Saturation for Flagged Skew
Littlewood-Richardson coefficients
Abstract.
We define and study a generalization of the Littlewood-Richardson (LR) coefficients, which we call the flagged skew LR coefficients. These subsume several previously studied extensions of the LR coefficients. We establish the saturation property for these coefficients, generalizing work of Knutson-Tao and Kushwaha-Raghavan-Viswanath.
Key words and phrases:
Skew Hives, Skew GT Patterns, Saturation, Flagged Littlewood-Richardson Coefficients, CrystalsMathematics Subject Classification:
05E05 (05E16)1. Introduction
The Littlewood-Richardson (LR) coefficients are among the most celebrated numbers in algebraic combinatorics. They are the multiplicities in the decomposition into irreducibles of tensor products of irreducible polynomial representations of general linear groups. As such, they are the structure constants for the multiplication of Schur polynomials (which form a basis for the ring of symmetric polynomials). These coefficients also determine the branching of irreducible representations of symmetric groups on restriction to Young subgroups. They also come up in several other places. For example, they occur as structure constants for the multiplication of Schubert cohomology classes of Grassmanians.
Several generalizations of these coefficients can be found in the literature: e.g., [Zel81], [RS95], [KRV21]. Our broader goal is to investigate, for some of these generalizations, the analogue of the saturation theorem of Knutson-Tao for the LR coefficients. In this paper, we consider a simultaneous generalization of Zelevinsky’s skew LR coefficients [Zel81] and the flagged LR coefficients of [KRV21]. We prove that these flagged skew LR coefficients exhibit the saturation property.
In order to do this, we need to lift the main key-positivity result of [RS95] to crystals; we do this using a recent result of Assaf [ADG22]. We also give a hive-like model for the flagged skew LR coefficients. Although a skew Gelfand-Tsetlin (GT) polytope need not be isomorphic to a GT polytope, it turns out that every flagged skew hive polytope is isomorphic to some flagged hive polytope.
2. Preliminaries and Statements of Main Theorems
A partition is a weakly decreasing sequence of non-negative integers with finitely many non-zero terms (or parts). The length of the partition is defined to be the largest integer such that is non-zero and we denote it by . The weight of is the sum of its parts and we denote it by . We denote by the set of all partitions of length at most . The Young diagram of the partition is the left and top justified collection of boxes such that row contains boxes. We denote it again by . For Young diagrams and such that (i.e., ), the skew diagram is obtained by removing the boxes of from those of .
Given partitions , a semi-standard skew tableau of shape is a filling of the skew diagram that is weakly increasing along the rows (from left to right) and strictly increasing along the columns (from top to bottom). A semi-standard tableau of shape is just a semi-standard skew tableau of shape . We denote by the set of all semi-standard skew tableaux of shape and the subset of where the fillings are all . It will be convenient to let be the empty set if are partitions with . The weight of a tableau is defined as , where is the number of times occurs in . A standard tableau is a semi-standard tableau of the same shape in which appears exactly once, where is the number of boxes in . For , we write to denote the reverse-row reading word of which is the word obtained by reading right to left and from top to bottom.
Fix a positive integer. A flag = is a weakly increasing sequence of positive integers such that111In the literature, a flag need not have , but for our purposes it is sufficient to consider only such flags. . For and flag = , is the set of all elements in such that the entries in row of are at most for . Following Reiner-Shimozono [RS95], we define the flagged skew Schur polynomial
where varies over and for , denotes the monomial . When , these reduce to the skew Schur polynomials . When is the empty partition, they become the flagged Schur polynomials , which coincide with key polynomials corresponding to -avoiding permutations [PS09, theorem 14.1]. The flagged skew Schur polynomials also have a representation theoretic interpretation as characters of certain Borel modules called flagged Schur modules [RS98].
For , define the Demazure operator on the ring of polynomials in the variables as follows:
For (the symmetric group), we define
where is a reduced expression for . This is well-defined because the ’s satisfy the braid relations.
