Dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams and cluster algebras
Maitreyee C. Kulkarni

TL;DR
This paper extends dimer model theory to cylinders over Dynkin diagrams, linking them to cluster algebras and proving rigidity of superpotentials for certain quivers in Kac--Moody algebras.
Contribution
It introduces a general framework for dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams and connects them to Berenstein--Fomin--Zelevinsky quivers in Kac--Moody algebra theory.
Findings
Dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams generalize known disc models.
All Berenstein--Fomin--Zelevinsky quivers for Schubert cells produce such dimer models.
Superpotentials associated with these quivers are proven to be rigid.
Abstract
In this paper, we describe a general setting for dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams which in type A reduces to the well studied case of dimer models on a disc. We prove that all Berenstein--Fomin--Zelevinsky quivers for Schubert cells in a symmetric Kac--Moody algebra give rise to dimer models on the cylinder over the corresponding Dynkin diagram. We also give an independent proof of a result of Buan, Iyama, Reiten and Smith that the corresponding superpotentials are rigid using the dimer model structure of the quivers.
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.
Dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams and cluster algebras
Maitreyee C. Kulkarni
Department of Mathematics, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA
Abstract.
In this paper, we describe a general setting for dimer models on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams which in type A reduces to the well-studied case of dimer models on a disc. We prove that all Berenstein–Fomin–Zelevinsky quivers for Schubert cells in a symmetric Kac–Moody algebra give rise to dimer models on the cylinder over the corresponding Dynkin diagram. We also give an independent proof of a result of Buan, Iyama, Reiten and Smith that the corresponding superpotentials are rigid using the dimer model structure of the quivers.
The author was supported by the NSF grant DMS-1601862, and an LSU Dissertation Year Fellowship.
1. Introduction
Cluster algebras were defined by Fomin and Zelevinsky in 2000 [FZ02] to study Lusztig’s dual canonical basis of quantum groups. A cluster algebra is a certain commutative ring that lies somewhere between a polynomial ring and its field of fractions, and it is generated from an initial collection of data (a quiver and a function on each vertex) by a combinatorial procedure called mutation. In particular, a cluster algebra is defined starting from a quiver (or directed graph) with vertices where each vertex has a function on it. A process called mutation changes both the quiver and the functions on the vertices, and iteratively produces the generating set of the cluster algebra.
Let be a Lie group of type ADE and be a parabolic subgroup. In this setting, Geiss, Leclerc and Schröer gave a cluster structure on the coordinate ring of the partial flag variety [GLS08]. This gives a categorification of the coordinate ring of the affine open cell in by a subcategory of modules over the preprojective algebra associated to the Dynkin diagram of G. This categorification is then lifted to the homogeneous coordinate ring. Jensen, King and Su gave a direct categorification of this homogeneous coordinate ring for Grassmannians, i.e. when is of type A and is a maximal parabolic subgroup [JKS16]. This is done using the category of (maximal) Cohen–Macaulay modules over , where is a quotient algebra of a certain preprojective algebra.
Recently, Baur, King and Marsh gave a combinatorial model for this categorification. They used Postnikov diagrams, which were used by Scott to show that the homogeneous coordinate ring of is a cluster algebra [Sco06]. A Postnikov diagram encodes information about seeds of the cluster algebra and its clusters. Each region in a Postnikov diagram is labelled by a -subset of . Let be a -subset of corresponding to a minor of the matrix and be a certain Cohen–Macaulay -module associated to . To each Postnikov diagram , associate the module . They define a dimer algebra as the Jacobian algebra for the quiver corresponding to a Postnikov diagram. One of Baur King Marsh’s main results is that the dimer algebra [BKM16], which gives a combinatorial construction of the endomorphism algebra required for their categorification.
The key idea in this paper is to realize cluster algebras associated to symmetric Kac–Moody algebras by Berenstein–Fomin–Zelevinsky quivers defined in [BFZ05]. We will introduce conceptual framework for dimer models in other types. The dimer models will play the role of quivers from Postnikov diagrams. Let be a Kac–Moody group and be its Weyl group. For any pair , associate a quiver following [BFZ05]. In type A, is planar for any but in other types, these quivers are not planar in general.
