This paper explores the cohomology of unipotent group schemes, linking universal classes to explicit cohomology classes of Frobenius kernels and analyzing the cohomology of specific unipotent groups like the Heisenberg group.
Contribution
It establishes explicit cohomology classes for Frobenius kernels of linear algebraic groups and investigates the relationship between inverse limits and rational cohomology.
Findings
01
Universal classes determine explicit cohomology classes of Frobenius kernels.
02
The relationship between inverse limit cohomology and rational cohomology is clarified.
03
Detailed analysis of the cohomology of Frobenius kernels of the Heisenberg group.
Abstract
We verify that universal classes in the cohomology of GLN determine explicit cohomology classes of Frobenius kernels G(r) of various linear algebraic groups G . We consider the relationship of limrH∗(U(r),k) to the rational cohomology H∗(U,k) of many unipotent algebraic groups U. The second half of this paper investigates in detail the cohomology of Frobenius kernels (U3)(r) of the Heisenberg group U3⊂GL3.
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
TopicsAdvanced Algebra and Geometry · Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory · Homotopy and Cohomology in Algebraic Topology
Full text
Cohomology of Unipotent Group Schemes
Eric M. Friedlander*∗*
Department of Mathematics, University of Southern California,
Los Angeles, CA
We verify that universal classes in the cohomology of GLN determine explicit
cohomology classes of Frobenius kernels G(r) of various linear algebraic groups G .
We consider the relationship of limrH∗(U(r),k) to the rational cohomology
H∗(U,k) of many unipotent algebraic groups U. The second half of this
paper investigates in detail the cohomology of Frobenius kernels (U3)(r)
of the Heisenberg group U3⊂GL3.
Key words and phrases:
rational cohomology, Frobenius kernels, unipotent algebraic groups
We consider linear algebraic groups G defined over a field of characteristic p>0 and their
Frobenius kernels G(r). We investigate the rational cohomology algebra H∗(G,k) of G and
the cohomology algebra H∗(G(r),k). Our results are of two types. The
first two sections are of a general nature, applying to a wide class of unipotent groups. The next two
sections provide more detailed information for H∗((U3)(r),k), where U3⊂GL3 is
the Heisenberg group.
The cohomology of groups has played an important role in various aspects of topology, number theory,
and algebraic geometry. Our initial interest was generated by the foundational work of D. Quillen [19], [20]
and the connections with algebraic K-theory as also developed by Quillen [21]. Subsequently, thanks
to the work of many mathematicians beginning with J. Alperin - L. Evens [2], J. Carlson [4],
and E. Cline - B. Parshall - L. Scott [6], cohomology of groups has evolved into a useful
tool (“support varieties”) for the study of representations of finite group schemes. We would be amiss not to mention
work of the author with B. Parshall (e.g., [10]), A. Suslin (e.g., [13]), and J. Pevtsova
(e.g., [12]).
Considerable progress has been made in computing the cohomology of infinitesimal group schemes of height 1, beginning with
work of Friedlander-Parshall [10]; this was extended by C. Drupieski - D. Nakano - N. Ngo [8]
to a determination of the cohomology algebra H∗((UJ)1,k) for unipotent radicals UJ of parabolic subgroups
of reductive groups (as considered in this paper) for sufficiently large primes p, and further
investigated by J. Carlson - D. Nakano [5] for small primes. The focus of this paper is the challenge
of achieving explicit computations of the cohomology of infinitesimal group schemes of height >1.
The work
of A. Suslin, C. Bendel, and the author [23], [24] gives a qualitative description of H∗(G(r),k)
for the cohomology of Frobenius kernels of any linear algebraic group G. A key step in this description for G
utilizes universal classes for GLN constructed in [13] leading to a map ϕGLN:k[Vr(GLN)]→H∗((GLN)(r),k), complementing in the special case of G=GLN, the canonical map ψ:H∗(G(r),k)→k[Vr(G)]);
here, k[Vr(G)] is the coordinate algebra of the variety of 1-parameter subgroups
Ga(r)→G.
In Section 1, we extend this construction to various linear algebraic groups
G with an embedding G→GLN of exponential type. In particular, Theorem 1.7 establishes
a map ϕG,r from an explicit symmetric algebra determined by g=Lie(G) to H∗(G(r),k) whose image
is highly non-trivial. For UJ the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup of GLN, Proposition 1.9
shows that ϕUJ,r determines the map ϕUJ,r satisfying the properties established for
ϕGLN,r in [23], [24].
The author’s original motivation for the study of H∗(U(r),k) was to investigate the feasibility of a cohomology-based
theory of support varieties for a unipotent algebraic group U complementing his theory using 1-parameter subgroups [9]
for much more general linear algebraic groups. One reason for restricting our attention to unipotent algebraic groups
is that H∗(G,k) is trivial for many linear algebraic groups (for example, if G is simple) but is never trivial if G
is unipotent.
Our computations show such a cohomology-based theory even for unipotent linear algebraic groups is unlikely; see, for example,
Corollary 2.7 in conjunction with Theorem 4.5.
We present in Section 2 various results concerning the limiting behavior of the cohomology of
Frobenius kernels U(r) of a unipotent algebraic group U as r increases. In particular, Theorem
2.2 established that the inverse limit with respect to r of such Frobenius kernels is additively
isomorphic to the rational cohomology of U; this verification is the first of several occasions in this paper
where we utilize the Andersen-Jantzen spectral sequence [1] for the cohomology of a connected group scheme.
The results of this Section 2 formulate the general principal that the explicit cohomology classes
considered in other sections of this paper “vanish in the limit.”
A second motivation for our calculations is internal, within the general framework of
cohomology of groups. Let G be a simple algebraic group, UJ⊂PJ⊂G the unipotent
radical of a parabolic subgroup, and {Γv,v≥1} the descending central series of UJ.
This descending central series is well described by H. Azad, M. Barry, and G. Seitz in [3].
Using the Lyndon-Hochschild-Serre spectral sequence [15]
for the central extension 1→Γ2/Γ3→UJ→UJ/Γ2→1,
we construct in Definition 3.8 the map of graded k-algebras
[TABLE]
where S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) is a polynomial algebra with generating subspaces
⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2] (in cohomology degree 2,
where the Frobenius twist (−)(ℓ+1) indicates the torus action) and
⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1].
The subtlety here is the existence of the choice of an intrinsic map ηUJ/Γ3.
This is established with the help of the Andersen-Jantzen spectral sequence.
Proposition 3.11 verifies that ηUJ/Γ3
factors through ηUJ/Γ3,r:S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))→H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k),
reflecting the kernel of the inflation map H∗((UJ/Γ2)(r),k)→H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k); this kernel
has explicit generators given by (3.3.2) arising from a non-zero differential in the spectral sequence.
A key ingredient in this construction is the action of the Steenrod algebra on
the LHS spectral sequence which enables us to identify permanent cycles.
We view the map ηUJ/Γ3,r as a good “explicit” model for
H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k). As summarized in Theorem 4.5,
ηU3,r=ϕU3,r:S∗((U3)(r))→H∗((U3)(r),k)
is a map from an integrally closed domain with known generators and relations
to H∗((U3)(r),k) which is a.) injective, b.) surjective onto p-th powers, and
c.) has associated graded map gr(ηU,r) which is both injective and surjective
onto p-th powers.
We anticipate that similar arguments should apply to H∗((UJ/Γv+1)(r),k) for any v≥2
once a suitable action of the Steenrod algebra on the Andersen-Jantzen spectral sequence [1] is established.
This is only one of the many challenges left unanswered in the present paper, and appears as Question 3 in the list of
seven questions given in Section 5.
In what follows, k denotes an algebraically closed field of characteristic p>2.
We denote by H∗(G,k) the (rational, or Hochschild) cohomology of an affine group scheme
G over k and by H∙(G,k)⊂H∗(G,k) the commutative subalgebra of cohomology
classes of even degree. We use V# to denote the k-linear dual of a k-vector space V. Other
than in Section 2 where we
consider the effect of increasing r, we fix an arbitrary positive integer r.
We thank Robert Guralnick for helpful discussions. We especially express our gratitude and admiration
to the patient referee for detailed and constructive corrections.
1. 1-parameter subgroups, exponential type, and cohomology
In this section, we extend the formulation of the map of k-algebras
[TABLE]
given by A. Suslin and the author in [13] to the Frobenius kernels U(r) of various unipotent subgroups
U⊂GLN. In contrast to our subsequent constructions, this extension involves little computation.
Throughout this discussion, r will denote an arbitrary positive integer. The main result of this section,
Theorem 1.7 gives sufficient conditions for a simple group G given together with an embedding
i:G⊂GLN to admit an induced map ϕG,r which in turn determine an induced map for certain
unipotent subgroups UJ⊂G.
Recall that for any linear algebraic group G over k,
the r-th iterate Fr:G→G(r) of the Frobenius map F:G→G(1) admits a
scheme theoretic kernel G(r)≡ker{Fr} which is an infinitesimal group scheme of height r.