For , let be the partition obtained by sorting the parts of in descending order and let be any permutation such that (here, the action of is the usual left action of on -tuples). We recall that the key polynomial is defined to be , and that this is independent of the choice of . A polynomial is said to be key-positive if it is a sum of key polynomials. If is key-positive, then and are also key-positive, for all and all . The former follows from a theorem of Joseph [Jos03] and the latter from the fact that a composition of Demazure operators is itself a Demazure operator. Reiner-Shimozono [RS95, Theorem 20] showed that the flagged skew Schur polynomial is key-positive.
Now, if denotes the longest element of , we have
(1) |
the Schur polynomial indexed by . More generally, (since the key polynomials form a -basis of the polynomial ring in variables [RS95, corollary 7]) given any polynomial , we have that is a symmetric polynomial, which can therefore be expanded in the basis of Schur polynomials. If further is key-positive, then equation (1) shows that is Schur-positive, i.e., a sum of Schur polynomials. This leads us to the main objects of our study.
Definition 1.
For and flag , let
(2) |
We call the coefficients as the flagged skew Littlewood-Richardson coefficients.
By the remarks preceding equation (1), it follows that the LHS of (2) is Schur positive, and thus the flagged skew Littlewood-Richardson coefficients are non-negative integers. It is clear by definition that these coefficients are zero if . It will follow from Theorem 1 below that they are also zero if .
These coefficients subsume many other extensions of the Littlewood-Richardson coefficients. When , these become Zelevinsky’s extension [Zel81] of the Littlewood-Richardson coefficients defined by . These in turn reduce to the usual Littlewood-Richardson coefficients when we further take .
On the other hand, if we take but let remain arbitrary, we get the w-refined Littlewood-Richardson coefficients of [KRV21] for 312-avoiding permutations .
If we set , we have where the sum runs over all compositions that are obtained by permuting the parts of . The coefficients on the right are the ones which appear in the flagged Littlewood-Richardson expansion of [RS95, section 7].
Our first result provides two combinatorial models for flagged skew LR coefficients (see §3, 4 for undefined terms) that generalize those for LR coefficients:
Theorem 1.
Let be a flag and . Then,
-
(1)
is the cardinality of the set of all -dominant tableaux in of weight .
-
(2)
is the number of the integral points of the flagged skew hive polytope .
Our proof of Theorem 1 hinges on understanding the crystal structure on the set of flagged skew tableaux . We show in particular that this set is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals; this lifts the key-positivity result of Reiner-Shimozono [RS95, Theorem 20] from the level of characters to that of crystals.
The main theorem of this paper is the following saturation property of the flagged skew LR coefficients:
Theorem 2.
Let be a flag and . Then,
We remark that, as in the classical LR case, the stronger converse statement holds. Scaling by also dilates the polytope by the factor . Thus, implies that for every , by Theorem 1.
3. The crystal
The purpose of this section is to prove that the subset of the type crystal
is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals. This is the key step in proving the first part of theorem 1 which we will see at the end of this section.
By a crystal of type (see section 2.2 of [BS17]), we mean a finite and non-empty set together with maps
where and is an auxiliary element, satisfying the following conditions:
-
(1)
If then if and only if . In this case it is assumed that
where are the standard orthonormal vectors in .
-
(2)
For all and we require that
where (resp. ) is the maximum number of times (resp. ) can be applied to (resp. ) without making it .
The maps and are called the raising and lowering operators respectively.
Example: The Standard type crystal is where
Also, . This crystal can be depicted by the following “crystal graph”:
The crystal graph associated to a type crystal is an edge-coloured (the colours being ) directed graph whose vertex set is the underlying set of the crystal. An edge with colour originates from and terminates at if and only if . We say a crystal is connected if its crystal graph is connected (viewed as an undirected graph).
