Baxterization for the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation
Abstract.
The Baxterization process for the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation is studied. We introduce the local dynamical Hecke ,Temperley–Lieb and Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operators, then by inserting spectral parameters, from each representation of these operators, we get dynamical R matrix under some conditions. As applications, we reformulate trigonometric degeneration of elliptical quantum group representations and also get dynamical R matrices for critical ADE integrable lattice models. Through Baxterization, we construct some one dimensional integrable systems that are dynamical version of the Heisenberg spin chain.
1. Introduction
In 1990, Jones summarized and proposed the Baxterization procedure in [31] when he discussed the relation between Yang-Baxter equation (1.1) and the braid relation (1.2)
(1.1) |
the idea as he wrote:”take a knot invariant, turn it into a coherent sequence of braid group representations, and then Baxterize (if possible) by inserting a spectral parameter so that YBE is satisfied ….”. Jones then gave two universal Baxterization examples, suppose that satisfies the braid relations,
(1.2a) | |||
(1.2b) |
- (1)
- (2)
We want to apply the similar ideas to study the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation and try to have more understanding of the construction of its solutions. The dynamical Yang–Baxter equation was initially considered by Gervais and Neveu in the study of Liouville theory [28]. And later Felder in [20, 21] rediscovered this equation in the study of quantization of Knizhnik–Zamolodchikov–Bernard equation and discovered the theory of elliptic quantum group and elliptic R matrix. Later the equations were widely studied in different aspects and have many connections to other fields, see for example [25, 23, 24, 16, 15, 17, 1, 6, 7, 41], see also the standard books [13, 12, 33].
We consider the generalized Baxterization process for the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation (1.4) based on the groupoid graded vector spaces language developed in [22]. The main difference to the classical situation is the appearance of the dynamical shifts .
(1.4) |
It is very natural to define the local dynamical Hecke operators, Temperley–Lieb and Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operators using dynamical notations. For example the local Temperley–Lieb operators associated to a map is defined by equations on a groupoid graded vector spaces
(1.5a) | |||
(1.5b) | |||
(1.5c) |
We provides four kinds of examples of representations for the local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operators
-
(1)
The representations 1.6 related to the classification of coxeter diagrams, see the work of Goodman–Harpe–Jones, chapter 1 of the book [29] and restricted quantum group [22]. Here are entries of the Perro–Frobenious eigenvector of the corresponding diagram , the groupoid structure is got from these diagrams.
(1.6) - (2)
-
(3)
Let , the hyperbolic representation of the dynamical Temperley-Lieb associated to is (1.8), the groupoid structure is the infinite type groupoid in figure 1.
(1.8) -
(4)
The trigonometric representation related to the trigometric degenerations of elliptic quantum group is (1.9), in rank 2 case, with and .
(1.9)
And following Jones cases, by inserting the spectral parameters, we consider three cases of Baxterization for the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation,
-
(1)
local dynamical Hecke case. Suppose that we have invertible operators defined on source fibers of groupoid graded vector space that satisfy
(1.10a) (1.10b) -
(2)
local dynamical Temperley–Lieb case. In this case, if we assume that
(1.11) where is local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operators associated to on , then we will get
Theorem 1.2 (also Theorem 2.24, see also [40]).
Suppose that satisfies the following equation
(1.12) then the operators satisfies the dynamical Yang-Baxter equation (1.4).
Cases ellpitic hyperbolic trigonometric ADE affine ADE Groupoid type infinite infinite infinite finite finite x (no) Table 1. Baxterization table Remark 1.3.
The elliptic case is not baxterizable in the sense of ansatz of the theorem 2.24.
-
(3)
local dynamical Birman–Murakami–Wenzl case.
Theorem 1.4 (same as Theorem 2.25).
Suppose that the operators are the local dynamical Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operator associated with on , and suppose that if there exists an arrow with . Then we define
and it satisfies the following two parameters dynamical Yang–Baxter equation
We provide several applications of the Baxterization procedure of the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation mentioned above.
