Semisimple algebraic tensor categories
Rainer Weissauer

TL;DR
This paper characterizes semisimple algebraic tensor categories over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero as categories of finite-dimensional twisted super representations of affine reductive supergroups, detailing their structural properties.
Contribution
It provides a classification of such tensor categories in terms of supergroups and describes the conditions under which these supergroups are reductive, linking algebraic and superalgebraic structures.
Findings
Semisimple algebraic tensor categories correspond to representations of affine reductive supergroups.
Reductivity of the supergroup is characterized by its connected component and Lie superalgebra structure.
The Lie superalgebra divided by its center decomposes into classical Lie algebras and orthosymplectic types.
Abstract
A semisimple algebraic tensor category over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic zero is the representation category of all finite dimensional twisted super representations of an affine reductive supergroup G over k. Such a supergroup is reductive if and only if its connected component is reductive. The connected component is reductive if and only if the Lie superalgebra divided by its center is a product of simple Lie algebras of classical type and Lie superalgebras spo(1,2r) of the orthosymplectic types BC_r.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgebraic structures and combinatorial models · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology · Advanced Topics in Algebra
Semisimple algebraic tensor categories
(Rainer Weissauer)
For a field a monoidal -linear category abelian category is an abelian -linear category with biadditive tensor functor , -linear and exact in each variable, with associativity and commutativity constraints and unit element satisfying the axioms ACU of [SR]. Then is called rigid, if every object has a dual with morphisms
[TABLE]
so that and . See [CP] or [SR] for a detailed exposition.
Under the assumptions above, if is a small category such that , the category is called a ‘categorie -tensorielle ’in [D]. If in addition is generated by one of its objects as a tensor category, such that for some integer the lenght in is bounded by for all , the category will be called an algebraic tensor category over .
The typical example for an algebraic tensor category over (see [D], p.228) is the category of finite dimensional -linear -super representations
[TABLE]
of a super-affine groupscheme over . The main result on algebraic tensor categories is the following
Theorem 1. ([D]) Suppose is algebraically closed of characteristic zero. Then any algebraic tensor category over is of the form .
So let be algebraically closed of characteristic zero. Under this assumption it is then interesting to know the cases where the category is a semisimple abelian category. It is very easy to see that this only depends on the super-affine groupscheme and not on the additional twist . In other words is semisimple if and only if the category of all -linear finite dimensional super representations of is semisimple. More or less by definition coincides with the tensor category of -finite dimensional -comodules, where is the super-affine Hopf algebra over defined the coordinate ring of . If these categories are semisimple, we say is reductive.
For a super-affine groupscheme over a field of characteristic zero the reduced groupscheme of is an algebraic group over . The left-invariant super derivations of the underlying Hopf algebra corresponding to define a finite dimensional Lie superalgebra over . A Lie superalgebra over will be called reductive if modulo its supercenter it is isomorphic to a direct sum of simple Lie superalgebras over of the classical types and of the orthosymplectic simple supertypes . We then show
Theorem 2. * is reductive if and only its reduced group is a reductive algebraic group over and its Lie superalgebra is reductive over .*
In particular is reductive if and only if its connected component with respect to the Zariski topology is reductive. In the connected case we show that is reductive if and only if etale unramified coverings are connected.
For the proof of theorem 2 we pass from super-affine groupschemes over defined by their super-affine Hopf coordinate algebra over , to their associated supergroups . Here is the reduced group of . The even part of is the Lie algebra of . The odd part is an algebraic -module, and the Lie superbracket defines a -equivariant symmetric map . Together these data give rise to a triple called a supergroup or a Harish-Chandra triple. For a suitable notion of representations for supergroups then the following holds
Theorem 3. The categories of -finite dimensional super representations and are equivalent as algebraic tensor categories over .
Theorem 3 allows us to reduce the proof of theorem 2 to the classical results on the reductivity of semisimple Lie superalgebras obtained by Djokovic and Hochschild [DH].
Affine super Hopf algebras
Let be field of and be a Hopf algebra with comultiplication, counit and antipode over the field . Suppose is super-affine, i.e. suppose that as a ring A is a finitely generated super-commutative -algebra such that are morphisms in the category of super-commutative -algebras.
