Tensor ideals for quantum groups
via minimal tilting complexes
Abstract.
We use minimal tilting complexes to construct an explicit bijection between the set of thick tensor ideals with the two-out-of-three property in the category of finite-dimensional modules over a quantum group at a root of unity and the set of thick tensor ideals in the subcategory of tilting modules. We also explain why the analogous construction for rational representations of a reductive algebraic group over a field of positive characteristic does not give rise to a bijection.
Key words and phrases:
quantum group, tensor ideal, tilting module1991 Mathematics Subject Classification:
20G42 (primary), 17B55, 18M15, 20G05 (secondary)Introduction
One way of understanding the structure of a braided monoidal category is via its thick tensor ideals, i.e. the sets of objects of that are closed under direct sums, retracts and tensor products with arbitrary objects of . When is triangulated and the tensor product bifunctor is exact in both arguments then one can further impose that tensor ideals should be well-behaved with respect to the triangulated structure (in a suitable sense), and this leads to the rich theory of tensor triangular geometry developed by P. Balmer [Bal05]. When is abelian, and the tensor product bifunctor is exact in both arguments, we can consider the set of thick tensor ideals with the so-called two-out-of-three property, that is, with the property that for any short exact sequence in such that two of the three objects , and belong to , the third one also belongs to .
In this note, we study thick tensor ideals with the two-out-of-three property in the category of modules over a quantum group at a root of unity. Let be the quantum group at a primitive -th root of unity corresponding to a complex simple Lie algebra , defined using divided powers as in [Jan03, Appendix H], and assume that is odd and strictly greater than the Coxeter number of , and not divisible by if is of type . Further, let be the category of finite-dimensional -modules of type one and let be the full subcategory of tilting -modules, again as in [Jan03, Appendix H]. The thick tensor ideals in have been classified by V. Ostrik in [Ost97] in terms of certain Kazhdan-Lusztig cells in the affine Weyl group of . Here, we provide an explicit bijection between the set of thick tensor ideals in and the set of thick tensor ideals with the two-out-of-three property in , using the theory of minimal tilting complexes. As explained in [Gru22b, Subsection 2.2], we can associate to every -module a bounded minimal complex in (unique up to isomorphism), and we call the minimal tilting complex of . Given a thick tensor ideal in , we define
and prove that is a thick tensor ideal in with the two-out-of-three property. Our main result is as follows; see Theorem 2.9.
Theorem.
The map from the set of thick tensor ideals in to the set of thick tensor ideals in with the two-out-of-three property is a bijection, with inverse map .
Thick tensor ideals in have also been studied by B. Boe, J. Kujawa and D. Nakano in [BKN19] via the geometry of the nilpotent cone of , and we partially rely on their results.
Our construction also makes perfect sense for the category of finite-dimensional rational representations of a simply-connected simple algebraic group over an algebraically closed field of positive characteristic , but the above theorem fails in this setting. In Section 3, we show that the Frobenius twist of the Steinberg module for generates a thick tensor ideal in with the two-out-of-three property which is not of the form , for any thick tensor ideal in the category of tilting modules in .
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Stephen Donkin, Thorge Jensen, Daniel Nakano and Donna Testerman for helpful conversations and comments. This work was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation under the grants FNS 200020_175571 and FNS 200020_207730 and by the Singapore MOE grant R-146-000-294-133.
1. Minimal tilting complexes
Let us start by recalling some important facts about representations of quantum groups and minimal tilting complexes. We keep the notation from the introduction; in particular is a quantum group at a primitive -th root of unity as in [Jan03, Appendix H], where is odd (and not divisible by if is of type ). We write for the category of finite-dimensional -modules of type one. Note that is a rigid monoidal category because is a Hopf algebra and that admits a braiding by [Lus10, Chapter 32]. In the following, we simply refer to the objects of as -modules. The category is also a highest weight category with weight poset , where denotes the set of dominant weights for (with respect to a fixed base of the root system of ) and is the usual dominance order. We write for the full subcategory of tilting modules in ; see Section 1 and Subsection 4.3 in [Gru22b] for more details. As explained in [Gru22b, Subsection 2.2], we can assign to every -module a minimal tilting complex ; it is the unique minimal bounded complex in whose cohomology groups are given by
for . (See [Gru22b, Definition 2.2] for the definition of a minimal complex.) Below, we list some key properties of minimal tilting complexes.
