format: text

text:
# 𝑝-adic multiple zeta values I — 𝑝-adic multiple polylogarithms and the 𝑝-adic KZ equation

## 0. Introduction

The aim of the present paper and the upcoming papers \[F2\] and \[F3\] is to enlighten crystalline aspects of the fundamental group of the projective line minus three points and add crystalline part to \[F1\]. In this paper, we will introduce the notions of (one-variable) $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms, $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values, $`p`$-adic KZ equation and $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator, which will be our basic foundations of \[F2\] and \[F3\], and show their various properties and their relationships.

Let $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$. The (usual) multiple zeta value is the real number defined by the following series

(0.1)
$$\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)=\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{1}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}.$$

Especially in the case when $`m=1`$, the multiple zeta value coincides with the Riemann zeta value $`\zeta (k)`$. We can check easily that this series converges in the topology of $``$ if and only if $`k_m>1`$, however, this series never converges in the topology of $`_p`$! Thus it is not so easy and not so straightforward to give a definition of $`p`$-adic version of multiple zeta value. To give a nice definition, we need another interpretation of multiple zeta values.

Suppose $`z`$. The (one variable) multiple polylogarithm is a function defined by the following series

$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{z^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}.$$

Especially in the case when $`m=1`$, the multiple polylogarithm coincides with the classical polylogarithm $`Li_k(z)`$. Easily we see that this series converges for $`|z|<1`$. In §2.2, we will define the $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithm to be the function defined by the above series just replacing $`z`$ by $`z_p`$. We remark that especially in the case when $`m=1`$, the $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithm is equal to the $`p`$-adic polylogarithm $`\mathrm{}_k(z)`$ which was studied by Coleman \[C\]. What is interesting is that this $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithm converges for $`|z|_p<1`$ similarly to the above complex case. Here $`||_p`$ means the standard multiplicative valuation of $`_p`$.

An important relationship between the multiple polylogarithm and the multiple zeta value is the following formula:

(0.2)
$$\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)=\underset{|z|<1}{\underset{z1}{lim}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z).$$

In this paper, we will define the $`p`$-adic multiple zeta value à la formula (0.2) instead of à la (0.1). But we note that here happens a serious problem because the open unit disk centered at $`0`$ on $`_p`$ and the one centered at $`1`$ on $`_p`$ are disjoint! Thus we cannot consider $`\underset{z1}{lim}`$ of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms which are functions defined on $`|z|_p<1`$, i.e. on the open unit disk centered at $`0`$. To give a meaning of this limit, we will make an analytic continuation of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms by Coleman’s $`p`$-adic iterated integration theory \[C\] and then define $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values to be a limit value at $`1`$ of analytically continued $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms.

The organization of this paper is as follows. §1 is devoted to a short review of well-known results on (usual) multiple polylogarithms and multiple zeta values and definitions of the KZ equation and the Drinfel’d associator, which will play a role of prototype in the $`p`$-adic case in the following two sections.

In §2, we will introduce $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values and show their many nice properties. At first, we will review Coleman’s $`p`$-adic iterated integration theory \[C\] in §2.1 and then in §2.2 we will give an analytic continuation of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms (which is just a multiple analogue of that of his $`p`$-adic polylogarithms $`\mathrm{}_k(z)`$ in \[C\]) to the whole plane minus $`1`$, i.e. $`_p\{1\}`$, by his integration theory. But we will see that there happens a terrible problem that the analytically continued $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithm admits too many (uncountably infinite) branches $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m,z_p\{1\})`$ which correspond to each branch parameter $`a_p`$, coming from branch $`log^a(z)`$ of $`p`$-adic logarithms (see §2.2). However the following theorem in §2.3 will remove our anxiety.
Theorem 2.13. If $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges on $`_p`$, its limit does not depend on any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. For $`lim^{}`$, see Notation 2.12.
By this theorem, we can give a definition of the $`p`$-adic multiple zeta value $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ to be the above limit on $`_p`$ as follows.
Definition 2.17. $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m):=\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)_p`$ if it converges.
This definition of $`p`$-adic multiple zeta value is actually independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ by Theorem 2.13. Especially, in the case when $`m=1`$, we shall see in Example 2.19 (due to Coleman \[C\]) that the $`p`$-adic multiple zeta value is equal to the $`p`$-adic $`L`$-value up to a certain constant multiple. The following three theorems in §2.3 are $`p`$-adic analogues of basic properties, Lemma 1.6, Lemma 1.9 and Proposition 1.11, in the complex case.
Theorem 2.18. $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges on $`_p`$ if $`k_m>1`$.
Theorem 2.25. $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)_p`$.
Theorem 2.28. The product of two $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values can be written as a $``$-linear combination of $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values.

In §3, we will consider the $`p`$-adic KZ equation and introduce the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator which will play a role of main tools to prove Theorem 2.18, Theorem 2.22 and Theorem 2.28. In §3.1, we will introduce the $`p`$-adic KZ equation in Definition 3.2 and prove the following.
Theorem 3.3. Let $`a_p`$. Then there exists a unique solution $`G_0^a(A,B)(z)`$ ($`z^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$) of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation which is a formal power series whose coefficients are Coleman functions with respect to $`a_p`$ and are locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ and satisfies a certain asymptotic behavior $`G_0^a(z)z^A`$ ($`z0`$), where $`z^A:=1+\frac{log^a(z)}{1!}A+\frac{(log^a(z))^2}{2!}A^2+\mathrm{}`$.
Then we will introduce a definition of $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ from two fundamental solutions, $`G_0^a(u)`$ and $`G_1^a(u)`$, of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation in Definition 3.12 and show its branch independency in Theorem 3.10. In §3.2, we will state precisely and prove the following.
Theorem 3.15. Let $`a_p`$. The fundamental solution $`G_0^a(z)`$ ($`z^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$) of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation can be expressed in terms of (analytically continued) $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ and the $`p`$-adic logarithm $`log^a(z)`$ explicitly.
In §3.3, we will state precisely and prove the following.
Theorem 3.30. The $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ can be expressed explicitly in terms of $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values.
In §3.4, we will show functional equations of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms at first.
Theorem 3.40.

$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(1z)=(1)^m\underset{W=W^{}W^{\prime \prime }}{\underset{W^{},W^{\prime \prime }:\text{words}}{}}I_p(W^{\prime \prime })J_p^a\left(\tau (W^{})\right)(z)$$

where $`W=A^{k_m1}BA^{k_{m1}1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B`$. Here each $`I_p(W^{\prime \prime })`$ is a certain $``$-linear combination of $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values (see Theorem 3.30) and each $`J_p^a\left(\tau (W^{})\right)(z)`$ is a certain combination of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms (see Theorem 3.15).
Next we will see that especially Coleman-Sinnott’s functional equation of the $`p`$-adic dilogarithm will be re-proved in Example 3.41 by Theorem 3.40 and then will prove Theorem 2.22 and Theorem 2.28.

In the upcoming paper \[F2\], we will relate the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator with the crystalline Frobenius action on the rigid (unipotent) fundamental group of the projective line minus three points and compare the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator with other corresponding objects in various realizations of motivic fundamental groups of the projective line minus three points. In \[F3\], certain algebraic relations among $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values are shown. We will show there that the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator determines a point of the Grothendieck-Teichmüller group and discuss the elements of Ihara’s stable derivation algebra arising from this point and finally we will add crystalline part to \[F1\].

###### Acknowledgments .

The author wish to thank his advisor Professor Akio Tamagawa for his encouragement. The author is grateful to Hiroshi Fujiwara who helped the author to type this manuscript. The author is supported in part by JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientists.

## 1. Review of the complex case

We shall review definitions of multiple polylogarithms and multiple zeta values in §1.1 and shall recall notions of the KZ equation and the Drinfel’d associator briefly in §1.2, which may help to understand its $`p`$-adic version developed in the following two sections.

### 1.1. Multiple polylogarithms and multiple zeta values

We review briefly definitions and properties of multiple polylogarithms and multiple zeta values. For more details, consult \[F0\] and \[Gon\] for example.

Let $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$ and $`z`$.

###### Definition 1.1.

The (one variable) multiple polylogarithm (MPL for short) is defined to be the following series:

$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{z^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}.$$

###### Remark 1.2.

This MPL is the special case of the multiple polylogarithm

$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{z_1^{n_1}\mathrm{}z_m^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}$$

introduced in \[Gon\] where $`z_1=\mathrm{}=z_{m1}=1`$ and $`z_m=z`$

Easily we can check the following.

###### Lemma 1.3.

The MPL $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ converges for $`|z|<1`$.

###### Lemma 1.4.

Suppose that $`|z|<1`$. Then

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{z}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m1}(z)\hfill & k_m1,\hfill \\ \frac{1}{1z}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1}}(z)\hfill & k_m=1,\hfill \end{array}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Li_1(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}.`$
By Lemma1.4, for $`|z|<1`$, we get $`Li_1(z)=log(1z)`$ and the following,

$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}_0^z\frac{1}{t}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m1}(t)𝑑t\hfill & k_m1,\hfill \\ _0^z\frac{1}{1t}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1}}(t)𝑑t\hfill & k_m=1,\hfill \end{array}$$

from which we get an expression of the MPL by iterated integral of $`\frac{dt}{t}`$ and $`\frac{dt}{1t}`$. Since $`\frac{dt}{t}`$ and $`\frac{dt}{1t}`$ admit poles at $`t=0,1`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$, we cannot give an analytic continuation of the MPL to the whole complex plane due to monodromies around $`0`$, $`1`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$. However we can say that

###### Lemma 1.5.

The MPL $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ can be analytically continued to the universal unramified covering $`\stackrel{~}{^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}}`$ of $`^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$.

Since the simply-connected Riemann surface $`\stackrel{~}{^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}}`$ is an infinite covering of $`^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$, each MPL admits (countably) infinite branches. The following are well-known ( for example, see \[Gon\]).

###### Lemma 1.6.

$`\underset{|z|<1}{\underset{z1}{lim}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ converges if $`k_m>1`$.

###### Lemma 1.7.

$`\underset{|z|<1}{\underset{z1}{lim}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ diverges if $`k_m=1`$.

###### Definition 1.8.

For $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$, $`k_m>1`$, the multiple zeta value (MZV for short) is defined to be

$$\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)=\underset{|z|<1}{\underset{z1}{lim}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)\left(=\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}\frac{1}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}\right).$$

Since MPL’s are $``$-valued functions, MZV’s lie in $``$. However we can say more.

###### Lemma 1.9.

For $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$, $`k_m>1`$, $`\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$.

###### Notation 1.10.

For each natural number $`w`$, let $`Z_w`$ be the $``$-vector subspace of $``$ generated by all MZV’s $`\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ with $`k_1+\mathrm{}+k_m=w`$, i.e. $`Z_w:=\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)|k_1+\mathrm{}+k_m=w_{}`$, and put $`Z_0=`$. Denote $`Z`$ to be the formal direct sum of $`Z_w`$ for all $`w0`$: $`Z:=\underset{w0}{}Z_w`$.

The following is one of the fundamental properties of MZV’s.

###### Proposition 1.11.

The graded $``$-vector space $`Z`$ forms a graded $``$-algebra, i.e. $`Z_aZ_bZ_{a+b}`$ for $`a,b0`$.

###### Proof .

At least we have two proofs \[Gon\]. The first one is given by the harmonic product formulae, from which it follows, for example,

$$\zeta (m)\zeta (n)=\zeta (m,n)+\zeta (n,m)+\zeta (m+n).$$

The other one is given by the shuffle product formulae, from which it follows, for example,

$$\zeta (m)\zeta (n)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{m1}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1+i}{i}\right)\zeta (mi,n+i)+\underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1+j}{j}\right)\zeta (nj,m+j).$$

### 1.2. The KZ equation and the Drinfel’d associator

In this subsection, we will briefly review the definition of the KZ equation and the Drinfel’d associator. For more detailed information on the KZ equation and the Drinfel’d associator, see \[Dr\], \[F0\] and \[Kas\].

Let $`A_{}^{}=A,B`$ be the non-commutative formal power series ring generated by two elements $`A`$ and $`B`$ with complex number coefficients.

###### Definition 1.12.

The (formal) Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov equation 111 This is a special case of the KZ equation for $`^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ in \[Kas\].  (KZ equation for short) is the differential equation

(KZ)
$$\frac{G}{u}(u)=(\frac{A}{u}+\frac{B}{u1})G(u),$$

where $`G(u)`$ is an analytic function in complex variable $`u`$ with values in $`A_{}^{}`$ where ‘analytic’ means each of whose coefficient is analytic.