A subset of a crystal which is a union of connected components of inherits a crystal structure from that of . In this case, we call a full-subcrystal of .
3.1. Tensor Product of Crystals
If and are type crystals, there is a natural notion of the tensor product crystal . As a set it is (where is just a symbol). We define to be . The raising and lowering operators are defined as follows:
(3) |
and
(4) |
It is understood that .
We define the character of a crystal to be . From the definition of the tensor product crystal, it is elementary to observe that the character of the tensor product is equal to the product of the characters. The tensor product is associative222The convention for tensor products in [BS17] differs from the widely-used convention (that is also employed in this paper). - see [BS17, §2.3 and remark 1.1].
The set is usually called the crystal of words (of length ). An element of is said to be a dominant word if for all .
3.2. Demazure Crystals
Let and a permutation in the symmetric group . For any reduced expression of , the Demazure crystal is defined by:
(5) |
where is the unique dominant tableau of shape (i.e., with shape and weight both equal to ).
Remark 2.
For any and , is the unique element in such that for all . In (5) above, we could replace with any other dominant word of weight . We thereby obtain a subset of :
which is isomorphic to as crystals, i.e., there is a weight-preserving bijection between these sets which intertwines the crystal raising and lowering operators (where defined). We also refer to as a Demazure crystal in what follows, and write (by abuse of notation) in place of .
The following proposition is the refined Demazure character formula in [Kas93].
Proposition 1.
Let and . Then, .
Examples:
-
•
. This crystal is denoted as in the literature.
-
•
= for . We will denote this Demazure crystal by .
A subset of a crystal is said to have the string property if and such that , we have
-
(1)
-
(2)
implies
Proposition 2.
[Kas93, Proposition 3.3.5] For any and , the Demazure subcrystal of has the string property.
A characterization of when a tensor product of Demazure crystals decomposes into Demazure crystals was given in [Kou20]. Following [Kou20], a different characterization was obtained in [ADG22] as follows:
Theorem 3.
[ADG22, Theorem 1.2] For and , the subset of is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals if and only if has the string property.
Subsets of crystals that exhibit the string property are referred to as extremal in [ADG22]. The following proposition is a strengthening of [ADG22, Proposition 8.1].
Proposition 3.
Let and be subsets of crystals and respectively. Assume that such that (i.e., for each , contains a head of some -string). If has the string property, then has the string property.
Proof.
Let be arbitrary. Suppose such that . Then . Therefore by the string property of we have , which implies that .
Additionally, if then since . Therefore by the string property of we have , which implies that . ∎
Corollary 1.
Let be Demazure crystals. If has the string property, then it is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals.
Proof.
We prove by induction on . The case is straight forward. Suppose . Then it follows from proposition 3 that has string property since has such that . Therefore by induction hypothesis is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals (say = ). Now,
Observe that if and then because of proposition 2.
Let such that and It follows that because and the fact that the decomposition is disconnected. Therefore has string property. By theorem 3, it now follows that is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals. ∎
Let be a flag and be a composition of (i.e., ). Define the subset of :
Lemma 1.
is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals.
Proof.
By corollary 1, it is sufficient to show that has string property.
Let . Suppose that . Then , because of proposition 2 and the fact that ’s are Demazure crystals.
Now suppose furthermore that . Let be the index where acts in . i.e.,
Theorem 4.
Let be a flag and such that . Then is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals.
Proof.
Define the composition by . Let . Since is a full subcrystal of , the theorem follows from lemma 1 because
∎
Remark 4.
Remark 5.
It is important that we assume to be weakly increasing. For example, if , and , then does not even have the string property.
Consider the tensor product . Here is the standard flag. The Demazure crystal is the singleton set containing .
Proposition 4.
is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals.
Proof.
By Theorem 4, we have where each is a Demazure crystal. Then
But is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals by Joseph’s theorem [Jos03]. This fact also follows from theorem 3 because has the string property as we show below:
For , only if . This implies that . By the tensor product rule we therefore have . By assumptions, and . Since is a Demazure crystal, by proposition 2 it follows that and hence . ∎
Corollary 2.