Lemma 1.1.
Let and be -modules. Then we have .
Proof.
See part (1) of Lemma 2.12 in [Gru22b]. ∎
For -modules and , let us write if admits a split embedding into , and denote by the term in homological degree of .
Lemma 1.2.
Let be a short exact sequence of -modules. Then
for all .
Proof.
This follows from Lemma 2.17 in [Gru22b]. ∎
Given two complexes and of -modules, we define the tensor product complex with terms
for and differential defined on via . The cohomology groups of can be computed via the Künneth-formula (see for instance [Big07, Theorem 4.1]):
Lemma 1.3.
Let and be -modules. Then there is a split monomorphism
in the category of complexes in .
Proof.
By the Künneth formula, the tensor product complex satisfies
for , whence we have in , the bounded derived category of . By part (2) of Lemma 2.12 in [Gru22b], this implies that is the minimal complex of and that there is a split monomorphism as in the statement of the lemma. ∎
2. Tensor ideals for quantum groups
Recall that a thick tensor ideal in is a set of -modules that is closed under direct sums, retracts and tensor products with arbitrary -modules, that is, for -modules and and , we have if and only if and , and if then . Thick tensor ideals in are defined analogously. We say that a thick tensor ideal in has the 2/3-property (or two-out-of-three property) if for any short exact sequence of -modules such that two of the -modules , and belong to , the third also belongs to .
Remark 2.1.
In [BKN19], the term thick tensor ideal in is used for what we call thick tensor ideal with the 2/3-property.
Definition 2.2.
For any thick tensor ideal in , we define a set of -modules by
Lemma 2.3.
Let be a thick tensor ideal in . Then is a thick tensor ideal in and has the 2/3-property.
Proof.
First note that is closed under direct sums and retracts because
for all -modules and , by Lemma 1.1. If then all terms of the tensor product complex belong to because is a tensor ideal. As is a direct summand of in the category of complexes in by Lemma 1.3 and as is closed under retracts, we conclude that . Finally, for a short exact sequence
of -modules, we have
for all , by Lemma 1.2. As is closed under retracts, we conclude that has the 2/3-property. ∎
The following Lemma justifies the notation .
Lemma 2.4.
Let be a thick tensor ideal in . Then is the smallest thick tensor ideal with the 2/3-property in that contains .
Proof.
The inclusion follows from the fact that for every tilting -module , we have , viewed as a complex concentrated in degree zero; see [Gru22b, Remark 2.11]. Now let be a thick tensor ideal with the 2/3-property in such that , and let be a -module in . We claim that belongs to . Writing as
we have , so there is a short exact sequence
As has the 2/3-property, it suffices to show that and belong to . As is exact in all degrees except zero, there are short exact sequences
for all , where , and using the 2/3-property, we see that belongs to if and only if belongs to . Now is bounded, so for some , and we conclude that belongs to . Analogously, we see that belongs to , and the claim follows. ∎
For a thick tensor ideal in , it is straightforward to see that (the set of tilting modules in ) is a thick tensor ideal in . The next result shows that the map is a section to the map from the set of thick tensor ideals in to the set of thick tensor ideals in with the 2/3-property.
Lemma 2.5.
Let be a thick tensor ideal in . Then .
Proof.
For a tilting -module , we have , viewed as a complex concentrated in degree zero, and it follows that belongs to if and only if all terms of belong to . ∎
Following [Bal05] and [BKN19], let us call a proper thick tensor ideal in a prime ideal if implies that either or , for -modules and . The following result has been proven by P. Balmer in the framework of tensor triangulated geometry in [Bal05, Lemma 4.2]. The proof in our setting is almost identical; we sketch the main ideas below and refer the reader to [Bal05] for more details.
Proposition 2.6.
Let be a proper thick tensor ideal with the 2/3-property in . Then we have
where the intersection runs over all prime thick tensor ideals in such that has the 2/3-property and .
Proof.
