invariant theory for quiverssites.lsa.umich.edu/.../2018/09/auslanderslides.pdf · invariant theory...
TRANSCRIPT
Invariant Theory for Quivers
Harm Derksen
University of Michigan
Maurice Auslander Distinguished Lecturesand International Conference
April 29, 2017
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Invariant Theory
K = K algebraically closed fieldG reductive algebraic group (e.g., GLn, semi-simple, finite,. . . )V n-dimensional representation of GK [V ] ring of polynomial functions on V
G acts on K [V ]: for g ∈ G , f ∈ K [V ], g · f defined by
(g · f )(v) = f (g−1v), v ∈ V
Definition
K [V ]G = {f ∈ K [V ] | ∀g ∈ G g · f = f } invariant ring
Theorem (Hilbert 1890, Nagata 1963/Haboush 1975)
K [V ]G is a finitely generated K -algebra
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Invariant Theory
K = K algebraically closed fieldG reductive algebraic group (e.g., GLn, semi-simple, finite,. . . )V n-dimensional representation of GK [V ] ring of polynomial functions on V
G acts on K [V ]: for g ∈ G , f ∈ K [V ], g · f defined by
(g · f )(v) = f (g−1v), v ∈ V
Definition
K [V ]G = {f ∈ K [V ] | ∀g ∈ G g · f = f } invariant ring
Theorem (Hilbert 1890, Nagata 1963/Haboush 1975)
K [V ]G is a finitely generated K -algebra
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Invariant Theory
K = K algebraically closed fieldG reductive algebraic group (e.g., GLn, semi-simple, finite,. . . )V n-dimensional representation of GK [V ] ring of polynomial functions on V
G acts on K [V ]: for g ∈ G , f ∈ K [V ], g · f defined by
(g · f )(v) = f (g−1v), v ∈ V
Definition
K [V ]G = {f ∈ K [V ] | ∀g ∈ G g · f = f } invariant ring
Theorem (Hilbert 1890, Nagata 1963/Haboush 1975)
K [V ]G is a finitely generated K -algebra
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Invariant Theory
K = K algebraically closed fieldG reductive algebraic group (e.g., GLn, semi-simple, finite,. . . )V n-dimensional representation of GK [V ] ring of polynomial functions on V
G acts on K [V ]: for g ∈ G , f ∈ K [V ], g · f defined by
(g · f )(v) = f (g−1v), v ∈ V
Definition
K [V ]G = {f ∈ K [V ] | ∀g ∈ G g · f = f } invariant ring
Theorem (Hilbert 1890, Nagata 1963/Haboush 1975)
K [V ]G is a finitely generated K -algebra
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Example
Example
G = Sn acts on V = Kn by permutationsG acts on K [V ] = K [x1, . . . , xn] by permuting variables
K [V ]Sn = K [e1, e2, . . . , en] where
ek =∑
i1<i2<···<ik
xi1xi2 · · · xik
is k-th elementary symmetric function
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Example
Example
G = Sn acts on V = Kn by permutationsG acts on K [V ] = K [x1, . . . , xn] by permuting variablesK [V ]Sn = K [e1, e2, . . . , en] where
ek =∑
i1<i2<···<ik
xi1xi2 · · · xik
is k-th elementary symmetric function
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
inclusion K [V ]G ↪→ K [V ] corresponds to a quotient
π : V → V //G
where V //G = SpecK [V ]G
Theorem
(a) π is surjective(b) for y ∈ V //G , π−1(y) contains exactly 1 closed orbit, say G · z(c) z lies in the close of each orbit in π−1(y)
Definition (Hilbert’s Nullcone)
N = π−1π(0) is Hilbert’s nullconeN = {v ∈ V | f (v) = 0 for all nonconst. homogen. f ∈ K [V ]G}N = {v ∈ V | 0 ∈ G · v}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
inclusion K [V ]G ↪→ K [V ] corresponds to a quotient
π : V → V //G
where V //G = SpecK [V ]G
Theorem
(a) π is surjective(b) for y ∈ V //G , π−1(y) contains exactly 1 closed orbit, say G · z(c) z lies in the close of each orbit in π−1(y)
Definition (Hilbert’s Nullcone)
N = π−1π(0) is Hilbert’s nullconeN = {v ∈ V | f (v) = 0 for all nonconst. homogen. f ∈ K [V ]G}N = {v ∈ V | 0 ∈ G · v}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
inclusion K [V ]G ↪→ K [V ] corresponds to a quotient
π : V → V //G
where V //G = SpecK [V ]G
Theorem
(a) π is surjective(b) for y ∈ V //G , π−1(y) contains exactly 1 closed orbit, say G · z(c) z lies in the close of each orbit in π−1(y)
Definition (Hilbert’s Nullcone)
N = π−1π(0) is Hilbert’s nullconeN = {v ∈ V | f (v) = 0 for all nonconst. homogen. f ∈ K [V ]G}N = {v ∈ V | 0 ∈ G · v}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Examples
Example
G = GL1 = K ? acts on V = K 3:
t · (x , y , z) = (tx , t3y , t−2z)
K [V ] = K [x , y , z ]
K [V ]G = K [x2z , xyz2, y2z3] ∼= K [a, b, c]/(b2 − ac)
π : K 3 → C := {(a, b, c) | b2 − ac}
N = {x = y = 0} ∪ {z = 0}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Examples
Example
G = GL1 = K ? acts on V = K 3:
t · (x , y , z) = (tx , t3y , t−2z)
K [V ] = K [x , y , z ]
K [V ]G = K [x2z , xyz2, y2z3] ∼= K [a, b, c]/(b2 − ac)
π : K 3 → C := {(a, b, c) | b2 − ac}
