format: text

text:
# Contents

## 1 Introduction

One of the basic principles of modern theoretical physics is the principle of local gauge invariance. Its application to the theory of particle interactions gave rise to the standard model, which proved to be a success from both theoretical and phenomenological points of view. The most impressive results of the model were obtained within the perturbation theory, which works well for high energy processes. On the other hand, the low energy hadron physics, in particular, the quark confinement, turns out to be dominated by nonperturbative effects, for which there is no rigorous theoretical explanation yet.

The application of geometrical methods to non-abelian gauge theories revealed their rich geometrical and topological properties. In particular, it showed that the configuration space of such theories, which is the space of gauge group orbits in the space of connections, may have a highly nontrivial structure. In general, the orbit space possesses not only orbits of the so called principal type, but also orbits of other types, which may give rise to singularities of the configuration space. This stratified structure of the gauge orbit space is believed to be of importance for both classical and quantum properties of non-abelian gauge theories in nonperturbative approach, and it has been intensively studied in recent years. Let us discuss some aspects indicating its physical relevance.

First, studying the geometry and topology of the generic (principal) stratum, one gets a deeper understanding of the Gribov-ambiguity and of anomalies in terms of index theorems. In particular, one gets anomalies of purely topological type, which can not be seen by perturbative quantum field theory. These are well-known results from the eighties. Moreover, there are partial results and conjectures concerning the relevance of nongeneric strata. First of all, nongeneric gauge orbits affect the classical motion on the orbit space due to boundary conditions and, in this way, may produce nontrivial contributions to the path integral. They may also lead to localization of certain quantum states, as it was suggested by finite-dimensional examples . Further, the gauge field configurations belonging to nongeneric orbits can possess a magnetic charge, i.e. they can be considered as a kind of magnetic monopole configurations, which are responsible for quark confinement. This picture was found in 3-dimensional gauge systems , and it is conjectured that it can hold for 4-dimensional theories as well . Finally, it was suggested in  that non-generic strata may lead to additional anomalies.

Most of the problems mentioned here are still awaiting a systematic investigation. In a series of papers we are going to make a new step in this direction. We give a complete solution to the problem of determining the strata that are present in the gauge orbit space for $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ gauge theories in compact Euclidean space-time of dimension $`d=2,3,4`$. Our analysis is based on the results of a paper by Kondracki and Rogulski , where it was shown that the gauge orbit space is a stratified topological space in the ordinary sense, cf.  and references therein. Moreover, these authors found an interesting relation between orbit types and certain bundle reductions, which we are going to use. We also refer to  for the discussion of a very simple, but instructive special example (orbit types of $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-gauge theory on $`\mathrm{S}^4`$).

The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the basic notions related to the action of the group of gauge transformations on the space of connections, state the definitions of stabilizer and orbit type and recall basic results concerning the stratification structure of the gauge orbit space. In Section 3 we introduce the notions of Howe subgroup and holonomy-induced Howe subbundle and establish the relation between orbit types and holonomy-induced Howe subbundles. Section 4 is devoted to the study of the Howe subgroups of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. In Section 5 we give a classification of the Howe subbundles of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundles for space-time dimension $`d4`$. In Section 6 we prove that any Howe subbundle of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundles is holonomy-induced. In Section 7 we implement the equivalence relation of Howe subbundles due to the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. As an example, in Section 8 we determine the orbit types for gauge group $`\mathrm{SU2}`$. Finally, in Section 9 we discuss an application to Chern-Simons theory in $`2+1`$ dimensions.

In two subsequent papers we shall investigate the natural partial ordering on the set of orbit types and the structure of another, coarser stratification, see , obtained by first factorizing with respect to the so called pointed gauge group and then by the structure group.

## 2 Gauge Orbit Types and Stratification

We consider a fixed topological sector of a gauge theory with gauge group $`G`$ on a Riemannian manifold $`M`$. In the geometrical setting it means that we are given a smooth right principal fibre bundle $`P`$ with structure group $`G`$ over $`M`$. $`G`$ is assumed to be a compact connected Lie group and $`M`$ is assumed to be compact, connected, and orientable.

Denote the sets of connection forms and gauge transformations of $`P`$ of Sobolev class $`W^k`$ (locally square integrable up to the $`k`$-th derivative) by $`𝒜^k`$ and $`𝒢^k`$, respectively. Here $`k`$ is a nonnegative integer. For generalities on Sobolev spaces of cross sections in fibre bundles, see . Provided $`2k>dimM`$, $`𝒜^k`$ is an affine Hilbert space and $`𝒢^{k+1}`$ is a Hilbert Lie group acting smoothly from the right on $`𝒜^k`$ . We shall even assume $`2k>dimM+2`$. Then, by the Sobolev Embedding Theorem, connection forms are of class $`C^1`$ and, therefore, have continuous curvature. If we view elements of $`𝒢^{k+1}`$ as $`G`$-space morphisms $`PG`$, the action of $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$ on $`A𝒜^k`$ is given by

$$A^{(g)}=g^1Ag+g^1\mathrm{d}g.$$
(1)
Let $`^k`$ denote the quotient topological space $`𝒜^k/𝒢^{k+1}`$. This space represents the configuration space of our gauge theory.

For this to make sense, $`^k`$ should not depend essentially on the purely technical parameter $`k`$. Indeed, let $`k^{}>k`$. Then one has natural embeddings $`𝒢^{k^{}+1}𝒢^{k+1}`$ and $`𝒜^k^{}𝒜^k`$. As a consequence of the first, the latter projects to a map $`\phi :^k^{}^k`$. Since the image of $`𝒜^k^{}`$ in $`𝒜^k`$ is dense, so is $`\phi \left(^k^{}\right)`$ in $`^k`$. To see that $`\phi `$ is injective, let $`A_1,A_2𝒜^k^{}`$ and $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$ such that $`\phi (A_2)=\phi (A_1)^{(g)}`$. Then (1) implies

$$\mathrm{d}g=g\phi (A_2)\phi (A_1)g.$$
(2)
Due to $`2k^{}>2k>dimM`$, by the multiplication rule for Sobolev functions, the rhs. of (2) is of class $`W^{k+1}`$. Then $`g`$ is of class $`W^{k+2}`$. This can be iterated until the rhs. is of class $`W^k^{}`$. Hence, $`g𝒢^{k^{}+1}`$, so that $`A_1`$ and $`A_2`$ are representatives of the same element of $`^k^{}`$. This shows that $`^k^{}`$ can be identified with a dense subset of $`^k`$. Another question is whether the stratification structure of $`^k`$, which will be discussed in a moment, depends on $`k`$. Fortunately, the answer to this question is negative, see Theorem 3.3.

In general, the orbit space of a smooth Lie group action does not admit a smooth manifold structure w.r.t. which the projection is smooth. The best one can expect is that it admits a stratification. For the notion of stratification of a topological space, see  or \[23, §4.4\]. For the gauge orbit space $`^k`$, a stratification was constructed in , using a method which is known from compact Lie group actions on completely regular spaces . In order to explain this, let us recall the notions of stabilizer and orbit type. The stabilizer, or isotropy subgroup, of $`A𝒜^k`$ is the subgroup

$$𝒢_A^{k+1}=\{g𝒢^{k+1}|A^{(g)}=A\}$$

of $`𝒢^{k+1}`$. It has the following transformation property: For any $`A𝒜^k`$ and $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$,

$$𝒢_{A^{(g)}}^{k+1}=g^1𝒢_A^{k+1}g.$$

Thus, there exists a natural map, called type map, assigning to each element of $`^k`$ the conjugacy class in $`𝒢^{k+1}`$ made up by the stabilizers of its representatives in $`𝒜^k`$. Let $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ denote the image of this map. The elements of $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ are called orbit types. The set $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ carries a natural partial ordering: $`\tau \tau ^{}`$ iff there are representatives $`𝒢_A^{k+1}`$ of $`\tau `$ and $`𝒢_A^{}^{k+1}`$ of $`\tau ^{}`$ such that $`𝒢_A^{k+1}𝒢_A^{}^{k+1}`$. Note that this definition is consistent with  but not with  and several other authors who define it just inversely.

As was shown in , the subsets $`_\tau ^k^k`$, consisting of gauge orbits of type $`\tau `$, can be equipped with a smooth Hilbert manifold structure and the family

$$\left\{_\tau ^k\right|\tau \mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})\}$$
(3)
is a stratification of $`^k`$. Accordingly, the manifolds $`_\tau ^k`$ are called strata. In particular,

$$^k=\underset{\tau \mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})}{}_\tau ^k,$$

where for any $`\tau \mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+})`$ there holds

$`_\tau ^k`$ is open and dense in $`_{\tau ^{}\tau }_\tau ^{}^k`$. (4)
Similarly to the case of compact Lie groups, there exists a principal orbit type $`\tau _0`$ obeying $`\tau _0\tau `$ for all $`\tau \mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$. Due to (4), the corresponding stratum $`_{\tau _0}^k`$ is open and dense in $`^k`$. For this reason it is called the generic stratum.

The above considerations show that the set $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ together with its natural partial ordering carries the information about which strata occur and how they are patched together.

To conclude, let us remark that instead of using Sobolev techniques one can also stick to smooth connection forms and gauge transformations. Then one obtains essentially analogous results about the stratification of the corresponding gauge orbit space where, roughly speaking, one has to replace ’Hilbert manifold’ and ’Hilbert Lie group’ by ’tame Fréchet manifold’ and ’tame Fréchet Lie group’, see .

## 3 Correspondence between Orbit Types and Bundle Reductions

In this section, let $`p_0P`$ be fixed. For $`A𝒜^k`$, let $`H_A`$ and $`P_A`$ denote the holonomy group and holonomy subbundle, respectively, of $`A`$ based at $`p_0`$. We assume $`2k>dimM+2`$. Then, by the Sobolev Embedding Theorem, $`A`$ is of class $`C^1`$ so that $`P_A`$ is a subbundle of $`P`$ of class $`C^2`$. In particular, it is a subbundle of class $`C^0`$.

For any $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$, let $`\vartheta _g`$ denote the associated vertical automorphism of $`P`$. Then

$$\vartheta _g(p)=pg(p)pP.$$
(5)
Let $`\mathrm{C}_G(H)`$ denote the centralizer of $`HG`$ in $`G`$. We abbreviate $`\mathrm{C}_G^2(H)=\mathrm{C}_G\left(\mathrm{C}_G(H)\right)`$.

Let $`A𝒜^k`$ and $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$. Since the elements of $`𝒢_A^{k+1}`$ map $`A`$-horizontal paths in $`P`$ to $`A`$-horizontal paths they are constant on $`P_A`$. Conversely, any gauge transformation which is constant on $`P_A`$ leaves $`A`$ invariant. Thus, for any $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$ one has

$$g𝒢_A^{k+1}g|_{P_A}\text{ is constant.}$$
(6)
This suggests the idea to characterize orbit types by certain classes of subbundles of $`P`$. For any subgroup $`S𝒢^{k+1}`$ define a subset $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)P`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Theta }(S)=\left\{pP\right|g(p)=g(p_0)gS\}.$$
(7)
###### Lemma 3.1

(a) For any $`A𝒜^k`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)=P_A\mathrm{C}_G^2\left(H_A\right)`$.
(b) Let $`A,A^{}𝒜^k`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)=\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{}^{k+1}\right)`$ implies $`𝒢_A^{k+1}=𝒢_A^{}^{k+1}`$.
(c) Let $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$. For any subgroup $`S𝒢^{k+1}`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(gSg^1\right)=\vartheta _g\left(\mathrm{\Theta }(S)\right)g(p_0)^1`$.

Remark: In , $`P_A\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)`$ is called the evolution bundle generated by $`A`$. Thus, in this terminology, (a) states that $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ maps the stabilizer of a connection to its evolution bundle.

Proof:

(a) Let $`A𝒜^k`$. Recall that $`P_A`$ has structure group $`H_A`$. Hence, in view of (6), the equivariance property of gauge transformations implies

$$\left\{g(p_0)\right|g𝒢_A^{k+1}\}=\mathrm{C}_G(H_A).$$
(8)
Thus, by equivariance again,

$$g𝒢_A^{k+1}g|_{P_A\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)}\text{ is constant.}$$
(9)
This shows $`P_A\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$. Conversely, let $`pP`$ such that $`g(p)=g(p_0)`$ for all $`g𝒢_A^{k+1}`$. There exists $`aG`$ such that $`pa^1P_A`$. Then (6) yields

$$g(p_0)=g\left(pa^1\right)=ag(p)a^1=ag(p_0)a^1,$$

for all $`g𝒢_A^{k+1}`$. Due to (8), then $`a\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)`$. Hence, $`p=(pa^1)aP_A\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)`$.

(b) Let $`A,A^{}𝒜^k`$ be given. For any $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$, we have

$$g𝒢_A^{k+1}g|_{\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)}\text{ is constant.}$$

Here implication from left to right is due to (9) and assertion (a), the inverse implication follows from $`P_A\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ and (6). Since a similar characterization holds for $`𝒢_A^{}^{k+1}`$, the assertion follows.

(c) Let $`pP`$, $`hS`$. Using (5) we compute

$$g(p_0)^1g(p)h(p)g(p)^1g(p_0)=h\left(\vartheta _{g^1}(p)g(p_0)\right).$$

This allows us to write down the following chain of equivalences:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill p\mathrm{\Theta }\left(gSg^1\right)& & g(p)h(p)g(p)^1=g(p_0)h(p_0)g(p_0)^1\hfill \\ & & g(p_0)^1g(p)h(p)g(p)^1g(p_0)=h(p_0)\hfill \\ & & h\left(\vartheta _{g^1}(p)g(p_0)\right)=h(p_0)\hfill \\ & & \vartheta _{g^1}(p)g(p_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(S).\hfill \end{array}$$

This proves assertion (c).

###### Definition 3.2

Let $`G`$ be a Lie group and let $`P`$ be a principal $`G`$-bundle. A subgroup $`HG`$ is called Howe subgroup iff there exists a subset $`KG`$ such that $`H=\mathrm{C}_G(K)`$. A reduction of $`P`$ to a Howe subgroup of $`G`$ will be called Howe subbundle. A subbundle $`QP`$ will be called holonomy-induced of class $`C^r`$ iff it contains a connected subbundle $`\stackrel{~}{Q}Q`$ of class $`C^r`$ with structure group $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ such that

$$Q=\stackrel{~}{Q}\mathrm{C}_G^2\left(\stackrel{~}{H}\right).$$
(10)
We remark that the notion of Howe subgroup is common in the literature, cf. . The notions of Howe subbundle and holonomy-induced subbundle are, to our knowledge, new. Moreover, we note that $`HG`$ is a Howe subgroup iff $`\mathrm{C}_G^2(H)=H`$. In particular, the subset $`KG`$ in the definition can be chosen to be $`\mathrm{C}_G(H)`$.

The set of holonomy-induced Howe subbundles of $`P`$ of class $`C^0`$ is acted upon in a natural way by the group of continuous gauge transformations $`𝒢^{C^0}`$ and by the structure group $`G`$. Let $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$ denote the corresponding set of conjugacy classes. We note that the actions of $`𝒢^{C^0}`$ and $`G`$ commute. Moreover, two subbundles of class $`C^0`$ of $`P`$ are conjugate under the action of $`𝒢^{C^0}`$ iff they are isomorphic. $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$ carries a natural partial ordering, which is defined similarly to that of orbit types: $`\eta \eta ^{}`$ iff there are representatives $`Q`$ of $`\eta `$ and $`Q^{}`$ of $`\eta ^{}`$ such that $`QQ^{}`$.

###### Theorem 3.3

Let $`M`$ be compact, $`dimM2`$. Then the assignment $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ induces, by passing to quotients, an order-preserving bijection from $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ onto $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$.

Proof: Let $`\tau \mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ and choose a representative $`S𝒢^{k+1}`$. There exists $`A𝒜^k`$ such that $`S=𝒢_A^{k+1}`$. According to Lemma 3.1(a), $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ can be obtained by extending the subbundle $`P_AP`$ to the structure group $`\mathrm{C}_G^2(H_A)`$. Since $`P_A`$ is of class $`C^0`$, so is $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$. Since $`P_A`$ is connected, $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ is holonomy-induced of class $`C^0`$. Moreover, it is obviously Howe. According to Lemma 3.1(c), when passing to quotients the class of $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ does not depend on the chosen representative $`S`$ of $`\tau `$. Thus, indeed, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ projects to a map from $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ to $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$.

To check that this map is surjective, let $`QP`$ be a holonomy-induced Howe subbundle of class $`C^0`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{Q}Q`$ be a connected subbundle of class $`C^0`$, with structure group $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$, such that (10) holds. Due to well-known smoothing theorems \[17, Ch. I, §4\], $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ and $`Q`$ are $`C^0`$-isomorphic to $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-subbundles of $`P`$. Hence, up to the action of $`𝒢^{C^0}`$, we may assume that $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ and $`Q`$ are of class $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ themselves. Moreover, up to the action of $`G`$, $`p_0\stackrel{~}{Q}`$. Since $`M`$ is compact and $`dimM2`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ carries a $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-connection with holonomy group $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ \[21, Ch. II, Thm. 8.2\]. This connection prolongs to a unique (smooth) $`A𝒜^k`$ obeying $`P_A=\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ and $`H_A=\stackrel{~}{H}`$. Then Lemma 3.1(a) and (10) imply

$$\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)=\stackrel{~}{Q}\mathrm{C}_G^2\left(\stackrel{~}{H}\right)=Q.$$

This proves surjectivity.

To show that the projected map is injective, let $`\tau ,\tau ^{}\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$. Choose representatives $`S,S^{}`$ and assume that there exist $`g𝒢^{C^0}`$, $`aG`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Theta }\left(S^{}\right)=\vartheta _g\left(\mathrm{\Theta }\left(S\right)\right)a.$$
(11)
Consider the following lemma.

###### Lemma 3.4

Let $`A𝒜^k`$ and let $`QP`$ be a subbundle of class $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$. If there exists $`h𝒢^{C^0}`$ such that

$$\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)=\vartheta _h(Q)$$
(12)
then $`h`$ may be chosen from $`𝒢^{k+1}`$.

Before proving the lemma, let us assume that it holds and finish the arguments. Again, due to smoothing theorems, $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$ is $`C^0`$-isomorphic to some $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$-subbundle $`QP`$. Then there exists $`h𝒢^{C^0}`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S)=\vartheta _h(Q)`$. Due to Lemma 3.4, we can choose $`h𝒢^{k+1}`$. Moreover, due to (11), $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})=\vartheta _{gh}\left(Qa\right)`$. By application of Lemma 3.4 again, we can achieve $`gh𝒢^{k+1}`$. This shows that we may assume, from the beginning, $`g𝒢^{k+1}`$.

