text:
# Bibliography

On Commutative Polarizations

Alexander G. Elashvili111Partially supported by the CRDF grant RM1-2088
Razmadze Mathematics Institute, M. Aleksidze Str.1, 380093 Tbilisi,
Republic of Georgia
E-mail address: alela@rmi.acnet.ge

and

Alfons I. Ooms
University of Limburg, Mathematics Department, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium E-mail address: alfons.ooms@luc.ac.be

INTRODUCTION

Let $`L`$ be a finite-dimensional Lie algebra over a field $`k`$ of characteristic zero and let $`U(L)`$ be its enveloping algebra with quotient division ring $`D(L)`$. Let $`P`$ be a commutative Lie subalgebra of $`L`$. In \[O2\] the necessary and sufficient condition on $`P`$ was given in order for $`D(P)`$ to be a maximal (commutative) subfield of $`D(L)`$. In particular, this condition is satisfied if $`P`$ is a commutative polarization (CP) with respect to any regular $`fL^{}`$ and the converse holds if $`L`$ is ad-algebraic. The purpose of this paper is to study Lie algebras admitting these CP’s and to demonstrate their widespread occurrence.
First we have the following characterisation if $`L`$ is completely solvable: $`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$ if and only if there exists a descending chain of Lie subalgebras

$`L=L_n\mathrm{}L_{j+1}L_j\mathrm{}L_p=P`$
such that $`dimL_j=j`$ with increasing index, i.e. $`i(L_j)=i(L_{j+1})+1`$, $`j:p,\mathrm{},n1`$ (Theorem 1.11). In low dimension this phenomenon appears frequently. In fact, in a case by case study of indecomposable nilpotent Lie algebras of dimension at most seven we discover that Lie algebras without CP’s are rather exceptional: 1 (out of 9) in dimension at most 5; 3 (out of 22) in dimension 6 and 26 (out of 130) in dimension 7. These will be listed in section 3, in which we also prove that nonabelian Lie algebras having a nondegenerate, invariant bilinear form do not admit any CP (Theorem 3.2).

Suppose $`k`$ is algebraically closed. Then for a Lie algebra $`L`$ to admit a CP $`P`$ has the following advantage: in $`U(L)`$ the primitive ideals $`I(f)`$, with regular $`fL^{}`$, can all be constructed using the same polarization $`P`$, since $`I(f)`$ is the kernel of the (twisted) induced representation $`\sigma =\text{ind}^{}(f|_P,L)`$ \[D, 10.3.4\]. If in addition $`P`$ is an ideal of $`L`$ (a so called CP-ideal of $`L`$) then the representation $`\sigma `$ is irreducible (in the completely solvable case $`P`$ even turns out to be a Vergne polarization). Also, the semi-center $`Sz(U(L))`$ of $`U(L)`$ is contained in $`U(P)`$ (Corollary 4.4). Moreover, a standard technique using Grassmannians shows that if $`L`$ is solvable with a CP, then it also has a CP-ideal (Theorem 4.1).

In section 5, we look for CP-ideals in some Frobenius Lie algebras (i.e. Lie algebras of index zero \[O1\]). For instance, let $`xL`$ be a principal nilpotent element of a semi-simple Lie algebra $`L`$ with centralizer $`P`$. Then the normalizer $`F`$ of $`P`$ is a Frobenius Lie algebra by a recent result of Panyushev \[P2\], in which $`P`$ is a CP-ideal (Theorem 5.7). Next, let $`A`$ be a finite dimensional associative algebra over $`k`$ with a unit. A becomes a Lie algebra g for the Lie bracket $`[a,b]=abba`$, $`a,bA`$ and $`V=A`$ becomes a g-module by left multiplication. Consider the semi-direct product $`L=`$g$`V`$. Then the following are equivalent (Proposition 5.6):

* $`A`$ is a Frobenius algebra
* $`L`$ is a Frobenius Lie algebra
* $`V`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$
* $`D(V)`$ is a maximal subfield of $`D(L)`$.

A similar result can be obtained if $`A`$ is a finite dimensional left symmetric algebra (Example 5.4) or if $`A`$ is a finite dimensional simple Novikov algebra over $`k`$, char$`(k)=p>2`$.

CP-ideals also occur naturally in the nilradical $`N`$ of any parabolic Lie subalgebra of a simple Lie algebra $`L`$ of type $`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$. As a bonus we obtain an explicit formula for the index $`i(N)`$ of $`N`$ (Theorem 6.2).
Finally, section 7 deals with some CP-preserving extensions.

1. PRELIMINARIES AND GENERAL RESULTS

Let $`L`$ be a Lie algebra over a field $`k`$ of characteristic zero with basis $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$. Let $`fL^{}`$ and consider the alternating bilinear form $`B_f`$ on $`L`$ sending $`(x,y)`$ into $`f([x,y])`$. For any subset $`A`$ of $`L`$ we denote by $`A^{}`$ or $`A^f`$ the subspace

$`\{xLf([x,a])=0\text{for all}aA\}`$
We also put $`L(f)=L^{}`$ and $`i(L)=\underset{fL^{}}{\mathrm{min}}dimL(f)`$, the index of $`L`$. Note that $`L(f)`$ is a Lie subalgebra of $`L`$ containing the center $`Z(L)`$ of $`L`$. We recall from \[D, 1.14.13\] that

$`i(L)=dimL\text{rank}_{R(L)}([x_i,x_j])`$
where $`R(L)`$ is the quotient field of the symmetric algebra $`S(L)`$ of $`L`$. In particular, $`dimLi(L)`$ is an even number.
Furthermore, $`f`$ is called regular if $`dimL(f)=i(L)`$. It is well- known that the set $`L_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ of all regular elements of $`L^{}`$ is an open dense subset of $`L^{}`$ for the Zariski topology.

DEFINITION 1.1 \[D, 1.12.7\] A Lie subalgebra $`P`$ of $`L`$ is called a polarization w.r.t. $`fL^{}`$ if $`f([P,P])=0`$ and $`dimP=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+dimL(f))`$, in other words $`P`$ is a maximal totally isotropic subspace of $`L`$ (equipped with $`B_f`$). If in addition $`P`$ is commutative then $`f`$ is regular by the following observation.

LEMMA 1.2 (see Theorem 14 of \[O2\]). Let $`P`$ be a commutative Lie subalgebra of $`L`$; $`h_1,\mathrm{},h_m`$ a basis of $`P`$ and $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ a basis of $`L`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`dimP=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$, i.e. $`P`$ is a CP (commutative polarization) of $`L`$ w.r.t. each $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
* $`P=P^f`$ w.r.t. some $`fL^{}`$ (such an $`f`$ is necessarily regular)
* $`\text{rank}_{R(L)}([h_i,x_j])=dimLdimP`$

LEMMA 1.3 Let $`P`$ and $`M`$ be Lie subalgebras of $`L`$ such that $`PML`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$
* $`P`$ is a CP of $`M`$ and $`i(M)=i(L)+dimLdimM`$.

Under these conditions the following hold:

$`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}f|_MM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$
Proof. (1) $``$ (2). Take any $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Then $`P=P^f`$. Put $`g=f|_MM^{}`$. W.r.t. $`B_g`$ we have:

$`P^g`$ $`=`$ $`\{xMg([x,P])=0\}=\{xMf([x,P])=0\}`$
$`=`$ $`MP^f=MP=P.`$
Hence $`P`$ is a CP of $`M`$ and $`gM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ by Lemma 1.2. In particular,

$`\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))=dimP=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$
Consequently, $`i(M)=i(L)+dimLdimM`$.
(2) $``$ (1). $`P`$ is commutative and

$`dimP`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))`$
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(L)+dimLdimM)`$
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$
Hence, $`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$.

The following is a direct application of \[D, Lemma 1.12.2\].

LEMMA 1.4. Let $`M`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`L`$ of codimension one. Let $`fL^{}`$ and put $`g=f|_MM^{}`$. Then we distinguish two cases:

* If $`L(f)M`$ then $`L(f)`$ is a hyperplane in $`M(g)`$.
* If $`L(f)M`$ then $`M(g)=L(f)M`$ is a hyperplane in $`L(f)`$.

REMARK 1.5. In \[O2\] we introduced the notion of the Frobenius semiradical $`F(L)`$ of a Lie algebra $`L`$, namely

$`F(L)={\displaystyle \underset{fL_{\text{reg}}^{}}{}}L(f)`$
This is a characteristic ideal of $`L`$ containing the center $`Z(L)`$ of $`L`$. It seems to play a natural role in the study of commutative polarizations. For instance if $`L`$ admits a CP $`P`$, then $`F(L)P`$ and hence is commutative \[O2, p.710\].

PROPOSITION 1.6. Let $`M`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`L`$ of codimension one, $`fL^{}`$ and $`g=f|_MM^{}`$. Then we have:

* either $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$ or $`i(M)=i(L)1`$
* $`\{\begin{array}{c}fL_{\text{reg}}^{}\hfill \\ i(M)=i(L)+1\hfill \end{array}\{\begin{array}{c}gM_{\text{reg}}^{}\hfill \\ L(f)M\hfill \end{array}`$
* $`\{\begin{array}{c}fL_{\text{reg}}^{}\hfill \\ L(f)M\hfill \end{array}\{\begin{array}{c}gM_{\text{reg}}^{}\hfill \\ i(M)=i(L)1\hfill \end{array}`$
* $`i(M)=i(L)+1F(L)M`$
* Suppose $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$ and let $`P`$ be a Lie subalgebra of $`M`$. Then

$`P\text{is a CP of}LP\text{is a CP of}M`$
* Suppose $`i(M)=i(L)1`$. If $`H`$ is a CP (respectively a CP- ideal) of $`L`$, then $`HM`$ is a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) of $`M`$ and $`dim(HM)=dimH1`$.

Proof.

* Choose $`\phi L_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ such that $`\gamma =\phi |_MM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Suppose $`L(\phi )M`$ then

$`i(M)=dimM(\gamma )=dimL(\phi )+1=i(L)+1`$
by (i) of Lemma 1.4. On the other hand, if $`L(\phi )M`$ then

$`i(M)=dimM(\gamma )=dimL(\phi )1=i(L)1`$
by (ii) of Lemma 1.4.
* $`:`$
Suppose $`L(f)M`$. By (ii) of Lemma 1.4

$`i(M)dimM(g)=dimL(f)1=i(L)1`$
Contradiction. Therefore $`L(f)M`$. Hence,

$`i(M)1=i(L)=dimL(f)=dimM(g)1`$
by (i) of Lemma 1.4. Hence $`i(M)=dimM(g)`$, i.e. $`gM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
$`:`$
By (i) of Lemma 1.4 $`L(f)M`$ implies that

$`i(L)dimL(f)=dimM(g)1=i(M)1`$
So, $`i(M)i(L)+1`$. By (1), $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$ and therefore
$`i(L)=dimL(f)`$, i.e. $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
* $`:`$
$`L(f)M`$ implies that

$`i(M)dimM(g)=dimL(f)1=i(L)1`$
by (ii) of Lemma 1.4. Hence, by (1), $`i(M)=i(L)1`$ which forces
$`i(M)=dimM(g)`$, i.e. $`gM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
$`:`$
Since $`i(M)i(L)+1`$ it follows from (2) that $`L(f)M`$. Hence,

$`i(L)1=i(M)=dimM(g)=dimL(f)1`$
by (ii) of Lemma 1.4. Consequently, $`dimL(f)=i(L)`$, i.e. $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
* $``$ follows from (2).
$``$ Choose $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ such that $`g=f|_MM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Then
$`L(f)F(L)M`$. Using (2) it follows that $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$.
* Clearly, $`i(M)=i(L)+dimLdimM`$. Now use Lemma 1.3.
* Suppose $`i(M)=i(L)1`$. Hence, by Lemma 1.3 $`HM`$. Then
$`dim(HM)=dimH1`$. $`HM`$ is abelian and

$`dim(HM)=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))1=\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))`$
Consequently, $`HM`$ is a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) of $`M`$.