The coordinate algebra k[G(r)] of G(r) equals the
finite dimensional commutative Hopf algebra k[G]/Ipr, where I is the maximal ideal at the identity of G
and where Ipr is the ideal generated by {fpr,f∈I}.
A (rational) G(r)-module is a comodule for k[G(r)] or, equivalently, a module for
kG(r)≡(k[G(r)])# (the k-linear dual of k[G(r)] with its inherited Hopf algebra structure).
For G defined over Fpr, we may view the Frobenius map Fr
as an endomorphism of G and G(r)⊂G as the kernel of Fr:G→G.
The universal, GLN-invariant classes er−ℓ=er−ℓ(0)∈H2pr−ℓ−1(GLN,glN(r−ℓ)) of [13]
and their ℓ-th Frobenius twist er−ℓ(ℓ)∈H2pr−ℓ−1(GLN,glN(r)) (i.e., pull-back
along the ℓ-th iterate Fℓ of the Frobenius morphism F:GLN→GLN) are elements in the rational
cohomology of the (reductive) algebraic group GLN. The restriction of er−ℓ(ℓ) to GLN(r),
[TABLE]
can be identified with a GLN-equivariant map
[TABLE]
(vanishing on the dual trace class Tr(r)∈glN#(r)), thereby determining the GLN-equivariant map of
commutative k-algebras (1.0.1). For ℓ<r, the Frobenius map Fℓ restricts to
Fℓ:GLN(r)→GLN(r) and factors as
[TABLE]
The Frobenius twist (er−ℓ(ℓ))(r) can thus be realized as the pull-back along
GLN(r)↠GLN(r−ℓ) of
(er−ℓ(0))(r−ℓ)∈H2pr−ℓ−1(GLN(r−ℓ),glN(r−ℓ)).
The following proposition summarizes some of the basic properties of these universal classes (whose
proofs can be found in [13] and [23]).
er−ℓ∈H2pr−ℓ−1(GLN,glN(r−ℓ))* restricts via the “standard inclusion” GLN−1⊂GLN to er−ℓ∈H2pr−ℓ−1(GLN−1,glN−1(r−ℓ)).*
4. (4)
For any root subgroup Ei,j:Ga→GLN (with i<j), the restriction of
er−ℓ(ℓ) to H2pr−ℓ−1(Ga(1),glN(r)) equals
x1pr−ℓ−1⊗Xi,j(r), where x1∈H2(Ga(1),k)
is the “canonical generator”.
Following [23] (specifically, the notation of the proof of Proposition 5.1 of [23]),
we use the following notation: we identify S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]))
with the algebra of functions on the affine space ArN2=∏ℓ=0r−1Mn,n, identifying
Xi,j(ℓ)∈glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]
with the (i,j) coordinate function of the ℓ-th factor.
For any affine group scheme G
over k, we use the notation Vr(G) for
the affine scheme of 1-parameter subgroups of G of height r (i.e., homomorphisms Ga(r)→G
of group schemes over k) with
coordinate algebra k[Vr(G)] as in [23].
We state two theorems of Suslin-Friedlander-Bendel. The first originates from the observation in
[23] that every infinitesimal 1-parameter subgroup ψ:Ga(r)→GLN is uniquely of the form
[TABLE]
for some r-tuple B=(B0,…Br−1) of p-nilpotent, pair-wise commuting elements of glN.
Here, q is the quotient by the ideal generated by the relations
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
for all i,j,ℓ,ℓ′ as in [23, 5.1]. Thus, Vr(GLN) is identified with the k-scheme of r-tuples
of p-nilpotent matrices (in view of relations {Si,j,ℓ}) which are pair-wise commuting (in view of relations
{Ri,j,ℓ,ℓ′}).
Theorem 1.2 can be viewed as a complement (in the special case G=GLN(r)) to the
following theorem.
Fix some integer r≥1. Then for any infinitesimal group scheme H of height ≤r, there
is a natural homomorphism of commutative k-algebras*
[TABLE]
whose kernel is nilpotent and whose image contains all pr-th powers of elements of k[Vr(H)].
If H=G(r), the r-th Frobenius kernel of some linear algebraic group G, then we denote
ψ by ψG,r:H∙(G(r),k)→k[Vr(G)].
The map ψG,r is G-equivariant.
In the special case of G=GLN(r), the composition
[TABLE]
is the r-th iterate of the Frobenius map. In particular, ψGLN,r(ϕGLN,r(Xi,j(ℓ)))=(Xi,j(ℓ))pr.
Remark 1.4**.**
The assertion of Theorem 1.3 of G-equivariance of ψG,r arises from the naturality of ψ,
in particular the commutativity of the first displayed square of the proof of Theorem 1.14 of [23].
As shown in [23], Vr(G) has a natural grading given by the monoid action of (right) composition by
Vr(Ga(r)) on Vr(G); namely, one restricts this action of Ar≃Vr(Ga(r)) to the
linear polynomials A1⊂Ar. With this grading, Xi,j(ℓ)∈k[Vr(GLN)] has grading
pr−ℓ−1 mapping via ϕGLN,r to a cohomology class of degree 2pr−ℓ−1, then further mapping
via ψGLN,r to Fr(Xi,j(ℓ)) with degree pr⋅pr−ℓ−1.
We recall that a closed embedding G→GLN of a linear algebraic group G is said to be of exponential type if
the map of schemes exp:Ga×Np(glN)→Vr(GLN) given by the usual truncated exponential map
restricts to E:Ga×Np(g)→Vr(G). (As usual, for any p-restricted Lie algebra g, we denote the
p-operator as (−)[p]:g→g and we denote by Np(g)⊂g the subvariety whose k points are
elements X∈g such that X[p]=0.) For any
G equipped with such an embedding, every infinitesimal 1-parameter subgroup
Ga(r)→G is uniquely of the form ∏s=0r−1EBs∘Fs for some B∈Cr(Np(g))
by [22, 2.5];
here, Cr(Np(g)) is
the variety of r-tuples (B0,…,Br−1) of p-nilpotent, pairwise commuting elements of g.
.
Proposition 1.5**.**
Let i:G→GLN be a closed embedding of exponential type for some linear algebraic group G.
Then the following square is a cartesian square of closed immersions
[TABLE]
In other words, we have a cocartesian square of quotient maps of k-algebras
[TABLE]
Proof.
The condition that i:G→GLN is of exponential type enables us to identify
the embedding Vr(G)→Vr(GLN) of schemes representing height r infinitesimal
1-parameter subgroups with the embedding of schemes of r-tuples of p-nilpotent, pair-wise
commuting elements of respective Lie algebras. Using this, we verify that (1.5.1)
arises as a cartesian square of representable functors. Namely, we verify that the
defining relations {Ri,j,ℓ,ℓ′,Si,j,ℓ} in
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])) (for
Vr(GLN)⊂(glN)×r)
have image in S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(g#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])) (i.e., restrictions to
(g)×r⊂(glN)×r) which generate defining relations for Vr(G)⊂(glN)×r.
This follows from the observation for X,Y∈g that the condition that X,Y commute in g is the
same as the condition that their images commute in glN, and the condition that X[p]=0 is the condition
that the image of X in glN has p-th power 0.
The cartesian square (1.5.1) is equivalent to the cocartesian square (1.5.2)
of coordinate algebras thanks to the anti-equivalence of categories relating affine k-schemes and
finitely generated commutative k-algebras.
∎
We thank R Guralnick for explaining the following result of S. Garibaldi given in [14].
If G is a simple algebraic group for which p>2 is a very good prime (i.e.,
for type An−1, p does not divide n; for type G2,F4,E6,E7, p>3; for type E8, p>5),
then there exist a closed embedding i:G→GLN such that the induced map i:g→glN admits
a unique G-equivariant splitting τ:glN→g.*
Garibaldi’s result is proved for a split, almost simple algebraic group over an arbitrary field F and uses
an embeddding G⊂GLN associated to a representation defined over F. The splitting
is also defined over F.
The following theorem can be interpreted as giving a lower bound on the “size” of H∙(G(r),k).
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let G be a simple algebraic group and assume that p>2 is very good for G. Assume give some
embedding i:G⊂GLN as in Proposition 1.6 which is also an embedding of exponential type. Let
τ:glN→g=Lie(G) be the unique G-equivariant splitting of i:g→glN.
Set ϕG,r=i∗∘ϕGLN,r∘τ∗. Then
[TABLE]
has image containing all pr-th powers.
Consider the unipotent radical UJ of PJ⊂G
for some subset J of the set of fundamental positive roots Π of a chosen root system for G (given by a
choice B⊂G of Borel subgroup with maximal torus T), denote by
τUJ:g→uJ the unique T-equivariant splitting of iUJ:u→g, and set ϕUJ,r=iUJ∗∘ϕG,r∘τUJ∗. Then the composition
[TABLE]
has image containing all pr-th powers and is injective when restricted to each uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1].