In this paper, we will see that these quivers can be realized as dimer models on the cylinder over the Dynkin diagram of . Suppose is the Dynkin diagram corresponding to , then is called the cylinder over the Dynkin diagram . A vertex in the Dynkin diagram is called a branching point if it has more than two edges incident to it. A vertex is called an endpoint if it has exactly one edge incident to it. Let be the set of endpoints and branching points of a Dynkin diagram. The path between any two vertices and in is called a branch in the Dynkin diagram. The space is called the sheet of the cylinder over the branch . If a Dynkin diagram has branches then the cylinder over the Dynkin diagram has sheets glued at a string on every branching point. This realization makes the quiver planar in each sheet of the cylinder.
Theorem 1.1**.**
The quiver corresponding to any pair , where is the identity element and is an arbitrary element in the Weyl group, has the following structure:
- •
Each face of is oriented.
- •
Each face of on the cylinder projects onto an edge of the Dynkin diagram.
- •
Each edge of projects onto a vertex of the Dynkin diagram or an edge of the Dynkin diagram.
Any quiver on a cylinder over a Dynkin diagram that has the above properties will be called a dimer model on the cylinder [see Definition 3.2] because it will play a similar role to the dimer models of [BKM16]. The dimer algebra of [BKM16] will be replaced by the Jacobian algebra (see [DWZ08]) corresponding to a certain potential of the BFZ quiver. The Jacobian algebra of the quiver depends on the choice of a potential. In this case we use a particularly nice type of potential called a rigid potential. Every rigid potential is non-degenerate which means that any sequence of mutations of the quiver with potential does not create a 2-cycle in the quiver.
We define the superpotential of a quiver as follows:
[TABLE]
Note that a face of a quiver is a cycle which is not divided by an edge. We will show that this is a rigid potential, i.e. that all cycles in the quiver lie in the Jacobian ideal of the potential . This will be proved in two steps, first for faces, and then for non-self-intersecting oriented cycles. As each cycle in the quiver is oriented, the above two cases cover all cycles in the quiver.
The dimer model structure of these quivers reduces the global problem of verification of rigidity of the super-potential to a local problem on each sheet. Let be the superpotential of the subquiver of drawn on the sheet of the cylinder. We show that is rigid in the sheet, for each . As sheets are glued at a string, they only share edges that lie on the gluing string with each other. Particularly, they do not share any faces, therefore the superpotential is simply the sum . As each face belongs to a unique sheet, the gluing of sheets does not affect the rigidity of the potential.
In Section 2, we give some preliminary definitions. In Section 3, we define a Berenstein–Fomin–Zelevinsky quiver, then give our construction of cylinders on Dynkin diagrams and quivers from double Bruhat cells. In this section we prove that the BFZ quivers can be realized as dimer models on the cylinder over a Dynkin diagram. The quiver lies entirely on the cylinder by construction. In the last section, as an application, we give an independent proof of the following result in [BIRS11]:
Theorem 1.2**.**
For any Weyl group element , the superpotential of the BFZ quiver is rigid.
We prove that the quiver is planar in each sheet of the cylinder and each face of the quiver is oriented. We prove the rigidity in each sheet by observing that the faces on the boundary belong to the Jacobian ideal. Then we use induction on the faces of dimer models to prove that every face belongs to the ideal. Then we notice that every cycle can be written in terms of faces that the cycle contains, which tells us that each cycle is in the ideal.
**Acknowledgements. ** I am grateful to my advisor Milen Yakimov for his advice on this project, many helpful discussions and great ideas. I would also like to thank Robert Marsh for his insightful discussions on dimer models.
2. Preliminaries
Cluster algebras are defined using quivers and their mutations. A quiver is a directed graph. We denote it by , its set of vertices by and its set of edges by . Consider two maps . The map the starting vertex of the edge and the end-vertex of the edge .
Definition 2.1**.**
A seed is a quiver together with elements of a field on the vertices that together freely generate that field over . The elements on the vertices are called cluster variables.
Definition 2.2**.**
The process of mutation of a seed at vertex is defined as follows:
- •
Step 1: Reverse all arrows touching the vertex .
- •
Step 2: Complete triangles, i.e., for every path , and an edge .
- •
Step 3: Cancel any 2-cycles created in Step 2.
- •
Step 4: Replace at the vertex with where the products are over edges with source vertex and with target vertex respectively.
Definition 2.3**.**
Let be a finite quiver without loops or 2-cycles with vertices and the initial seed . The cluster algebra is the subalgebra of generated by all cluster variables obtained from all possible sequences of mutations applied to the initial seed.