EXAMPLES 1.7.

* Let $`E`$ be a nonzero endomorphism of an $`n`$-dimensional vector space $`V`$ over $`k`$. Consider the Lie algebra $`L=kEV`$ with Lie brackets $`[E,v]=Ev`$ and in which $`V`$ is a commutative ideal. $`L`$ is solvable and $`i(L)=n1`$. Clearly, $`i(V)=n=i(L)+1`$ and $`V`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$ by (5) of Proposition 1.6.
* Let $`L`$ be a Frobenius Lie algebra (i.e. $`i(L)=0`$) and $`M`$ a Lie subalgebra of $`L`$ of codimension one. Then $`i(M)=1(=i(L)+1)`$.
* Let $`M`$ be a Lie subalgebra of codimension one in a nonabelian Lie algebra $`L`$ with $`F(L)=L`$. Then, $`i(M)=i(L)1`$ and $`L`$ does not have any CP’s (by Proposition 1.6 and Remark 1.5). For instance, let $`L`$ be the diamond Lie algebra with basis $`t,x,y,z`$ and nonvanishing brackets $`[t,x]=x[t,y]=y`$ and $`[x,y]=z`$. Clearly, $`i(L)=2`$ and $`M=[L,L]=x,y,z`$ is an ideal of codimension one in $`L`$ with $`i(M)=1`$. Put $`f=x^{}L_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ and $`g=f|_MM^{}`$. Then, $`L(f)=y,zM`$, $`i(M)=i(L)1`$ and $`gM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Also, $`P_1=y,z`$ is a CP of $`M`$. But there is no CP $`P`$ of $`L`$ such that $`PM=P_1`$ (in fact $`L`$ does not admit any CP since $`F(L)=L`$).
See also Theorem 3.2 and (2) of Examples 3.3.

DEFINITION 1.8 A Lie algebra $`L`$ is called square integrable if $`L(f)=Z(L)`$ for some $`fL^{}`$, i.e. $`i(L)=dimZ(L)`$.
In the nilpotent case these Lie algebras are precisely the Lie algebras of simply connected Lie groups admitting square integrable representations \[MW, p.450-453\].

PROPOSITION 1.9 Let $`L`$ be a Lie algebra having an element $`uL`$ such that its centralizer $`M=C(u)`$ has codimension one in $`L`$. Then we have

* $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$
* $`L`$ has a CP if and only if $`M`$ has a CP
* If $`L`$ is square integrable then so is $`M`$.

REMARK 1.10. Note that $`C(u)`$ is an ideal of codimension one of $`L`$ if either $`u`$ is a noncentral semi-invariant of $`L`$ (i.e. for a suitable $`\lambda L^{}\backslash \{0\}:[x,u]=\lambda (x)u,xL`$) or $`[u,L]`$ is a one dimensional subspace of the center $`Z(L)`$ (such an $`u`$ always exists if $`L`$ is nilpotent and $`dimZ(L)=1<dimL`$). In that situation, if $`L`$ has a CP-ideal then the same holds for $`C(u)`$.

Proof of the proposition.

* Take $`xL\backslash C(u)`$ and choose $`fL^{}`$ such that $`f|_M`$ is regular and such that $`f([x,u])0`$. Then $`C(u)=u^f`$ (since both have the same dimension and $`C(u)u^f`$). Then $`L(f)=L^fu^f=M`$. It follows by (2) of Proposition 1.6 that $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$ and $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
* First, let $`P`$ be a commutative Lie subalgebra of $`M`$. Then,

$`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$ if and only if $`P`$ is a CP of $`M`$

by (5) of Proposition 1.6. Next, let $`P`$ be a CP of $`L`$ such that $`PM`$. Then $`dim(PM)=dimP1`$ and $`uPM`$ (otherwise $`[u,P]=0`$ and thus $`PC(u)=M`$).
Finally, $`P_1=(PM)ku`$ is a CP of $`M`$ since it is commutative and

$`dimP_1=dimP=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))=\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))`$
* Clearly, $`Z(L)C(u)=M`$ and $`uZ(M)\backslash Z(L)`$. Hence,
$`Z(L)kuZ(M)`$. Therefore,

$`i(M)dimZ(M)dimZ(L)+1=i(L)+1`$
As $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$ we may conclude that $`i(M)=dimZ(M)`$, i.e. $`M`$ is square integrable.

THEOREM 1.11 Let $`P`$ be a commutative Lie subalgebra of a completely solvable Lie algebra $`L`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`P`$ is a CP (resp. CP-ideal) of $`L`$.
* There exists a descending series of Lie subalgebras (resp. ideals) of $`L`$.

$`L=L_n\mathrm{}L_{j+1}L_j\mathrm{}L_p=P`$
$`dimL_j=j`$, with increasing index (i.e. $`i(L_j)=i(L_{j+1})+1`$).

Proof. Let $`P`$ be a Lie subalgebra (resp. ideal) of $`L`$. $`P`$ (resp. $`L`$) acts on the quotient space $`L/P`$. Application of Lie’s theorem to this action shows the existence of Lie subalgebras (resp. ideals) $`L_j`$ of $`L`$ such that $`L=L_n\mathrm{}L_p=P`$ with $`dimL_j=j`$.
(1) $``$ (2). Now suppose $`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$.
Then, by Lemma 1.3, $`P`$ is also a CP for each $`L_j`$ and

$`i(L_j)`$ $`=`$ $`i(L)+(nj)=i(L)+(n(j+1))+1`$
$`=`$ $`i(L_{j+1})+1`$
(2) $``$ (1)
By induction on $`j`$ we show that $`P`$ is a CP of $`L_j`$. This is trivial for $`j=p`$. Next, let $`jp+1`$. Then $`P`$ is a CP of $`L_{j1}`$ and also of $`L_j`$ since $`i(L_{j1})=i(L_j)+1`$ by (5) of Proposition 1.6.

COROLLARY 1.12. Let $`L`$ be a completely solvable Frobenius Lie algebra of dimension $`2n`$ having a CP $`P`$. Then $`L`$ can be obtained from the $`n`$\- dimensional abelian Lie algebra $`P`$ with $`n`$ successive extensions as described in Theorem 1.10.

LEMMA 1.13. Let $`P`$ be a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) of a Lie algebra $`L`$, $`A`$ an ideal of $`L`$ contained in $`P`$ and $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ such that $`f(A)=0`$. Then $`P/A`$ is a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) of the Lie algebra $`L/A`$ and

$`i(L/A)=i(L)dimA`$
Proof. Let $`\phi :LL/A`$ be the quotient homomorphism. As $`f(A)=0`$ there is a $`g(L/A)^{}`$ such that $`g\phi =f`$. Clearly, $`P/A`$ is an abelian Lie subalgebra (resp. ideal) of $`L/A`$. It suffices to show that $`(P/A)^g=P/A`$.

$`(P/A)^g`$ $`=`$ $`\{\phi (x)L/Ag([\phi (x),\phi (P)])=0,xL\}`$
$`=`$ $`\phi (\{xLf([x,P])=0\}`$
$`=`$ $`\phi (P^f)=\phi (P)=P/A`$
as $`P^f=P`$. So, by Lemma 1.2 $`P/A`$ is a CP (resp. CP-ideal) of $`L/A`$ and $`g(L/A)_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Therefore, $`dimP/A=\frac{1}{2}(dimL/A+i(L/A))`$ and

$`i(L/A)`$ $`=`$ $`2dimP/AdimL/A`$
$`=`$ $`2(dimPdimA)(dimLdimA)`$
$`=`$ $`(2dimPdimL)dimA=i(L)dimA`$
2. CP’S IN SQUARE INTEGRABLE NILPOTENT LIE ALGEBRAS

The following lemma is easy to verify.

LEMMA 2.1. Suppose $`L`$ is a direct product of Lie algebras; $`L=L_1\times L_2`$. Then we have the following:

* $`i(L)=i(L_1)+i(L_2)`$ and $`Z(L)=Z(L_1)\times Z(L_2)`$.
* $`L`$ is square integrable if and only if the same holds for $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$.
* $`L`$ has a CP (resp. CP-ideal) if and only if the same holds for $`L_1`$ and $`L_2`$.

PROPOSITION 2.2. Let $`L`$ be a square integrable nilpotent Lie algebra over $`IC`$, of dimension $`n`$ at most seven. Then $`L`$ admits a CP-ideal.

Proof. By Lemma 2.1 we may assume that $`L`$ is indecomposable. In particular, $`1dimZ(L)=i(L)<dimL`$.

We now distinguish the following cases:

* $`i(L)=1`$. Then $`n`$ is 3, 5 or 7. Let $`m`$ be the maximum dimension of all abelian ideals of $`L`$. Then by \[Mo, p.161\] and \[O2, p.706\] we have the following inequalities:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\sqrt{8n+1}1)m{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(dimL+i(L))={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(n+1)`$
This implies that $`m=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$ in case $`n=3,5`$ or 7, showing the existence of a CP-ideal in $`L`$.
* $`i(L)=2`$. Then $`n=6`$ (The case $`n=4`$ does not occur since $`L`$ is indecomposable). We select from Morozov’s classification of 6-dimensional nilpotent Lie algebras those that are indecomposable, square integrable and of index 2; in each $`\{e_1,\mathrm{},e_6\}`$ is a basis of $`L`$. The numbering is Morozov’s \[Mo, p.168\].

+ $`[e_1,e_2]=e_5`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_6`$, $`[e_2,e_4]=e_6`$
    + $`[e_1,e_3]=e_5`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_6`$, $`[e_2,e_4]=e_5`$ $`[e_2,e_3]=\gamma e_6`$, $`\gamma 0`$
    + $`[e_1,e_2]=e_6`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_4`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_5`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=e_5`$
    + $`[e_1,e_3]=e_4`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_5`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=e_6`$
    + $`[e_1,e_2]=e_3+e_5`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_4`$, $`[e_2,e_5]=e_6`$
    + $`[e_1,e_2]=e_3`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_4`$, $`[e_1,e_5]=e_6`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=e_6`$
    + $`[e_1,e_2]=e_3`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_5`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_6`$, $`[e_2,e_4]=e_5`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=\gamma e_6`$, $`\gamma 0`$
    + $`[e_1,e_2]=e_3`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_4`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_5`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=e_6`$

In each one of these, $`P=e_3,e_4,e_5,e_6`$ is a CP- ideal, since $`P`$ is an abelian ideal and $`dimP=4=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$.
* $`i(L)=3`$. Then $`n=7`$ (The case $`n=5`$ does not occur since $`L`$ is indecomposable).
We have the following possibilities according to Seeley’s classification of 7- dimensional nilpotent Lie algebras. We maintain the same notation as in \[See\]. In particular $`\{a,b,c,d,e,f,g\}`$ is a basis of $`L`$. In each case we exhibit a commutative ideal $`P`$ of dimension 5 $`(=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L)))`$.
In the following 3 Lie algebras we take $`P=a,d,e,f,g`$
$`\mathrm{3\; 7}_B`$: $`[a,b]=e`$, $`[b,c]=f`$, $`[c,d]=g`$
$`\mathrm{3\; 7}_C`$: $`[a,b]=e`$, $`[b,c]=f`$, $`[c,d]=e`$, $`[b,d]=g`$
$`\mathrm{3\; 7}_D`$: $`[a,b]=e`$, $`[b,d]=g`$, $`[c,d]=e`$, $`[a,c]=f`$
In the following 3 we take $`P=c,d,e,f,g`$
$`3,5,7_A`$: $`[a,b]=c`$, $`[a,c]=e`$, $`[a,d]=g`$, $`[b,d]=f`$
$`3,5,7_B`$: $`[a,b]=c`$, $`[a,c]=e`$, $`[a,d]=g`$, $`[b,c]=f`$
$`3,5,7_C`$: $`[a,b]=c`$, $`[a,c]=e`$, $`[a,d]=g`$, $`[b,c]=f`$, $`[b,d]=e`$

REMARK 2.3 Among the Lie algebras described in Proposition 2.2 there is one which is characteristically nilpotent, namely $`1,2,4,5,7_N`$ with basis $`\{a,b,c,d,e,f,g\}`$ and nonzero brackets: $`[a,b]=c`$, $`[a,c]=d`$, $`[a,d]=g`$, $`[a,e]=f`$, $`[a,f]=g`$, $`[b,c]=e`$, $`[b,d]=f`$, $`[b,e]=\xi g`$, $`[b,f]=g`$, $`[c,d]=g`$, $`[c,e]=g`$ with $`\xi 0,1`$. \[See, p.493\]. In this case take $`P=d,e,f,g`$.