Proof.
Consider the following diagram, where Fr denotes the r-th power of the Frobenius map:
[TABLE]
Commutativity of the left square is a consequence of Proposition 1.5 and commutativity of
the right square follows from the functoriality of ψ; commutativity of the left rectangle follows from
the definition of ϕG,r, whereas commutativity of the right rectangle is a consequence of the
functoriality of Fr for maps of varieties defined over Fpr (granted that Garibaldi’s splitting is
defined over Fp, as observed after the statement of Proposition 1.6).
To show that ψG,r∘ϕG,r has image containing all pr-th powers, we observe that
Fr:k[Vr(G)]→k[Vr(G)] has image containing all pr-th powers. Thus, a simple diagram chase around the commutative
diagram (1.7.1) using the surjectivity of qG,r verifies this assertion.
Consider now the
following diagram obtained by replacing i:G→GLN in (1.7.1) by iUJ:UJ→G:
[TABLE]
The previous argument applies with only notational changes to verify the corresponding assertions for
ψUJ,r∘ϕUJ,r.
∎
Example 1.8**.**
As stated in [23, 1.8], the classical simple algebraic groups Sp2n,SOn and
SLn admit embeddings of exponential type. Namely,
one considers a vector space (of dimension 2n for Sp2n, of dimension n for On) equipped
with a non-degenerate bilinear form and one takes the embedding given by considering those linear
isomorphisms preserving the form. These embeddings i:G→GLN are defined over Fp
and also satisfy the condition that
i:glN→g admits a (unique) G-equivariant splitting.
For UJ⊂GLN, we have the following natural strengthening of Theorem 1.7.
We denote by TN⊂GLN the maximal torus of diagonal matrices.
Proposition 1.9**.**
Let iUJ:UJ→GLN be the inclusion of the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup
of GLN. Then we have the following TN-equivariant, commutative diagram, a stronger version of the
diagram obtained from (1.7.1):
[TABLE]
In particular, any element in the kernel of ϕUJ,r has pr-th power 0.
Proof.
Observe that the T-weights of H∙((UJ)(r),k) are all negatives of roots in the lattice generated by
the roots of UN, so that iUJ∗∘ϕGLN,r restricted to each uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1] must
factor as a T-equivariant map through the projection glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]→uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1].
This determines the map ϕUJ,r making commutative the left rectangle (i.e., double square) of
(1.9.1). In view of the surjectivity of qGLN,r,
the map ϕU,r is uniquely determined making the middle square commute.
Recall that the composition of F with the geometric Frobenius is the p-th power map. This implies
that any element in the kernel of Fr, and thus any element in the kernel of ϕU,r, has pr-th
power 0.
∎
The next proposition helps to pin down ϕG,r.
Proposition 1.10**.**
Let iUJ:UJ→GLN be the inclusion of the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup
of GLN. Denote by
Γ2⊂UJ the commutator subgroup of UJ
with Lie algebra γ2, and denote by q:UJ→UJ/Γ2 the projection.
Then the following square commutes for each ℓ,0≤ℓ<r:
[TABLE]
The lower left map of (1.10.1) is a special case (for V=(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1))
of the natural embedding V(r−ℓ−1)⊂Spr−ℓ−1(V) sending v∈V to its pr−ℓ−1-st
power. We have abused notation by using ϕUJ,r
to denote the restriction to the indicated summand of the map of (1.9.1) with this name.
For a minimal weight α of uJ, the map
ϕU/Γ2,r restricted to the weight space k⋅Xα(ℓ) of weight prα
is explicitly described as the projection (u/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]→k⋅Xα(ℓ),
followed by the map sending Xα(ℓ) to the pr−ℓ−1-st power of the natural class in H2(Ga(r),k),
followed by the inflation map H∗(Ga(r),k)→H∗((UJ/Γ2)(r),k) induced by the quotient map
UJ/Γ2→Ga onto the root subgroup indexed by the root α.
Proof.
We first observe the commutativity of
[TABLE]
where Ga≃Eα⊂UJ is the root subgroup associated to a minimal root α and qα:UJ/Γ2→Eα is the projection, a group homomorphism since α is minimal. This commutativity of (1.10.2)
follows from Proposition 1.1(4) and the fact iα:Ga→UJ/Γ2 is left inverse to qα.
This implies the commutativity of (1.10.1) for ℓ=0
For ℓ>0, we apply (1.10.2) with r replaced by r−ℓ and use the commutativity of
[TABLE]
which is a direct consequence of the definition of ϕGLN,r.
∎
2. Stabilization of H∙(U(r),k) with respect to r
Part of the author’s motivation for considering H∗(U(r),k) was
the hope that some form of “continuous cohomology” for the unipotent
algebraic group U would prove useful in the study of the (rational) representations
of U. This requires understanding the limiting behavior of
H∗(U(r),k) as r increases. Earlier computational information for H∗(U(r),k)
(especially in [23], [24]) shed little if any light on this limiting behavior.
We begin by recalling the following spectral sequence formulated by H. Andersen and J. Jantzen.
Let H be an irreducible affine group scheme (over k) and let I1⊂k[H]
denote the maximal ideal at the identity of H. The filtration of k[H] by powers of I1
leads to an associated graded Hopf algebra which is the coordinate
algebra of the vector group scheme gr(H). For any rational H-module M,
there is a naturally associated convergent spectral sequence*
[TABLE]
where H∗(gr(H),k)i is the cohomology algebra of the ith graded summand of
the Hochschild complex of gr(H).
If G is a irreducible linear algebraic group (hence, a reduced affine group scheme of finite
type over k) and p=2, then AJE1i,j(G) can be identified with the direct sum of
tensor products of the form
[TABLE]
where the sum is over all sequences {an},{bn} with each an≥0, each bn≥0
and
[TABLE]
Moreover, for any r≥1, AJE1i,j(G(r)) can be identified with the direct sum of those
tensor products of the form (2.1.2) with an=bn=0,n>r.
The following theorem shows for a large class of unipotent algebraic groups that the
rational cohomology equals the “continuous cohomology”, thereby motivating the study of this
continuous cohomology.
Theorem 2.2**.**
Let G be a simple algebraic group provided with a choice of Borel subgroup B⊂G
with maximal torus T and unipotent radical U.
Let U1⊂U be T-stable closed subgroup, U2⊂U1 a T-stable, normal
closed subgroup of U1, and consider V≡U1/U2. The natural map
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism.
Proof.
Let 0=ζ∈Hd(V,k) be a T-eigenvector of weight
ω=∑m=1ℓwmαm,wm≥0, an
element in the positive cone of the root lattice for v=Lie(V); here, α1,…,αℓ are the
simple roots determined by B⊂G. One verifies by inspection that
the restriction map AJE1∗,∗(V)→AJE1∗,∗(V(r)) is an isomorphism of ω-weight spaces
(AJE1∗,∗(V))ω→(AJE1∗,∗(V(r))ω provided that pr−1 is greater than any
of w1,…,wℓ. Namely, using (2.1.2), we can see that this condition on each wi implies that there can be
no contribution from a tensor factor in
Sai(v#(i)[2]) or in Λbj(v#(j−1[1]) for i>r or for j>r+1.
Observe that the spectral sequences {AJEsi,j(V),s≥1} and {AJEsi,j(V(r)),s≥1}
split (additively) as a direct sum of spectral sequences indexed by the weights in the
positive cone of the root lattice for v.
This implies that the restriction map induces an isomorphism (H∗(V,k))ω→(H∗(V(r),k))ω
whenever pr−1 is greater than max{wi}, the maximum of w1,…,wℓ in the expression for ω.
Thus, the restriction map (H∗(V,k))ω→limr(H∗(V(r),k))ω is an isomorphism for
all weights ω in the positive cone of the root lattice for v,
so that H∗(V,k)→limrH∗(V(r),k) is also an isomorphism.
∎
We easily verify that the injectivity statement of Theorem 2.2 extends to cohomology of V with coefficients
in a finite dimensional V-module having a compatible torus action.
Corollary 2.3**.**
Retain the notation of Theorem 2.2 and let M be a finite dimensional rational V⋊T-module.
Then the natural map
[TABLE]
is injective.
Moreover, if ζr∈Hd(V(r),M) is the restriction of some ζs∈H∗(V(s),M)
for all s≥r, then there exists some ζ∈Hd(V,M) which restricts to ζr.
Proof.
We repeat the argument of the proof of Theorem 2.2 for A-J spectral sequences
{AJEsi,j(V,M),s≥1} and {AJEsi,j(V(r),M),s≥1}. The action of
V on the associated
graded group of M is trivial, so that the E1 terms are obtained from those for coefficients
equal to k by tensoring with M. These spectral sequences now split as a direct sum of
spectral sequences indexed by weights given as the sum of a weight of M and
an element in the positive cone of the root lattice for v. As in the proof of Theorem 2.2,
we conclude that the restriction map AJE1∗,∗(V,M)→AJE1∗,∗(V(r),M) is an isomorphism of
ω-weight spaces
(AJE1∗,∗(V,M))ω→(AJE1∗,∗(V(r),M))ω provided that pr−1 does not divide
the coefficient of the linear expansion of any weight of the form w+w′, where w′
is a weight of M. The remainder of the proof is a repetition of that of Theorem 2.2.