It is clear that is contained in . Now let be a -module that does not belong to and consider the set . Since is a direct summand of (where denotes the dual of ) and is a thick tensor ideal, the set is disjoint from ; cf. Remark 4.3 and Proposition 4.4 in [Bal05]. As in Lemma 2.2 in [Bal05], one can use Zorn’s lemma to prove that there exists a thick prime tensor ideal in such that has the 2/3-property, and . In particular, does not belong to and the claim follows. ∎
Before we can prove our main result, we need two more preliminary lemmas.
Lemma 2.7.
Let be a collection of thick tensor ideals in . Then we have
Proof.
For a -module and for , the tilting module belongs to if and only if it belongs to for all . Hence belongs to if and only if belongs to . ∎
All the results so far are valid without any additional assumptions on the order of , apart from those that were made at the beginning of Section 1. For the rest of the section, we assume that , the Coxeter number of .
Lemma 2.8.
Let be a thick tensor ideal in with the 2/3-property. Then we have
where the intersection runs over all prime thick tensor ideals in such that has the 2/3-property and .
Proof.
By Theorem 8.2.1 in [BKN19], every prime thick tensor ideal in with the 2/3-property is generated by an indecomposable tilting module . Hence if is the thick tensor ideal in generated by then , and by Lemma 2.5, we have and therefore . Using Proposition 2.6 and Lemma 2.7, it follows that
as required. ∎
Now we are ready to prove our main result:
Theorem 2.9.
The map from the set of thick tensor ideals in to the set of thick tensor ideals with the 2/3-property in is a bijection. The inverse map is given by .
Proof.
Remark 2.10.
The existence of a bijection between the set of thick tensor ideals in and the set of thick tensor ideals in with the 2/3-property can also be deduced by combining Corollary 7.7.2 and Theorem 8.1.1 in [BKN19]. However, it is not clear from the results in [BKN19] that this bijection can be described in terms of minimal tilting complexes, as we have done here.
3. The modular case
Let be a simply connected simple algebraic group over an algebraically closed field of characteristic , with the same root system as . Then the category of finite-dimensional rational -modules is a highest weight category with weight poset , and we write and for the simple -module and the indecomposable tilting -module of highest weight , respectively. As before, we write for the full subcategory of tilting modules in and we simply refer to the objects of as -modules.
We can mimic the construction from Section 2 to define a map from the set of thick tensor ideals in to the set of thick tensor ideals in with the 2/3-property, and all the results from the preceding sections up to (including) Lemma 2.7 carry over to this setting verbatim. Below, we explain why Theorem 2.9 fails when we replace by . We first introduce some more notation.
Let be the root system of and fix a base of corresponding to a positive system . Further let be the Weyl group of and let and be the weight lattice of and the set of dominant weights with respect to . A dominant weight is called -restricted if it belongs to
where is a -invariant inner product on and denotes the coroot corresponding to , and we say that is -regular if is not divisible by for any , where is the half-sum of all positive roots. For all , we can uniquely write with and , and by Steinberg’s tensor product theorem (see [Jan03, Proposition 3.16]), we have , where denotes the pullback of a -module along the Frobenius morphism . For , let us further denote by the -th Frobenius kernel of (i.e. the scheme theoretic kernel of the -th power of ), as in Section II.3.1 in [Jan03]. The complexity over of a -module is the dimension of its support variety over . We do not recall any details of the definition here and instead refer the reader to Section 2 in [NPV02]. Some important properties of the complexity of -modules are listed below.
Lemma 3.1.
Let and let and be -modules. Then we have
-
(1)
;
-
(2)
.
-
(3)
For a short exact sequence in and a permutation of the set , we have .
Proof.
This follows from the properties of support varieties listed in (2.2.4)–(2.2.7) in [NPV02]. ∎
For , the preceding lemma implies that the set
is a thick tensor ideal in with the 2/3-property. In the remainder of this section, we prove that the tensor ideal is not of the form for any thick tensor ideal in when .
Suppose from now on that , and note that is a proper tensor ideal in because the complexity of the trivial -module over is the dimension of the variety of pairs of commuting nilpotent elements in the Lie algebra of ; see Lemma 1.7 in [SFB97a], Theorem 5.2 in [SFB97b] and the introduction to [Pre03].