The equation (KZ) has singularities only at $`0,1`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$. Let $`^{}`$ be the complement of the union of the real half-lines $`(\mathrm{},0]`$ and $`[1,+\mathrm{})`$ in the complex plane. This is a simply-connected domain. The equation (KZ) has a unique analytic solution on $`^{}`$ having a specified value at any given points on $`^{}`$. Moreover, for the singular points $`0`$ and $`1`$, there exist unique solutions $`G_0(u)`$ and $`G_1(u)`$ of (KZ) such that

$$G_0(u)u^A(u0),G_1(u)(1u)^B(u1),$$

where $``$ means that $`G_0(u)u^A`$ (resp. $`G_1(u)(1u)^B`$) has an analytic continuation in a neighborhood of $`0`$ (resp. $`1`$) with value $`1`$ at $`0`$ (resp. $`1`$). Here, $`u^A:=exp(Alogu):=1+\frac{Alogu}{1!}+\frac{(Alogu)^2}{2!}+\frac{(Alogu)^3}{3!}+\mathrm{}`$ and $`logu:=_1^u\frac{dt}{t}`$ in $`^{}`$. In the same way, $`(1u)^B`$ is well-defined on $`^{}`$. Since $`G_0(u)`$ and $`G_1(u)`$ are both non-zero unique solutions of (KZ) with the specified asymptotic behaviors, they must coincide with each other up to multiplication from the right by an invertible element of $`A_{}^{}`$.

###### Definition 1.13.

The Drinfel’d associator 222 To be precise, Drinfel’d defined $`\phi _{KZ}(A,B)`$ instead of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(A,B)`$ in \[Dr\], where $`\phi _{KZ}(A,B)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(\frac{1}{2\pi i}A,\frac{1}{2\pi i}B)`$. is the element $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(A,B)`$ of $`A_{}^{}`$ which is defined by

$$G_0(u)=G_1(u)\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(A,B).$$

By considering on $`(A_{}^{})^{ab}`$, the abelianization of $`A_{}^{}`$, we easily find that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(A,B)1`$ on $`(A_{}^{})^{ab}`$. We note that MZV’s appear at each coefficient of the Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}(A,B)`$. For its explicit formulae, see \[F0\]Proposition 3.2.3.

## 2. $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms and $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values

In this section, we shall give the definition of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms (§2.2) and $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values (§2.3) and state main results in §2.3, which will be proved in §3. The reader will find interesting analogies between §1.1 and §2.3.

### 2.1. Review of Coleman’s $`p`$-adic iterated integration theory

We will review the $`p`$-adic iterated integration theory by R. Coleman \[C\], following A. Besser’s reformulation in \[Bes1\]. This theory will be employed in the analytic continuation of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms in §2.3. For other nice expositions of his theory, see \[Bes2\]§5, \[Br\]§2.2.1 and \[CdS\]§2.

###### Assumption 2.1.

Suppose that $`X/𝒪__p`$ is a smooth projective and surjective scheme over the ring $`𝒪__p`$ of integers of $`_p`$, of relative dimension $`1`$ with its generic fiber $`X__p`$ and its special fiber $`X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}`$. Let $`Y=XD`$ where $`D`$ is a closed subscheme of $`X`$ which is relatively etale over $`𝒪__p`$.

We denote $`j:Y_{\overline{𝔽_p}}X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}`$ to be the associated open embedding, where $`Y_{\overline{𝔽_p}}`$ is the special fiber of $`Y`$ and denote the finite set $`X(\overline{𝔽_p})Y(\overline{𝔽_p})`$ by $`\{e_1,\mathrm{},e_s\}`$. For $`0r<1`$, $`U_r`$ stands for the rigid analytic space 333 As is explained in \[Bes1\] §2, while the definition of $`U_r`$ depends on the choice of ‘local lifts’, the definitions of $`A_{log}^a(U_x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{log}^a(U_x)`$ (see below) do not.  obtained by removing all closed discs of radius $`r`$ around $`e_i`$ from $`X(_p)`$ ($`1is`$) (see \[Bes1\]). For a subset $`SX(\overline{𝔽_p})`$, we denote its tubular neighborhood (see \[Ber\]) in $`X(_p)`$ by $`]S[`$. For any rigid analytic space $`W`$, we mean by $`A(W)`$ the ring of global sections of the sheaf $`𝒪_W^{\mathrm{rig}}`$ of rigid analytic functions on $`W`$.

Fix $`a_p`$. It determines a branch of $`p`$-adic logarithm $`log^a:_p^\times _p`$ (\[Bes1\]Definition 2.6) which is characterized by $`log^a(p)=a`$. We call this $`a_p`$ the branch parameter of $`p`$-adic logarithm. Define

$$A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a:=\underset{xX(\overline{𝔽_p})}{}A_{log}^a(U_x),\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{loc}}^a:=\underset{xX(\overline{𝔽_p})}{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{log}^a(U_x)$$

where

$`A_{log}^a(U_x):=\{\begin{array}{cc}A(]x[)\hfill & xY(\overline{𝔽_p}),\hfill \\ \underset{r1}{\mathrm{ind}\text{-}\mathrm{lim}}A(]x[U_r)\left[log^a(z_x)\right]\hfill & x\{e_1,\mathrm{},e_s\},\hfill \end{array}`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{log}^a(U_x):=A_{log}^a(U_x)dz_x.`$
Here $`z_x`$ means a local parameter

$$z_x:]x[Y(_p)\stackrel{}{}\{z_p|0<|z|_p<1\}.$$

We note that $`log^a(z_x)`$ is a locally analytic function defined on $`]x[Y(_p)`$ whose derivation is $`\frac{1}{z_x}`$ and it is transcendental over $`\underset{r1}{\mathrm{ind}\text{-}\mathrm{lim}}A(]x[U_r)`$ and $`\underset{r1}{\mathrm{ind}\text{-}\mathrm{lim}}A(]x[U_r)\{f(z)=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{n=\mathrm{}}{}}a_nz^n(a_n_p)\text{ converging for }r<|z|_p<1\text{ for some }0r<1\}`$ (see \[Bes1\]). We remark that these definitions of $`A_{log}^a(U_x)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{log}^a(U_x)`$ are independent of any choice of local parameters $`z_x`$. By taking a component-wise derivative, we obtain a $`_p`$-linear map $`d:A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$. Regard $`A^{}:=\mathrm{\Gamma }(]X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}[,j^{}𝒪_{]X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}[})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^{}:=\mathrm{\Gamma }(]X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}[,j^{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{]X_{\overline{𝔽_p}}[}^1)`$ to be a subspace of $`A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ respectively (for $`j^{}`$, see \[Ber\]).

In \[C\], Coleman constructed an $`A^{}`$-subalgebra $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ of $`A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$, which we call the ring of Coleman functions attached to a branch parameter $`a_p`$, and a $`_p`$-linear map $`_{(a)}:A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{A^{}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{}A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a/_p1`$ satisfying $`d|_{A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a}_{(a)}=id_{A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\mathrm{\Omega }^{}}`$, which we call the $`p`$-adic (Coleman) integration attached to a branch parameter $`a_p`$. We often drop the subscript (a).

Actually Coleman’s $`p`$-adic integration theory is essentially independent of any choice of branches, which may not be well-known, and we will try to explain this fact below:
Suppose that $`a,b_p`$. Consider the isomorphisms $`\iota _{a,b}:A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a\stackrel{}{}A_{\mathrm{loc}}^b`$ and $`\tau _{a,b}:\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{loc}}^a\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{loc}}^b`$ obtained by replacing each $`log^a(z_{e_i})`$ by $`log^b(z_{e_i})`$ for $`1is`$.

###### Lemma 2.2.

These maps, $`\iota _{a,b}`$ and $`\tau _{a,b}`$, are independent of any choice of a local parameter $`z_{e_i}`$.

###### Proof .

Suppose that $`z_{e_i}^{}`$ is another local parameter. Then we check easily that $`\iota _{a,b}(z_{e_i}^{})=z_{e_i}^{}`$, $`\iota _{a,b}(log^a(z_{e_i}^{}))=log^b(z_{e_i}^{})`$ and $`\tau _{a,b}(dz_{e_i}^{})=dz_{e_i}^{}`$ because $`log^a(\frac{z_{e_i}^{}}{z_{e_i}})`$ is analytic at $`e_i`$, from which it follows the lemma. ∎

The following branch independency principle, which was not stated explicitly in \[C\], should be one of the important properties of Coleman’s $`p`$-adic integration theory, but this principle just follows directly from his construction of $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$.

###### Proposition 2.3 (Branch Independency Principle).

Suppose that $`a,b_p`$. Then $`\iota _{a,b}(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a)=A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b`$, $`\tau _{a,b}(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\mathrm{\Omega }^{})=A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ and $`\iota _{a,b}_{(a)}=_{(b)}\tau _{a,b}mod_p1`$. Namely the following diagram is commutative.

$$\begin{array}{ccc}A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{A^{}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{}& \stackrel{\tau _{a,b}}{}& A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b\underset{A^{}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{}\\ _{\left(a\right)}& & _{\left(b\right)}& & \\ A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a/_p1& \stackrel{\iota _{a,b}}{}& A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b/_p1\end{array}$$

###### Proof .

It follows directly because both $`(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b,_{(b)})`$ and $`(\iota _{a,b}(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b),\iota _{a,b}_{(a)}\tau _{a,b}^1)`$ satisfies the same axioms (A)–(F) of logarithmic $`F`$-crystals on \[C\] (see also \[CdS\]), which is a characterization of $`(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^b,_{(b)})`$. ∎

Other important properties of Coleman’s functions are the uniqueness principle and the functorial property below.

###### Proposition 2.4 (Uniqueness Principle ; \[C\]Ch IV).

Let $`a_p`$. Let $`fA_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ be a Coleman function which is defined on an admissible open subset $`U`$ of $`X(_p)`$. Suppose that $`f|_U0`$. Then $`f0`$ on $`X(_p)`$.

Especially this proposition yields the fact that a locally constant Coleman function is globally constant.

###### Proposition 2.5 (Functorial Property ; \[C\]Theorem 5.11 and \[Bes2\]Definition 4.7).

Let $`a_p`$. Let $`(X^{},Y^{})`$ be another pair satisfying Assumption 2.1. Suppose that $`f:X^{}X`$ is a morphism defined over $`𝒪__p`$ such that $`f(Y^{})Y`$. Then the pull-back morphism $`f^{\mathrm{}}:A_{\mathrm{loc}}^aA_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ induces the morphism $`f^{}:A_{\mathrm{Col}}^aA_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ of rings of Coleman functions, where $`A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ (resp. $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$) stands for $`A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ (resp. $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$) for $`(X^{},Y^{})`$.

Precisely speaking, Coleman showed this theorem in more general situation in \[C\] Theorem 5.1.

###### Notation 2.6.

Let $`a_p`$ and $`\omega A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{A^{}}{}\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$. Then by Coleman’s integration theory, there exists (uniquely modulo constant) a Coleman function $`F_\omega `$ such that $`\omega F_\omega `$ (modulo constant). For $`x,y]Y(\overline{𝔽_p})[`$, we define $`_x^y\omega `$ to be $`F_\omega (y)F_\omega (x)`$. It is clear that $`_x^y\omega `$ does not depend on any choice of $`F_\omega `$ (although it may depend on $`a_p`$). If $`F_\omega (x)`$ and $`F_\omega (y)`$ make sense for some $`x,yX(_p)`$, we also denote $`F_\omega (y)F_\omega (x)`$ by $`_x^y\omega `$. When we let $`y`$ vary, we regard $`_x^y\omega `$ as the Coleman function which is characterized by $`dF_\omega =\omega `$ and $`F_\omega (x)=0`$.

### 2.2. Analytic continuation of $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms

We will define $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms to be Coleman functions which admits an expansion around $`0`$ similar to the complex case.

Let $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$ and $`z_p`$. Consider the following series

(2.1)
$$Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{z^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}.$$

###### Lemma 2.7.

This series $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ converges on the open unit disk $`D(0:1)=\{z_p||z|_p<1\}`$ around $`0`$ with radius $`1`$.

###### Proof .

Easy. ∎

###### Lemma 2.8.

Let $`z_p`$ such that $`|z|_p<1`$. Then

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}(z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{z}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m1}(z)\hfill & k_m1,\hfill \\ \frac{1}{1z}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1}}(z)\hfill & k_m=1,\hfill \end{array}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dz}}Li_1(z)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{1z}}.`$
###### Proof .