∎
In order to investigate how the map ϕGLN,r in (1.0.1) behaves as r increases, we
introduce in the next proposition the map ρ.
Proposition 2.4**.**
Define the degree preserving map of graded k-algebras
[TABLE]
by sending Xs,t(ℓ)∈glN(r)#[2pr−ℓ−1] to
the p-th power (Xs,t(ℓ))p∈Sp(glN(r−1)#[2pr−ℓ−2])
if ℓ<r−1 and to 0 if ℓ=r−1.
Then ρ fits in the GLN-equivariant
commutative square
[TABLE]
Proof.
We first show that ϕGLN,r(Xs,t(0))∈H2pr−1(GLN(r),k) restricts to the p-th power
of ϕGLN,r−1(Xs,t(0))∈H2pr−2(GLN(r−1),k). By [23, 3.4], both of these
classes restrict to the pr−1-st power of the image of ϕGLN,1(Xs,t(0))
in H2(GLN−1(1),k). Thus, the outer rectangle and the lower square of the following diagram
commutes:
[TABLE]
The images in H2pr−1(GLN(r−1),k) of the two compositions in the upper square of (2.4.3) are
each irreducible GLN-modules (copies of (glN#(r)[2pr−1])/(k⋅Tr(r))) which restrict non-trivially
to H2pr−1(GLN(1),k). Using the form of the E1-term of the A-J spectral sequence (2.1.1),
we conclude that there is a unique copy of (glN#(r)[2pr−1])/(k⋅Tr(r))
in AJE1∗,∗(GLN(r−1)) of cohomological degree 2pr−1, so that these images
are equal. The functoriality of (2.1.1)
with respect to GLN(1)→GLN(r) now implies that
the upper square of (2.4.3) must also commute.
By definition of er−ℓ(ℓ) as the pull-back via Fℓ:GLN→GLN of er−ℓ, we have the commutativity of
the following square
[TABLE]
Consequently, pulling back via Fℓ the commutative upper square of (2.4.3)
with r replaced by r−ℓ
determines the following commutative square for each ℓ,0≤ℓ<r:
[TABLE]
The proposition now follows since the maps of (2.4.2) are maps of k-algebras and
the commutativity of (2.4.5) implies the commutativity of (2.4.2) on generators.
∎
The proof of the following lemma (including the definitions of ρG and ρUJ) is immediate from the
definitions.
Lemma 2.5**.**
Let UJ⊂G satisfy the hypotheses of Theorem 1.7. Define
[TABLE]
by sending X∈g#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1] to Xp∈Sp(g#(r−1)[2pr−ℓ−2])
if ℓ<r−1 and to 0 if ℓ=r−1. Define
ρUJ:S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]))→S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−2(uJ#(r−1)[2pr−ℓ−2]))
similarly. Then ρ,ρG,ρUJ fit in the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
The following extension of Proposition 2.4 to G and UJ now follows easily.
Proposition 2.6**.**
Retain the hypotheses and notation of Theorem 1.7. Then the following squares commute
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proof.
We readily verify that ϕG,r,ϕG,r−1 provide two faces of a commutative “cube” with three other faces provided
by (2.4.2), the right square of (2.5.2), and the square resulting from the functoriality of
the restriction map with respect to G→GLN. The remaining face is (2.6.1).
The commutativity of (2.6.2) is verified similarly, replacing G→GLN by UJ→G.
∎
As summarized in [16, I.9.9], the natural map H∗(G,M)→limrH∗((G(r),M) is an isomorphism
for all finite dimensional G-modules M; a key ingredient in the proof of that isomorphism is the fact that H∗(G,k)
is isomorphic to k (in degree 0). Although H∗(UJ,k) is non-trivial, we do have the following
vanishing result.
Corollary 2.7**.**
Retain the hypotheses and notation of Theorem 1.7. Then the sub-algebra
[TABLE]
of limrH∗((UJ)(r),k)≃H∗(UJ,k) is isomorphic to k (in degree 0).
Proof.
The left exactness of limr implies that
[TABLE]
is a subalgebra of limrH∗((UJ)(r),k) which is isomorphic to H∗(UJ,k) by Theorem 2.2.
By the commutativity of (2.4.2), (2.6.1), and (2.6.2),
we observe that no homogeneous element of degree d,0<d<ps, in
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])) lies in the image of ρs for any r>s.
Consequently, there can not exist some non-zero element
{xr}∈limrim{ϕUJ,r:S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]))→H∗((UJ)(r),k)} of degree d: such an element {xr} in the inverse limit must satisfy
ρr′−r(xr′)=xr for all r′≥r≥0 and would have to
have some xr=0,r>s; then {xr} would have to satisfy xr′=0 for all r′≥r (including r′=r+s), contradicting the above observation.
∎
As we shall see in the next section, the image of the composition
[TABLE]
(which factors through limrS∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(u3#(ℓ+1)[2]))→limrH∗((U3)(r),k))
is highly non-trivial, where Ga≃Γ2⊂U3 is the center of U3.
3. The map ηUJ/Γ3,r:S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))→H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)
In this section, we consider groups of the form
UJ/Γ3, where Γ3≡Γ3(UJ) is the third stage of the
descending central series of the unipotent radical of a parabolic subgroup PJ⊂G of a simple
algebraic group G.
Our primary tool is the Lyndon-Hochshield-Serre spectral sequence for a central extension (see
Proposition 3.2) together with the action of the mod-p Steenrod algebra on this
spectral sequence.
We recall from [3] the description due to H. Azad, M. Barry, and G. Seitz
of the terms of the descending central series of the unipotent radical UJ of PJ⊂G
for some subset J of the set of fundamental positive roots Π of a chosen root system for G.
For a positive root β∈Σ+−ΣJ+ (where Σ+ is the
set of positive roots for the root system of G⊃B⊃T and ΣJ+ is the set of
positive roots for the root system of LJ=PJ/UJ⊃TJ), we adopt the terminology of [3]:
write β=βJ+βJ′ where βJ is a sum ∑iciαi with each
αi∈J and βJ′ is a sum ∑jdjαj with each αj∈Π−J;
then the height of β is defined to be ∑ici+∑jdj, the level of β is defined to
be ∑jdj and the shape of β is defined to be βJ′.
Let G be a simple algebraic group of adjoint type, and P=PJ⊂G a parabolic
subgroup, LJ its Levi factor, and UJ its unipotent radical for some subset J⊂Π.
As usual, assume p>2; for G of type G2, assume p>3. Consider the descending central series for UJ:*
[TABLE]
For any v>1, we have the central extension with a natural action of LJ:
[TABLE]
The commutative group Γv/Γv+1 is a direct product of irreducible LJ-modules VS indexed by
shapes S of level v; each VS is T isomorphic to a product of U−β
indexed by β∈Σ+−ΣJ+ of shape S and level v,
where U−β is the root subgroup with T-weight
−β; VS is a high weight LJ-module with highest weight −βSo, where βSo
is the unique root of minimal height and shape S.
In particular, if PJ is the minimal parabolic (i.e., equal to the given Borel subgroup B⊂G, corresponding to
J=∅), then
Γv/Γv+1 is T-isomorphic to ∏U−β where the product is indexed
by β∈Σ+ of level v.
In what follows, we shall denote Lie(Γv(UJ)) by γv. As in Section 1, r will denote a
fixed (but arbitrary) positive integer.
In order to fix notation and T-weights for Frobenius twists, we recall
the known computation of H∗(Ga,k) and H∗(Ga(r),k) (see, for example, [16, Ch I.4] or [7]):
there is a natural isomorphism of graded commutative k-algebras
[TABLE]
where V=H1(Ga,k) is a countable k-vector space spanned by λ1,λ2,…λs… with Frobenius action
F∗(λs)=λs+1 , Λ∗(V([1]) is the exterior algebra on V placed in degree 1, and S∗(V(1)[2]) is
the polynomial algebra on the Frobenius twist V(1) of V placed in degree 2 spanned by x1,x2,…,xs,…, the Bocksteins of the λi. The action of multiplication by c∈k on Ga induces an action on H∗(Ga,k) given by
c∗(λi)=cpi−1λi,c∗(xi)=cpixi. This indexing is that of [7] and [24, Thm 1.3].
We recall that the cohomology algebra H∗(Ga(r),k)
of the rth Frobenius kernel Ga(r) of Ga can be identified with
the quotient of H∗(Ga,k) obtained by setting λs=0=xs for s>r. This finitely generated cohomology algebra admits
the natural action of the mod-p Steenrod algebra Ap (see [24, 1.7] for an explicit description of the action
of the generators Pi,βPi of Ap on H∗(Ga,k)).