Remark. The tensor product of the category is the ordinary tensor product except that it carries an induced grading with additional sign rules for certain structures like the tensor product of super -algebras etc. For a detailed exposition of this we refer to [DM].
For the -grading defined by the super structure the super-commutativity rule implies for . Thus and the ideal generated by in are nilpotent. We call the super radical of . is a Hopf ideal, i.e. , and
[TABLE]
as an immediate consequence of
[TABLE]
and . Surjective Hopf algebra homomorphisms are in 1-1 correspondence with Hopf ideals of . Since is even, the quotient
[TABLE]
defines an commutative affine Hopf algebra quotient for which therefore
[TABLE]
is a group scheme of finite type over . We say is connected, if is connected in the Zariski topology. Similar for the notion of being simply connected. If , then is automatically reduced by a result of Cartier. In this case the super radical is the nilradical of .
-comodules
An -comodule is a -super vector space together with a -superlinear map
[TABLE]
satisfying the axioms (Modass) and (Modun) as in [S], p.30, i.e. the commutativity of
[TABLE]
The notion of -comodule only depends on the cogebra structure of . With the obvious notion of -comodule homomorphism (see [S], p.31) the category of -comodules is an abelian category. Any -comodule is a union of its -finite dimensional -submodules.The category of -finite dimensional -comodules is a -linear rigid abelian (monoidal) tensor category (see [CP], p.141).
Example a). itself is an -comodule by the Hopf algebra axioms
[TABLE]
Example b). For a -super subvectorspace such that the restriction defines an -comodule , a subcomodule of .
Example c). Any Hopf algebra quotient map makes -comodules into -comodules with respect to
[TABLE]
This is a consequence of and .
Representations
Suppose for an -comodule that the super vectorspace is finite dimensional with basis for . Then for certain . The axiom (Modass) implies . Thus the coefficients define a homomorphism of super Hopf algebras
[TABLE]
from the super Hopf algebra of the general linear group of the super vector space to . Indeed as -algebra is generated by elements and the inverse of the determinants of the for resp. subject to the rule . The elements are even iff or . In other words, this defines a super representation of , i.e. a homomorphism of super group schemes
[TABLE]
Conversely, it is easy to see that this defines a 1-1 correspondence between -finite dimensional -comodules and finite -linear dimensional super representations of the Lie super group scheme . The category of such -finite dimensional super representations of is an algebraic tensor category over . The following is well known (see [D])
Lemma 1. This correspondence induces a tensor-equivalence between the algebraic tensor categories and over .
The functor of invariants
For the -groupscheme consider the left-exact functor
[TABLE]
from the category of -comodules to the category of -vectorspaces. The -vectorspace can be identified with the maximal trivial -subcomodule of of all elements in for which
[TABLE]
We say a -comodule is free, if it isomorphic to a -comodule of the form . Here is a -vectorspace and . -comodules will be called almost free, if they have a finite filtration by -subcomodules whose sucessive quotients are free -comodules. Notice , since for . Hence for free
[TABLE]
Using bar-resolutions (see [DG], p.233ff) one can define derived functors such that . In other words a short exact sequence of -comodules gives rise to a long exact sequence of -vectorspaces using the derived functors . By [DG], lemma 3.4
[TABLE]
for any free -comodule. Obviously for almost free -comodules . Hence
Lemma 2. On the Grothendieck group of almost free -comodules
[TABLE]
defines a homomorphism .
The Hopf ideals defined by
Let be a super-affine Hopf algebra over . Then its super radical is generated as an -module by finitely many elements in . If is generated by elements then it is easy to see that . Hence there exists a finite descending filtration by -right (and left) ideals
[TABLE]
whose sucessive quotients
[TABLE]
are right (and left) -modules. Although the are not -modules a priori, they are -subcomodules of the -comodule with structure map
[TABLE]
using the examples a), b) and c) above. There is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
since the image of in , under , is contained in . Thus becomes a -comodule. The then are quotient -comodules of the in the obvious way.
Lemma 3. * is finite free both as a -right module and a -comodule.*
Proof. The -linear structure map of the -comodule is -linear in the following sense: For and of course . Since is -linear
[TABLE]
where is viewed as a -right module in the obvious way. In other words acts on via . Since the map induces a quotient map
[TABLE]
on making it to a -comodule. The right action of on factors over the quotient ring . Similarly the right action of on factors over the quotient ring , so that now (*)
[TABLE]
is obvious: The composition of with the projection is equal to .