Example 2.1**.**
We show an example of mutation of the following quiver at the vertex labelled .
Definition 2.4**.**
A quiver is said to be 2-acyclic if it has no oriented 2-cycles.
The path algebra of a quiver is an algebra generated by paths in the quiver with multiplication given by concatenation of paths. A potential is a linear combination of cycles in the quiver. The pair of a quiver and its potential is called a quiver with potential or a QP. We will follow the definition of mutation of quivers with potential in [DWZ08]. One of the hardships of the theory is that mutations of potentials may not produce a 2-acyclic quiver in general.
Definition 2.5**.**
A QP is called non-degenerate if every sequence of mutations of is 2-acyclic.
The process of verifying non-degeneracy is an infinite process in general, as the quiver may not be mutation finite. To verify non-degeneracy of a potential without going through this infinite process, we use a stronger condition on a potential called rigidity.
Theorem 2.1** ([DWZ08]).**
Every rigid potential is non-degenerate.
To define a rigid potential, let us first define the cyclic derivative of a potential. For every , the cyclic derivative is defined as:
[TABLE]
where is a cycle in the quiver and . If for any , then . If is a potential of , we define the Jacobian ideal to be the ideal generated by , for all . The Jacobian algebra is the quotient .
Definition 2.6**.**
A QP is rigid if every cycle Q is cyclically equivalent to an element of .
Example 2.2**.**
Consider the potential in the quiver in Figure 3. Then, by differentiating with respect to the edges , and , we get that . So but . Therefore is not rigid. If , then . So and . Therefore is rigid.
3. Quivers on cylinders over Dynkin diagrams
3.1. Cylinders over Dynkin diagrams
Let be a Dynkin diagram. A vertex of a Dynkin diagram is called an endpoint if it has only one edge incident to it. A vertex is called a branching point if it has strictly more than two edges incident to it. A path between two vertices and in is called a branch if both and are branching points or endpoints or if one of them is a branching point and the other is an endpoint.
Definition 3.1**.**
For a Dynkin diagram , we define the cylinder over to be the topological space . Let be the set of vertices of . We call the set a grid on the cylinder. The set is called the sheet over the branch . The length of a sheet is the number of edges on the branch. The subset where is called a string.
Example 3.1**.**
A quiver for double Bruhat cells of can be drawn on a book-like structure as shown in the figure below. The cylinder has strings and three sheets; one sheet of length and two sheets of length 1 glued together at their boundaries.
Definition 3.2**.**
A quiver on the cylinder over a Dynkin diagram is called a dimer model on the cylinder if
- (1)
Each arrow of the quiver projects onto an edge or a vertex of the Dynkin diagram. 2. (2)
Each face projects onto an edge of the Dynkin diagram. 3. (3)
Each face is oriented.
Example 3.2**.**
Quivers for double Bruhat cells of can be drawn on a book-like structure as shown in Figure 5. The cylinder has seven strings and three sheets: one sheet of length 3 (green in color), one sheet of length 2(red in color) and one sheet of length 1 (blue in color) glued together at their boundaries (the black string).
3.2. Double Bruhat cells
Let be a Kac–Moody group. Let and be opposite borel subgroups and be its Weyl group. Then can be written as disjoint union of double Bruhat cells where, and . To each such pair of Weyl elements , we can associate a quiver as defined in [BFZ05].
3.3. Berenstein–Fomin–Zelevinsky quivers
Let be a simply connected complex algebraic group. Let be the Weyl group and be the Lie algebra of . Every Weyl group can be realized as a Coxeter group with reflections of simple roots as its generators. Each is an involution and , for some integer encoded in the Dynkin diagram. Every element has a smallest expression in terms of ’s. A word is a tuple of indices of simple reflections in the smallest expression for . If for in is the smallest such expression in terms of the generators of then the word is said to be in its reduced form. The length of the word is denoted by and .
Fix a pair . Let us use negative indices for the generators of the first copy of and positive indices for the second copy of . Then a reduced word is an arbitrary shuffle of a reduced word for and a reduced word for . Let . For , is the smallest index such that and . If for any , then . An index is called -exchangeable if both and are in .
Definition 3.3**.**
Let . A BFZ quiver has set of vertices Vertices and such that are connected if and only if either or are -exchangeable. There are two types of edges:
- •
An edge is called horizontal if and it is directed from to if and only if .