- (1)
-
(2)
The second application is to derive some new dynamical matrices of two kinds of face type two dimensional integrable lattice models, critical ADE models (also called Pasquier models [37]) and Temperley–Lieb interaction models introduced by Owczarek and Baxter [35].
Critical ADE models are a series of face type lattice models introduced and studied mainly by Pasquier ([36, 37, 38]), these models are interesting as they are related to the unitary A-series of minimal models considered by Belavin–Polyakov–Zamolodchikov [4] and Friedan– Qiu–Shenker [27]. Temperley–Lieb interaction models are also very interesting models which unifies (meaning that partition functions are the same with carefully chosen parameters and boundary conditions) a series of interesting models including critical ADE models, six-vertex model, self-dual Potts model, critical hard hexagons model, see the nice lecture note of Pearce [40].
Interesting questions about these models are the ”quantum group” picture behind these models [9, 18, 19] and the possibility of application of algebraic Bethe ansatz [19]. With the dynamical matrices derived here and the algebraic Bethe ansatz of face type restricted model developed in [22], these questions can be answered.
-
(3)
The third application of Baxterization is to get a family of one dimensional integrable systems. For each representation of local dynamical Temperley–Lieb algebra that can be Baxterized, we can define a Hamiltonian that commute with a family of transfer matrices. They are some dynamical version of Heisenberg spin chains. For the restricted type A case, they were initial considered by Bazhanov–Reshetikhin [3], where they also calculate the eigenvalues and eigenvectors. For the unrestricted type A case, see the work of Etingof–Kirillov [11], Felder–Varchenko [26] and Etingof–Vachenko [14], where they studied the spin generalization of Ruijsenarrs models and MacDonald theory.
And also there is a recent breakthrough in the study of long range spin chains, Klabbers and Lamers in [32] introduced two new integrable systems which unifies Inozemtsev and partially isotropic Haldane–Shastry chains. And by taking the short range limit of their new integrable systems, they got some new dynamical spin chains, which is very similar to the Hamiltonian we get (2.70), one difference is we use the periodic boundary condition, they have a twist. Another is that in (2.70), we have conjugation of which is some translation operator, but the equation (18) of [32] is conjugated by some terms which contains nontrivial matrix.
1.1. Outline of the paper
The note is organized as follows, in the beginning of 2, we first recall the basic definition of graded vector space [22] and operators on it. Then in subsection 2.1 and 2.2, we define dynamical Hecke, Temperley–Lieb and Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operators, its local versions and the finite type representation of local Temperley–Lieb operators. In subsection 2.3, we discuss the relation between the local dynamical operators and the usual operators. In subsection 2.4, we discuss the Baxterization of the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation. In subsection 2.5, we provides the unrestricted examples of local Temperley–Lieb operators and its Baxterization. In subsection 2.6, we consider the Baxterization of restricted cases examples including ADE type and affine ADE type. Then in subsection 2.7, we discuss the transfer matrix and hamiltonian spin chains.
Acknowledgment The author would like to thank Anton Alekseev for encouragement and support, Giovanni Felder for mentioning the reference [39] and Rinat Kashaev, Rob Klabbers and Jules Lamers for interesting discussions. Research of the author is supported by the grant number 208235 of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) and by the NCCR SwissMAP of the SNSF.
2. Main constructions
A groupoid is a small category in which every morphism is invertible. We denote its object by , for any , the set of morphisms from an object to is denoted by , we also call the morphisms as arrows, the composition of arrows and is denoted by . The object of is identified with the identity arrows. By abuse of notation, the set of arrows of is also denoted by , then we can denote the source and target maps by . The source fibers are and target fibers are , for .
Example 2.1.
For any unoriented graph , it can be seen as a groupoid by taking the vertices as objects, for each unoriented edge , we have corresponding two inverse direction arrows and arrows formed by their compositions.
Example 2.2 (Action groupoid).
Let be a set with right group action , the action groupoid has the set of objects and for each , there is an arrow , thus an arrow is described by a pair . The source and target are and the composition is ,with . The identity arrows are where is the identity element in the group and the inverse of is .