Now consider (11). Since $`p_0\mathrm{\Theta }(S)`$, $`\vartheta _g(p_0)a=p_0\left(g(p_0)a\right)\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})`$. Since also $`p_0\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})`$, $`g(p_0)a`$ is an element of the structure group of $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})\left(a^1g(p_0)^1\right)=\mathrm{\Theta }(S^{})`$, so that (11) and Lemma 3.1(c) yield

$$\mathrm{\Theta }\left(S^{}\right)=\vartheta _g\left(\mathrm{\Theta }(S)\right)g(p_0)^1=\mathrm{\Theta }\left(gSg^1\right).$$

Due to Lemma 3.1(b), then $`S^{}=gSg^1`$. This proves injectivity.

Proof of Lemma 3.4: Let $`A`$ and $`Q`$ be given. Under the assumption that (12) holds, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ and $`Q`$ have the same structure group $`H`$. There exist an open covering $`\{U_i\}`$ and local trivializations

$$\xi _i:U_i\times H\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)|_{U_i},\eta _i:U_i\times HQ|_{U_i}$$

of $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ and $`Q`$, respectively. These define local trivializations

$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i,\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i:U_i\times GP|_{U_i}$$

of $`P`$ over $`\{U_i\}`$. Here $`\eta _i`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i`$ can be chosen from the class $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$. As for $`\xi _i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i`$, we note that $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ contains the holonomy bundle $`P_A`$. A standard way of constructing local cross sections in $`P_A`$ goes as follows (cf. the proof of Lemma 1 in \[21, Ch. II,§7.1\]): Choose a local chart about some $`xM`$ and a point $`p`$ in the fibre of $`P_A`$ over $`x`$. Take the pre-images, under the local chart map, of straight lines running through $`x`$ and lift them to $`A`$-horizontal paths running through $`p`$. Since $`A`$ is of class $`W^k`$, the lifts are of class $`W^{k+1}`$. Hence, so is the local cross section and, therefore, the local trivialization defined by that cross section. This shows that $`\xi _i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i`$ may be chosen from the class $`W^{k+1}`$.

Due to (12), the family $`\{\vartheta _h\eta _i\}`$ defines a local trivialization of class $`C^0`$ of $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ over $`\{U_i\}`$. Hence, there exists a vertical automorphism $`\vartheta ^{}`$ of class $`C^0`$ of $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ such that $`\xi _i=\vartheta ^{}\vartheta _h\eta _i`$ $`i`$. By equivariant prolongation, $`\vartheta ^{}`$ defines a unique element $`h^{}𝒢^{C^0}`$. Since $`\vartheta _h^{}`$ leaves $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)`$ invariant, $`\mathrm{\Theta }\left(𝒢_A^{k+1}\right)=\vartheta _{h^{}h}(Q)`$. Thus, by possibly redefining $`h`$ we may assume that $`h^{}=\mathrm{𝟙}`$, i.e., that $`\vartheta ^{}`$ is trivial. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i=\vartheta _h\stackrel{~}{\eta }_ii.$$
(13)
As we shall argue now, (13) implies $`h𝒢^{k+1}`$. To see this, note that $`h𝒢^{k+1}`$ iff the local representatives $`h_i=h\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i\iota `$ are of class $`W^{k+1}`$, see . Here $`\iota `$ denotes the embedding $`U_iU_i\times G`$, $`x(x,\mathrm{𝟙})`$. Using $`\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i(x,h_i(x))=\vartheta _h\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i(x,\mathrm{𝟙})`$, $`xU_i`$, we find

$$h_i=\mathrm{pr}_2\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i^1\vartheta _h\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i\iota ,$$
(14)
where $`\mathrm{pr}_2`$ is the canonical projection $`U_i\times GG`$. Inserting (13) into (14) yields

$$h_i=\mathrm{pr}_2\stackrel{~}{\eta }_i^1\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i\iota i.$$

Here $`\stackrel{~}{\xi }_i`$ is of class $`W^{k+1}`$ and the other maps are of class $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$. Thus, according to the composition rules of Sobolev mappings, $`h_i`$ is of class $`W^{k+1}`$. It follows $`h𝒢^{k+1}`$. This proves Lemma 3.4 and, therefore, Theorem 3.3.

Remarks:
1. As one important consequence of Theorem 3.3, $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ does not depend on $`k`$.
2. General arguments show that $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$ is countable, see \[23, §4.2\]. Hence, so is $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$. Countability of $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ is a necessary condition for this set to define a stratification in the sense of . It was first stated in Theorem 4.2.1 in . In fact, the proof of this theorem already contains most of the arguments needed to prove Theorem 3.3. Unfortunately, although in the proof of Theorem 4.2.1 the authors used that isomorphy of evolution subbundles implies conjugacy under the action of $`𝒢^{k+1}`$, they did not give an argument for that. Such an argument is provided by our Lemma 3.4.
3. Theorem 3.3 also shows that the notion of holonomy-induced Howe subbundle may be viewed as an abstract version of the notion of evolution subbundle generated by a connection.
4. The geometric ideas behind the proof of Theorem 3.3 are also contained in \[15, §2\]. However, a rigorous proof was not given there.

In view of Theorem 3.3, we are left with the problem of determining the set $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$ together with its partial ordering. This leads us to the following

Programme
Step 1 Determination of the Howe subgroups of $`G`$. Since $`G`$-action on subbundles conjugates the structure group, classification up to conjugacy is sufficient.

Step 2 Determination of Howe subbundles of $`P`$. Since subbundles are conjugate by $`𝒢^{C^0}`$ iff they are isomorphic, classification up to isomorphy is sufficient.

Step 3 Specification of the Howe subbundles which are holonomy-induced.

Step 4 Factorization by $`G`$-action

Step 5 Determination of the natural partial ordering.

In the present paper, we perform steps 1–4 for the group $`G=\mathrm{SU}n`$. As already noted, the determination of the natural partial ordering, which includes the study of the natural partial ordering of Howe subgroups, will be published in a subsequent paper.

## 4 The Howe Subgroups of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$

Let $`\text{Howe}(\mathrm{SU}n)`$ denote the set of conjugacy classes of Howe subgroups of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. In order to derive $`\text{Howe}(\mathrm{SU}n)`$, we consider $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ as a subset of the general linear algebra $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$, viewed as an associative algebra.

In the literature it is customary to consider, instead of Howe subgroups, Howe dual pairs. A Howe dual pair is an ordered pair of subgroups $`(H_1,H_2)`$ of $`G`$ such that

$$H_1=\mathrm{C}_G(H_2),H_2=\mathrm{C}_G(H_1).$$

The assignment $`H(H,\mathrm{C}_G(H))`$ defines a $`1:1`$-relation between Howe subgroups and Howe dual pairs. One also defines Howe subalgebras and Howe dual pairs in an associative algebra. We remark that, usually, one restricts attention to reductive Howe dual pairs. This means, one requires that any finite dimensional representation of the members be completely reducible. In our case this condition is automatically satisfied, because $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ is compact and Howe subgroups are always closed. Reductive Howe dual pairs play an important role in the representation theory of Lie groups. This was first observed by R. Howe . Although for $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ it is not necessary to go into the details of the classification theory of reductive Howe dual pairs, we note that there exist, essentially, two methods. One applies to the isometry groups of Hermitian spaces and uses the theory of Hermitian forms . The other method applies to complex semisimple Lie algebras and uses root space techniques .

Let $`\mathrm{K}(n)`$ denote the collection of pairs of sequences (of equal length) of positive integers

$$J=(𝐤,𝐦)=((k_1,\mathrm{},k_r),(m_1,\mathrm{},m_r)),r=1,2,3,\mathrm{},n,$$

which obey

$$𝐤𝐦=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}k_im_i=n.$$
(15)
For a given element $`J=(𝐤,𝐦)`$ of $`\mathrm{K}(n)`$, let $`g`$ denote the greatest common divisor of the integers $`m_1,\mathrm{},m_r`$. Define a sequence $`\stackrel{~}{𝐦}=(\stackrel{~}{m}_1,\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{m}_r)`$ by $`g\stackrel{~}{m}_i=m_i`$ $`i`$. Moreover, for any permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`r`$ elements, define $`\sigma J=(\sigma 𝐤,\sigma 𝐦)`$.

Any $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$ generates a canonical decomposition

$$^n=\left(^{k_1}^{m_1}\right)\mathrm{}\left(^{k_r}^{m_r}\right).$$
(16)
This decomposition, in turn, induces an injective homomorphism

$`\mathrm{gl}(k_1,)\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{gl}(k_r,)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$
$`(D_1,\mathrm{},D_r)`$ $``$ $`\left(D_1\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_1}\right)\mathrm{}\left(D_r\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_r}\right).`$ (17)
Written as a matrix w.r.t. the canonical basis, the elements of the image look like

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\left(\begin{array}{cccc}D_1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& D_1& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& D_1\end{array}\right)& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& \mathrm{}& \left(\begin{array}{cccc}D_r& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& D_r& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& D_r\end{array}\right)\end{array}\right)$$

($`m_1`$ times $`D_1`$, $`m_2`$ times $`D_2`$, etc.). We denote the image of this homomorphism by $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$, its intersection with $`\mathrm{U}n`$ by $`\mathrm{U}J`$ and its intersection with $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ by $`\mathrm{SU}J`$. Note that $`\mathrm{U}J`$ is the image of the restriction of (17) to $`\mathrm{U}k_1\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{U}k_r`$.

###### Lemma 4.1

(a) A $``$-subalgebra of $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$ is Howe if and only if it is conjugate, under the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ by inner automorphisms, to $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ for some $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$.

(b) A subgroup of $`\mathrm{U}n`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{SU}n`$) is Howe if and only if it is conjugate, under the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ by inner automorphisms, to $`\mathrm{U}J`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{SU}J`$) for some $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$.

Remark: Assertion (a) is a version of the structure theorem for finite-dimensional von Neumann algebras.

Proof: (a) For any $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$, $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ is a $``$-subalgebra of $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$ containing $`\mathrm{𝟙}_n`$. Thus, $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ is a von Neumann algebra and the Double Commutant Theorem says that $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ is Howe. Conversely, let $`L`$ be a Howe $``$-subalgebra of $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$. Let $`L^{}`$ denote the centralizer of $`L`$ in $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$ and let $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$ denote the subalgebra generated by $`L`$ and $`L^{}`$. Decompose

$$^n=V_1\mathrm{}V_r$$
(18)
into mutually orthogonal, $`\stackrel{~}{L}`$-irreducible subspaces. Due to Schur’s Lemma, for each $`i`$,

$$V_i=W_i^{m_i},$$
(19)
where $`W_i`$ is $`L`$-irreducible and $`m_i`$ is a positive integer. Moreover,

$`L^{}|_{V_i}`$ $``$ $`\left\{\mathrm{id}_{W_i}D_i^{}\right|D_i^{}\mathrm{gl}(m_i,)\},`$ (20)
$`L|_{V_i}`$ $``$ $`\left\{D_i\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_i}\right|D_i\text{End}(W_i)\}.`$ (21)
Since $`L^{}`$ is the full centralizer of $`L`$, one has equality in (20). As a consequence, since $`L`$ is the full centralizer of $`L^{}`$, there holds equality in (21). Now let $`k_i=dimW_i`$ and $`J=(𝐤,𝐦)`$. By identifying $`W_i^{k_i}`$, we arrive at a decomposition of $`^n`$ of the form (16). There exists $`T\mathrm{SU}n`$ transforming this decomposition into the canonical one induced by $`J`$. Then the inner automorphism of $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$ defined by $`T`$ transforms $`L`$ into $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$.

(b) We give only the proof for $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. Let $`H`$ be a Howe subgroup of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. Then

$$H=\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{SU}n}(K)=\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{gl}(n,)}(K)\mathrm{SU}n$$

for some subset $`K\mathrm{SU}n`$. By construction, $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{gl}(n,)}(K)`$ is a Howe $``$-subalgebra of $`\mathrm{gl}(n,)`$. Hence, by virtue of (a), it is conjugate, under $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-action, to $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ for some $`J`$. Then $`H`$ is conjugate, in $`\mathrm{SU}n`$, to $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)\mathrm{SU}n=\mathrm{SU}J`$. Conversely, let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Due to (a), there exists $`J^{}\mathrm{K}(n)`$ and $`T\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)=\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{gl}(n,)}\left(T\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)T^1\right)`$. Taking into account that $`\left(T\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)T^1\right)\mathrm{SU}n`$ spans $`\left(T\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)T^1\right)`$, we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{SU}J& =& \mathrm{gl}(J,)\mathrm{SU}n\hfill \\ & =& \mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{gl}(n,)}\left(T\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)T^1\mathrm{SU}n\right)\mathrm{SU}n\hfill \\ & =& \mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{SU}n}\left(T\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)T^1\mathrm{SU}n\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

This shows that $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ is Howe.

###### Lemma 4.2

Let $`J,J^{}\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Then $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ and $`\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)`$ are conjugate under the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ by inner automorphisms if and only if there exists a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`J^{}=\sigma J`$.

Proof: Let $`T\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)=T^1\mathrm{gl}(J,)T`$. Then $`\mathrm{gl}(J,)`$ and $`\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)`$ are isomorphic. Hence, there exists a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`𝐤^{}=\sigma 𝐤`$. Moreover, $`T`$ is an isomorphism of the representations

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{gl}(k_1,)\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{gl}(k_r,)\stackrel{J}{}\mathrm{gl}(n,),\hfill \\ \mathrm{gl}(k_1,)\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{gl}(k_r,)\stackrel{\sigma }{}\mathrm{gl}(k_{\sigma (1)},)\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{gl}(k_{\sigma (r)},)\stackrel{J^{}}{}\mathrm{gl}(n,),\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`J`$, $`J^{}`$ indicate the embeddings (17) defined by $`J`$ and $`J^{}`$, respectively. In particular, it does not change the multiplicities of the irreducible factors. This implies $`𝐦^{}=\sigma 𝐦`$. It follows $`J^{}=\sigma J`$.

Conversely, assume that $`J^{}=\sigma J`$ for some permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$. Consider the canonical decompositions (16) defined by $`J`$ and $`J^{}`$, respectively. There exists $`T\mathrm{SU}n`$ which maps the factors $`^{k_i^{}}^{l_i^{}}`$ of the second decomposition identically onto the factors $`^{k_{\sigma (i)}}^{m_{\sigma (i)}}`$ of the first one, for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. It is not difficult to see that $`\mathrm{gl}(J^{},)=T^1\mathrm{gl}(J,)T`$.

As a consequence of Lemma 4.2, we introduce an equivalence relation on the set $`\mathrm{K}(n)`$ by writing $`JJ^{}`$ iff there exists a permutation of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`J^{}=\sigma J`$. Let $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(n)`$ denote the set of equivalence classes.

###### Theorem 4.3

The assignment $`J\mathrm{SU}J`$ induces a bijection from $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(n)`$ onto $`\text{Howe}(\mathrm{SU}n)`$.

Proof: According to Lemma 4.1, the assignment $`J\mathrm{SU}J`$ induces a surjective map $`\mathrm{K}(n)\text{Howe}(\mathrm{SU}n)`$. Due to Lemma 4.2, this map projects to $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(n)`$ and the projected map is injective.

This concludes the classification of Howe subgroups of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$, i.e., Step $`1`$ of our programme.

## 5 The Howe Subbundles of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-Bundles

In this chapter, let $`P`$ be a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle over $`M`$, $`dimM4`$. We are going to derive the Howe subbundles of $`P`$ up to isomorphy. Since the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ on subbundles conjugates the structure group, it suffices to consider reductions of $`P`$ to the subgroups $`\mathrm{SU}J`$, $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Thus, let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$ be fixed. Let $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ denote the set of isomorphism classes of principal $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-bundles over $`M`$ (where principal bundle isomorphisms are assumed to commute with the structure group action and to project to the identical map on the base space). Moreover, let $`\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ denote the set of isomorphism classes of reductions of $`P`$ to the subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{SU}n`$.

We shall first derive a description of $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ in terms of suitable characteristic classes and then give a characterization of the subset $`\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)`$. The classification of $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ will be performed by constructing the Postnikov tower of the classifying space $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ up to level $`5`$. For the convenience of the reader, the basics of this method will be briefly explained below.

Note that in the sequel maps of topological spaces are always assumed to be continuous, without explicitly stating this.

### 5.1 Preliminaries

#### Universal Bundles and Classifying Spaces

Let $`G`$ be a Lie group. As a basic fact in bundle theory, there exists a so-called universal $`G`$-bundle

$$G\mathrm{E}G\mathrm{B}G$$
(22)
with the following property: For any CW-complex (hence, in particular, any manifold) $`X`$ the assignment

$$[X,\mathrm{B}G]\text{Bun}(X,G),ff^{}\mathrm{E}G,$$
(23)
is a bijection . Here $`[,]`$ means the set of homotopy classes of maps and $`f^{}`$ denotes the pull-back of bundles. Both $`\mathrm{E}G`$ and $`\mathrm{B}G`$ can be realized as CW-complexes. They are unique up to homotopy equivalence. $`\mathrm{B}G`$ is called the classifying space of $`G`$. The homotopy class of maps $`X\mathrm{B}G`$ associated to $`P\text{Bun}(X,G)`$ by virtue of (23) is called the classifying map of $`P`$. We denote it by $`f_P`$. Note that a principal $`G`$-bundle is universal iff its total space is contractible. In particular,

$$\pi _i(G)\pi _{i+1}(\mathrm{B}G),i=0,1,2,\mathrm{}.$$
(24)
This is an immediate consequence of the exact homotopy sequence of fibre spaces .

#### Associated Principal Bundles Defined by Homomorphisms

Let $`\phi :GG^{}`$ be a Lie group homomorphism and let $`P\text{Bun}(X,G)`$. By virtue of the action

$$G\times G^{}G^{},(a,a^{})\phi (a)a^{},$$

$`G^{}`$ becomes a left $`G`$-space and we have an associated bundle $`P^{[\phi ]}=P\times _GG^{}`$. Observe that $`P^{[\phi ]}`$ can be viewed as a principal $`G^{}`$-bundle with right $`G^{}`$-action

$$P^{[\phi ]}\times G^{}P^{[\phi ]},([(p,a^{})],b^{})[(p,a^{}b^{})].$$

One has the natural bundle morphism

$$\psi :PP^{[\phi ]},p[(p,\mathrm{𝟙}_G^{})].$$
(25)
It obeys $`\psi (pa)=\psi (p)\phi (a)`$ and projects to the identical map on $`X`$.