It is the property (*) which makes the right -module and right -comodule into a -right Hopf module in the sense of [S], p.83. Since is an ordinary Hopf algebra we can immediately apply [S], theorem 4.1.1. It states that
[TABLE]
as a Hopf right -module and comodule for any Hopf right -module and co-module . Applied for we now use the fact that , hence also , are finitely generated -right modules. Hence in our case. This proves our claim. QED
Therefore is an almost free -comodule. By lemma 2 this implies
Corollary 1. \ dim_{k}(A^{G})=\sum_{i=0}^{s}d_{i}\* for .*
Remark. We will see later in corollary 5 that for affine super group scheme over we have . This will imply
[TABLE]
Lemma 4. * is a finite dimensional -subalgebra of *.
Proof. and imply . QED
Superderivations
.
Let be an super-affine Hopf algebra over . Let be the maximal ideal of at the identity. Tanget vectors extend to even or odd -linear superderivations by composing with the projection . Define -super derivations
[TABLE]
by the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Then by definition. The -superderivations so constructed are left-invariant, i.e. for there exists a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
by the coassociativity law and . Indeed, if we apply on the left side of the coassociativity law, this becomes . On the right side of the coassociativity law it becomes .
Lemma 5. There exists a canonical isomorphism of -vectorspaces
[TABLE]
between the tangent space at the identity element and the -vector space of all left-invariant -superderivations of .
Proof. The inverse map is . Since is a -superderivation, it must vanish on and on . Hence for some . The left-invariant -superderivation is uniquely determined by its restriction , since determines via the right vertical arrow of the composed commutative diagrams
[TABLE]
For any Hopf ideal of with quotient map the cotangent space surjects onto the cotangent space . Hence injects into . QED
Lemma 6. *The image of the natural injection is the space of left-invariant -derivations of (as in the last lemma) with the property . *
Proof. Such induce left-invariant derivations on the quotient . So it suffices that implies . For this let be the quotient map with kernel , considered as a -valued point of . For by definition . Now for since is a Hopf ideal. But . On the other hand for , since is the space of linear forms trivial on the image of . Hence or . QED
The Lie algebra. The supercommutator of two -super derivations is a -superderivations. Since the super commutator of left-invariant derivations is left invariant, the finite dimensional super-vector space
[TABLE]
defined by becomes a Lie -superalgebra with as a super vectorspace
[TABLE]
The super radical . Notice implies . Hence the quotient is odd. Since is nilpotent, we have and . Clearly the quotient again is odd. Since is even, also is even with even. Hence the exact sequence
[TABLE]
gives rise to a splitting of the super-vectorspace with even
[TABLE]
and with odd.
Fix a basis of and representatives of the elements . Then as a right-module. Consider the exact sequence of odd -vectorspaces
[TABLE]
We claim .
Since , the right hand side is contained in . Conversely elements have odd representatives in , or hence in . Notice by a case by case verification and the definition of the super graded ring structure on . Since , hence . As acts on via its quotient therefore the image of is contained in . This proves the claim. As a consequence
[TABLE]
Together with the lemma 6 this implies
Corollary 2. The left-invariant derivations for respect the exact sequence defined by the super radical
[TABLE]
A left-invariant superderivation preserves the super radical if and only if . Furthermore
[TABLE]
Homomorphisms. A homomorphism between super-affine -Hopf algebras induces a map between the tangent spaces at the identity element, hence a -linear map
[TABLE]
is a homomorphism of -super Lie algebras, since for . [Reduce to , hence to .]
Adjoint action. The interior automorphism defined by a -valued point of induces a Lie algebra homomorphism from to . Obviously . Hence defines a -linear representation on of the underlying algebraic group
[TABLE]
This adjoint action respects the super structure, hence decomposes into representations of on and respectively. is the usual adjoint action of on its Lie algebra .
Left versus right
Similar to left-invariant superderivations define right-invariant superderivations of a Hopfalgebra . The Lie superalgebra of the left-invariant and right-invariant superderivations are isomorphic (use the antipode). Left-invariant superderivations and right-invariant superderivations of supercommute. Use
[TABLE]
to show that their supercommutator is a derivation with . Hence by applying the counit .