N = {x = y = 0} ∪ {z = 0}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Examples
Example
G = GL1 = K ? acts on V = K 3:
t · (x , y , z) = (tx , t3y , t−2z)
K [V ] = K [x , y , z ]
K [V ]G = K [x2z , xyz2, y2z3] ∼= K [a, b, c]/(b2 − ac)
π : K 3 → C := {(a, b, c) | b2 − ac}
N = {x = y = 0} ∪ {z = 0}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Examples
Example
G = GL1 = K ? acts on V = K 3:
t · (x , y , z) = (tx , t3y , t−2z)
K [V ] = K [x , y , z ]
K [V ]G = K [x2z , xyz2, y2z3] ∼= K [a, b, c]/(b2 − ac)
π : K 3 → C := {(a, b, c) | b2 − ac}
N = {x = y = 0} ∪ {z = 0}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
Construction of quotient of P(V ) with respect to G :
Definition
(a) v ∈ V is semistable if and only if 0 6∈ G · v(b) v ∈ V is stable if and only if v is semistable and
dimG · v = dimG
V ss semistable pointsV s stable points, open subset of V ss
P(V s) ⊆ P(V ss) ⊆ P(V )
Theorem
(a) π : P(V ss)→ P(V //G ) is a “good” quotient
(b) restriction to P(V s) is geometric quotient (orbits=fibers)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
Construction of quotient of P(V ) with respect to G :
Definition
(a) v ∈ V is semistable if and only if 0 6∈ G · v(b) v ∈ V is stable if and only if v is semistable and
dimG · v = dimG
V ss semistable pointsV s stable points, open subset of V ss
P(V s) ⊆ P(V ss) ⊆ P(V )
Theorem
(a) π : P(V ss)→ P(V //G ) is a “good” quotient
(b) restriction to P(V s) is geometric quotient (orbits=fibers)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Geometric Invariant Theory
Construction of quotient of P(V ) with respect to G :
Definition
(a) v ∈ V is semistable if and only if 0 6∈ G · v(b) v ∈ V is stable if and only if v is semistable and
dimG · v = dimG
V ss semistable pointsV s stable points, open subset of V ss
P(V s) ⊆ P(V ss) ⊆ P(V )
Theorem
(a) π : P(V ss)→ P(V //G ) is a “good” quotient
(b) restriction to P(V s) is geometric quotient (orbits=fibers)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Constructive Invariant Theory
char(K ) = 0r = dimK [V ]G ≤ dimV = n
Theorem (Popov 1981)
if N ⊆ V is the zero set of f1, f2, . . . , fs ∈ K [V ]G homogeneous ofdegree d , then K [V ]G generated by invariants of degree ≤ rd .
Theorem (D. 2001)
if N ⊆ V is the zero set of f1, f2, . . . , fs ∈ K [V ]G homogeneous ofdegree ≤ d , then K [V ]G generated by invariants of degree≤ max{d , 38 rd
2}.
(improves bound r lcm(1, 2, . . . , d) of Popov.)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Constructive Invariant Theory
char(K ) = 0r = dimK [V ]G ≤ dimV = n
Theorem (Popov 1981)
if N ⊆ V is the zero set of f1, f2, . . . , fs ∈ K [V ]G homogeneous ofdegree d , then K [V ]G generated by invariants of degree ≤ rd .
Theorem (D. 2001)
if N ⊆ V is the zero set of f1, f2, . . . , fs ∈ K [V ]G homogeneous ofdegree ≤ d , then K [V ]G generated by invariants of degree≤ max{d , 38 rd
2}.
(improves bound r lcm(1, 2, . . . , d) of Popov.)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Quiver Representations
Definition
A quiver is a 4-tuple Q = (Q0,Q1, h, t), whereQ0, finite set of verticesQ1, finite set of arrowsh, t : Q1 → Q0
h(a) = ha head of arrow at(a) = ta tail of arrow a
Fix a field K
Definition
A quiver representation V (over K ) isfinite dimensional K -vector spaces V (x), x ∈ Q0, together withK -linear maps V (a) : V (ta)→ V (ha), a ∈ Q1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Quiver Representations
Definition
A quiver is a 4-tuple Q = (Q0,Q1, h, t), whereQ0, finite set of verticesQ1, finite set of arrowsh, t : Q1 → Q0
h(a) = ha head of arrow at(a) = ta tail of arrow a
Fix a field K
Definition
A quiver representation V (over K ) isfinite dimensional K -vector spaces V (x), x ∈ Q0, together withK -linear maps V (a) : V (ta)→ V (ha), a ∈ Q1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Representation Spaces
The dimension vector of a representation V is the function
dimV : x ∈ Q0 7→ dimV (x)
NQ0 is the set of dimension vectors
if V has dimension vector α ∈ NQ0 and we choose basis ofV (x) ∼= Kα(x), x ∈ Q0, then V (a) is α(ha)× α(ta) matrix fora ∈ Q1
We can view V as an element in the representation space
V = (V (a), a ∈ Q1) ∈ Repα(Q) :=∏a∈Q1
Hom(Kα(ta),Kα(ha))
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Representation Spaces
The dimension vector of a representation V is the function
dimV : x ∈ Q0 7→ dimV (x)
NQ0 is the set of dimension vectors
if V has dimension vector α ∈ NQ0 and we choose basis ofV (x) ∼= Kα(x), x ∈ Q0, then V (a) is α(ha)× α(ta) matrix fora ∈ Q1
We can view V as an element in the representation space
V = (V (a), a ∈ Q1) ∈ Repα(Q) :=∏a∈Q1
Hom(Kα(ta),Kα(ha))