([RS95, Theorem 20]) is key-positive.
A skew tableau is -dominant if the concatenated word is a dominant word. We now prove the first part of theorem 1.
Theorem 5.
is the cardinality of the set of all -dominant tableaux in of weight .
Proof.
By Proposition 4 (and Remark 2), for all there exists a multi-subset such that
(6) |
Taking characters, we obtain
Applying and using proposition 1 gives . Thus
Now, by definition of -dominance, the number of elements of weight satisfying for all is precisely . On the other hand, in the RHS of equation (6), each has a unique element such that for all ; this element has weight . Thus, the number of elements as above is also equal to . Putting all these together establishes Theorem 5. ∎
4. A hive model for flagged skew Littlewood-Richardson coefficients
In this section we define the skew hive polytope and its faces corresponding to flags . We then prove the second part of theorem 1.
4.1. Skew GT patterns
Given , a skew Gelfand-Tsetlin pattern is an array of real numbers satisfying the following inequalities:
The above inequalities simply mean that the consecutive rows interlace. Hence we arrange the rows in the shape of a parallelogram as follows (shown for ):
For , such that , the skew Gelfand-Tsetlin polytope is the set of all skew Gelfand-Tsetlin patterns with satisfying , for all . Define,
In the sequel, we will only have occasion to consider the case when . Consider the map
where maps to the unique tableau in such that the number of that appears in the row of is .
The following statement is well-known - see for instance [Lou, §3] (whose pattern drawing convention differs from ours by a vertical flip).
Lemma 2.
The map is a bijection.
4.2. Flagged skew GT patterns
We keep the notation of the previous subsection, but in addition assume that we are given a flag . Define the set of flagged skew GT patterns:
(7) |
and let denote the set of integer points in this polytope. We have:
Lemma 3.
The map restricts to a bijection between and .
Proof.
Let . If then it is easy to see . Otherwise let be the maximum such that . Then the number of that appear in the row of is . Since , so for those in row of all entries are . Thus . Also, if then entry of is the number of entries that appear in the row of . So . ∎
In the next two subsections, we give a hive model for the flagged skew Littlewood-Richardson coefficients.
4.3. Skew hives
The array of nodes in figure 3 is called the n-hive parallelogram. Observe that the small rhombi 333A rhombus with unit side length. in the -hive parallelogram are oriented in the following three different ways:
Let . Following [KRV21], we define and . Let be such that and . We define the skew hive polytope as the set of all -labellings of the nodes of the -hive parallelogram such that:
-
(1)
The boundary labels of the left boundary (read top to bottom); bottom boundary (read left to right); top boundary (read left to right); right boundary (read top to bottom) are respectively as in figure 4.
-
(2)
The contents of all the small rhombi are non-negative. We recall that the content of a small rhombus is the sum of the labels on its obtuse-angled nodes minus the sum of the labels on its acute-angled nodes.
We denote the set of integer points in by .
An element of is called a skew hive with boundary . The rows of a skew hive (from top to bottom) give a sequence of vectors . Consider the parallelogram array with rows (and nodes in each row) whose rows (from top to bottom) are . It follows directly (adapting the arguments of [KRV21]) that the positivity of the contents of Northeast and Southeast rhombi in correspond to positivity (in the skew GT setting of §4.1) of and of respectively. Thus is a skew GT pattern with top row and bottom row . It is elementary to check that the map is linear, injective and maps integer points to integer points.
Theorem 6.
For such that and , the map is a bijection between and is a dominant word of weight }.
Proof.
We follow closely the proof of Proposition 4 in [KRV22].
Let . By the discussion in the previous para and lemma 2, it is clear that .
Now we will show that . Let . So the number of times appears in row of .