Definition 2.3.
Let be a groupoid with set of objects , a -graded vector space of finite type over a field is a collection of finite dimensional vector spaces indexed by the arrows of such that for each , there are finitely many arrows with source or target and nonzero .
With groupoids, we can define the groupoid graded vector spaces with certain finite conditions.
Definition 2.4.
Let be a groupoid, a -graded vector space of finite type over a field is a collection of finite dimensional vector spaces indexed by the arrows of , such that for each , there are only finitely many arrows with source or target and nonzero .
For , the source fibers of the vector space is the direct sum of components with source , that is . And similar for the target fibers.
The vector space of two graded vector spaces consists of families of linear maps , that is , the compositions of maps are also defined component-wise. The category of groupoid graded vector spaces is a monoidal category, we denote by , with the tensor product defined
In the following example, we introduce a family of automorphism induced by the maps from to nonzero complex numbers.
Example 2.5.
Let be a map from the objects of the groupoid to the nonzero complex numbers. For any , the map induces endormorphisms . For convenience is also simply denoted by .
For any such that , the component of restricted to is defined by
(2.1a) | |||
(2.1b) |
where is the identity operator in . It is easily seen that are invertible, its inverse are the endormoprhisms induced by which are defined by
(2.2) |
On the source fibers of vector space , the operators can also be denoted by
(2.3) |
here are the ”dynamical” notations, intuitively means the target vertices of th edge of a chain of arrows that starts at .
For the additive category , we can also define the dual groupoid graded vector space and the resulting category is an abelian pivotal monoidal category, see section 2 of [22].
2.1. Yang-Baxter operator and other local operators
Let , a Yang-Baxter operator on is a meromorphic function of the spectral parameter with values in the endormorphisms of , obeying the Yang-Baxter equation
(2.4) |
more generally, we can write the equation as:
(2.5) |
in for all generic values of the spectral parameters and certain inversion (also called unitary) relation. And here are certain functions of the and satisfies the conditions .
The restriction of to for composable arrows has components in each direct summand of the decomposition
The sum is over such that and is the component
Similarly we can define the local Hecke operator, local Temperley–Lieb operator and local Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operator which are without the spectral parameter.
Definition 2.6.
For a map , it induces a map as in 2.5. The local Hecke operator associated to is defined by the following equations
(2.6a) | |||
(2.6b) |
Definition 2.7.
For a map , it induces a map . The local Temperley–Lieb operator in associated to is defined by the equations
(2.7a) | |||
(2.7b) | |||
(2.7c) |
Definition 2.8.
For two maps , let and be an invertible operator in and
(2.8) |
is called local Birman–Murakami–Wenzl operator if it satisfies the following equations
(2.9a) | |||
(2.9b) | |||
(2.9c) | |||
(2.9d) |
2.2. Local dynamical operators
Let , the dynamical Yang-Baxter operator is defined on the source fibers of , ,
which satisfies the dynamical Yang-Baxter equation
(2.10) |
here we use the ”dynamical” notation with the placeholder :
And more generally, we write the dynamical Yang–Baxter equation as
(2.11) |
and here are functions of the and satisfies the conditions .
In the case of an action groupoid and its subgroupoids, the operator can be written explicitly as
(2.12a) | |||
(2.12b) |
for any composable edges, we have
(2.13) |
where , graphically it is
(2.14) |
In the same spirit, when we look at the source fibers, we can define the various dynamical local operators.
Definition 2.9.
For a map , the local dynamical Hecke operator is defined on the source fibers of , ,
(2.15) |
and satisfy the relations
(2.16a) | |||
(2.16b) |
Definition 2.10.
For a map , an operator defined on the source fibers
(2.17) |
is called a local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator if it satisfies the following dynamical Temperley–Lieb equations:
(2.18a) | |||
(2.18b) | |||
(2.18c) |
Lemma 2.11.
Suppose that we have dynamical Hecke operator with parameter , if for any in , then we can define , which forms the local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator with parameter .