It follows from a direct calculation. ∎

Lemma 2.7 and Lemma 2.8 are $`p`$-adic analogue of Lemma 1.3 and Lemma 1.4 respectively.

From now on, we fix a branch parameter $`a_p`$ and employ Coleman’s $`p`$-adic integration theory attached to this branch parameter $`a_p`$ for $`X=_{𝒪__p}^1`$ and $`Y=Spec𝒪__p[t,\frac{1}{t},\frac{1}{1t}]`$.

###### Definition 2.9.

We define recursively the (one variable) $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithm ($`p`$-adic MPL for short) $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ attached to $`a_p`$ which is the Coleman function characterized below:

$`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z):=\{\begin{array}{cc}_0^z\frac{1}{t}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m1}^a(t)𝑑t\hfill & k_m1,\hfill \\ _0^z\frac{1}{1t}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1}}^a(t)𝑑t\hfill & k_m=1,\hfill \end{array}`$
$`Li_1^a(z)=log^a(1z):={\displaystyle _0^z}{\displaystyle \frac{dt}{1t}}.`$
###### Remark 2.10.

1. It is easy to see that $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)=\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}\frac{z^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}`$ if $`|z|_p<1`$.
2. Because we get $`\frac{dt}{t}`$, $`\frac{dt}{1t}A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ and we know that $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ is analytic on $`|z|_p<1`$ and takes value $`0`$ at $`z=0`$, it is easy to see that each $`p`$-adic MPL is well defined in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$.
3. Our construction of $`p`$-adic MPL is just a multiple analogue of Coleman’s construction \[C\] of $`p`$-adic polylogarithm $`\mathrm{}_k(z)`$. His $`p`$-adic polylogarithm $`\mathrm{}_k(z)`$ can be written as $`Li_k^a(z)`$ in our notation.

The following is a $`p`$-adic version of Lemma 1.5.

###### Proposition 2.11.

The $`p`$-adic MPL $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(t)`$ is locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$. More precisely, $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(t)|_{]0[}A(]0[)`$, $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(t)|_{]1[}A(]1[)\left[log^a(t1)\right]`$ and $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(t)|_{]\mathrm{}[}A(]\mathrm{}[)\left[log^a(\frac{1}{t})\right]`$.

###### Proof .

By construction, we can prove the claim inductively. ∎

This proposition means that the series (2.1) can be analytically continued to $`^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$, although the complex MPL cannot be analytically continued to $`^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ but only to its universal unramified covering $`\stackrel{~}{^1()\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}}`$ instead by Lemma 1.5. We note that the $`p`$-adic MPL admits uncountably infinite branches which correspond to branches of $`p`$-adic logarithms $`log^a(z)`$ although complex MPL admits countably infinite branches. We call $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ the branch of $`p`$-adic MPL corresponding to $`a_p`$.

### 2.3. $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values and main results

We will state main results of this paper, whose proof will be given in §3.3 and §3.4 and will introduce $`p`$-adic multiple zeta values, whose definitions themselves are highly non-trivial.

###### Notation 2.12.

Let $`\alpha _p`$ and let $`f(z)`$ be a function defined on $`_p`$. We denote $`\underset{z\alpha }{lim^{}}f(z)`$ to be $`\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}f(z_n)`$ if this limit converges to the same value for any sequence $`\{z_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ which satisfies $`z_n\alpha `$ in $`_p`$ and $`e(_p(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{})/_p)<\mathrm{}`$ (which means that the field generated by $`z_1,z_2,\mathrm{}`$ over $`_p`$ is a finitely ramified (possibly infinite) extension field over $`_p`$). If the latter limit converges (resp. does not converge) to the same value, we call $`\underset{z\alpha }{lim^{}}f(z)`$ converges (resp. diverges).

###### Theorem 2.13.

Fix $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$ and a prime $`p`$. Then the statement whether $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges or diverges 444 This makes sense because $`p`$-adic MPL’s are locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$ by Proposition 2.11. on $`_p`$ is independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. Moreover if it converges on $`_p`$, this limit value is independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$.

###### Proof .

Since $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ is locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$ by Proposition 2.11, its $`A_{log}^a(]1[)`$-component can be written as follows.

$`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)=`$ $`f_0(z1)+f_1(z1)log^a(z1)+f_2(z1)(log^a(z1))^2`$
$`+\mathrm{}\mathrm{}+f_m(z1)(log^a(z1))^m,`$
where $`f_i(z)A(D(0:1))`$ for $`i=0,\mathrm{},m`$. By Proposition 2.3, we see that these $`f_i(z)`$’s are independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. Saying $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges is equivalent to saying $`f_i(0)=0`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},m`$ by Lemma 2.14 and Lemma 2.15, which is a statement independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. Thus we get the first half of this theorem. If $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges, then $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)=f_0(0)`$. Since $`f_0(z)`$ was independent of any choice of branches, the second half of this theorem follows. ∎

###### Lemma 2.14.

For $`n0`$, $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ(log^aϵ)^n=0`$.

###### Proof .

If $`n=0`$, it is clear.
If $`n=1`$, suppose that $`ϵ_nL`$ ($`n1`$) and $`ϵ_n0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$, where $`L`$ is a finitely ramified (possibly infinite) extension of $`_p`$ with ramification index $`e_L(<\mathrm{})`$ and a uniformizer $`\pi _L`$. Take $`c_L`$ such that $`p^{c_L}>e_L`$. Decompose $`ϵ_n=u_n\pi _L^{r_n}`$ where $`u_n𝒪_L^\times `$ and $`r_n`$. Take $`s_n`$ such that $`(s_n,p)=1`$ and $`u_n^{s_n}1mod\pi _L𝒪_L`$. Put $`\alpha _n:=u_n^{s_n}1\pi _L𝒪_L`$. Then $`(u_n^{s_n})^{p^{c_L}}=(1+\alpha _n)^{p^{c_L}}1+\alpha _n^{p^{c_L}}1modp𝒪__p`$. Therefore $`log^au_n=\frac{1}{s_np^{c_L}}log^a(u_n^{s_np^{c_L}})\frac{1}{p^{c_L}}𝒪__p`$. So we get

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}ϵ_nlog^aϵ_n=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\{ϵ_nlog^au_n+ϵ_nr_nlog^a\pi _L\}=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}ϵ_nlog^au_n=0.$$

In a similar way, we can prove the case for $`n>1`$. ∎

###### Lemma 2.15.

Let $`a_p`$, $`l0`$ and $`g(z)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{l}{}}a_k\left(log^a(z)\right)^k`$ ($`a_k_p`$). Then $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}g(z)`$ converges if and only if $`a_k=0`$ for $`1kl`$.

###### Proof .

Take $`z_n=\alpha ^n`$ such that $`|\alpha |_p<1`$ and $`log^a(\alpha )0`$. Then we get the claim by an easy calculation. ∎

###### Remark 2.16.

1. As for another proof of the last statement of Theorem 2.13 for $`k_m>1`$, see Remark 3.29.
2. It is striking that $`\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(1ϵ)`$ does not depend on any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ although $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(1ϵ)`$ takes whole vales on $`_p`$ if we fix $`ϵ`$ ($`0<|ϵ|_p<1`$) and let $`a`$ vary on $`_p`$.

###### Definition 2.17.

For any index $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ whose $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges, we define the corresponding $`p`$-adic multiple zeta vale ($`p`$-adic MZV for short) $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ to be its limit in $`_p`$, i.e.

$$\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m):=\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)_p\text{ if it converges.}$$

If this limit diverges for $`(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$, we do not give a definition of the corresponding $`p`$-adic MZV $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$.

We note that this definition of $`p`$-adic MZV is independent of any choice of branches by Theorem 2.13.

###### Theorem 2.18.

If $`k_m>1`$, $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ always converges on $`_p`$.

Thus we get a definition of $`p`$-adic MZV $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ for $`k_m>1`$. This theorem is a $`p`$-adic analogue of Lemma 1.6 and it will be proved in §3.3.

###### Examples 2.19.

Coleman made the following calculation in \[C\] (stated in Ch I (4) and proved in Ch VII):

(2.2)
$$\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_n^a(z)=\frac{p^n}{p^n1}L_p(n,\omega ^{1n})\text{for }n>1.$$

Here $`L_p`$ is the Kubota-Leopoldt $`p`$-adic $`L`$-function and $`\omega `$ is the Teichmüller character. In particular this formula (2.2) shows that this limit value is actually independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ although this fact is a special case of Theorem 2.13. We remark that, in the case of $`p`$-adic polylogarithms, this branch independency also follows from the so-called distribution relation (\[C\] Proposition 6.1). By (2.2), we get

(2.3)
$$\zeta _p(n)=\frac{p^n}{p^n1}L_p(n,\omega ^{1n})\text{for }n>1.$$

1. When $`n`$ is even (i.e. $`n=2k`$ for some $`k1`$), by (2.3) we get the equality

$$\zeta _p(2k)=0.$$

We will see that this equality proved arithmetically here will be also deduced from geometric identities, 2-cycle relation and 3-cycle relation, among $`p`$-adic MZV’s, proved in \[F3\].
2. On the other hand, when $`n`$ is odd (i.e. $`n=2k+1`$ for some $`k0`$), it does not look so easy to show $`\zeta _p(2k+1)0`$:
Suppose that $`p`$ is an odd prime. Then by \[KNQ\] Theorem 3.1, we see that saying $`L_p(2k+1,\omega ^{2k})0`$ is equivalent to saying

(L2k+1)
$$H_{\mathrm{et}}^2(,_p/_p(k))=0,$$

which is one of standard conjectures 555 In \[KNQ\], (L2k+1) was denoted by (Ck).  in Iwasawa theory and a higher version of Leopoldt conjecture (cf. \[KNQ\] Remark 3.2.(ii)).

###### Remark 2.20.

1. We know that $`\zeta _p(2k+1)0`$ in the case where $`p`$ is regular or $`(p1)|2k`$ by \[Sou\]§3.3.
2. Suppose that $`p`$ is an odd prime. Let $`G`$ denote the standard Iwasawa module for $`(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})/`$ ($`\mu _p^{\mathrm{}}`$: the group of roots of unity whose order is a power of $`p`$), i.e. $`G=\pi _1\left([\mu _p^{\mathrm{}},\frac{1}{p}]\right)^{p,\text{ab}}`$. Let $`I`$ denote the inertia subgroup of the unique prime $`𝔭`$ in $`(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})`$ which is above $`p`$. Soulé \[Sou\] constructed a specific non-zero element $`\chi _{p,m}^{\text{Soulé}}Hom(G,_p(m))`$ for $`m1`$: odd. Let $`𝒢`$ denote the standard Iwasawa module for $`_p(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})/_p`$, i.e. $`𝒢=\pi _1\left(_p(\mu _p^{\mathrm{}})\right)^{p,\text{ab}}`$. Let $``$ denote the inertia subgroup of $`𝒢`$. For $`m1`$, the Coates-Wiles homomorphism gives a specific non-zero element $`\chi _{p,m}^{\text{CW}}Hom(,_p(m))`$. Coleman—using his reciprocity law—showed the following formula for all odd $`m>1`$ (see \[KNQ\]):

(2.4)
$$\chi _{p,m}^{\text{Soulé}}r=(p^{m1}1)L_p(m,\omega ^{1m})\chi _{p,m}^{\text{CW}}.$$

Here $`r`$ is the natural (surjective) map $`r:I`$. By (2.4), we get the following statement in algebraic number theory which is equivalent to saying $`\zeta _p(2k+1)0`$ (or, equivalently, (L2k+1) ):

(P2k+1)  the prime ideal $`𝔭`$ ramify in the kernel field of $`\chi _{p,m}^{\text{Soulé}}`$.
The author guesses more generally that problems on $`p`$-adic MZV’s related to $`p`$-adic transcendental number theory (such as the problem of proving the $`p`$-adic version $`\zeta _p(3)`$ of Apéry’s result) could be translated into problems in algebraic number theory.

As for a $`p`$-adic analogue of Lemma 1.7, at present, we have nothing to say except the following.

###### Note 2.21.

The limit $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ sometimes converges and sometimes diverges on $`_p`$ for $`k_m=1`$.

For example, see Example 2.23.(a) and (b) below.

###### Theorem 2.22.

Suppose that $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges on $`_p`$ for $`k_m=1`$. Then it converges to a $`p`$-adic version of the regularized MZV, i.e.

$$\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1},1)=(1)^mI_p(W)\text{ where }W=BA^{k_{m1}1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B.$$

See §3.2 for $`I_p(W)`$ and Remark 3.31(2) for the regularized $`p`$-adic MZV. This theorem will be proved in §3.4. Therefore $`p`$-adic MZV $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)`$ for $`k_m=1`$ can be written as a $``$-linear combination of $`p`$-adic MZV’s corresponding to the same weight indexes with $`k_m>1`$.