Observe that UJ/Γ2 is a product Ga×s of copies of Ga, so that its cohomology and that
of (Ga×s)(r) are determined by the above computation and the Künneth theorem.
In particular, we conclude that there is a natural injective map
[TABLE]
with left inverse H∗((UJ/Γ2)(r),k)→S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2]) whose kernel
consists of elements with p-th power 0.
We designate T-eigenvector generators for
[TABLE]
by xα(ℓ) of cohomological degree 2 and T-weight pℓ+1α and yα(ℓ)
of cohomological degree 1 and T-weight pℓα; here, α ranges
over roots of UJ of level 1 and ℓ is an non-negative integer satisfying 0≤ℓ.
Similarly, we designate generators for
[TABLE]
by xβ(ℓ) of cohomological 2 and yβ(ℓ) of cohomological degree 1, with 0≤ℓ and with β
ranging over T-weights of UJ of level 2.
Consequently,
[TABLE]
equals
[TABLE]
where E2∗,∗(UJ/Γ3) is the spectral sequence considered in the following proposition.
The indexing we adopt (for example, in Proposition 3.2) relates to the above indexing
as follows for cohomology classes of Ga: λi corresponds to yα(ℓ) and
xi corresponds to xα(ℓ) with ℓ=i−1.
The summation ∑α+α′=β
indicates a sum of pairs of roots α,α′ with the property that [Xα,Xα′]=Xβ∈uJ/γv+1.
Proposition 3.2**.**
Retain the notation and hypotheses of Proposition 3.1.
Consider the T-equivariant Lyndon-Hochshild-Serre spectral sequence
[15] for the extension 1→Γ2/Γ3→UJ/Γ3→UJ/Γ2→1:
[TABLE]
For any ℓ≥0, j≥0, and any β a weight of level 2:
(1)
[TABLE]
2. (2)
d2pj+10,2pj((xβ(ℓ))pj)=∑α+α′=β{(xα(ℓ))pj⊗yα′(ℓ+1+j)−(xα′(ℓ))pj⊗yα(ℓ+1+j)}*
is non-zero in H2pj+1+1(UJ/Γ2,k). Thus, (xβ(ℓ))pj∈H2pj(Γ2/Γ3,k)
does not lie in the image of
H∙(UJ/Γ3,k).*
3. (3)
non-zero in H2pj+1+2(UJ/Γ2,k). The expression
(3.2.2) maps to 0 in H2pj+1+2(UJ/Γ3,k).
Proof.
Assume first that UJ equals U3 and consider the extensions
[TABLE]
Since (Ga)(i)/(Ga)(i−1) lies in the commutator of (U3)(i)/(U3)(i−1),
we conclude that the map
H1((U3)(i)/(U3)(i−1),k)→H1((Ga)(i)/(Ga)(i−1),k) is 0,
so that the differential d20,1 must be non-zero for each of these extensions. We thus
conclude using induction on r and the fact that differentials commute with the
action of T3 that d20,1(yβ(ℓ)) is a sum of the form given in (1)
with non-zero coefficients of each summand yα(ℓ)∧yα′(ℓ).
These coefficients must be equal for varying ℓ using functoriality with respect to
Frobenius maps U3(i)→U3(i+1). Defining our group schemes over Z,
we conclude these coefficients must be ±1. We have chosen the ordering of the pairs α,α′
so that these coefficients are all +1.
For a more general UJ/Γ3, we consider a pair α,α′ with
α+α′=β and define the subgroup Rα,α′⊂UJ/Γ3 to be the subgroup generated by the root subgroups Uα,Uα′.
Thus, Rα,α′≃U3 with center Uβ. The functoriality of the LHS spectral
sequence implies that
[TABLE]
commutes, so that d20,1(yβ(ℓ)) must be given by (1) plus additional terms. Yet there
are no other eigenvectors of T-weight pℓβ in H2(UJ/Γ2,k), so there can be no additional terms
in the formula for d20,1(yβ(ℓ)) .
For j=0, (2) follows from the equality xβ(ℓ)=(βP0)(yβ(ℓ)), the fact that
βP0 commutes with transgression ([17]), and the Cartan formula
[TABLE]
In particular, this tells us that
[TABLE]
To prove (2) for j>0, we recall that Ppi applied to (xβ(ℓ))pi equals (xβ(ℓ))pi+1.
Using the fact that the Steenrod action commutes with the differentials in the spectral sequence and repeated applications
of the Cartan formula, we verify (2) by computing
d2pj+10,2pj((xβ(ℓ))pj), the result of applying d2pj+10,2pj to
(Ppj−1∘⋯P1∘βP0)(yβ(ℓ)).
The fact that d2pj+10,2pj((xβ(ℓ))pj)=0 follows
from the explicit computation of H∙(UJ/Γ2,k).
Because some differential in the spectral sequence is non-vanishing on (xβ(ℓ))pj,
it does not lie in the image of H∙(UJ/Γ3,k).
The computation of assertion (3) follows from the Cartan formula for βPpj
and the detailed description of Pi and βPi
given in [24, 1.7]. The non-vanishing of (3.2.2) follows once again from the
explicit computation of H∙(UJ/Γ2,k).
∎
The restriction map for the embedding (UJ/Γ3)(r)→UJ/Γ3 determines a map
from the spectral sequence (3.2.1) to the spectral sequence
[TABLE]
considered in the next proposition. On E2-terms, this map sends yβ(ℓ),xβ(ℓ),yα(ℓ),xα(ℓ) to 0 for ℓ≥r.
To exhibit the action of T, we retain the indexing of Proposition 3.2, viewing E2∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))
as the tensor
product
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.3**.**
Retain the notation and hypotheses of Proposition 3.1, and consider
the spectral sequence (3.2.4) for the central extension
[TABLE]
For any β of level 2,
(1)
(xβ(ℓ))pj∈S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2])⊂E20,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))* is
a permanent cycle if and only if ℓ+1+j≥r.*
2. (2)
For any ℓ,j≥0 with ℓ+1+j<r,
[TABLE]
3. (3)
For UJ=U3 (with Γ3=1), the pr−ℓ−j−1-st power of relation
(3.3.2) in H∙((U3)(r),k) is the restriction to (U3)(r)
of the relation X1,2(ℓ)⋅X2,3(ℓ′)−X2,3(ℓ)⋅X1,2(ℓ′) of
Theorem 1.2.
Proof.
The vanishing of yα(ℓ),ℓ≥r together with Proposition
3.2(2) immediately implies that (xβ(ℓ))pj is a permanent cycle
if ℓ+1+j≥r. Conversely, if ℓ+1+j<r, then Proposition 3.2 tells us that
d2pj0,2pj does not vanish on (xβ(ℓ))pj.
To conclude (2), we first recall that Proposition 3.2(2) implies that
[TABLE]
is non-zero and in the image of a differential in the spectral sequence (3.2.4). This implies
that (3.3.3) lies in the kernel of the inflation map. One obtains the relation of (3.3.2) by applying
βPj to (3.3.3) to obtain a class in H2pj+1+2((UJ/Γ2)(r),k) whose inflation
gives (3.3.2); since βPj commutes with the inflation map, we conclude the asserted vanishing.
Assertion (2) follows from Proposition 3.2(2), since
∑α+α′=β{(xα(ℓ))pj+1⊗yα′(ℓ+1+j)−(xα′(ℓ))pj+1⊗yα(ℓ+1+j)} is
a boundary and the restriction map commutes with the Bockstein.
The fact that the pr−ℓ−j−1-st power of (3.3.2) equals the relation
X1,2(ℓ)⋅X2,3(ℓ′)−X2,3(ℓ)⋅X1,2(ℓ′) of
Theorem 1.2 is immediate from the identification of X1,2(ℓ) with (xα(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1
and X2,3(ℓ) with (xα′(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1.
∎
We view S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2]) as a subalgebra of
E20,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) using the identification (3.2.5). Proposition 3.3(1)
tells us that the subalgebra
[TABLE]
(defined as the image of the endomorphism S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1Fr−ℓ−1) on S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2]))
consists of permanent cycles in the spectral sequence (3.2.4).
The following corollary tells us that this subalgebra is the intersection of the permanent cycles in
E2∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) with S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2]).
What this corollary does not do is identify all permanent cycles of E2∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)).
Corollary 3.4**.**
*If z∈S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2]) does not lie in the subalgebra
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]), then there exists some
differential of (3.2.4)
which is non-zero on z.*
Proof.
We employ the fact that the differentials in the spectral sequence are k-linear derivations. Let
{βi,i∈I} be the set of positive roots of UJ of level 2. Consider a monomial
w=∏i∈I∏ℓ=0r−1(xβi(ℓ))ni,ℓ with some ni,ℓ not divisible by pr−ℓ−1.
Let pj be the smallest power of p such that pj divides some ni,ℓ, and
pj+1 does not divide ni,ℓ.