Now we have to prove that is a dominant word of weight . Let where is the reverse reading word of the -th row of . Also, let be the number of times appears in the word (with ). Then by definition, is dominant iff .
We get
So by the corresponding vertical rhombus inequality in . Now is
So is a dominant word of weight . Thus .
Now, we will show is injective. It suffices to show that is injective. Let where . Also, let . We will show that for all by induction on . Clearly, . So for we get for all . Let for all . Since So . Thus for all . Hence . Therefore is injective.
Next we will prove is surjective. Let and where the numbers of entries in the row of . Define for all . Consider the -hive parallelogram whose rows (from top to bottom) are . We claim that . The Northeast and Southeast rhombi inequalities of hold since and the vertical rhombi inequalities of hold because is dominant. The boundary labels of can be easily seen to be (left edge, top to bottom), (bottom edge, left to right), (top edge, left to right) and (right edge, top to bottom) respectively. So and . Thus is surjective. ∎
4.4. Flagged skew hives
Given a flag , consider the face of the skew hive polytope defined by . We call this the flagged skew hive polytope. We let denote the set of integer points in this polytope. It is elementary to observe that . Lemma 3 and Theorem 6 together give us the second part of theorem 1:
Theorem 7.
The map restricts to a bijection between and . Then .
The NE rhombi of the -hive parallelogram are labelled with as shown in the example in Figure 5. To the flag , we associate the set . Then forms a bottom-left-justified region of NE rhombi (shown in purple in Figure 5). It is easy to see from equation (7) that is obtained from by imposing the condition that all rhombi in are flat. For example, the hive in figure 4(b) is such that every NE oriented rhombus in is flat where = (2,2,3,4).
5. Flagged Skew LR coefficients are -refined LR coefficients
In this section we prove that any skew hive polytope is affinely isomorphic to some hive polytope (albeit in twice as many ambient dimensions). Moreover, this isomorphism maps the flagged skew hive polytope to a hive Kogan face corresponding to some -avoiding permutation [KRV21, §2.4] and preserves the integral points.
Given partitions such that , the hive polytope is the set of all -labellings of an -triangular array of nodes such that
-
(1)
the boundary labels are given by , reading the nodes anti-clockwise beginning from the topmost node as in figure 6.
-
(2)
the contents of all the small rhombi are non-negative.
The horizontal strings of nodes (“rows”) of the triangular array are termed the zeroth row, first row, second row, etc starting from the top. Consider the labelling of the NE oriented small rhombi as shown in the example in figure 6. Given a flag , consider the set of NE rhombi . We define the face of the polytope as the collection of those hives in which all the rhombi in are flat. As we vary , these run over the hive Kogan faces corresponding to -avoiding permutations, in the terminology of [KRV21, §2.4]. Refer [KRV21] for more details.
Lemma 4.
Let be weakly decreasing sequences such that either or is a constant sequence. Then is either empty or a singleton set. The latter is true if and only if .
Proof.
Supposing first that is constant, i.e., (say) for all . If is non-empty, let be an element. Define . The labels along the left and right edges of are and for . Now consider the following types of trapezia formed by two overlapping unit rhombi, one NE and the other SE.
From the two rhombus inequalities in this picture, we conclude that if , then each is also equal to . Now for all implies that the successive differences of labels on the bottom (i.e., ) row of are all equal to . The observation above means that the successive differences of labels on the row are also all . We proceed by induction, moving up the hive triangle, to conclude that the successive differences of labels along every row of is equal to . In particular, all labels of are uniquely determined from those on left boundary alone. An additional compatibility condition arises from summing the differences in each row - this gives for each , or equivalently that as claimed.
The proof for the case that is constant is similar. One considers instead the trapezia of the form:
∎
Proposition 5.
Let be such that and . Define by and . Then there exists an affine linear isomorphism between and . Moreover, the isomorphism preserves integral points and maps onto , where .
Proof.
