. The positive characteristic theory can to some extent be developed, provided we start the axioms from the idea of a norm and not a trace. Since the theory is still incomplete we will not go into it now.

The basic algebraic restriction which we know for the algebra of $`n\times n`$ matrices over a commutative ring $`B`$ is the Cayley Hamilton theorem:

Every matrix $`M`$ satisfies its characteristic polynomial $`\chi _M(t):=det(tM)`$.

The main remark that allows to pass to the formal theory is that, in characteristic 0, there are universal polynomials $`P_i(t_1,\mathrm{},t_i)`$ with rational coefficients, such that:

$$\chi _M(t)=t^n+\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}P_i(tr(M),\mathrm{},tr(M^i))t^{ni}.$$

The polynomials $`P_i(t_1,\mathrm{},t_i)`$ are the ones which express the elementary symmetric functions $`e_i(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ defined by $`(tx_i)=t^n+_{i=1}^ne_i(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)t^{ni}`$ in terms of the Newton functions $`\psi _k:=_ix_i^k`$, i.e. $`e_i(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=P_i(\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _i).`$

At this point we can formally define, in an algebra with trace $`R`$, for every element $`a`$ a formal $`n`$characteristic polynomial:

$$\chi _a^n(t):=t^n+\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}P_i(t(a),\mathrm{},t(a^i))t^{ni}.$$

With this definition we obviously see that, given any element $`a`$, the element $`\chi _a^n(a)`$ vanishes in every $`n`$dimensional representation or equivalently it is in the kernel of the universal map. Thus we are led to make the following.

###### Definition 2.5.

An algebra with trace $`R`$ is said to be an $`n`$Cayley Hamilton algebra, or to satisfy the $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton identity if:

1) $`t(1)=n`$.222this restriction could be to some extent dropped

2) $`\chi _a^n(a)=0,aR`$.

It is clear that $`n`$Cayley Hamilton algebras form a category. This category has obviously free algebras. By definition the free $`n`$-Cayley-Hamilton algebra $`F_nx_i`$ is the algebra generated freely by $`x_i`$ and by traces of monomials modulo the trace ideal generated by evaluating in all possible ways the $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton identity. It is thus a quotient of the free algebra $`Fx_i`$ with trace. Some remarks are in order, they are all standard from the theory of identities \[P\],\[P3\].

One can polarize the Cayley-Hamilton identity getting a multilinear identity $`CH(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$, since we are in characteristic 0 this identity is equivalent to the 1-variable Cayley-Hamilton identity, $`CH(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ has a nice combinatorial description as follows. given a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`n+1`$ elements written into cycles as $`\sigma =(i_1,i_2,\mathrm{},i_a)(j_1,j_2,\mathrm{},j_b)\mathrm{}(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{},v_r)(u_1,u_2,\mathrm{},u_s,n+1)`$ set

$$\varphi _\sigma (x_1,\mathrm{},x_n):=t(x_{i_1}x_{i_2}\mathrm{}x_{i_a})t(x_{j_1}x_{j_2}\mathrm{}x_{j_b})\mathrm{}t(x_{v_1}x_{v_2}\mathrm{}x_{v_r})x_{u_1}x_{u_2}\mathrm{}x_{u_s}$$

then

$$CH(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=(1)^n\underset{\sigma S_{n+1}}{}sgn(\sigma )\varphi _\sigma (x_1,\mathrm{},x_n).$$

Base change If $`R`$ is a $`A`$algebra satisfying the $`n`$-Cayley-Hamilton identity and $`B`$ is a commutative $`A`$ algebra, then $`R_AB`$ acquires naturally a $`B`$linear trace for which it is also an $`n`$-Cayley-Hamilton algebra.

By construction the free trace algebra satisfying the $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton identity in variables $`x_i,iI`$ has as universal map to the algebra $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ of $`GL(n)`$-equivariant maps of matrices $`M_n(k)^IM_n(k)`$.

The first main theorem of the theory is the following:

###### Theorem 2.6.

1. The universal map

$$F_nx_i\stackrel{i}{}C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)$$

from the free $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton algebra in variables $`x_i`$ to the ring of equivariant maps on $`m`$tuples of matrices is an isomorphism.
2. The trace algebra $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ is the algebra of invariants of $`m`$tuples of matrices. As soon as $`m>1`$, it is the center of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$.
3. $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ is a finite $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ module.

###### Proof.

We sketch the proof, (cf. \[P3\], \[P4\], \[R\]). We take an infinite set of variables $`x_i,i=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$ we let the linear group $`G:=GL(\mathrm{},k)`$ act by linear transformations on variables on both sides. The map $`i`$ is clearly $`G`$ equivariant. By standard representation theory, in order to prove that $`i`$ is an isomorphism it is enough to check it on multilinear elements. Now the space of multilinear equivariant maps of matrices in $`m`$variables $`f:M_n(k)^mM_n(k)`$ can be identified with the space of multilinear invariant functions of matrices in $`m+1`$variables $`g:M_n(k)^{m+1}k`$ by the formula $`tr(f((\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)\xi _{m+1})`$. This last space can be identified with the centralizer of $`Gl(n,k)`$ acting on the $`m+1^{th}`$ tensor power of $`k^n`$. Finally this space is identified with the group algebra of the symmetric group $`S_{m+1}`$ modulo the ideal generated by the antisymmetrizer on $`n+1`$ elements. Finally one has to identify the element of the symmetric group decomposed into cycles $`(i_1,\mathrm{},i_k)\mathrm{}(s_1,\mathrm{},s_l)(j_1,\mathrm{},j_h,m+1)`$ with covariant map $`tr(\xi _{i_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{i_k})\mathrm{}tr(\xi _{s_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{s_l})\xi _{j_1}\mathrm{}\xi _{j_h}`$ and finally identify the antisymmetrizer with the Cayley Hamilton identity and the elements in the ideal of the symmetric group with the elements deduced from this identity in the free algebra. ii) follows easily from the previous description. For iii) one has the estimate of Razmyslov that $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ is generated as $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ module by the monomials in the $`\xi _i`$ of degree $`n^2`$. Conjecturally the right estimate is rather $`\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+1}{2}\right)`$. ∎

From this theorem, using a suitable method of Reynolds operators, one gets (\[P5\]):

###### Theorem 2.7.

If $`R`$ is a $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton algebra, the universal trace preserving maps $`i_R,\overline{i}_R`$

$`R`$ $`\stackrel{i_R}{}M_n(B_n(R))^{GL(n,k)}`$
$`t`$ $`tr`$
$`T`$ $`\stackrel{\overline{i}_R}{}B_n(R)^{GL(n,k)}`$
are isomorphisms.

## 3. Semisimple representations

In this section and the next ones we will work on finitely generated algebras over an algebraically closed field $`k`$. If $`A`$ is a commutative finitely generated algebra over $`k`$, we set $`V(A)`$ to be the associated algebraic variety, which can be identified either to the maximal spectrum of $`A`$ or to the homomorphisms $`\varphi :Ak`$.

Let us look at $`F_nx_i=C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ in the case that $`k`$ is algebraically closed. In this case we can apply geometric invariant theory. First we analyze the case of the free algebra in $`m`$variables.

Here we have seen that the coordinate ring of the $`n`$dimensional representations of $`Fx_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m`$ or equivalently of $`F_nx_1,x_2,\mathrm{}x_m`$ is the coordinate ring of the space of $`m`$tuples of $`n\times n`$ matrices $`M_n(k)^m`$. The action of the linear group is by simultaneous conjugation. The ring of invariants, which we have denoted by $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ is the coordinate ring of the quotient variety

$$V_{n,m}:=M_n(k)^m//Gl(n,k)$$

the quotient map $`M_n(k)^m\stackrel{\pi }{}V_{n,m}=M_n(k)^m//Gl(n,k)`$ is surjective and each fiber contains exactly one closed orbit. By the analysis of M. Artin (cf. \[A\],\[P\],\[P2\]) we have that an $`n`$tuple $`(A_1,\mathrm{},A_m)`$ of matrices is in a closed orbit if and only if it is semisimple in the sense that the subalgebra $`k[A_1,\mathrm{},A_m]M_n(k)`$ is semisimple. Given any $`n`$tuple $`(A_1,\mathrm{},A_m)`$ of matrices the unique closed orbit contained in the closure of its orbit is constructed by taking a composition series of $`k^n`$ thought as a $`k[A_1,\mathrm{},A_m]`$ module and constructing the associated graded semisimple representation (whose isomorphism class is uniquely determined).

It is interesting to analyze more closely this picture. Let us use again the notation $`A_{n,m}:=k[M_n(k)^m]`$ the coordinate ring of the space of $`m`$tuples of matrices. Given a point $`pV_{n,m}`$ this is given by a maximal ideal $`m_p`$ of $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$, by the previous theory it corresponds to an equivalence class of semisimple representations of $`Fx_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m`$, the closed orbit in the fiber $`\pi ^1(p)`$. An explicit representation $`\varphi `$ of $`Fx_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m`$ in the fiber of $`p`$ is given by a maximal ideal $`M_\varphi `$ in the coordinate ring of matrices lying over $`m_p`$ and the representation is given by the evaluation:

$$\varphi :F_nx_i\stackrel{i}{}M_n[A_{n,m}]M_n[A_{n,m}/M_\varphi ]=M_n[k]$$

Take now any finitely generated Cayley Hamilton algebra $`R`$, and let $`T`$ be its trace algebra. $`R=F_nx_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m/I`$ is the quotient of the free Cayley Hamilton algebra $`F_nx_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_m`$ modulo a trace ideal $`I`$ and correspondingly $`T`$ is the quotient of $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ modulo $`IT_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$.

By Theorem 2.6 and functoriality we have a commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{cccc}F_nx_i\hfill & \stackrel{i}{}& M_n[A_{n,m}]^{GL(n,k)}\hfill & M_n[A_{n,m}]\hfill \\ \hfill & & \hfill & \hfill \\ R\hfill & \stackrel{i_R}{}& M_n[B_n(R)]^{GL(n,k)}\hfill & M_n[B_n(R)]\hfill \end{array}$$

The ring $`B_n(R)=A_{n,m}/I^{}`$ need not be reduced, nevertheless it defines a $`GL(n,k)`$ stable subvariety of $`M_n(k)^m`$ made of the (trace) representations of $`R`$, furthermore $`T=B_n(R)^{GL(n,k)}`$. Again explicitly a homomorphism $`\psi :A_{n,m}B_n(R)k`$ gives maximal ideals $`M_\psi ,M_\psi ^{}`$ and the commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}F_nx_i\hfill & \stackrel{i}{}& M_n[A_{n,m}]\hfill & & M_n[A_{n,m}/M_\psi ^{}]=M_n[k]\hfill \\ \hfill & & \hfill & & 1\hfill \\ R\hfill & \stackrel{i_R}{}& M_n[B_n(R)]\hfill & & M_n[B_n(R)]/M_\psi ]=M_n[k]\hfill \end{array}$$

If $`\psi :A_{n,m}B_n(R)k`$ gives a point in a closed orbit then the corresponding representation of $`R`$ is semisimple. It follows:

###### Theorem 3.1.

The algebraic variety associated to the ring $`T`$ parametrizes isomorphism classes of (trace compatible) semisimple representations of $`R`$.

Consider again $`\varphi :C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)=F_nx_i\stackrel{i}{}M_n[A_{n,m}]M_n[A_{n,m}/M_\varphi ]=M_n[k]`$ which induces a map $`\varphi :T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)k`$ with kernel some maximal ideal $`m_p`$. The representation $`\varphi `$ factors through

$$C_n(p):=C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)/m_pC_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m).$$

The algebra $`C_n(p)`$ is by construction a finitely generated (over the trace algebra) Cayley Hamilton algebra with trace and the trace takes values in $`k`$, so we need to start with analyzing this picture.

###### Proposition 3.2.

Let $`R`$ be a $`n^{th}`$Cayley Hamilton algebra with trace values in $`k`$ and finitely generated over $`k`$, denote by $`t`$ the trace, then333one could drop the hypothesis that $`R`$ is finitely generated and still get 2),3) but not 1):

1. $`R`$ is finite dimensional over $`k`$.
2. The trace is 0 on the Jacobson radical $`J`$ of $`R`$. So $`t`$ factors through $`R/J`$ which is also a $`n^{th}`$Cayley Hamilton algebra.
3. $`R/J=_{i=1}^sM_{k_i}(k)`$ and there exists positive integers $`h_i`$ with $`n=_{i=1}^sh_ik_i`$ such that given $`a_iM_{k_i}(k)`$ and $`tr(a_i)`$ the ordinary trace, we have:

$$t(a_1,a_2,\mathrm{},a_s)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}h_itr(a_i)$$

###### Proof.

The finite dimensionality follows from Theorem 2.6 3). By the previous discussion, if we present $`R`$ as a quotient of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)=F_nx_i`$ we have a commutative diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)\hfill & \stackrel{tr}{}& T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)\hfill \\ \hfill & & p\hfill \\ R\hfill & \stackrel{t}{}& k\hfill \end{array}$$

thus a point $`p`$ in $`V_{n,m}`$ which can be lifted to a semisimple representation of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ factoring through $`R`$.