3. LIE ALGEBRAS WITHOUT CP’S

First we want to show that the restriction on the dimension in Proposition 2.2 cannot be removed.

EXAMPLES 3.1

* Let $`L`$ be the 8-dimensional Lie algebra over $`k`$ with basis $`\{e_1,\mathrm{},e_8\}`$ and nonvanishing brackets: $`[e_1,e_2]=e_5`$, $`[e_1,e_3]=e_6`$, $`[e_1,e_4]=e_7`$, $`[e_1,e_5]=e_8`$, $`[e_2,e_3]=e_8`$, $`[e_2,e_4]=e_6`$, $`[e_2,e_6]=e_7`$, $`[e_3,e_4]=e_5`$, $`[e_3,e_5]=e_7`$, $`[e_4,e_6]=e_8`$.
$`L`$ is characteristically nilpotent \[DL\]. $`L`$ is also square integrable of index 2, but it does not admit a CP-ideal (and not any CP’s either, see section 4).

Proof. Suppose $`L`$ has a CP-ideal $`P`$. So, $`P`$ is a 5-dimensional abelian ideal of $`L`$. Now take the linear functional $`f=e_7^{}L^{}`$, which is regular. Put $`A=ke_8Z(L)`$. This is a 1-dimensional ideal of $`L`$ contained in $`P`$ and $`f(A)=0`$. By Lemma 1.13 $`Q=P/A`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L/A`$. Clearly, $`L/A`$ is a 7- dimensional nilpotent Lie algebra of index 1, with basis $`x_1=e_1+A,\mathrm{},x_7=e_7+A`$. So, $`Q`$ is a 4-dimensional abelian ideal of $`L/A`$. One verifies that there are $`\lambda ,\mu k`$, not both zero such that $`Q`$ is generated by $`\lambda x_1+\mu x_4,x_5,x_6,x_7`$. Then $`P`$ is generated by $`\lambda e_1+\mu e_4,e_5,e_6,e_7,e_8`$. But this contradicts the fact that $`P`$ is commutative, since

$`[\lambda e_1+\mu e_4,e_5]=\lambda e_8\text{and}[\lambda e_1+\mu e_4,e_6]=\mu e_8`$
* Let $`V`$ be a vector space over $`k`$ with basis $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$; $`n2`$. Take the vector space $`\stackrel{2}{}V`$ with basis $`e_{ij}=e_ie_j`$, $`i<j`$. Next, consider the Lie algebra

$`L=V\stackrel{2}{}V`$
with nonvanishing brackets $`[e_i,e_j]=e_{ij}`$, $`i<j`$. Clearly, $`[L,L]=\stackrel{2}{}V=Z(L)`$. So, $`L`$ is 2-step nilpotent of dimension $`n+\frac{1}{2}n(n1)=\frac{1}{2}n(n+1)`$. Let $`x,yV`$. Then it is easy to see that

$`[x,y]=0x,y\text{are linearly dependent over }k()`$
Next, we take $`n`$ to be even. Then, $`\text{rank}_{R(L)}([e_i,e_j])=n`$. This implies that

$`i(L)=dimLn={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}n(n1)=dimZ(L)`$
i.e. $`L`$ is square integrable.

Finally, take $`n=4`$. Then $`dimL=10`$, $`dimZ(L)=i(L)=6`$ and
$`\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))=8.`$ But, because of $`()`$, $`L`$ has no 8-dimensional abelian Lie subalgebra containing $`Z(L)`$, i.e. $`L`$ has no CP’s. The same holds for all even $`n4`$, using a similar argument.

THEOREM 3.2 Let $`L`$ be a Lie algebra having a nondegenerate, invariant bilinear form b. Then $`F(L)=L`$. In particular, $`L`$ does not admit a CP unless $`L`$ is abelian.

Proof. Take $`yL`$ and consider the map $`\phi _y`$ sending each $`xL`$ into $`b(x,y)`$. Clearly, $`\phi _yL^{}`$ and the map $`\phi :LL^{}`$ sending $`y`$ into $`\phi _y`$ is an isomorphism of $`L`$-modules. Consequently, $`y`$ and $`\phi _y`$ have the same stabilizer in $`L`$, i.e. $`C(y)=L(\phi _y)`$.
Next, put $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\phi ^1(L_{\text{reg}}^{})`$. Then,

$`F(L)=\underset{fL_{\text{reg}}^{}}{}L(f)=\underset{y\mathrm{\Omega }}{}L(\phi _y)=\underset{y\mathrm{\Omega }}{}C(y)`$
Clearly, $`F(L)`$ contains $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, which is an open dense subset of $`L`$ for the Zariski topology since $`\phi `$ is a linear isomorphism. Consequently, $`F(L)=L`$.

EXAMPLES 3.3

* $`L`$ semi-simple (take $`b`$ to be the Killing form of $`L`$).
* The diamond Lie algebra with basis $`t,x,y,z`$ and nonvanishing brackets $`[t,x]=x`$, $`[t,y]=y`$ and $`[x,y]=z`$. Let $`b`$ be the symmetric bilinear form with nonzero entries $`b(t,z)=1`$ and $`b(x,y)=1`$.
* Let g5 be the 5-dimensional nilpotent Lie algebra over $`k`$ with basis $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_5`$ and nonvanishing brackets $`[x_1,x_2]=x_3,[x_1,x_3]=x_4,[x_2,x_3]=x_5`$.
Let $`b`$ be the symmetric bilinear form with nonzero entries:

$`b(x_1,x_5)=b(x_3,x_3)=1\text{and}b(x_2,x_4)=1`$
* Let g6 be the 6-dimensional 2-step nilpotent Lie algebra with basis $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_6`$ and nonvanishing brackets $`[x_1,x_2]=x_6,[x_1,x_3]=x_4,[x_2,x_3]=x_5`$.
Let $`b`$ be the symmetric bilinear form with nonzero entries:

$`b(x_1,x_5)=b(x_3,x_6)=1\text{and}b(x_2,x_4)=1`$
(see \[B1, p.133\])
* Consider the semi-direct product $`L=sl(2,k)W_2`$, where $`W_2`$ is the 3-dimensional irreducible $`sl(2,k)`$-module. $`L`$ also admits a nondegenerate, invariant, symmetric bilinear form.

PROPOSITION 3.4 Among all the different types of indecomposable nilpotent Lie algebras over $`IC`$ of dimension $`n7`$, only the following 30 Lie algebras do not have a CP:

* $`n=5`$: g5 (see (3) of Examples 3.3)
* $`n=6`$: From Morozov’s classification \[Mo, p.168\] the Lie algebras $`3(`$g$`{}_{6}{}^{})`$, 21 and 22.
* $`n=7`$: From Seeley’s classification \[See\]: 2, 5, $`7_K`$; 2, 5, $`7_L`$; 2, 4, $`7_D`$;
2, 4, $`7_E`$; 2, 4, $`7_G`$; 2, 4, $`7_H`$; 2, 4, $`7_J`$; 2, 4, $`7_K`$; 2, 4, $`7_Q`$; 2, 4, $`7_R`$;
2, 3, 5, $`7_C`$; 2, 3, 5, $`7_D`$; 2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_B`$; 2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_C`$; 2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_D`$;
2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_F`$; 2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_G`$; 1, 3, 5, $`7_S`$, $`\xi =1`$; 1, 3, 4, 5, $`7_H`$;
1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_C`$; 1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_F`$; 1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_H`$; 1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_K`$; 1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_L`$;
1, 2, 4, 5, $`7_N`$, $`\xi =1`$; 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, $`7_I`$, $`\xi =0`$
Note that the infinite families fail to have a CP only for exceptional values of the parameter $`\xi `$.

Proof: This is done case by case, considering only the ones that are not square integrable (Proposition 2.2). Usually, CP’s are easy to spot by looking at the multiplication table. To prove that a Lie algebra $`L`$ has no CP’s is more difficult however. This can be achieved by using Proposition 1.9 or by showing that $`F(L)`$ is not commutative. For instance, take $`L=1,2,4,5,7_N`$, $`\xi =1`$. See Remark 2.3 for its Lie brackets. One verifies that $`F(L)=ab,c,d,e,f,g`$, which is not commutative.

REMARK 3.5 Having a CP is not preserved under degeneration (for a definition we refer to \[GO1\] or \[GO2\]). Indeed, $`g_5`$, which has no CP’s (see 3 of Examples 3.3), is a degeneration of the Lie algebra $`h_5`$ with basis $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_5`$ over $`IC`$ and nonzero brackets $`[x_1,x_2]=x_3`$, $`[x_1,x_3]=x_4`$, $`[x_1,x_4]=x_5`$ and $`[x_2,x_3]=x_5`$ for which $`x_3,x_4,x_5`$ is a CP. On the other hand, the Lie algebra $`j_5`$ with the same basis and nonzero brackets $`[x_1,x_2]=x_3`$ and $`[x_1,x_3]=x_4`$ admits a CP (namely $`x_2,x_3,x_4,x_5`$) and is a degeneration of g5 \[GO1, p.323\].

4. CP-IDEALS

These are by far the most interesting CP’s. The following shows that they occur as often as ordinary CP’s, at least in the solvable case.

THEOREM 4.1 Let $`L`$ be solvable and $`k`$ algebraically closed. Let $`m`$ be the maximum dimension of all abelian ideals of $`L`$. Clearly, $`m\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$ \[O2, p. 706\]. Then the following are equivalent:

* $`L`$ admits a CP
* $`L`$ admits a CP-ideal
* $`m=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$

Proof. It suffices to show that (1) $``$ (2), since (2) $``$ (1) and (2) $``$ (3) are clear. Let $`G`$ be the adjoint algebraic group of $`L`$, i.e. the smallest algebraic subgroup of $`\text{Aut}L`$ such that $`L(G)`$ contains $`\text{ad}L`$ \[D, 1.1.14\]. Clearly, $`\text{ad}L`$ and hence its algebraic hull $`L(G)`$ are solvable (since they have the same derived algebra \[Ch, p.173\], which is nilpotent). Therefore $`G`$ is a solvable connected group. Next put $`p=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$. Then the set $`C`$ of all CP’s is a nonempty (by assumption) closed subset of the Grassmannian $`\text{Gr}(L,p)`$, which is an irreducible and complete algebraic variety \[D, 1.11.8-9\]. Hence $`C`$ is also complete. Now $`G`$ acts morphically on $`C`$, mapping each CP $`H`$ on $`g(H)`$, $`gG`$. By Borel’s theorem, $`G`$ has a fixed point $`P`$ in $`C`$ \[Bo, p.242\]. So, $`g(P)=P`$ for all $`gG`$. In particular, $`\text{ad}x(P)P`$ for all $`xL`$. Consequently, $`P`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$.