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Representation Spaces
The dimension vector of a representation V is the function
dimV : x ∈ Q0 7→ dimV (x)
NQ0 is the set of dimension vectors
if V has dimension vector α ∈ NQ0 and we choose basis ofV (x) ∼= Kα(x), x ∈ Q0, then V (a) is α(ha)× α(ta) matrix fora ∈ Q1
We can view V as an element in the representation space
V = (V (a), a ∈ Q1) ∈ Repα(Q) :=∏a∈Q1
Hom(Kα(ta),Kα(ha))
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Loop Quivers
Definition
I(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]GLα invariant ring for quiver representations
Special case Q quiver with 1 vertex, m-loops, α = (p)Repα(Q) = Matp(K )m, GLα = GLp acts by conjugation
Theorem (Procesi)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by all
(A1,A2, . . . ,Am) 7→ Tr(Ai1Ai2 · · ·Aid )
Theorem (Razmyslov)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by invariants ofdegree ≤ n2
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Loop Quivers
Definition
I(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]GLα invariant ring for quiver representations
Special case Q quiver with 1 vertex, m-loops, α = (p)Repα(Q) = Matp(K )m, GLα = GLp acts by conjugation
Theorem (Procesi)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by all
(A1,A2, . . . ,Am) 7→ Tr(Ai1Ai2 · · ·Aid )
Theorem (Razmyslov)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by invariants ofdegree ≤ n2
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Loop Quivers
Definition
I(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]GLα invariant ring for quiver representations
Special case Q quiver with 1 vertex, m-loops, α = (p)Repα(Q) = Matp(K )m, GLα = GLp acts by conjugation
Theorem (Procesi)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by all
(A1,A2, . . . ,Am) 7→ Tr(Ai1Ai2 · · ·Aid )
Theorem (Razmyslov)
If char(K ) = 0, then K [Matmn,n]GLn is generated by invariants ofdegree ≤ n2
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Arbitrary Quivers
Q arbitary quiverif V representation, and p = akak−1 · · · a1 path, thenV (p) := V (ak)V (ak−1) · · ·V (a1)If p1, p2, . . . , pr paths (same head/tail), λ1, . . . , λr ∈ K , thenV (∑r
i=1 λipi ) :=∑r
i=1 λiV (pi )
Theorem (LeBruyn-Procesi 1990)
if char(K ) = 0, then I(Q, α) is generated by invariants of the formV 7→ Tr(V (p)) with p a cyclic path
so if Q has no oriented cycles, then I(Q, α) = K
Theorem (Donkin 1994)
I(Q, α) is generated by the coefficients of the characteristicpolynomial of all V (p) with p a cyclic path
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Arbitrary Quivers
Q arbitary quiverif V representation, and p = akak−1 · · · a1 path, thenV (p) := V (ak)V (ak−1) · · ·V (a1)If p1, p2, . . . , pr paths (same head/tail), λ1, . . . , λr ∈ K , thenV (∑r
i=1 λipi ) :=∑r
i=1 λiV (pi )
Theorem (LeBruyn-Procesi 1990)
if char(K ) = 0, then I(Q, α) is generated by invariants of the formV 7→ Tr(V (p)) with p a cyclic path
so if Q has no oriented cycles, then I(Q, α) = K
Theorem (Donkin 1994)
I(Q, α) is generated by the coefficients of the characteristicpolynomial of all V (p) with p a cyclic path
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Rings of Invariants for Arbitrary Quivers
Q arbitary quiverif V representation, and p = akak−1 · · · a1 path, thenV (p) := V (ak)V (ak−1) · · ·V (a1)If p1, p2, . . . , pr paths (same head/tail), λ1, . . . , λr ∈ K , thenV (∑r
i=1 λipi ) :=∑r
i=1 λiV (pi )
Theorem (LeBruyn-Procesi 1990)
if char(K ) = 0, then I(Q, α) is generated by invariants of the formV 7→ Tr(V (p)) with p a cyclic path
so if Q has no oriented cycles, then I(Q, α) = K
Theorem (Donkin 1994)
I(Q, α) is generated by the coefficients of the characteristicpolynomial of all V (p) with p a cyclic path
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants
Assume K is infiniteFor σ ∈ ZQ0 we define a multiplicative character χσ : GLα → K ?
by
(A(x), x ∈ Q0) 7→∏x∈Q0
A(x)σ(x)
Definition
The space of semi-invariants of weight σ is
SI(Q, α)σ = {f ∈ K [Repα(Q)] | ∀A ∈ GLα A · f = χσ(A)}
The ring of semi-invariants is
SI(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]SLα =⊕σ
SI(Q, α)σ
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants
Assume K is infiniteFor σ ∈ ZQ0 we define a multiplicative character χσ : GLα → K ?
by
(A(x), x ∈ Q0) 7→∏x∈Q0
A(x)σ(x)
Definition
The space of semi-invariants of weight σ is
SI(Q, α)σ = {f ∈ K [Repα(Q)] | ∀A ∈ GLα A · f = χσ(A)}
The ring of semi-invariants is
SI(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]SLα =⊕σ
SI(Q, α)σ
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants
Assume K is infiniteFor σ ∈ ZQ0 we define a multiplicative character χσ : GLα → K ?