For any finite connected unoriented graph with vertices and that has at most one edge between different vertices, let be its adjacency matrix, by the Perron–Frobenius theorem, see appendix A, it has a Perron–Frobenius vector with eigenvalue for , and satisfies the eigenvalue equation
For each un-oriented edge in , we have two specific inverse direction edges corresponding to it in the associated groupoid , for those specific directed edges corresponding to unoriented edges, we associate a one dimensional vector space for each of them, then we have a .
Proposition 2.12.
Suppose that , then we can construct a representation of the local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator associated to constant function by
(2.19) |
Proof.
It is easy to see that the ”dynamical Temperlay–Lieb” relations are equivalent to the following graphical relations on source fibers, these graph of relations of blocks of Temperley-Lieb was already observed by the Pasquier [37], with the above parametrization, these relations are easily verified.
∎
From the duality between the square lattice model and the loop model, see [35] section 4, we can have the following diagram interpretaion of this Temperley–Lieb operator
(2.20) |
And then we can form the loop model or diagram algebra definition of the operator in Proposition 2.1 related to unoriented graphs. Later in subsection 2.3, we will see that the following example is a specific case of the relation between dynamical Temperley–Lieb and the usual Temperley–Lieb algebra in proposition 2.20.
Definition 2.13.
Given any connected non-oriented graph with at most single edge between two different vertices, for and , the diagram algebra is defined as the follows.
For any , if there exists which is connected to by an edge, a generator is defined and the generators satisfy the following three equation
(2.21a) | |||
(2.21b) | |||
(2.21c) |
And graphically the generators are presented as the following:
(2.22) |
The equations (2.21a),(2.21b) and (2.21c) are graphically described by the (2.23),(2.24) and (2.25) respectively.
(2.23) |
(2.24) |
(2.25) |
Definition 2.14.
For two maps and an invertible operator defined on the source fiber of where . That is
(2.26) |
and we denote
(2.27) |
is called the local dynamical Birman-Murakami-Wenzl operator associated to , if they satisfies the following relations
(2.28a) | |||
(2.28b) | |||
(2.28c) | |||
(2.28d) |
2.3. Relation between the usual and dynamical operators
There are three types of relations that relate the non-dynamical and dynamical operators.
The first type of relation is about the groupoid structure, suppose that the groupoid is trivial that has only one vertex and one identity arrow, then the category of graded vector space becomes just the usual category of vector space
the local dynamical operators does not depend on the dynamical shift and becomes the usual operators, for example the dynamical Yang-Baxter equation (2.10) becomes the usual quantum Yang-Baxter equation
and similarly other local dynamical operators will become the local non dynamical operators.
The second type relation is about the relations between usual operators on groupoid graded representation and dynamical operators on the source fibers. We can simply restrict the operators to the source fibers to get the dynamical operators.
For example, if is an action groupoid with an Yang-Baxter operator defined on , we can restrict the to a graded component of the vector space with fixed
the restriction of the Yang-Baxter equation to the graded component will be the corresponding dynamical Yang-Baxter equation.
The third type of relation is the globalization which goes from dynamical to non-dynamical, for example we can first define the following global dynamical operators.
Definition 2.15.
Let , , , for operators defined on the source fibers ,
(2.29) |
they forms a dynamical Hecke operator associated to , if it satisfies the following dynamical Hecke relations:
(2.30a) | |||
(2.30b) | |||
(2.30c) | |||
(2.30d) |
Many classical arguments naturally extend to the dynamical case, for example, we can also define the Murphy element of type , the type here is actually refer to both the boundary type and the Lie algebra type. Here is the definition,
(2.31) | |||
(2.32) |
Proposition 2.16.
Suppose that is constant, the Murphy elements satisfies the relations:
(2.33) | |||
(2.34) | |||
(2.35) | |||
(2.36) | |||
(2.37) |
Remark 2.17.
For different boundary conditions, there may be other different generalizations of Temperley–Lieb and Hecke algebra as in the classical case, for example as in [8].
Definition 2.18.