Then d2pj+10,∑ℓ2ni,ℓ(w) is a sum of non-zero terms indexed by those i,ℓ with
pj but not pj+1 dividing ni,ℓ, each summand having a different T-weight. Thus, w is not a permanent cycle.
More generally, different such monomials have different T-weights, so that no non-trivial sum
of such monomials is a permanent cycle.
∎
Notation 3.5**.**
Let UN⊂GLN denote the subgroup of strictly upper triangular matrices.
The generators Xi,j(ℓ)∈S∗((uN/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) (as discussed following Proposition 1.1)
correspond to (xi,j(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1∈E2∗,∗((UN/Γ3)(r)) of Proposition 3.3.
We extend this notation, denoting generators of S∗((uJ/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) by Xβ(ℓ)∈S∗((uJ/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
These classes have the same weight and cohomological degree as the classes (xβ(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1∈E2∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)). We shall see that the representative in E2∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))
of ηUJ/Γ3,r(Xβ(ℓ))∈H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) is (xβ(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1.
The uniqueness given in the following proposition enables us to specify the map ηUJ/Γ3,r.
We are particularly interested in the special case UJ/Γ3=U3.
Proposition 3.6**.**
Retain the notation and hypotheses of Proposition 3.1. Assume each root β of UJ
of level 2 can be written uniquely as a sum α+α′ of roots UJ of level 1.
Then there exists a unique T-equivariant k-linear map
[TABLE]
which fits in the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Here, the left and right vertical maps are given by the inclusions S∗((uJ/γ2)#(1)[2])→H∙((UJ/Γ2)(r),k) and S∗((γ2/γ3)#(1)[2])→H∙((Γ2/Γ3)(r),k), the upper horizontal maps are
the evident ones, the lower horizontal maps are those given by functoriality.
Furthermore, the map ηr fits in a commutative square
[TABLE]
whose vertical maps are inflation maps and whose lower horizontal map is the restriction of
the map ϕU,r of Theorem 1.7 with U=UJ satisfying the hypotheses of this
proposition.
Proof.
The existence of some η fitting in the commutative diagram (3.6.1) is
implied by Proposition 3.3(1).
To prove the uniqueness of η, it suffices to verify for each root β of UJ of level 2 that the
T-weight space of H2pr−1((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) of weight prβ is 1-dimensional. This would imply
the uniqueness of the choice of class η(Xβ(0))∈H2pr−1((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)
fitting in the commutative diagram (3.6.1).
We search in AJE1∗,∗ as given in (2.1.2) for T-weight vectors with T-weight prβ and
cohomology degree 2pr−1 other than (xβ(0))pr−1∈E20,2pr−1. Consider a simple
tensor of the specified weight and degree, in other words a monomial z in x’s and y’s. Because the
weight of yα(0)∧yα′(0) is not divisible by p, this does not divide the monomial z.
None of the factors of the monomial z of weight prβ and degree 2pr−1 can be of the form
x(ℓ) for ℓ>1 or for y(ℓ) for ℓ>2 because such a factor would increase the weight too “fast” with respect to
increase of the resulting degree by either 2 or 1.
Thus, the only allowable weight vectors of cohomology degree 2pr−1 are scalar multiples of (xβ(0))pr−1
and (xβ(0))pr−1−1⊗yα(1)∧yα′(1).
Since yβ(i)∈E20,1 is a permanent cycle, we conclude that d2((xβ)(i))=0 (using the
fact that differentials in the spectral sequence commute with Bocksteins). Consequently,
the value of the derivation d20,2pr−1−1 applied to
(xβ(0))pr−1−1⊗yβ(1) equals (xβ(0))pr−1−1⊗yα1(1)∧yα2(1). We conclude that the class of (xβ(0))pr−1∈E∞0,2pr−1 spans
the prβ weight space of degree 2pr−1 of E∞0,2pr−1. This implies that
the prβ weight space of
H2pr−1((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) is 1-dimensional.
Finally, the commutativity of (3.6.2) follows from the T-equivariance of η and the uniqueness
assertion of Theorem 1.7.
∎
Definition 3.7**.**
Retain the notation and hypotheses of Propositions 3.6. We define
S∗((UJ/Γv)(r)) to be
[TABLE]
In other words, S∗((UJ/Γv)(r)) is the coproduct in the category of
commutative k algebras of S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2])
and S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γv)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) over
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
The T-equivariant splitting uJ/γv≃(uJ/γ2)⊕(γ2/γv)
gives the T-equivariant splitting
[TABLE]
Definition 3.8**.**
Retain the notation and hypotheses of Propositions 3.1. We define
[TABLE]
to be the map of k-algebras determined by the ℓ-th Frobenius twists
ηr−ℓ(ℓ):(uJ/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]→H2pr−ℓ−1((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)
of the maps
ηr−ℓ:(uJ/γ3)#(r−ℓ)[2pr−ℓ−1]→H2pr−ℓ−1((UJ/Γ3)(r−ℓ),k)
constructed in Proposition 3.6 (with r replaced by r−ℓ).
We define
[TABLE]
to be the composition of ηUJ/Γ2,r given in (3.1.3) and the inflation map.
We define
[TABLE]
to be the coproduct of g~ and the map f~ .
The maps g~ and f~ agree on S∗((⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) by
commutativity of the left square of (3.6.1), so that ηUJ/Γ3,r is well defined.
We give S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) the decreasing filtration whose subalgebra of level 2i is the coproduct of
S≥i(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2]) and
S∗((⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) over
S≥i(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
Proposition 3.9**.**
The map ηUJ/Γ3,r is a naturally defined
T-equivariant map of filtered k-algebras, where we give
H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) the LHS filtration of Proposition 3.3 and S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))
the filtration described immediately above.
Furthermore,
[TABLE]
where g:S∗((⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])→E∞0,∗ is defined to be the
composition of
g~ with the natural map H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)→E∞0,∗ and f:S∗((UJ/Γ2)(r))→H∙((UJ/Γ2)(r),k)→E∞∗,0 is the map whose composition with the natural inclusion
E∞∗,0→H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) equals f~.
Proof.
The map f~ is induced by UJ/Γ3→UJ/Γ2 and thus is filtration preserving.
Observe that 1⊗S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])⊂S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) has filtration degree 0 as does E∞0,∗, so that g~
is also a map of filtered algebras. The mutliplicative property of these filtrations thus implies that
ηUJ/Γ3,r itself is a map of filtered algebras.
The identification of gr{ηUJ/Γ3,r} is verified by proving the commutativity of the following
two diagrams
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
By Proposition 3.3(2), the left square of (3.9.2) commutes. By definition of
ηUJ/Γ3,r, the right square of (3.9.2) also commutes.
The commutativity of the outer square of (3.9.3) arises from the naturality of the restriction maps for
Γ2/Γ3→UJ/Γ3. The commutativity of the two squares of (3.9.3)
thus follows from the fact
that S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) is the image of the upper composition of
(3.9.3) and the fact that E∞0,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) is the image of the restriction map
H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)→H∙((Γ2/Γ3)(r),k) by a standard property of Grothendieck spectral sequences.
∎
Definition 3.10**.**
We define Q((UJ/Γ2)(r)) to be the quotient of S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2])
by the ideal generated by the elements of (3.3.2), which we denote by J2:
[TABLE]
We define S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) to be the tensor product of S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) and
Q((UJ/Γ2)(r)) over S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2]).
The T-equivariant splitting uJ/γ3≃(uJ/γ2)⊕(γ2/γ3)
gives the T equivariant splitting
[TABLE]
We view
S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) as
[TABLE]
where I3⊂S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) is the ideal generated by
the relations (3.3.2).
Proposition 3.11**.**
The map ηUJ/Γ3,r of Proposition 3.9 factors through the quotient
S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))↠S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)), thereby determining
the map of k-algebras
[TABLE]
where f~Q factors the map f~ of (3.8.2) via the natural surjection
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2])→Q((UJ/Γ2)(r)).
The map ηUJ/Γ3,r is a map of filtered algebras for the LHS filtration.
Moreover,
[TABLE]
where fQ:Q((UJ/Γ2)(r))→E∞∗,0 composed with the natural map E∞∗,0→H∗((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) equals f~Q.
Proof.
Because ηUJ,3(I3)=0, ηUJ,3 induces ηUJ,3. Since I3 is generated by
elements of J2, we conclude that ηUJ,3 is given as indicated in (3.11.1).
Observe that Q∗((UJ/Γ2)(r))=S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2])/J2
inherits an LHS filtration because J2 is a filtered ideal.
Thus, to prove that ηUJ/Γ3,r is filtration preserving, it suffices to observe that (1) ηUJ/Γ3,r
restricted to Q∗((UJ/Γ2)(r)) is a filtered map of algebras for the LHS filtration
because it is induced by the inflation map for (UJ/Γ3)(r)→(UJ/Γ2)(r).
(2) ηUJ/Γ3,r restricted to S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2])
is also a filtered map of algebras for the LHS filtration, as shown in the proof of
Propositions 3.9.