by
(A(x), x ∈ Q0) 7→∏x∈Q0
A(x)σ(x)
Definition
The space of semi-invariants of weight σ is
SI(Q, α)σ = {f ∈ K [Repα(Q)] | ∀A ∈ GLα A · f = χσ(A)}
The ring of semi-invariants is
SI(Q, α) = K [Repα(Q)]SLα =⊕σ
SI(Q, α)σ
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
GIT for quivers
Definition
a representation V is σ-(semi)stable if (V , 1) ∈ Repα(Q)⊕ χσ isGLα-(semi)stable
Repα(Q)ssσ (resp. Repα(Q)s) set of σ-semi-stable (resp. σ-stable)points
Theorem (King 1994)
(a) V is σ-semistable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) ≤ 0for every subrepresentation W of V
(b) V is σ-stable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) < 0 forevery proper subrepresentation W of V
(c) π : Repα(Q)ssσ → Proj(⊕
n SI(Q, α)nσ) is “good” quotient
(d) restriction to Repα(Q)s is geometric quotient
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
GIT for quivers
Definition
a representation V is σ-(semi)stable if (V , 1) ∈ Repα(Q)⊕ χσ isGLα-(semi)stable
Repα(Q)ssσ (resp. Repα(Q)s) set of σ-semi-stable (resp. σ-stable)points
Theorem (King 1994)
(a) V is σ-semistable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) ≤ 0for every subrepresentation W of V
(b) V is σ-stable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) < 0 forevery proper subrepresentation W of V
(c) π : Repα(Q)ssσ → Proj(⊕
n SI(Q, α)nσ) is “good” quotient
(d) restriction to Repα(Q)s is geometric quotient
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
GIT for quivers
Definition
a representation V is σ-(semi)stable if (V , 1) ∈ Repα(Q)⊕ χσ isGLα-(semi)stable
Repα(Q)ssσ (resp. Repα(Q)s) set of σ-semi-stable (resp. σ-stable)points
Theorem (King 1994)
(a) V is σ-semistable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) ≤ 0for every subrepresentation W of V
(b) V is σ-stable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) < 0 forevery proper subrepresentation W of V
(c) π : Repα(Q)ssσ → Proj(⊕
n SI(Q, α)nσ) is “good” quotient
(d) restriction to Repα(Q)s is geometric quotient
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
GIT for quivers
Definition
a representation V is σ-(semi)stable if (V , 1) ∈ Repα(Q)⊕ χσ isGLα-(semi)stable
Repα(Q)ssσ (resp. Repα(Q)s) set of σ-semi-stable (resp. σ-stable)points
Theorem (King 1994)
(a) V is σ-semistable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) ≤ 0for every subrepresentation W of V
(b) V is σ-stable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) < 0 forevery proper subrepresentation W of V
(c) π : Repα(Q)ssσ → Proj(⊕
n SI(Q, α)nσ) is “good” quotient
(d) restriction to Repα(Q)s is geometric quotient
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
GIT for quivers
Definition
a representation V is σ-(semi)stable if (V , 1) ∈ Repα(Q)⊕ χσ isGLα-(semi)stable
Repα(Q)ssσ (resp. Repα(Q)s) set of σ-semi-stable (resp. σ-stable)points
Theorem (King 1994)
(a) V is σ-semistable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) ≤ 0for every subrepresentation W of V
(b) V is σ-stable if and only if σ(α) = 0 and σ(dimW ) < 0 forevery proper subrepresentation W of V
(c) π : Repα(Q)ssσ → Proj(⊕
n SI(Q, α)nσ) is “good” quotient
(d) restriction to Repα(Q)s is geometric quotient
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
Definition (Euler/Ringel Form)
for α, β dimension vectors
〈α, β〉 =∑x∈Q0
α(x)β(x)−∑a∈Q1
α(ta)β(ha)
Definition
if V ∈ Repα(Q), W ∈ Repβ(Q), define
dVW :
⊕x∈Q0
HomK (V (x),W (x))→⊕a∈Q1
HomK (V (ta),W (ha))
by(φ(x), x ∈ Q0) 7→ (φ(ha)V (a)−W (a)φ(ta), a ∈ Q1)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
Definition (Euler/Ringel Form)
for α, β dimension vectors
〈α, β〉 =∑x∈Q0
α(x)β(x)−∑a∈Q1
α(ta)β(ha)
Definition
if V ∈ Repα(Q), W ∈ Repβ(Q), define
dVW :
⊕x∈Q0
HomK (V (x),W (x))→⊕a∈Q1
HomK (V (ta),W (ha))
by(φ(x), x ∈ Q0) 7→ (φ(ha)V (a)−W (a)φ(ta), a ∈ Q1)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
suppose that 〈α, β〉 = 0dVW is a square matrix
Definition (Schofield 1991)
c(V ,W ) = cV (W ) = cV (W ) = det dVW
ker dVW = HomQ(V ,W ), coker dV
W = Ext1Q(V ,W ), so
c(V ,W ) = 0⇔ HomQ(V ,W ) = 0⇔ Ext1Q(V ,W ) = 0
Theorem (Schofield 1991)
cV ∈ SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉cW ∈ SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
suppose that 〈α, β〉 = 0dVW is a square matrix
Definition (Schofield 1991)
c(V ,W ) = cV (W ) = cV (W ) = det dVW
ker dVW = HomQ(V ,W ), coker dV
W = Ext1Q(V ,W ), so
c(V ,W ) = 0⇔ HomQ(V ,W ) = 0⇔ Ext1Q(V ,W ) = 0
Theorem (Schofield 1991)
cV ∈ SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉cW ∈ SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
suppose that 〈α, β〉 = 0dVW is a square matrix
Definition (Schofield 1991)
c(V ,W ) = cV (W ) = cV (W ) = det dVW
ker dVW = HomQ(V ,W ), coker dV
W = Ext1Q(V ,W ), so
c(V ,W ) = 0⇔ HomQ(V ,W ) = 0⇔ Ext1Q(V ,W ) = 0
Theorem (Schofield 1991)
cV ∈ SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉cW ∈ SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β) spanned by Schofield semi-invariants cV whereV ∈ Repα(Q) and α a dimension vector with 〈α, β〉 = 0
(a similar statement is true for cW ’s)
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉 and SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉 are dual and have same dimension
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β) spanned by Schofield semi-invariants cV whereV ∈ Repα(Q) and α a dimension vector with 〈α, β〉 = 0
(a similar statement is true for cW ’s)
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉 and SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉 are dual and have same dimension
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Schofield Semi-Invariants
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β) spanned by Schofield semi-invariants cV whereV ∈ Repα(Q) and α a dimension vector with 〈α, β〉 = 0
(a similar statement is true for cW ’s)