It is enough to see that the kernel $`Ker\varphi `$ of this semisimple representation $`\varphi :RM_n(k)`$ is exactly the radical $`J`$ since then one can use the ordinary theory of semisimple algebras and deduce that $`R/J=_{i=1}^sM_{k_i}(k)`$ and an $`n`$dimensional representation of this algebra is of the form $`h_ik^{k_i}`$ with trace exactly $`t(a_1,a_2,\mathrm{},a_s)=_{i=1}^sh_itr(a_i)`$.

Clearly $`JKer\varphi `$ so it suffices to show that $`Ker\varphi `$ is a nilpotent ideal.

By construction we have that, for every element $`aKer\varphi `$ the (formal) trace $`t(a)`$ is 0. Therefore the Cayley Hamilton polynomial is $`\chi _a^n(t)=t^n`$ hence every element $`aKer\varphi `$ is nilpotent and thus the Kernel is nilpotent. ∎

The previous proposition applies thus to the algebras

$$C_n(p):=C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)/m_pC_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m).$$

We need to understand a special case, when $`\varphi `$ is irreducible.

###### Proposition 3.3.

If $`\varphi `$ is irreducible then

$$C_n(p):=C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)/m_pC_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)=M_n(k).$$

###### Proof.

By the previous proposition we have that $`C_n(p)/J=M_n(k)`$ where $`J`$ is the radical, we have to show that $`J=0`$. If $`u_i,i=1,\mathrm{},n^2`$ are elements of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)`$ whose images in $`C_n(p)/J=M_n(k)`$ form a basis, we have that the matrix $`tr(u_iu_j)`$ is invertible in the local ring $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$ since the trace form on $`M_n(k)`$ is non degenerate. Moreover these elements form also a basis for the ring of matrices $`M_n(A_{n,m})`$ localized at $`m_p`$. Thus given any $`uC_n(p)`$ we have $`u=_ix_iu_i,x_i[A_{n,m}]_{m_p}`$. The $`x_i`$ can be computed by the equations $`tr(uu_j)=_ix_itr(u_iu_j)`$ which shows that $`x_iT_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$ specializing modulo $`m_p`$ we see that the classes of the $`u_i`$ are a $`k`$basis of $`C_n(p)`$ hence $`C_n(p)=C_n(p)/J=M_n(k)`$. ∎

From the previous analysis it follows that the set of points $`p`$ in which $`C_n(p)=M_n(k)`$ is the open set defined by the non vanishing of at least one of the discriminants $`det(tr(u_iu_j))`$ where the elements $`u_i`$ vary on all $`n^2`$tuples of elements of $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m).`$

This set is empty if and only if $`m=1`$. For $`m=2`$ one takes a diagonal matrix with distinct entries and the matrix of a cyclic permutation which generate $`M_n(k)`$.

A more careful analysis of the previous argument shows that the localized algebra $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$ is an Azumaya algebra over $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$. In the geometric language, the points of the spectrum of $`T_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$ where $`C_n(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _m)_{m_p}`$ is an Azumaya algebra are exactly the points over which the quotient map

$$M_n(k)^m\stackrel{\pi }{}M_n(k)^m//Gl(n,k)$$

is a principal bundle over the projective linear group. In fact this can be viewed as a special case of M. Artin characterization of Azumaya algebras by polynomial identities (cf. \[A\], \[P\],\[S\]).

One easily obtains the following

###### Corollary 3.4.

Let $`R`$ be an $`n`$Cayley Hamilton algebra with trace values in $`k`$ and Jacobson radical $`J`$. If $`R/J=M_n(k)`$ then $`J=0`$.

### 3.1. Some categorical constructions.

Let $`R`$ be a $`n^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton algebra finitely generated algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$, with trace $`t`$ and $`t(R)=A`$. $`A`$ is also a finitely generated algebra over $`k`$. By Theorem 3.1 the (closed) points of $`V(A)`$ parametrize semisimple representations of dimension $`n`$ of $`R`$. Fix a positive integer $`r`$ and change trace taking the new trace $`\tau =rt_{R/A}`$.

###### Proposition 3.5.

Let $`R`$ be a $`n^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton algebra with trace $`t`$ and $`t(R)=A`$. $`A`$ a finitely generated algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ and $`V(A)`$ the reduced variety of $`Spec(A)`$.

The algebra $`R`$ with trace $`\tau :=rt`$ is an $`(rn)^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton algebra. Given a point $`pV(A)`$ it determines an $`n`$dimensional semisimple representation $`M_p^t`$ compatible with the trace $`t`$ and also an $`rn`$dimensional semisimple representation $`M_p^\tau `$ compatible with the trace $`\tau `$ we have:

$$M_p^\tau =rM_p^t=(M_p^t)^r$$

###### Proof.

Let us show first that, if $`R`$ is a $`n^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton algebra with trace $`t`$ the algebra $`R`$ with trace $`\tau :=rt`$ is an $`(rn)^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton algebra. We know that $`R`$ embeds in a trace compatible way into $`n\times n`$ matrices over a commutative ring $`A`$, then the natural diagonal embedding of $`M_n(A)`$ into $`M_{rn}(A)`$ gives the claim.

Now we have that $`V(A)`$ parametrizes also semisimple representations (compatible with the new trace) of dimension $`rn`$. We have an obvious map from the variety of $`n`$ dimensional representations compatible with the reduced trace to the variety of $`rn`$ dimensional representations compatible with trace $`\tau `$ it is simply the map that associates to a representation $`M`$ its direct sum $`M^r`$.

From this the statement is clear.∎

Let now $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$ two trace algebras over $`A`$ which are Cayley-Hamilton for two integers $`n_1,n_2`$, and $`t(R_1)=t(R_2)=A`$, then, a point $`pV(A)`$ determines a semisimple representation $`M_p^1`$ of dimension $`n_1`$ of $`R_1`$ and a semisimple representation $`M_p^2`$ of dimension $`n_2`$ of $`R_2`$:

###### Proposition 3.6.

The algebra $`R:=R_1R_2`$ with trace $`t(r_1,r_2):=t(r_1)+t(r_2)`$ is an $`n^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton for $`n:=n_1+n_2`$, and $`t(R)=A`$, a point $`pV(A)`$ determines also a semisimple representation $`M_p`$ of dimension $`n=n_1+n_2`$ of $`R`$ and:

$$M_p=M_p^1M_p^2$$

The proof is similar to that of the previous proposition and it is omitted.

Finally let now $`R_1`$ and $`R_2`$ two trace algebras over $`k`$ which are Cayley-Hamilton for two integers $`n_1,n_2`$, and $`t(R_1)=A_1,t(R_2)=A_2`$, then, a point $`pV(A_1)`$ determines a semisimple representation $`M_p^1`$ of dimension $`n_1`$ of $`R_1`$ and a point $`qV(A_2)`$ determines a semisimple representation $`M_q^2`$ of dimension $`n_2`$ of $`R_2`$:

###### Proposition 3.7.

The algebra $`R:=R_1R_2`$ with trace $`t(r_1r_2):=t(r_1)t(r_2)`$ is an $`n^{th}`$Cayley-Hamilton for $`n:=n_1n_2`$, and $`t(R)=A:=A_1A_2`$, a point $`(p,q)V(A)=V(A_1)\times V(A_2)`$ determines also a semisimple representation $`M_p`$ of dimension $`n=n_1n_2`$ of $`R`$ and:

$$M_p=M_p^1M_p^2$$

Again the proof is similar.

## 4. The reduced trace

Let us recall that a prime ring $`R`$ is a ring in which the product of two non-zero ideals is non-zero. Let $`R`$ be a prime algebra over a commutative ring $`A`$ and assume that $`AR`$ and $`R`$ is an $`A`$module of finite type. One easily sees that:

1. $`A`$ is an integral domain.
2. $`R`$ is a torsion free module.

If $`F`$ is the field of fractions of $`A`$ then $`RR_AF`$ and $`S:=R_AF`$ is, by a Theorem of Wedderburn a (finite dimensional) simple algebra isomorphic to $`M_k(D)`$ where $`D`$ is a finite dimensional division ring.

If $`Z`$ is the center of $`S`$, it is also the center of $`D`$ and $`dim_ZD=h^2`$; moreover, if $`\overline{Z}`$ is an algebraic closure of $`Z`$ we have $`M_k(D)_Z\overline{Z}=M_{hk}(\overline{Z})`$, if the finite extension $`ZF`$ is separable, as happens in characteristic 0 and if $`p:=[Z:F]=dim_FZ`$ we also have

$$S_F\overline{Z}=M_k(D)_F\overline{Z}=M_{hk}(\overline{Z})^p$$

We define the number $`hkp`$ to be the degree of $`S`$ over $`F`$ and let:

$$hkp:=[S:F],$$

If $`aS`$ we have that $`a1M_k(D)_F\overline{Z}`$ is a $`p`$tuple of matrices $`(A_1,\mathrm{},A_p)`$ one defines the reduced trace of $`a`$ to be the sum

$$t(a)=t_{S/F}(a):=\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}tr(A_i),$$

A standard argument of Galois theory shows that $`t(a)F`$, in characteristic 0 this can be even more easily seen as follows.

Consider the $`F`$linear operator $`a^L:SS,a^L(b):=ab`$ let us compute its trace. This can be done in $`M_k(D)_F\overline{Z}=M_{hk}(\overline{Z})^p`$ where $`a^L=(A_1^L,\mathrm{},A_p^L)`$ and so

$$tr(a^L)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}tr(A_i^L)=hk\underset{i=1}{\overset{p}{}}tr(A_i)t_{S/F}(a)=\frac{1}{hk}tr(a^L)$$

###### Theorem 4.1.

If $`S=R_AF`$ as before and $`A`$ is integrally closed we have that the reduced trace $`t_{S/F}`$ maps $`R`$ into $`A`$, so we will denote by $`t_{R/A}`$ the induced trace.

The algebras $`R,S`$ with their reduced trace are $`n`$Cayley Hamilton algebras of degree $`n=hkp=[S:F]=[R:A]`$, (we set $`[R:A]:=[S:F]`$).

###### Proof.

We have a natural representation of $`M_{hk}(\overline{Z})^p`$ by $`hkp`$ matrices for which the reduced trace is the trace. If $`R`$ is a finite $`A`$module, it is easy to see that the reduced trace of an element of $`r`$ is integral over $`A`$. If $`A`$ is integrally closed then the trace takes values in $`A`$.∎

The importance of the reduced trace comes from the next result. $`R,A`$ are as before, $`n:=[R:A]`$ the degree and we are assuming characteristic 0:

###### Theorem 4.2.

If $`\tau :RA`$ is any trace for which $`R`$ is an $`m`$Cayley Hamilton algebra then there is a positive integer $`r`$ for which:

$$m=rn,\tau =rt_{R/A}$$

###### Proof.

Clearly $`\tau `$ extends to a trace on $`S`$ with values in $`F`$ for which $`S`$ is an $`m`$Cayley Hamilton algebra.

Let $`G`$ be a finite Galois extension of $`F`$ for which $`S_FG=M_{hk}(G)^p`$, $`\tau `$ extends to a $`G`$valued trace on $`S_FG=M_{hk}(G)^p`$ which is invariant under the Galois group and for which $`S_FG`$ is an $`m`$Cayley Hamilton algebra. Passing to the algebraic closure we can now apply statement 3 in Proposition 3.2 where we know that, by invariance under the Galois group, all the integers $`h_i`$ must be equal to some positive integer $`r`$. The formula follows from the definitions. ∎

## 5. The unramified locus and restriction maps

### 5.1. The unramified locus

Let us go back to the previous setting. $`R`$ a prime algebra over $`A`$, $`F`$ the field of fractions of $`A`$, $`S=R_AF`$ and finally $`Z`$ the center of $`S`$. Let now $`B:=RZ`$ be the center of $`R`$. If we further assume that $`B`$ is integrally closed we have the reduced trace $`t_{R/B}`$ and the formulas:

$$t_{R/A}=t_{B/A}t_{R/B},[R:A]=[R:B][B:A]$$

Let us assume now that $`A`$ is a finitely generated algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ and $`V(A)`$ the associated affine variety parametrizing semisimple representations (compatible with the reduced trace $`t_{R/A}`$) of $`R`$ of dimension $`n=[R:A].`$ Since we are assuming that $`R`$ is a finite $`A`$ module it follows that also $`B`$ is a finite $`A`$ module. Then $`B`$ is a finitely generated algebra over $`k`$ and its associated affine variety $`V(B)`$ parametrizes semisimple representations (compatible with the reduced trace $`t_{R/B}`$) of $`R`$ of dimension $`m=[R:B].`$ Moreover we can also use $`V(A)`$ to parametrize semisimple representations (compatible with the reduced trace $`t_{B/A}`$) of $`B`$ of dimension $`p=[B:A].`$ Finally the inclusion $`AB`$ defines a morphism of algebraic varieties $`\pi :V(B)V(A)`$ of degree $`p`$. We want to put all these things together.

Given a point $`QV(A)`$ denote by $`N_Q`$ the corresponding $`mp`$ dimensional semisimple representation of $`R`$. Given a point $`PV(B)`$ denote by $`M_P`$ the corresponding $`m`$ dimensional semisimple representation of $`R`$ .