In the special case where $`\phi `$ is a Lie subgroup embedding, the natural bundle morphism (25) is an embedding of $`P`$ onto a subbundle of $`P^{[\phi ]}`$. In this case, if no confusion about $`\phi `$ can arise, we shall often write $`P^{[G^{}]}`$ instead of $`P^{[\phi ]}`$. Note that $`P^{[\phi ]}`$ is the extension of $`P`$ by $`G^{}`$ and $`P`$ is a reduction of $`P^{[\phi ]}`$ to the subgroup $`(G,\phi )`$.

#### Classifying Maps Associated to Homomorphisms

Again, let $`\phi :GG^{}`$ be a homomorphism. There exists a map $`\mathrm{B}\phi :\mathrm{B}G\mathrm{B}G^{}`$, associated to $`\phi `$, which is defined as the classifying map of the principal $`G^{}`$-bundle $`(\mathrm{E}G)^{[\phi ]}`$ associated to the universal $`G`$-bundle $`\mathrm{E}G`$. It has the following functorial property: For $`\phi :GG^{}`$ and $`\phi ^{}:G^{}G^{\prime \prime }`$ there holds

$$\mathrm{B}(\psi \phi )=\mathrm{B}\psi \mathrm{B}\phi .$$
(26)
Using $`\mathrm{B}\phi `$, the classifying map of $`P^{[\phi ]}`$ can be expressed through that of $`P`$:

$$f_{P^{[\phi ]}}=\mathrm{B}\phi f_P.$$
(27)
In the special case where $`\phi `$ is a normal Lie subgroup embedding, the short exact sequence of Lie group homomorphisms

$$\mathrm{𝟙}G\stackrel{\phi }{}G^{}\stackrel{p}{}G/G^{}\mathrm{𝟙}$$
(28)
induces a principal bundle

$$G^{}/G\mathrm{B}G\stackrel{\mathrm{B}\phi }{}\mathrm{B}G^{}.$$
(29)
The classifying map of this bundle is $`\mathrm{B}p`$ , where $`p`$ denotes the natural projection.

#### Characteristic Classes

Let $`G`$ be a Lie group. Consider the cohomology ring $`H^{}(\mathrm{B}G,\pi )`$ of the classifying space with values in some Abelian group $`\pi `$. For any $`P\text{Bun}(X,G)`$, the homomorphism $`\left(f_P\right)^{}`$, induced on cohomology, maps $`H^{}(\mathrm{B}G,\pi )`$ to $`H^{}(X,\pi )`$. Therefore, given $`\gamma H^{}(\mathrm{B}G,\pi )`$, one can define a map

$$\chi _\gamma :\text{Bun}(X,G)H^{}(X,\pi ),P\left(f_P\right)^{}\gamma .$$
(30)
This is called the characteristic class for $`G`$-bundles over $`X`$ defined by $`\gamma `$. By construction, one has the following universal property of characteristic classes: Let $`f:XX^{}`$ be a map and let $`P^{}\text{Bun}(X^{},G)`$. Then

$$\chi _\gamma \left(f^{}P^{}\right)=f^{}\chi _\gamma \left(P^{}\right).$$
(31)
Observe that if two bundles are isomorphic then their images under arbitrary characteristic classes coincide, whereas the converse, in general, does not hold. This is due to the fact that characteristic classes can control maps $`X\mathrm{B}G`$ only on the level of the homomorphisms induced on cohomology. In general, the latter do not give sufficient information on the homotopy properties of the maps. In certain cases, however, they do. For example, such cases are obtained by specifying $`G`$ to be $`\mathrm{U1}`$ or discrete, or by restricting $`X`$ in dimension. In these cases there exist sets of characteristic classes which classify $`\text{Bun}(X,G)`$. In the sequel we will utilize this to determine $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$.

#### Eilenberg-MacLane Spaces

Let $`\pi `$ be a group and $`n`$ a positive integer. An arcwise connected CW-complex $`X`$ is called an Eilenberg-MacLane space of type $`K(\pi ,n)`$ iff $`\pi _n(X)=\pi `$ and $`\pi _i(X)=0`$ for $`in`$. Eilenberg-MacLane spaces exist for any choice of $`\pi `$ and $`n`$, provided $`\pi `$ is commutative for $`n2`$. They are unique up to homotopy equivalence.

The simplest example of an Eilenberg-MacLane space is the $`1`$-sphere $`\mathrm{S}^1`$, which is of type $`K(,1)`$. Two further examples, $`K(,2)`$ and $`K(_g,1)`$, are briefly discussed in Appendix A. Note that Eilenberg-MacLane spaces are, apart from very special examples, infinite dimensional. Also note that, up to homotopy equivalence one has

$$K(\pi _1\times \pi _2,n)=K(\pi _1,n)\times K(\pi _2,n).$$
(32)
Now assume $`\pi `$ to be commutative also in the case $`n=1`$. Due to the Universal Coefficient Theorem, $`\text{Hom}(H_n(K(\pi ,n)),\pi )`$ is isomorphic to a subgroup of $`H^n(K(\pi ,n),\pi )`$. Due to the Hurewicz Theorem, $`H_n(K(\pi ,n))\pi _n(K(\pi ,n))=\pi `$. It follows that $`H^n(K(\pi ,n),\pi )`$ contains elements which correspond to isomorphisms $`H_n(K(\pi ,n))\pi `$. Such elements are called characteristic. If $`\gamma H^n(K(\pi ,n),\pi )`$ is characteristic then for any CW-complex $`X`$, the map

$$[X,K(\pi ,n)]H^n(X,\pi ),ff^{}\gamma ,$$
(33)
is a bijection \[8, §VII.12\]. In this sense, Eilenberg-MacLane spaces provide a link between homotopy properties and cohomology. We remark that the bijection (33) induces an Abelian group structure on the set $`[X,K(\pi ,n)]`$.

#### Path-Loop-Fibration

Let $`X`$ be an arcwise connected topological space. Consider the path-loop fibration over $`X`$

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(X)P(X)X,$$
(34)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }(X)`$ and $`P(X)`$ denote the loop space and the path space of $`X`$, respectively (both based at some point $`x_0X`$). Since $`P(X)`$ is contractible, the exact homotopy sequence induced by the fibration (34) implies $`\pi _i(\mathrm{\Omega }(X))\pi _{i+1}(X)`$, $`i=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$. Thus, for $`X=K(\pi ,n)`$,

$$\pi _i\left(\mathrm{\Omega }(K(\pi ,n+1))\right)\pi _{i+1}\left(K(\pi ,n+1)\right)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}\pi & |\hfill & i=n\hfill \\ 0& |\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

Hence, $`\mathrm{\Omega }(K(\pi ,n+1))=K(\pi ,n)`$ $`n`$ and the path-loop fibration over $`K(\pi ,n+1)`$ reads

$$K(\pi ,n)P(K(\pi ,n+1))K(\pi ,n+1).$$
(35)
#### Postnikov Tower

A map $`f:XX^{}`$ of topological spaces is called an $`n`$-equivalence iff the homomorphism induced on homotopy groups $`f_{}:\pi _i(X)\pi _i(X^{})`$ is an isomorphism for $`i<n`$ and surjective for $`i=n`$. One also defines the notion of an $`\mathrm{}`$-equivalence, which is often called weak homotopy equivalence.

Let $`f:XX^{}`$ be an $`n`$-equivalence and let $`Y`$ be a CW-complex. Then the map $`[Y,X][Y,X^{}]`$, $`gfg`$, is bijective for $`dimY<n`$ and surjective for $`dimY=n`$ \[8, Ch. VII, Cor. 11.13\].

A CW-complex $`Y`$ is called $`n`$-simple iff it is arcwise connected and the action of $`\pi _1(Y)`$ on $`\pi _i(Y)`$ is trivial for $`1in`$. It is called simple iff it is $`n`$-simple for all $`n`$.

The following theorem describes how a simple CW-complex can be approximated by $`n`$-equivalent spaces constructed from Eilenberg-MacLane spaces.

###### Theorem 5.1

Let $`Y`$ be a simple CW-complex. There exist
(a) a sequence of CW-complexes $`Y_n`$ and principal fibrations

$$K(\pi _n(Y),n)Y_{n+1}\stackrel{q_n}{}Y_n,n=1,2,3,\mathrm{},$$
(36)
induced by maps $`\theta _n:Y_nK(\pi _n(Y),n+1)`$,
(b) a sequence of $`n`$-equivalences $`y_n:YY_n`$, $`n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$,
such that $`Y_1=`$ (one point space) and $`q_ny_{n+1}=y_n`$ for all $`n`$.

Proof: The assumption that $`Y`$ be a simple CW-complex implies that the constant map $`Y`$ is a simple map (see \[8, Ch. VII, Def. 13.4\] for a definition of the latter). Thus, the assertion is a consequence of a more general theorem about simple maps given in \[8, Ch. VII, Thm. 13.7\].

Remarks:

1. The sequence of spaces and maps $`(Y_n,y_n,q_n)`$, $`n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$, is called a Postnikov tower, or Postnikov system, or Postnikov decomposition of $`Y`$.

2. For the principal fibrations (36) to be induced by a map $`\theta _n:Y_nK(\pi _n(Y),n+1)`$ means that they are given as pull-back of the path-loop fibration (35) over $`K(\pi _n(Y),n+1)`$.

The theorem allows one to successively construct $`Y_n`$ for given $`n`$, starting from $`Y_1=`$. For example, for $`n=5`$ such constructions have been carried out for $`Y=\mathrm{BU}k`$ in \[5, §4.2\], or for $`Y=\mathrm{BPU}k`$, where $`\mathrm{PU}k`$ denotes the projective unitary group, in . In the sequel, we shall construct $`\left(\mathrm{BSU}J\right)_5`$. For this purpose, we need information about the low-dimensional homotopy groups of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$.

### 5.2 The Homotopy Groups of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$

For $`a`$ being a positive integer, denote the canonical embedding $`_a\mathrm{U1}`$ by $`j_a`$ and the endomorphism of $`\mathrm{U1}`$ mapping $`zz^a`$ by $`p_a`$. Moreover, let $`j_J`$ and $`i_J`$ denote the natural embeddings $`\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{U}J`$ and $`\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U}n`$, respectively.

Using the natural projections $`\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}:\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U}k_i`$, we define a homomorphism

$$\lambda _J:\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U1},D_{i=1}^rp_{\stackrel{~}{m}_i}det_{\mathrm{U}k_i}\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}(D).$$
(37)
The following diagram commutes:

(38)
Accordingly, the restriction of $`\lambda _J`$ to the subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ takes values in $`j_g(_g)\mathrm{U1}`$. Thus, we can define a homomorphism $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}:\mathrm{SU}J_g`$ by the following commutative diagram:

(39)
Let $`(\mathrm{SU}J)_0`$ denote the arcwise connected component of the identity. Note that it is also a connected component, because $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ is a closed subgroup of $`\mathrm{GL}(n,)`$.

###### Lemma 5.2

The homomorphism $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ projects to an isomorphism $`\mathrm{SU}J/(\mathrm{SU}J)_0_g`$.

Proof: Consider the homomorphism $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}:\mathrm{SU}J_g`$. The target space being discrete, $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ must be constant on connected components. Hence $`(\mathrm{SU}J)_0\mathrm{ker}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$, so that $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ projects to a homomorphism $`\mathrm{SU}J/(\mathrm{SU}J)_0_g`$. The latter is surjective, because $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ is surjective. To prove injectivity, we show $`\mathrm{ker}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}(\mathrm{SU}J)_0`$. Let $`D\mathrm{ker}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ and denote $`D_i=\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J(D)`$. Define a homomorphism

$$\phi :\mathrm{U1}^r\mathrm{U1},(z_1,\mathrm{},z_r)z_1^{\stackrel{~}{m}_1}\mathrm{}z_r^{\stackrel{~}{m}_r}.$$

Then

$$\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}(D)=\phi (det_{\mathrm{U}k_1}D_1,\mathrm{},det_{\mathrm{U}k_r}D_r).$$

By assumption, $`(det_{\mathrm{U}k_1}D_1,\mathrm{},det_{\mathrm{U}k_r}D_r)\mathrm{ker}\phi `$. Since the exponents defining $`\phi `$ have greatest common divisor 1, $`\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ is connected. Thus, there exists a path $`(\gamma _1(t),\mathrm{},\gamma _r(t))`$ in $`\mathrm{ker}\phi `$ running from $`(det_{\mathrm{U}k_1}D_1,\mathrm{},det_{\mathrm{U}k_r}D_r)`$ to $`(1,\mathrm{},1)`$. For each $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, define a path $`G_i(t)`$ in $`\mathrm{U}k_i`$ as follows: First, go from $`D_i`$ to $`(det_{\mathrm{U}k_i}D_i)\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_i1}`$, keeping the determinant constant, thus using connectedness of $`\mathrm{SU}k_i`$. Next, use the path $`\gamma _i(t)\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_i1}`$ to get to $`\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_i}`$. By construction, the image of $`(G_1(t),\mathrm{},G_r(t))`$ under the embedding (17) is a path in $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ connecting $`D`$ with $`\mathrm{𝟙}_n`$. This proves $`\mathrm{ker}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}(\mathrm{SU}J)_0`$.

###### Theorem 5.3

The homotopy groups of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ are

$$\pi _i(\mathrm{SU}J)\{\begin{array}{ccc}_g& |& i=0\hfill \\ ^{(r1)}& |& i=1\hfill \\ \pi _i(\mathrm{U}k_1)\mathrm{}\pi _i(\mathrm{U}k_r)& |& i>1.\hfill \end{array}$$

In particular, $`\pi _1(\mathrm{SU}J)`$ and $`\pi _3(\mathrm{SU}J)`$ are torsion-free.

Proof: For $`i=0`$, $`\pi _0(\mathrm{SU}J)=\mathrm{SU}J/(\mathrm{SU}J)_0`$. This group is given by Lemma 5.2. For $`i>1`$, the assertion follows immediately from the exact homotopy sequence induced by the bundle $`\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{U}J\stackrel{det_{\mathrm{U}n}}{}\mathrm{U1}`$. For $`i=1`$, consider the following portion of this sequence:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}\pi _2(\mathrm{U1})& & \pi _1(\mathrm{SU}J)& & \pi _1(\mathrm{U}J)& \stackrel{(det_{\mathrm{U}n})_{}}{}& \pi _1(\mathrm{U1})& & \pi _0(\mathrm{SU}J)& & \pi _0(\mathrm{U}J)\\ 0& & \pi _1(\mathrm{SU}J)& & ^r& & & & _g& & 0.\end{array}$$

One has $`^r/\mathrm{ker}((det_{\mathrm{U}n})_{})\mathrm{im}((det_{\mathrm{U}n})_{})`$. Exactness implies $`\mathrm{ker}((det_{\mathrm{U}n})_{})\pi _1(\mathrm{SU}J)`$ and $`\mathrm{im}((det_{\mathrm{U}n})_{})=g`$. It follows $`\pi _1(\mathrm{SU}J)^{(r1)}`$, as asserted.

### 5.3 The Postnikov Tower of $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ up to Level 5

Let $`r^{}`$ denote the number of indices $`i`$ for which $`k_i>1`$.

###### Theorem 5.4

The $`5`$th level of the Postnikov tower of $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ is given by

$$(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5=K(_g,1)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}K(,2)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r^{}}{}}K(,4).$$
(40)
Proof: First, we check that $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ is a simple space. To see this, note that any inner automorphism of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ is generated by an element of $`(\mathrm{SU}J)_0`$, hence is homotopic to the identity automorphism. Consequently, the natural action of $`\pi _0(\mathrm{SU}J)`$ on $`\pi _{i1}(\mathrm{SU}J)`$, $`i=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ , induced by inner automorphisms, is trivial. Since the natural isomorphisms $`\pi _{i1}(\mathrm{SU}J)\pi _i(\mathrm{BSU}J)`$ transform this action into that of $`\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J)`$ on $`\pi _i(\mathrm{BSU}J)`$, the latter is trivial, too. Thus, we can apply Theorem 5.1 to construct the Postnikov tower of $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ up to level $`5`$. According to Theorem 5.3, the relevant homotopy groups are

$$\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J)=_g,\pi _2(\mathrm{BSU}J)=^{(r1)},\pi _3(\mathrm{BSU}J)=0,\pi _4(\mathrm{BSU}J)=^r^{}.$$
(41)
Moreover, we note that $`H^{}(K(,2),)`$ is torsion-free, and that

$$H^{2i+1}(K(,2),)=0,H^{2i+1}(K(_g,1),)=0,i=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(42)
see Appendix A. We start with $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_1=`$.

$`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_2:`$ Being a fibration over $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_1`$, $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_2`$ must coincide with the fibre:

$$(\mathrm{BSU}J)_2=K(_g,1).$$
(43)
$`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_3:`$ In view of (43) and (41), $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_3`$ is the total space of a fibration

$$K(^{(r1)},2)(\mathrm{BSU}J)_3\stackrel{q_2}{}K(_g,1)$$
(44)
induced from the path-loop fibration over $`K(^{(r1)},3)`$ by some map $`\theta _2:K(_g,1)K(^{(r1)},3)`$. Note that $`K(^{(r1)},n)=_{j=1}^{r1}K(,n)`$ $`n`$. Then, due to (33),

$$[K(_g,1),K(^{(r1)},3)]=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r1}{}}H^3(K(_g,1),).$$

Here the rhs. is trivial by (42). Hence, $`\theta _2`$ is homotopic to a constant map, so that the fibration (44) is trivial. It follows

$$(\mathrm{BSU}J)_3=K(_g,1)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}K(,2).$$
(45)
$`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_4:`$ In view of (41), $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_4`$ is given by a fibration over $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_3`$ with fibre $`K(0,3)=`$. Hence, it just coincides with the base space.