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000)
SI(Q, β)〈α,·〉 and SI(Q, α)−〈·,β〉 are dual and have same dimension
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for Semi-Invariants, etc.
char(K ) = 0
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
dim SI(Q, α)nσ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000, Generalized SaturationConjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 0 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2011, Generalized Fulton Conjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 1 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2016, gen. King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 2 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for Semi-Invariants, etc.
char(K ) = 0
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
dim SI(Q, α)nσ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000, Generalized SaturationConjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 0 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2011, Generalized Fulton Conjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 1 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2016, gen. King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 2 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for Semi-Invariants, etc.
char(K ) = 0
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
dim SI(Q, α)nσ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000, Generalized SaturationConjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 0 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2011, Generalized Fulton Conjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 1 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2016, gen. King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 2 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for Semi-Invariants, etc.
char(K ) = 0
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
dim SI(Q, α)nσ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2000, Generalized SaturationConjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 0 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2011, Generalized Fulton Conjecture)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 1 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2016, gen. King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if dim SI(Q, α)σ = 2 then dim SI(Q, α)nσ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Application to Littlewood-Richardson Coefficients
irreducible representations of GLp are Vλ where λ is a partition(Young diagram)
cνλ,µ = dim Hom(Vµ,Vλ ⊗ Vµ)GLp
is multiplicity of Vν in Vλ ⊗ Vµ.
Let Q = Tp,p,p:
◦ // · · · // ◦
��◦ // · · · // ◦ // ◦
◦ // · · · // ◦
??
Then cνλ,µ = dim SI(Q, α)σ for some α, σ anddim SI(Q, α)nσ = cνnλ,nµ
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Application to Littlewood-Richardson Coefficients
irreducible representations of GLp are Vλ where λ is a partition(Young diagram)
cνλ,µ = dim Hom(Vµ,Vλ ⊗ Vµ)GLp
is multiplicity of Vν in Vλ ⊗ Vµ. Let Q = Tp,p,p:
◦ // · · · // ◦
��◦ // · · · // ◦ // ◦
◦ // · · · // ◦
??
Then cνλ,µ = dim SI(Q, α)σ for some α, σ anddim SI(Q, α)nσ = cνnλ,nµ
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for LR-Coefficients, etc.
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
cνnλ,nµ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (Knutson-Tao 1999, Klyachko Saturation Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 0 then cnνnλ,nµ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Knutson-Tao-Woodward 2004, Fulton Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 1 then cnνnλ,nµ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2015, King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if cνλ,µ = 2 then cnνnλ,nµ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for LR-Coefficients, etc.
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
cνnλ,nµ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (Knutson-Tao 1999, Klyachko Saturation Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 0 then cnνnλ,nµ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Knutson-Tao-Woodward 2004, Fulton Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 1 then cnνnλ,nµ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2015, King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if cνλ,µ = 2 then cnνnλ,nµ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for LR-Coefficients, etc.
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
cνnλ,nµ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (Knutson-Tao 1999, Klyachko Saturation Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 0 then cnνnλ,nµ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Knutson-Tao-Woodward 2004, Fulton Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 1 then cnνnλ,nµ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2015, King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if cνλ,µ = 2 then cnνnλ,nµ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Saturation for LR-Coefficients, etc.
Theorem (D.-Weyman 2002)
cνnλ,nµ is a polynomial in n
Theorem (Knutson-Tao 1999, Klyachko Saturation Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 0 then cnνnλ,nµ = 0 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Knutson-Tao-Woodward 2004, Fulton Conjecture)
if cνλ,µ = 1 then cnνnλ,nµ = 1 for all n ≥ 1
Theorem (Sherman 2015, King-Tollu-Toumazet conj.)
if cνλ,µ = 2 then cnνnλ,nµ = n + 1 for all n ≥ 1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants as determinants
suppose that x1, x2, . . . , xr , y1, y2, . . . , ys ∈ Q0 (possible repetition)pi ,j linear combination of paths from xi to yj , andα is a dimension vector with
∑ri=1 α(xi ) =
∑sj=1 α(yj), then
V ∈ Repα(Q) 7→ det
V (p1,1) · · · V (ps,r )...