Lemma 7. For quotients by a Hopf ideal and the left-invariant superderivations of preserve -subcomodules of .
Proof. The commutative diagram
[TABLE]
for and gives for the structure map of the -comodule .
Next notice and the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Hence for and with the element
[TABLE]
is using left-equivariance of as in first diagram above. Thus and . QED.
For in particular , since .
Corollary 3. * for all where . *
Corollary 4. * is stable under all right-invariant superderivations in . *
Proof. This follows from the commutative diagram
[TABLE]
which implies for the structure map of the -comodule . For by definition . Hence . This shows . QED
The subring
For the super radical of put and as before. Since is odd and almost free, the quotient map is surjective so that we can choose representatives of a -basis in so that the are also a -basis of by lemma 2. Then by recursion modulo the
[TABLE]
The are odd. Hence by supercommutativity
[TABLE]
For define if and . With these notations is generated as an -right module by the with . Hence for the elements mod in we get
[TABLE]
We may replace by a -right linear independent subset of of the set of all the , since we already know that is a free -right module generated by a -basis of . Therefore
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since , recursively now any element in can be written as a superpolynom in the elements by induction modulo the .This defines a surjective -algebra homomorphism mapping the generators of the superpolynomial ring to the .
Lemma 8. * is a superpolynomial ring over in the odd variables *.
Proof. Recall . This means that we can find odd right-invariant superderivations in such that in . In other words
[TABLE]
Since and since
[TABLE]
for certain super polynomials in the variables , whose minimal nonvanishing Taylor coefficient has degree . Suppose is an element in with minimal nonvanishing Taylor coefficient say of degree , such that this is minimal among all . If , then is a unit in the superpolynomial ring and the quotient would be zero in contradiction to . Hence . Let be a variable which occurs nontrivially in the Taylor coefficient of of degree . Then apply the derivative . Obviously has a nonvanishing Taylor coefficient of degree . On the other hand , hence . This gives a contradiction unless the kernel vanishes . QED
Then by an obvious counting argument lemma 8 implies
Corollary 5. * for all *.
Choice of bases. Up to a scalar for is independent of the choice of the basis , since it is a generator of the one dimensional vectorspace . Hence is an eigenvalue of the right-invariant operators corresponding to the character of . generates as a -right module for the universal enveloping algebra .
For the odd superderivations dual to the for define
[TABLE]
Since acts on by the character , it is easy to see that is annihilated by all right-invariant derivations for in . Furthermore modulo or
[TABLE]
A global splitting
The even derivation defined by the Euler operator
[TABLE]
obviously satisfies (with notations as in the last section). Hence as a derivation for all . The map
[TABLE]
induced by is -linear. So it suffices to compute on the basis elements . [For and use that mod and implies .] Therefore, as an immediate consequence of modulo , this shows
[TABLE]
Lemma 9. For or the even derivation induces an -linear isomorphism
[TABLE]
Proof. For large enough we have . The diagram
[TABLE]
commutes. Hence by downward induction is an -linear isomorphism for all using the snake lemma. QED
The kernel
[TABLE]
of the derivation is a -subalgebra of . In the situation of the last lemma the snake lemma for
[TABLE]
implies that the restriction of the quotient homomorphism to is bijective. This inverse of the isomorphism then defines a splitting of . Hence we get
Splitting theorem. Suppose or . Then is even and there exists an isomorphism of -superalgebras
[TABLE]
Supergroups
An affine algebraic group acts on its Lie algebra by the adjoint representation. Let be any finite dimensional algebraic representation of over with action denoted by . Then acts on by derivations . Consider -equivariant quadratic maps
[TABLE]
with respect to these actions of (i.e. arising from a symmetric -bilinear form on with values in ). A triple as above will be called a supergroup (over ) provided
[TABLE]
holds for all in . An associated Lie algebra considered as a -graded Lie algebra structure is defined on in the obvious way by the Lie bracket induced by the group structure of , the action of on and the map (super commutator). See [DM], p.59.
Example 1. If is a supergroup, then also its connected component in the Zariski topology .