REMARK 4.2 (a) The number $`m`$ is an important characteristic of a Lie algebra, often used in classifications.
(b) It is now easy to see that the 8-dimensional Lie algebra (i) of 3.1 has no CP’s (go over to the algebraic closure of $`k`$ and use Theorem 4.1).

THEOREM 4.3 Let $`P`$ be an ideal of a Lie algebra $`L`$ and let $`P`$ be a polarization of $`L`$ with respect to some $`fL^{}`$. Then we have

* If $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ then $`P`$ is solvable (in fact $`P^{\prime \prime }=0`$). If in addition $`L`$ is Frobenius or nilpotent of index one, then $`P`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$.
* If $`k`$ is algebraically closed and $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$, then the induced representation $`\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ is simple.
* If $`L`$ is completely solvable then $`P`$ is a Vergne polarization. In particular, $`\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ is absolutely simple.

Proof.

* Take $`xL`$ and $`y,y^{}P`$, then

$`f([x,[y,y^{}]])`$ $`=`$ $`f([[x,y],y^{}])+f([y,[x,y^{}]])`$
$`=`$ $`0\text{since }P\text{ is an ideal}`$
and $`f([P,P])=0`$.

Hence, $`[y,y^{}]L(f)`$. Therefore, $`P^{}=[P,P]L(f)`$. This implies that $`P^{\prime \prime }=0`$ since $`L(f)`$ is abelian by \[D,1.11.7\]. Now, suppose $`L`$ is Frobenius, i.e. $`i(L)=0`$. Then $`L(f)=0`$ which forces $`[P,P]=0`$. On the other hand, if $`L`$ is nilpotent of index 1, then $`dimL(f)=1`$. We may assume that $`f0`$. Clearly, $`[P,P]L(f)`$ since $`f([P,P])=0`$ and $`f(L(f))0`$ \[BC, p.89\]. So, we conclude that $`[P,P]=0`$.
* By \[RV, p.395\] or \[D, 10.5.7\] there exists a solvable polarization $`H`$ of $`L`$ w.r.t. $`f`$ such that $`HP`$ is a solvable polarization of $`P`$ w.r.t. $`f|_P`$ and such that the twisted induced representation $`\text{ind}^{}(f|_H,L)`$ is simple. First we observe that

$`dimH=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+dimL(f))=dimP()`$
Similarly,

$`dim(HP)=\frac{1}{2}(dimP+dimP(f|_P))=dimP`$
since $`P(f|_P)=\{xPf([x,P])=0\}=P`$. It follows that $`HP=P`$, i.e. $`PH`$. Hence, by $`()`$, we see that $`P=H`$.
Consequently, $`\text{ind}^{}(f|_P,L)`$ is simple. Finally, $`\text{ind}^{}(f|_P,L)=\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ because $`P`$ is an ideal of $`L`$ \[D, 5.2.1\].
* $`L`$ being completely solvable, we can find a flag of ideals of $`L`$:

$`L=L_n\mathrm{}L_p\mathrm{}L_1L_0=(0)`$
such that $`L_p=P`$ where $`p=dimP`$. Put $`f_i=f|_{L_i}`$ and $`P_j=\underset{ij}{}L_i(f_i)`$.
Then $`P_n`$ is the so called Vergne polarization w.r.t. this flag and $`fL^{}`$ \[BGR, 9.4\]. We claim that $`P=P_n`$. Clearly,

$`L_i(f_i)=\{xL_if([x,L_i])=0\}=L_iL_i^{}`$
In particular, $`L_p(f_p)=L_pL_p^{}=PP^{}=P`$ since $`P=P^{}`$ w.r.t. $`fL^{}`$. This implies that $`PP_n`$. On the other hand consider $`L_j(f_j)`$.
If $`jp`$, then $`L_j(f_j)L_jL_p=P`$.
If $`j>p`$, then $`P=L_pL_j`$ implies that $`L_j(f_j)=L_jL_j^{}L_j^{}P^{}=P`$. Consequently, $`P_n=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}L_j(f_j)P`$.

COROLLARY 4.4 Let $`P`$ be a CP-ideal of a Lie algebra $`L`$ and take any
$`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Then,

* If $`k`$ is algebraically closed, then $`\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ is simple.
* If $`L`$ is completely solvable, then $`P`$ is a Vergne polarization w.r.t. $`f`$ and any flag of ideals containing $`P`$. In particular, $`\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ is absolutely simple.
* + $`Sz(U(L))U(P)`$ and $`Sz(D(L))D(P)`$ where $`Sz(U(L))=\underset{\lambda }{}U(L)_\lambda `$ is the semi-center of $`U(L)`$. Similarly for $`Sz(D(L))`$. This generalizes \[D, 6.1.6\].
    + Put $`(L)=\{\lambda L^{}U(L)_\lambda 0\}`$ and $`L_{}=\underset{\lambda (L)}{}\mathrm{ker}\lambda `$. Then, $`PL_{}`$.

Proof. (1) and (2) follow directly from Theorem 4.3.
(3) Let $`uU(L)_\lambda `$ be any semi-invariant with weight $`\lambda (L)`$, i.e. $`[x,u]=\lambda (x)u`$ for all $`xL`$.
Now, take $`xP`$. Then $`adx(L)P`$ and $`(adx)^2=0`$ since $`P`$ is a commutative ideal of $`L`$. So, $`adx`$ is nilpotent. This implies that $`\lambda (x)=0`$ and $`[x,u]=0`$. Consequently, $`xL_{}`$ which shows (b) and also $`uC(U(P))=U(P)`$. Therefore, $`Sz(U(L))U(P)`$. Similarly for $`Sz(D(L))D(P)`$ (since $`C(D(P))=D(P))`$.

REMARK 4.5 The previous corollary does not hold for arbitrary CP’s of $`L`$. For example, let $`L`$ be the 2-dimensional Lie algebra over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ with basis $`x,y`$ and nonzero bracket $`[x,y]=y`$. $`L`$ is Frobenius and $`fL^{}`$ with $`f(x)=0`$ and $`f(y)=1`$ is regular. Clearly, $`P=kx`$ is a CP of $`L`$ w.r.t. $`fL^{}`$. But $`\text{ind}^{}(f|_P,L)`$ is not simple \[BGR, p.95\]. Also, $`y`$ is a semi-invariant of $`L`$ but $`yU(P)`$.

The following, which we recall from \[O2, p.708\], describes how CP-ideals naturally arise in certain semi-direct products.

PROPOSITION 4.6. Let g be a Lie algebra with basis $`\{x_1,\mathrm{},x_m\}`$ and let $`V`$ be a g-module with basis $`\{v_1,\mathrm{},v_n\}`$ with $`dim`$$`dimV`$. For each $`fV^{}`$ we put

$`\text{g}(f)=\{x\text{g}f(xv)=0\text{for all}vV\}`$
the stabilizer of $`f`$. Consider the semi-direct product $`L=`$ g$`V`$ in which $`[x,v]=xv`$, $`x`$ g, $`vV`$ and in which $`V`$ is an abelian ideal. Then the following are equivalent:

* $`D(V)(=R(V))`$ is a maximal subfield of $`D(L)`$
* $`V`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$
* $`i(L)=dimVdim`$ g
* $`\text{rank}_{R(V)}(e_iv_j)=dim`$ g
* g$`(f)=0`$ for some $`fV^{}`$

REMARK 4.7 If $`k`$ is algebraically closed, g a simple Lie algebra, acting irreducibly on $`V`$, then the conditions of the proposition are satisfied if and only if
$`dim`$ g $`<dimV`$. \[AVE, p.196\].

The following shows that if a Lie algebra $`L`$ admits a CP-ideal then its structure comes close to that of the semi-direct product considered in Proposition 4.6.

COROLLARY 4.8 Let $`V`$ be a commutative ideal of $`L`$. Clearly, the Lie algebra g $`=L/V`$ acts on $`V`$. Consider the semi-direct product $`L_1=`$ g$`V`$. Then,

$`V`$ is a CP of L $`V`$ is a CP of $`L_1`$

In that case, $`i(L_1)=i(L)`$.

Proof. Let $`gL^{}`$ and put $`f=g|_VV^{}`$. Then, we claim that g$`(f)=V^g/V`$. Indeed,

$`\overline{x}=x+V\text{g}(f)`$ $``$ $`f([\overline{x},V])=0`$
$``$ $`f([x,V])=0`$
$``$ $`g([x,V])=0`$
$``$ $`xV^g\overline{x}V^g/V`$
We now proceed with the proof
$`:`$ $`dimV=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$. Also, $`V^g=V`$ for some $`gL^{}`$ by Lemma 1.1. Hence, g$`(f)=0`$. By Proposition 4.6 $`V`$ is a CP of $`L_1`$ and

$`i(L_1)=dimVdim\text{g}`$ $`=`$ $`dimV(dimLdimV)`$
$`=`$ $`2dimVdimL=i(L).`$
$`:`$ By Proposition 4.6, g$`(f)=0`$ for some $`fV^{}`$. Next, choose $`gL^{}`$ such that $`f=g|_V`$. Then, $`V^g/V=`$ g$`(f)=0`$. So, $`V^g=V`$ which by Lemma 1.2 implies that $`V`$ is a CP of $`L`$.

5. CP-IDEALS IN CERTAIN FROBENIUS LIE ALGEBRAS

Let $`L`$ be a Frobenius Lie algebra with a CP-ideal $`P`$. Take any $`fL_{reg}^{}`$ and assume that $`k`$ is algebraically closed. Then $`I(f)=0`$ by \[O1, p.42\]. So, by Corollary 4.4 $`\text{ind}(f|_P,L)`$ is a faithful irreducible representation of $`U(L)`$. Next, let $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_m`$, $`y_1,\mathrm{},y_m`$ be a basis of $`L`$ such that $`y_1,\mathrm{},y_m`$ is a basis of $`P`$. Then $`det([x_i,y_j])S(P)`$ is a nonzero semi- invariant under the action of $`\text{Aut}L`$ \[O1,p.28\]. It is also known that Frobenius Lie algebras give rise to constant solutions for the classical Yang- Baxter equation \[BD\].

The following is a special case of Proposition 4.6.

COROLLARY 5.1 Let g be a Lie algebra and $`V`$ a g-module such that $`dim`$ g $`=dimV`$. Consider the semi- direct product $`L=`$ g$`V`$. Then the following are equivalent:

* $`R(V)`$ is a maximal subfield of $`D(L)`$
* $`V`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$
* $`L`$ is Frobenius
* g$`(f)=0`$ for some $`fV^{}`$

EXAMPLE 5.2 Let g be Frobenius and let $`V=`$ g be the adjoint representation.

EXAMPLE 5.3 The above condition is satisfied if g is reductive over an algebraically closed field $`k`$ and $`V^{}`$ is a prehomogeneous g-module (i.e. $`V^{}`$ has an open g-orbit) with $`dim`$ g $`=dimV`$. These modules have been studied extensively by the Japanese school since 1977 \[SK\], \[KKTI\].