...V (ps,1) · · · V (ps,r )
is a semi-invariant of weight σ =
∑ri=1 1xi −
∑sj=1 1yj
Theorem (Domokos-Zubkov 2001)
SI(Q, α) is spanned by such semi-invariants
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants as determinants
suppose that x1, x2, . . . , xr , y1, y2, . . . , ys ∈ Q0 (possible repetition)pi ,j linear combination of paths from xi to yj , andα is a dimension vector with
∑ri=1 α(xi ) =
∑sj=1 α(yj), then
V ∈ Repα(Q) 7→ det
V (p1,1) · · · V (ps,r )...
...V (ps,1) · · · V (ps,r )
is a semi-invariant of weight σ =
∑ri=1 1xi −
∑sj=1 1yj
Theorem (Domokos-Zubkov 2001)
SI(Q, α) is spanned by such semi-invariants
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants of Generalized Kronecker Quiver
Q quiver with two vertices, x1, x2, and m arrows from x1 to x2α = (n, n) and σ = (1,−1), then:
Repα(Q) = Matmn,nSL(α) = SLn×SLn acts by left-right multiplication
Definition
for T = (T1,T2, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d define
fT (A1, . . . ,Am) = det(∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti )
semi-invariant of weight (d ,−d) and degree dn
(⊗ is Kronecker product for matrices)
Domokos-Zubkov Thm: fT ’s span SI(Q, α) = K [Matmn,n]SLn ×SLn
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants of Generalized Kronecker Quiver
Q quiver with two vertices, x1, x2, and m arrows from x1 to x2α = (n, n) and σ = (1,−1), then:
Repα(Q) = Matmn,nSL(α) = SLn×SLn acts by left-right multiplication
Definition
for T = (T1,T2, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d define
fT (A1, . . . ,Am) = det(∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti )
semi-invariant of weight (d ,−d) and degree dn
(⊗ is Kronecker product for matrices)
Domokos-Zubkov Thm: fT ’s span SI(Q, α) = K [Matmn,n]SLn ×SLn
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Semi-Invariants of Generalized Kronecker Quiver
Q quiver with two vertices, x1, x2, and m arrows from x1 to x2α = (n, n) and σ = (1,−1), then:
Repα(Q) = Matmn,nSL(α) = SLn×SLn acts by left-right multiplication
Definition
for T = (T1,T2, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d define
fT (A1, . . . ,Am) = det(∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti )
semi-invariant of weight (d ,−d) and degree dn
(⊗ is Kronecker product for matrices)
Domokos-Zubkov Thm: fT ’s span SI(Q, α) = K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Degree Bounds for Matrix Invariants
Theorem (Ivanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree O(n816n2)
using general bounds for Nullcone [D. 2001]
Theorem (vanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degreeO(n4(n + 1)!2)
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, Visu Makam thesis 2018)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree < mn4
(we may replace mn4 by n6)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Degree Bounds for Matrix Invariants
Theorem (Ivanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree O(n816n2)
using general bounds for Nullcone [D. 2001]
Theorem (vanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degreeO(n4(n + 1)!2)
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, Visu Makam thesis 2018)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree < mn4
(we may replace mn4 by n6)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Degree Bounds for Matrix Invariants
Theorem (Ivanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree O(n816n2)
using general bounds for Nullcone [D. 2001]
Theorem (vanyos-Qiao-Subrahmanyan)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degreeO(n4(n + 1)!2)
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, Visu Makam thesis 2018)
K [Matmn,n]SLn × SLn generated by invariants of degree < mn4
(we may replace mn4 by n6)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
About the Proof ...
King’s criterion: A = (A1,A2, . . . ,Am) ∈ Matmn,n lies on thenullcone N (i.e., is not σ-semistable) if and only if there exists asubspaces W1,W2 of Kn such that
Ai (W1) ⊆W2
for all i , and dimW2 < dimW1
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, uses IQS regularity lemma)
A = (A1, . . . ,An) ∈ N if and only if fT (A) = 0 for allT ∈ Matmn−1,n−1
fT has degree (n − 1)n, so together with Popov’s bound (fromearlier) we see that the invariant ring is generated in degree≤ dim Matmn,n((n − 1)n) < mn4
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
About the Proof ...
King’s criterion: A = (A1,A2, . . . ,Am) ∈ Matmn,n lies on thenullcone N (i.e., is not σ-semistable) if and only if there exists asubspaces W1,W2 of Kn such that
Ai (W1) ⊆W2
for all i , and dimW2 < dimW1
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, uses IQS regularity lemma)
A = (A1, . . . ,An) ∈ N if and only if fT (A) = 0 for allT ∈ Matmn−1,n−1
fT has degree (n − 1)n, so together with Popov’s bound (fromearlier) we see that the invariant ring is generated in degree≤ dim Matmn,n((n − 1)n) < mn4
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
About the Proof ...