Example 2. Super-affine Hopf algebra define supergroups
[TABLE]
where is the restriction of the Lie bracket on to the diagonal.
Example 3. As a special of example 2 for a finite dimensional super vector space over the standard supergroup is defined by together with and for the super commutator . Here we used the obvious identification .
Center. For a super group let the center be the maximal central subgroup of , which acts trivial on .
Morphisms. A homomorphism between supergroups is a pair , where is a group homomorphism between algebraic groups over and where is a -linear -equivariant map such that .
Representations. A representation of a supergroup is a finite dimensional super vector space together with a homomorphism of supergroups . The category of such representations, also denoted -modules, is a -linear abelian rigid (monoidal) tensor category
[TABLE]
with the forget functor as a super fibre functor. This fiber functor factorizes over the functor
[TABLE]
The category of super representations of the Lie superalgebra again is a -linear abelian rigid (monoidal) tensor category. Notation: Let be an automorphism of the supergroup . If is a -module, then also .
An equivalence of representation categories
Suppose . Let be the opposite of the category of affine super Hopf algebras over . Let be the category of supergroups . Recall is an affine algebraic groups over , and morphisms in are algebraic with respect to the first component of the triples. There is an obvious forget functor
[TABLE]
There is a similar forget functor from the category of differentiable Lie supergroups (as in [DM]) to the category of differentiable Harish Chandra triples. Objects now are for classical Lie groups . According to [DM] p.79, [CF], [K] p. 232 this forget functor is a quasi-equivalence of categories in the -case. Consider the following commutative diagram of forget functors
[TABLE]
Since an algebraic morphism is determined by its associated map, the functor is faithful by going over the top of the diagram. We now show
Theorem 4. The functor is fully faithful.
This immediately implies theorem 3 or the equivalent
Corollary 6. For a super-affine Hopf algebra over with its associated supergroup there exists a tensor-equivalence of algebraic tensor categories over
[TABLE]
Proof of theorem. For in with associated triples and in and a morphism
[TABLE]
in we have to construct a homomorphism of super Hopf algebras inducing . By the diagram above the corresponding differentiable morphism exists in .
By construction is ‘reduced algebraic’, i.e. the underlying morphism of Lie groups is induced from an algebraic morphism between the underlying reduced algebraic groups. Hence it suffices, if reduced algebraic morphisms of are induced from algebraic scheme morphisms , The algebraic scheme morphism then automatically respects the additional structures comultiplication, antipode and augmention; this is obvious, since by assumption the morphism induced from it has this property.
To construct from a reduced algebraic consider its graph
[TABLE]
which again is reduced algebraic. By projection onto the second factor it suffices to show that is algebraic. Thus it is enough to consider reduced algebraic morphisms which are closed immersions. This means that the underlying Hopf algebra morphism
[TABLE]
is surjective, and that the map induced by is injective.
Construction of . We may assume that is a locally algebraic closed immersion. How to find ? By the splitting theorem it suffices to find a right vertical ring homomorphism
[TABLE]
such that the morphism of super schemes induced on the left extends to the given in the differentiable category. Such of course exists if an only if the pullback of superfunctions in the differentiable sense satisfies the algebraicity condition
[TABLE]
Now use and , being defined by left-invariant derivations on the super ring of algebraic resp. differentiable functions. For there is a commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Since the kernel of all , derivations on (being contained in the kernel of all for ) pulls back to the kernel of all , on . Thus the desired existence of is evident, if the natural injection
[TABLE]
is a bijection. Notice is a Lie algebra, hence integrable! Thus for as a consequence of the Frobenius theorem. See [DM], p.75 and [K], p. 230. Therefore
[TABLE]
This implies and proves the claim. QED
Semisimple tensor categories
For a -linear abelian rigid (monoidal) tensor category with unit object and the object is simple (see [DMi], prop 1.17). Furthermore
Lemma 10. * is semisimple iff is injective or projective or is exact or holds for all simple objects in .*
Proof. is semisimple iff is exact in . This is equivalent to for all (simple) objects in . QED
For tensor categories and as above let be an exact covariant functor with an isomorphism . Assume is a left-exact covariant functor. Let be an epimorphism in
[TABLE]
Suppose there exists a natural transformation
[TABLE]
such that .