- •
An edge is called inclined if one of the following conditions hold:
- (1)
, , 2. (2)
, ,
An inclined edge is directed from to if and only if .
These quivers are used in [BFZ05] to produce a cluster structure on the coordinate rings of double Bruhat cells.
Theorem 3.1**.**
A BFZ quiver can be realized as a dimer model on the cylinder over the corresponding Dynkin diagram.
Proof.
Notice that the horizontal edges in Definition 3.3 lie on the strings of the cylinder over the Dynkin diagram. All inclined edges lie between two adjacent strings such that they project down onto an edge of the Dynkin diagram. According to the definition of the quiver, there is an edge between two vertices of adjacent strings only if the corresponding vertices in the graph are connected by an edge. ∎
3.4. BFZ quivers for type
A quiver for double Bruhat cells for can be viewed as a quiver on a plane on as shown below. All vertical edges in the quiver project onto vertices in the Dynkin diagram. All inclined edges project onto edges of the Dynkin diagram.
Example 3.3**.**
Consider the Lie group of type . The Weyl group in this case is . Let . The quiver corresponding to the double Bruhat cell is as shown below:
Lemma 3.1**.**
A BFZ quiver is planar in each sheet.
Proof.
Consider the th and the th string of the quiver. If the strings are not adjacent on a sheet, then we know that there cannot be edges between the vertices of the strings. If the strings are adjacent, consider the following diagram:
{k}$${k^{+}}$${k^{++}}$${\cdots}$${k^{p+}}$${l}$${l^{+}}$${l^{++}}$${\cdots}$${l^{r+}}
Suppose the vertices and are connected. Then depending on whether or , there will be the following inequalities:
(1) If , then
(2) If , then .
(3) So in both cases above, .
We want to show that the vertex is not connected to for any . Suppose and are connected. Then again, there are two cases:
(4) If , then
(5) If , then .
(6) Combining inequalities in (4) and (5) with we get, .
As (3) and (6) contradict each other, there cannot be an overlapping edge. Hence the quiver is planar in each sheet. ∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
For any Kac–Moody algebra and , all faces of are oriented, where is the identity element in .
Proof.
Let us assume that there exists a non-oriented - cycle in the quiver with vertices in th string, vertices in (a neighboring) th string and . Note that all edges in all strings are directed in one direction as we are fixing one of the Weyl group elements to be the identity. Two edges between the neighboring strings can be directed in the same or opposite direction (as shown below). Let us consider the first case where the vertical edges have the same direction.
{j}$${j^{+}}$${j^{++}}$${\cdots}$${j^{p+}}$${k}$${k^{+}}$${k^{++}}$${\cdots}$${k^{r+}}
Let . From the direction of the vertical arrows, it is clear that and . We also know that and .
Each inequality creates an edge from to . For every such inequality, notice that we get one or more edges in the -cycle which divides the cycle into smaller oriented cycles. The second case where the two edges between the neighboring strings have opposite directions follows similarly from corresponding inequalities. ∎
Remark 3.1**.**
Each -face in a quiver has vertices in one string and the remaining one vertex in its adjacent string.
{j}$${j^{+}}$${j^{++}}$${\cdots}$${j^{p+}}$${k} **
4. Rigidity of the superpotential
In this section, we will use the planarity of a dimer models on a cylinder to show that its superpotential is rigid, in certain cases. Recall that a potential of a quiver is a linear combination of cycles in the quiver. The potential
[TABLE]
is called the superpotential of the quiver .
Remark 4.1**.**
Each vertex of a quiver has at most one edge going to and at most one edge coming from each adjacent string.
As an application of the theory of dimer models on cylinders we give an independent proof of the following result of [BIRS09]:
Theorem 4.1**.**
The superpotential of the quiver is a rigid potential.
We first prove that the sub-potential of the superpotential lying in each sheet is rigid. Recall that two sheets are glued at a string, hence the sub-potentials share edges between them, but they do not share any faces of the quiver. Therefore, rigidity of the sub-potentials indeed implies rigidity of the superpotential. Denote by , the sub-potential of the superpotential that lies on the th sheet. In order to prove rigidity of , we need to show that each cycle in the quiver belongs to the Jacobian ideal .
Lemma 4.1**.**
Every face belongs to .
Proof.
We will prove this by induction on the distance of a face from the boundary of the quiver. The distance of a face is denoted by and defined as follows: if has a boundary edge as one of its edges. If is not a boundary face, then where d=\min\{{d(F^{\prime})|\\ \ F^{\prime}\text{ is an adjacent face to F}}\}.