Lemma 3.2.
The simple -module belongs to .
Proof.
Lemma 3.3.
Let be a -regular weight. Then there is no proper thick tensor ideal in such that belongs to .
Proof.
By Proposition 12 and the remarks after Proposition 9 in [And04], the category has a unique maximal thick tensor ideal, whose objects are the direct sums of tilting modules with , where is the highest coroot. (It is called the ideal of negligible tilting modules, cf. [EO22].) Therefore, it suffices to show that there exist and with such that is a direct summand of .
Let us write for the number of hyperplanes of the form that separate and , for and . Then equals the good filtration dimension of by Corollary 4.5 in [Par03], whence by Lemma 2.15 in [Gru22b]. Using Lemma 1.12 and Proposition 3.3 in [Gru22b] and the linkage principle from Section II.7 in [Jan03], it is straightforward to see that for all and such that is a direct summand of , we have . In particular, any weight such that is a direct summand of satisfies and therefore (again using the linkage principle), as required. ∎
Remark 3.4.
More detailed results about the minimal tilting complexes of simple -modules are proven in Proposition II.2.6 in [Gru22a]; they will be published in a forthcoming article.
Corollary 3.5.
The thick tensor ideal in is not of the form for any thick tensor ideal in .
References
- [And04] Henning Haahr Andersen. Cells in affine Weyl groups and tilting modules. In Representation theory of algebraic groups and quantum groups, volume 40 of Adv. Stud. Pure Math., pages 1–16. Math. Soc. Japan, Tokyo, 2004.
- [Bal05] Paul Balmer. The spectrum of prime ideals in tensor triangulated categories. J. Reine Angew. Math., 588:149–168, 2005.
- [Big07] Shahram Biglari. A Künneth formula in tensor triangulated categories. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 210(3):645–650, 2007.
- [BKN19] Brian D. Boe, Jonathan R. Kujawa, and Daniel K. Nakano. Tensor triangular geometry for quantum groups, 2019. preprint, url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1702.01289.
- [EO22] Pavel Etingof and Victor Ostrik. On semisimplification of tensor categories. In Representation theory and algebraic geometry. A conference celebrating the birthdays of Sasha Beilinson and Victor Ginzburg, Chicago, IL, USA, August 21–25, 2017, pages 3–35. Cham: Birkhäuser, 2022.
- [Gru22a] Jonathan Gruber. Generic direct summands of tensor products for reductive algebraic groups and quantum groups at roots of unity, 2022. PhD thesis, available at https://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/293801?ln=en.
- [Gru22b] Jonathan Gruber. On minimal tilting complexes in highest weight categories, 2022. preprint, to appear in Algebr. Represent. Theory, url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2207.11999.
- [Jan03] Jens C. Jantzen. Representations of algebraic groups, volume 107 of Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, second edition, 2003.
- [Lus10] George Lusztig. Introduction to quantum groups. Modern Birkhäuser Classics. Birkhäuser / Springer, New York, 2010. Reprint of the 1994 edition.
- [Nak95] Daniel K. Nakano. A bound on the complexity for modules. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 123(2):335–341, 1995.
- [NPV02] Daniel K. Nakano, Brian J. Parshall, and David C. Vella. Support varieties for algebraic groups. J. Reine Angew. Math., 547:15–49, 2002.
- [Ost97] Victor Ostrik. Tensor ideals in the category of tilting modules. Transform. Groups, 2(3):279–287, 1997.
- [Par03] Alison E. Parker. On the good filtration dimension of Weyl modules for a linear algebraic group. J. Reine Angew. Math., 562:5–21, 2003.
- [Pre03] Alexander Premet. Nilpotent commuting varieties of reductive Lie algebras. Invent. Math., 154(3):653–683, 2003.
- [SFB97a] Andrei Suslin, Eric M. Friedlander, and Christopher P. Bendel. Infinitesimal -parameter subgroups and cohomology. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 10(3):693–728, 1997.
- [SFB97b] Andrei Suslin, Eric M. Friedlander, and Christopher P. Bendel. Support varieties for infinitesimal group schemes. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 10(3):729–759, 1997.