Example. exact tensor functor with left adjoint . Then defines and let correspond to for . Then the above properties hold.
Lemma 11. a) In the situation above is semisimple, if is semisimple. b) If is adjoint to and , then is semisimple iff is semisimple and splits in .
Proof. b) Suppose is semisimple. Then is exact. If splits in , then . Hence also is exact. Hence is semisimple. Conversely if is semisimple, splits.
a) Suppose is semisimple. If is not semisimple, then by the lemma 10 there exists a simple object and a nonsplit extension in
[TABLE]
Since and by our assumptions, is not in the kernel of . Hence is a monomorphism. Then implies , since is simple. Since this would split this proves
[TABLE]
Since is semisimple, has a section . Then
[TABLE]
defined by is nonzero. [Otherwise , from , would give by the naturality of ]. Hence is an isomorphism as is simple, using . Then splits
[TABLE]
Since this splits in . Contradiction! Hence is semisimple.
Semisimple representation categories
Let be a supergroup over . The obvious covariant exact restriction functor satisfies . There exists a covariant induction functor
[TABLE]
which, for in and , is defined by
[TABLE]
The action of on comes from an algebraic action of on by the -module isomorphism . Hence . It is easy to see that is exact and left adjoint to , i.e. Frobenius reciprocity .
Since has characteristic zero is semisimple if and only if is a reductive algebraic group over . Therefore lemma 11 b) implies
Theorem 5. * is semisimple if and only if (a) is reductive and (b) the surjection of -modules defined by the adjunction morphism*
[TABLE]
has a splitting in the category .
Remark. By condition a) holds iff is a reductive Lie algebra over . Condition b) says that the restriction
[TABLE]
to the space of -invariant subspace of is surjective. For then by [DG], prop. 2.1(c), p.309. The group of connected components of in the Zariski topology is finite. Since the functor of -invariants is exact by Maschke’s theorem. Hence conditions a) resp b) are equivalent to the following conditions
[TABLE]
Definition. If satisfies these two properties, we say the Lie superalgebra is reductive. is semisimple if and only if is reductive (by theorem 5). In this case we say is reductive.
Connected component. As already explained
[TABLE]
Etale coverings. Similarly we may replace by a finite etale covering . We say that the supergroup attached to is a finite etale (central) cover of . Then of course
[TABLE]
Then for a finite subgroup of the center of .
Central quotients. Finally if is a closed subgroup of the center of , then again a supergroup called a central quotient. Obviously
[TABLE]
since is a full subcategory of , if is semisimple!
Reductive supergroups
The main classification statement involves the orthosymplectic supergroups
[TABLE]
Fix a nondegenerate antisymmetric -matrix so that . This identifies with the matrices for which is symmetric. For the standard action of on the map
[TABLE]
for is well defined and equivariant such that . So this defines a supergroup. Different choices of yield isomorphic supergroups.
Proposition 1. A supergroup is reductive over if and only if its connected component admits a finite etale central covering, which as a supergroup is a direct product of super groups of the following type
[TABLE]
Similarly a Lie superalgebra is reductive if and only if, modulo the center, it is a direct sum of simple Lie superalgebras of classical type or of the orthosymplectic types corresponding to the super groups .
Proof. A product of reductive supergroups is reductive. We leave this as an exersize. So in one direction it suffices that the supergroups are reductive. In fact because is simply connected, and this reduces to [DH], theorem 4.1.
Now for the converse. By our preliminary remarks in the last section we may replace by an etale finite covering , where for a -torus and a product of connected simple and simply connected -groups. Then we can divide by its maximal central torus . The new supergroup is reductive, if is reductive. This allows to reduce the proof to the case without central torus so that in addition is connected and a product of a torus and a simple simply connected -group . If these conditions hold and is semisimple, we say is good. So assume is good. Then by [DG], page 309ff and theorem 4 it suffices to prove that is a product of simple Lie superalgebras of the classical type and types . Using condition b’) this immediately would follow from [DH], theorem 4.1 for semisimple .
We already know is reductive. To show that is semisimple we claim that is a direct sum of Lie superalgebras with and either or is an irreducible -module with . This is easy: For and an irreducible -submodule
[TABLE]
is an ideal in by the Jacobi identity . Hence either in case commutes with , or otherwise
[TABLE]
is an ideal in with the desired property. (As a -module, thus as a -module) splits into ideals by the semisimplicity of . The ideal property decomposes . Since condition b’) easily implies for (see [DH], prop.2.2) our claim follows by induction.