The identification of gr{ηUJ/Γ3,r} follows from Proposition 3.9 and the
fact that the LHS filtration on S∗((U3)(r)) is induced by taking the quotient of the filtration for
S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) by an ideal which is of the form
J2⊗S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
∎
The Andersen-Jantzen spectral sequence of Proposition 2.1 admits a natural action of T
whose T-weights are identified using (2.1.2).
We envision that this spectral sequence should
enable the extension to UJ/Γv+1 of our considerations of
UJ/Γ3.
For UJ/Γ3, we verify below that the elements of S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) are permanent
cycles of the AJ spectral sequence. It would be of interest to know whether or not all permanent cycles
in S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ3)#(ℓ+1)[2]) belong to S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)).
Proposition 3.12**.**
Retain the hypotheses and notation of Proposition 3.1. Every element
[TABLE]
is a permanent cycle for the AJ spectral sequence.
Moreover, the map ηUJ/Γ3,r:S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))→H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k) sends z∈S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) to the cohomology class ηUJ/Γ3,r(z)
represented at the E1∗∗-page of the AJ spectral sequence by the image
of z in AJgr(S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))≃S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))⊂AJE1∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)).
Proof.
The map ηUJ/Γ2,r:S∗((UJ/Γ2)(r))→H∙((UJ/Γ2)(r),k) of Definition
3.8
is the tensor power of natural embeddings S∗(H2(Ga(r),k))→H∙(Ga(r),k) as in (3.1.2)
and so can be identified with AJgr(ηUJ/Γ2,r).
Recall that S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) is the tensor
product of its restrictions to
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2]) and
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
Using functoriality for the map UJ/Γ3→UJ/Γ2
and multiplicativity of ηU/Γ3,r, we invoke a simple induction argument to conclude that it
suffices to prove the assertions for z∈S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
Let β be a root of UJ of level 2 and 0≤ℓ<r. Consider ηU/Γ3,r−ℓ applied to
(Xβ(0)) (corresponding to (xβ(0))pr−1∈E1∗,∗ as in Notation 3.5), giving an element
of H2pr−ℓ−1((UJ/Γ3)(r−ℓ),k) of weight pr−ℓ−1⋅β.
An inspection of (2.1.2) verifies that the
only possible representative in AJE1∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r−ℓ))
of this weight and degree is (xβ(0))pr−1−ℓ.
The following square commutes
[TABLE]
because the maps η are defined over Fp. Moreover, (Fℓ)∗ determines a map of
AJ spectral sequences, so that the representative in AJE1∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r−ℓ)) of
ηUJ/Γ3,r−ℓ(Xβ(0)) is sent to the representative
in AJE1∗,∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) of
ηUJ/Γ3,r(Xβ(ℓ)). In particular, (xβ(ℓ))pr−1−ℓ∈S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)) is a permanent cycle in the AJ spectral sequence representing
ηU/Γ3,r(Xβ(ℓ)) for each β and each 0≤ℓ<r.
Now, using mulitipicativity, we conclude the assertions of the proposition for z∈S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) and thus the proposition as
stated.
∎
As a corollary of Proposition 3.12, we conclude the following description
gr{ηUJ/Γ3,r}. This is of some interest for the AJ-filtration is intrinsic to UJ/Γ3.
We apply the results of the previous section to the Heisenberg group U3 and its Frobenius kernels (U3)(r).
Example 4.1**.**
S∗((U3)(r)) is generated by
elements X1,3(ℓ)=(x1,3(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1∈(γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]
and (X1,2(ℓ))p−r+ℓ+1=x1,2(ℓ),(X2,3(ℓ))p−r+ℓ+1=x2,3(ℓ)∈(u3/γ2)#(ℓ+1)[2]
with 0≤ℓ<r. A set of relations for S∗((U3)(r)) is given by the
special case of (3.3.2):
[TABLE]
for each ℓ,j≥0 such that ℓ+1+j<r.
Generators and relations for Q((U3/Γ2)(r)) are obtained from those for S∗((U3)(r))
by setting each X1,3(ℓ) equal to 0.
Composition with the quotient map UJ/Γ3→UJ/Γ2 determines Vr(UJ/Γ3)→Vr(UJ/Γ2)
and thus the map of k-algebras k[Vr(UJ/Γ2)]→k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)]. We denote the image of this map
by k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)]⊂k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)].
In the proof of the following proposition we use the description of k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)] in terms of generators and relations
which follows immediately from Proposition 1.5 and the explicit description of k[Vr(GLN)] given in
Theorem 1.2. Namely, k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)] is generated by Xi,j(ℓ) where 1≤i≤j≤3
and 0≤ℓ<r; a set of relations is given by
[TABLE]
Proposition 4.2**.**
The coordinate algebra k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)] admits a natural tensor product
decomposition as k-algebras,
[TABLE]
In the special case UJ=U3, k[Vr(U3/Γ2)] is an integral domain smooth outside of the origin
with field of fractions a purely transcendental extension of transcendence degree r+1.
Consequently, k[Vr(U3)] is an integrally closed domain of dimension 2r+1.
Proof.
We identify k[Vr(UJ/Γ2)] with
[TABLE]
and k[Vr(U3/Γ2)] with the quotient of k[Vr(UJ/Γ2)] by the relations (4.1.2).
The tensor product decomposition is immediate from the observation that these relations
do not involve elements of S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
If r=1, then Vr(U3)=u3 so that k[V1(U3/Γ2)]≃k[X1,3(0),X2,3(0)].
For the remainder of the proof, we assume r>1.
For any ℓ1,0≤ℓ1<r, the algebra k[Vr(U3/Γ2)][(X2,3(ℓ1))−1] is isomorphic to
[TABLE]
since X1,2(ℓ)=X1,2(ℓ1)(X2,3(ℓ1))−1X2,3(ℓ);
similarly, for any ℓ0,0≤ℓ0<r, the algebra k[Vr(U3/Γ2)][(X1,2(ℓ0))−1] is isomorphic to
[TABLE]
This verifies the computation of the field of fractions of k[Vr(U3/Γ2)] and shows that k[Vr(U3/Γ2)]
is smooth outside the common zeros of {X1,2(ℓ0),X2,3(ℓ1);0≤ℓ0,ℓ1<r};
namely, the origin.
A theorem of Serre (see [18, Thm 39]) tells us that k[Vr(U3/Γ2)] is an integrally
closed domain since the codimension of this zero locus is at least 2.
∎
Proposition 4.3**.**
There is a naturally constructed injective map
[TABLE]
such that ηUJ/Γ3,r:S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r)→H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k)
as defined in Definition 3.8 factors through ηUJ/Γ3,r∘θUJ/Γ3,r:k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)]→H∙((UJ/Γ3)(r),k),
where ηUJ/Γ3,r is given in Proposition 3.11.
Consider the defining quotient map qUJ/Γ3,r:S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])→k[Vr(UJ/Γ3)]. We see by inspection that the kernel of qUJ/Γ3,r
is generated by the intersection of J2⊂S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) with S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]).
This determines θUJ/Γ3,r fitting in the commutative square
[TABLE]
The fact that the kernel of qUJ/Γ3,r is the intesection of I3 with
S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]) (also generated by the intersection of J2⊂S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(uJ/γ2)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]))
implies the injectivity of θUJ/Γ3,r.
The equality ηU3,r=ϕU3,r of Proposition 3.6 together with
the surjectivity of qUJ/Γ3,r implies the
equality ηU3,r∘θU3,r=ϕU3,r.
∎
We next observe that the tensor product decomposition of Proposition 4.2 is
respected by the map θUJ/Γ3. This enables us to show in the following proposition
that θU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→S∗((U3)(r)) is a finite map of integral domains.
Proposition 4.4**.**
The map θU3,r of Proposition 4.3 can be written as the tensor product
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The map θU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r)) is a finite map of integral domains
of degree p2(r+2)(r−1) obtained by taking pr−ℓ−1-st roots of X1,2(ℓ),X2,3(ℓ)
for each ℓ,0≤ℓ<r.
Thus, θU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→S∗((U3)(r)) is a finite map of integral domains.
Proof.
The fact that θUJ/Γ3,r
is a tensor product of the form θU3,r⊗1 arises from the fact that the tensor decomposition
of k[Vr(U3)] in Proposition 4.2 and that of S∗((U3)(r)) in (3.10.1) both arise
because the relations do not involve weights of level 2. The fact that θUJ/Γ3,r is essentially
the identity on S∗((γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1) can be traced back to the definition of
Xi,j(ℓ)∈glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1] prior to Theorem 1.2.
The k-algebra k[Vr(U3)] is an integral domain by Proposition 4.2.
Arguing as in the proof of Proposition 4.2, we verify that Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r))[(xα(0))−1]
is the localization of the polynomial algebra on generators xα′(ℓ),0≤ℓ<r;Y1,2(0) with
xα(0) inverted. Thus, to show that Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r)) is a domain it suffices
to show that the localization map
Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r))→Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r))[(xα(0)−1]
is injective. This is verified by examining the relations (3.3.2) to show that xα(0)∈Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r)) is not a zero-divisor.