###### Examples 2.23.

1. $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{2,1}^a(z)`$ converges to $`2\zeta _p(1,2)`$, i.e. $`\zeta _p(2,1)=2\zeta _p(1,2)`$. This follows from the functional equation in Example 3.41.(a), $`\zeta _p(2)=0`$ by Example 2.19.(a) and Lemma 2.14.
2. $`\underset{z1}{lim}^{}Li_{3,1}^a(z)`$ diverges if and only if $`\zeta _p(3)0`$ (equivalently if and only if $`p`$ satisfies the 3rd Leopoldt conjecture (L3) above).

Suppose that 3rd Leopoldt conjecture (L3) fails at a prime $`p`$. Then we get $`\zeta _p(3,1)=2\zeta _p(1,3)\zeta _p(2,2)`$ for this prime $`p`$. This follows from the functional equation in Example 3.41.(b) combined with Lemma 2.14.
3. We will show many identities between $`p`$-adic MZV’s in \[F3\], from which we will deduce, for example, $`\zeta _p(3)=\zeta _p(1,2)`$ and $`\zeta _p(1,3)=\zeta _p(2,2)=\zeta _p(1,1,2)=0`$.

###### Remark 2.24.

The author guesses that to know whether $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges or diverges might be to tell something deep in number theory, such as Example 2.23.(b).

Those $`p`$-adic MZV’s were defined to be elements of $`_p`$, but actually we can say more.

###### Theorem 2.25.

All $`p`$-adic MZV’s are $`p`$-adic numbers, i.e. $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)_p`$.

###### Proof .

Suppose that $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ converges. Recall that $`p`$-adic MPL $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ $`(a_p)`$ is an iterated integral of $`\frac{dt}{t}`$ and $`\frac{dt}{1t}`$ which is a rational $`1`$-form defined over $`_p`$ and notice that $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)_p`$ for all $`zp_p`$. Then from the Galois equivariancy stated in \[BdJ\] Remark 2.3, it follows that $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ is $`Gal(\overline{_p}/_p)`$-invariant for $`z^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$ if we take $`a_p`$. Therefore in this case, we get $`Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)_p`$ for $`z^1(_p)\backslash \{1,\mathrm{}\}`$. Thus we get $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)_p`$, which yields the theorem (Recall that this limit is independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ by Theorem 2.13). ∎

It may be better to say that this theorem is a $`p`$-adic version of Lemma 1.9. The author poses the following question, which he wants to study in the future.

###### Question 2.26.

Are all $`p`$-adic MZV’s $`p`$-adic integers? Namely $`\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)_p`$ for all primes $`p`$?

###### Definition 2.27.

For each natural number $`w`$, let $`Z_w^{(p)}`$ be the finite dimensional $``$-linear subspace of $`_p`$ generated by all $`p`$-adic MZV’s of indices with weight $`w`$, and put $`Z_0^{(p)}=`$. Define $`Z_{}^{(p)}`$ to be the formal direct sum of $`Z_w^{(p)}`$ for all $`w0`$: $`Z_{}^{(p)}:=\underset{w0}{}Z_w^{(p)}`$.

By Theorem 2.22, we see that $`Z_w^{(p)}=\zeta _p(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)|k_1+\mathrm{}+k_m=w,k_m>1,m_{}_p`$

###### Theorem 2.28.

The graded $``$-vector space has a structure of $``$-algebra, i.e. $`Z_a^{(p)}Z_b^{(p)}Z_{a+b}^{(p)}`$ for $`a,b0`$.

This is a $`p`$-adic analogue of Proposition 1.11, whose proof will be given in §3.4. Unfortunately we do not have such a simple proof as Proposition 1.11. Our proof is based on showing the shuffle product formulae (Corollary 3.46) coming from the shuffle-like multiplication of iterated integrals, from which it follows, for example,

$$\zeta _p(m)\zeta _p(n)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{m1}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n1+i}{i}\right)\zeta _p(mi,n+i)+\underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m1+j}{j}\right)\zeta _p(nj,m+j).$$

In \[BF\], we shall discuss the harmonic product formulae \[H\] coming from the shuffle-like multiplication of series in Definition 1.1, from which it should follow, for example,

$$\zeta _p(m)\zeta _p(n)=\zeta _p(m,n)+\zeta _p(n,m)+\zeta _p(m+n).$$

We note that the validity of the harmonic product formulae for $`p`$-adic MZV’s is non-trivial because we do not have a series expansion of $`p`$-adic MZV such as §0. Introduction (0.1).

###### Remark 2.29.

Here is another direction of further possible developments of our theory of $`p`$-adic MZV’s. Since the $`p`$-adic $`L`$-function is related to the Bernoulli numbers, the author expects that the multiple Bernoulli number (MBN for short) $`B_n^{(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)}`$ ($`k_1,\mathrm{},k_m`$, $`n`$) given by the following generating series

$$\frac{Li_{k_1\mathrm{},k_m}(1e^x)}{(1e^x)^m}=:\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}B_n^{(k_1,\mathrm{},k_m)}\frac{x^n}{n!},$$

where $`Li_{k_1\mathrm{},k_m}(z)`$ and $`e^z`$ means the following formal power series

$$\underset{n_i}{\underset{0<n_1<\mathrm{}<n_m}{}}\frac{z^{n_m}}{n_1^{k_1}\mathrm{}n_m^{k_m}}[[z]]\text{ and }\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{z^n}{n!}[[z]]$$

respectively, would help to describe a $`p`$-adic behavior of $`p`$-adic MZV’s and constructions of $`p`$-adic multiple zeta (or $`L`$-)functions. We remark that this definition of MBN is just a multiple version of that of the poly-Bernoulli number in \[AK\] and \[Kan\] (especially $`B_n^1`$ is the usual Bernoulli number). We stress that the definition of MBN is independent of any prime $`p`$.

## 3. The $`p`$-adic KZ equation

In this section, we will introduce and consider the $`p`$-adic KZ equation. We will give the definition of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ in §3.1. In §3.2 (resp. §3.3), we will give an explicit formula of a certain fundamental solution $`G_0^p(z)`$ of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation (resp. an explicit formula of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$). In §3.4, we will show the functional equation among $`p`$-adic MPL’s and will give proofs of Theorem 2.22 and Theorem 2.28.

### 3.1. The $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator

###### Notation 3.1.

Let $`A__p^{}=_pA,B`$ be the non-commutative formal power series ring with $`_p`$-coefficients generated by two elements $`A`$ and $`B`$.

###### Definition 3.2.

The (formal) $`p`$-adic Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov equation ($`p`$-adic KZ equation for short) is the differential equation

(KZp)
$$\frac{G}{u}(u)=(\frac{A}{u}+\frac{B}{u1})G(u),$$

where $`G(u)`$ is an analytic function in variable $`u^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ with values in $`A__p^{}`$ where ‘analytic’ means each of whose coefficient is locally $`p`$-adic analytic.

Unfortunately, because $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ is topologically totally disconnected, the equation (KZp) does not have a unique solution on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ even locally as in the complex analytic function case. But fortunately we get the following nice property on Coleman functions.

###### Theorem 3.3.

Fix $`a_p`$. Then there exists a unique (invertible) solution $`G_0^a(u)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ of (KZp) which is defined and locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ and satisfies $`G_0^a(u)u^A`$ ($`u0`$).

Here $`u^A:=1+\frac{log^a(u)}{1!}A+\frac{(log^a(u))^2}{2!}A^2+\mathrm{}`$ and $`G_0^a(u)u^A`$ ($`u0`$) means that the $`A_{log}^a(]0[)\widehat{}A__p^{}`$-component of $`P^a(u):=G_0^a(u)u^A=G_0^a(u)\left\{1\frac{log^a(u)}{1!}A+\frac{(log^a(u))^2}{2!}A^2\frac{(log^a(u))^3}{3!}A^3+\mathrm{}\right\}`$ lies in $`1+A(]0[)\widehat{}A__p^{}A+A(]0[)\widehat{}A__p^{}B`$ and takes value $`1A__p^{}`$ at $`u=0`$.

###### Lemma 3.4.

Fix $`a_p`$. Let $`G(u)`$ and $`H(u)`$ be solutions of (KZp) in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$. Suppose that $`H(u)`$ is invertible. Then $`H(u)^1G(u)`$ is a constant function, i.e. an element of $`A__p^{}`$.

###### Proof .

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}`$ $`H(u)^1G(u)=H(u)^1{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}H(u)H(u)^1G(u)+H(u)^1{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}G(u)`$
$`=H(u)^1({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})H(u)H(u)^1G(u)+H(u)^1({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})G(u)`$
$`=H(u)^1({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})G(u)+H(u)^1({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})G(u)=0.`$
Therefore $`H(u)^1G(u)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ is constant by Proposition 2.4. ∎

Proof of Theorem 3.3.

Uniqueness: Suppose that $`H_0^a(u)`$ is another solution satisfying above properties. Then $`H_0^a(u)`$ is invertible (i.e. $`H_0^a(u)(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{})^\times `$) because it follows easily that its constant term is $`1A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$. By Lemma 3.4, there exists a unique ’constant’ series $`cA__p^{}`$ such that $`G_0^a(u)=H_0^a(u)c`$. By the assumption, we get $`u^Acu^A1`$ as $`u0`$, from which we can deduce $`c=1`$.

Existence: By substituting $`G(u)=P(u)u^A`$ into (KZp), we get

(3.1)
$$\frac{dP}{du}(u)=[\frac{A}{u},P(u)]+\frac{B}{u1}P(u).$$

By expanding $`P(u)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}P_W(u)W`$, we obtain the following differential equation from (3.1):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u}}P_{W^{}A}(u){\displaystyle \frac{1}{u}}P_{AW^{}}(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=AW^{}A(W^{}A_{}^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u}}P_{W^{}B}(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=AW^{}B(W^{}A_{}^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u}}P_{BW^{}}(u)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{u1}}P_{W^{}A}(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=BW^{}A(W^{}A_{}^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u1}}P_{W^{}B}(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=BW^{}B(W^{}A_{}^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)=0`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=A,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_W}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u1}}`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=B.`$
Since $`\frac{du}{u}`$ and $`\frac{du}{1u}`$ lie in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\mathrm{\Omega }^{}`$ and are defined and locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$, we can construct inductively a unique solution $`P_0^a(u)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}P_{0,W}^a(u)W`$ of (3.1) such that each $`P_{0,W}^a(u)`$ satisfy the above differential equation, lies in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$, is defined and locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ and $`P_W^a(0)=0`$. By putting $`G_0^a(u)=P_0^a(u)u^A`$, we get a required solution in Theorem 3.3. ∎

###### Proposition 3.5.

Let $`a,b_p`$. Then $`\iota _{a,b}(G_0^a)=G_0^b`$.

###### Proof .

This follows from the unique characterization of $`G_0^b`$ in Theorem 3.3. ∎

###### Proposition 3.6.

Fix $`a_p`$, $`z_0^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ and $`g_0A__p^{}`$. Then there exists a unique solution $`H^a(u)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ of (KZp) which satisfies $`H^a(z_0)=g_0`$. Here $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ means the non-commutative two variable formal power series ring with $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$-coefficients, i.e. $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}=A_{\mathrm{Col}}^aA,B`$.

###### Proof .

This immediately follows from Lemma 3.4 by taking $`H^a(u)=G_0^a(u)G_0^a(z_0)^1g_0`$. ∎

###### Proposition 3.7.

Fix $`a_p`$. Then there exists a unique solution $`G_1^a(u)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ of (KZp) which is locally analytic on $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ and satisfies $`G_1^a(u)(1u)^B`$ ($`u1`$).

Here the meanings of notations $`(1u)^B`$ and $`G_1^a(u)(1u)^B`$ ($`u1`$) are similar to those of $`u^A`$ and $`G_0^a(u)u^A`$ ($`u0`$) in Theorem 3.3.

###### Proof .

By a similar argument to Theorem 3.3, we get the claim. ∎

###### Proposition 3.8.

$`G_1^a(u)=G_0^a(B,A)(1u)`$.

Here for any $`gA__p^{}`$, $`g(B,A)`$ stands for the image of $`g`$ by the automorphism $`A__p^{}`$ induced from $`AB`$, $`BA`$ and, for $`f(u)A_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$, $`f(1u)`$ means its image by the algebra homomorphism $`\tau ^{\mathrm{}}:A_{\mathrm{loc}}^aA_{\mathrm{loc}}^a`$ induced from the automorphism $`\tau :t1t`$ of $`^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$.