$`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5:`$ According to (41) and (45), $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5`$ is the total space of a fibration

$$K(^r^{},4)(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5\stackrel{q_4}{}K(_g,1)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}K(,2),$$
(46)
which is induced by a map $`\theta _4`$ from the base to $`K(^r^{},5)`$. Similarly to the case of $`\theta _2`$,

$$[K(_g,1)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}K(,2),K(^r^{},5)]=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r^{}}{}}H^5(K(_g,1)\times \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}K(,2),).$$
(47)
Since $`H^{}(K(,2),)`$ is torsion-free, we can apply the Künneth Theorem for cohomology \[25, Ch. XIII, Cor. 11.3\] to obtain

$`H^5(K(_g,1)\times {\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{r1}{}}}K(,2),)`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j,j_1,\mathrm{},j_{r\text{-}1}}{j+j_1+\mathrm{}+j_{r1}=5}}{}}H^j(K(_g,1),)H^{j_1}(K(,2),)\mathrm{}H^{j_{r1}}(K(,2),).`$
By (42), each summand of the rhs. is trivial, because it contains a tensor factor of odd degree. Hence, (47) is trivial, and so is the fibration (46). This proves the assertion.

The fact that $`(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5`$ is a direct product of Eilenberg-MacLane spaces immediately yields the following corollary.

###### Corollary 5.5

Let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$ and $`dimM4`$. Let $`P,P^{}\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$. Assume that for any characteristic class $`\alpha `$ defined by an element of $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$, $`H^2(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$, or $`H^4(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ there holds $`\alpha (P)=\alpha (P^{})`$. Then $`P`$ and $`P^{}`$ are isomorphic.

Proof: Let $`\mathrm{pr}_1`$, $`\mathrm{pr}_{21},\mathrm{},\mathrm{pr}_{2r\text{-}1}`$, and $`\mathrm{pr}_{41},\mathrm{},\mathrm{pr}_{4r^{}}`$ denote the natural projections of the direct product $`K(_g,1)\times _{i=1}^{r1}K(,2)\times _{i=1}^r^{}K(,4)`$ onto its factors. Let $`\gamma _1`$, $`\gamma _2`$, and $`\gamma _4`$ be characteristic elements of $`H^1(K(_g,1),_g)`$, $`H^2(K(,2),)`$, and $`H^4(K(,4),)`$, respectively. Consider the map

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \phi :[M,\mathrm{BSU}J]& & [M,(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5]\hfill \\ & & [M,K(_g,1)]\times _{i=1}^{r1}[M,K(,2)]\times _{i=1}^r^{}[M,K(,4)]\hfill \\ & & H^1(M,_g)\times _{i=1}^{r1}H^2(M,)\times _{i=1}^r^{}H^4(M,),\hfill \\ \hfill f& & (f^{}(\mathrm{pr}_1y_5)^{}\gamma _1,\{f^{}(\mathrm{pr}_{2i}y_5)^{}\gamma _2\}_{i=1}^{r1},\{f^{}(\mathrm{pr}_{4i}y_5)^{}\gamma _4\}_{i=1}^r^{}),\hfill \end{array}$$
(48)
where $`y_5:\mathrm{BSU}J(\mathrm{BSU}J)_5`$ is the $`5`$-equivalence provided by Theorem 5.1. According to Theorem 5.4, the second step of $`\phi `$ and, therefore, the whole map, is a bijection.

Now let $`P,P^{}\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ as proposed in the assertion. Then, by assumption, the homomorphisms $`\left(f_P\right)^{}`$ and $`\left(f_P^{}\right)^{}`$, induced on $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$, $`H^2(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$, and $`H^4(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$, coincide. This implies $`\phi \left(f_P\right)=\phi \left(f_P^{}\right)`$. Hence, $`f_P`$ and $`f_P^{}`$ are homotopic. This proves the corollary.

We remark that, of course, the cohomology elements $`\left(\mathrm{pr}_1y_5\right)^{}\gamma _1`$, $`\left(\mathrm{pr}_{2i}y_5\right)^{}\gamma _2`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r1`$, and $`\left(\mathrm{pr}_{4i}y_5\right)^{}\gamma _4`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r^{}`$ define a set of characteristic classes which classifies $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$. These classes are independent and surjective. However, they are hard to handle, because we do not know the homomorphism $`y_5^{}`$ explicitly. Therefore, we prefer to work with characteristic classes defined by some natural generators of the cohomology groups in question. The price we have to pay for this is that the classes so constructed are subject to a relation and that we have to determine their image explicitly.

### 5.4 Generators for $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$

Instead of generators for the groups $`H^2(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ and $`H^4(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ only, we can construct generators for the whole cohomology algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ without any additional effort.

Consider the homomorphisms and induced homomorphisms

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \mathrm{SU}J& \stackrel{j_J}{}& \mathrm{U}J& \stackrel{\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}}{}& \mathrm{U}k_i,\hfill \\ \hfill H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)& \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}}{}& H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)& \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}}{}& H^{}(\mathrm{BU}k_i,),\hfill \end{array}$$
(49)
where $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Recall that the cohomology algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}k,)`$ is generated freely over $``$ by elements $`\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k}^{(2j)}H^{2j}(\mathrm{BU}k,)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k`$, see . We denote

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k}=1+\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k}^{(2)}+\mathrm{}+\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k}^{(2k)}.$$
(50)
The generators $`\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}^{(2j)}`$ define elements

$`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}^{(2j)},`$ (51)
$`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}^{(2j)}`$ (52)
of $`H^{2j}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ and $`H^{2j}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$, respectively. We denote

$`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}`$ $`=`$ $`1+\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2)}+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2k_i)},i=1,\mathrm{},r,`$ (53)
$`\gamma _{J,i}`$ $`=`$ $`1+\gamma _{J,i}^{(2)}+\mathrm{}+\gamma _{J,i}^{(2k_i)},i=1,\mathrm{},r,`$ (54)
as well as $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J=(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,1},\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,r})`$ and $`\gamma _J=(\gamma _{J,1},\mathrm{},\gamma _{J,r})`$.

###### Lemma 5.6

The cohomology algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ is generated freely over $``$ by the elements $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2j)}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$.

Proof: Consider the isomorphism and induced isomorphism

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\mathrm{U}J& \stackrel{d_r}{}& \mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{U}J& \stackrel{\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}}{}& \mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{U}k_i,\\ H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)& \stackrel{d_r^{}}{}& H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{BU}J,)& \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}}{}& H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{BU}k_i,).\end{array}$$
(55)
where $`d_r`$ denotes $`r`$-fold diagonal embedding and $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ is a shorthand notation for $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{i=1}^r`$. Due to the Künneth Theorem for cohomology \[25, Ch. XIII, Cor. 11.3\], $`H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{BU}k_i,)`$ is generated freely over $``$ by the elements

$$1_{\mathrm{BU}k_1}\times \mathrm{}\times 1_{\mathrm{BU}k_{i1}}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}^{(2j)}\times 1_{\mathrm{BU}k_{i+1}}\times \mathrm{}\times 1_{\mathrm{BU}k_r},j=1,\mathrm{},k_i,i=1,\mathrm{},r.$$

Here $`\times `$ stands for the cohomology cross product, and $`1_{\mathrm{BU}k_i}`$ denotes the generator of $`H^0(\mathrm{BU}k_i,)`$. The assertion follows by applying (55) to these generators and using

$$d_r^{}(\alpha _1\times \mathrm{}\times \alpha _r)=\alpha _1\mathrm{}\alpha _r\alpha _iH^{}(\mathrm{BU}k_i,).\text{ }$$
(56)
###### Lemma 5.7

$`\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}`$ is surjective.

Proof: According to (29) and due to $`\mathrm{U}J/\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{U1}`$, $`\mathrm{B}j_J`$ is the projection in a principal bundle

$$\mathrm{U1}\mathrm{BSU}J\stackrel{\mathrm{B}j_J}{}\mathrm{BU}J.$$
(57)
Denote this bundle by $`\eta `$. Due to $`\pi _1(\mathrm{BU}J)\pi _0(\mathrm{U}J)=0`$, $`\eta `$ is orientable, see \[9, Def. 7.3.3\]. Therefore, it induces a Gysin sequence, see \[9, §7.3.1\],

$$\begin{array}{c}H^1(\mathrm{BU}J,)\stackrel{\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}}{}H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\stackrel{\sigma ^{}}{}H^0(\mathrm{BU}J,)\stackrel{c_1(\eta )}{}H^2(\mathrm{BU}J,)\hfill \\ \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}}{}H^2(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\stackrel{\sigma ^{}}{}H^1(\mathrm{BU}J,)\stackrel{c_1(\eta )}{}H^3(\mathrm{BU}J,)\hfill \\ \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}}{}H^3(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\stackrel{\sigma ^{}}{}H^2(\mathrm{BU}J,)\stackrel{c_1(\eta )}{}H^4(\mathrm{BU}J,)\mathrm{}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(58)
(On the level of differential forms, $`\sigma ^{}`$ is given by integration over the fibre.) If $`\eta `$ was trivial, $`\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J)`$ would coincide with $`\pi _1(\mathrm{BU}J\times \mathrm{U1})=`$, which would contradict Theorem 5.3. Hence, $`\eta `$ is nontrivial, so that $`c_1(\eta )0`$. Since $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ has no zero divisors by Lemma 5.6, it follows that multiplication by $`c_1(\eta )`$ is an injective operation on $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$. Then exactness of the Gysin sequence (58) implies that the homomorphism $`\sigma ^{}`$ is trivial and, therefore, $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}`$ is surjective.

Lemmas 5.6 and 5.7 imply the following corollary.

###### Corollary 5.8

The cohomology algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ is generated over $``$ by the elements $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$.

Remark: The generators $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2)}`$ of $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ are subject to a relation which is, however, irrelevant for our purposes. For the sake of completeness, we derive this relation in Appendix B.

### 5.5 Generator for $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$

Since $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ is connected, $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ can be computed by means of the Hurewicz and the Universal Coefficient Theorems:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)& & \text{Hom}(H_1(\mathrm{BSU}J),_g)\text{Ext}(H_0(\mathrm{BSU}J),_g)\hfill \\ & & \text{Hom}(\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J),_g)\text{Ext}(,_g).\hfill \end{array}$$

Due to Theorem 5.3, $`\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J)\pi _0(\mathrm{SU}J)_g`$. Moreover, $`\text{Ext}(,_g)=0`$. Hence, $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is isomorphic to $`_g`$. It is therefore generated by a single element. Apparently, we are free to choose any of the generators to work with. However, there exists a relation between this generator and the generators $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2)}`$ of $`H^2(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$. This can be seen as follows. Consider the short exact sequence

$$0\stackrel{\mu _g}{}\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}_g0,$$
(59)
where $`\mu _g`$ denotes multiplication by $`g`$ and $`\varrho _g`$ reduction modulo $`g`$. This induces a long exact sequence (see \[8, §IV.5\])

$$\mathrm{}\stackrel{\beta _g}{}H^i(,)\stackrel{\mu _g}{}H^i(,)\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}H^i(,_g)\stackrel{\beta _g}{}H^{i+1}(,)\stackrel{\mu _g}{}\mathrm{}.$$
(60)
Here we have denoted the coefficient homomorphisms induced by $`\mu _g`$ and $`\varrho _g`$ by the same letters, i.e., $`\mu _g`$ maps $`\alpha g\alpha `$ and $`\varrho _g`$ maps $`\alpha \alpha \text{mod}g`$. Usually, the connecting homomorphism $`\beta _g`$ is called Bockstein homomorphism. Application of $`\beta _g`$ to an arbitrary generator of $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ yields an element of $`H^2(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ which can be expressed in terms of the $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2)}`$. In order to keep track of this relation, we have to choose a specific generator of $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$. This will be constructed now.

Consider the homomorphism $`\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}:\mathrm{SU}J_g`$ and the induced homomorphism

$$\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}:H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g).$$
(61)
Due to Lemma 5.2, $`\lambda _{J}^{\mathrm{S}}{}_{}{}^{}:\pi _0(\mathrm{SU}J)\pi _0(_g)`$ is an isomorphism. Hence, so is $`\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)_{}:\pi _1(\mathrm{BSU}J)\pi _1(\mathrm{B}_g)`$. Then the Hurewicz and Universal Coefficient Theorems imply that (61) is an isomorphism. Thus, generators of $`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ can be obtained as the images of generators of $`H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$ under $`\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}`$.

###### Lemma 5.9

There exists a unique element $`\delta _gH^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$ such that

$$\beta _g(\delta _g)=\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}.$$
(62)
This element is a generator of $`H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$.

Proof: First we notice that both $`\beta _g(\delta _g)`$ and $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$ are elements of $`H^2(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$ so that Eq. (62) makes sense.

Next, consider the following portion of the exact sequence (60):

$$\mathrm{}H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,)\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)\stackrel{\beta _g}{}H^2(\mathrm{B}_g,)\stackrel{\mu _g}{}H^2(\mathrm{B}_g,)\mathrm{}.$$
(63)
To determine the cohomology groups, we note that a model for $`\mathrm{B}_g`$ is given by the lens space $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$, see Appendix A. Thus, from Eq. (139) in this appendix we infer

$`H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,)`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (64)
$`H^2(\mathrm{B}_g,)`$ $`=`$ $`_g.`$ (65)
Due to (64), $`\beta _g`$ is injective in (63). Due to (65), $`\mu _g`$ is trivial in (63) so that $`\beta _g`$ is also surjective there. Hence, we can define $`\delta _g=\beta _g^1\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$. In order to check that this is a generator, we consider $`J^{}=((1),(g))\mathrm{K}(g)`$. We observe that $`_g\mathrm{SU}J^{}`$, $`\mathrm{U1}\mathrm{U}J^{}`$, and that $`j_g`$ corresponds, by virtue of these isomorphisms, to $`j_J^{}:\mathrm{SU}J^{}\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Then Lemma 5.7 implies that $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}`$ is surjective. In particular, $`H^2(\mathrm{B}_g,)`$ is generated by $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$. Hence, $`H^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$ is generated by $`\delta _g`$.

We define

$$\delta _J=\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}\delta _g.$$
(66)
Then Lemma 5.9 yields the following corollary.

###### Corollary 5.10

$`H^1(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is generated by $`\delta _J`$, where $`\beta _g(\delta _J)=\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$.

### 5.6 The Relation between Generators

In this subsection, we are going to derive the relation between $`\delta _J`$ and the $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2)}`$, i.e., to compute $`\beta _g(\delta _J)`$ in terms of the latter.

For any topological space $`X`$, let $`H_0^{\mathrm{even}}(X,)`$ denote the subset of $`H^{\mathrm{even}}(X,)`$ consisting of elements of the form $`1+\alpha ^{(2)}+\alpha ^{(4)}+\mathrm{}`$ . For any finite sequence of nonnegative integers $`𝐚=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_s)`$, define a polynomial function

$$E_𝐚:\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}H_0^{\mathrm{even}}(X,)H_0^{\mathrm{even}}(X,),(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _s)\alpha _1^{a_1}\mathrm{}\alpha _s^{a_s},$$
(67)
where powers are taken w.r.t. the cup product. By construction, for any map $`f:XY`$,

$$f^{}E_𝐚(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _s)=E_𝐚(f^{}\alpha _1,\mathrm{},f^{}\alpha _s).$$
(68)
Let us derive explicit expressions for the components of $`E_𝐚`$ of $`2`$nd and $`4`$th degree.

###### Lemma 5.11

Let $`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _s)_{i=1}^sH_0^{\mathrm{even}}(X,)`$. Then

$`E_𝐚^{(2)}(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}a_i\alpha _i^{(2)},`$ (69)
$`E_𝐚^{(4)}(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}a_i\alpha _i^{(4)}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{a_i(a_i1)}{2}}\alpha _i^{(2)}\alpha _i^{(2)}+{\displaystyle \underset{i<j=2}{\overset{s}{}}}a_ia_j\alpha _i^{(2)}\alpha _j^{(2)}.`$ (70)
Proof: This is a straightforward computation which we only indicate here. Let $`\alpha `$ be given. Without loss of generality we may assume that the components of $`\alpha _i`$ of degree higher than $`4`$ vanish. For the cup product of elements of this form one has the following formula:

$$\begin{array}{c}\left(1+\beta ^{(2)}+\beta ^{(4)}\right)\left(1+\gamma ^{(2)}+\gamma ^{(4)}\right)\hfill \\ =1+\left(\beta ^{(2)}+\gamma ^{(2)}\right)+\left(\beta ^{(4)}+\gamma ^{(4)}+\beta ^{(2)}\gamma ^{(2)}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

We can iterate this to obtain

$$\alpha _i^{a_i}=1+\left(a_i\alpha _i\right)+\left(a_i\alpha _i^{(4)}+\frac{a_i(a_i1)}{2}\alpha _i^{(2)}\alpha _i^{(2)}\right)$$

and then to compute the product of all the factors $`\alpha _i^{a_i}`$. This yields the assertion.

As an immediate consequence of (69), for any $`l`$,

$$E_{l𝐚}^{(2)}=lE_𝐚^{(2)}.$$
(71)
###### Lemma 5.12

The following two formulae hold:

$`\left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}`$ $`=`$ $`E_𝐦\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right),`$ (72)
$`\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right).`$ (73)
Proof: First, consider (72). We decompose $`i_J`$ as follows:

$$i_J:\mathrm{U}J\stackrel{d_r}{}\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{U}J\stackrel{\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}}{}\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{U}k_i\stackrel{\mathrm{\Pi }_id_{m_i}}{}\mathrm{\Pi }_i(\mathrm{U}k_i\stackrel{m_i}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\mathrm{U}k_i)\stackrel{j}{}\mathrm{U}n.$$
(74)
Here $`d_r`$, $`d_{m_i}`$ denote $`r`$-fold and $`m_i`$-fold diagonal embedding, respectively, and $`j`$ stands for the natural (blockwise) embedding. According to (74), $`\left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}`$ decomposes as

$$\begin{array}{c}\left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}:H^{}(\mathrm{BU}n,)\stackrel{\left(\mathrm{B}j\right)^{}}{}H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i(\mathrm{BU}k_i\stackrel{m_i}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\mathrm{BU}k_i),)\hfill \\ \stackrel{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_id_{m_i}\right)^{}}{}H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{BU}k_i,)\stackrel{\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}}{}H^{}(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{BU}J,)\stackrel{d_r^{}}{}H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,).\hfill \end{array}$$
(75)
Under the assumption that we have chosen the generators $`\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k}^{(2j)}`$ for different $`k`$ in a consistent way (namely, such that the universal properties of Chern classes hold for the characteristic classes defined by these elements), there holds the relation

$$\left(\mathrm{B}j\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}=(\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1}\stackrel{m_1}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1})\times \mathrm{}\times (\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r}\stackrel{m_r}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r}).$$
(76)
Using this, as well as (56), we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}& =& d_r^{}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_id_{m_i}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}\hfill \\ & =& d_r^{}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_id_{m_i}\right)^{}\left((\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1}\stackrel{m_1}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1})\times \mathrm{}\times (\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r}\stackrel{m_r}{\times \mathrm{}\times }\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r})\right)\hfill \\ & =& d_r^{}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1}^{m_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r}^{m_r}\right)\hfill \\ & =& d_r^{}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,1}^{m_1}\times \mathrm{}\times \stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,r}^{m_r}\right)\hfill \\ & =& \stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,1}^{m_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,r}^{m_r}.\hfill \end{array}$$

This yields (72). Now consider (73). The commutative diagram (38) implies

$$\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}p_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}=\left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}det_{\mathrm{U}n}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}.$$
(77)
We have

$`\left(\mathrm{B}det_{\mathrm{U}n}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}^{(2)},`$ (78)
$`\left(\mathrm{B}p_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`g\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}.`$ (79)
Formula (79) follows, by virtue of the Hurewicz and the Universal Coefficient Theorems, from the fact that the homomorphism $`\left(\mathrm{B}p_g\right)_{}:\pi _2(\mathrm{BU1})\pi _2(\mathrm{BU1})`$ is given by multiplication by $`g`$. Inserting Eqs. (78) and (79) into (77) we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill g\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}& =& E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{72}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& gE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{71}\text{).}\hfill \end{array}$$

Since this relation holds in $`H^2(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ which is free Abelian, it implies (73).