For we describe as follows (see figure 7 for a representative example):
-
(1)
is a labelling of the - triangular array, with boundary labels coinciding with those of hives in .
-
(2)
The bottom-left-justified parallelogram in (white, with a red border in figure 7) is labelled by , i.e., the labels of the nodes of are translated by the constant .
- (3)
- (4)
.
By the above description, to verify the well definedness of the map , it suffices to check the rhombus inequalities in for the following rhombi:
-
•
The SE rhombi each of which straddles the regions described in (2) and (4).
-
•
The vertical rhombi each of which straddles the regions described in (2) and (3).
The first rhombi inequalities hold because of the fact that the entries of increase along the rows (this follows form the Southeast rhombi inequalities and the fact that ). The second rhombi inequalities hold because the edge labels 444The edge label of the Northeast edge is defined to be . of the Northeast edges (green edges in figure 7) originating from the row is bounded above by , which is equal the edge label of the Northeast edges originating from the row (blue in the figure). This follows from the Northeast rhombi inequalities and the boundary condition on . For example, in figure 7 we have . Therefore the map is well defined.
It is clear from the definition of the map that it is injective, affine linear and sends integral skew hives to integral hives. We now establish surjectivity. Given a hive in , consider its triangular subarrays marked in yellow and blue in Figure 7. These are themselves hives, and lemma 4 implies that these hives are uniquely determined (since the corresponding hive polytopes are non-empty). In particular, the labels on the bottom row of the yellow triangle are where denotes the vector of partial sums of as defined in §4.3. Likewise, the labels on the left edge of the blue triangle must be . These are also edges of the the white parallelogram. The othe two edges of the parallelogram have edge labels and . This proves surjectivity of .
Finally, since the map does not change rhombus contents, it does not alter any flatness conditions within the white parallelogram. Thus if the left and bottom justified region is flat in , then it remains flat in ; however since is a triangular hive in twice as many ambient dimensions, this region would now correspond to in , where . ∎
We remark that coincides with the hive Kogan face of [KRV21], where is the unique -avoiding permutation corresponding to the flag [PS09, §14], [KRV21, §2.4]. Now, as a consequence of the proposition, we have:
Theorem 8.
The flagged skew Littlewood-Richardson coefficients coincide with certain -refined (where, is -avoiding) Littlewood-Richardson coefficients of [KRV21]. More precisely, where is the unique -avoiding permutation corresponding to the flag .
It is elementary to check that and . This implies, . But Theorem 1.4 of [KRV21] establishes the saturation property of the -refined LR coefficients when is -avoiding. Together with the preceding remarks, this implies our main theorem:
Theorem 9.
The saturation property holds for the flagged LR coefficients. i.e.,
Theorem 9 can also be proved by working directly with the skew hive polytope, rather than with its isomorphic hive polytope. This involves mimicking all the arguments of [Buc00, KRV21] for skew hives. While we have chosen a shorter approach in this paper, this alternate approach naturally suggests numerous other refinements of the LR coefficients with the saturation property. These will be considered in a future publication.
6. Appendix: Decomposition of into Demazure crystals
In this section, we make theorem 4 effective, describing algorithmically the Demazure crystals which occur in the decomposition. The arguments below are implicit in the character level proof of [RS95], and so we content ourselves with sketching their broad contours.
We start with a brief discussion of the Burge correspondence [Ful97]. We use the standard notation . Consider a matrix of size with non-negative integer entries. We associate a biword to as follows
such that for any pair that indexes an entry of , there are columns equal to in , and the columns of are ordered as follows:
-
(1)
.
-
(2)
whenever .
In other words, form the biword by reading the entries of from left to right within each row starting with the bottom row and proceeding upwards, recording each with multiplicity . We will often denote the row and column indices of the biword by and . Additionally, given a flag , if for all (in particular, the matrix is block upper-triangular) then i is said to be -compatible (see [RS95]).
Theorem 10.