Let , , , the operators are defined on the source fibers ,
(2.39) |
they forms a dynamical Temperley–Lieb algebra if it satisfies the following dynamical Hecke relations:
(2.40a) | |||
(2.40b) | |||
(2.40c) | |||
(2.40d) |
Lemma 2.19.
Suppose that we have dynamical Hecke operators associated to , if is not equal to zero for any and , then we can define , which forms the dynamical Temerpey-Lieb operator associated to .
The following proposition describes the relation between the local dynamical operators and global dynamical operators.
Proposition 2.20.
Let be a local dynamical operator defined on source fibers of in definition 2.10 associated to , then
(2.41) |
is a representation of dynamical Temperley-Lieb operator on the source fiber space of associated with .
The following proposition describes the relation between the ”global” dynamical algebra and the usual algebra.
Proposition 2.21.
Suppose that is a constant function for all in the Definition 2.18 , then collecting all the fiber space, we get the operator , which forms a representation on groupoid graded vector space of usual Temperley-Lieb algebras associated with the constant .
And similarly for the Birman-Wenzl-Mirakami case, we give the following definitions of the global version.
Definition 2.22.
Let ,, the invertible operators are defined on source fibers ,
(2.42) |
The are defined by
(2.43) |
are called dynamical Birman-Murakami-Wenzl operator if they satisfies the relation
(2.44a) | |||
(2.44b) | |||
(2.44c) | |||
(2.44d) |
2.4. Baxterization
In this section, we consider the Baxterization process of the local dynamical operators.
In the first case, let , suppose that we have invertible operators that satisfy the relations
(2.45a) | |||
(2.45b) |
where .
Theorem 2.23.
Suppose that if there exists an arrow with , then the operator defined by
satisfies the dynamical Yang-Baxter equation (2.10).
Proof.
We use the relations
∎
In the second case, if we assume that
(2.46) |
where is local dynamical Temperley-Lieb operators associated to on as defined in 2.10 then we will get
Theorem 2.24.
Suppose that satisfies the following equation
(2.47) |
then the operators satisfies the dynamical Yang-Baxter equation (2.11).
Proof.
In the third case, we consider about the Birman-Murakami-Wenzl case.
Theorem 2.25.
Suppose that the operators are the local dynamical Birman-Murakami-Wenzl operator associated with on , and suppose that if there exists an arrow with . Then we define
(2.49) |
and it satisfies the following two parameters dynamical Yang-Baxter equation
(2.50) |
Proof.
With the assumption if there exists an arrow with , the proof is similar to the classical case. ∎
2.5. Example: unrestricted cases
The first case we consider is the unrestricted case. For the non-oriented graph with objects and an edge for every two neighbouring numbers (see Figure 1),here is a generic shift to avoid the singularities of the operators we defined below,
the corresponding groupoid is denoted by . And we define the following graded vector space,
(2.51) |
here is the edge with source a and target and is the edge with source and target .
In this case, we can identify the fiber space with some vector spaces and then write the operator in a matrix form. For any ,
(2.52) |
by identifying with , with , with and with , let be the matrix unit such that for all .
In the following, we define operators on .
Proposition 2.26.
Let , the operators
(2.53) |
forms local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator algebra on associated with the constant function .
Lemma 2.27.
The function satisfies the equation (2.47) for the , then it follows satisfies the dynamical YBE.
Proposition 2.28.
Let , the operators
(2.54) |
forms local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator algebra on associated with the constant function .
Lemma 2.29.
The function satisfies the equation (2.47) for the , then it follows satisfies the dynamical YBE.
Fix complex numbers and such that and , let
(2.55) |
be the odd Jacobi theta function and is normalized to have derivative 1 at .
Proposition 2.30.
On the source fiber vector space of , the operators defined by
(2.56) |
forms local dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator associated with map
(2.57) |
Proof.
In the elliptic case, the dynamical matrix related to is Andrews-Baxter-Forrester [2] parametrization of elliptic dynamical [20] matrix
(2.58) |
Lemma 2.31.