###### Proof .

By the functorial property of Coleman functions (Proposition 2.5), $`\tau ^{\mathrm{}}(A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$. Therefore the proposition follows immediately from the uniqueness of $`G_1^a(u)`$ because $`G_0^a(B,A)(1u)`$ lies in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}`$, satisfies (KZp) and admits the same asymptotic behavior to that of $`G_1(u)`$ at $`u=1`$. ∎

###### Remark 3.9.

As in the same way as the above proof of the uniqueness on Theorem 3.3, we see that $`G_0^a(u)`$ and $`G_1^a(u)`$ are both invertible and they must coincide with each other up to a multiplication from the right by an invertible element $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}(A,B)A__p^{}=_pA,B`$ (which is independent of $`u^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$). Namely

$$G_0^a(u)=G_1^a(u)\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}(A,B).$$

###### Theorem 3.10.

Actually $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}(A,B)`$ is independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$.

###### Proof .

Put $`z_0]_{\overline{𝔽_p}}^1\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}[`$. Since $`\left]_{\overline{𝔽_p}}^1\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}\right[`$ is a branch independent region, the special value of $`G_0^a(u)`$ at $`u=z_0`$ actually does not depend on any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. Similarly we see that the value of $`G_1^a(u)`$ at $`u=z_0`$ does not depend on any choice of branch parameter. Therefore $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}(A,B)=G_1^a(z_0)^1G_0^a(z_0)`$ is actually independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$. ∎

###### Remark 3.11.

We have another proof of Theorem 3.10. Put $`a,b_p`$. Then we get $`\iota _{a,b}(G_0^a(u))=G_0^b(u)`$ and $`\iota _{a,b}(G_1^a(u))=G_1^b(u)`$ by Proposition 3.5. Therefore we get $`\iota _{a,b}(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p})=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(b),p}`$, which implies $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(b),p}`$ because $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(a),p}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^{(b),p}A__p^{}`$.

###### Definition 3.12.

The $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ is the element of $`_pA,B^\times `$, which is defined by $`G_0^a(u)=G_1^a(u)\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$.

###### Remark 3.13.

1. This definition of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ is independent of $`u^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$ by Remark 3.9 and any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ by Theorem 3.10.
2. In §3.3, we will see that each coefficient of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ can be expressed in terms of $`p`$-adic MZV’s, from which we know that actually $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ belongs to $`_pA,B`$ by Theorem 2.25.
3. We shall prove many identities, such as $`2`$-, $`3`$\- and $`5`$-cycle relation of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ in \[F3\].

### 3.2. Explicit formulae of the fundamental solution of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation

In this subsection, we will give a calculation to express each coefficient of the fundamental solution $`G_0^a(z)`$ of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation (KZp).

###### Notation 3.14.

1. Let $`𝔸=\underset{w0}{}𝔸_w=A,B(A__p^{})`$ be the non-commutative graded polynomial ring over $``$ with two variables $`A`$ and $`B`$ with $`degA=degB=1`$. Here $`𝔸_w`$ is the homogeneous degree $`w`$ part of $`𝔸`$. We call an element of $`𝔸`$ which is a monomial with coefficient $`1`$ by a word. But exceptionally we shall not call $`1`$ a word. For each word $`W`$, the weight and depth of $`W`$ are as follows.

$`wt(W):=`$ ‘the sum of exponents of $`A`$ and $`B`$ in $`W`$

$`dp(W):=`$ ‘the sum of exponent of $`B`$ in $`W`$
2. Put $`M^{}=𝔸B=\{FB|F𝔸\}`$ which is the $``$-linear subspace of $`𝔸`$. Note that there is a natural surjection from $`𝔸`$ to $`𝔸/𝔸A`$. By identifying the latter space with $`1+M^{}(=1+𝔸B)`$ we obtain the $``$-linear map $`f^{}:𝔸𝔸/𝔸A\stackrel{}{}1+M^{}𝔸`$. Abusively we denote by $`f^{}`$ the $`_p`$-linear map $`A__p^{}A__p^{}`$ induced by $`f^{}:𝔸𝔸`$.
3. For each word $`W=B^{q_0}A^{p_1}B^{q_1}A^{p_2}B^{q_2}\mathrm{}A^{p_k}B^{q_k}`$ ($`k0`$, $`q_00`$, $`p_i,q_i1`$ for $`i1`$) in $`M^{}`$, we define

$$Li_W^a(z):=Li_{\underset{q_k1}{\underset{}{1,\mathrm{}1}},p_k+1,\underset{q_{k1}1}{\underset{}{1,\mathrm{}1}},p_{k1}+1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{},1,p_1+1\underset{q_0}{\underset{}{1,\mathrm{}1}}}^a(z)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a.$$

By extending linearly, we get the $``$-linear map $`Li^a(z):M^{}A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ which sends each word $`W`$ in $`M^{}`$ to $`Li_W^a(z)`$.

###### Theorem 3.15 (Explicit Formulae).

Put $`a_p`$. Let $`G_0^a(z)`$ be the fundamental solution of the $`p`$-adic KZ equation (KZp) in Theorem 3.3. Expand $`G_0^a(z)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}J_p^a(W)(z)W`$. Then each coefficient $`J_p^a(W)(z)`$ can be expressed as follows.

1. When $`W`$ is in $`M^{}`$, $`J_p^a(W)(z)=(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(z)`$.
2. When $`W`$ is written as $`VA^r(r0,VM^{})`$,

$$J_p^a(W)(z)=\underset{0s,0t}{\underset{s+t=r}{}}(1)^{dp(W)+s}Li_{f^{}(VA^s)}^a(z)\frac{\{log^a(z)\}^t}{t!}.$$
3. When $`W`$ is written as $`A^r(r0)`$, $`J_p^a(W)(z)=\frac{\{log^a(z)\}^r}{r!}`$.

For the definition of the shuffle product ‘$``$’, see \[F0\] Definition 3.2.2. The proof of this theorem will be given in the end of this subsection.

###### Lemma 3.16.

$`f^{}(G_0^a(z))=1+\underset{WM^{}:\text{words}}{}J_p^a(W)(z)W`$.

###### Proof .

Apply $`f^{}`$ term by term. ∎

###### Lemma 3.17.

$`f^{}(G_0^a(z))=1+\underset{WM^{}:\text{words}}{}(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(z)W`$.

###### Proof .

By the $`p`$-adic KZ equation, we get the following:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}J_p^a(W)(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u}}J_p^a(W^{})(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=AW^{}(W^{}M^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}J_p^a(W)(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u1}}J_p^a(W^{})(u)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=BW^{}(W^{}M^{}),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}J_p^a(W)(u)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{u1}}`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=BM^{}.`$
By Lemma 2.8, we see that the family $`\left\{(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(z)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\right\}_{WM^{}:\text{words}}`$ satisfies the above differential equation. The definition of $`G_0^a(u)u^A`$ in Theorem 3.3 especially implies that each $`J_p^a(W)(z)A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$ for $`WM^{}`$ is analytic at $`z=0`$ and $`J_p^a(W)(0)=0`$ because $`f^{}\left(G_0^a(u)u^A\right)=f^{}\left(G_0^a(u)\right)=1+\underset{WM^{}:\text{words}}{}J_p^a(W)(u)W`$. Therefore by using $`J_p^a(W)(0)=(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(0)=0`$, we obtain inductively the equality $`J_p^a(W)(u)=(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(u)`$. ∎

By combining Lemma 3.16 with Lemma 3.17, we get Theorem 3.15.(a).

###### Notation 3.18.

Let $`A__p^{}[[\alpha ]]:=A__p^{}\widehat{}_p[[\alpha ]]`$ be the one variable formal power series ring with coefficients in the non-commutative algebra $`A__p^{}`$. Let $`g_1^{}:A__p^{}A__p^{}[[\alpha ]]`$ be the algebra homorphism which sends $`A`$, $`B`$ to $`A\alpha `$, $`B`$ respectively and let $`g_2^{}:A__p^{}[[\alpha ]]A__p^{}`$ be the well-defined $`_p`$-linear map which sends $`W\alpha ^q`$ to $`WA^q`$ for each word $`W`$ and $`q0`$.

Consider the $`_p`$-linear map $`g_2^{}g_1^{}:A__p^{}A__p^{}`$.

###### Lemma 3.19.

$`g_2^{}g_1^{}f^{}=g_2^{}g_1^{}`$.

###### Proof .

By definition, we get easily $`g_2^{}g_1^{}(VA)=0`$ for $`VA__p^{}`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.20.

$`G_0^a(z)=g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(f^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)\right)z^A`$.

###### Proof .

By Lemma 3.19, we get

(3.2)
$$g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(f^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)\right)=g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right).$$

Both $`G_0^a(A\alpha ,B)(u)`$ and $`u^\alpha G_0^a(A,B)(u)`$ are solutions of the $`p`$-adic differential equation $`\frac{dG}{du}(u)=(\frac{A\alpha }{u}+\frac{B}{u1})G(u)`$ in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}[[\alpha ]]`$ and satisfies the same asymptotic behavior $`G(u)u^{A\alpha }`$ as $`u0`$. Therefore the uniqueness of solution of the above $`p`$-adic differential equation (which can be shown in a way similar to Proposition 3.6), we get $`G_0^a(A\alpha ,B)(u)=G_0^a(A,B)(u)u^\alpha `$, from which it follows that

(3.3)
$$g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)=G_0^a(z)z^A.$$

By (3.2) and (3.3), we get $`G_0^a(z)=g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(f^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)\right)z^A`$. ∎

Therefore we see that $`P^a(z)=g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(f^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)\right)`$ (for $`P^a(z)`$, see the proof of Theorem 3.3).

###### Notation 3.21.

1. We define the $``$-bilinear inner product $`<,>:𝔸\times 𝔸𝔸`$ by $`<W,W^{}>:=\delta _{W,W^{}}`$ for each word (or $`1`$) $`W`$ and $`W^{}`$, where

$$\delta _{W,W^{}}:=\{\begin{array}{cc}1,\text{if }W=W^{},\hfill & \\ 0,\text{if }WW^{},\hfill & \end{array}$$
2. We define $`F^{}:𝔸𝔸`$ to be the graded $``$-linear map which sends each word (or $`1`$) $`W=W^{}A^r`$ ($`r0`$, $`W^{}M^{}`$ or $`W^{}=1`$) to $`(1)^rf^{}(W^{}A^r)`$. We note that $`ImF^{}M^{}`$.

###### Lemma 3.22.

The linear map $`F^{}`$ is the transpose of $`g_2^{}g_1^{}`$, i.e.

$$<(g_2^{}g_1^{})(W_1),W_2>=<W_1,F^{}(W_2)>\text{for any words }W\text{ and }W^{}\text{.}$$

###### Proof .

In the case when $`W_1M^{}`$, it is clear. So we may assume that $`W_1M^{}`$. Denote $`W_2=W_2^{}A^r`$ ($`r0`$, $`W_2^{}=1`$ or $`W_2^{}M^{}`$). Then, by a direct computation, we deduce elementarily the following

$$<(g_2^{}g_1^{})(W_1),W_2>=<(g_2^{}g_1^{})(W_1),W_2^{}A^r>=<W_1,(1)^rf^{}(W_2^{}A^r)>.$$

Proof of Theorem 3.15. By Lemma 3.17 and Lemma 3.22, we get

$$g_2^{}g_1^{}\left(f^{}\left(G_0^a(z)\right)\right)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}J^{}(W)(z)W$$

where

$`J^{}(W)(z)`$ $`=(1)^{dp(W)}Li_W^a(z)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`M^{},`$
$`J^{}(W)(z)`$ $`=J^{}(W^{}A^r)(z)=J^{}\left(F^{}(W^{}A^r)\right)(z)`$ $`=(1)^r`$ $`J^{}\left(f^{}(W^{}A^r)\right)(z)`$
$`=(1)^{dp(W)+r}Li_{f^{}(W^{}A^r)}^a(z)`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=W^{}A^r(r0,W^{}M^{}),`$
$`J^{}(W)(z)`$ $`=0`$ $`\text{if }W`$ $`=A^r(r1).`$
By Lemma 3.20, we obtain

$`G_0^a(z)`$ $`=1+{\displaystyle \underset{W:\text{words}}{}}J_p^a(W)(z)W`$
$`=\left(1+{\displaystyle \underset{W:\text{words}}{}}J^{}(W)(z)W\right)\left({\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\{log^a(z)\}^n}{n!}}A^n\right).`$
Then, by a direct calculation, we can show the explicit formula in Theorem 3.15. ∎

###### Notation 3.23.

We denote the involution of $`A__p^{}`$ which exchanges $`A`$ and $`B`$ by $`\tau :A__p^{}A__p^{}`$.