King’s criterion: A = (A1,A2, . . . ,Am) ∈ Matmn,n lies on thenullcone N (i.e., is not σ-semistable) if and only if there exists asubspaces W1,W2 of Kn such that
Ai (W1) ⊆W2
for all i , and dimW2 < dimW1
Theorem (D.-Makam 2017, uses IQS regularity lemma)
A = (A1, . . . ,An) ∈ N if and only if fT (A) = 0 for allT ∈ Matmn−1,n−1
fT has degree (n − 1)n, so together with Popov’s bound (fromearlier) we see that the invariant ring is generated in degree≤ dim Matmn,n((n − 1)n) < mn4
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Ivanyos, Qiao Subrahmanyan Regularity Lemma
Theorem (Ivanyos, Qiao, Subrahmanyan 2016)
For given A1, . . . ,Am ∈ Matmn,n and generic T1, . . . ,Tm ∈ Matmd ,dthe rank of
∑mi=1 Ai ⊗ Ti is divisible by d .
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Example
Example: n = m = 3 and take:
A1 =
0 1 0−1 0 00 0 0
,A2 =
0 0 10 0 0−1 0 0
,A3 =
0 0 00 0 10 −1 0
If T = (t1, t2, t3) ∈ Mat31,1, then
fT (A) = det
0 t1 t2−t1 0 t3−t2 −t3 0
= 0
because matrix is skew-symmetric of odd size
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Example
Example: n = m = 3 and take:
A1 =
0 1 0−1 0 00 0 0
,A2 =
0 0 10 0 0−1 0 0
,A3 =
0 0 00 0 10 −1 0
If T = (t1, t2, t3) ∈ Mat31,1, then
fT (A) = det
0 t1 t2−t1 0 t3−t2 −t3 0
= 0
because matrix is skew-symmetric of odd size
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
However, if T = (T1,T2,T3) then
T1 ⊗ A1 + T2 ⊗ A2 + T3 ⊗ A3 =
0 T1 T2
−T1 0 T3
−T2 −T3 0
can be invertible, for example if we take T1 = I , then 0 I T2
−I 0 T3
−T2 −T3 0
∼ 0 I T2
−I 0 T3
−0 0 T3T2 − T2T3
now take
T2 =
(0 10 0
)and T3 =
(0 01 0
)so A = (A1,A2,A3) is semistable
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Theorem (D.-Makam)
There exists A = (A1,A2, . . . ,Ad+1) ∈ Matd+1d2−1,d2−1 with
(a) for all e ≤ d and all T ∈ Matd+1e,e fT (A) = 0
(b) for some T ∈ Matd+1d ,d fT (A) 6= 0
For d = 3, take A = (A1,A2,A3,A4) ∈ Mat48,8 such that
4∑i=1
Ai ⊗ Ti =
T1 T3
−T2 T1 T3
−T2 T3
T1 T4
−T2 T1 T4
−T2 T4
T1 T2
−T2 T2 T1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Theorem (D.-Makam)
There exists A = (A1,A2, . . . ,Ad+1) ∈ Matd+1d2−1,d2−1 with
(a) for all e ≤ d and all T ∈ Matd+1e,e fT (A) = 0
(b) for some T ∈ Matd+1d ,d fT (A) 6= 0
For d = 3, take A = (A1,A2,A3,A4) ∈ Mat48,8 such that
4∑i=1
Ai ⊗ Ti =
T1 T3
−T2 T1 T3
−T2 T3
T1 T4
−T2 T1 T4
−T2 T4
T1 T2
−T2 T2 T1
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Commutative Rank
K infinite fieldif A = (A1, . . . ,Am) ∈ Matmn,n then A(t) = t1A1 + · · ·+ tmAm
called linear matrixA(t) is n × n matrix whose entries are linear in t1, . . . , tm
Definition
commutative rank of A(t) is
cr(A(t)) = max{rankA(t1, . . . , tm) | t1, . . . , tm ∈ K}
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Non-Commutative Rank
S = K (< t1, . . . , tm>) is free skew-field generated by t1, . . . , tmmay view A(t) as matrix with entries in K (< t1, . . . , tm>)
Definition
The noncommutative rank ncrk(A(t)) of A(t) is r , where r is therank of the image of A(t) : Sn → Sn as a free S-module
If T = (T1, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d then A(T ) =∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti isobtained by replacing ti by matrix Ti in A(t)
Theorem
ncrkA(t) = max{rank(A(T ))/d | d ≥ 1,T ∈ Matmd ,d}.
(this is an integer by regularity lemma)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Non-Commutative Rank
S = K (< t1, . . . , tm>) is free skew-field generated by t1, . . . , tmmay view A(t) as matrix with entries in K (< t1, . . . , tm>)
Definition
The noncommutative rank ncrk(A(t)) of A(t) is r , where r is therank of the image of A(t) : Sn → Sn as a free S-module
If T = (T1, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d then A(T ) =∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti isobtained by replacing ti by matrix Ti in A(t)
Theorem
ncrkA(t) = max{rank(A(T ))/d | d ≥ 1,T ∈ Matmd ,d}.
(this is an integer by regularity lemma)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Non-Commutative Rank
S = K (< t1, . . . , tm>) is free skew-field generated by t1, . . . , tmmay view A(t) as matrix with entries in K (< t1, . . . , tm>)
Definition
The noncommutative rank ncrk(A(t)) of A(t) is r , where r is therank of the image of A(t) : Sn → Sn as a free S-module
If T = (T1, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d then A(T ) =∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti isobtained by replacing ti by matrix Ti in A(t)
Theorem
ncrkA(t) = max{rank(A(T ))/d | d ≥ 1,T ∈ Matmd ,d}.