Taking the trigonometric limit of and , we get the corresponding and .
Proof.
we have the following addition formula
and similarly for . ∎
Remark 2.32.
There are two new phenomenons in the elliptic case, the first is that the function is not constant, the second is that is not Baxterized in the sense of 2.24. This can be seen as the mathematical interpretation of the physics fact that only passing to the trigonometric or hyperbolic limit of the lattice model, we have some critical behaviors.
2.6. Example: restricted case
In this section, we recover reformulate the classical results of Pasquier models [36] and Temperley–Lieb interaction models [35], see also [40].
We first discuss the classical case, let be one of the classical diagrams. From the Proposition 2.12, we get the dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator corresponding to those graphs. The Perro-Frobenius eigenvalue of the graphs are where and is the coexter number for the ADE graph as in the Table 2:
Lie algebra | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coxter number |
Proposition 2.33.
The parameterization satisfies the relation (2.47) for , the dynamical satisfies the dynamical YBE.
Let denote one of the affine graphs, from the Proposition 2.12, we get the dynamical Temperley–Lieb operator corresponding to those graphs, the Perro-Frobenius eigenvalue of the graphs are 2.
Proposition 2.34.
The parameterization satisfies the relation (2.47) for , the dynamical satisfies the dynamical YBE.
For the type case, we can write the matrix and operator more explicitly as a matrix similar to the unrestricted setting, but because our groupoid graded vector space is the restricted case, we do not have the isomorphism for all fiber space 2.52, so there are some items may not appear due to the restriction.
We denote , for , we have the following
(2.59) |
And in this case the is the following:
For other near the boundary, certain terms in these matrix are not defined because the fiber space do not have the isomorphism (2.47). For example, if ,
if ,
For , the situation is similar.
2.7. Transfer matrix and hamiltonian of spin chain
For complicity, we briefly recall the definition of convolution algebra with coefficients in graded algebras over a field and the partial traces to describe the transfer matrix in terms of graded vector space developed in [22].
Definition 2.35.
Let be a groupoid , a graded algebra over is a collection of -vector spaces labeled by arrows of with bilinear products defined for composable arrows and units , for such that whenever defined and for all of degree .
Example 2.36.
Let and let be the graded vector space with where , then with the product given by the composition of linear maps
and unit is a graded algebra.
Definition 2.37.
Let be a graded algebra, the convolution algebra with coefficients in is the algebra of maps such that
-
(1)
for all arrows ,
-
(2)
for every , there are finitely many such that .
The product is the convolution product
(2.60) |
The partial trace over is the map
(2.61) |
defined as follows. For and , let be the component of the mapping, which is the mapping between two paths in the figure 2.64.
(2.62) |
Define
(2.63) |
for any basis of and dual basis of the dual vector space .
(2.64) |
Definition 2.38.
The partial trace of over is the section
(2.65) |
For the vector spaces with the dynamical Yang-Baxter operator , the component of face type transfer matrix
can be draw as in the 2.66 which transfer from lower horizontal line to the upper horizontal line, it is an element in , its component is written as
(2.66) |
Proposition 2.39.
By the corallory 3.9 of [22], we have the family of commuting transfer matrix
(2.67) |
Now let , suppose that we have the Baxterization with respect to the local Temperley-Lieb operators as in with the ansatz , the component of transfer matrix can be written as
(2.68) |
We can then define the hamiltonian to be the ”log derivative” at 0 of the transfer matrix
(2.70) |
From the commuting of the transfer matrices, we have the following commuting relations
Proposition 2.40.
(2.71) |
We have that , if we assume that
(2.72) |
for simplicity to deal with the partial trace and also enough for all our examples.
Then we have more explicitly form of
(2.73) | ||||
(2.74) |
graphically this corresponds to
(2.75) |
More explicitly, we have different forms
(2.76a) | ||||
(2.76b) | ||||
(2.76c) |
Example 2.41.
Remark 2.42.