First of all an irreducible representation of $`B`$ is 1-dimensional and corresponds to a point $`PV(B)`$, a semisimple representation corresponds to a positive cycle $`h_iP_i`$ of degree $`p=_ih_i`$. Proposition 3.2 implies:

###### Proposition 5.1.

Given a point $`QV(A)`$ we have for the associated semisimple representation $`_{i=1}^sh_iP_i`$ of $`B`$, that the points $`P_i`$ are exactly the points in the fiber $`\pi ^1(Q)`$. So we may identify formally $`_{i=1}^sh_iP_i`$ with the cycle $`[\pi ^1(P)].`$

In general a fiber need not have exactly $`p`$ points but it can have $`sp`$ points.

In terms of algebras, $`Q`$ corresponds to a maximal ideal $`m`$ of $`A`$ and the points $`P_i`$ to the maximal ideals of $`B/mB`$. This is a finite dimensional commutative algebra and so $`\overline{B}:=B/mB=_{i=1}^sB_i`$ where $`B_i`$ is a local ring supported in the point $`P_i`$. Let $`\overline{n}_i`$ be the maximal ideal of $`B_i`$ and $`n_i`$ the corresponding maximal ideal of $`B`$. We have $`B_i/\overline{n}_i=k`$ and again Proposition 3.2 implies that the trace $`t_{B/A}`$ induces a trace $`t_{\overline{B}/k}`$ on $`\overline{B}`$ decomposes as the sum of local factors $`h_it_i`$ where $`t_i:B_iB_i/\overline{n}_i=k`$ is the projection. In other words, if $`e_i`$ is the idempotent, unit of $`B_i`$ we have $`t_{\overline{B}/k}(e_i)=h_i`$.

###### Remark 5.2.

If $`B`$ is a projective $`A`$module of rank $`n`$ the reduced trace $`t_{B/A}(b)`$ is just the trace of the linear map $`xbx`$. In this case $`dim_k\overline{B}=n,dim_kB_i=h_i`$

Passing to the algebra $`R`$ we have a direct sum decomposition.

$$\overline{R}:=R/mR=R_AA/m=R_B(B_AA/m)=_{i=1}^sR_BB_i=_{i=1}^s\overline{R}_i$$

We pass to the traces: we know that $`t_{R/A}=t_{B/A}t_{R/B}`$, and modulo $`m`$ we get traces $`t_{\overline{R}/k}=t_{\overline{B}/k}t_{\overline{R}/\overline{B}}`$. If $`e_iB_i`$ is the idempotent identity of $`B_i`$ we have $`\overline{R}_i=\overline{R}e_i`$ thus $`t_{\overline{R}/\overline{B}}`$ restricts to $`\overline{R}_i`$ to a $`B_i`$ trace and $`t_{\overline{R}/\overline{B}}=_{i=1}^st_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$. Similarly $`t_{\overline{B}/k}=_{i=1}^st_{B_i/k}`$ and

$$t_{\overline{R}/k}=_{i=1}^st_{B_i/k}t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}$$

The algebra $`R_i`$ with the trace $`t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$ is an $`m=[R:B]`$-Cayley Hamilton algebra, if $`\overline{n}_i`$ is the maxiamal ideal of $`B_i`$ the unique point of $`Spec(B_i)`$ given by $`B_iB_i/\overline{n}_i=k`$ corresponds to some semisimple representation $`M_i`$, as $`R`$ representation it is $`M_{P_i}`$ where $`P_i`$ corresponds to the maximal ideal $`n_i`$, since we have that $`R/n_iR=\overline{R}_i/\overline{n}_i\overline{R}_i`$. If we denote by $`\overline{t}_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$ the image of $`t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$ modulo $`\overline{n}_i`$ we have

$$h_i\overline{t}_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}=t_{\overline{B}_i/k}t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}$$

it follows that the semisimple representation of $`\overline{R}_i`$ relative to the trace $`t_{\overline{B}_i/k}t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$ is $`h_iM_i`$. Thus the semisimple representation of $`\overline{R}`$ relative to the trace $`t_{\overline{R}/k}=_{i=1}^st_{B_i/k}t_{\overline{R}_i/B_i}`$ is $`_ih_iM_{P_i}`$, (cf. 3.5, 3.6).

We have proved:

###### Theorem 5.3.

Given a point $`QV(A)`$ and its cycle $`_ih_iP_i`$ in $`V(B)`$ we have

$$N_Q=_ih_iM_{P_i}$$

Let $`R`$ be an algebra with trace finitely generated over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ satisfying the $`n^{th}`$ Cayley Hamilton identity with the trace algebra $`t(R)`$. If $`PV(t(R))`$ with maximal ideal $`m_P`$ we ask when $`R(P):=R_{t(R)}k=R/m_PR`$ is a semisimple algebra?

The answer is implicit in Proposition 3.2. The trace map for $`R`$ induces the trace $`t:R(P)k`$ for $`R(P)`$ and the bilinear trace form $`t(ab)`$. It follows immediately from 3.2 that:

###### Proposition 5.4.

The radical $`J`$ of $`R(P)`$ is the kernel of the trace form $`t(ab)`$.

Let us see what is the meaning of this statement in the case $`RA`$ is a prime algebra over $`A`$ finitely generated algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$, $`F`$ the field of fractions of $`A`$, $`S=R_AF`$, $`Z`$ the center of $`S`$, $`B:=RZ`$ be the center of $`R`$ with $`B`$ integrally closed. If $`m:=[R:B]`$ the map $`\frac{t_{R/B}}{m}`$ is a projection on $`B`$ so that $`R=BR^0`$ and $`B`$ is a direct summand.

With the previous notations $`V(A)`$ the associated affine variety parametrizes semisimple representations (compatible with the reduced trace $`t_{R/A}`$) of $`R`$ of dimension $`n=[R:A].`$ $`B`$ is a finitely generated algebra over $`k`$ and its associated affine variety $`V(B)`$ parametrizes semisimple representations (compatible with the reduced trace $`t_{R/B}`$) of $`R`$ of dimension $`m=[R:B].`$ Denote by $`\pi :V(B)V(A)`$.

If $`QV(A)`$ corresponds to a maximal ideal $`m_Q`$ and the algebra $`R(Q):=R_AA/m_Q`$ is semisimple we have that $`R_AA/m_Q=B_AA/m_QR^0_AA/m_Q`$, since $`B(Q):=B_AA/m_Q`$ is in the center of $`R(Q):=R_AA/m_Q`$ we have that $`B(Q)`$ is semisimple, in other words the scheme theoretic fiber $`\pi ^1(Q)`$ is reduced, $`B_AA/m_Q=_iB/n_i`$ and $`B/n_i=k`$ is a point $`P_i`$ in the fiber of $`Q`$. We also have $`R(P_i)=RB/n_i`$ and $`R_AA/m_Q=_iR(P_i)`$ hence $`R(P_i)`$ is semisimple. The converse is also clear.

The commutative algebra $`B(Q)`$ is semisimple if and only if it is reduced, i.e. the fiber of $`Q`$ under the map $`\pi `$ is reduced, which in our case implies that $`\pi `$ is étale in the points of this fiber. Now we know that $`R`$ is a finite module over $`B`$ and its generic dimension is $`m^2`$. The dimension of $`R(P)`$ over $`k=B(P),PV(B)`$ is a semicontinuous function and we always have $`dim_{B(P)}R(P)m^2`$. If $`R(P)`$ is not simple of dimension $`m^2`$ from 3.2, 3) follows that, if $`J`$ is the radical of $`R(P)`$ we have $`dim_kR(P)<m^2`$ hence we have a dichotomy, either $`R(P)=M_m(k)`$ that is to say that $`P`$ corresponds to an irreducible representation, or $`R(P)`$ is not semisimple.

###### Proposition 5.5.

Let $`W^0`$ be the open set of $`V(B)`$ made of points $`P`$ where $`R(P)=M_m(k)`$ (the irreducible representations), let $`V^0`$ be the maximal open set of $`V(A)`$ with $`\pi ^1(V^0)W^0`$ and $`V^1`$ be the open set of $`V(A)`$ where $`B(Q)`$ is reduced, then the set of points of $`V`$ where $`R(Q)`$ is semisimple is $`V^0V^1`$.

The set of points $`V^0V^1`$ of $`V`$ where $`R(Q)`$ is semisimple is called the unramified locus of the $`A`$ algebra $`R`$.

From our analysis it follows that, if $`m=[R:B],p=[B:A]`$ over a point $`Q`$ in the unramified locus

$$N_Q=_{i=1}^pM_{P_i}$$

decomposes as the direct sum of the $`p`$ irreducible representations $`M_{P_i}`$ supported at the $`p`$ distinct points of the fiber $`\pi ^1(Q)`$.

### 5.2. Restriction maps

We come now to the final application of the previous theory. The setting we have in mind appears naturally for quantum groups at roots of 1 and their subgroups.

We need a first Lemma. Given a prime algebra $`R`$ finite over $`A`$ with center $`Z`$, let $`F`$ be the quotient field of $`A`$ and $`FG`$ an extension field.

###### Lemma 5.6.

The following are equivalent:

i) $`R_AG`$ is a simple algebra.

ii) The algebra $`Z_AG`$ is a field.

###### Proof.

Let $`F`$ be the quotient field of $`A`$ we have that $`S:=R_AF`$ is a simple algebra with center the field $`W:=Z_AF`$ and that $`R_AG=(R_AF)_FG=S_W(W_FG)`$. Since $`S`$ is a simple algebra with center $`W`$ it is well known and easy that $`S_W(W_FG)`$ is simple if and only if $`W_FG`$ is a field. Finally $`W_FG=(Z_AF)_FG=Z_AG.`$

Assume that we have two prime algebras $`R_1R_2`$ over two commutative rings $`A_1A_2R_2`$. Assume as in the previous paragraph that each $`R_i`$ is finitely generated as $`A_i`$ module and that the two rings $`A_i`$ are integrally closed. We thus have the two reduced traces $`t_{R_i/A_i}`$, we want to discuss the compatibility of these traces. In general one can see by simple examples that there is no compatibility. Let us thus make the basic assumption of compatibility (with trace). We let $`F_i`$ be the quotient field of $`A_i`$ and consider $`S_i:=R_i_{A_i}F_i`$.

###### Lemma 5.7.

Given two prime algebras $`R_1R_2`$ over the rings $`A_1A_2R_2`$ with $`Z_1`$ the center of $`R_1`$. Assume $`R_1`$ is finite over $`A_1`$. The following two conditions are equivalent:

i) $`R_1_{A_1}F_2`$ is a simple algebra.

ii) The algebra $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2`$ is a field.

In this case the map $`i:R_1_{A_1}F_2=S_1_{F_1}F_2S_2`$ is injective.

These conditions are satisfied if:

iii) The algebra $`Z_1_{A_1}A_2`$ is a domain.

###### Proof.

The equivalence of the first two conditions is the content of the previous Lemma. It is clear that iii) implies ii) since if $`Z_1_{A_1}A_2`$ is a domain, $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2`$ is its quotient field.

###### Definition 5.8.

We say that the two algebras $`R_1R_2`$ are compatible with $`A_1A_2R_2`$ if the previous two equivalent conditions are satisfied.

In the examples which we will study we will usually verify iii).

###### Remark 5.9.

If $`R_2`$ is a domain then $`R_1R_2`$ is compatible with $`A_1A_2R_2`$ if and only if the map $`i:R_1_{A_1}F_2=S_1_{F_1}F_2S_2`$ is injective.

###### Proof.

If $`R_2`$ is a domain so is $`S_2`$ and so, if $`i`$ is injective we must have that $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2`$ is a field.∎

###### Example 5.10.

1) If the extension $`F_1F_2`$ is unirational then $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2`$ is a field.

2) If $`A_1=Z`$ is the center of $`R_1`$ then $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2=F_2`$ is a field.

1) In fact we have $`F_2F_1(t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ so $`Z_1_{A_1}F_2Z_1_{A_1}F_1(t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)=(Z_{A_1}F_1)(t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ is a field.

###### Theorem 5.11.

Given two compatible algebras $`R_1R_2`$ we have that for a positive integer $`r`$:

$$r[R_1:A_1]=[R_2:A_2],rt_{R_1/A_1}=t_{R_2/A_2}\text{ on }R_1$$

###### Proof.

By the hypotheses made one can reduce the computation to the two algebras $`S_1_{F_1}F_2S_2`$ over $`F_2`$. In this case we know that the reduced trace $`t_{S_2/F_2}`$ restricted to $`S_1_{F_1}F_2`$ makes it a Cayley Hamilton trace algebra. Since by assumption $`S_1_{F_1}F_2`$ is simple, one can then apply Theorem 4.2. ∎

Let us now assume to be in the geometric case in which $`A_1,A_2`$ are further assumed to be finitely generated over an algebraically closed field $`k`$. If $`V(A_1),V(A_2)`$ are the two associated affine varieties parametrizing semisimple representations we have an induced map $`\pi :V(A_2)V(A_1)`$. If $`QV(A_2)`$ and $`M`$ is a representation of $`R_2`$ over $`Q`$ we then see that $`M`$ is also a representation of $`R_1`$ over $`\pi (Q)`$ but for $`r`$ times the reduced trace. If $`M`$ is semisimple as $`R_2`$ module it may well be that it is not semisimple as $`R_1`$ module.