EXAMPLE 5.4 Let $`A`$ be a left-symmetric algebra (LSA), i.e. a finite dimensional vector space provided with a bilinear product $`A\times AA`$, $`(a,b)ab`$ which satisfies

$`a(bc)(ab)c=b(ac)(ba)c()`$
for all $`a,b,cA`$. There is an extensive literature on LSA’s, see for example \[H\], \[Seg\]. Vinberg used LSA’s to classify convex homogeneous cones \[V\]. A left-symmetric algebra is Lie-admissable. This means that $`A`$ becomes a Lie algebra, which we denote by g, for the Lie bracket $`[a,b]=abba`$, $`a,bA`$. Using $`()`$ we observe that

$`[a,b]c=(ab)c(ba)c=a(bc)b(ac).`$
Therefore, $`A`$ becomes a g-module, which we denote by $`V`$, for the bilinear map

$`\text{g}\times VV,(x,v)xv`$
Now, suppose $`A`$ contains a nonzero element $`fA`$ which is not a right zero divisor of $`A`$. Let $`V^{}`$ be the dual module of $`V`$. Identifying the module $`V^{}`$ with $`V`$, we may consider $`f`$ to be an element of $`(V^{})^{}`$. Clearly, the stabilizer g$`(f)=\{x\text{g}xf=0\}=0`$ by assumption.
Finally, using Corollary 5.1 we may conclude that the semi-direct product
$`L=`$ g $`V^{}`$ is a Frobenius Lie algebra in which $`V^{}`$ is a CP-ideal.

REMARK 5.5 In characteristic $`p>2`$ a similar result can be obtained if $`A`$ is a finite dimensional simple Novikov algebra and where $`V`$ is a certain irreducible $`A`$-module. We recall that a nonassociative $`k`$-algebra is said to be a left Novikov algebra if $`A`$ is left symmetric, satisfying the identity $`(ab)c=(ac)b`$ for all $`a,b,cA`$. In characteristic zero E. Zelmanov showed that finite dimensional simple Novikov algebras are all one- dimensional \[Z\]. Recently simple Novikov algebras and their irreducible modules have been determined by M. Osborn and X. Xu \[Os\], \[X\].

We now focus on a special case, which provides an interesting link between Frobenius algebras and Frobenius Lie algebras.

PROPOSITION 5.6 Let $`A`$ be a finite dimensional associative algebra over $`k`$ with a unit element. A becomes a Lie algebra g for the Lie bracket $`[a,b]=abba`$, $`a,bA`$, and $`V=A`$ becomes a g-module by left multiplication. Consider the semi-direct product $`L=`$$`V`$. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`A`$ is a Frobenius algebra
* $`L`$ is a Frobenius Lie algebra
* $`V`$ is a CP-ideal of $`L`$
* $`R(V)`$ is a maximal subfield of $`D(L)`$

Proof. In view of Corollary 5.1 it suffices to show that (1) is equivalent with g$`(f)=0`$ for some $`fV^{}`$. So, take $`fV^{}`$. Then

$`\text{g}(f)=\{aAf(ab)=0\text{for all}bA\}`$
Clearly, g$`(f)=0`$ if and only if the bilinear map $`A\times Ak`$, $`(a,b)f(ab)`$ is nondegenerate, i.e. $`A`$ is a Frobenius algebra \[CR, Theorem 61.3\].

Finally, we devote our attention to certain Frobenius Lie subalgebras of a semi- simple Lie algebra.

THEOREM 5.7 Let $`L`$ be a semi-simple Lie algebra of rank $`r`$ over $`k`$, $`k`$ algebraically closed, and let $`x`$ be a principal nilpotent element of $`L`$ (i.e. the centralizer $`C(x)`$ of $`x`$ in $`L`$ has dimension $`r`$). Then the normalizer $`F`$ of $`C(x)`$ in $`L`$ is a solvable Frobenius Lie subalgebra of $`L`$ in which $`C(x)`$ is a CP-ideal.

Proof. It is well known that $`C(x)`$ is abelian \[K\]. Clearly, $`C(x)`$ is an ideal of $`F`$. In 1991 R. Brylinski and B. Kostant showed that $`dimF=2r`$ and that $`F/C(x)`$, and hence also $`F`$, is solvable $`[BK]`$. Recently, D. Panyushev proved that $`F`$ is Frobenius \[P2, Theorem 5.5\].

6. CP-IDEALS IN THE NILRADICAL OF PARABOLIC LIE SUBALGEBRAS OF A SIMPLE LIE ALGEBRA

THEOREM 6.1 Let $`B`$ be a Borel subalgebra of a simple Lie algebra $`L`$ over $`k`$, $`k`$ algebraically closed, of rank $`r`$ and let $`N`$ be the nilradical of $`B`$. Then,

* $`N`$ admits a CP $``$ $`L`$ is of type $`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$.
In these 2 cases $`N`$ has a CP-ideal $`P`$, which is an ideal of $`B`$.
* $`P`$ is also a CP-ideal of $`B`$ in case $`L`$ is of type $`C_r`$, $`r1`$.

Proof. The information on $`i(N)`$, $`i(B)`$ in table 1 is obtained from \[E1\], \[E2\]. Also, we know that $`i(N)+i(B)=r`$ \[P2, 1.5\].

|  |  | $`dimN`$ | $`i(N)`$ | $`i(B)`$ | $`\frac{1}{2}(dimN+i(N))`$ | $`m`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`A_{2t}`$ | $`t1`$ | $`t(2t+1)`$ | $`t`$ | $`t`$ | $`t(t+1)`$ | $`t(t+1)`$ |
| $`A_{2t+1}`$ | $`t0`$ | $`(t+1)(2t+1)`$ | $`t+1`$ | $`t`$ | $`(t+1)^2`$ | $`(t+1)^2`$ |
| $`B_3`$ |  | 9 | 3 | 0 | 6 | 5 |
| $`B_r`$ | $`r4`$ | $`r^2`$ | $`r`$ | 0 | $`\frac{1}{2}r(r+1)`$ | $`\frac{1}{2}r(r1)+1`$ |
| $`C_r`$ | $`r2`$ | $`r^2`$ | $`r`$ | 0 | $`\frac{1}{2}r(r+1)`$ | $`\frac{1}{2}r(r+1)`$ |
| $`D_{2t}`$ | $`t2`$ | $`2t(2t1)`$ | $`2t`$ | 0 | $`2t^2`$ | $`t(2t1)`$ |
| $`D_{2t+1}`$ | $`t2`$ | $`2t(2t+1)`$ | $`2t`$ | 1 | $`2t(t+1)`$ | $`t(2t+1)`$ |
| $`E_6`$ | | 36 | 4 | 2 | 20 | 16 |
| $`E_7`$ | | 63 | 7 | 0 | 35 | 27 |
| $`E_8`$ | | 120 | 8 | 0 | 64 | 36 |
| $`F_4`$ | | 24 | 4 | 0 | 14 | 9 |
| $`G_2`$ | | 6 | 2 | 0 | 4 | 3 |

Table 1

The idea is to compare the maximum dimension $`m`$ of abelian Lie subalgebras of $`N`$, computed by Malcev \[Ma, p.216\] with the number $`\frac{1}{2}(dimN+i(N))`$. Then $`N`$ contains a CP if and only if these numbers coincide. According to the table this occurs precisely if $`L`$ is of type $`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$.
Furthermore, we know from \[PR, Table 1\] that in both types ($`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$) $`B`$ has a maximal abelian ideal $`P`$ of dimension $`\frac{1}{2}(dimN+i(N))`$. Clearly $`PN`$. Therefore $`P`$ is a CP-ideal of $`N`$. This can also be deduced from Theorem 4.1.
(2) Using Lemma 1.3 we see that $`P`$ is also a CP-ideal of $`B`$ if and only if

$`i(N)`$ $`=`$ $`i(B)+dimBdimN`$
$``$ $`i(N)i(B)=r`$
$``$ $`i(B)=0\text{(since }i(N)+i(B)=r\text{).}`$
and this happens when $`L`$ is of type $`A_1(=C_1)`$ or $`C_r`$, $`r2`$.

THEOREM 6.2 Let $`L`$ be a simple Lie algebra over $`k`$, $`k`$ algebraically closed, of type $`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$, $`\pi `$ a parabolic Lie subalgebra of $`L`$. Then the nilradical $`N`$ of $`\pi `$ admits a CP-ideal $`P`$. Furthermore,

* suppose $`L`$ is of type $`A_r`$ and $`\pi `$ of type $`(p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)`$. Put $`n=r+1`$ and $`p=p_1+\mathrm{}+p_{\mathrm{}}`$, $`1\mathrm{}m`$, such that $`\left|\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}\right|`$ is as small as possible. Then,

$`i(N)=2p(np){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(n^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}}p_i^2\right)`$
* suppose $`L`$ is of type $`C_r`$, $`r2`$, and $`\pi `$ of type $`(p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)`$. Put $`\mathrm{}=\left[\frac{m}{2}\right]`$, then

$`i(N)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}p_i(p_i+1)`$

REMARK 6.3

* The first formula is new. A recursive formula for $`i(N)`$ was already established in \[E1\]. A different proof for the second formula can also be found in \[E1\].
* (made by the referee) A. Joseph already gave a formula for $`i(N)`$ in an arbitrary simple Lie algebra, using a maximal subset of strongly orthogonal positive roots \[J, (ii) of Proposition 2.6\]. Being applied to $`A_r`$ or $`C_r`$, Joseph’s formula gives the above explicit expressions.

Proof. (1) Let $`L=\text{sl}(V)`$ where $`V`$ is an $`n`$\- dimensional vector space over $`k`$. By \[B2, p.187\] we can find a flag $`F`$ of subspaces of $`V`$:

$`\{0\}=F_0F_1\mathrm{}F_m=V,F_{i1}\underset{}{}F_i`$
such that $`\pi `$ (respectively its nilradical $`N`$) consists of all endomorphisms $`xL`$ such that $`xF_iF_i`$ (resp. $`xF_iF_{i1}`$) for $`1im`$. Put $`p_i=dim(F_i/F_{i1})`$ then $`\pi `$ is said to be of type $`(p_1,\mathrm{},p_m)`$. Next, choose a basis $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_n`$ of $`V`$ compatible with the flag $`F`$ (i.e. $`e_1,\mathrm{},e_{p_1}F_1\backslash F_0`$, etc.). Then, $`N`$ can be considered to be the Lie algebra of matrices of the form as shown in figure 1.

Figure 1

We may assume, as is the case in figure 1, that $`p\frac{n}{2}`$ $`()`$. In particular, $`p+p_{\mathrm{}+1}>\frac{n}{2}`$. As usual we denote by $`E_{ij}`$ the $`n\times n`$ matrix whose $`ij`$-th entry is 1 and other entries are zero. Let $`P`$ be the subspace of $`N`$ generated by all $`E_{ij}`$ with $`1ip`$; $`p+1jn`$. So, $`P`$ consists of matrices of the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& M\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ where $`M`$ is any $`p\times (np)`$ matrix. It is easy to see that $`P`$ is an abelian ideal of $`N`$. We claim that $`P`$ is a CP of $`N`$. Let $`fN^{}`$ be defined by $`f(E_{p,np+1})=\mathrm{}=f(E_{1n})=1`$ and zero on all other $`E_{ij}`$. We want to show that $`P^f=P`$. Therefore we take $`xP^f`$. We write

$`x=\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}E_{ij}+y`$
where $`E_{ij}N\backslash P`$, $`\lambda _{ij}k`$ and $`yP`$. We need to demonstrate that each $`\lambda _{i_0j_0}=0`$. There are two cases to distinguish:

* $`j_0p`$. Then $`i_0<j_0p`$ and $`s=(n+1)i_0>(n+1)p>p`$. Hence, $`E_{j_0s}P`$ and

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`f([x,E_{j_0s}])=\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f([E_{ij},E_{j_0s}])+f([y,E_{j_0s}])`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f(\delta _{jj_0}E_{is}\delta _{si}E_{j_0j})`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i<j_0}{}\lambda _{ij_0}f(E_{is})\underset{j>s}{}\lambda _{sj}f(E_{j_0j})`$
$`=`$ $`\lambda _{i_0j_0}`$
($`f(E_{j_0j})=0`$ since $`j_0+j>i_0+s=n+1`$)
* $`i_0>p`$ and $`j_0>p_1+\mathrm{}+p_{\mathrm{}}+p_{\mathrm{}+1}>{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}`$.
By definition of $`p`$:

$`(p_1+\mathrm{}+p_{\mathrm{}}+p_{\mathrm{}+1}){\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{n}{2}}p`$
Hence

$`j_0(p_1+\mathrm{}+p_{\mathrm{}}+p_{\mathrm{}+1})+1np+1`$
So, $`t=(n+1)j_0p<i_0`$ and $`E_{ti_0}P`$. Therefore

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`f([E_{ti_0},x])=\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f([E_{ti_0},E_{ij}])+f([E_{ti_0},y])`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f(\delta _{i_0i}E_{tj}\delta _{jt}E_{ii_0})`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{j>i_0}{}\lambda _{i_0j}f(E_{tj})\underset{i<t}{}\lambda _{it}f(E_{ii_0})`$
$`=`$ $`\lambda _{i_0j_0}`$
($`f(E_{ii_0})=0`$ since $`i+i_0<t+j_0=n+1`$).