###### Theorem 5.13

There holds the relation $`\beta _g(\delta _J)=E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\gamma _J)`$.

Proof: We compute

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \beta _g(\delta _J)& =& \left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & |& \text{by Corollary }\text{5.10}\hfill \\ & =& \left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{39}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{73}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\gamma _J\right).\hfill & & \end{array}$$

### 5.7 Characteristic Classes for $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-Bundles

Using the cohomology elements $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ and $`\delta _J`$ constructed above, we define the following characteristic classes for $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-bundles over a manifold $`M`$:

$`\alpha _{J,i}`$ $`:`$ $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)H_0^{\mathrm{even}}(M,),Q\left(f_Q\right)^{}\gamma _{J,i},i=1,\mathrm{},r`$ (80)
$`\xi _J`$ $`:`$ $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)H^1(M,_g),Q\left(f_Q\right)^{}\delta _J.`$ (81)
Sorted by degree, $`\alpha _{J,i}(Q)=1+\alpha _{J,i}^{(2)}(Q)+\mathrm{}+\alpha _{J,i}^{(2k_i)}(Q)`$, where $`\alpha _{J,i}^{(2j)}(Q)=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$. Moreover, we introduce the notation $`\alpha _J(Q)=(\alpha _{J,1}(Q),\mathrm{},\alpha _{J,r}(Q))`$. Then

$$\alpha _J(Q)=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\gamma _J$$
(82)
and $`\alpha _J`$ can be viewed as a map from $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ to the set

$$H^{(J)}(M,)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{k_i}{}}H^{2j}(M,).$$
(83)
By construction, the relation which holds for $`\gamma _J`$ and $`\delta _J`$ carries over to the characteristic classes $`\alpha _J`$ and $`\xi _J`$. By virtue of (68), from Theorem 5.13 we infer

$$E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\alpha _J(Q)\right)=\beta _g\left(\xi _J(Q)\right)Q\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J).$$
(84)
In order to derive expressions for $`\alpha _J`$ and $`\xi _J`$ in terms of the ordinary characteristic classes for $`\mathrm{U}k_i`$-bundles and $`_g`$-bundles, let $`Q\text{Bun}(M,SUJ)`$. There are two kinds of principal bundles associated in a natural way to $`Q`$: The $`\mathrm{U}k_i`$-bundles $`Q^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, and the $`_g`$-bundle $`Q^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}`$. For the first ones, using (27) and (52) we compute

$$c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}\right)=\left(f_{Q^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_i}=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\gamma _{J,i},$$

so that

$$\alpha _{J,i}\left(Q\right)=c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}\right),i=1,\mathrm{},r.$$
(85)
As for the second one, let $`\chi _g`$ denote the characteristic class for $`_g`$-bundles over $`M`$ defined by the generator $`\delta _gH^1(\mathrm{B}_g,_g)`$, i.e.,

$$\chi _g(R)=\left(f_R\right)^{}\delta _g,R\text{Bun}(M,_g).$$
(86)
Then (27) and (66) yield $`\chi _g\left(Q^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}\right)=\left(f_{Q^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}}\right)^{}\delta _g=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}\right)^{}\delta _g=\left(f_Q\right)^{}\delta _J`$. Consequently,

$$\xi _J\left(Q\right)=\chi _g\left(Q^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}\right).$$
(87)
### 5.8 Classification of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-Bundles

We denote

$$\mathrm{K}(M)_J=\left\{(\alpha ,\xi )H^{(J)}(M,)\times H^1(M,_g)\right|E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha )=\beta _g(\xi )\}.$$
(88)
###### Theorem 5.14

Let $`M`$ be a manifold, $`dimM4`$, and let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Then the characteristic classes $`\alpha _J`$ and $`\xi _J`$ define a bijection from $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ onto $`\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$.

Proof: The map is injective by Corollary 5.5. In the following lemma we prove that it is also surjective.

###### Lemma 5.15

Let $`M`$ be a manifold, $`dimM4`$, and let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Let $`(\alpha ,\xi )\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$. Then there exists $`Q\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ such that $`\alpha _J(Q)=\alpha `$ and $`\xi _J(Q)=\xi `$.

Proof: We give a construction of $`Q`$ in terms of $`\mathrm{U}k_i`$ and $`_g`$-bundles. There exists $`R\text{Bun}(M,_g)`$ such that $`\chi _g(R)=\xi `$. Due to $`dimM4`$, there exist also $`Q_i\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{U}k_i)`$ such that $`c(Q_i)=\alpha _i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Define $`\stackrel{~}{Q}=Q_1\times _M\mathrm{}\times _MQ_r`$ (Whitney, or fibre, product). By identifying $`\mathrm{U}k_1\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{U}k_r`$ with $`\mathrm{U}J`$, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ becomes a $`\mathrm{U}J`$-bundle. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}]}Q_i,i=1,\mathrm{},r.$$
(89)
Consider the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundles $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}`$ and $`R^{[j_g]}`$ associated to $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ and $`R`$, respectively. Assume, for a moment, that they are isomorphic. Then $`R`$ is a subbundle of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}`$ with structure group $`_g`$. Let $`Q`$ denote the pre-image of $`R`$ under the natural bundle morphism $`\stackrel{~}{Q}\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}`$, see (25). This is a subbundle of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ with structure group being the pre-image of $`_g`$ under $`\lambda _J`$, i.e., with structure group $`\mathrm{SU}J`$. Using (85), $`Q^{[j_J]}=\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, and (89), for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$,

$$\alpha _{J,i}(Q)=c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}\right)=c\left(\left(Q^{[j_J]}\right)^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}]}\right)=c\left(\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J}]}\right)=c\left(Q_i\right)=\alpha _i.$$

Moreover, by construction of $`Q`$, $`Q^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}R`$. Thus, (87) yields $`\xi _J\left(Q\right)=\chi _J\left(R\right)=\xi `$.

It remains to prove $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}R^{[j_g]}`$. We compute

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill c_1\left(\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}\right)& =& \left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & & \\ & =& \left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}\lambda _J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{27}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}\right)^{}E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{73}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{68}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_1^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1},\mathrm{},\left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{Bpr}_r^{\mathrm{U}J}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r})\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{51}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\mathrm{pr}_1^{\mathrm{U}J}]}}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1},\mathrm{},\left(f_{\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\mathrm{pr}_r^{\mathrm{U}J}]}}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r})\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{27}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\left(f_{Q_1}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_1},\mathrm{},\left(f_{Q_r}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}k_r})\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{89}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(c(Q_1),\mathrm{},c(Q_r))\hfill & & \\ & =& E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha ),\hfill & & \end{array}$$

as well as

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill c_1\left(R^{[j_g]}\right)& =& \left(f_{R^{[j_g]}}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & & \\ & =& \left(f_R\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_g\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{27}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \left(f_R\right)^{}\beta _g(\delta _g)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{62}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \beta _g\left(f_R\right)^{}\delta _g\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{68}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \beta _g(\chi _g(R))\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{86}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \beta _g(\xi ).\hfill & & \end{array}$$

Thus, due to $`(\alpha ,\xi )\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$, $`c_1(\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]})=c_1(R^{[j_g]})`$. It follows that, indeed, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^{[\lambda _J]}R^{[j_g]}`$. This proves the lemma and, therefore, the theorem.

### 5.9 Classification of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-Subbundles of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-Bundles

Let $`P`$ be a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle over a manifold $`M`$ and let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. We are going to characterize the subset $`\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ in terms of the characteristic classes $`\alpha _J`$ and $`\xi _J`$. Recall that for $`Q\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$, $`Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}`$ denotes the extension of $`Q`$ by $`\mathrm{SU}n`$.

###### Lemma 5.16

For any $`Q\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$, $`c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}\right)=E_𝐦\left(\alpha _J(Q)\right)`$.

Proof: Note that $`c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}\right)=c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{U}n]}\right)=c\left(Q^{[i_Jj_J]}\right)`$. Hence,

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}\right)& =& \left(f_Q\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{27}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \left(f_Q\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}E_𝐦\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{72}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_𝐦\left(\left(f_Q\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{68}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_𝐦\left(\left(f_Q\right)^{}\gamma _J\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{52}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_𝐦\left(\alpha _J(Q)\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{82}\text{).}\hfill \end{array}$$

We define

$$\mathrm{K}(P)_J=\left\{(\alpha ,\xi )\mathrm{K}(M)_J\right|E_𝐦(\alpha )=c(P)\}.$$
(90)
###### Theorem 5.17

Let $`P`$ be a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle over a manifold $`M`$, $`dimM4`$, and let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$. Then the characteristic classes $`\alpha _J`$, $`\xi _J`$ define a bijection from $`\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)`$ onto $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$.

Proof: Let $`Q\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$. Then $`(\alpha _J(Q),\xi _J(Q))\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$. Lemma 5.16 implies that $`(\alpha _J(Q),\xi _J(Q))\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ if and only if $`c\left(Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}\right)=c(P)`$. Due to $`dimM4`$, the latter is equivalent to $`Q^{[\mathrm{SU}n]}P`$, i.e., to $`Q\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)`$.

The equation $`E_𝐦(\alpha )=c(P)`$ actually contains the two equations $`E_𝐦^{(2)}(\alpha )=0`$ and $`E_𝐦^{(4)}(\alpha )=c_2(P)`$. However, under the assumption that $`(\alpha ,\xi )\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$, the first one is redundant, because then, due to (71), $`E_𝐦^{(2)}(\alpha )=gE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha )=g\beta _g(\xi )=0`$. Thus, the relevant equations are

$`E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _g(\xi ),`$ (91)
$`E_𝐦^{(4)}(\alpha )`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P),`$ (92)
where $`\alpha H^{(J)}(M,)`$, $`\xi H^1(M,_g)`$. The set of solutions of Eq. (91) yields $`\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$, hence $`\text{Bun}(M,\mathrm{SU}J)`$. The set of solutions of both Eqs. (91) and (92) yields $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ and, therefore, $`\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J)`$.

This concludes the classification of Howe subbundles of $`P`$, i.e., Step 2 of our programme.

### 5.10 Examples

We are going to determine $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$, i.e., to solve the system of equations (91) and (92), for several choices of $`J`$ and for base manifolds $`M=\mathrm{S}^4,\mathrm{S}^2\times \mathrm{S}^2,\mathrm{T}^4`$, and $`\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$. Here $`\mathrm{L}_p^3`$ denotes the $`3`$-dimensional lens space which is defined to be the quotient of the restriction of the natural action of $`\mathrm{U1}`$ on the sphere $`\mathrm{S}^3^2`$ to the subgroup $`_p`$. Note that $`\mathrm{L}_p^3`$ is orientable. We remark that there are more general lens spaces, even in $`3`$ dimensions.

#### Preliminary Remarks

Due to compactness and orientability, $`H^4(M,)`$. Let us derive the Bockstein homomorphism $`\beta _g:H^1(M,_g)H^2(M,)`$. Since for products of spheres the integer-valued cohomology is torsion-free, $`\beta _g`$ is trivial here. On the other hand, consider $`M=\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$. From the exact homotopy sequence induced by the fibration $`_p\mathrm{S}^3\mathrm{L}_p^3`$ we infer

$$\pi _1\left(\mathrm{L}_p^3\right)_p.$$
(93)
According to the Hurewicz and Universal Coefficient Theorems, then

$$H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,_g)\text{Hom}(\pi _1\left(\mathrm{L}_p^3\right),_g)\text{Hom}(_p,_g)_{p,g},$$
(94)
where $`p,g`$ denotes the greatest common divisor of $`p`$ and $`g`$. Let $`\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}^{(1)}`$ and $`\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}`$ be generators of $`H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,_g)`$ and $`H^1(\mathrm{S}^1,)`$, respectively. Due to the Künneth Theorem for cohomology \[25, Ch. XIII, Thm. 11.2\] and (94),

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1,_g)& & H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,_g)H^0(\mathrm{S}^1,)H^0(\mathrm{L}_p^3,_g)H^1(\mathrm{S}^1,)\hfill \\ & & _{p,g}_g,\hfill \end{array}$$
(95)
where the first factor is generated by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}`$ and the second one by $`1_{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}`$. Consider the following portion of the exact sequence (60):

$$H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,)\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,_g)\stackrel{\beta _g}{}H^2(\mathrm{L}_p^3,).$$
(96)
One has, see \[8, §10, p. 363\],

$$H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3,)=0,H^2(\mathrm{L}_p^3,)_p$$
(97)
(the first equality follows also from (93)). In view of (97) and (94), (96) implies

$$\beta _g\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}^{(1)}\right)=\frac{p}{p,g}\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;}^{(2)},$$
(98)
where $`\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;}^{(2)}`$ is an appropriately chosen generator of $`H^2(\mathrm{L}_p^3,)`$. Moreover, due to (97), $`\beta _g(1_{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g})=0`$. Thus, we obtain

$$\beta _g\left(\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}\right)=\frac{p}{p,g}\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;}^{(2)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1},\beta _g\left(1_{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\right)=0.$$
(99)
Finally, note that via the Künneth Theorem, (97) implies $`H^2(\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1,)_p`$. Since $`H^4(\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1,)`$ is torsion-free, then the cup product $`\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ is trivial.

Now let us discuss some special choices for $`J`$. For brevity, we write $`J`$ in the form $`J=(k_1,\mathrm{},k_r|m_1,\mathrm{},m_r)`$.

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{|}𝒏\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝐊\mathbf{(}𝒏\mathbf{)}`$

Here $`\mathrm{SU}J=_n`$, the center of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. Moreover, $`g=n`$. Variables are $`\xi H^1(M,_n)`$ and $`\alpha =1+\alpha ^{(2)}`$, $`\alpha ^{(2)}H^2(M,)`$. The system of equations (91) and (92) reads

$`\alpha ^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _n(\xi )`$ (100)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{n(n1)}{2}}\alpha ^{(2)}\alpha ^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P).`$ (101)
Note that we have used Lemma 5.11. Eq. (100) merely expresses $`\alpha ^{(2)}`$ in terms of $`\xi `$. In particular, it yields $`n\alpha ^{(2)}=0`$, so that Eq. (101) requires $`c_2(P)=0`$. As a result, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is nonempty iff $`P`$ is trivial and is then parametrized by $`\xi `$. This coincides with what is known about $`_n`$-subbundles of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundles.

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}𝒏\mathbf{|}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝐊\mathbf{(}𝒏\mathbf{)}`$

Here $`\mathrm{SU}J=\mathrm{SU}n`$, the whole group. Due to $`g=1`$, the only variable is $`\alpha =1+\alpha ^{(2)}+\alpha ^{(4)}`$, where $`\alpha ^{(2j)}H^{2j}(M,)`$, $`j=1,2`$. The system of equations (91) and (92) is

$$\alpha ^{(2)}=0,\alpha ^{(4)}=c_2(P).$$

Thus, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ consists of $`P`$ itself.

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{|}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝐊\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟒}\mathbf{)}`$

One can check that $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ has connected components

$$\{\text{diag}(z,z,z^1,z^1)|z\mathrm{U1}\},\{\text{diag}(z,z,z^1,z^1)|z\mathrm{U1}\}.$$

It is, therefore, isomorphic to $`\mathrm{U1}\times _2`$. Variables are $`\xi H^1(M,_2)`$ and $`\alpha _i=1+\alpha _i^{(2)}`$, $`\alpha _i^{(2)}H^2(M,)`$, $`i=1,2`$. The system of equations under consideration is

$`\alpha _1^{(2)}+\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _2(\xi )`$ (102)
$`\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}+\alpha _2^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}+4\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P).`$ (103)
We solve Eq. (102) w.r.t. $`\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ and insert it into Eq. (103). Since $`H^4(M,)`$ is torsion-free, products including $`\beta _2(\xi )`$ vanish. Thus, we obtain

$$2\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}=c_2(P).$$
(104)
For base manifold $`M=\mathrm{S}^4`$, $`H^2(M,)=0`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is nonempty iff $`c_2(P)=0`$, in which case it contains the (necessarily trivial) $`\mathrm{U1}\times _2`$-bundle over $`\mathrm{S}^4`$.

For $`M=\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$, in case $`c_2(P)=0`$, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is parametrized by $`\xi H^1(M,_g)_{2,p}_2`$ and $`\alpha _1^{(2)}H^2(M,)_p`$. Otherwise it is empty.

For $`M=\mathrm{S}^2\times \mathrm{S}^2`$, $`H^1(M,_g)=0`$. Let $`\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$ be a generator of $`H^2(\mathrm{S}^2,)`$. Due to the Künneth Theorem, $`H^2(M,)`$, where it is generated by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^2}`$ and $`1_{\mathrm{S}^2}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$. Moreover, $`H^4(M,)`$ is generated by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$. Writing

$$\alpha _1^{(2)}=a\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^2}+b1_{\mathrm{S}^2}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}$$
(105)
with $`a,b`$, Eq. (104) becomes

$$4ab\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}=c_2(P).$$

If $`c_2(P)=0`$, there are two series of solutions: $`a=0`$ and $`b`$ as well as $`a`$ and $`b=0`$. Here $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is infinite. If $`c_2(P)=4l\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$, $`l0`$, then $`a=q`$ and $`b=l/q`$, where $`q`$ runs through the (positive and negative) divisors of $`l`$. Hence, in this case, the cardinality of $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is twice the number of divisors of $`l`$. If $`c_2(P)`$ is not divisible by $`4`$ then $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is empty.