By Proposition 3.8, we get

###### Lemma 3.24.

$$G_1^a(z)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}J_p^a\left(\tau (W)\right)(1z)W.$$

###### Examples 3.25.

The following is a low degree part of $`G_0^a(A,B)(z)`$.

$`G_0^a`$ $`(A,B)(z)=1+(log^az)A+log^a(1z)B+{\displaystyle \frac{(log^az)^2}{2}}A^2Li_2^a(z)AB`$
$`+\left\{Li_2^a(z)+(log^az)log^a(1z)\right\}BA+{\displaystyle \frac{\{log^a(1z)\}^2}{2}}B^2+{\displaystyle \frac{(log^az)^3}{6}}A^3`$
$`Li_3^a(z)A^2B+\left\{2Li_3^a(z)+(log^az)Li_2^a(z)\right\}ABA+Li_{1,2}^a(z)AB^2`$
$`\left[Li_3^a(z)(log^az)Li_2^a(z){\displaystyle \frac{(log^az)^2log^a(1z)}{2}}\right]BA^2+Li_{2,1}^a(z)BAB`$
$`\left[Li_{1,2}^a(z)+Li_{2,1}^a(z){\displaystyle \frac{log^az\{log^a(1z)\}^2}{2}}\right]B^2A`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\{log^a(1z)\}^3}{6}}B^3+\mathrm{}.`$
### 3.3. Explicit formulae of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator

In this subsection, first we give a proof of Theorem 2.18 and then give an explicit formula to express each coefficient of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$. The technique employed here is essentially a $`p`$-adic analogue of that employed in \[LM\] Appendix A.

###### Lemma 3.26.

$$\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^AG_0^a(ϵ)=1.$$

###### Proof .

Since $`P^a(u)=G_0^a(u)u^A`$ lies in $`A(]0[)\widehat{}A__p^{}`$ and takes value $`1`$ at $`u=0`$ by Theorem 3.3, we get an expression $`P^a(u)=1+uk(u)`$ where $`k(u)A(]0[)\widehat{}A__p^{}`$. Thus

$`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^AG_0^a(ϵ)=`$ $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^AP^a(ϵ)ϵ^A`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}1+ϵexp\{log^a(ϵ)A\}k(ϵ)exp\{log^a(ϵ)A\}.`$
By taking its word expansion and applying Lemma 2.14 in each term, we get the lemma. ∎

Although $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}}G_0^a(ϵ)ϵ^A=1`$ by definition and $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^AG_0^a(ϵ)=1`$ by Lemma 3.26, $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}}ϵ^AG_0^a(ϵ)=1`$ does not hold.

###### Lemma 3.27.

$$\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_0^a(1ϵ)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B).$$

###### Proof .

By Proposition 3.8 and Lemma 3.26, we get

$$\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_1^a(1ϵ)=\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_0^a(B,A)(ϵ)=1.$$

Thus

$$\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_0^a(1ϵ)=\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_1^a(1ϵ)\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B).$$

It is interesting to compare $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^BG_0^a(1ϵ)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ in Lemma 3.27 with $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}ϵ^AG_0^a(ϵ)=1`$ in Lemma 3.26.

Proof of Theorem 2.18. By Lemma 3.27, we obtain

$$\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}\left(\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\{log^a(ϵ)\}^n}{n!}B^n\right)\left(1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}J_p^a(W)(1ϵ)W\right)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B).$$

Therefore especially for a word $`WA𝔸`$, we see that $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}J_p^a(W)(1ϵ)`$ converges to the coefficient of $`W`$ on $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$. Thus for each word $`W=A^{k_m1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B`$ ($`k_i1`$) where $`k_m>1`$, we can say that $`\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}J_p^a(W)(1ϵ)=(1)^m\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(1ϵ)`$ (cf. Theorem 3.15.(a)) converges. ∎

###### Notation 3.28.

1. Put $`M=A𝔸B=\{AFB|F𝔸\}`$, which is a $``$-linear subspace of $`𝔸`$. Note that there is a natural surjection from $`𝔸`$ to $`𝔸/(B𝔸+𝔸A)`$. By identifying the latter space with $`1+M(=1+A𝔸B)`$, we obtain the $``$-linear map $`f:𝔸𝔸/(B𝔸+𝔸A)\stackrel{}{}1+M𝔸`$. Abusively we denote by $`f`$ the $`_p`$-linear map $`A__p^{}A__p^{}`$ induced by $`f:𝔸𝔸`$.
2. For each word $`A^{p_1}B^{q_1}A^{p_2}B^{q_2}\mathrm{}A^{p_k}B^{q_k}`$ ($`p_i,q_i1`$) in $`M`$, we define

$`Z_p(W):`$ $`=\underset{ϵ_p}{\underset{ϵ0}{lim}^{}}Li_W^a(1ϵ)`$
$`=\zeta _p(\underset{q_k1}{\underset{}{1,\mathrm{}1}},p_k+1,\underset{q_{k1}1}{\underset{}{1,\mathrm{}1}},p_{k1}+1,\mathrm{}\mathrm{},1,p_1+1).`$
By extending linearly, we get the $``$-linear map $`Z_p:M_p`$ which sends each word $`W`$ in $`M`$ to $`Z_p(W)_p`$.

We already know that $`Z_p(W)`$ is independent of any choice of branch parameter $`a_p`$ by Theorem 2.13 and lies in $`_p`$ by Theorem 2.25.

###### Remark 3.29.

By combining Lemma 3.27 with Theorem 3.10, we get another proof of branch independency (Theorem 2.13) of the value $`\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}Li_{k_1,\mathrm{},k_m}^a(z)`$ for $`k_m>1`$.

###### Theorem 3.30 (Explicit Formulae).

Expand the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator: $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)=1+\underset{W:\text{words}}{}I_p(W)W`$. Then each coefficient $`I_p(W)`$ can be expressed as follows.

1. When $`W`$ is in $`M`$, $`I_p(W)=(1)^{dp(W)}Z_p(W)`$.
2. When $`W`$ is written as $`B^rVA^s(r,s0,VM)`$,

$$I_p(W)=(1)^{dp(W)}\underset{0ar,0bs}{}(1)^{a+b}Z_p\left(f(B^aB^{ra}VA^{sb}A^b)\right).$$
3. When $`W`$ is written as $`B^rA^s(r,s0)`$,

$$I_p(W)=(1)^{dp(W)}\underset{0ar,0bs}{}(1)^{a+b}Z_p\left(f(B^aB^{ra}A^{sb}A^b)\right).$$

The proof of this theorem will be given in the end of this subsection.

###### Remark 3.31.

1. These explicit formulae are the $`p`$-adic version of those given in \[F1\] Proposition 3.2.3.
2. Suppose that $`k_i1`$ and $`k_m=1`$. In the complex case, $`(1)^mI(A^{k_m1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B)`$ (for $`I()`$, see \[F1\] Proposition 3.2.3) is called the regularized MZV corresponding to $`A^{k_m1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B`$ (just something like a modification of the divergent series $`\zeta (k_1,\mathrm{},k_{m1},1)`$), see for example \[IKZ\]. Therefore we may call $`(1)^mI_p(A^{k_m1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B)`$ by the regularized $`p`$-adic MZV corresponding to $`A^{k_m1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B`$.

###### Lemma 3.32.

$$f(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B))=1+\underset{WM:\text{words}}{}I_p(W)W.$$

###### Proof .

Apply $`f`$ term by term. ∎

###### Lemma 3.33.

$$f(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B))=1+\underset{WM:\text{words}}{}(1)^{dp(W)}Z_p(W)W$$

###### Proof .

It follows from Theorem 3.15.(a) and Lemma 3.27. ∎

By combining Lemma 3.32 and Lemma 3.33, we get Theorem 3.30.(a).

###### Notation 3.34.

Let $`A__p^{}[[\alpha ,\beta ]]:=A__p^{}\widehat{}_p[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ be the two variable formal power series ring with coefficients in the non-commutative algebra $`A__p^{}`$. Let $`g_1:A__p^{}A__p^{}[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ be the algebra homomorphism which sends $`A`$, $`B`$ to $`A\alpha `$, $`B\beta `$ respectively and let $`g_2:A__p^{}[[\alpha ,\beta ]]A__p^{}`$ be the well-defined $`_p`$-linear map which sends $`W\alpha ^p\beta ^q`$ to $`B^qWA^p`$ for each word $`W`$ and $`p,q0`$.

Consider the $`_p`$-linear map $`g_2g_1:A__p^{}A__p^{}`$.

###### Lemma 3.35.

$`g_2g_1f=g_2g_1`$.

###### Proof .

By definition, we get easily $`g_2g_1(VA)=0`$ and $`g_2g_1(BV)=0`$ for $`VA__p^{}`$. ∎

###### Lemma 3.36.

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)=g_2g_1\left(f\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)\right)\right)`$ .

###### Proof .

By Lemma 3.35, we get

(3.4)
$$g_2g_1(f\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)\right))=g_2g_1\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)\right).$$

Both $`G_0^a(A\alpha ,B\beta )(u)`$ and $`u^\alpha (1u)^\beta G_0(A,B)(u)`$ are solutions of the $`p`$-adic differential equation $`\frac{dG}{du}(u)=(\frac{A\alpha }{u}+\frac{B\beta }{u1})G(u)`$ in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\widehat{}A__p^{}[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ and satisfy the same asymptotic behavior $`G(u)u^{A\alpha }`$ as $`u0`$. By the uniqueness of solutions of the above $`p`$-adic differential equation (which can be shown in a way similar to Proposition 3.6), we get

$$G_0^a(A\alpha ,B\beta )(u)=u^\alpha (1u)^\beta G_0(A,B)(u).$$

Similarly we get

$$G_1^a(A\alpha ,B\beta )(u)=u^\alpha (1u)^\beta G_1(A,B)(u).$$

Therefore

$$G_1^a(A\alpha ,B\beta )(u)^1G_0^a(A\alpha ,B\beta )(u)=G_1^a(A,B)(u)^1G_0^a(A,B)(u),$$

from which it follows that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A\alpha ,B\beta )=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B).$$

Thus we get,

(3.5)
$$g_2g_1\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)\right)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B).$$

From (3.4) and (3.5), it follows that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)=g_2g_1\left(f\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)\right)\right)`$. ∎

###### Notation 3.37.

We denote $`F:𝔸𝔸`$ to be the graded $``$-linear map which sends each word (or $`1`$) $`W=B^rW^{}A^s`$ ($`r,s0`$, $`W^{}M`$ or $`W^{}=1`$) to $`\underset{0ar,0bs}{}(1)^{a+b}f^{}(B^aB^{ra}W^{}A^{sb}A^b)`$. We note that $`ImFM`$.

###### Lemma 3.38.

The linear map $`F`$ is the transpose of $`g_2g_1`$.

###### Proof .

By an argument similar to Lemma 3.22, we can prove this lemma. ∎

Proof of Theorem 3.30. By combining Lemma 3.33 with Lemma 3.36 and Lemma 3.38, we can show the explicit formulae in Theorem 3.30 by an argument similar to the proof of Theorem 3.15. ∎

###### Examples 3.39.

The following is a low degree part of the $`p`$-adic Drinfel’d associator $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$.

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p`$ $`(A,B)=1\zeta _p(2)AB+\zeta _p(2)BA\zeta _p(3)A^2B+2\zeta _p(3)ABA`$
$`+\zeta _p(1,2)AB^2\zeta _p(3)BA^22\zeta _p(1,2)BAB+\zeta _p(1,2)B^2A`$
$`\zeta _p(4)A^3B+3\zeta _p(4)A^2BA+\zeta _p(1,3)A^2B^23\zeta _p(4)ABA^2`$
$`+\zeta _p(2,2)ABAB(2\zeta _p(1,3)+\zeta _p(2,2))AB^2A\zeta _p(1,1,2)AB^3`$
$`+\zeta _p(4)BA^3(2\zeta _p(1,3)+\zeta _p(2,2))BA^2B+(4\zeta _p(1,3)+\zeta _p(2,2))BABA`$
$`+3\zeta _p(1,1,2)BAB^2\zeta _p(1,3)B^2A^23\zeta _p(1,1,2)B^2AB`$
$`+\zeta _p(1,1,2)B^3A+\mathrm{}.`$
### 3.4. Proofs of main results and functional equations among $`p`$-adic multiple polylogarithms

Here we show functional equations among $`p`$-adic MPL’s in Theorem 3.40 and give proofs of Theorem 2.22 and Theorem 2.28.