In both cases: $`x=yP`$. So, $`P^fP`$. Consequently, $`P^f=P`$ as the other inclusion is obvious by the commutativity of $`P`$.

By Lemma 1.2 we may conclude that $`P`$ is a CP of $`N`$ and $`fN_{\text{reg}}^{}`$.
Finally, from $`dimP=\frac{1}{2}(dimN+i(N))`$ we obtain:

$`i(N)`$ $`=`$ $`2dimPdimN`$
$`=`$ $`2p(np){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(n^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}p_i^2)`$
(2) Let $`L=\text{sp}(V)`$ where $`V`$ is a vector space over $`k`$ of dimension $`n=2r`$ provided with a nondegenerate alternating bilinear form $`\phi :V\times Vk`$. There exists an isotropic flag

$`\{0\}=F_0F_1\mathrm{}F_m=V`$
i.e. $`F_i^{}=F_{mi}`$ for $`0im`$ such that $`\pi `$ (respectively its nilradical $`N`$) consists of all $`xL`$ such that $`xF_iF_i`$ (resp. $`xF_iF_{i1}`$) for $`1im`$. Put $`p_i=dim(F_i/F_{i1})`$ then it follows that $`p_i=p_{m+1i}`$ for $`1im`$. Following \[B2, p.200\] we can find a Witt basis of $`V`$:

$`e_1,\mathrm{},e_r,e_r,\mathrm{},e_1`$
compatible with the given flag and such that $`\phi (e_i,e_j)=\delta _{ij}`$.
We now identify each $`xL`$ with its matrix with respect to this basis, i.e. $`x=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)`$ where $`A,B,C,D`$ are $`r\times r`$ matrices such that $`B=\widehat{B}`$, $`C=\widehat{C}`$, $`D=\widehat{A}`$, where the transformation $`\widehat{}`$ is the transpose relative to the second diagonal. If $`xN`$ then $`x`$ is of the form as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2

If $`m=2\mathrm{}+1`$ then we put $`r_1=\frac{1}{2}p_{\mathrm{}+1}`$ ($`p_{\mathrm{}+1}`$ is even since $`\underset{i=1}{\overset{m}{}}p_i=n=2r`$ and $`p_i=p_{m+1i}`$). If $`m=2\mathrm{}`$ then we put $`r_1=0`$. $`\pi `$ is determined by the sequence $`(p_1,\mathrm{},p_{\mathrm{}};r_1)`$. Note that $`r=\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i+r_1`$. Next, let $`P`$ be the subspace of $`N`$ of matrices of the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& B\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$ where $`B`$ is an $`r\times r`$ matrix such that $`B=\widehat{B}`$ and with zero $`r_1\times r_1`$ submatrix in the bottom left corner. Clearly,

$$X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _j}=E_{i,j}+E_{j,i},1irr_1;ijr$$

form a basis of $`P`$ which is an abelian ideal of $`N`$ and $`dimP=\frac{1}{2}[(r^2r_1^2)+(rr_1)]`$. We enlarge this basis to a basis of $`N`$ by adjoining some vectors of the type

$`X_{\epsilon _i\epsilon _j}=E_{ij}E_{j,i},i<j`$
From figure 2 we see that

$`dimN`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\left(r^2\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i^2r_1^2\right)+dimP`$
$`=`$ $`(r^2r_1^2)\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i^2+\frac{1}{2}(rr_1)`$
Next, let $`fN^{}`$ be defined by $`f(X_{2\epsilon _i})=1`$ for $`1irr_1`$ and zero on all other basis vectors of $`N`$. We want to show that $`P^f=P`$. For this purpose we take $`xP^f`$ which we can write as

$`x=\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}X_{\epsilon _i\epsilon _j}+y`$
where $`X_{\epsilon _i\epsilon _j}N`$, $`\lambda _{ij}k`$ and $`yP`$. Fix any $`\lambda _{st}`$, $`s<t`$ with $`X_{\epsilon _s\epsilon _t}N`$. This implies that $`srr_1`$, $`tr`$. Hence $`X_{\epsilon _s+\epsilon _t}P`$. Therefore,

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`f([x,X_{\epsilon _s+\epsilon _t}])=\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f([X_{\epsilon _i\epsilon _j},X_{\epsilon _s+\epsilon _t}])+f([y,X_{\epsilon _s+\epsilon _t}])`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i<j}{}\lambda _{ij}f(\delta _{js}X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _t}+\delta _{jt}X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _s})`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i<s}{}\lambda _{is}f(X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _t})+\underset{i<t}{}\lambda _{it}f(X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _s})`$
$`=`$ $`0+\lambda _{st}`$
($`f(X_{\epsilon _i+\epsilon _t})=0`$ since $`i<s<t`$).
It follows that $`x=yP`$. So, $`P^fP`$. Consequently, $`P^f=P`$ as the other inclusion is obvious. By Lemma 1.2 we may conclude that $`P`$ is a CP of $`N`$ and $`fN_{\text{reg}}^{}`$. Finally,

$`i(N)`$ $`=`$ $`2dimPdimN`$
$`=`$ $`(r^2r_1^2)+(rr_1)(r^2r_1^2)+\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i^2\frac{1}{2}(rr_1)`$
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i^2+(rr_1)\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_i(p_i+1)`$
7. CP-PRESERVING EXTENSIONS

PROPOSITION 7.1 Let $`M`$ be a finite dimensional Lie algebra over $`k`$ and let $`d\text{Der}M`$ be a derivation such that $`d(Z(M))0`$. Consider the extension $`L=Mkd`$ in which $`[d,x]=d(x)`$, $`xM`$.
Then we have

* $`i(M)=i(L)+1`$.
* $`L`$ has a CP if and only if $`M`$ has a CP.
* If $`L`$ is square integrable, then so is $`M`$.

REMARK 7.2 Example (3) of 1.7 shows that the condition on $`d`$ cannot be removed.

Proof. Take $`uZ(M)`$ such that $`d(u)0`$. Clearly $`M=C(u)`$. Now the assertions follow directly from Proposition 1.8.

PROPOSITION 7.3 Let $`M`$ be a finite dimensional Lie algebra over $`k`$ and fix $`z`$, a nonzero central element of $`M`$. Let $`S`$ be a $`2r`$-dimensional vector space, provided with a nondegenerate alternating bilinear form $`\phi :S\times Sk`$. Consider the Lie algebra $`L=MS`$ containing $`M`$ as an ideal and in which $`[x,s]=0`$ and $`[s,t]=\phi (s,t)z`$ for $`xM`$; $`s,tS`$. Then we have

* $`H=Skz`$ is a Heisenberg Lie algebra
* $`i(L)=i(M)`$ and $`Z(L)=Z(M)`$
* $`M`$ is square integrable if and only if $`L`$ is square integrable
* If $`M`$ allows a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) then the same holds for $`L`$.

Proof. (i) It is easy to verify that $`L`$ is a Lie algebra. There exists a $`fL_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ such that $`f|_MM_{\text{reg}}^{}`$ and $`f(z)0`$. We may assume that $`f(z)=1`$ (by replacing $`f`$ by $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{f(z)}}f`$). Then for all $`s,tS`$

$`B_f(s,t)=f([s,t])=\phi (s,t)`$
From the assumption on $`\phi `$, $`SS^{}=0`$ and we can find a basis $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r;t_1,\mathrm{},t_r`$ of $`S`$ such that for all $`i,j`$:

$`\phi (s_i,s_j)=0=\phi (t_i,t_j)\text{and}\phi (s_i,t_j)=\delta _{ij}`$
This implies $`[s_i,s_j]=0=[t_i,t_j]`$ and $`[s_i,t_j]=\delta _{ij}z`$ for all $`i,j`$. Consequently, $`H`$ is a Heisenberg Lie algebra.
(ii) First, we notice that $`M=S^{}`$. Indeed, $`MS^{}`$ since $`f([M,S])=0`$. For the other inclusion, take $`xS^{}`$, which we decompose as $`x=m+s`$ with $`mM`$ and $`sS`$. Then, $`s=xmSS^{}=\{0\}`$. Hence, $`x=mM`$. As $`M=S^{}`$ we deduce from \[D,1.12.4\] that

$`M(f|_M)=MM^{}=SS^{}+L^{}=L(f)`$
Taking dimensions yields $`i(M)=i(L)`$. Clearly, the elements of $`Z(M)`$ commute with those of $`M`$ and $`S`$. Hence, $`Z(M)Z(L)`$. Conversely, take $`xZ(L)`$ which we can decompose as $`x=m+s`$ with $`mM`$ and $`sS`$. For all $`s^{}S`$:

$`[s,s^{}]=[xm,s^{}]=[x,s^{}][m,s^{}]=0`$
and hence also $`\phi (s,s^{})=f([s,s^{}])=0`$ which implies that $`s=0`$ and so $`x=mMZ(L)Z(M)`$.
(iii) This follows at once from (ii).
(iv) Suppose $`P_1`$ is a CP of $`M`$. Put $`P_2=ks_1+\mathrm{}+ks_r`$ and $`P=P_1P_2`$. Then $`P`$ is a CP of $`L`$ since $`P`$ is commutative and

$`dimP=dimP_1+dimP_2=\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))+\frac{1}{2}dimS=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L)).`$
Finally, if $`P_1`$ is an ideal of $`M`$ then $`P`$ is an ideal of $`L`$ since

$`[M,P]=[M,P_1]+[M,P_2]=[M,P_1]P_1P`$
and

$`[t_j,P]`$ $`=`$ $`[t_j,P_1]+[t_j,P_2]=[t_j,P_2]`$
$`=`$ $`\underset{i}{}k[t_j,s_i]=kzZ(M)P_1P.`$
PROPOSITION 7.4 Let $`A`$ be an $`n`$-dimensional commutative (associative) Frobenius algebra over $`k`$ and $`M`$ an $`m`$-dimensional Lie algebra over $`k`$.
Consider the Lie algebra $`L=A_kM`$ for which $`[ax,a^{}y]=aa^{}[x,y]`$, $`a,a^{}A`$ and $`x,yM`$. Then we have

* $`M`$ is square integrable if and only if $`L`$ is square integrable.
* $`M`$ is Frobenius if and only if $`L`$ is Frobenius.
* If $`M`$ allows a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) then the same holds for $`L`$.