To show that is an ideal for , notice . Indeed and . Thus . Therefore , since is a -submodule of . Obvious are and and similarly . To show use .
If is an irreducible -module, the center of acts by a character . By the equivariance and surjectivity (!) of the Lie bracket
[TABLE]
the trivial action of on forces , hence . Thus is in the center of , therefore trivial by our assumption that is good. Hence the reductive Lie algebra is semisimple. QED
The categories
For a supergroup suppose is in the center of such that and . Let be the full subcategory of defined by the super representations for which is the super parity automorphism of . is an algebraic tensor category over (see [D]).
Not every supergroup admits twisting elements as above. But the extended supergroup , where , always has the twisting element . The forget functor defines a tensor-equivalence
[TABLE]
since extends uniquely to for .
Lemma 12. * is semisimple if and only if is semisimple.*
Since this is a statement on the underlying abelian categories, we may ignore the tensor structures on these categories. On the underlying abelian categories the parity change , defined by the trivial super representation on , induces a functor which in general does not preserve the subcategory . However
[TABLE]
preserves the subcategory .
Proof of lemma 12. In the extended supergroup we have two twisting elements and . This defines an element in the center of the supergroup , i.e. is in the center of with trivial action on , and commutes with and . The eigenspace decomposition with respect to decomposes the category
[TABLE]
and also its subcategories and . Then by definition and Rep_{k}^{-}({\bf G}^{ext},\varepsilon^{ext})=\Pi\bigl{(}Rep_{k}^{+}({\bf G}^{ext},\varepsilon^{ext})\bigr{)}, since has trivial action and acts by on . Ignoring tensor structures and give
[TABLE]
Hence is semisimple iff is semisimple. QED
Remarks on
We discuss the representations of the orthosymplectic group over . The category of super representations of a supergroup contains the trivial even representation on and the odd trivial representation on such that .
For the center of is . The center of is trivial. Hence gives a unique choice for a twisting element to define a category . Recall from the last section
[TABLE]
Also notice .
The standard representation . Consider the following representation of the supergroup on . As a -module with trivial action on and with the standard representation of on . This defines for . We identify with . The odd elements act on by defined by the annihilation and creation operators
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then for . We call the orthosymplectic standard representation. It is easy to see that is an irreducible super representation.
Invariant form . The orthosymplectic standard representation admits a nondegenerate supersymmetric -invariant form
[TABLE]
where is the orthogonal direct sum of the symmetric form on and the antisymmetric form on . In fact the orthosymplectic supergroup is the automorphism group of this supersymmetric form on . In particular: The standard representation is an ‘orthogonal self dual’ faithful representation of . Hence is a tensor generator of
[TABLE]
See [Sh] for an explicit decomposition of the tensor powers . See [RS] for a connection of with the representation category of the group .
Lemma 13. All irreducible representations in are ‘orthogonal self dual’. All representations in are ‘symplectic self dual’.
Proof. If is ‘orthogonal self dual’ then is ‘symplectic self dual’ and vice versa. Since it therefore suffices that contains all ‘orthogonal self dual’irreducible representations. Tensor products of ‘orthogonal self dual’ representations are ‘orthogonal self dual’, hence any multiplicity one representation contain in it is again ‘orthogonal self dual’. By the theory of highest weight vectors any irreducible representation in appears with multiplicity one in a tensor power of irreducible fundamental representations of up to parity shift. For these and . See [Dj], p.31 and p.36. Obviously . The are self dual, therefore ‘orthogonal self dual’ by considering their restriction to , which contains the highest weight representation with multiplicity one as an ‘orthogonal self dual’ representation of . QED
We claim
Lemma 14. For the tensor subcategory of generated by the standard representation of is . The tensor subcategory generated by is the full category .