The local dynamical Temperley–Lieb structure underlying these one dimensional integrable systems are probably new. As a physics system expressed in the square lattice language, these systems has been widely studied in physics, for example the work of [3], where they considered restricted type A and calculate the eigenvectors and eigenvalues.
Appendix A Perron-Frobenius theorem
In this appendix, we recall the classical Perron-Frobenius theorem in the form of the book [10], Theorem 3.2.1.
Theorem A.1 (Frobenius-Perron).
Let be a square matrix with non-negative real entries.
-
(1)
has a non-negative real eigenvalue. The largest non-negative real eigenvalue of dominates the absolute values of all other eigenvalues of (in other words, the spectral radius of is an eigenvalue.) Moreover, there is an eigenvector of with non-negative entries and eigenvalue .
-
(2)
If has strictly positive entries then is a simple positive eigenvalue, and the corresponding eigenvector can be normalized to have strictly positive entries. Moreover, for any other eigenvalue of .
-
(3)
If a matrix with non-negative entries has an eigenvector with strictly positive entries, then the corresponding eigenvalue is .
Proof.
See the proof of [10], Theorem 3.2.1. ∎
As a example of the above theorem, we have the following table 3 of Perro-Frobenius eigenvector of classical ADE Dykin diagram, see for example [40].
Lie lagebra | Perro-Frobenius Eigenvector |
---|---|
. |
References
- [1] M. Aganagic and A. Okounkov. Elliptic stable envelopes. J.Am.Math.Soc., 34(1):79–133, dec 2021.
- [2] G.E. Andrews, R.J. Baxter, and P.J. Forrester. Eight-vertex SOS model and generalized Rogers-Ramanujan-type identities. Journal of Statistical Physics, 35(3-4):193–266, 1984.
- [3] V.V. Bazhanov and N.Yu. Reshetikhin. Critical RSOS Models and Conformal Field Theory. Int.J.Mod.Phys.A, 4(01):115–142, jan 1989.
- [4] A.A. Belavin, A.M. Polyakov, and A.B. Zamolodchikov. Infinite conformal symmetry in two-dimensional quantum field theory. Nuclear Physics B, 241(2):333–380, jul 1984.
- [5] J.S. Birman and H. Wenzl. Braids, link polynomials and a new algebra. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 313(1):249–273, 1989.
- [6] K. Costello, E. Witten, and M. Yamazaki. Gauge theory and integrability, I. ICCM Not., 6(1):46–119, 2018.
- [7] K. Costello, E. Witten, and M. Yamazaki. Gauge theory and integrability, II. ICCM Not., 6(1):120–146, 2018.
- [8] J. de Gier and A. Nichols. The two-boundary Temperley–Lieb algebra. Journal of Algebra, 321(4):1132–1167, feb 2009.
- [9] V. Drinfeld. Quantum groups. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Vol. 1, 2 (Berkeley, Calif., 1986), pages 798–820. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1987.
- [10] P. Etingof, S. Gelaki, D. Nikshych, and V. Ostrik. Tensor categories, volume 205. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2015.
- [11] P. Etingof and A. Kirillov. Macdonald’s polynomials and representations of quantum groups. Mathematical Research Letters, 1:279–296, 1994.
- [12] P. Etingof and F. Latour. The dynamical Yang-Baxter equation, representation theory, and quantum integrable systems, volume 29 of Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005.
- [13] P. Etingof and O. Schiffmann. Lectures on the dynamical Yang-Baxter equations. In Quantum groups and Lie theory (Durham, 1999), volume 290 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., pages 89–129. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2001.
- [14] P. Etingof, O. Schiffmann, and A. Varchenko. Traces of intertwiners for quantum groups and difference equations. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 62(2):143–158, nov 2002.
- [15] P. Etingof and A. Varchenko. Geometry and classification of solutions of the classical dynamical Yang-Baxter equation. Comm. Math. Phys., 192(1):77–120, 1998.
- [16] P. Etingof and A. Varchenko. Solutions of the quantum dynamical Yang-Baxter equation and dynamical quantum groups. Comm. Math. Phys., 196(3):591–640, 1998.