Proof. (i) From \[F, p.241-243\] we know that $`i(L)=n.i(M)`$. On the other hand, $`Z(L)=A_kZ(M)`$ and so $`dimZ(L)=n.dimZ(M)`$. Therefore,
$`i(L)=dimZ(L)`$ if and only if $`i(M)=dimZ(M)`$.
(ii) This follows from (i) and its proof.
(iii) Let $`P`$ be a CP (resp. a CP-ideal) of $`M`$. Then $`Q=A_kP`$ is a commutative Lie subalgebra (resp. ideal) of $`L`$ and

$`dimQ=n.dimP=n.\frac{1}{2}(dimM+i(M))`$
$`=\frac{1}{2}(n.dimM+n.i(M))=\frac{1}{2}(dimL+i(L))`$
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors thank Jacques Alev for his interest and his valuable comments on the subject. They also express their gratitude to Dmitri Panyushev for providing some useful preprints of his work. The first author is grateful for the generous hospitality he received during his visits at the University of Limburg and the University of Bochum, which greatly contributed to the completion of this paper.
Finally, the authors thank the referee for pointing out Remark 6.3(b) and for giving helpful suggestions in connection with the presentation of the paper.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The bosonic sector of $`D=11`$ supergravity is derived from the action

$$I_{11}^{\mathrm{bulk}}=_X(R\text{1}\mathrm{l}\frac{1}{2}G_4G_4\frac{1}{6}C_3G_4G_4),$$
(1)
where $`G_4=dC_3`$ and the relative coefficients are fixed by the requirement of $`D=11`$ local supersymmetry once the fermions have been included. The $`D=11`$ spacetime $`X`$ is taken here to be without boundary.

The form-field $`C_3`$ has the field equation

$$dG_4+\frac{1}{2}G_4G_4=0;$$
(2)
this is manifestly invariant under the gauge transformation $`\delta C_3=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3`$, where $`d\mathrm{\Lambda }_3=0`$. This allows “large” gauge transformation if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3`$ is taken to be closed but not exact; $`\delta C_3`$ is “small” if $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3=d\lambda _2`$, for $`\lambda _2`$ globally defined.

Rewriting the $`C_3`$ field equation as $`d(G_4+\frac{1}{2}C_3G_4)=0`$, notice that one can introduce a dual field strength

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_7=d\stackrel{~}{C}_6\frac{1}{2}C_3G_4$$
(3)
and impose the duality condition

$$\stackrel{~}{G}_7=G_4;$$
(4)
then the $`C_3`$ field equation becomes a Bianchi identity:

$$d\stackrel{~}{G}_7=\frac{1}{2}G_4G_4.$$
(5)
In this way, the $`C_3`$ field equation may be replaced by a duality condition for the “doubled” $`(C_3,\stackrel{~}{C}_6)`$ system.

This doubled system has a noncommutative ring of large gauge transformations:

$`\delta C_3=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3,`$ $`\delta \stackrel{~}{C}_6=\mathrm{\Lambda }_6\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Lambda }_3C_3`$ (6)
$`[\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_3},\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_3^{}}]=\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_6}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_6=\mathrm{\Lambda }_3\mathrm{\Lambda }_3^{}`$ (7)
$`[\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_3},\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_6}]`$ $`=`$ $`[\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_6},\delta _{\mathrm{\Lambda }_6^{}}]=0.`$ (8)
This is the cohomology ring for 3-forms and 6-forms on the underlying spacetime. These cohomologies are taken for the time being to be defined over the real numbers, but they will soon be restricted to integral cohomologies when we consider the corresponding Dirac quantization conditions.

In the rest of this article, which is based on , we will investigate the way in which the algebra (8) is preserved a) in the presence of 2–branes and 5–branes, and b) at the quantum level.

## 2 Current couplings to 2–branes and 5–branes

For an $`\mathrm{M}_2`$–brane worldvolume $`W_3`$ ending on an $`\mathrm{M}_5`$–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$, one has $`W_30`$, so the basic $`\mathrm{M}_2`$ coupling $`_{W_3}C_3`$ fails to be gauge invariant even for small gauge transformations $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3=d\lambda _2`$. The cure for this problem is provided by a form-field that exists on the $`W_6`$ worldvolume: the self-dual 3–form $`h_3`$, which has a potential $`b_2`$. Using the latter, one can take the combination $`_{W_3}C_3_{W_3}b_2`$, which is invariant under small gauge transformations when taken together with a compensating Green-Schwarz mechanism, $`\delta C_3=d\lambda _2`$, $`\delta B_2=\lambda _2`$.

Note that a self-dual 3–form field strength is precisely what is needed in order to complete the bosonic part of the $`(2,0)`$ worldvolume fluctuation-field supermultiplet. The transverse oscillations of the 5–brane provide 5 worldvolume scalar bosonic degrees of freedom, while the 16 broken supersymmetries contribute 8 worldvolume fermionic degrees of freedom (taking into account that the fermionic equations of motion are of first-order). Thus, in order to have a bose–fermi balance on the $`W_6`$ worldvolume, one needs to have an additional 3 bosonic degrees of freedom. This is what is contributed by the self-dual 3-form, which contributes precisely $`\frac{1}{2}\left(43/2\right)=3`$ degrees of freedom.

The gauge-invariant field strength for the $`C_3`$ gauge field is accordingly the bulk $``$ worldvolume combination

$$h_3=i^{}Cdb_2$$
(9)
where $`i^{}`$ is the pullback to the $`W_6`$ worldvolume effected by the $`i:W_6X`$ embedding map.

The action for the $`\mathrm{M}_2`$, $`\mathrm{M}_5`$ system  can be written

$$I_{\mathrm{branes}}=I_{\mathrm{kinetic}}+I_{\mathrm{forms}}^{\mathrm{brane}}+I_{\mathrm{WZ}}+I_{\mathrm{counterterms}}$$
(10)
in which the various terms are

$`I_{\mathrm{kinetic}}`$ $`=`$ $`T_3{\displaystyle _{W_3}}d^3\xi \sqrt{det\left(\gamma _{\mu \nu }\right)}+T_6{\displaystyle _{W_6}}\sqrt{det\left(G_{ij}\right)}`$ (11)
$`I_{\mathrm{forms}}^{\mathrm{brane}}`$ $`=`$ $`\frac{1}{2}{\displaystyle _{W_6}}hh+b{\displaystyle _{W_6}}\stackrel{~}{C}+e{\displaystyle _{W_6}}hC+a{\displaystyle _{W_3}}C+k{\displaystyle _{W_2}}b`$ (12)
$`I_{\mathrm{WZ}}`$ $`=`$ $`f{\displaystyle _{W_7}}CG+{\displaystyle \frac{q}{2}}{\displaystyle _{W_8}}GG;`$ (13)
the values of the coefficients $`a,b,e,k,f,q`$ shall be determined by requiring gauge invariance. The selection of possible terms in (1113) is made by taking all the relevant products of operators, integrated over spaces of appropriate dimensionality. Clearly, the $`I_{\mathrm{WZ}}`$ terms are unusual, and their inclusion will need to be explained. The final term, $`I_{\mathrm{counterterms}}`$, is required for anomaly cancellation and will involve both worldvolume and bulk contributions.

In order to determine the values of the coefficients in (1113), one has to impose the requirements of gauge invariance but also take into account the fact that the “magnetically” charged 5–brane and the string boundary of the 2–brane give rise to violations of the normal Bianchi identities for the corresponding bulk and worldvolume form-fields.

## 3 Relative homology and cohomology, Bianchi identities and gauge invariance

In order to express the violated Bianchi identities compactly, it is convenient to use the language of relative cohomology.111For some original applications of relative cohomology to branes, see . Consider a pair of form-fields of adjacent rank, $`(C_k,C_{k1})`$. The first element in a pair is taken to be valued in the bulk spacetime, but the second element is taken to be valued in the subspace with respect to which the relative cohomology is being defined, in this case the 5–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$. Using the pull-back $`i^{}`$ from the bulk spacetime to the worldvolume $`W_6`$ as above, one can define the relative exterior derivative (or coboundary operator) as

$$d(C_k,C_{k1}):=(dC_k,i^{}C_kdC_{k1}).$$
(14)
The group of forms closed in this sense, taken for now over the real numbers, is denoted $`H^k(X,W_6;)`$.

The pair of field strengths $`(G_4,h_3)`$, valued respectively in the bulk and in the worldvolume $`W_6`$, is thus given locally in terms of the exterior derivative (14): $`(G_4,h_3)=d(C_3,b_2)`$, so the naïve Bianchi identity is $`d(G_4,h_3)=0`$. In the presence of magnetically charged sources, however, this must be violated on the corresponding source loci:

$$d(G_4,h_3)=(\kappa T_6\delta \left(W_6\right),T_{26}\delta \left(W_2\right)),$$
(15)
where $`T_6`$ and $`T_{26}`$ are real coefficients; $`\kappa `$ is the gravitational coupling constant, needed on dimensional grounds. $`T_6`$ has been chosen to equal the 5–brane tension, as is necessary in order for the 5–brane to be a $`\frac{1}{2}`$ supersymmetric BPS soliton.

After some analysis , the various conditions for small gauge invariance, taken together with the form (15) of the violated Bianchi identities plus use of the field equations yield the following relationships between the coefficients in (1113):

$`T_3`$ $`=`$ $`a=2k`$ (16)
$`T_6`$ $`=`$ $`2e=6f`$ (17)
$`T_{26}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k}{e}}={\displaystyle \frac{T_3}{T_6}}`$ (18)
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (19)
These relations are fully consistent with the “brane surgery” relations  expected on the basis of charge conservation for a $`\left(q1\right)`$ brane intersecting a $`\left(p1\right)`$ brane over a $`\left(k1\right)`$ brane,

$$T_{kq}T_q=T_{kp}T_p,$$
(20)
where $`T_{kq}`$ and $`T_{kp}`$ represent the tension of the $`\left(k1\right)`$ brane as seen within the $`\left(q1\right)`$ brane or as seen within the $`\left(p1\right)`$ brane. The relations (1619) fit this rule for $`T_{26}=T_3/T_6`$ if one takes $`T_{23}=1`$.

In addition to the coefficient relations (1619), one obtains also the following homology relations from the gauge invariance requirements:

$$W_2=W_3,W_6=W_7;$$
(21)
the first of these is of course expected since the string is always located at the boundary of the 2–brane on the 5–brane; the second establishes $`W_7`$ as a “Dirac surface” for the 5–brane worldsheet $`W_6`$.

Homology relations are of course dual to cohomology relations, and so one has an appropriate boundary relation that is dual to the relative exterior derivative/coboundary operator defined in (14). For cycles $`(W_k,W_{k1})`$ in $`(X,W_6)`$ one has the relative boundary relation

$$(W_k,W_{k1});=(W_{k1}W_k,W_{k1}).$$
(22)
Thus in relative homology, the statement that a pair has no boundary means

$$(W_k,W_{k1})=0W_{k1}=W_kW_6,W_{k1}=0.$$
(23)
The group of homology chains in this sense, again taken for the time being over the reals, is denoted $`H_k(X,W_6;)`$.

Pairs of cycles and pairs of forms can be integrated as follows:

$$_{(W_k,W_{k1})}(C_k,C_{k1}):=_{W_k}C_k_{W_{k1}}C_{k1}.$$
(24)
The duality of relative homology and cohomology is then expressed via Stokes’ Theorem:

$$_{(D_{k+1},D_k)}d(C_k,C_{k1})=_{(D_{k+1},D_k)}(C_k,C_{k1}).$$
(25)
One can also give the following meaning to integrals over linear combinations of spaces:

$$_{\alpha W+\beta U}C:=\alpha _WC+\beta _UC,\alpha ,\beta .$$
(26)
Relative cohomology language can now be used to describe the sense in which the gauge transformations (8) remain “large” in the presence of 2–branes and 5–branes. The transformation parameters $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }_3,\lambda _2)`$ for the form-fields $`(C_3,b_2)`$ are taken to be elements of $`H^3(X,W_6;)`$. Thus, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_3`$ may remain cohomologically nontrivial on $`XW_6`$, but it must reduce to an exact form $`d\lambda _2`$ when restricted to the 5–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$.