Finally, for $`M=\mathrm{T}^4`$ one has $`H^1(M,)_2^4`$ and $`H^2(M,)^6`$. Moreover, $`H^2(M,)`$ is generated by elements $`\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;ij}^{(2)}`$, $`1i<j4`$, where

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;12}^{(2)}=\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1},\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;13}^{(2)}=\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1},\text{etc.,}$$

whereas $`H^4(M,)`$ is generated by $`\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4}^{(4)}=\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}`$. One can check

$$\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;ij}^{(2)}\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;kl}^{(2)}=ϵ_{ijkl}\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4}^{(4)},$$
(106)
where $`ϵ_{ijkl}`$ denotes the totally antisymmetric tensor in $`4`$ dimensions. Writing

$$\alpha _1^{(2)}=\underset{1i<j4}{}a_{ij}\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4;ij}^{(2)}$$
(107)
and using (106), Eq. (104) yields

$$4\left(a_{12}a_{34}a_{13}a_{24}+a_{14}a_{23}\right)\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4}^{(4)}=c_2(P).$$

Hence, we find that $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is again nonempty iff $`c_2(P)`$ is divisible by $`4`$, in which case it now has always infinitely many elements.

To conclude, let us point out that, when passing to $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$, one has to identify the symbol containing $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ with that containing $`(\alpha _2,\alpha _1)`$.

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{|}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝐊\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟓}\mathbf{)}`$

The subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ of $`\mathrm{SU5}`$ consists of matrices of the form $`\text{diag}(z_1,z_1,z_2,z_2,z_2)`$, where $`z_1,z_2\mathrm{U1}`$ such that $`z_1^2z_2^3=1`$. We can parametrize $`z_1=z^3`$, $`z_2=z^2`$, $`z\mathrm{U1}`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ is isomorphic to $`\mathrm{U1}`$. Variables are $`\alpha _i=1+\alpha _i^{(2)}`$, $`i=1,2`$. The equations to be solved read

$`2\alpha _1^{(2)}+3\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (108)
$`\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}+3\alpha _2^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}+6\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P)`$ (109)
Eq. (108) can be parametrized by $`\alpha _1^{(2)}=3\eta `$, $`\alpha _2^{(2)}=2\eta `$, where $`\eta H^2(M,)`$. Then Eq. (109) becomes

$$15\eta \eta =c_2(P).$$

The discussion of this equation is analogous to that of Eq. (104) above.

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{|}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{,}\mathrm{𝟏}\mathbf{)}\mathbf{}𝐊\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟓}\mathbf{)}`$

Here $`\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{S}(\mathrm{U2}\times \mathrm{U3})`$, the symmetry group of the standard model. In the grand unified $`\mathrm{SU5}`$-model this is the subgroup to which $`\mathrm{SU5}`$ is broken by the heavy Higgs field. Moreover, the subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ is the centralizer of the subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}(1,1|2,3)`$ discussed above. Variables are $`\alpha _i=1+\alpha _i^{(2)}+\alpha _i^{(4)}`$, where $`\alpha _i^{(2j)}H^{2j}(M,)`$, $`i,j=1,2`$. Eqs. (91) and (92) read

$`\alpha _1^{(2)}+\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (110)
$`\alpha _1^{(4)}+\alpha _2^{(4)}+\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P).`$ (111)
Using (110) to replace $`\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ in (111) we obtain for the latter

$$\alpha _2^{(4)}=c_2(P)\alpha _1^{(4)}+\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}.$$

Thus, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ can be parametrized by $`\alpha _1`$ (or $`\alpha _2`$), i.e., by the Chern class of one of the factors $`\mathrm{U2}`$ or $`\mathrm{U3}`$. This has been known for a long time .

#### $`𝑱\mathbf{=}\mathbf{(}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{|}\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{)}`$

The subgroup $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ of $`\mathrm{SU4}`$ consists of matrices $`DD`$, where $`D\mathrm{U2}`$ such that $`(detD)^2=1`$. Hence, it has connected components $`\{DD|D\mathrm{SU2}\}`$ and $`\{(iD)(iD)|D\mathrm{SU2}\}`$. One can check that the map $`\mathrm{SU2}\times _4\mathrm{SU}J`$, $`(D,a)e^{2\pi ia/4}D`$, induces an isomorphism from $`(\mathrm{SU2}\times _4)/_2`$ onto $`\mathrm{SU}J`$.

Now consider $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$. Variables are $`\xi H^1(M,_2)`$ and $`\alpha =1+\alpha ^{(2)}+\alpha ^{(4)}`$. We have

$`\alpha ^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _2(\xi )`$ (112)
$`\alpha ^{(2)}\alpha ^{(2)}+2\alpha ^{(4)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P)`$ (113)
Eq. (112) fixes $`\alpha ^{(2)}`$ in terms of $`\xi `$. For example, in case $`M=\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$, by expanding $`\xi =\xi _\mathrm{L}\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;_g}^{(1)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}+\xi _\mathrm{S}1_{\mathrm{L}_p^3}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^1}^{(1)}`$, Eqs. (99) and (112) imply

$$\alpha ^{(2)}=\{\begin{array}{ccc}q\xi _L\gamma _{\mathrm{L}_p^3;}^{(2)}\times 1_{\mathrm{S}^1}& |& p=2q\hfill \\ 0& |& p=2q+1.\hfill \end{array}$$

For general $`M`$, due to (112), Eq. (113) becomes $`2\alpha ^{(4)}=c_2(P)`$. Thus, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$ is nonempty iff $`c_2(P)`$ is even and is then parametrized by $`\xi H^1(M,_2)`$.

Let us point out the following. Consider Eq. (112) which defines the set $`\mathrm{K}(M)_J`$ classifying $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-bundles over $`M`$. In case $`M`$ is a product of spheres (or, more generally, has trivial $`\beta _2`$ in degree $`1`$), this classification coincides with that of $`(\mathrm{SU2}\times _2)`$-bundles, although this group is only locally isomorphic to $`\mathrm{SU}J`$. In case $`M=\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$, there is a difference though. Here the $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-bundles which are nontrivial over the factor $`\mathrm{L}_p^3`$ have a magnetic charge, whereas an $`(\mathrm{SU2}\times _2)`$-bundle can never have one.

## 6 Holonomy-Induced Howe Subbundles

In the next step of our programme we have to specify the Howe subbundles which are holonomy-induced. However, in fact, this turns out not to be necessary here because for Howe subbundles of principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundles the condition of being holonomy-induced is redundant. This will be proved now.

###### Lemma 6.1

Let $`HH^{}\mathrm{SU}n`$ be Howe subgroups. If $`dimH=dimH^{}`$ then $`H=H^{}`$.

Proof: There exist $`J,J^{}\mathrm{K}(n)`$ such that $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$ are conjugate to $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ and $`\mathrm{SU}J^{}`$, respectively. Consider $`\mathrm{U}J`$ and $`\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Due to $`HH^{}`$, there exists $`D\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`D^1\mathrm{U}JD\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Moreover,

$$dim\mathrm{U}J^{}=dim\mathrm{SU}J^{}+1=dimH^{}+1=dimH+1=dim\mathrm{SU}J+1=dim\mathrm{U}J.$$
(114)
$`\mathrm{U}J^{}`$ being connected and $`D^1\mathrm{U}JD`$ being closed in $`\mathrm{U}J^{}`$, (114) implies $`D^1\mathrm{U}JD=\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Then $`D^1\mathrm{SU}JD=D^1\left(\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{SU}n\right)D=\left(D^1\mathrm{U}JD\right)\mathrm{SU}n=\mathrm{U}J^{}\mathrm{SU}n=\mathrm{SU}J^{}`$. It follows $`H=H^{}`$.

###### Theorem 6.2

Any Howe subbundle of a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle is holonomy-induced.

Proof: Let $`P`$ be a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle and let $`Q`$ be a Howe subbundle of $`P`$ with structure group $`H`$. Denote the structure group of a connected component of $`Q`$ by $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$. It is easily seen that $`Q`$ is holonomy-induced provided

$$\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{SU}n}^2(\stackrel{~}{H})=H.$$
(115)
Since $`H`$ is a Howe subgroup, we have $`\stackrel{~}{H}\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{SU}n}^2(\stackrel{~}{H})H`$. Since $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ and $`H`$ are of the same dimension, so are $`\mathrm{C}_{\mathrm{SU}n}^2(\stackrel{~}{H})`$ and $`H`$. By virtue of Lemma 6.1, this implies (115).

For the reader who wonders whether there exist Howe subbundles which are not holonomy-induced we give an example here. Consider the Lie group $`\mathrm{SO3}`$. One checks that the subgroup $`H=\{\mathrm{𝟙}_3,\text{diag}(1,1,1)\}`$ is Howe. Thus, the subbundle $`Q=M\times H`$ of the bundle $`M\times \mathrm{SO3}`$ is Howe. Any connected subbundle $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ of $`Q`$ has the center $`\{\mathrm{𝟙}_3\}`$ as its structure group. Since the center is Howe itself, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}\mathrm{C}_G^2(\{\mathrm{𝟙}_3\})=\stackrel{~}{Q}Q`$.

## 7 Factorization by $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-Action

In Step 4 of our programme to determine $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$, we actually have to take the disjoint union of $`\text{Red}(P,H)`$ over all Howe subgroups $`H`$ of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ and to factorize by the action of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. Since $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-action on subbundles conjugates their structure groups, however, it suffices to take the union only over $`\mathrm{SU}J`$, $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$:

$$\underset{J\mathrm{K}(n)}{}\text{Red}(P,\mathrm{SU}J).$$
(116)
According to this, define

$$\mathrm{K}(P)=\underset{J\mathrm{K}(n)}{}\mathrm{K}(P)_J.$$
(117)
We shall denote the elements of $`\mathrm{K}(P)`$ by $`L`$ and write them in the form $`L=(J;\alpha ,\xi )`$, where $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$ and $`(\alpha ,\xi )\mathrm{K}(P)_J`$. Due to Theorem 5.17, the collection of characteristic classes $`\{(\alpha _J,\xi _J)|J\mathrm{K}(n)\}`$ defines a bijection from (116) onto $`\mathrm{K}(P)`$. Now we reverse this bijection: Let $`L\mathrm{K}(P)`$, $`L=(J;\alpha ,\xi )`$. Then define $`Q_L`$ to be the isomorphism class of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-subbundles of $`P`$ which obey

$$\alpha _J(Q_L)=\alpha ,\xi _J(Q_L)=\xi .$$
(118)
###### Lemma 7.1

Let $`L,L^{}\mathrm{K}(P)`$, where $`L=(J;\alpha ,\xi )`$ and $`L^{}=(J^{};\alpha ^{},\xi ^{})`$. There exists $`D\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`Q_L^{}=Q_LD`$ (up to isomorphy) if and only if $`\xi ^{}=\xi `$, as well as $`J^{}=\sigma J`$ and $`\alpha ^{}=\sigma \alpha `$ for some permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$.

Proof: For $`J_1,J_2\mathrm{K}(n)`$ and $`D\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`D^1\mathrm{SU}J_1D\mathrm{SU}J_2`$, define embeddings

$`h_{J_1J_2}^D`$ $`:`$ $`\mathrm{U}J_1\mathrm{U}J_2,CD^1CD`$
$`h_{J_1J_2}^{D;\mathrm{S}}`$ $`:`$ $`\mathrm{SU}J_1\mathrm{SU}J_2,CD^1CD.`$
First, assume that we are given $`D\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`Q_L^{}Q_LD`$. Then $`D^1\mathrm{SU}JD=\mathrm{SU}J^{}`$, so that we can consider the isomorphisms $`h_{JJ^{}}^{D;\mathrm{S}}:\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{SU}J^{}`$ and $`h_{JJ^{}}^D:\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. One can check that

$$Q_LDQ_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{D;\mathrm{S}}]}.$$
(119)
Moreover, there exists a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`h_{JJ^{}}^D`$ maps the $`\sigma (i)`$-th factor of $`\mathrm{U}J`$ isomorphically onto the $`i`$-th factor of $`\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Then, in particular, $`J^{}=\sigma J`$. Moreover, there exists $`C\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J^{}}h_{JJ^{}}^C=\mathrm{pr}_{\sigma (i)}^{\mathrm{U}J}`$ $`i`$ (in fact, $`C`$ has been constructed in the proof of Lemma 4.2). Then

$$\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J^{}}j_Jh_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}=\mathrm{pr}_{\sigma (i)}^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J.$$
(120)
Next, define $`B=DC^1\mathrm{SU}n`$. The corresponding homomorphism $`h_{JJ}^B`$ is an automorphism of $`\mathrm{U}J`$ which leaves each factor invariant separately. One can check that it is an inner automorphism of $`\mathrm{U}J`$. Then $`h_{JJ}^{B;\mathrm{S}}`$ is an inner automorphism of $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ and can, therefore, be generated by an element of the connected component of the identity. Then $`\mathrm{B}h_{JJ}^{B;\mathrm{S}}`$ is homotopic to $`\mathrm{Bid}_{\mathrm{SU}J}\mathrm{id}_{\mathrm{BSU}J}`$. As a consequence, the classifying map of the subbundle $`Q_LB`$, which is, due to (119) and (27), given by $`f_{Q_LB}=f_{Q_L^{[h_{JJ}^{B;\mathrm{S}}]}}=\mathrm{B}h_{JJ}^{B;\mathrm{S}}f_{Q_L}`$, is homotopic to that of $`Q_L`$. It follows $`Q_L^{}Q_LC`$. Then, due to (119),

$$Q_L^{}Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}.$$
(121)
We compute the characteristic classes of $`Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}`$ in terms of those of $`Q_L`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)& =& c\left(\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J^{}}j_J]}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{85}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& c\left(Q_L^{[\mathrm{pr}_i^{\mathrm{U}J^{}}j_Jh_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)\hfill & & \\ & =& c\left(Q_L^{[\mathrm{pr}_{\sigma (i)}^{\mathrm{U}J}j_J]}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{120}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{J,\sigma (i)}\left(Q_L\right),\hfill & & \end{array}$$
(122)
as well as, using $`\lambda _J^{}^\mathrm{S}h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}=\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}`$ and (87),

$$\xi _J^{}\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)=\chi _g\left(\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)^{[\lambda _J^{}^\mathrm{S}]}\right)=\chi _g\left(Q_L^{[\lambda _J^\mathrm{S}]}\right)=\xi _J\left(Q_L\right).$$
(123)
Thus,

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \alpha _i^{}& =& \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_L^{}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{118}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{C;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{121}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{J,\sigma (i)}\left(Q_L\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{122}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{\sigma (i)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{118}\text{),}\hfill \end{array}$$

i.e., $`\alpha ^{}=\sigma \alpha `$. In an analogous way, using (123), we obtain $`\xi ^{}=\xi `$.

To prove the converse implication, assume $`\xi ^{}=\xi `$ and let $`\sigma `$ be a permutation of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`J^{}=\sigma J`$ and $`\alpha ^{}=\sigma \alpha `$. Due to Lemma 4.2, there exists $`D\mathrm{SU}n`$ such that $`\mathrm{SU}J^{}=D^1\mathrm{SU}JD`$. As shown in the proof of this lemma, $`D`$ can be chosen in such a way that (120) holds. Then (122) holds, too. We compute the characteristic classes of $`Q_LD`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_LD\right)& =& \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_L^{[h_{JJ^{}}^{D;\mathrm{S}}]}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{119}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{J,\sigma (i)}\left(Q_L\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{122}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{\sigma (i)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{118}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _i^{}\hfill & |& \text{by assumption}\hfill \\ & =& \alpha _{J^{},i}\left(Q_L^{}\right)\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{118}\text{).}\hfill \end{array}$$

Analogously, using (123), we find $`\xi _J^{}\left(Q_LD\right)=\xi _J^{}\left(Q_L^{}\right)`$. It follows $`Q_LDQ_L^{}`$.

As suggested by Lemma 7.1, we introduce an equivalence relation on the set $`\mathrm{K}(P)`$: Let $`L,L^{}\mathrm{K}(P)`$, where $`L=(J;\alpha ,\xi )`$ and $`L^{}=(J^{};\alpha ^{},\xi ^{})`$. Write $`LL^{}`$ iff $`\xi ^{}=\xi `$ and there exists a permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$ such that $`J^{}=\sigma J`$ and $`\alpha ^{}=\sigma \alpha `$. The set of equivalence classes will be denoted by $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$.

###### Theorem 7.2

The assignment $`LQ_L`$ induces a bijection from $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ onto $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$.

Proof: The assignment $`LQ_L`$ induces a map $`\mathrm{K}(P)\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$. This map is surjective by construction. Due to Lemma 7.1, it projects to $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ and the projected map is injective.

With Theorem 7.2 we have accomplished the determination of $`\text{Howe}_{}(P)`$ and, therefore, of the set of orbit types $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$. Calculations for the latter can now be performed entirely on the level of the classifying set $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$.

## 8 Example: Gauge Orbit Types for $`\mathrm{SU2}`$

In this section, we are going to determine $`\mathrm{OT}(𝒜^k,𝒢^{k+1})`$ for an $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-gauge theory over the base manifolds discussed in Subsection 5.10. The set $`\mathrm{K}(2)`$ contains the elements

$$J_a=(1|2),J_b=(1,1|1,1),J_c=(2|1).$$

Here $`\mathrm{SU}J_a=\{\pm \mathrm{𝟙}\}_2`$ is the center, $`\mathrm{SU}J_b=\left\{\text{diag}(z,z^1)\right|z\mathrm{U1}\}\mathrm{U1}`$ is the toral subgroup and $`\mathrm{SU}J_c=\mathrm{SU2}`$. The strata corresponding to the elements of $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_a}`$, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_b}`$, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_c}`$ are, in the respective order, those with stabilizers isomorphic to $`\mathrm{SU2}`$, $`\mathrm{U1}`$, and the generic stratum. Accordingly, we shall refer to the first class as $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-strata and to the second class as $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata. We have

$$\mathrm{K}(P)=\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_a}\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_b}\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_c}$$

(disjoint union). As we already know, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_a}`$ is parametrized by $`\xi H^1(M,_2)`$ in case $`P`$ is trivial and is empty otherwise. Moreover, $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_c}`$ consists of $`P`$ itself. For $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_b}`$, variables are $`\alpha _i=1+\alpha _i^{(2)}`$, $`\alpha _i^{(2)}H^2(M,)`$, $`i=1,2`$. The system of equations (91), (92) reads

$`\alpha _1^{(2)}+\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (124)
$`\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`c_2(P)`$ (125)
Using (124) to replace $`\alpha _2^{(2)}`$ in (125) we obtain

$$\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}=c_2(P).$$
(126)
Note that here $`\alpha _1^{(2)}`$ is just the first Chern class of a reduction of $`P`$ to the subgroup $`\mathrm{U1}`$. According to this, Eq. (126) has been derived in the discussion of spontaneous symmetry breaking of $`\mathrm{SU2}`$ to $`\mathrm{U1}`$, see . Note also that when passing from $`\mathrm{K}(P)`$ to $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$, the pairs $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ and $`(\alpha _2,\alpha _1)`$ label the same class of subbundles. Hence, solutions $`\alpha _1^{(2)}`$ of (126) have to be identified with their negative.