###### Theorem 5.12.

Given two compatible algebras $`R_1R_2`$ as before, $`QV(A_2)`$. $`M_Q`$ the corresponding semisimple representation of $`R_2`$ of dimension $`[R_2:A_2]`$, $`M_{\pi (Q)}`$ the corresponding semisimple representation of $`R_1`$ of dimension $`[R_1:A_1].`$ We have that the restriction of $`M_Q`$ to $`R_1`$ is a trace representation for $`rt_{R_1/A_1}`$, its associated semisimple representation is $`rM_{\pi (Q)}=M_{\pi (Q)}^r.`$

If $`\pi (Q)`$ lies in the unramified locus of $`R_1`$ (as $`A_1`$ algebra) we have that the restriction of $`M_Q`$ to $`R_1`$ is the semisimple representation $`rM_{\pi (Q)}.`$

###### Proof.

Everything follows from the previous discussions except the last point. Let $`mA_2`$ be the maximal ideal associated to $`Q`$ and $`m^{}:=mA_1`$, by definition of the unramified locus the algebra $`R_1/m^{}R_1`$ is a semisimple algebra for which every representation is semisimple. ∎

### 5.3. Examples

In this section we collect examples from quantum groups.

One class of examples is obtained by taking a quantum group $`R`$ at roots of 1, where $`A`$ is a Hopf subalgebra coordinate ring of an algebraic group $`G`$. In this case $`R,R_{}R`$ are domains and we need to prove that:

###### Theorem 5.13.

The comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }:RR_{}R`$ is compatible with $`\mathrm{\Delta }:AA_{}A.`$

###### Proof.

By the previous lemma it is enough to show that, setting $`𝒵`$ the center of $`R`$, we have that $`𝒵_{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}(A_{}A)`$ is a domain.

Let us use some geometric language. $`A`$ is the coordinate ring of a connected algebraic group $`G`$ and the map $`\mathrm{\Delta }:AAA`$ is the comorphism associated to the multiplication $`G\times G\stackrel{\mu }{}G`$. Let $`\nu :G\times GG\times G`$ be defined by $`\nu (x,y):=(xy,y),`$ clearly $`\nu `$ is an isomorphism and $`\mu `$ can be identified to $`\nu `$ composed by the first projection. Thus $`\nu ^{}:AAAA`$ maps $`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)A1`$. Using this isomorphism we see that:

$$𝒵_{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}(A_{}A)(𝒵_AA)_{}A=𝒵_{}A$$

is a domain.∎

The second class of examples we have in mind is when $`R_2`$ is a Hopf algebra and $`R_1,A_1,A_2`$ Hopf subalgebras. In this case $`A_2`$ is the coordinate ring of an algebraic group $`G_2`$ and $`A_1`$ that of a quotient group. In the case where $`G_2`$ is solvable, as for the quantized enveloping algebras, we will always get that the extension $`F_1F_2`$ is rational and so we can also conclude.

For instance for $`R_2=U_q(𝔤)`$ the quantized enveloping algebra of a semisimple group and $`R_1=U_q(𝔟^+)`$ we have that $`A_2`$ is the coordinate ring of the dual group $`U^{}\times T\times U^+`$ and $`A_1`$ the coordinate ring of the quotient group $`T\times U^+`$ hence the rationality statement.

### 5.4. Cayley-Hamilton Hopf algebras

We formalize the previous discussion as follows:

###### Definition 5.14.

A Cayley-Hamilton Hopf algebra is a Hopf algebra such that:

* it is a Cayley-Hamilton algebra
* the trace subalgebra is a Hopf subalgebra

In the next section we will see plenty examples of such Hopf algebras that are given by quantized universal enveloping algebras at roots of unity.

Let $`R`$ be a Cayley-Hamilton Hopf algebra with the trace subalgebra $`A:=t(R)`$. Assume $`R`$ is prime and a finite $`A`$ module. Let $`ZA`$ be the center of $`R`$, set $`m:=[R:A],n=[R:Z],p:=[Z:A]`$ so that $`m=np`$. For a point $`xV(A)`$ (resp. $`PV(Z)`$) denote by $`N_x`$ (resp. $`M_P`$) the corresponding semisimple $`m`$dimensional representation (resp. $`n`$dimensional).

Assume that $`A`$ is finitely generated over an algebraically closed field $`k`$, so that $`V(A),V(Z)`$ are affine algebraic varieties, and let $`\pi :V(Z)V(A)`$ be the corresponding map of varieties. The comultiplication on $`A`$ defines an associative binary operation on $`V(A)`$. The antipode defines the inverse operation for this operation on $`V(A)`$, so $`V(A)`$ is an algebraic group.

From 5.12, and 5.13 we see that:

###### Proposition 5.15.

If $`x,yV(A)`$ and $`N_x,N_y`$ are the corresponding semisimple representations then the semisimple representation associated to $`N_xN_y`$ is $`mN_{xy}`$.

We will say that the pair of points $`x,yV(A)`$ is generic if both points and their product in $`V(A)`$ lie in the unramified locus. Such pairs of points form a Zariski open subvariety in $`V(A)\times V(A)`$.

For each point $`QV(Z)`$ in the fiber of, either $`x,y,xy`$ the corresponding representation $`M_Q`$ is irreducible.

$$N_x=_{P\pi ^1(x)}M_P,N_y=_{Q\pi ^1(y)}M_Q,N_{xy}=_{R\pi ^1(xy)}M_R.$$

From 5.15 we get

(5)
$$N_xN_y=mN_{xy},\underset{P\pi ^1(x),Q\pi ^1(y)}{}M_PM_Q=\underset{R\pi ^1(xy)}{}mM_R,$$

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be two irreducible representations of the CH-Hopf algebra $`R`$ such that the restrictions of $`V`$ and $`W`$ to $`A`$ are given by the action of characters $`x,yV(A)`$ respectively. Thus $`V=M_P,W=M_Q`$ where $`P\pi ^1(x),Q\pi ^1(y)`$. The restriction to $`A`$ of the tensor product $`VW`$ has the same property, with central character $`xy`$ .

If the pair $`x,yV(A)`$ is generic the tensor product $`M_PM_Q`$ is semisimple as an $`R`$-module and we have the:

###### Theorem 5.16.

Clebsch-Gordan decomposition (cf. equation 5):

(6)
$$M_PM_Q_{R\pi ^1(xy)}M_R^{h_R^{P,Q}},\underset{R}{}h_R^{P,Q}=n,\underset{P,Q}{}h_R^{P,Q}=m$$

For quantized enveloping algebras at roots of 1 we will prove the stronger statement that all the multiplicities $`h_R^{P,Q}`$ are equal.

## 6. Quantized universal enveloping algebras at roots of 1

### 6.1. The definition $`𝒰_ϵ`$

Let $`𝔤`$ be a simple Lie algebra of rank $`n`$ with the root system $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Denote by $`Q,P`$ the root and weight lattice. Fix simple roots $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ and denote by $`(a_{ij})_{i,j=1}^r`$ the corresponding Cartan matrix. Denote by $`d_i`$ the length of the $`i`$-th simple root.

For an odd positive integer $`\mathrm{}`$ denote by $`ϵ`$ a primitive root of 1 of degree $`\mathrm{}`$ (in case of components of type $`G_2`$ we also need to restrict to $`\mathrm{}`$ prime with 3).

For any lattice $`Q\mathrm{\Lambda }P`$ we have a quantized universal enveloping algebra $`U_ϵ^\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝔤)`$. It is the associative algebra with 1 over $``$ generated by $`K_\mu `$, $`\mu \mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and $`E_i,F_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$ with defining relations:

$`K_\mu K_\nu `$ $`=`$ $`K_\nu K_\mu ,K_\mu K_\mu =1K_0=1,`$
$`K_\mu E_i`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ^{\alpha _i(\mu )}E_iK_\mu `$
$`K_\mu F_i`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ^{\alpha _i(\mu )}F_iK_\mu ,E_iF_jF_jE_i=\delta _{ij}(K_{\alpha _i}K_{\alpha _i}^1)/(ϵ_iϵ_i^1),`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{1a_{ij}}{}}}(1)^k\left[\begin{array}{c}1a_{ij}\\ k\end{array}\right]_{ϵ_i}E_i^{1ka_{ij}}E_jE_k^k=0,ij`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{1a_{ij}}{}}}(1)^k\left[\begin{array}{c}1a_{ij}\\ k\end{array}\right]_{ϵ_i}F_i^{1ka_{ij}}F_jF_k^k=0,ij`$
Here $`ϵ_i=ϵ^{d_i}`$,

$$\left[\begin{array}{c}m\\ h\end{array}\right]_ϵ=\frac{[m]_ϵ!}{[mh]_ϵ![h]_ϵ!},[h]_ϵ!=[h]_ϵ\mathrm{}[2]_ϵ[1]_ϵ,\left[h\right]_ϵ=\frac{ϵ^hϵ^h}{ϵϵ^1}.$$

The map $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ acting on generators as

(9) $`\mathrm{\Delta }K_\mu `$ $`=`$ $`K_\mu K_\mu ,`$
(10) $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_i`$ $`=`$ $`E_i1+K_{\alpha _i}E_i,`$
(11) $`\mathrm{\Delta }F_i`$ $`=`$ $`F_iK_{\alpha _i}^1+1F_i`$
extends to the homomorphism of algebras $`\mathrm{\Delta }:𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ`$. Here we used the notation $`K_i=K_{\alpha _i}`$. The pair $`(𝒰_ϵ,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ is a Hopf algebra with the counit $`\eta (L_\mu )=1`$, $`\eta (E_i)=\eta (F_i)=0`$.

For $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=P`$ we have the simply connected quantized algebra, denoted by $`𝒰_ϵ^s`$ or simply $`𝒰_ϵ`$, for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=Q`$ we have the adjoint form denoted by $`𝒰_ϵ^a`$, the definitions hold also if instead of $`ϵ`$ we have a $`q`$ generic.

We will denote by $`𝒰_ϵ^\pm `$ the subalgebras of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ generated by $`E_i`$ and $`F_i`$ respectively. The subalgebra generated by $`K_i`$ will be denoted $`𝒰_ϵ^0`$.

### 6.2. PBW basis and the structure of the center

One can introduce a monomial basis in the algebras $`𝒰_ϵ^\pm `$ that is the analog of the Poincare-Birkhoff-Witt basis. We will call it PBW basis. In order to describe this basis we first should introduce root elements $`E_\alpha 𝒰_ϵ^+`$, $`F_\alpha 𝒰_ϵ^{}`$. This can be done ( see \[L\] for details) by choosing a convex ordering on positive roots.

If $`\beta (1)>\mathrm{}>\beta (N)`$ is the convex ordering of positive roots $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ ( here $`N=|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|`$) then we choose PBW bases as follows. For $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ this is a basis of monomials

$$E^{\underset{¯}{m}}=E_{\beta (N)}^{m_N}\mathrm{}E_{\beta (1)}^{m_1}$$

where $`m_i0`$. For $`𝒰_ϵ^{}`$ this is a basis of monomials

$$F^{\underset{¯}{m}}=F_{\beta (1)}^{m_1}\mathrm{}F_{\beta (N)}^{m_N}$$

where $`m_i0`$. For $`𝒰_ϵ^0`$ we choose a natural basis of Laurent monomials for $`\underset{¯}{p}=(p_1,\mathrm{},p_r)^r`$ the monomial is $`K^{\underset{¯}{p}}=K_1^{p_1}\mathrm{}K_r^{p_r}`$.

There is a linear isomorphism $`𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ^{}𝒰_ϵ^0𝒰_ϵ^+`$, the PBW basis in $`𝒰_ϵ`$ is the tensor product of bases described above.

Let moreover consider $`_e^+:=𝒰_ϵ^0𝒰_ϵ^+,_e^{}:=𝒰_ϵ^0𝒰_ϵ^{}.`$

By the defining relations it follows that $`𝒰_e^+,𝒰_ϵ^{},_e^+,_e^{}`$ are subalgebras while $`_e^+,_e^{}`$ are even sub-Hopf algebras. It is known that the subalgebras

* $`Z_0^+_ϵ^+`$ generated by $`E_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}},K_i^{\mathrm{}}`$
* $`Z_0^{}_ϵ^{}`$ generated by $`F_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}},K_i^{\mathrm{}}`$
* $`Z_0𝒰_ϵ`$ generated by $`E_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}}`$, $`F_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`K_i^{\mathrm{}}`$,

are central and are Hopf subalgebras \[DC-K\], we will recall to which groups these Hopf algebras correspond.

The algebras $`_ϵ^+`$, $`_ϵ^{}`$ and $`𝒰_ϵ`$ are CH-Hopf algebras with trace subalgebras $`Z_0^+`$, $`Z_0^{}`$ and $`Z_0`$ respectively, and are free of respective ranks $`\mathrm{}^{N+r},\mathrm{}^{N+r},\mathrm{}^{2N+r}`$ over their trace subalgebras \[DC-K\].

### 6.3. Structure of the center

Let $`G`$ be the simply connected group associated to $`𝔤`$, $`T`$ a maximal torus of $`G`$ and $`W`$ its Weyl group. $`U^+,U^{}`$ the unipotent radicals of opposite Borel subgroups $`B^+,B^{}`$.