Because k[Vr(U3)] is a domain, Fr=ψU3,r∘ηU,3∘θU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→k[Vr(U3)]
is injective and thus θU3,r is injective. Since S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(u3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])→S∗((U3)(r)) is obtaining by taking pr−ℓ−1-st roots of
(xα(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1,(xα′(ℓ))pr−ℓ−1 for each ℓ,0≤ℓ<r,
we conclude that Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r)) is similarly obtained from k[Vr(U3/Γ2)].
To compute the degree of θU3,r,
we consider the map k[Vr(U3/Γ2)][(X1,2(0))−1]→Q∗((U3/Γ2)(r))[(xα(0))−1] and utilize
the facts that xα′(ℓ) is the pr−ℓ−1-th root of the image of X2,3(ℓ) and that
xα(0) is the pr−1-st root of the image of X1,2(0) (using the notation of Proposition 4.2).
Finally, since θU3,r=θU3,r⊗1, the fact that θU3,r is a finite map of
integral domains implies that θU3,r is also a finite map of integral domains
∎
The following theorem summarizes what we know about ηU3,r.
Theorem 4.5**.**
Retain the hypotheses and notation of Proposition 3.1.
(1)
ηU3,r=ϕU3,r.**
2. (2)
ηU3,r:S∗((U3)(r))→H∙((U3)(r),k)* is injective.*
3. (3)
ηU3,r* is surjective onto pr-th powers of elements of H∙((U3)(r),k).*
4. (4)
gr(ηU3,r)* factors through*
[TABLE]
5. (5)
gr(ηU3,r):S∗((U3)(r))→gr{H∙((U3)(r),k)* is injective.*
6. (6)
gr(ηUJ/Γ3,r)* is surjective onto p-th powers of elements of gr{H∙((U3)(r),k).*
Proof.
The equality ηr=(ϕU3,r)∣ of (3.6.2) implies that
ηU3,r=ϕU3,r, since ηU3,r,ϕU3,r are determined by
the Frobenius twists of the basic maps ηr,(ϕU3,r)∣.
By Proposition 1.9, Fr=ψU3,r∘ϕU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→k[Vr(U3)].
Since k[Vr(U3)] is a domain by Proposition 4.2, Fr and thus also ϕU3,r are injective.
Since the pr−1-st power of each element in S∗((U3)(r)) lies in the
image of S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(u3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]), the commutativity of (4.3.2)
and the surjectivity of S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))→S∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))
imply that the pr−1-st power of an element in S∗((U3)(r)) lies in the image of θU3,r.
Thus, any element in the kernel of ηU3,r must have pr−1-st power which is in the kernel
of ϕU3,r which we have observed is trivial. Since S∗((U3)(r)) is a domain by
Proposition 4.4, we conclude that ηU3,r must be injective.
The surjectivity statement of (3) follows from the fact that the composition Fr=ψU3,r∘ϕU3,r is surjective
onto pr-th powers.
The factorization of f⊙g through f⊗g:S∗((U3)(r))⊗S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])→E∞∗,0⊗E∞0,∗ is given by the proof of Proposition 3.9. This is
easily seen to determine the factorization of gr(ηU3,r) as asserted in (4).
Granted the injectivity (1), to prove the injectivity of gr(ηU3,r)
as asserted in (5) it suffices to show that both f~Q and g~ are
filtration level preserving. Since the filtration level on Q((UJ/Γ2)(r) equals the cohomological degree
and f~Q can only increase filtration level (since it is a map of filtered algebras), f~Q preserves
filtration level. Since the composition of g~:S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])→H∙((U3)(r),k) with the natural map E∞0,∗ is injective, we conclude that g~ sends every
non-zero element to a cohomology class of filtration level 0 and therefore must also preserve filtration level.
Finally, to prove that gr(ηU3,r) is surjective onto p-th powers, it suffices to prove that the p-th power
of any permanent cycle, z∈Z2∗,∗⊂E2∗,∗, lies in the image of S∗((U3)(r)). Write z=x+y
with x defined as the sum of those summands of z lying in S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(u3)#(ℓ+1)[2]) and
y as the sum of the remaining summands of z, where z is written as a sum of terms using the decomposition
(3.1.4). Then yp=0∈E2∗,∗, so that zp=xp∈Z2∗,∗∩S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(u3)#(ℓ+1)[2]). By Corollary 2.4, either zp is a boundary or
zp∈S∗((U3)(r)). This completes the proof of (6).
∎
Observe that the (adjoint) action of T on S∗((UJ)(r)) induces an action on S∗((UJ)(r))=S∗((UJ)(r))/I3
which restricts to an action on the tensor factor Q((UJ/Γ2)(r)) of S∗((UJ)(r)) because
the relations (3.2.2) are generated by T-eigenvalues. The following
proposition is a consequence of the description of θU3,r given in Proposition 4.4.
Proposition 4.6**.**
With respect to the above action, we have the equality
[TABLE]
Consequently, the restriction of ηU3,r:S∗((U3)(r))→H∙((U3)(r),k) to
(T3)(r)-invariants has the form
[TABLE]
Proof.
By definition of Xi,j(ℓ) as an element of glN#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1] (see Theorem 1.2),
we see that the images in k[Vr(U3)]⊂Q((U3/Γ2)(r) of Xi,j(ℓ) for 1≤i<j≤3
are T3(r) invariant. On the other hand, using Proposition 4.4 we write Q((U3/Γ2)(r)
as a free module over k[Vr(U3)] generated by powers of the pr−ℓ−1-st roots of the images of
Xi,j(ℓ) viewed as images of elements of S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1u#(ℓ+1)[2]). If a power of such
a root is not divisible by pr−ℓ−1, then it is a non-trivial eigenvector for the semi-simple action of T3(r).
This implies the asserted equality.
Since S∗((U3)(r))≃Q((U3/Γ2)(r))⊗S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1]), we conclude that
H0(T3(r),S∗((U3)(r))) equals k[Vr(U3)]⊗S∗(⊕ℓ=0r−1(γ2/γ3)#(r)[2pr−ℓ−1])
which equals k[Vr(U3)] by Proposition 4.2. The spectral sequence for the extension
[TABLE]
and the semi-simplicity of (T3)(r) imply the equality
[TABLE]
This implies that H0(T(r),−) applied to ηU3,r yields k[Vr(U3)]→H∙((B3)(r),k).
∎
5. Questions
Here are a few of the many questions encountered, but not answered, in this paper.
Question 5.1**.**
For V as in Theorem 2.2, does there exist a non-nilpotent cohomology class
α∈H∗(V,k) each of whose restrictions ir∗(α)∈H∗(V(r),k) is nilpotent?
Question 5.2**.**
Under what conditions on the unipotent group V is the image of the restriction map H∗(V,k)→H∗(V(r),k)
finitely generated?
Question 5.3**.**
Are there natural Steenrod operations on the Andersen-Jantzen spectral sequence which satisfy the usual relationship
with respect to differentials including the Kudo transgression theorem?
Question 5.4**.**
Can one compare the LHS-filtration and the AJ-filtration on the Hochschild complex C∗((UJ/Γ3)(r))?
Question 5.5**.**
Is the map ϕU3,r:k[Vr(U3)]→(H∗((U3)(r),k))red an isomorphism?
Question 5.6**.**
Under what conditions on the unipotent algebraic group U is the k-algebra k[Vr(U)]
reduced (i.e., has no non-trivial nilpotent elements) for all r>0?
Question 5.7**.**
Can we establish the unipotent analogue of the “matrix p-th power relation”
[TABLE]
using the AJ spectral sequence.
Bibliography24
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] H. Andersen, J. Jantzen, Cohomology of induced representations for algebraic groups , Math. Ann. 269 (1985), 487-525.
2[2] J. Alperin, L. Evens, Representations, resolutions, and Quillen’s dimension theorem , J. Pure and Appl. Algebra 22 (1981), 1 - 9.
3[3] H. Azad, M. Barry, G Seitz, On the structure of parabolic subgroups , Comm. Algebra 18 (1990), 551-562.
4[4] J. Carlson, The varieties and the cohomology ring of a module , J. Algebra 85 (1983), 101-143.
5[5] J. Carlson, D. Nakano, On the structure of cohomology rings of p 𝑝 p -nilpotent Lie algebras, Transform. Groups 19 (2104), 721-734.
6[6] E. Cline, B. Parshall, L. Scott, Cohomology, hyperalgebras, and representations, J. Alg. 63 (1980), 98 - 123.
7[7] E. Cline, B. Parshall, L. Scott, W. van der Kallen, Rational and generic cohomology, Invent. Math 39 (1977), 143-163.
8[8] C. Drupieski, D. Nakano, N. Ngo, Cohomology for infinitesimal unipotent groups and quantum groups , Transform. Groups 17 (2012), 393-416.