###### Theorem 3.40 (Functional Equation among $`p`$-adic MPL’s).

Let $`W`$ be a word and $`z^1(_p)\backslash \{0,1,\mathrm{}\}`$, then

$$J_p^a(W)(1z)=\underset{W=W^{}W^{\prime \prime }}{\underset{W^{},W^{\prime \prime }:\text{words}}{}}J_p^a\left(\tau (W^{})\right)(z)I_p(W^{\prime \prime }).$$

For $`J_p^a`$, $`I_p`$, $`\tau `$, see Theorem 3.15, Theorem 3.30 and Notation 3.23 respectively. This formulae may be regarded as a functional equation among $`p`$-adic MPL’s because $`J_p^a(\tau (W^{}))(z)`$ (resp. $`I_p(W^{\prime \prime })`$) is expressed in terms of $`p`$-adic MPL’s (resp. $`p`$-adic MZV’s).

###### Proof .

It follows from $`G_0^a(A,B)(z)=G_1^a(A,B)(z)\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)`$ and Lemma 3.24. ∎

###### Examples 3.41.

Put $`a_p`$.

1. Take $`W=BAB`$. Then we get

$$Li_{2,1}^a(1z)=2Li_3^a(z)log^a(z)Li_2^a(z)\zeta _p(2)log^a(z)2\zeta _p(3).$$
2. Take $`W=BA^2B`$. Then we get

$`Li_{3,1}^a(1z)=`$ $`2Li_{1,3}^a(z)Li_{2,2}^a(z)+log^a(z)Li_{1,2}^a(z)`$
$`+\zeta _p(2)Li_2^a(z)\zeta _p(3)log^a(z)2\zeta _p(1,3)\zeta _p(2,2).`$
3. Take $`W=AB`$. Then we get

$$Li_2^a(1z)=Li_2^a(z)log^a(z)log^a(1z)+\zeta _p(2).$$

This formula is equal Coleman-Sinnott’s functional equation of the $`p`$-adic dilogarithm (\[C\] Proposition 6.4.(iii)) because $`\zeta _p(2)=0`$ by Example 2.19.(a).

Proof of Theorem 2.22. By the explicit formulae in Theorem 3.15 and the functional equation of $`p`$-adic MPL’s in Theorem 3.40 combined with Lemma 2.14, it is immediate to see that

$$\underset{z_p\{1\}}{\underset{z1}{lim}^{}}J_p^a(W)(1z)=I_p(W)\text{ if it converges.}$$

Theorem 2.22 is a special case for $`W=BA^{k_{m1}1}B\mathrm{}A^{k_11}B`$. ∎

###### Notation 3.42.

1. Denote the subset of $`A__p^{}`$ consisting of formal Lie series in $`A__p^{}`$ by $`𝕃__p^{}`$ and its topological commutator by $`[𝕃__p^{},𝕃__p^{}]`$. We denote $`exp𝕃__p^{}`$ (resp. $`exp[𝕃__p^{},𝕃__p^{}]`$ ) to be the subset of $`A__p^{}`$ consisting of formal power series in $`A__p^{}`$ which is an exponential of an element in $`𝕃__p^{}`$ (resp. $`[𝕃__p^{},𝕃__p^{}]`$ ).
2. We define the (non-commutative) $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$-algebra homomorphism

$$\mathrm{\Delta }:A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{_p}{\overset{^}{}}A__p^{}A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{_p}{\overset{^}{}}(A__p^{}\underset{_p}{\overset{^}{}}A__p^{})$$

to be the homomorphism which is deduced from $`\mathrm{\Delta }(A)=A1+1A`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(B)=B1+1B`$.

###### Proposition 3.43.

$`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p\widehat{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p`$ .

###### Proof .

Put $`a_p`$. By the following calculations,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)=G_0^a(\mathrm{\Delta }(A),\mathrm{\Delta }(B))(u)u^{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}\text{ as }u0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)\right)}{du}}(u)={\displaystyle \frac{dG_0^a(\mathrm{\Delta }(A),\mathrm{\Delta }(B))}{du}}(u)`$
$`=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(B)}{u1}})G_0^a(\mathrm{\Delta }(A),\mathrm{\Delta }(B))(u)`$
$`=({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(B)}{u1}})\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right),`$
$`G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)=\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}1\right)\left(1\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)1\right)`$
$`u^A\widehat{}u^A\text{ as }u0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)}{du}}={\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}\left\{\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}1\right)\left(1\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)\right\}`$
$`=\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)\widehat{}1\right\}\left\{1\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right\}`$
$`+\left\{G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}1\right\}\left\{1\widehat{}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{du}}\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)\right\}`$
$`=\left\{({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}1\right\}\left\{1\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right\}`$
$`+\left\{G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}1\right\}\left\{1\widehat{}({\displaystyle \frac{A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B}{u1}})G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right\}`$
$`=({\displaystyle \frac{A\widehat{}1+1\widehat{}A}{u}}+{\displaystyle \frac{B\widehat{}1+1\widehat{}1}{u1}})\left\{G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right\},`$
we see that both $`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)`$ and $`G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)`$ are solutions in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a\underset{_p}{\overset{^}{}}(A__p^{}\underset{_p}{\overset{^}{}}A__p^{})`$ of the $`p`$-adic differential equation

$$\frac{dH}{dt}(t)=(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(A)}{t}+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(B)}{t1})H(t)$$

which satisfies $`H(t)t^A\widehat{}t^A`$ as $`t0`$. Because of the uniqueness of solution for above $`p`$-adic differential equation (which can be shown in a similar way to Proposition 3.6), we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)=G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u).$$

Similarly we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)\right)=G_1^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_1^a(A,B)(u).$$

Therefore

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p\right)`$ $`=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)^1G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)`$
$`=\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)\right)^1\mathrm{\Delta }\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)`$
$`=\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_1^a(A,B)(u)\right)^1\left(G_0^a(A,B)(u)\widehat{}G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)`$
$`=\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)^1G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)\widehat{}\left(G_1^a(A,B)(u)^1G_0^a(A,B)(u)\right)`$
$`=\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p\widehat{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p.`$
###### Lemma 3.44.

Put $`a_p`$. Denote $`g_0^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)`$ and $`g_1^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)`$ to be the images of $`G_0^a(A,B)(z)`$ and $`G_1^a(A,B)(z)`$ by the natural projection $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a[[A,B]]A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ sending $`A`$ (resp. $`B`$) to $`\alpha `$ (resp. $`\beta `$), where $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ is the two variable commutative formal power series ring with $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a`$-coefficients. Then

$$g_0^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=g_1^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=z^\alpha (1z)^\beta \text{ in }A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a[[\alpha ,\beta ]].$$

###### Proof .

Both $`g_0^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)`$ and $`z^\alpha (1z)^\beta `$ are solutions in $`A_{\mathrm{Col}}^a[[\alpha ,\beta ]]`$ of the $`p`$-adic differential equation

$$\frac{dH}{dt}(t)=(\frac{\alpha }{t}+\frac{\beta }{t1})H(t)$$

which satisfy $`H(t)t^\alpha `$ as $`t0`$. By the uniqueness of solution of the above $`p`$-adic differential equation (which can be shown in a similar way to Proposition 3.6), we get

$$g_0^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=z^\alpha (1z)^\beta .$$

Similarly we get

$$g_1^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=z^\alpha (1z)^\beta .$$

Therefore

$$g_0^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=g_1^a(\alpha ,\beta )(z)=z^\alpha (1z)^\beta .\mathit{}$$

###### Theorem 3.45.

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)exp[𝕃__p^{},𝕃__p^{}]`$.

###### Proof .

By Proposition 3.43, we see that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p`$ is group-like, which means that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)exp𝕃__p^{}`$ (see \[Se\] Part I Ch IV §7). It follows from Lemma 3.44 that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{KZ}^p(A,B)=G_1^a(A,B)(z)^1G_0^a(A,B)(z)exp[𝕃__p^{},𝕃__p^{}].\mathit{}$$

###### Corollary 3.46 (Shuffle Product Formulae).

For each word $`W`$ and $`W^{}M`$,

$$Z_p(W)Z_p(W^{})=Z_p(WW^{}).$$

###### Proof .

Consider the graded $``$-linear map $`I_p:𝔸Z_{}^{(p)}`$ which sends each word $`W`$ to $`I_p(W)Z_{}^{(p)}`$ (for $`I_p(W)`$, see Theorem 3.30). Then by Proposition 3.43, we obtain the shuffle product formulae $`I_p(W)I_p(W^{})=I_p(WW^{})`$ on $`_p`$ for each word $`W^{}`$ and $`W^{\prime \prime }`$. By Theorem 3.30, we get the corollary. ∎

Proof of Theorem 2.28. It follows immediately from Corollary 3.46. ∎


text:
# Lax matrices for Yang-Baxter maps

## Introduction

In 1990 V.G. Drinfeld suggested the problem of studying the solutions of the quantum Yang-Baxter equation in the case when the vector space $`V`$ is replaced by an arbitrary set $`X`$ and tensor product by the direct product of the sets (“set-theoretical solutions to the quantum Yang-Baxter equation”) . In the paper  one of the authors investigated the dynamical aspects of this problem and suggested a shorter term “Yang-Baxter map” for such solutions.

For each Yang-Baxter map one can introduce the hierarchy of commuting transfer-maps which are believed to be integrable (see ). In this note we explain how to find Lax representations for a certain class of Yang-Baxter maps thus giving another justification for this conjecture. We were motivated by the explicit examples of the Yang-Baxter maps from  and recent results on the equations on quad-graphs, satisfying the so-called “3D consistency condition” .

## Yang-Baxter maps and their Lax representations

Let $`X`$ be any set and $`R`$ be a map:

$$R:X\times XX\times X.$$

Let $`R_{ij}:X^nX^n,X^n=X\times X\times \mathrm{}..\times X`$ be the map which acts as $`R`$ on $`i`$-th and $`j`$-th factors and identically on the others. Let $`R_{21}=PRP`$, where $`P:X^2X^2`$ is the permutation: $`P(x,y)=(y,x)`$.

Following , we call $`R`$ the Yang-Baxter map if it satisfies the Yang-Baxter relation

(1)
$$R_{23}R_{13}R_{12}=R_{12}R_{13}R_{23},$$

considered as the equality of the maps of $`X\times X\times X`$ into itself. If additionally $`R`$ satisfies the relation

(2)
$$R_{21}R=Id,$$

it is called reversible Yang-Baxter map. Reversibility condition will not play an essential role in this note but it is satisfied in all the examples we present.

The standard way to represent the Yang-Baxter relation is given by the diagram in Fig. 1.

However we would like to use here also an alternative (dual) way to visualize it, which emphasizes the relation with 3D consistency condition for discrete equations on quad-graphs (see ). In this representation the fields (elements of $`X`$) are assigned to the edges of elementary quadrilaterals, so that Fig.2 encodes the map $`R:(x,y)(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})`$.

Then the Yang-Baxter relation is illustrated as in Fig. 3.

It encodes the 3D consistency of the maps $`R`$ attached to all facets of an elementary cube. The left–hand side of (1) corresponds to the chain of maps along the three rear faces of the cube on Fig. 3:

$$R_{12}:(x,y)(x_2,y_1),R_{13}:(x_2,z)(x_{23},z_1),R_{23}:(y_1,z_1)(y_{13},z_{12}),$$

while its right–hand side corresponds to the chain of the maps along the three front faces of the cube:

$$R_{23}:(y,z)(y_3,z_2),R_{13}:(x,z_2)(x_3,z_{12}),R_{12}:(x_3,y_3)(x_{23},y_{13}).$$

So, (1) assures that two ways of obtaining $`(x_{23},y_{13},z_{12})`$ from the initial data $`(x,y,z)`$ lead to the same results.

One can consider also parameter-dependent Yang-Baxter maps $`R(\lambda ,\mu )`$, with $`\lambda ,\mu 𝐂`$, satisfying the corresponding version of Yang-Baxter relation

(3)
$$R_{23}(\mu ,\nu )R_{13}(\lambda ,\nu )R_{12}(\lambda ,\mu )=R_{12}(\lambda ,\mu )R_{13}(\lambda ,\nu )R_{23}(\mu ,\nu ).$$

The reversibility condition in this situation reads

(4)
$$R_{21}(\mu ,\lambda )R(\lambda ,\mu )=Id.$$

One thinks of the parameters $`\lambda ,\mu `$ as assigned to the same edges of the quadrilateral in Fig. 2 as the fields $`x,y`$ are. Moreover, opposite edges are thought of as carrying the same parameters. Thus, in Fig. 3 all edges parallel to the $`x`$ (resp. $`y,z`$) axis, carry the parameter $`\lambda `$ (resp. $`\mu ,\nu `$). Although this can be considered as a particular case of the general notion, by introducing $`\stackrel{~}{X}=X\times 𝐂`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{R}(x,\lambda ;y,\mu )=R(\lambda ,\mu )(x,y)`$, it is convenient for us to keep the parameter separately.