Let us recall \[DKP1\] that, as an Hopf algebra, $`Z_0`$ is the coordinate ring of the dual group $`H`$ which is the subgroup of $`B^+\times B^{}`$ kernel of the composed homomorphisms $`B^+\times B^{}\stackrel{\mu }{}T\times T\stackrel{m}{}T`$ where $`m`$ is multiplication and $`\mu `$ the quotient modulo the unipotent radical. As a variety, $`H`$ is identified to $`U^{}\times T\times U^+`$

Furthermore $`Z_0^+,Z_0^{}`$ are the coordinate rings of the two quotients $`B^{}=H/U^+,`$ $`B^+=H/U^{}`$.

The center $`Z_ϵ`$ of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ is described in \[DKP1\], the one of $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ will be presented later in this paper.

Let us recall briefly the description of $`Z_ϵ`$.

$`Z_ϵ`$ contains also another subalgebra $`Z_1`$ (specialization of the central elements for the generic value of $`q`$). $`Z_1`$ is identified to the coordinate ring of the quotient $`T/W`$ (isomorphic to $`G//G`$ the quotient under adjoint action).

The morphism $`B^+\times B^{}G,(x,y)xy^1,`$ restricted to $`H`$ induces an étale covering $`\rho :HG`$, in coordinates $`\rho :U^{}\times T\times U^+G`$ is given by $`\rho (u,t,v):=ut^2v^1`$.

Let $`Z^{}:=Z_0Z_1`$. In \[DKP1\] it is proved that $`Z_ϵ=Z_0_Z^{}Z_1`$, moreover there is the following geometric interpretation of this tensor product.

a) $`Z^{}`$ is identified to the coordinate ring of the quotient $`T/W`$ (isomorphic to $`G//G`$), under the composite map:

$$H\stackrel{\rho }{}G\stackrel{\pi }{}G//G=T/W$$

b) The $`\mathrm{}`$ power map $`tt^{\mathrm{}}`$ factors to the quotient giving a map $`\mathrm{}:T/WT/W`$ which at the level of coordinate rings induces the inclusion $`Z^{}Z_1`$.

c) From this we get that $`X:=V(Z_ϵ)`$ is the schematic fiber product:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}X& ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill T/W\\ \sigma & & \hfill \mathrm{}\\ H& \stackrel{\rho }{}& \hfill G\stackrel{\pi }{}T/W.\end{array}$$

### 6.4. Center of $`_e^+`$

In \[DP1\] and \[DKP3\] (where in fact more general algebras are studied), it is proved that the degree of the algebra $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ (resp. $`_ϵ^+`$ ) over the respective center, is $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }^+|s}{2}}`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }^+|+s}{2}}`$), where $`s`$ is the number of orbits of the permutation $`w_0`$ on the set $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of simple roots, and $`w_0`$ is the longest element of the Weyl group. In particular, since the dimension of $`_ϵ^+`$ over $`Z_0^+`$ is $`\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }^+|+n}`$ where $`n`$ is the rank of the group, we have that the center $`Z^+`$ of $`_ϵ^+`$ has dimension $`\mathrm{}^{ns}`$ over $`Z_0^+`$.

For types different from $`A_n,D_n,E_6`$ we have $`w_0=1`$ and so $`Z^+=Z_0^+`$.

Otherwise there is a bigger center which we want to describe, for type $`A_{2m}`$ we have $`s=m`$ and for $`A_{2m+1}`$ we have $`s=m+1`$, for $`D_n`$ we have $`s=n1`$ and for $`E_6`$ we have $`s=4`$.

In order to compute the center of $`_e^+`$ we need to identify this algebra with the so called quantized function algebra $`F_ϵ[B^{}]`$.

The construction of a function algebra is a general construction on Hopf algebras.

Given a Hopf algebra $``$ and a class of finite dimensional representations closed under direct sum and tensor products one considers the space $`\widehat{}`$, of linear functions on $``$ spanned by the matrix coefficients $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$.

Here $`v`$ is a vector in a representation $`V`$ and $`\varphi V^{}`$, the function $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$ is defined by:

$$c_{\varphi ,v}(h):=\varphi |hv.$$

$`\widehat{}`$ is also a Hopf algebra, dual to $``$ and called function algebra.

In \[DL\] this theory is developed for the algebras of $`_q^a,_q^{a,}`$ first at $`q`$ generic. One obtains the algebras $`F_q[G]`$ and $`F_q[B^{}]`$ which can be specialized to $`F_ϵ[G]`$ and $`F_ϵ[B^{}]`$ when $`q`$ is specialized to a primitive $`\mathrm{}`$-th root of unity $`ϵ`$.

Remark that, as $`_ϵ`$ is an Hopf subalgebra of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ so $`F_ϵ[B^{}]`$ is a quotient Hopf algebra of $`F_ϵ[G]`$ (the same holds for $`q`$ generic).

In particular for every dominant weight $`\lambda `$ one has in $`F_q[G]`$ and in $`F_ϵ[G]`$, the matrix coefficients of the Weyl modules $`V_\lambda `$ for the Lusztig divided power form of $`𝒰_q^a`$.

An important ingredient is Drinfeld’s duality which gives the following canonical pairing between $`_q^{a,}`$ and $`_q^{s,+}`$ :

$$(\underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}F_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha ,\underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}E_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\beta )=q^{(\alpha |\beta )}(h_i)_{q_{\beta _i}^2}!(q_{\beta _i}^1q_{\beta _i})^{h_i}$$

(where $`q_\beta =q^{\frac{(\beta ,\beta )}{2}}`$ and $`(h)_q=\frac{q^h1}{q1}`$) and 0 otherwise.

From \[DL\] we have:

###### Theorem 6.1.

The algebra $`_q^{s,+}`$ under this pairing is identified to $`F_q[B^{}]`$.

These isomorphisms specialize at $`q`$ a root of 1 giving an isomorphism between $`_ϵ^+`$ and $`F_ϵ[B^{}]`$.

In view of this theorem we compute the center of $`F_ϵ[B^{}]`$.

We start from some identities at $`q`$ generic.

From the theory of the $`R`$matrix one has an immediate implication on the commutation rules among the elements $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$. Assume that $`v,w`$ have weights $`\mu _1,\mu _2`$ and that $`\varphi ,\psi `$ have weights $`\nu _1,\nu _2`$ with respect to the action of the elements $`K_i`$ \[LS\]. Then:

$$c_{\varphi ,v}c_{\psi ,w}=q^{(\mu _1|\mu _2)+(\nu _1|\nu _2)}c_{\psi ,w}c_{\varphi ,v}+c_{\psi _i,w_i}c_{\varphi _i,v_i}$$

where

$$\psi _i\varphi _i=p_i(q)(M_i(E)M_i(F))\psi \varphi ,w_iv_i=p_i^{}(q)(M_i^{}(E)M_i^{}(F))wv$$

where the $`p_i,p_i^{}`$ are in $`(q)`$ and $`M_i,M_i^{}`$ are monomials of which at least one is not constant.

For each dominant weight $`\lambda `$ we have an irreducible representation $`V_\lambda `$, we choose for each $`\lambda `$ a highest weight vector $`v_\lambda `$. We make the convention that $`\varphi _\lambda `$ denotes a dual vector, so it is a lowest weight vector in the dual space and it has weight $`\lambda `$.

Take $`\varphi _{w_0\lambda }`$ dual of a vector $`v_{w_0\lambda }`$. In the commutation take $`c_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }`$ and a matrix coefficient $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$ where $`\varphi `$ has weight $`\nu `$ and $`v`$ has weight $`\mu `$:

$$c_{\varphi ,v}c_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }=q^{(\mu |\lambda )(\nu |w_0\lambda )}c_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }c_{\varphi ,v}$$

Set $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda :=d_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }`$ and notice that, from the previous formula we have that;

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\mu \mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda =q^{(\mu |\lambda )(w_0\mu |w_0\lambda )}\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_\mu $$

###### Lemma 6.2.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_\mu =k\mathrm{\Delta }_{\lambda +\mu }`$, $`k`$ a constant.

###### Proof.

By definition of multiplication between matrix coefficients:

$$c_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }c_{\varphi _{w_0\mu },v_\mu }=c_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda }\varphi _{w_0\mu },v_\lambda v_\mu }$$

Now in the representation $`V_\lambda V_\mu `$ the highest weight vector $`v_\lambda v_\mu `$ generates the irreducible module $`V_{\lambda +\mu }`$ and in the dual we have a similar picture, thus the matrix coefficient is only relative to this submodule.∎

We can thus normalize the choices of the $`v_\lambda `$ so that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_{\lambda +\mu }$$

###### Lemma 6.3.

A matrix coefficient $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$ where $`\varphi `$ has weight $`\nu `$ and $`v`$ has weight $`\mu `$ vanishes on $`_q^{a,}`$ if $`\nu \mu `$ (in the dominant order).

###### Proof.

A form of weight $`\nu `$ vanishes on all vectors which do not have weight $`\nu `$, the vectors of $`_q^{a,}v`$ have weights $`\mu `$ in the dominant order, so the matrix coefficient is 0 unless $`\nu \mu `$ or $`\nu \mu `$.∎

Let us now denote by $`d_{\varphi ,v}`$ the restriction of $`c_{\varphi ,v}`$ as function on $`_q^{a,}`$.

Take now $`d_{\varphi _\lambda ,v_\lambda }`$ as function

$$d_{\varphi _\lambda ,v_\lambda }(\underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}F_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha )=<\varphi _\lambda ,\underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}F_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha v_\lambda >=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\text{if}h_i>0\hfill & \\ q^{<\alpha ,\lambda >}\hfill & \end{array}$$

So, under the canonical pairing we have the identification

$$d_{\varphi _\lambda ,v_\lambda }=K_\lambda ,$$

###### Lemma 6.4.

A matrix coefficient $`d_{\varphi ,v}`$ where $`\varphi `$ has weight $`\nu `$ and $`v`$ has weight $`\mu `$ and $`\nu \mu `$ (in the dominant order) is identified to a linear combination of elements $`_{i=N}^1E_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha `$ where $`_ih_i\beta _i=\mu +\nu `$.

###### Proof.

We have that $`<\varphi ,_{i=N}^1F_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha v>`$ is 0 unless $`\mu _ih_i\beta _i=\nu `$ therefore in the duality 1.3.3 only the terms described can occur.∎

We have

$$K_\lambda \underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}E_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha =q^{(\lambda ,_ih_i\beta _i)}\underset{i=N}{\overset{1}{}}E_{\beta _i}^{h_i}K_\alpha K_\lambda $$

Therefore, from the previous Lemma, we get:

$$d_{\varphi _\lambda ,v_\lambda }d_{\varphi ,v}=q^{(\lambda ,\mu +\nu )}d_{\varphi ,v}d_{\varphi _\lambda ,v_\lambda },K_\lambda d_{\varphi ,v}=q^{(\lambda ,\mu +\nu )}d_{\varphi ,v}K_\lambda $$

Set $`T_\lambda :=\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda K_\lambda `$, from the previous commutation relations we get:

$$d_{\varphi ,v}T_\lambda =q^{(\mu |\lambda )(\nu |w_0\lambda )+(\lambda ,\mu +\nu )}T_\lambda d_{\varphi ,v}=q^{(\lambda w_0\lambda ,\nu )}T_\lambda d_{\varphi ,v}$$

From the previous relations and the fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\lambda \mathrm{\Delta }_\mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_{\lambda +\mu }`$ and commute we have

###### Proposition 6.5.

$$T_\lambda T_\mu =q^{(\lambda ,w_0\mu \mu )}T_{\lambda +\mu },$$

We can now introduce the elements

$$A_{h,\lambda }:=T_\lambda ^hT_{w_0\lambda }^{lh}=T_{h\lambda +(lh)(w_0\lambda )}$$

and compute the commutation relations with a matrix coefficient $`d_{\varphi ,v}`$ where $`\varphi `$ has weight $`\nu `$ and $`v`$ has weight $`\mu `$:

$$d_{\varphi ,v}A_{h,\lambda }=q^{h(\lambda w_0\lambda ,\nu )}q^{(\mathrm{}h)(w_0\lambda +\lambda ,\nu )}A_{h,\lambda }d_{\varphi ,v}=q^{\mathrm{}}A_{h,\lambda }d_{\varphi ,v}$$

###### Proposition 6.6.

If we specialize $`q`$ to an $`\mathrm{}`$ root of 1 we obtain that $`A_{h,\lambda }`$ is in the center.

Remark that, if $`\lambda =w_0\lambda `$ we have $`T_{h\lambda +(lh)(w_0\lambda )}=T_{l\lambda }Z_0`$ and notice that, since $`\mathrm{}`$ is odd $`T_\mathrm{}\lambda =T_\lambda ^{\mathrm{}}`$.

To understand $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{}\lambda ,`$ (and also $`T_\mathrm{}\lambda =\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{}\lambda K_\mathrm{}\lambda `$) we must use the Frobenius isomorphism, so that we identify this element to the classical matrix coefficient for $`\lambda `$ which we will denote by $`\delta _\lambda =C_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }`$ (denote by $`C`$ the classical matrix coefficients), by abuse of notations we denote by the same symbols the vectors and forms in the classical representation.