[Ful97, Appendix A, Proposition 2] The Burge correspondence gives a bijection between the set of all matrices with non-negative integer entries and the set of pairs of semistandard tableaux with the same shape where entries of are in and entries of are in . We use the notation if A corresponds to .
Theorem 11.
[Ful97, Appendix A, Symmetry Theorem b] If corresponds to then its transpose corresponds to .
The reverse filling of the skew shape , denoted , is defined to be the filling of the boxes of the shape by , sequentially from right to left within each row, starting with the top row and proceeding downwards.
We say a standard tableau with is -compatible if it satisfies the following:
-
(1)
If are adjacent in a row of then appears weakly north and strictly east of in .
-
(2)
If occurs directly above in a column of then appears weakly west and strictly south of in .
Remark 6.
The set of all -compatible standard tableaux of shape is in one-to-one correspondence with the set of Littlewood-Richardson tableaux of shape and weight [Ful97, Chapter 5, Proposition 4].
Fix a -compatible standard tableau . Given a composition , let b() be the word in which consists of a string of copies of . Also, consider the semi-standard tableau whose standardization555The standardization of a tableau (denoted by std) is the tableau obtained by changing the ’s in from left to right to , then the ’s to etc, where weight. is and weight is the composition . If then by we mean the word .
Define
.
Then where the union is over all -compatible standard tableaux [RS95]. We will show that is isomorphic to some Demazure crystal as crystals, i.e., there is a weight-preserving bijection between these sets which intertwines the crystal raising and lowering operators (where defined).
For a composition , key() is the semi-standard tableau of shape whose first columns contain the letter for all . One can see that key() is the unique tableau of shape and weight . We define as the set of all words , where each is a maximal row word of length together with the properties that each letter in can be atmost and .
Let denote the standard flag. We have:
Theorem 12.
[LS90, Proposition 5.6] Let . Then the set has a one-to-one correspondence with the set via where is the unique tableau that is Knuth equivalent to u.
Let be a word. Then by an ascent of the word a we mean a positive integer such that . We recursively define the essential subword of a with respect to a positive integer or to be the following indexed subword of a:
-
(1)
is the empty word if .
-
(2)
if .
-
(3)
if .
Define the essential subword of a as .
Lemma 5.
Let be a flag and be a word. If , are words in having the same essential subword and ascents, then i is -compatible if and only if i is -compatible.
Proof.
The proof is similar to that of Lemma 8 of [RS95]. ∎
For a semi-standard tableau , let denote the subtableau of consisting of the entries of which are less than , and let denote the left key tableau of . For more details on computing left and right keys, see [RS95], [Wil13] and [RS95a].
Lemma 6.
Let . Suppose that
-
(1)
and are semi-standard tableaux of the same shape such that and .
-
(2)
and , where is the composition of length .
Then and have the same ascents.
Proof.
The proof is similar to that of Lemma 9 of [RS95]. ∎
Now we have the following proposition:
Proposition 6.
There is a bijection between the sets and such that if then and are Knuth equivalent. Here denote the weight of the left key tableau of .
Proof.
Let and be the matrix corresponding to
.
Suppose that is the biword for . Thus i is -compatible because .
Let denote the rectification of the skew tableau . Then (by theorem 11). Consider the unique word such that . Then by Lemma 5 and Lemma 6, i is -compatible. Let be the biword associated to the matrix A such that corresponds to . Hence (by theorem 11). So by corollary 12 of [RS95], we have We define . Then is a bijection and and are Knuth equivalent. ∎
Theorem 13.
[RS95, Theorem 21] For a flag and a composition , either is empty or there is a bijection between the sets and for some composition with such that if then u and are Knuth equivalent.
Now the following proposition tells us that is a disjoint union of Demazure crystals.
Proposition 7.
The rectification map is a weight-preserving bijection which intertwines the crystal raising and lowering operators where defined. Here is any permutation such that .
Proof.