## 4 Dirac-Schwinger-Zwanziger quantization relations

The above real relative homology and cohomology groups become restricted to integral subgroups when quantum effects are taken into account. The basic requirement is that adiabatic deformations of a dual pair of electric and magnetic solitons through a closed deformation path should not produce any change in the quantum generating functional path-integral. Thus, variations of the action $`I`$ by amounts $`2\pi k`$, $`k`$ are allowed since the integrand $`\mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{i}I\right)`$ becomes multiplied in that case just by $`\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi \mathrm{i}k\right)=1`$. A Wu-Yang style argument  then shows that if an $`\mathrm{M}_2`$ brane worldvolume $`W_3`$ is deformed through a closed path $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_4`$ around an $`\mathrm{M}_5`$ brane worldvolume $`W_6`$, one must for quantum consistency have at most a phase change

$$T_3_{W_3^{\mathrm{final}}}CT_3_{W_3^{\mathrm{initial}}}C=T_3_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_4}G\stackrel{!}{=}2\pi \mathrm{},\mathrm{},$$
(27)
i.e. the class

$$\frac{T_3}{2\pi }\left[G_4\right]$$
(28)
must be integral when integrated over closed manifolds $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_4`$ that do not intersect the 5–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$ itself.

Taking then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_4=D_5`$ and using the violated Bianchi identity $`dG=\kappa T_6\delta \left(W_6\right)`$ yields the $`\mathrm{M}_2`$-$`\mathrm{M}_5`$ brane Dirac quantization rule for the cell units of the brane charge/tension lattice:

$$\kappa T_3T_6\stackrel{!}{=}2\pi .$$
(29)
In addition, one has a quantization relation for the self-dual (i.e. dyonic) string on the 5–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$. Firstly, note that the dimension here is in the sequence $`d=4n+2`$, $`n`$, for which the Dirac-Schwinger-Zwanziger quantization condition for dyons with (electric,magnetic) charges $`(e_i,g_i)`$ is symmetric :

$$e_1g_2+e_2g_1=2\pi \mathrm{},\mathrm{}.$$
(30)
Thus, for dyons with $`e=g`$, one has the charge relation $`e_1e_2=\pi \mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}`$. This might appear to give a unit cell that is out by a factor of $`\frac{1}{2}`$ with respect to the unit expected, but one needs to recall that the coefficient $`k`$ of $`_{W_2}b`$ in (12) also contained a factor of $`\frac{1}{2}`$ in the coefficient relations (16). Taking this factor into account and performing an adiabatic closed deformation similar to those above, one obtains

$$T_3_{(W_3,W_2)^{\mathrm{final}}}(C_3,b_2)T_3_{(W_3,W_2)^{\mathrm{initial}}}(C_3,b_2)=T_3_{(\mathrm{\Sigma }_4,\mathrm{\Sigma }_3)}(G_4,h_3)\stackrel{!}{=}2\pi \mathrm{},\mathrm{}.$$
(31)
Then taking $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_4,\mathrm{\Sigma }_3)=(D_5,D_4)`$ and using the violated Bianchi identities (15), one finds out that of the two terms, only the $`D_4`$ integral contributes because the $`D_5`$ integral of $`\delta \left(W_6\right)`$ vanishes since $`\text{dim}\left(D_5W_6^{}\right)=1`$ only. Thus one obtains $`T_3_{(\mathrm{\Sigma }_4,\mathrm{\Sigma }_3)}(G_4,h_3)=T_3_{D_4}T_{26}\delta \left(W_6\right)`$ and accordingly there is a second quantization rule for the charge/tension lattice-cell units:

$$T_3T_{26}\stackrel{!}{=}2\pi .$$
(32)
Combining this with the relation (19) for $`T_{26}`$, one obtains the quadratic cell unit rule

$$\left(T_3\right)^2\stackrel{!}{=}2\pi T_6,$$
(33)
The quantization rules (29) and (33) yield the correct charge lattice for M–theory solitons .

## 5 $`D=12`$ Formulation and Dirac Surfaces

The bulk plus brane-source action discussed so far for M–theory needs to be completed by gravitational counterterms in order to cancel diffeomorphism anomalies on the 5–brane worldvolume $`W_6`$ that arise from loops of worldvolume chiral fermion modes . In order to write these, it is convenient to introduce a $`D=12`$ spacetime $`Y`$ such that

$$X=Y.$$
(34)
Using this, the Chern-Simons term in the bulk action can be conveniently written $`\frac{1}{6\kappa }_YG_4G_4G_4`$.

The main advantage of the $`D=12`$ formulation, however, is in the way it gives to express the Dirac surfaces needed to maintain manifest gauge invariance. For this purpose, we need to introduce two surfaces bounded by $`W_6`$: $`V_7`$, which extends into $`Y`$ in such a way that

$$i^{}\delta _Y\left(V_7\right)=\delta _X\left(W_6\right),$$
(35)
and another surface $`W_7X`$; for both one has the boundary relation

$$V_7=W_7=W_6.$$
(36)
Since $`V_7`$ and $`W_7`$ share a boundary, one may flip the orientation of $`V_7`$ and glue it onto $`W_7`$ in order to make a closed surface $`W_7\left(V_7\right)=W_7V_7`$ :

$$\left(W_7V_7\right)=W_6W_6=0.$$
(37)
Hence, one can find a ball $`V_8Y`$ such that

$$V_8=W_7V_7.$$
(38)
A similar construction can be made on the 5–brane worldvolume for surfaces bounded by $`W_2`$. Letting $`i:W_6W_7`$, introduce $`U_3W_7`$ with $`U_3=W_2`$ such that

$$i^{}\delta _{W_7}\left(U_3\right)=\delta _{W_6}\left(W_2\right).$$
(39)
Since also one has $`W_3=W_2`$, one can flip the orientation of $`W_3`$ and glue it onto $`U_3`$ along $`W_2`$ to produce a closed surface $`U_3\left(W_3\right)=U_3W_3`$ which can similarly be taken to be the boundary of a ball $`U_4`$ :

$$U_4=U_3W_3.$$
(40)
Taken all together, one has the following relative homology relations for the Dirac surfaces:

$`(V_8,W_7)`$ $`=`$ $`(V_7,W_6)`$ (41)
$`(U_4,U_3)`$ $`=`$ $`(W_3,W_2).`$ (42)
At this point, we can also state the gauge invariance requirement for the integration domain in the remaining term $`\frac{q}{2}_{W_8}G_4G_4`$ in the action (13), with a coefficient to be understood in the sense of Eq. (26):

$$qW_8=\frac{T_6}{3}V_8.$$
(43)
Taken all together, the gauge-field part of the action is then

$`I_{\mathrm{gauge}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _X}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa }}G_4G_4+T_3G_4\mathrm{\Omega }_7\left(R\right){\displaystyle _Y}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6\kappa }}G_4G_4G_4`$
$`\frac{1}{2}T_6{\displaystyle _{(V_8,W_7)}}(G_4G_42\kappa T_3\mathrm{\Omega }_8,h_3i^{}G_4)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{T_6}{4}}{\displaystyle _{W_6}}h_3h_3+T_3{\displaystyle _{U_4}}G_4{\displaystyle \frac{T_3}{2}}{\displaystyle _{U_3}}h_3,`$
where the integration domains satisfy the relations (34,42). The terms involving $`\mathrm{\Omega }_8`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_7`$ are parts of the counterterm structure needed to cancel the diffeomorphism anomalies on the $`W_6`$ worldvolume. $`\mathrm{\Omega }_8=d\mathrm{\Omega }_7`$ generates the anomaly compensator $`𝒜_6`$ by transgression:

$$\delta _{\mathrm{diff}}\mathrm{\Omega }_7=d𝒜_6.$$
(45)
$`𝒜_6`$ then cancels a part of the anomaly from loops of chiral fermions and of the self-dual $`h_3`$ field in the 5–brane’s $`W_6`$ $`(2,0)`$ supersymmetric worldvolume theory.

## 6 Dependence on Dirac surfaces

The presence of terms like $`_{V_8}G_4G_4`$ in the action (5) may give rise to concern whether the action as presented describes correctly the 2–brane/5–brane system, or whether extra degrees of freedom have sneaked in via the dynamics of surfaces like $`V_8`$.

The answer is “no.” One has just the required degrees of freedom and nothing more. This is demonstrated by showing that variations of the Dirac surfaces in the action (5) produce effects that vanish modulo $`2\pi `$ as a result of appropriate integrality and relative homology conditions.

Independence from variations of $`Y`$ and $`V_8`$ under shifts by closed surfaces boils down to requiring that the classes

$$\frac{1}{2\pi \kappa }\left[\frac{1}{3!}G_4^3\right]\text{and}\frac{T_6}{2\pi }\left[\frac{1}{2!}G_4^2\right]$$
(46)
be integral. From the flux integrality condition (28) that

$$\left[\frac{T_3}{2\pi }G_4\right]H^4(Y;),$$
(47)
one sees that the needed integrality conditions follow from the charge-lattice unit conditions

$$\frac{\left(2\pi \right)^2}{\kappa }=\left(T_3\right)^3\text{and}2\pi T_6=\left(T_3\right)^2,$$
(48)
which follow from (29,33).

Independence from variations of $`W_7`$, $`V_7`$, $`U_4`$ and $`U_3`$ is more complicated because some of these surfaces are subsurfaces of others that can be varied, and so are carried along. Thus, varying $`Y`$ and $`W_7`$ by closed surfaces $`Z`$ and $`D_8`$, one induces variations

$`Y^{}=Y+Z`$ $``$ $`V_7^{}=V_7+Z_8`$ (49)
$`W_7^{}=W_7+D_8`$ $``$ $`U_3^{}=U_3+D_4.`$ (50)
At the same time, one should also consider the variations

$`V_8^{}`$ $`=`$ $`V_8+T_8`$ (51)
$`U_4^{}`$ $`=`$ $`U_4+T_4.`$ (52)
The shift in the action (5) under these Dirac surface variations is

$$\frac{T_6}{2}_{D_8T_8Z_8}G_4G_4+2\pi _{T_8}\mathrm{\Omega }_8+T_3_{T_4D_4}G_4+\frac{T_3}{2}_{(D_4,D_4)}(G_4,h_3).$$
(53)
Using again the flux integrality condition (47), one finds that this shift is in $`2\pi `$ provided one has the boundary conditions for the integration domains

$$\left(D_8+T_8+Z_8\right)=T_8=\left(T_4D_4\right)=0,$$
(54)
which follow from the Dirac surface relative homology relations (42). In addition, one needs to require that

$$\left[\mathrm{\Omega }_8\right]H^8(Y;).$$
(55)
This condition is known to be required also by membrane tadpole cancellation requirements .

## 7 Lattice of Large Gauge Transformations

Finally, we return to the large gauge transformations. Since the various Dirac and DSZ quantization conditions restrict the M–theory charges to lie on the charge lattice determined by (29,32,33), the large gauge transformations are also restricted. From the flux integrality condition (47), it follows that gauge transformations relating the gauge fields on different hemispheres must also lie on an integral lattice,

$$\left[\frac{T_3}{2\pi }\mathrm{\Lambda }_3\right]H^3(Y;).$$
(56)
Similarly, the flux integrality condition

$$\left[\frac{T_3}{2\pi }(G_4,h_3)\right]H^4(Y,W_6;)$$
(57)
requires the gauge transformation integrality condition

$$\left[\frac{T_3}{2\pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }_3,\lambda _2)\right]H^3(Y,W_6;)$$
(58)
and for the 6-form transformations one likewise finds the requirement

$$\left[\frac{T_6}{2\pi }\mathrm{\Lambda }_6\right]H^6(Y;).$$
(59)
## Remembrance

The work of Ref.  on which this article is based was significantly aided by early penetrating discussions with Sonia Stanciu, who is sadly no longer with us. Her gentleness and her keen intelligence will be much missed.