Now recall that, for an algebraic group $`G`$, the function algebra $`[G]`$ has a left and a right $`G`$ action which in terms of functions or of matrix coefficients are

$$(h,k)f(g):=f(h^1gk),(h,k)c_{\varphi ,v}=c_{h\varphi ,kv}$$

when $`G`$ is semisimple and simply connected, we can exponentiate the action and identify the function algebra on $`U(𝔤)`$ with the function algebra on $`G`$. For every dominant weight $`\lambda `$ we have an irreducible representation $`V_\lambda `$ and the embedding given by matrix coefficients:

$$i_\lambda :V_\lambda ^{}V_\lambda [G]$$

The element $`c_\lambda :=C_{\varphi _{w_0\lambda },v_\lambda }`$, respect to the left and right actions of $`B^+\times B^+`$ is an eigenvector of weight $`w_0(\lambda ),\lambda `$. In particular we can analyze it for the fundamental weights. The following is well known

###### Proposition 6.7.

The elements $`c_{\omega _i}`$ for the various fundamental weights are irreducible elements whose divisors are the closures of the codimension 1 Bruhat cells of $`G`$.

###### Proof.

Let us recall one possible proof for completeness. The ring $`[G]`$ is a unique factorization domain (cf. ), the elements that are $`B^+\times B^+`$ eigenvectors will then factor into irreducible $`B^+\times B^+`$ eigenvectors. But these elements coincide up to constant with the elements $`\delta _\lambda `$ hence the first statement is due to the fact that the fundamental weights are free generators of the monoid of dominant weights.

For the second part we have exactly $`n=rk(G)`$ codimension 1 Bruhat cells of $`G`$ which must have equations which are $`B^+\times B^+`$ eigenvectors. In fact one can identify more precisely the correspondence (cf. ).

Another interpretation is with the Borel Weil theorem and identifying the $`c_\lambda `$ with sections of line bundles on the flag variety.∎

Now when we restrict to $`B^{}`$ we can exploit the fact that $`B^{}U^+`$ is open in $`G`$, functions invariant under right $`U^+`$ action are identified to functions on $`B^{}`$ we deduce that also

###### Proposition 6.8.

The elements $`d_{\omega _i}`$, restriction to $`B^{}`$ of the elements $`c_{\omega _i}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$, are irreducible elements whose divisors are the closures of the codimension 1 Bruhat cells of $`G`$ intersected with $`B^{}`$.

The restriction $`t_\lambda (u,t)`$ to $`B^{}=U^{}\times T`$ of $`T_\mathrm{}\lambda =\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{}\lambda K_\mathrm{}\lambda `$ is a function only of $`u`$ and independent of $`t`$.

###### Proof.

We have already proved the first part, for the second remark that, by definition $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\mathrm{}\lambda `$ transforms under right action of $`T`$ through the character $`\chi _\lambda `$ so $`\delta _\lambda (t,u)=g_\lambda (u)\chi _\lambda (t)`$, but $`K_\mathrm{}\lambda `$ restricts to the character $`\chi _\lambda (t)`$ hence the claim.

Example. For $`SL(n)`$ the fundamental representation $`^iV`$ the highest weight vector $`e_1e_2\mathrm{}e_i`$ the lowest weight vector $`e_{ni+1}e_{ni+2}\mathrm{}e_n`$ the matrix coefficient is the determinant formed in the triangular matrix $`(x_{ij})`$, by the determinant of the first $`i`$ rows and the last $`i`$ columns:

$$\left|\begin{array}{ccc}x_{1,ni+1}& \mathrm{}& x_{1,n}\\ x_{2,ni+1}& \mathrm{}& x_{2,n}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ x_{i,ni+1}& \mathrm{}& x_{i,n}\end{array}\right|$$

###### Lemma 6.9.

Let $`A`$ be a unique factorization domain and a Cohen Macaulay ring of characteristic 0 (or prime to $`\mathrm{}`$) and containing the $`\mathrm{}`$ roots of 1.

Let $`f_1,f_2,\mathrm{},f_kA`$ be distinct irreducible elements and

$$R:=A[t_1,\mathrm{},t_k]/(t_1^{\mathrm{}}f_1,t_2^{\mathrm{}}f_2,\mathrm{},t_k^{\mathrm{}}f_k)$$

then $`R`$ is a normal domain, Galois extension of $`A`$ with Galois group $`/(\mathrm{})^k`$.

###### Proof.

Clearly $`R`$ is free over $`A`$ of rank $`\mathrm{}^k`$ and $`/(\mathrm{})^k`$ acts as symmetry group. We need only show that $`R`$ is a normal domain.

1) First of all $`R`$ is a complete intersection hence it is Cohen Macaulay.

2) Next we will prove that it is smooth in codimension 1 which will prove that it is a normal ring.

3) Finally we prove that its spectrum is connected which will imply that it is a domain.

2) Since $`A`$ is normal we can restrict our analysis to the smooth locus and choose a regular system of parameters $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_m`$. Consider the Jacobian matrix (e.g. $`k=3`$):

$$\left|\begin{array}{ccccccc}\mathrm{}t_1^\mathrm{}1& 0& 0& \frac{f_1}{x_1}& \frac{f_1}{x_2}& \mathrm{}& \frac{f_1}{x_m}\\ 0& \mathrm{}t_2^\mathrm{}1& 0& \frac{f_2}{x_1}& \frac{f_2}{x_2}& \mathrm{}& \frac{f_2}{x_m}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}t_3^\mathrm{}1& \frac{f_3}{x_1}& \frac{f_3}{x_2}& \mathrm{}& \frac{f_3}{x_m}\end{array}\right|$$

On the open set where the $`f_i`$ are non zero the first determinant is not zero and thus $`R`$ is smooth in codimension 0 and hence reduced. In a smooth point of the subvariety $`f_i=0`$ where also $`_{ji}f_j0`$, we also have a non zero maximal determinant so also these points are smooth. The complement has codimension at least 2.

3) Finally we have to prove connectedness. Let $`\overline{F}`$ be an algebraic closure of $`F`$, we can argue as follows, let us consider the ring $`\overline{R}\overline{F}`$ obtained from $`R`$ by adding $`\mathrm{}`$ roots $`b_i`$ of $`f_i`$ we have clearly a homomorphism of $`R`$ onto $`\overline{R}`$. Let $`Q,G`$ be the quotient fields of $`R,\overline{R}`$, clearly $`G`$ is a Galois extension of $`Q`$ with Galois group a subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`/(\mathrm{})^k`$, it is clearly enough to show that this subgroup is $`/(\mathrm{})^k`$ itself.

Let $`:=\{b_1^{h_1}\mathrm{}b_k^{h_k},(h_1,h_2,\mathrm{},h_k)^k\}`$ and $`ϵ=e^{\frac{2\pi i}{\mathrm{}}}`$, we identify $`/(\mathrm{})`$ with the multiplicative group generated by $`ϵ`$ and have a pairing:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\times \stackrel{p}{}/(\mathrm{}),p(\sigma ,M):=\sigma (M)M^1$$

This pairing factors through $`^{\mathrm{}}`$ and if by contradiction $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }|<\mathrm{}^k`$ we must have an element $`M=b_1^{h_1}\mathrm{}b_k^{h_k},0h_i<\mathrm{}`$ not all the $`h_i=0`$ which is in the kernel of the pairing, hence by Galois theory (and the fact that the element is integral over $`A`$) $`MA`$. Then

$$M^{\mathrm{}}=f_1^{h_1}\mathrm{}f_k^{h_k}.$$

Factoring $`M`$ into irreducibles, this implies that $`\mathrm{}|h_i`$ for all $`i`$ a contradiction unless all $`h_i=0`$.∎

Let $`a_i:=T_{\mathrm{}\omega _i}Z_0^+`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Notice that, under the identification of $`Z_0^+`$ with $`[B^{}]`$, the elements $`a_i`$ coincide up to a unit with the elements $`d_{\omega _i}`$ defined in Proposition 6.8, so that their divisors are irreducible and distinct. Consider the algebra $`R:=Z_0[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]`$ with $`b_i^{\mathrm{}}=a_i`$. Lemma 6.9 implies that $`R`$ is a normal domain on which acts the Galois group $`/(\mathrm{})^n`$. Let $`\tau :\omega _iw_0\omega _i`$ be the standard involution of fundamental weights. $`\tau `$ induces an involution of the factors of $`/(\mathrm{})^n`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the invariant subgroup, it is made of those $`r`$tuples which have the same entry in the orbits of $`\tau `$ (made of 1 or 2 elements). The invariants under $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are spanned by the monomials $`b_1^{h_1}b_2^{h_2}\mathrm{}b_n^{h_n}`$ which when $`i,j`$ are an orbit of $`\tau `$ have exponents $`h_i+h_j0,\text{mod}\mathrm{}`$.

Thus $`R^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is isomorphic to the algebra generated by the elements $`T_{h\lambda +(\mathrm{}h)(w_0\lambda )}`$.

###### Theorem 6.10.

The center of $`_ϵ^+`$ is the algebra $`Z_ϵ^+`$ generated by $`Z_0^+`$ and by the elements $`T_{h\lambda +(\mathrm{}h)(w_0\lambda )}`$ .

###### Proof.

The algebra $`Z_ϵ^+`$ being isomorphic to $`R^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, is normal. Also, since the degree of $`B_ϵ^+`$ equals $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }^+|+s}{2}}`$, where $`s`$ is the number of orbits of $`\tau `$, while $`B_ϵ^+`$ has rank $`\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }^+|+n}`$ over $`Z_0^+,`$ we deduce that the rank of $`Z_ϵ^+`$ over $`Z_0^+,`$ equals the rank of the center, so $`Z_ϵ^+`$ is the center.∎

## 7. Clebsch-Gordan decompositions for generic representations of quantized universal enveloping algebras at roots of 1

### 7.1. Compatibility for $`𝒰_ϵ^+𝒰_ϵ`$

###### Proposition 7.1.

The natural map $`𝒰+_ϵ_{Z_0^+}Z_ϵ𝒰_ϵ`$ is injective.

###### Proof.

Recall that $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ is free over $`Z_0^+`$. As a linear basis in $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ over $`Z_0^+`$ we can choose PBW elements $`b=_{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }_+}E_\alpha ^{m_\alpha }`$ with $`0m_\alpha <\mathrm{}`$. The center $`Z_ϵ`$ is generated by $`Z_1`$ and $`Z_0`$ where $`Z_1`$ is the “specialization at $`q=ϵ`$ of the center for generic $`q`$. Any element $`zZ_1`$ is completely determined by its component $`\varphi _{0,0}𝒰_ϵ^0`$ and it is of the form

(12)
$$z=\varphi _{0,0}+\underset{\underset{¯}{r},\underset{¯}{k}}{}E^{\underset{¯}{r}}\varphi _{\underset{¯}{r},\underset{¯}{k}}F^{\underset{¯}{k}},\varphi _{\underset{¯}{r},\underset{¯}{k}}𝒰_ϵ^0$$

Moreover $`Z_ϵ=Z_0_{Z_0Z_1}Z_1`$.

We want to prove that if $`bz_b=0`$ where $`b`$ are elements of the PBW basis and $`z_bZ_ϵ`$, then for any $`b`$, $`z_b=0`$.

Recall that we have a convex ordering on $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$. In the product defining PBW elements we choose the decreasing order of $`E_\alpha ^{m_\alpha }`$. This provides a total ordering on PBW elements defined by the lexicographic ordering of $`E_\alpha `$.

###### Lemma 7.2.

Let $`b=_\alpha E_\alpha ^{m_\alpha }`$ be a PBW element and $`\beta \mathrm{\Delta }_+`$ ; then $`bE_\beta `$ is a linear combination of PBW elements which are greater than $`b`$.

###### Proof.

We have $`b=E_{\beta (1)}^{m_1}\mathrm{}E_{\beta (N)}^{m_N}`$ where $`\beta (1)>\mathrm{}>\beta (N)`$ in the convex ordering of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_+`$. Then

* if $`\beta (N)\beta `$ the statement is clear,
* if $`\beta (N)<\beta `$ we use the commutation relation

(13) $`E_{\beta (N)}E_\beta `$ $`=`$ $`q^{(\beta (N),\beta )}E_\beta E_{\beta (N)}`$
(14) $`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\beta (N)<\gamma _1<\mathrm{}<\gamma _s<\beta }{}}`$ $`a_{\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _sr_1,\mathrm{},r_s}E_{\gamma _s}^{r_s}\mathrm{}E_{\gamma _1}^{r_1}`$
It is clear that here $`E_\beta E_{\beta (N)}>E_{\beta (N)}`$ and $`E_{\gamma _s}^{r_s}\mathrm{}E_{\gamma _1}^{r_1}>E_{\beta (N)}`$. Now we can iterate this process to reorder monomials and the lemma follows.

* Coming back to the proof of the proposition we look at the PBW elements $`b`$ for which $`z_b0`$ and let $`b_0`$ be the minimal among them. Then let us apply the coproduct and take the component which belongs to $`𝒰_ϵ^+𝒰_ϵ^0𝒰_ϵ^{}𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ`$.
* Due to triangular decomposition in $`𝒰_ϵ`$, each $`\mathrm{\Delta }(b)`$ will contribute only by $`b1`$ to this component. The element (12) will contribute as

$$1\varphi _{0,0}+E^{\underset{¯}{r}}\varphi _{\underset{¯}{r},\underset{¯}{k}}F^{\underset{¯}{k}}$$

and any element in $`Z_0`$ which is always a polynomial in $`x_\alpha =E_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}},y_\alpha =F_\alpha ^{\mathrm{}},z_i^\pm =k_i^\pm \mathrm{}`$ will contribute as a polynomial in $`x_\alpha 1,1y_\alpha ,1z_i^\pm `$.