By the Lax matrix (or Lax representation) for such a map we will mean the matrix $`A(x,\lambda ;\zeta )`$ depending on the point $`xX`$, parameter $`\lambda `$ and additional (“spectral”) parameter $`\zeta 𝐂,`$ which satisfies the following relation:

(5)
$$A(x,\lambda ;\zeta )A(y,\mu ;\zeta )=A(\stackrel{~}{y},\mu ;\zeta )A(\stackrel{~}{x},\lambda ;\zeta ),$$

whenever $`(\stackrel{~}{x},\stackrel{~}{y})=R(\lambda ,\mu )(x,y).`$ As it was shown in , such a matrix allows one to produce integrals for the dynamics of the related transfer-maps.

Our main result is the following observation.

Suppose that on the set $`X`$ we have an action of the linear group $`G=GL_N`$, and that the Yang-Baxter map $`R(\lambda ,\mu )`$ has the following special form:

(6)
$$\stackrel{~}{x}=B(y,\mu ,\lambda )[x],\stackrel{~}{y}=A(x,\lambda ,\mu )[y],$$

where $`A,B:X\times 𝐂\times 𝐂GL_N`$ are some matrix valued functions on $`X`$ depending on parameters $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ and $`A[x]`$ denotes the action of $`AG`$ on $`xX.`$ Suppose for the beginning that the action of $`G`$ on $`X`$ is effective, i.e. $`A`$ acts identically on $`X`$ only if $`A=I`$. Then we claim that both $`A(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ and $`B^\mathrm{T}(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ are Lax matrices for $`R`$. The claim about $`B`$ is equivalent to saying that $`B(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ is a Lax matrix for $`R_{21}.`$

The following argument is illustrated by either the standard or the “cubic” diagram for the Yang-Baxter relation (Figs. 1,3). Look at the values of $`z_{12}`$ produced by the both parts of the Yang-Baxter relation (3): the left-hand side gives $`z_{12}=A(y_1,\mu ,\nu )A(x_2,\lambda ,\nu )[z]`$, while the right-hand side gives $`z_{12}=A(x,\lambda ,\nu )A(y,\mu ,\nu )[z]`$. Now since we assume that the action of $`G`$ is effective, we immediately arrive at the relation

$$A(x,\lambda ,\nu )A(y,\mu ,\nu )=A(y_1,\mu ,\nu )A(x_2,\lambda ,\nu ),$$

which holds whenever $`(x_2,y_1)=R(\lambda ,\mu )(x,y)`$. This coincides with (5), an arbitrary parameter $`\nu `$ playing the role of the spectral parameter $`\zeta `$.

Similarly, one could look at the values of $`x_{23}`$ produced by the both parts of (3): the left-hand side gives $`x_{23}=B(z,\nu ,\lambda )B(y,\mu ,\lambda )[x]`$, while the right-hand side gives $`x_{23}=B(y_3,\mu ,\lambda )B(z_2,\nu ,\lambda )[x]`$. Effectiveness of the action of $`G`$ again implies:

$$B(z,\nu ,\lambda )B(y,\mu ,\lambda )=B(y_3,\mu ,\lambda )B(z_2,\nu ,\lambda ),$$

whenever $`(y_3,z_2)=R(\mu ,\nu )(y,z)`$. This turns into (5) for the transposed matrices $`B^\mathrm{T}`$ (or for the inverse matrices $`B^1`$); the role of spectral parameter is here played by an arbitrary parameter $`\lambda `$.

It should be mentioned that this kind of arguments was first used to derive Lax representations for 3D consistent discrete equations on quad-graphs with fields on vertices in . In fact the 3D consistency condition is the exact analog of the Yang-Baxter relation for the problems with fields on vertices (see ).

In order to cover all the known examples we have to extend the proposed scheme in the following way. Let us say that $`A(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ gives a projective Lax representation for the Yang-Baxter map $`R`$ if the relation (5) holds up to multiplication by a scalar matrix $`cI`$, where $`c`$ may depend on all the variables in the relation. One can easily modify the arguments from  to produce the integrals for the transfer-maps using the projective Lax matrix: all the ratios of the eigenvalues of the monodromy matrix are obviously preserved by these maps.

Assume now that the action of $`G=GL_N`$ on $`X`$ is projective, i.e. scalar matrices are acting trivially and moreover if the action of $`A`$ on $`X`$ is trivial then $`A`$ is a scalar. Then our previous considerations show that the matrices $`A(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ and $`B^\mathrm{T}(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ give projective Lax representations for the corresponding Yang-Baxter maps (6). In practice for a natural choice of matrices $`A`$, $`B`$ in (6) we have actually proper Lax representations, as the following examples show.

## Example 1

Adler’s map.

Here $`X=\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$ and the map has the form

(7)
$$\stackrel{~}{x}=y\frac{\lambda \mu }{x+y},\stackrel{~}{y}=x\frac{\mu \lambda }{x+y}.$$

This map (modulo additional permutation) first appeared in Adler’s paper  as a symmetry of the periodic dressing chain . The Lax pair for this map was known from the very beginning since it comes from re-factorization problem for the matrix

$$A(x,\lambda ,\zeta )=(\begin{array}{cc}x& x^2+\lambda \zeta \\ 1& x\end{array}).$$

Our point is that we can actually see this matrix directly in the map:

$$\stackrel{~}{y}=x\frac{\mu \lambda }{x+y}=\frac{x^2+xy(\mu \lambda )}{x+y}=A(x,\lambda ,\mu )[y],$$

where the group $`G=GL_2`$ is acting on $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^1`$ by Möbius transformations. In this example $`B(x,\lambda ,\zeta )=A(x,\lambda ,\zeta )`$, which reflects the symmetry of the map: $`R_{21}=R`$.

## Example 2

Interaction of matrix solitons.

One-soliton solutions of the matrix KdV equation

$$U_t+3UU_x+3U_xU+U_{xxx}=0$$

have the form

$$U=2\lambda ^2Psech^2(\lambda x4\lambda ^3t),$$

where the matrix amplitude $`P`$ must be a projector: $`P^2=P`$, and $`\lambda `$ is the parameter measuring the soliton velocity. If we assume that $`P`$ has rank 1 then $`P={\displaystyle \frac{\xi \eta }{\xi ,\eta }}`$. Here $`\xi `$ is a vector in a vector space $`V`$ of dimension $`N`$, $`\eta `$ is a (co)vector from the dual space $`V^{}`$, and bracket $`\xi ,\eta `$ means the canonical pairing between $`V`$ and $`V^{}.`$

The change of the matrix amplitudes $`P`$ of two solitons with the velocities $`\lambda _1`$ and $`\lambda _2`$ after their interaction is described by the following Yang-Baxter map :

$$R(\lambda _1,\lambda _2):(\xi _1,\eta _1;\xi _2,\eta _2)(\stackrel{~}{\xi }_1,\stackrel{~}{\eta }_1;\stackrel{~}{\xi }_2,\stackrel{~}{\eta }_2),$$

(8)
$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_1=\xi _1+\frac{2\lambda _2\xi _1,\eta _2}{(\lambda _1\lambda _2)\xi _2,\eta _2}\xi _2,\stackrel{~}{\eta }_1=\eta _1+\frac{2\lambda _2\xi _2,\eta _1}{(\lambda _1\lambda _2)\xi _2,\eta _2}\eta _2,$$

(9)
$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_2=\xi _2+\frac{2\lambda _1\xi _2,\eta _1}{(\lambda _2\lambda _1)\xi _1,\eta _1}\xi _1,\stackrel{~}{\eta }_2=\eta _2+\frac{2\lambda _1\xi _1,\eta _2}{(\lambda _2\lambda _1)\xi _1,\eta _1}\eta _1.$$

In this example $`X`$ is the set of projectors $`P`$ of rank 1 which is the variety $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}\times \mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}`$, and the group $`G=GL_N`$ is acting on the projectors by conjugation (which corresponds to the natural action of $`GL(V)`$ on $`VV^{}`$).

It is easy to see that the formulas (8), (9) are of the form (6) with the matrices

$$A(P,\lambda ,\zeta )=B(P,\lambda ,\zeta )=I+\frac{2\lambda }{\zeta \lambda }P=I+\frac{2\lambda }{\zeta \lambda }\frac{\xi \eta }{\xi ,\eta }$$

(note that again $`R_{21}=R`$). Our results show that the matrix $`A(P,\lambda ,\zeta )`$ gives a projective Lax representation for the interaction map. In  it is shown that this is actually a genuine Lax representation. One can explain in the same way the Lax matrices for more general Yang-Baxter maps on Grassmannians from .

## Example 3

Yang-Baxter maps arising from geometric crystals , .

Let $`X=𝐂^n`$, and define $`R:X\times XX\times X`$ by the formulas

(10)
$$\stackrel{~}{x}_j=x_j\frac{P_j}{P_{j1}},\stackrel{~}{y}_j=y_j\frac{P_{j1}}{P_j},j=1,\mathrm{},n,$$

where

(11)
$$P_j=\underset{a=1}{\overset{n}{}}\left(\underset{k=1}{\overset{a1}{}}x_{j+k}\underset{k=a+1}{\overset{n}{}}y_{j+k}\right)$$

(in this formula subscripts $`j+k`$ are taken (mod $`n`$)). Clearly, the map (10) keeps the following subsets invariant: $`X_\lambda \times X_\mu X\times X`$, where $`X_\lambda =\{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)X:_{k=1}^nx_k=\lambda \}`$. It can be shown that the restriction of $`R`$ to $`X_\lambda \times X_\mu `$ may be written in the form (6). For this, the following trick is used. Embed this set into $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{n1}\times \mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{n1}`$:

$$J(x,y)=(z(x),w(y)),z(x)=(1:z_1:\mathrm{}:z_{n1}),w(y)=(w_1:\mathrm{}:w_{n1}:1),$$

$$z_j=\underset{k=1}{\overset{j}{}}x_k,w_j=\underset{k=j+1}{\overset{n}{}}y_k.$$

Then it is easy to see that in coordinates $`(z,w)`$ the map $`R`$ is written as

$$\stackrel{~}{z}=B(y,\mu ,\lambda )[z],\stackrel{~}{w}=A(x,\lambda ,\mu )[w],$$

with certain matrices $`B,A`$ from $`G=GL_n`$, where the standard projective action of $`GL_n`$ on $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{n1}`$ is used. Moreover, a simple calculation shows that the inverse matrices are cyclic two-diagonal:

(12)
$$B^1(y,\mu ,\lambda )=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}y_1& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 0& y_2& 1& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& y_3& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ & \mathrm{}& & & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& y_{n1}& 1\\ \lambda & 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& y_n\end{array}\right),$$

(13)
$$A^1(x,\lambda ,\mu )=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}x_1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& \mu \\ 1& x_2& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 0& 1& x_3& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ & \mathrm{}& & & \mathrm{}& \\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& x_{n1}& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 1& x_n\end{array}\right).$$

To be more precise the matrices $`A,B`$ are defined only up to multiplication by scalar matrices. These scalar matrices are chosen in (12), (13) in such a way that the dependence of the matrices $`B^1`$, $`A^1`$ on their “own” parameters ($`\mu `$ and $`\lambda `$, resp.) drops out, so that the only parameter remaining in the Lax representation is the spectral one. In other words, the Lax representation does not depend on the subset $`X_\lambda \times X_\mu `$ to which we restricted the map. Note also that we get this time only one Lax representation for $`R`$, since the matrices $`B^\mathrm{T}`$ coincide with $`A`$. It can be checked that this is actually a genuine (not only projective) Lax representation.

As the last remark we would like to mention that our Lax representation is closely related to the notion of the structure group $`G_R`$ of the Yang-Baxter map $`R`$ . It was shown by Etingof in  that for the map (10) the so-called reduced structure groups $`G_R^+`$ and $`G_R^{}`$ can be realized as the subgroups of the loop group $`PGL_n(C(\lambda ))`$ generated by the matrix functions $`A^1(x,,\lambda )`$ with $`xX`$, resp. by $`B^1(x,,\lambda )`$ with $`xX`$.

## Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the organizers of the SIDE-V conference in Giens (21-26 June 2002) where this work was done.