Proof. It suffices to find in a tensor power of . Then generates and . We claim
[TABLE]
for the induced module . By Frobenius reciprocity the dimension of
[TABLE]
is by the classical invariant theory of the group . A basis for the invariants are the powers of the symplectic form . Indeed
[TABLE]
for and the different fundamental representations of (see [Dj], p.36). By Frobenius reciprocity also the dimension of
[TABLE]
is equal to using
[TABLE]
Then , provided has at least nonisomorphic irreducible constituents. For this (with the convention I of [DM], p.49 and p.62f) consider the superpolynomial ring
[TABLE]
Multiplication with the invariant form is injective inducing a filtration of by -modules . Notice for . The highest weight submodules of the for define nonisomorphic -modules, since and as -modules. Hence
[TABLE]
Therefore the must have been irreducible -modules. Considering highest weights a comparison shows for and for . Hence all the representations for are constituents of the tensor power . QED
We remark that there is a dual filtration on with , and again .
Lemma 15. Let be a semisimple algebraic tensor category over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero. For a simple object of the categorial rank does not vanish.
Proof. Since , this follows from [Ka], p.619 formula (2.6) with in the notations of loc. cit. QED
Structure Theorem
Assume . Then according to proposition 1 a connected reductive supergroup is of the form where is a product of orthosymplectic supergroups and where is a reductive algebraic -group. Since is a finite central subgroup of and since the center of is trivial, this implies . Hence for . Hence
Lemma 16. A connected reductive supergroup is isomorphic to a product where is a reductive algebraic -group and where is a product of orthosymplectic supergroups.
For and one has and therefore . In other words, any automorphism of is an inner automorphism for a unique element . Let be a reductive supergroup. Then the group acts on . For we can choose a representative , by a suitable modification with an element in , such that acts by a strict permutation of the factors on . The group of such defines a canonical subgroup such that . Hence . Hence any has a representative in . We get a canonical homomorphism
[TABLE]
into the product of symmetric permutation groups whose kernel is . Conversely given such a homomorphism for a reductive algebraic -group one can construct the semidirect product supergroup obtained from the permutation action of on . Obviously in our case therefore
Theorem 6. Any reductive supergroup over an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero is isomorphic to a semidirect product of a reductive algebraic -group with a product of simple supergroups of -type, where the semidirect product is defined by an abstract group homomorphism
[TABLE]
References
[CF] Cook J.-Fulp R., Infinite dimensional Super Lie groups, arXiv: math-ph / 0610061
[CP] Chari V.-Pressley A., A guide to Quantum groups, Cambridge university press (1998)
[D] Deligne P., Categories Tensorielles, Moscow Mathematical Journal, vol. 2, n. 2, p. 227 - 248 (2002)
[DMi] Deligne P.-Milne J.S., Tannakian categories, in Hodge cycles, Motives, and Shimura Varieties, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 900 (1982)
[DM], Deligne P. -Morgan J.W., Notes on supersymmetry (following J.Bernstein), AMS (1999), in Quantum fields and strings, a course for mathematicians, vol. 1.
[DG], Demazure M.-Gabriel P., Introduction to Algebraic geometry and Algebraic groups, North-Holland (1980)
[Dj] Djokovic D.Z., Symplectic 2-graded Lie Algebras, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra 9, 25-38 (1976)
[DH] Djokovic D.Z. -Hochschild G., Semisimplicity of 2-graded Lie Algebras II, Illinois J. Math., 20 (1976)
[H] Hochschild G., Semisimplicity of 2-graded Lie Algebras, Illinois J. Math., 20 (1976)
[Ka] Kac V.G., Representations of classical Lie superalgebras, in Differential Geometric methods in Mathematical Physics II, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 676 (1978)
[K] Kostant B., Graded Manifolds, graded Lie theory, and Prequantisation, in Differential Geometric Methods in Mathematical Physics, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 570, (1977)
[RS] Rittenberg V.-Scheunert M., A remarkable connection between the representations of the Lie superalgebra osp(1,2n) and the Lie algebra o(2n+1), Comm. Math. Phys. 83 (1982), no. 1, 1-9.
[SR] Saavedra Rivano, Categories Tannakiennes, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 265, (1972)
[Sch] Scheunert M. , The Theory of Lie Superalgebras, Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 716, (1979)
[Sh] C.L.Shader J.Korean Math Soc 36 (1999), no. 3, p. 593-607
[S] Sweedler M.S., Hopf algebras, Benjamin (1968)