We know that are all Knuth equivalent. Thus we have . So the map is well-defined. Clearly, the rectification map is a weight-preserving bijection. Commutativity of the rectification map with the crystal raising and lowering operators comes from properties of Knuth equivalence. ∎
References
- [ADG22] Sami Assaf, Anne Dranowski and Nicolle Gonzalez “Extremal tensor products of Demazure crystals”, 2022 arXiv:2210.10236 [math.RT]
- [BS17] Daniel Bump and Anne Schilling “Crystal bases” Representations and combinatorics World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2017, pp. xii+279 DOI: 10.1142/9876
- [Buc00] Anders Skovsted Buch “The saturation conjecture (after A. Knutson and T. Tao)” With an appendix by William Fulton In Enseign. Math. (2) 46.1-2, 2000, pp. 43–60
- [Ful97] William Fulton “Young tableaux” With applications to representation theory and geometry 35, London Mathematical Society Student Texts Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997, pp. x+260
- [Jos03] Anthony Joseph “A decomposition theorem for Demazure crystals” In J. Algebra 265.2, 2003, pp. 562–578 DOI: 10.1016/S0021-8693(03)00028-0
- [Kas93] Masaki Kashiwara “The crystal base and Littelmann’s refined Demazure character formula” In Duke Math. J. 71.3, 1993, pp. 839–858 DOI: 10.1215/S0012-7094-93-07131-1
- [Kou20] Takafumi Kouno “Decomposition of tensor products of Demazure crystals” In J. Algebra 546, 2020, pp. 641–678 DOI: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2019.11.001
- [KRV21] Mrigendra Singh Kushwaha, K. N. Raghavan and Sankaran Viswanath “The saturation problem for refined Littlewood-Richardson coefficients” In Sém. Lothar. Combin. 85B, 2021, pp. Art. 52, 12
- [KRV22] Mrigendra Singh Kushwaha, K. N. Raghavan and Sankaran Viswanath “The saturation problem for refined Littlewood-Richardson coefficients”, 2022 arXiv:2204.03399v1 [math.RT]
- [Lou] James D. Louck “Skew Gelfand-Tsetlin Patterns, Lattice Permutations, And Skew Pattern Polynomials” In Symmetry and Structural Properties of Condensed Matter, pp. 241–264 DOI: 10.1142/9789812704474˙0019
- [LS90] Alain Lascoux and Marcel-Paul Schützenberger “Keys & standard bases” In Invariant theory and tableaux (Minneapolis, MN, 1988) 19, IMA Vol. Math. Appl. Springer, New York, 1990, pp. 125–144
- [PS09] Alexander Postnikov and Richard P. Stanley “Chains in the Bruhat order” In J. Algebraic Combin. 29.2, 2009, pp. 133–174 DOI: 10.1007/s10801-008-0125-4
- [RS95] Victor Reiner and Mark Shimozono “Key polynomials and a flagged Littlewood-Richardson rule” In J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 70.1, 1995, pp. 107–143 DOI: 10.1016/0097-3165(95)90083-7
- [RS95a] Victor Reiner and Mark Shimozono “Plactification” In J. Algebraic Combin. 4.4, 1995, pp. 331–351 DOI: 10.1023/A:1022434000967
- [RS98] Victor Reiner and Mark Shimozono “Percentage-avoiding, northwest shapes and peelable tableaux” In J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 82.1, 1998, pp. 1–73 DOI: 10.1006/jcta.1997.2841
- [Wil13] Matthew J. Willis “A direct way to find the right key of a semistandard Young tableau” In Ann. Comb. 17.2, 2013, pp. 393–400 DOI: 10.1007/s00026-013-0187-4
- [Zel81] A. V. Zelevinsky “A generalization of the Littlewood-Richardson rule and the Robinson-Schensted-Knuth correspondence” In J. Algebra 69.1, 1981, pp. 82–94 DOI: 10.1016/0021-8693(81)90128-9