The minimal term in the left side of the tensor product is of the form $`b_0P(x_\alpha )`$ for some polynomial $`P`$ because, from lemma 7.2, the terms coming from $`Z_1`$ will contribute by $`1`$ up to bigger terms. The contribution of PBW elements $`b>b_0`$ to the left component of the tensor product will have their minimal monomial of exactly the same form.

Now the proposition follows from the freeness of $`𝒰_ϵ^+`$ over $`Z_0^+`$. ∎

### 7.2. Compatibility of comultiplication

In this paragraph we will strengthen Theorem 5.13 as follows:

###### Theorem 7.3.

Comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }:𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ`$ is compatible (with trace) when we think of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ as $`Z_0`$ algebra and $`𝒰_ϵ𝒰_ϵ`$ as $`Z_ϵZ_ϵ`$ algebra.

Using 5.8 ii) we need to show:

###### Proposition 7.4.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0)}(Z_ϵZ_ϵ)`$ is a normal domain.

###### Proof.

We have recalled the analysis of \[DP1\] in 6.3 and in particular the fiber product diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}X& ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill T/W\\ \sigma & & \hfill \mathrm{}\\ H& \stackrel{\rho }{}& \hfill G\stackrel{\pi }{}T/W.\end{array}$$

where $`X`$ is the spectrum of $`Z_ϵ`$.

The analysis shows that one can define a regular locus in all these varieties.

$`G^{reg}`$ is the usual set of regular elements (i.e. elements with conjugacy class of maximal dimension).

Finally we set

$$H^{reg}:=\rho ^1G^{reg},X^{reg}:=\sigma ^1H^{reg}.$$

In the restricted fiber product diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}X^{reg}& ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill T/W\\ \sigma & & \hfill \mathrm{}\\ H^{reg}& \stackrel{\rho }{}& \hfill G^{reg}\stackrel{\pi }{}T/W.\end{array}$$

by \[St\], we know that the subset $`G^{reg}`$ of $`G`$ of regular elements has a complement of codimension 2 and that the map $`\pi `$ restricted to $`G^{reg}`$ is a smooth map. It follows that $`\pi \rho `$ and also $`p`$ are smooth and since $`T/W`$ is smooth, that all varieties in this regular diagram are smooth. Since the complement of $`H^{reg}`$ in $`H`$ has codimension $`2`$ and $`\sigma `$ is finite, the complement of $`X^{reg}`$ in $`X`$ has also codimension $`2`$.

We know that the ring $`Z_ϵ`$ is presented as a complete intersection over $`Z_0`$ by the fiber product diagram and it is free of finite rank. Thus we have that, $`Z_ϵ`$ and $`Z_ϵZ_ϵ`$ are normal Cohen Macaulay domains. For the same reasons $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0)}(Z_ϵZ_ϵ)`$ is a complete intersection, hence a Cohen-Macaulay ring.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0)}(Z_ϵZ_ϵ)`$ is the coordinate ring of the schematic fiber product $`Y`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}Y& ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill X\\ & & \hfill \sigma \\ X\times X& \stackrel{\sigma \times \sigma }{}& \hfill H\times H\stackrel{m}{}H.\end{array}$$

where $`m`$ is multiplication. This can also be presented as the unique fiber product map:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}Y\hfill & ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& X\hfill & ^{\underset{}{\overset{p}{\text{ }}}}& T/W\hfill \\ q\hfill & & \sigma \hfill & & \mathrm{}\hfill \\ X\times X\hfill & \stackrel{\sigma \times \sigma }{}& H\times H\stackrel{m}{}H\hfill & \stackrel{\rho }{}& G\stackrel{\pi }{}T/W.\hfill \end{array}$$

We will then apply Serre’s criterion \[Se\], and prove that $`Y`$ is smooth in codimension 1, which will show that its coordinate ring is a normal ring.

By the homeomorphism $`\nu :H\times HH\times H,\nu (x,y):=(x,xy)`$ it follows that the open set $`𝒜:=\{(x,y)H\times H\}`$ with $`x,y,xy`$ regular has a complement of codimension 2; on this set the map $`(x,y)\pi \rho (xy)`$ of $`H\times HT/W`$ is a smooth map.

On the open set $`:=(\sigma \times \sigma )^1𝒜`$ the composite map $`\pi \rho (\sigma \times \sigma )`$ is smooth, and since the map $`T/W^{reg}\stackrel{\mathrm{}}{}T/W^{reg}`$ is also smooth we deduce that $`𝒞:=q^1`$ is smooth. Since $`q`$ is finite it follows that the complement of $`𝒞`$ in $`Y`$ has codimension $`2`$ hence $`Y`$ is a normal variety and it follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0)}(Z_ϵZ_ϵ)`$ is a normal ring.

It remains (as in Lemma 6.9 ) to finish the argument and prove that $`Y`$ is connected which implies that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0)}(Z_ϵZ_ϵ)`$ is a normal domain.

Since the morphism $`q`$ is finite it is also proper so it suffices to find some closed subvariety $`M`$ of $`X\times X`$ with the property that $`q^1(M)`$ is connected.

First of all, we claim that we have a natural embedding:

$`U^+\stackrel{i^+}{}X`$ so that the diagram: is commutative.

In fact we see that the composed map $`U^+HGG//G`$ is constant with value the class $`\overline{1}`$ of 1, so it can be lifted by choosing a point in the fiber of $`\mathrm{}^1(\overline{1})`$.

We now embed $`U^+\times U^{}\stackrel{j}{}X\times X`$ and see that the composed map

$$U^+\times U^{}\stackrel{j}{}X\times X\stackrel{\rho \times \rho }{}H\times H\stackrel{m}{}H\stackrel{\sigma }{}G$$

induces the natural inclusion by multiplication $`U^+U^{}G`$.

In the next Lemma we show that we have a section $`MU^+U^{}`$ for which the composed map $`M\stackrel{\pi }{}G//G`$ is an isomorphism, hence $`q^1(M)`$, i.e. $`Y`$ restricted to $`M`$ is $`T/W`$ and connected.

###### Lemma 7.5.

There is a section $`MU^+U^{}`$ for which the composed map $`M\stackrel{\pi }{}G//G`$ is an isomorphism.

We will need in our analysis a variation of a result of Steinberg. Let us recall his Theorem. Let $`G`$ be a semisimple simply connected group.

For $`\beta `$ a positive root let us denote by $`X_\beta =\mathrm{exp}(e_\beta )`$ the root subgroup associated to $`\beta `$. If $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _n`$ is the set of simple positive roots denote by $`\sigma _i`$ a representative in the normalizer of the torus $`T`$ of the simple reflection $`s_i`$ associated to the root $`\alpha _i`$. Finally let $`\pi :GG//G=T/W`$ be the quotient under adjoint action. Define:

$$N=X_{\alpha _1}\sigma _1X_{\alpha _2}\sigma _2\mathrm{}X_{\alpha _n}\sigma _n$$

the theorem of Steinberg is that $`N`$ is a slice of the map $`\pi `$ in other words under $`\pi `$ $`N`$ is isomorphic to $`T/W`$.

For our purposes we have to slightly change this type of slice, we start remarking that

$$N=X_{\beta _1}X_{\beta _2}\mathrm{}X_{\beta _n}\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _n,\beta _i:=s_1s_2\mathrm{}s_{i1}(\alpha _i)$$

next we want to show that, provided we possibly change the representative $`\sigma _n`$, we can express

$$\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _n=a_+b_{}c_+,a_+,c_+U^+,b_{}U^{}.$$

For this consider the flag variety $``$ and in it the point $`p^+`$ with stabilizer $`B^+`$, consider $`q:=\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _np_+`$ and then $`U^+qU^{}p_+\mathrm{}`$ (cf. ). Thus we can find $`a_+U^+,b_{}U^{}`$ with $`a_+^1q=b_{}p_+`$ hence $`b_{}^1a_+^1\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _np_+=p_+`$ hence:

$$\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _n=a_+b_{}c_+t,c_+U^+,tT.$$

We change then $`\sigma _n`$ with $`\sigma _nt^1`$ and get

$$\sigma _1\sigma _2\mathrm{}\sigma _n=a_+b_{}c_+$$

Now we obtain the new slice $`M:=c_+Nc_+^1`$.

The interest for us is that

$$M=c_+X_{\beta _1}X_{\beta _2}\mathrm{}X_{\beta _n}a_+b_{}U^+U^{}.$$

as requested.∎

There is actually a rather interesting application of the slice that we found.

We can consider $`U^+U^{}`$ also as subset of $`H`$, the canonical covering $`\sigma :HG`$ restricted to $`U^+U^{}`$ is a homeomorphism to the image. Therefore we can also consider $`MH`$, in \[DKP1\] it is shown that the preimage of a regular orbit of $`G`$ is a unique symplectic leaf in $`H`$ while it is the union of $`\mathrm{}^n`$ leaves in $`X`$. We deduce that we have the regular elements in $`X`$ and $`H`$ which are unions of maximal Poisson leaves and that:

###### Theorem 7.6.

The set $`MH`$ is a cross section of the set of regular Poisson leaves in $`H`$.

The set $`\rho ^1(M)X`$ is homeomorphic to $`T/W`$ and is a cross section of the set of regular Poisson leaves in $`X`$.

### 7.3. Clebsch Gordan formula

We know that $`𝒰_ϵ`$ has no zero divisors, as a $`Z_0`$-algebra is a free $`Z_0`$-module of rank $`\mathrm{}^{2|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+n}`$. By \[DP1\] its center $`Z_ϵ`$ is a free $`Z_0`$-module of rank $`\mathrm{}^n`$. If $`Q(Z_0)`$ denotes the quotient field of $`Z_0`$ we have that $`Q(𝒰_ϵ)=𝒰_ϵ_{Z_0}Q(Z_0)`$ is a division algebra of dimension $`\mathrm{}^{2|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|}`$ over its center $`Q(Z_ϵ)=Z_ϵ_{Z_0}Q(Z_0)`$.

Therefore:

$$[𝒰_ϵ:Z_0]=\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+n},[𝒰_ϵ:Z_ϵ]=\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|},[Z_ϵ:Z_0]=\mathrm{}^n.$$

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be two generic irreducible representations of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ of maximal dimension $`m=\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|}`$. We want to decompose the representation $`VW`$ of $`𝒰_e𝒰_ϵ`$ into irreducible representations of the subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Delta }(𝒰_ϵ)`$.

We apply the methods of Theorem 5.16, recalling that $`Z_0`$ is a Hopf subalgebra of $`𝒰_ϵ`$, but $`Z_ϵ`$ is only a subalgebra. So, if $`V=M_P,W=M_Q`$ where $`P,QV(Z_ϵ)`$ and $`\pi (P)=xV(Z_0),\pi (Q)=yV(Z_0)`$ we know by 5.16 that, for generic $`x,y`$:

$$M_PM_Q_{R\pi ^1(xy)}M_R^{h_R^{P,Q}}$$

we want to prove in our case:

###### Theorem 7.7.

The multiplicities $`h_R^{P,Q},R\pi ^1(xy)`$, are all equal to $`\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|n}`$.

###### Proof.

In view of Theorem 5.12, in order to prove this Theorem, since by the generic assumption $`dimM_P=dimM_Q=dimM_R=\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|}`$, and the degree of $`\pi `$ is $`\mathrm{}^n`$, it is enough to use the compatibility proven in Theorem 7.3.

### 7.4. Compatibility for $`_ϵ^+𝒰_ϵ`$

Using the results of 6.4 we prove now:

###### Theorem 7.8.

i) $`Z_ϵ^+_{Z_0}Z_ϵ`$ is a normal domain.

ii) The inclusion $`_ϵ^+𝒰_ϵ`$ gives compatible algebras, where $`_ϵ^+`$ is thought as $`Z_0`$ and $`𝒰_ϵ`$ as $`Z_ϵ`$ algebras.

###### Proof.

From the analysis leading to 6.10 we know that:

$$Z_ϵ^+=Z_0[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]^\mathrm{\Gamma },b_i^{\mathrm{}}=a_i.$$

thus also:

$$Z_ϵ^+_{Z_0}Z_ϵ=Z_ϵ[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]^\mathrm{\Gamma },b_i^{\mathrm{}}=a_i.$$

therefore it is enough to prove that $`Z_ϵ[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]`$ is a normal domain.

Let us argue geometrically. Let $`V`$ be the variety of $`Z_ϵ[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]`$, a normal variety. $`Z_ϵ[b_1,\mathrm{},b_n]`$ is the coordinate ring of the schematic fiber product $`S`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S& ^{\underset{}{\overset{s}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill V\\ t& & \hfill v\\ X& \stackrel{\sigma }{}& \hfill H\stackrel{p}{}B\end{array}$$

We have that the map $`t`$ is finite and flat so $`S`$ is Cohen Macaulay since, as we have seen, $`X`$ is Cohen Macaulay. The map $`p`$ is smooth, so the composite map $`p\sigma `$ is smooth in the corresponding regular elements i.e. outside subvarieties of codimension 2.

From Lemma 6.9 we have that also $`v`$ is smooth outside codimension 2 and, since $`t`$ is finite we deduce that $`S`$ is smooth in codimension 1 hence $`S`$ is a normal variety.