- [17] P. Etingof and A. Varchenko. Exchange dynamical quantum groups. Comm. Math. Phys., 205(1):19–52, 1999.
- [18] L.D. Faddeev. How the algebraic Bethe ansatz works for integrable models. In Symétries quantiques (Les Houches, 1995), pages 149—-219. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1998.
- [19] L.D. Faddeev, N.Yu. Reshetikhin, and L.A. Takhtajan. Quantization of Lie Groups and Lie Algebras. Algebraic Analysis, pages 129–139, jan 1988.
- [20] G. Felder. Conformal field theory and integrable systems associated with elliptic curves. Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, pages 1247–1255, jul 1994.
- [21] G. Felder. Elliptic quantum groups. In XIth International Congress of Mathematical Physics (Paris, 1994), pages 211–218. Int. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1995.
- [22] G. Felder and M. Ren. Quantum Groups for Restricted SOS Models. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications (SIGMA), 17:26, oct 2020.
- [23] G. Felder, V. Tarasov, and A. Varchenko. Solutions of the elliptic qKZB equations and Bethe ansatz. I. In Topics in singularity theory, volume 180 of Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, pages 45–75. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997.
- [24] G. Felder, V. Tarasov, and A. Varchenko. Monodromy of solutions of the elliptic quantum Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov-Bernard difference equations. Internat. J. Math., 10(8):943–975, 1999.
- [25] G. Felder and A. Varchenko. On representations of the elliptic quantum group . Comm. Math. Phys., 181(3):741–761, 1996.
- [26] G. Felder and A. Varchenko. Elliptic quantum groups and Ruijsenaars models. Journal of Statistical Physics, 89(5-6):963–980, apr 1997.
- [27] D. Friedan, Z. Qiu, and S. Shenker. Conformal Invariance, Unitarity, and Critical Exponents in Two Dimensions. Physical Review Letters, 52(18):1575, apr 1984.
- [28] J.L. Gervais and A. Neveu. Novel triangle relation and absence of tachyons in Liouville string field theory. Nuclear Physics B, 238(1):125–141, may 1984.
- [29] V.F.R. Goodman, F.M. and de la Harpe, P. and Jones. Coxeter graphs and towers of algebras. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1989.
- [30] M. Jimbo. A q-Analog of ,Hecke Algebra and the Yang-Baxter Equation. Lett.Math.Phys., 11(3):247, apr 1986.
- [31] V.F.R. Jones. Baxterization. International Journal of Modern Physics B, 04(05):701–713, apr 1990.
- [32] R. Klabbers and J. Lamers. The deformed Inozemtsev spin chain. arXiv:2306.13066v3, jun 2023.
- [33] H. Konno. Elliptic quantum groups, volume 37 of SpringerBriefs in Mathematical Physics. Springer Singapore, 2020.
- [34] J. Murakami. Solvable Lattice Models and Algebras of Face Operators. Integrable Sys Quantum Field Theory, pages 399–415, jan 1989.
- [35] A.L. Owczarek and R.J. Baxter. A class of interaction-round-a-face models and its equivalence with an ice-type model. Journal of Statistical Physics, 49(5-6):1093–1115, 1987.
- [36] V. Pasquier. Operator content of the ADE lattice models. Journal of Physics A: General Physics, 20(16):5707–5717, 1987.
- [37] V. Pasquier. Two-dimensional critical systems labelled by Dynkin diagrams. Nuclear Physics B, 285(C):162–172, jan 1987.
- [38] V. Pasquier. Continuum limit of lattice models built on quantum groups. Nuclear Physics, Section B, 295(4):491–510, 1988.
- [39] V. Pasquier. Etiology of IRF models. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 118(3):355–364, 1988.
- [40] P.A. Pearce. Temperley-Lieb operators and critical ADE models. International Journal of Modern Physics B, 04(05):715–734, jan 1990.
- [41] J. V. Stokman and N. Reshetikhin. N-point spherical functions and asymptotic boundary KZB equations. Inventiones Mathematicae, 229(1):1–86, jul 2022.