Let us now discuss Eq. (126) as well as the set $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ in dependence of $`P`$ for some specific base manifolds $`M`$.

#### $`𝑴\mathbf{=}𝐒^\mathrm{𝟒}`$

Since $`H^2(M,)=0`$, Eq. (126) requires $`c_2(P)=0`$. Thus, in case $`P`$ is trivial, $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains the $`_2`$-bundle, the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundle (both necessarily trivial) and $`P`$ itself. Accordingly, in the gauge orbit space there exist, besides the generic stratum, an $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-stratum and a $`\mathrm{U1}`$-stratum.

We remark that, due to the base manifold being a sphere, this result can be obtained much easier by homotopy arguments. It is, therefore, well known. The structure of the gauge orbit space in the present situation has been studied in great detail in . It has been shown that the two nongeneric strata of the gauge orbit space can be parametrized by means of an affine subspace of $`𝒜^k`$ which is acted upon by the Weyl group of $`\mathrm{SU2}`$ (the latter being just $`_2`$).

In case $`P`$ is nontrivial, both $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_b}`$ and $`\mathrm{K}(P)_{J_a}`$ are empty, so that $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains only the bundle $`P`$ itself. Accordingly, there do not exist nongeneric strata in the gauge orbit space.

#### $`𝑴\mathbf{=}𝐒^\mathrm{𝟐}\mathbf{\times }𝐒^\mathrm{𝟐}`$

We write $`\alpha _1^{(2)}`$ in the form (105). Then Eq. (126) becomes

$$2ab\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}=c_2(P).$$

Thus, if $`P`$ is trivial then $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains, in addition to $`P`$ itself, the $`_2`$-bundle, which is trivial, and the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundles labelled by $`a0`$, $`b=0`$ and $`a=0`$, $`b0`$, i.e., which are trivial over one of the $`2`$-spheres. The corresponding nongeneric strata in the gauge orbit space are one $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-stratum and infinitely many $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata.

In case $`c_2(P)=2l\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$, $`l0`$, $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundles with $`a=q`$ and $`b=l/q`$, where $`q`$ is a (positive) divisor of $`m`$. Hence, here the nongeneric part of the gauge orbit space consists of finitely many $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata.

Finally, in case $`c_2(P)=(2m+1)\gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}\times \gamma _{\mathrm{S}^2}^{(2)}`$, $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains only $`P`$ itself and the gauge orbit space consists only of the generic stratum.

#### $`𝑴\mathbf{=}𝐓^\mathrm{𝟒}`$

We use the notation introduced in Subsection 5.10. Writing $`\alpha _1^{(2)}`$ in the form (107) and using (106), Eq. (126) reads

$$2\left(a_{12}a_{34}a_{13}a_{24}+a_{14}a_{23}\right)\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4}^{(4)}=c_2(P).$$
(127)
Hence, the result is similar to that for the case $`M=\mathrm{S}^2\times \mathrm{S}^2`$. The only difference is that, due to $`H^1(M,_2)_2^4`$, there exist $`16`$ different $`_2`$-bundles which are all contained in $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ for $`P`$ being trivial. Accordingly, in this case the gauge orbit space contains $`16`$ $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-strata. Moreover, in case $`c_2(P)=2m\gamma _{\mathrm{T}^4}^{(4)}`$, $`m0`$, the number of solutions of (127) is infinite. Therefore, in this case there exist infinitely many $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata in the gauge orbit space.

We remark that pure Yang-Mills theory on $`\mathrm{T}^4`$ has been discussed in , where the authors have studied the maximal Abelian gauge for gauge group $`\mathrm{SU}n`$. They have found that in case $`P`$ is nontrivial this gauge fixing is necessarily singular on Dirac strings joining magnetically charged defects in the base manifold. It is an interesting question whether there is a relation between such defects and the nongeneric strata of the gauge orbit space.

#### $`𝑴\mathbf{=}𝐋_𝒑^\mathrm{𝟑}\mathbf{\times }𝐒^\mathrm{𝟏}`$

Here (126) requires $`c_2(P)=0`$. Thus, in case $`P`$ is trivial $`\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$ contains, in addition to $`P`$ itself, the $`_2`$-bundles over $`\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$, which are labelled by the elements of

$$H^1(\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1,_2)\{\begin{array}{ccc}_2_2& |& p0\text{, even}\hfill \\ _2& |& \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

as well as the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundles over $`\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1`$, which are labelled by $`\alpha _1^{(2)}H^2(\mathrm{L}_p^3\times \mathrm{S}^1,)_p`$, modulo the identification $`\alpha _1^{(2)}\alpha _1^{(2)}`$. According to this, if $`p`$ is even, the nongeneric part of the gauge orbit space contains $`4`$ $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-strata and $`(p/2+1)`$ $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata. If $`p`$ is odd, it contains $`2`$ $`\mathrm{SU2}`$-strata and $`((p+1)/2)`$ $`\mathrm{U1}`$-strata.

In case $`P`$ is nontrivial there do not exist nongeneric strata in the gauge orbit space.

## 9 Application: Kinematical Nodes in <br>$`2+1`$ Dimensional Chern-Simons Theory

Following , we consider Chern-Simons theory with gauge group $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ in the Hamiltonian approach. The Hamiltonian in Schrödinger representation is given by

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }}{2}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2x}{\sqrt{h}}\mathrm{Tr}\left|\frac{\delta }{\delta A_\mu }+\frac{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}}{4\pi }ϵ^{\mu \nu }A_\nu \right|^2+\frac{1}{4\mathrm{\Lambda }}_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{d}^2x\sqrt{h}\mathrm{Tr}\left(F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }\right).$$

Geometrically, $`A_\mu `$ and $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ are the local representatives of a connection $`A`$ in a given $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle $`P`$ over the $`2`$ dimensional space $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_s`$ and its curvature $`F`$, respectively. We assume $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_s`$ to be a Riemann surface of genus $`s`$. Note that, due to the dimension of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_s`$, $`c_2(P)=0`$, i.e., $`P`$ is trivial. The configuration space is the gauge orbit space $`^k`$ associated to $`P`$. Physical states are given by cross sections of a complex line bundle $`\eta `$ over (the topological space) $`^k`$ with first Chern class $`c_1(\eta )=\mathrm{}`$. Correspondingly, they can be thought of as functionals $`\psi `$ on the space $`𝒜^k`$ of connections in $`P`$ which are subject to the Gauss law condition

$$_A^\mu \frac{\delta }{\delta A^\mu (x)}\psi (A)=\frac{\mathrm{i}\mathrm{}}{4\pi }ϵ^{\mu \nu }_\mu A_\nu (x)\psi (A).$$
(128)
Here $`_A`$ denotes the covariant derivative w.r.t. $`A`$. In  it has been shown that if $`A`$ carries a nontrivial magnetic charge, i.e., if it can be reduced to some subbundle of $`P`$ with nontrivial first Chern class, all physical states obey $`\psi (A)=0`$. Such a connection is called a kinematical node. (Note that, due to $`\eta `$ being nontrivial, there exist also dynamical nodes, which differ from state to state.) The authors of  argue that nodal gauge field configurations are relevant for the confinement mechanism. In the following we shall show that being a node is a property of strata. For that purpose, we reformulate the result of  in our language.

###### Theorem 9.1

Let $`A𝒜^k`$ have orbit type $`[L]\widehat{\mathrm{K}}(P)`$, where $`L=(J;\alpha ,\xi )`$. If $`\alpha _i^{(2)}0`$ for some $`i`$ then $`A`$ is a kinematical node, i.e., $`\psi (A)=0`$ for all physical states $`\psi `$.

Proof: The proof follows the lines of . By assumption, $`A`$ can be reduced to a connection on an $`\mathrm{SU}J`$-subbundle $`QP`$ of class $`(\alpha _J(Q),\xi _J(Q))=(\alpha ,\xi )`$. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_s`$ being a compact orientable $`2`$-manifold, $`H^2(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,)`$. Hence, $`\alpha _i^{(2)}=c_i\gamma ^{(2)}`$, where $`c_i`$ and $`\gamma ^{(2)}`$ is a generator of $`H^2(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,)`$. We define a $`1`$-parameter subgroup $`\{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_t|t\}`$ of $`\mathrm{SU}n`$ by

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_t=\left(\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\frac{c_1}{k_1}t\right\}\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_1}\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_1}\right)\mathrm{}\left(\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\frac{c_r}{k_r}t\right\}\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_r}\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_r}\right).$$

Using

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill (m_1c_1+\mathrm{}+m_rc_r)\gamma ^{(2)}& =& g\left(\stackrel{~}{m}_1\alpha _1^{(2)}+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{m}_r\alpha _r^{(2)}\right)\hfill & & \\ & =& gE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha )\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{69}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& g\beta _g(\xi )\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{91}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& 0\hfill & |& \text{by }g\beta _g=0\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$

one checks $`det\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_t=\mathrm{exp}\{\mathrm{i}t(m_1c_1+\mathrm{}+m_rc_r)\}=1`$. Commuting with $`\mathrm{SU}J`$ for all $`t`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_t`$ defines a $`1`$-parameter subgroup $`\{\mathrm{\Phi }_t|t\}`$ of $`𝒢^{k+1}`$ by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_t(q)=\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_tqQ,t.$$

Each element of this subgroup is constant on $`Q`$. Hence, so is the generator $`\varphi =\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}(0)`$:

$$\varphi (q)=\mathrm{i}\left[\left(\frac{c_1}{k_1}\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_1}\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_1}\right)\mathrm{}\left(\frac{c_r}{k_r}\mathrm{𝟙}_{k_r}\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_r}\right)\right]qQ.$$
(129)
In particular,

$$_A\varphi =0.$$
(130)
According to this, for any state $`\psi `$,

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi _A^\mu \frac{\delta }{\delta A^\mu }\right)\psi (A)=_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left((_A^\mu \varphi )\frac{\delta }{\delta A^\mu }\right)\psi (A)=0.$$

For physical states, the Gauss law implies

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi \mathrm{d}A\right)\psi (A)=0.$$
(131)
Using (130), as well as the structure equation $`F=\mathrm{d}A+\frac{1}{2}[A,A]`$, we obtain

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi \mathrm{d}A\right)& =& _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi \mathrm{d}A_A\varphi A\right)\hfill \\ & =& _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi \mathrm{d}A\mathrm{d}\varphi A[A,\varphi ]A\right)\hfill \\ & =& _{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(2\varphi \mathrm{d}A+\varphi [A,A]\right)\hfill \\ & =& 2_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi F\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(132)
Since $`A`$ is reducible to $`Q`$, $`F`$ has block structure $`\left(F_1\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_1}\right)\mathrm{}\left(F_r\mathrm{𝟙}_{m_r}\right)`$ with $`F_j`$ being $`(k_j\times k_j)`$-matrices. Thus, using (129),

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi F\right)=\mathrm{i}\underset{j=1}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{m_j}{k_j}c_j_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}F_j.$$
(133)
Now $`c_j`$ being just the first Chern classes of the elementary factors of the $`\mathrm{U}k_1\times \mathrm{}\times \mathrm{U}k_r`$-bundle $`Q^{[\mathrm{U}J]}`$, we have

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}F_j=2\pi \mathrm{i}c_j,j=1,\mathrm{},r.$$

Inserting this into (133) and the latter into (132) we obtain

$$_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_s}\mathrm{Tr}\left(\varphi \mathrm{d}A\right)=4\pi \underset{j=1}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{m_j}{k_j}\left(c_j\right)^2.$$

Thus, in view of (131),

$$4\pi \underset{j=1}{\overset{r}{}}\frac{m_j}{k_j}\left(c_j\right)^2\psi (A)=0.$$
(134)
It follows that if one of the $`c_j`$ is nonzero then $`\psi (A)=0`$ for all physical states $`\psi `$, i.e., $`A`$ is a kinematical node. This proves the theorem.

Remark: Let us compare (134) with Formula $`(6)`$ in . Define $`k_i^{}=k_im_i`$ and $`m_i^{}=1`$. Then $`J^{}=(𝐤^{},𝐦^{})\mathrm{K}(n)`$ and $`\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U}J^{}`$. Let $`\phi :\mathrm{U}J\mathrm{U}J^{}`$ denote the canonical embedding. Consider the subbundle $`Q^{[\phi ]}P`$. One can check that the elementary factors of this subbundle have first Chern classes $`c_i^{}=m_ic_i`$. Inserting $`k_i^{}`$, $`l_i^{}`$, and $`c_i^{}`$ into (134) one obtains Formula $`(6)`$ in . In fact, the authors of  use that $`A`$ is reducible to $`Q^{}`$, rather than that it is even reducible to $`Q`$. This argument being ”coarser” than ours, it still suffices to prove that any connection which is reducible to a subbundle with nontrivial magnetic charge is a kinematical node.

As a consequence of Theorem 9.1, one can speak of nodal and nonnodal strata. This information can be read off directly from the labels of the strata.

Let us discuss this in some more detail. Let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$ be given and consider Eqs. (91) and (92). Variables are $`\xi H^1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,_g)`$ and $`\alpha _i^{(2)}H^2(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,)`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Since $`H^2(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,)`$ is torsion-free, $`\beta _g`$ is trivial. Moreover, due to $`H^4(\mathrm{\Sigma }_s,)=0`$, $`a_ia_j`$ vanishes. Thus, the system of equations (91), (92) reduces to

$$E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}(\alpha )=0.$$
(135)
Writing $`\alpha _i^{(2)}=c_i\gamma ^{(2)}`$ again, (135) becomes

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}\stackrel{~}{m}_ic_i=0.$$

The set of solutions of this equation is a subgroup $`G_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^r`$. According to Theorem 9.1, the nonnodal strata are parametrized by $`\xi `$ and the neutral element of $`G_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}`$, whereas the nodal strata are labelled by $`\xi `$ and all the other elements of $`G_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}`$. For example, in the case of $`\mathrm{SU2}`$ we obtain the following.
$`J=(1|2)`$: Here $`G_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}=\{0\}`$, hence all strata are nonnodal.
$`J=(1,1|1,1)`$: We have $`G_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}=\{(c,c)|c\}^2`$. Since also $`\xi =0`$, each value of $`c`$ labels one stratum. That corresponding to $`c=0`$ is nonnodal, the others are nodal.
$`J=(2|1)`$: Here we have the generic stratum, which is nonnodal.

## 10 Summary

Starting from a principal $`\mathrm{SU}n`$-bundle $`P`$ over a compact connected orientable Riemannian $`4`$-manifold $`M`$, we have derived a classification of the orbit types of the action of the group of gauge transformations of $`P`$ on the space of connections in $`P`$. Orbit types are known to label the elements of the natural stratification, given by Kondracki and Rogulski , of the gauge orbit space associated to $`P`$. The interest in this stratification is due to the fact that the role of nongeneric strata in gauge physics is not clarified yet.

In order to accomplish the classification, we have utilized that orbit types are 1:1 with a certain class of subbundles of $`P`$ (called holonomy-induced Howe subbundles), factorized by the natural actions of vertical automorphisms of $`P`$ and of the structure group. We have shown that such classes of subbundles are labelled by symbols $`[(J;\alpha ,\xi )]`$, where

$$J=((k_1,\mathrm{},k_r),(m_1,\mathrm{},m_r))$$

is a pair of sequences of positive integers obeying

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}k_im_i=n,$$

$`\alpha =(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r)`$ where $`\alpha _iH^{}(M,)`$ are admissible values of the Chern class of $`\mathrm{U}k_i`$-bundles over $`M`$, and $`\xi H^1(M,_g)`$ with $`g`$ being the greatest common divisor of $`(m_1,\mathrm{},m_r)`$. The cohomology elements $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\xi `$ are subject to the relations

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{r}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_i}{g}}\alpha _i^{(2)}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _g(\xi ),`$
$`\alpha _1^{m_1}\mathrm{}\alpha _r^{m_r}`$ $`=`$ $`c(P),`$
where $`\beta _g:H^1(M,_g)H^2(M,)`$ is the connecting homomorphism associated to the short exact sequence of coefficient groups in cohomology

$$0_g0.$$

Finally, for any permutation $`\sigma `$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$, the symbols

$$\begin{array}{c}[((k_1,\mathrm{},k_r),(m_1,\mathrm{},m_r);(\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r),\xi )],\\ [((k_{\sigma (1)},\mathrm{},k_{\sigma (r)}),(m_{\sigma (1)},\mathrm{},m_{\sigma (r)});(\alpha _{\sigma (1)},\mathrm{},\alpha _{\sigma (r)}),\xi )]\end{array}$$

have to be identified.

The result obtained enables one to determine which strata are present in the gauge orbit space, depending on the topology of the base manifold and the topological sector, i.e., the isomorphism class of $`P`$. For some examples we have discussed this dependence in detail. We have also shown that our result can be used to reformulate a sufficient condition on a connection to be a node for all physical states (when the latter are viewed as functionals of connections subject to the Gauss law). This condition has been derived in  and applies to Chern-Simons Theory in $`2+1`$ dimensions.

In this way, our result may be viewed as one more step towards a systematic investigation of the physical effects related to nongeneric strata of the gauge orbit space.

We remark that orbit types still carry more information about the stratification structure. Namely, their partial ordering encodes how the strata are patched together in order to build up the gauge orbit space (cf. \[23, Thm. (4.3.5)\]). A derivation of this partial ordering will be published separately.

## Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank C. Fleischhack, S. Kolb, A. Strohmaier, and S. Boller for interesting discussions. They are also grateful to T. Friedrich, J. Hilgert, and H.-B. Rademacher for useful suggestions, as well as to L.M. Woodward, C. Isham, and M. Čadek who on request have been very helpful with providing specific information.

## Appendix A The Eilenberg-MacLane Spaces $`K(,2)`$ and $`K(_g,1)`$

In this appendix, we construct a model for each of the Eilenberg-MacLane spaces $`K(,2)`$ and $`K(_g,1)`$ and derive the integer-valued cohomology of these spaces. Consider the natural free action of $`\mathrm{U1}`$ on the sphere $`\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}`$ which is induced from the natural action of $`\mathrm{U1}`$ on $`\mathrm{S}^{2n1}^n`$. The orbit space of this action is the complex projective space $`\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Moreover, by viewing $`_g`$ as a subgroup of $`\mathrm{U1}`$, this action gives rise to a natural free action of $`_g`$ on $`\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}`$. The orbit space of the latter is the lens space $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$. By construction, one has principal bundles

$`\mathrm{U1}`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}},`$ (136)
$`_g`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}.`$ (137)
Due to $`\pi _i(\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}})=0`$ $`i`$, the exact homotopy sequences induced by (136), (137) yield

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\pi _i(\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}})& =& \pi _{i1}(\mathrm{U1})& =& \{\begin{array}{ccc}& |& i=2\hfill \\ 0& |& i2,\hfill \end{array}\hfill \\ \pi _i(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}})& =& \pi _{i1}(_g)& =& \{\begin{array}{ccc}_g& |& i=1\hfill \\ 0& |& i=2,3,\mathrm{},\hfill \end{array}\hfill \end{array}$$

respectively. As a consequence, $`\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a model of $`K(,2)`$ and $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$ is a model of $`K(_g,1)`$. In particular,

$$H^i(K(,2),)=H^i(\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}},)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}& |& i\text{ even}\hfill \\ 0& |& i\text{ odd},\hfill \end{array}$$
(138)
see \[8, Ch. VI, Prop. 10.2\], and

$$H^i(K(_g,1),)=H^i(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}& |& i=0\hfill \\ _g& |& i0\text{, even}\hfill \\ 0& |& i0\text{, odd},\hfill \end{array}$$
(139)
see \[11, §24, p. 176\].

We notice that the vanishing of all homotopy groups of $`\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}`$ also implies that the bundles (136) and (137) are universal for $`\mathrm{U1}`$ and $`_g`$, respectively. Hence, $`\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$ are models of $`\mathrm{BU1}`$ and $`\mathrm{B}_g`$, respectively. For $`\mathrm{B}_g`$, this has been used in the proof of Lemma 5.9.

## Appendix B The Cohomology Algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$

Let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$, $`J=(𝐤,𝐦)`$. Recall from Corollary 5.8 that the cohomology algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ is generated by the elements $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, defined in (52). Here we are going to derive the relations these generators are subject to.

###### Proposition B.1

The generators $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ of $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ are subject to the relation

$$E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\gamma _J\right)=0.$$
(140)
Proof: Consider the homomorphism $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}:H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ induced by the embedding $`j_J:\mathrm{SU}J\mathrm{U}J`$. By construction, $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}=\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2j)}`$. Since there are no relations between the $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2j)}`$, see Lemma 5.6, all the relations between the $`\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ are derived from elements of the kernel of $`\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}`$. We claim that

$$\mathrm{ker}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}=H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right),$$
(141)
i.e., that $`\mathrm{ker}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}`$ is generated as an ideal by the single element $`E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)`$. This implies the assertion.

In order to prove (141), consider the $`\mathrm{U1}`$-bundle $`\eta `$ given in (57). The Gysin sequence (58) induced by $`\eta `$ being exact, it yields

$$\mathrm{ker}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}=H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)c_1(\eta ).$$

Let us compute $`c_1(\eta )`$. We note that $`\eta `$ is induced as a principal bundle of the form (28) by the short exact sequence of Lie group homomorphisms

$$\mathrm{𝟙}\mathrm{SU}J\stackrel{j_J}{}\mathrm{U}J\stackrel{det_{\mathrm{U}n}i_J}{}\mathrm{U1}\mathrm{𝟙},$$

cf. (28). Hence, it has classifying map $`\mathrm{B}det_{\mathrm{U}n}\mathrm{B}i_J`$. Accordingly,

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill c_1(\eta )& =& \left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\left(\mathrm{B}det_{\mathrm{U}n}\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U1}}^{(2)}\hfill & & \\ & =& \left(\mathrm{B}i_J\right)^{}\gamma _{\mathrm{U}n}^{(2)}\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{78}\text{)}\hfill \\ & =& E_𝐦^{(2)}(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,1},\mathrm{},\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,r})\hfill & |& \text{by (}\text{72}\text{)}\hfill \end{array}$$

This proves the proposition.

As a consequence of Proposition B.1, $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ is isomorphic to the polynomial ring

$$[x_{11},\mathrm{},x_{1k_1},\mathrm{},x_{r1},\mathrm{},x_{rk_r}]/(m_1x_{11}+\mathrm{}+m_rx_{r1}),$$

where $`\mathrm{deg}(x_{ij})=2j`$.

We remark that the relation (140) is a consequence of the relation between $`\delta _J`$ and $`\gamma _J`$ given in Theorem 5.13. Namely, using (71), Theorem 5.13, and $`g\beta _g=0`$ we find

$$E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\gamma _J\right)=gE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\gamma _J\right)=g\beta _g(\delta _J)=0.$$

This ensures, in particular, that (140) does not generate a relation independent of (84) on the level of the characteristic classes $`\alpha _J`$. (Nonetheless, we have already proved directly in Lemma 5.15 that there are no relations independent of (84).)

## Appendix C The Cohomology Algebra $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$

Let $`J\mathrm{K}(n)`$, $`J=(𝐤,𝐦)`$. In this appendix, we derive $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$. Recall that $`g`$ denotes the greatest common divisor of $`𝐦`$. Moreover, recall that $`\varrho _g:H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ denotes reduction modulo $`g`$. We start with some technical lemmas.

###### Lemma C.1

(a) Let $`\alpha H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ such that $`\varrho _g\left(\alpha \beta _g(\delta _J)\right)=0`$. Then $`\varrho _g(\alpha )=0`$ as well as $`\alpha \beta _g(\delta _J)=0`$.
(b) One has $`\mathrm{im}\beta _gH^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\beta _g(\delta _J)`$.
(c) The homomorphism $`\varrho _g\beta _g:H^{2j+1}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)H^{2j+2}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is injective for $`j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ .

Proof: (a) Let $`\alpha `$ be given as proposed. Then there exists $`\alpha ^{}H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ such that

$$\alpha \beta _g(\delta _J)=g\alpha ^{}.$$
(142)
Moreover, there exist $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ such that $`\alpha =\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$ and $`\alpha ^{}=\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$. Due to Theorem 5.13 and (52),

$$\beta _g(\delta _J)=\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)$$
(143)
Using this, as well as (141), (142) implies that there exists $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime }H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ such that

$`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)`$ $`=`$ $`g\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime }E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)`$ (144)
$`=`$ $`g\left(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime }E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\right).`$
Taking into account that $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ is torsion-free, that the elements $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_{J,i}^{(2j)}`$ are generators, and that the greatest common divisor of the integers $`\stackrel{~}{m}_i`$ is $`1`$, from (144) we infer that there exists $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime \prime }H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=g\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime \prime }`$. Then $`\alpha =\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=g\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{\prime \prime \prime }`$. It follows $`\varrho _g(\alpha )=0`$. Due to $`g\beta _g(\delta _J)=0`$, also $`\alpha \beta _g(\delta _J)=0`$, as asserted.

(b) Let $`\alpha \mathrm{im}\beta _g`$. By exactness of (153), $`g\alpha =0`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ such that $`\alpha =\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }`$. Then $`g\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\mathrm{ker}\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}`$. According to (141), there exists $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ such that

$$g\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}E_𝐦^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)=g\left(\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)\right).$$

Since $`H^{}(\mathrm{BU}J,)`$ is free Abelian, this implies $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}E_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\stackrel{~}{\gamma }_J\right)`$. Using (143) we obtain $`\alpha =\left(\mathrm{B}j_J\right)^{}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}\beta _g(\delta _J)`$. This shows (b).

(c) We note that (a) and (b) immediately imply that $`\mathrm{im}\beta _g\mathrm{ker}\varrho _g=\{0\}`$. Moreover, by exactness of (153), $`\beta _g`$ is injective in odd degree. This proves (c).

###### Lemma C.2

The homomorphism $`H^{2j}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)H^{2j+1}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$, $`\alpha \alpha \delta _J`$, is an isomorphism for $`j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ .

Proof: First, we check injectivity. Let $`\alpha H^{2j}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ such that $`\alpha \delta _J=0`$. Consider the homomorphism $`\varrho _g\beta _g`$. As an immediate consequence of the definition of $`\beta _g`$ (namely, as the connecting homomorphism in the long exact sequence (60)), this is a skew-derivation, i.e., for any $`\alpha _iH^{j_i}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$, $`i=1,2`$, one has

$$\varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha _1\alpha _2)=(\varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha _1))\alpha _2+(1)^{j_1}\alpha _1(\varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha _2)).$$
(145)
Hence, due to $`\beta _g`$ being trivial in even degree,

$$\varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha \delta _J)=\alpha \varrho _g\beta _g(\delta _J).$$
(146)
Since $`\varrho _g`$ is surjective in even degree, there exists $`\alpha ^{}H^{2j}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ such that $`\alpha =\varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\right)`$. Inserting this on the rhs. of (146) we obtain

$$\varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha \delta _J)=\varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\beta _g(\delta _J)\right).$$
(147)
By assumption, the lhs. of (147) vanishes. Then Lemma C.1(a) implies $`\alpha =\varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\right)=0`$. This proves injectivity. To show surjectivity, let $`\alpha H^{2j+1}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$. Due to Lemma C.1(b), there exists $`\alpha ^{}H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)`$ such that $`\beta _g(\alpha )=\alpha ^{}\beta _g(\delta _J)`$. Then

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha )& =& \varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\beta _g(\delta _J)\right)\hfill \\ & =& \varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\right)\varrho _g\beta _g(\delta _J)\hfill \\ & =& \varrho _g\beta _g(\varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\right)\delta _J),\hfill \end{array}$$

where the last equality is due to (145) and the fact that $`\beta _g`$ is trivial in even degree. As a consequence, Lemma C.1(c) implies $`\alpha =\varrho _g\left(\alpha ^{}\right)\delta _J`$. This shows surjectivity and, therefore, concludes the proof of the lemma.

###### Lemma C.3

There holds $`\delta _J\delta _J=\{\begin{array}{ccc}0& |& g=2l+1\hfill \\ l\varrho _g\beta _g(\delta _J)& |& g=2l\hfill \end{array}`$.

Proof: We notice that both the collections of maps

$`\theta _1:H^1(,_g)`$ $``$ $`H^2(,_g),\alpha \alpha \alpha ,`$ (148)
$`\theta _2:H^1(,_g)`$ $``$ $`H^2(,_g),\alpha \varrho _g\beta _g(\alpha ),`$ (149)
define a natural transformation of cohomology functors for $`CW`$-complexes. Such transformations are called cohomology operations of type $`(1,_g;2,_g)`$ or, more generally, of type $`(i_1,\pi _1;i_2,\pi _2)`$ if they map $`H^{i_1}(,\pi _1)H^{i_2}(,\pi _2)`$ \[8, Ch. VII, Def. 12.2\]. Here $`\pi _1,\pi _2`$ are Abelian groups. One should note that cohomology operations need not consist of group homomorphisms. Nevertheless, the Abelian group structure of $`H^{i_2}(,\pi _2)`$ induces an according structure on the set of cohomology operations of type $`(i_1,\pi _1;i_2,\pi _2)`$. Due to a theorem of Serre \[8, Ch. VII, Thm. 12.3\], there exists a group isomorphism from the group so defined onto $`H^{i_2}(K(\pi _1,i_1),\pi _2)`$. This is given by evaluating the cohomology operations at some fixed characteristic element of $`H^{i_1}(K(\pi _1,i_1),\pi _1)`$.

To apply this theorem, we choose $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$ as a model of $`K(_g,1)`$ and $`\delta _g`$ as a characteristic element of $`H^1(K(_g,1),_g)`$. Assume, for a moment, that there holds

$$\theta _1(\delta _g)=\{\begin{array}{ccc}0& |& g=2l+1\hfill \\ l\theta _2(\delta _g)& |& g=2l.\hfill \end{array}$$
(150)
Then the cohomology operations are related by

$$\theta _1=\{\begin{array}{ccc}0& |& g=2l+1\hfill \\ l\theta _2& |& g=2l.\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus, in order to prove the lemma, we have to show (150). Although the cohomology of the spaces $`\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$ is well known, this particular relation can rarely be found in textbooks. An exception is the case $`g=2`$, where $`\mathrm{L}_2^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}`$. For the sake of completeness, in the following we derive (150) for general $`g`$ from the case $`g=2`$.

One can show that $`H^2(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_g)_g`$ and that it is generated by $`\varrho _g\beta _g(\delta _g)`$, where $`\delta _g`$ is a generator of $`H^1(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_g)`$ . Thus, there exists $`a_g`$ such that

$$\theta _1(\delta _g)=\delta _g\delta _g=a\varrho _g\beta _g(\delta _g).$$

Since $`2\delta _g\delta _g=0`$, $`2a=0`$. Thus, if $`g`$ is odd then $`a=0`$. If $`g`$ is even then either $`a=l`$, where $`g=2l`$, or $`a=0`$. To rule out the second case, it suffices to find $`\delta H^1(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_g)`$ such that $`\delta \delta 0`$. Consider the composite homomorphism

$$H^1(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_g)\stackrel{\varrho _2}{}H^1(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_2)\stackrel{p^{}}{}H^1(\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}},_2).$$
(151)
Here $`\varrho _2`$ is reduction modulo $`2`$ and $`p`$ is the projection in the principal bundle

$$_l\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}\stackrel{p}{}\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}$$

which arises by factorizing $`\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}=\mathrm{S}^{\mathrm{}}/_2`$ by the residual action of $`_g/_2_l`$. We check that (151) is surjective. For the part of $`\varrho _2`$ this is obvious, due to $`g`$ being even. For the part of $`p^{}`$, we note that, by virtue of the Hurewicz and the Universal Coefficient Theorem, $`p^{}`$ is the $`_2`$-dual of the homomorphism $`p_{}:\pi _1\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}}`$. The latter is easily seen to be injective. Therefore, $`p^{}`$ is surjective, as asserted. As a consequence, there exists $`\delta H^1(\mathrm{L}_g^{\mathrm{}},_g)`$ such that $`p^{}\varrho _2(\delta )=\delta _2`$, where $`\delta _2`$ denotes the generator of $`H^1(\mathrm{P}^{\mathrm{}},_2)`$. We compute

$$p^{}\varrho _2(\delta \delta )=(p^{}\varrho _2(\delta ))(p^{}\varrho _2(\delta ))=\delta _2\delta _2.$$

Here the rhs. is known to be nontrivial \[8, Ch. VI, Prop. 10.2\]. Hence, $`\delta \delta `$ must have been nontrivial. This proves the Lemma.

###### Proposition C.4

$`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is generated over $`_g`$ by the elements $`\delta _J`$ and $`\varrho _g\left(\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}\right)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. The generators are subject to the relation

$$\delta _J\delta _J=\{\begin{array}{ccc}0& |& g=2l+1\hfill \\ lE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}\left(\gamma _J\right)& |& g=2l\hfill \end{array}$$
(152)
Proof: Consider the long exact sequence (60) for the space $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$. Since the integer-valued cohomology of $`\mathrm{BSU}J`$ is trivial in odd degree, this sequence splits into exact portions

$$\begin{array}{c}0\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}H^{2j+1}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)\stackrel{\beta _g}{}H^{2j+2}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\hfill \\ \stackrel{\mu _g}{}H^{2j+2}(\mathrm{BSU}J,)\stackrel{\varrho _g}{}H^{2j+2}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)\stackrel{\beta _g}{}0,\hfill \end{array}$$
(153)
where $`j=0,1,2,\mathrm{}`$ . As an immediate consequence, $`\varrho _g`$ is surjective in even degree. Thus, $`H^{\mathrm{even}}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is generated by $`\varrho _g\left(\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}\right)`$, $`j=1,\mathrm{},k_i`$, $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. Then Lemma C.2 implies that the whole of $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is generated by these elements together with $`\delta _J`$.

It remains to determine the relations the generators are subject to. First, consider relations among the generators $`\varrho _g\left(\gamma _{J,i}^{(2j)}\right)`$. These arise from the relation (140) and from the elements of $`\mathrm{ker}\varrho _g`$. Due to $`E_𝐦^{(2)}=gE_{\stackrel{~}{𝐦}}^{(2)}`$, the $`\text{mod}g`$-reduction of (140) is trivially satisfied. Moreover, relations generated by elements of $`\mathrm{ker}\varrho _g`$ are already taken into account by taking $`_g`$ as the base ring. Thus, there is no relation among the generators $`\varrho _g(\gamma _J,i^{(2j)})`$.

Next, consider relations involving $`\delta _J`$. One such relation is provided by Lemma C.3. It covers all relations in even degree, because the latter must contain an even power of $`\delta _J`$, hence can be written without $`\delta _J`$. Relations in odd degree, on the other hand, are of the form $`\alpha \delta _J=0`$, where $`\alpha `$ is of even degree. Due to Lemma C.2, then $`\alpha =0`$. Consequently, there are no further relations.

Due to Proposition C.4, if $`g`$ is odd then $`H^{}(\mathrm{BSU}J,_g)`$ is isomorphic to the polynomial ring

$$_g[x,x_{11},\mathrm{},x_{1k_1},\mathrm{},x_{r1},\mathrm{},x_{rk_r}],$$

whereas if $`g`$ is even then it is isomorphic to

$$_g[x,x_{11},\mathrm{},x_{1k_1},\mathrm{},x_{r1},\mathrm{},x_{rk_r}]/\left(x^2\left(\stackrel{~}{m}_1x_{11}+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{~}{m}_rx_{r1}\right)\right),$$

where $`g=2l`$. Here $`\mathrm{deg}(x)=1`$ and $`\mathrm{deg}(x_{ij})=2j`$.