To prove the irreducibility of $`S`$ we can, reasoning as in Proposition 7.4, restrict to the section $`U^{}X`$, analyze the schematic fiber product diagram:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}S^{}& ^{\underset{}{\overset{s}{\text{ }}}}& \hfill V\\ t& & \hfill v\\ U^{}& \stackrel{\sigma }{}& \hfill H\stackrel{p}{}B\end{array}$$

and show that $`S^{}`$ is irreducible. The coordinate ring $`A`$ of $`S^{}`$ is obtained from the coordinate ring $`[U^{}]`$ of $`U^{}`$ by adding the restrictions $`\overline{b}_i`$, of the elements $`b_i`$ which are of course $`\mathrm{}`$-th roots of the restrictions of the $`a_i`$. Now identify $`B^{}=U^{}\times T`$. By the definitions of the functions $`a_i`$ we have that these functions are invariant under right action of $`T`$. It follows that $`a{}_{i}{}^{}(u,t)=g_i(u)`$, hence the $`g_i(u)`$ are irreducible polynomials on $`U^{}`$ defining distinct divisors and the coordinate ring $`A`$ of $`S^{}`$ is:

$$A=[U^{}][\overline{b}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{b}_n],\overline{b}_i^{\mathrm{}}=g_i(u).$$

We can then again apply Lemma 6.9 and deduce that $`S^{}`$ is irreducible, concluding the proof of the theorem.∎

We obtain as corollary, using Theorems 5.11 and 5.12, the branching rules from $`𝒰_ϵ`$ to $`_ϵ^+`$. Recall that the degree of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ (as algebra over its center) is $`\mathrm{}^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|}`$, while the degree of $`_ϵ^+`$ (as algebra over $`Z_0^+`$) is $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|s}{2}+n}`$, so the factor $`r`$ of 5.11 is $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}}`$

###### Theorem 7.9.

Let $`M`$ be a semisimple trace representation of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ with central character $`\chi `$ on $`Z_e`$. Let $`p`$ the point in $`B^{}`$ induced by $`\chi `$.

i) The restriction of $`M`$ to $`_ϵ^+`$ has as associated semisimple representation the one $`N_p`$ of character $`p`$ on the coordinate ring $`Z_0^+`$ of $`B^{}`$ with multiplicity $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}n}`$.

ii) For generic $`p`$, $`N_p`$ is the direct sum of the irreducible trace representation for the center of $`_ϵ^+`$ with central characters all the $`\mathrm{}^{ns}`$ central characters which restricted to $`Z_0^+`$ give $`p`$.

In particular consider a generic point $`\chi X`$. We have a unique irreducible representation of $`𝒰_ϵ`$ with central character $`\chi `$. When we restrict it to $`_ϵ^+`$ we have a direct sum of all the $`\mathrm{}^{ns}`$ irreducible representations, each of dimension $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}}`$, which on $`Z_0^+`$ have central character $`p`$ and each with multiplicity $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}n}`$.

### 7.5. Compatibility of comultiplication for $`_ϵ^+`$

We can repeat for $`_ϵ^+`$ the same analysis done in §7.2 for $`𝒰_ϵ`$. Recall that:

$$[_ϵ^+:Z_0^+]=\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|s}{2}+n},[_ϵ^+:Z_ϵ^+]=\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}},[Z_ϵ^+:Z_0^+]=\mathrm{}^{ns}$$

Let $`V`$ and $`W`$ be two generic irreducible representations of $`_ϵ^+`$ of maximal dimension $`m=\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}}`$. We want to decompose the representation $`VW`$ of $`_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$ into irreducible representations of the subalgebra $`\mathrm{\Delta }(_ϵ^+)`$.

We apply the methods of Theorem 5.16, recalling that $`Z_0^+`$ is a Hopf subalgebra of $`_ϵ^+`$, but $`Z_ϵ^+`$ is only a subalgebra. So, if $`V=M_P,W=M_Q`$ where $`P,QV(Z_ϵ^+)`$ and $`\pi (P)=xV(Z_0),\pi (Q)=yV(Z_0^+)`$ we know by 5.16 that, for generic $`x,y`$:

$$M_PM_Q_{R\pi ^1(xy)}M_R^{h_R^{P,Q}}$$

we want to prove in our case:

###### Theorem 7.10.

The multiplicities $`h_R^{P,Q},R\pi ^1(xy)`$, are all equal to $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}n+s}`$.

###### Proof.

In order to prove this Theorem, since by the generic assumption $`dimM_P=dimM_Q=dimM_R=\mathrm{}^{\frac{|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+s}{2}}`$, it is enough, by Proposition 5.12 to show the stronger statement that the inclusion $`\mathrm{\Delta }(_ϵ^+)_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$ is compatible, when we consider $`_ϵ^+`$ as $`Z_0`$ algebra but $`𝒰_e𝒰_e`$ as $`Z_ϵ^+Z_ϵ^+`$ algebra. Hence we need to show, looking at the following restriction diagram :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }(_ϵ^+)\hfill & & _ϵ^+_ϵ^+\hfill \\ \hfill & & \hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0^+)\hfill & & Z_ϵ^+Z_ϵ^+\hfill \end{array}$$

that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(_ϵ^+)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0^+)}(Z_ϵ^+Z_ϵ^+)`$ embeds in $`_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$.

Recalling Theorem 5.12 and definition 5.7, we know that comultiplication is a compatible inclusion when we think of $`_ϵ^+`$ as $`Z_0^+`$ algebra and $`_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$ as $`Z_0^+Z_0^+`$ algebras but we need the stronger fact that

###### Theorem 7.11.

Comultiplication $`\mathrm{\Delta }:_ϵ^+_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$it is compatible (with trace) when we think of $`_ϵ^+`$ as $`Z_0^+`$ algebra and $`_ϵ^+_ϵ^+`$ as $`Z_ϵ^+Z_ϵ^+`$ algebra.

Using 5.8 ii) we need to show:

###### Proposition 7.12.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_ϵ^+)_{\mathrm{\Delta }(Z_0^+)}(Z_ϵ^+Z_ϵ^+)`$ is a normal domain.

###### Proof.

The proof is similar to the one of Proposition 7.4. We identify this ring to a ring of invariants of a ring obtained by extracting roots and prove the usual fiber product smoothness condition.

### 7.6. The degrees and dimensions of cosets

Here we will present hueristic arguments in favor of the idea that, the formulae for degrees that we obtained imply the existence of birational Darboux coordinates on the corresponding cosets.

#### 7.6.1.

Let $`_{2d}`$ be a compact symplectic manifold. Geometric quantization produces a sequence of vector spaces $`\{V_n\}_n,n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. The corresponding sequence $`\{End(V_n)\}`$ of matrix algebras can be regarded as a quantization of the Poisson algebra of functions on $`_{2d}`$. For large $`n`$ the dimension of $`V_n`$ have the following asymptotic behavior

(15)
$$dim(V_n)=Vol(_{2d})n^d(1+O(1/n)),$$

where $`Vol(_{2d})`$ is the symplectic volume of the symplectic manifold.

Let $`_{2d}=𝕋^{2d}`$ be the $`2d`$-dimensional torus with coordinates $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_{2d},|t_i|=1`$. Assume that the symplectic structure on this manifold is constant:

(16)
$$\omega =\underset{a,b=1}{\overset{2d}{}}\omega ^{ab}\frac{dt_a}{t_a}\frac{dt_b}{t_b}$$

where $`(\omega ^{ab})`$ is an integral matrix invertible over $``$. Geometric quantization of this manifold produces the sequence of vector spaces $`V_n`$ with $`dim(V_n)=n^d`$. Because the symplectic structure is constant, the asymptotic formula (15) becomes exact. One can argue that tori are typical manifolds for which this takes place.

The complexification of $`(𝕋^{2d},\omega )`$ is the complex torus $`(^{})^{2d}`$ with complex holomorphic symplectic form (16). The algebra of Laurent polynomials in $`t_i`$ is a Poisson algebra with the brackets

$$\{t_i,t_j\}=\omega _{ij}t_it_j$$

where $`\omega _{ij}`$ is the matrix inverse to $`\omega ^{ij}`$.

Let $`q`$ be a nonzero complex number. Define the algebra $`C_q((^{})^{2d})`$ generated by $`t_i^{\pm 1}`$ with defining relations

$$t_it_i^1=1,t_it_j=q^{\omega _{ij}}t_jt_i$$

This family of algebras is a deformation quantization of the Poisson algebra of functions on $`(^{})^{2d}`$.

For a primitive root of unity $`ϵ`$ of degree $`\mathrm{}`$ consider the specialization of the algebra $`C_ϵ((^{})^{2d})`$ to $`q=ϵ`$. It is clear that Laurent polynomials in $`t_i^{\mathrm{}}`$ are in the center of this algebra. Moreover, it is well known that they generate the center and that $`C_ϵ((^{})^{2d})`$ is a Cayley-Hamilton algebra over its center of degree $`\mathrm{}^d`$.

It is remarkable that the degree in this case coincides with the square of the dimension of the space obtained by geometrical quantization with $`n=\mathrm{}`$ and that this dimension coincides with its asymptotic (15).

There are many examples of algebraic symplectic varieties which are birationally equivalent to a complex symplectic torus. It is natural to expect that if a sequence of Cayley-Hamilton algebras quantizes such symplectic variety in a certain regular way then degrees of such algebras will be $`n^d`$ where $`d`$ is half the dimension of the complex torus. Conversely, if there is a sequence of such Cayley-Hamilton algebras quantizing a Poisson variety then, one can take it as an indication that the variety is birationally equivalent to a symplectic torus.

#### 7.6.2.

The dimensions of multiplicity spaces which we studied all have the form $`\mathrm{}^d`$ for some $`d`$. Hueristic arguments presented above suggest the following conjectures concerning the multiplicities. Let $`G`$ be as before, a semisimple group of rank $`n`$.

1. Let $`𝒪G`$ be a generic conjugation $`G`$-orbit in $`G`$ and $`𝒪_{}B_{}`$ be a generic dressing orbit of $`B_+`$ in $`B_{}`$ for the standard Poisson structure on $`B_{}`$. For generic orbits we have $`dim(𝒪)=2|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|`$ and $`dim(𝒪_+)=|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|dim(ker(w_0id))`$ where $`w_0W`$ is the longest element of the Weyl group.

Consider the Poisson structure on $`G`$ which comes from $`G^{}`$ via the factorization map. Then $`𝒪`$ and $`𝒪_{}`$ are symplectic leaves in $`G`$ and $`B_{}`$ respectively.

The Lie group $`B_+`$ acts on $`𝒪`$ as a subgroup of $`G`$. This action and the dressing action on $`𝒪_{}`$ are quasi-Hamiltonian, in a sense that there is an appropriate moment map \[Lu\]. Thus, the Lie group $`B_+`$ acts (locally) on $`𝒪\times 𝒪_{}`$ via the diagonal action and this action is quasi-Hamiltonian. Therefore, we can reduce this product via Hamiltonian reduction and thus we obtain the symplectic variety

$$X(𝒪,𝒪_{})=𝒪\times 𝒪_{}///B_+$$

Here two dashes mean that we take the categorical quotient and one extra dash means that we do Hamiltonian reduction.

It is easy to see that $`\mathrm{dim}(X(𝒪,𝒪_{}))=|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|+\mathrm{rk}(w_0id)2n`$. Therefore the multiplicity of the restriction is $`\mathrm{}^{\frac{\mathrm{dim}(X(𝒪,𝒪_{}))}{2}}`$.

Comparing with the above argument we arrive to a conjecture:

###### Conjecture 7.1.

There is a birational correspondence between the variety $`(𝒪\times 𝒪_{})///B_+`$ described above and a symplectic torus of the same dimension.

2. The dimension in the tensor product. Consider three conjugation $`G`$-orbits $`𝒪_1,𝒪_2,𝒪_3G`$. Consider $`G`$ as a Poisson variety with the Poisson structure inherited from the dual Poisson Lie group $`G^{}`$ via the factorization map. This Poisson Lie structure is not a Poisson Lie structure but rather a nonlinear deformation of the Poisson structure on $`𝔤^{}`$. Then conjugation orbits are symplectic leaves and the natural action of $`G`$ on them is quasi-Hamiltonian (i.e. there is an appropriate moment map). This action induces a $`G`$-action on the product $`𝒪_1\times 𝒪_2\times \overline{𝒪}_3`$ and this action is quasi-Hamiltonian. Here $`\overline{𝒪}`$ is the opposite symplectic variety to $`𝒪`$.

Consider the Hamiltonian reduction

$$X(𝒪_1,𝒪_2,𝒪_3)=(𝒪_1\times 𝒪_2\times \overline{𝒪}_3)///G$$

It is a symplectic variety with $`\mathrm{dim}(X(𝒪_1,𝒪_2,𝒪_3))=2(|\mathrm{\Delta }_+|n)`$.

It is clear that the multiplicity of a generic irreducible module in the tensor product of two generic irreducible representations is $`\mathrm{}^{\mathrm{dim}(X(𝒪_1,𝒪_2,𝒪_3))/2}`$.

###### Conjecture 7.2.

There is a birational equivalence between the symplectic variety $`(𝒪_1\times 𝒪_2\times \overline{𝒪}_3)///G`$ and a complex torus of the same dimension.