(this is an integer by regularity lemma)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Non-Commutative Rank
S = K (< t1, . . . , tm>) is free skew-field generated by t1, . . . , tmmay view A(t) as matrix with entries in K (< t1, . . . , tm>)
Definition
The noncommutative rank ncrk(A(t)) of A(t) is r , where r is therank of the image of A(t) : Sn → Sn as a free S-module
If T = (T1, . . . ,Tm) ∈ Matmd ,d then A(T ) =∑m
i=1 Ai ⊗ Ti isobtained by replacing ti by matrix Ti in A(t)
Theorem
ncrkA(t) = max{rank(A(T ))/d | d ≥ 1,T ∈ Matmd ,d}.
(this is an integer by regularity lemma)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Inequalities for Comm. and Non-Comm. Rank
Clearly, crk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(A(t)) We have seen that
A(t) =
0 t1 t2−t1 0 t3−t2 −t3 0
has commutative rank 2 and non-commutative rank 3
How much can discrepancy between commutative andnon-commutative rank be?
Theorem (Flanders)
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ 2 crk(A(t)).
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Inequalities for Comm. and Non-Comm. Rank
Clearly, crk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(A(t)) We have seen that
A(t) =
0 t1 t2−t1 0 t3−t2 −t3 0
has commutative rank 2 and non-commutative rank 3
How much can discrepancy between commutative andnon-commutative rank be?
Theorem (Flanders)
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ 2 crk(A(t)).
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Inequalities for Comm. and Non-Comm. Rank
Clearly, crk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(A(t)) We have seen that
A(t) =
0 t1 t2−t1 0 t3−t2 −t3 0
has commutative rank 2 and non-commutative rank 3
How much can discrepancy between commutative andnon-commutative rank be?
Theorem (Flanders)
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ 2 crk(A(t)).
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Proof of Flander’s Theorem
Let r = crk(A(t))
For some s ∈ Km, r = rankA(s)without loss of generality we may assume that
A(s) =
(Ir 0
0 0
).
Then we have
A(t) =
(B(t) C (t)
D(t) 0
).
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(B(t) C (t)) + ncrk(D(t)) ≤ r + r = 2r .
(B(t) and C (t) have r rows, D(t) has r columns)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Proof of Flander’s Theorem
Let r = crk(A(t))For some s ∈ Km, r = rankA(s)
without loss of generality we may assume that
A(s) =
(Ir 0
0 0
).
Then we have
A(t) =
(B(t) C (t)
D(t) 0
).
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(B(t) C (t)) + ncrk(D(t)) ≤ r + r = 2r .
(B(t) and C (t) have r rows, D(t) has r columns)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Proof of Flander’s Theorem
Let r = crk(A(t))For some s ∈ Km, r = rankA(s)without loss of generality we may assume that
A(s) =
(Ir 0
0 0
).
Then we have
A(t) =
(B(t) C (t)
D(t) 0
).
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(B(t) C (t)) + ncrk(D(t)) ≤ r + r = 2r .
(B(t) and C (t) have r rows, D(t) has r columns)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Proof of Flander’s Theorem
Let r = crk(A(t))For some s ∈ Km, r = rankA(s)without loss of generality we may assume that
A(s) =
(Ir 0
0 0
).
Then we have
A(t) =
(B(t) C (t)
D(t) 0
).
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(B(t) C (t)) + ncrk(D(t)) ≤ r + r = 2r .
(B(t) and C (t) have r rows, D(t) has r columns)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Proof of Flander’s Theorem
Let r = crk(A(t))For some s ∈ Km, r = rankA(s)without loss of generality we may assume that
A(s) =
(Ir 0
0 0
).
Then we have
A(t) =
(B(t) C (t)
D(t) 0
).
ncrk(A(t)) ≤ ncrk(B(t) C (t)) + ncrk(D(t)) ≤ r + r = 2r .
(B(t) and C (t) have r rows, D(t) has r columns)
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Theorem (D.-Makam 2016)
ncrk(A(t)) < 2 crk(A(t)).
(strict inequality)
this inequality is sharp, i.e., we can get arbitrarily close:
Let V be avector space of dimension 2p + 1 and for t ∈ V , defineA(t) :
∧p V →∧p+1 V by
A(t)(u) = u ∧ t
then crk(A(t)) =(2pp
)and ncrk(A(t)) =
(2p+1p
)and
ncrk(A(t))/ crk(A(t)) = 2p+1p+1 → 2 as p →∞
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Theorem (D.-Makam 2016)
ncrk(A(t)) < 2 crk(A(t)).
(strict inequality)
this inequality is sharp, i.e., we can get arbitrarily close:Let V be avector space of dimension 2p + 1 and for t ∈ V , defineA(t) :
∧p V →∧p+1 V by
A(t)(u) = u ∧ t
then crk(A(t)) =(2pp
)and ncrk(A(t)) =
(2p+1p
)and
ncrk(A(t))/ crk(A(t)) = 2p+1p+1 → 2 as p →∞
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers
Theorem (D.-Makam 2016)
ncrk(A(t)) < 2 crk(A(t)).
(strict inequality)
this inequality is sharp, i.e., we can get arbitrarily close:Let V be avector space of dimension 2p + 1 and for t ∈ V , defineA(t) :
∧p V →∧p+1 V by
A(t)(u) = u ∧ t
then crk(A(t)) =(2pp
)and ncrk(A(t)) =
(2p+1p
)and
ncrk(A(t))/ crk(A(t)) = 2p+1p+1 → 2 as p →∞
Harm Derksen Invariant Theory for Quivers