Now, if , has a boundary edge as one of its edges. Let us call the edge , then , which implies all boundary faces are in the Jacobian ideal. Suppose , then has at least one adjacent face whose distance is . Let that face be and be the edge shared by and . As , by induction, , and by the definition of the Jacobian ideal, , therefore . Hence all faces with distance are in the Jacobian ideal, which completes the proof by induction. ∎
Note that if a cycle is self-intersecting, it can be written a product of two or more non-self-intersecting cycles. If we want to show that the original cycle belongs to the Jacobian ideal, then it suffices to prove that one of its non-self-intersecting cycles belongs to the ideal.
Definition 4.1**.**
A cycle is called differentiable with respect to an edge if separates the cycle into a face and a smaller cycle.
As the quiver is planar in each sheet, we know that the edge is shared by at most two faces, say and . If is differentiable with respect to the edge , then contains all edges of either or except .
Lemma 4.2**.**
Every non-self-intersecting cycle in the quiver is differentiable with respect to at least one edge in its interior.
Proof.
Let be a cycle containing faces, . Suppose has vertices and edges. We need to show that contains all but one edge of for some .
Recall that each face has one of its vertices in a string and the remaining vertices in its adjacent string. Each vertex has at most one edge going to and at most one edge coming from each adjacent string. Lastly, every edge in each string is directed in the same direction.
Let be the right-most vertical path in cycle . Suppose belongs to the th string, of the quiver. This path has exactly one inclined edge from the string to its left, . That means, the face that contains and , has its vertex in string and all remaining vertices in that belong to path . As is the right-most vertical path of , the edge lands in the string . If , the cycle is self-intersecting. Hence . So, for some , there is an edge , which lies in the interior of and completes a face in the quiver. This edge separates into a face (consisting of vertices ) and a smaller cycle, and hence is differentiable with respect to .
v_{2}$$v_{3}$$v_{m}$$v_{n}$$v_{1}$$v_{n+1}$$e_{2}$$e_{1}$$e_{m}$$e_{n}
∎
Lemma 4.3**.**
Any non-self-intersecting cycle can be written as multiplication of a face and a cycle in the Jacobian algebra.
Proof.
We use induction on , the number of faces contained inside the cycle. If a cycle contains only one face, then by the lemma above, it belongs to the Jacobian ideal.
Let be a cycle containing faces, , with number of edges respectively. We know that contains all vertices of at least one of these faces. Let that face be , which starts and ends at the vertex . So contains edges of . Let be the path consisting of edges of that also belong to . As is a cycle, there exists a path, say such that . Let be the th edge of the face such that Now there exists a path such that , which implies that in the Jacobian algebra. Hence , reducing the number of faces inside to .
e_{n_{i}}$$e_{1}$$e$$p_{1}^{\prime}$$p_{2}$$p_{1}$$p_{1}$$F_{i}
∎
This shows that every cycle of a quiver belongs to the Jacobian ideal corresponding to the superpotential . Hence is a rigid potential.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BFZ 05] A. Berenstein, S.Fomin, and A. Zelevinsky. Cluster algebras. III. Upper bounds and double Bruhat cells. Duke Math. J. , 126(1):1–52, 2005.
- 2[BIRS 09] A. B. Buan, O. Iyama, I. Reiten, and J. Scott. Cluster structures for 2-Calabi–Yau categories and unipotent groups. Compositio Mathematica , 145(4):1035–1079, 007 2009.
- 3[BIRS 11] A. B. Buan, O. Iyama, I. Reiten, and D. Smith. Mutation of cluster-tilting objects and potentials. Amer. J. Math. , 133(4):835–887, 2011.
- 4[BKM 16] Karin Baur, Alastair D. King, and Robert J. Marsh. Dimer models and cluster categories of Grassmannians. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) , 113(2):213–260, 2016.
- 5[DWZ 08] H. Derksen, J. Weyman, and A. Zelevinsky. Quivers with potentials and their representations. I. Mutations. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 14(1):59–119, 2008.
- 6[FZ 02] S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky. Cluster algebras. I. Foundations. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 15(2):497–529 (electronic), 2002.
- 7[GLS 08] C. Geiss, B. Leclerc, and J. Schröer. Partial flag varieties and preprojective algebras. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 58(3):825–876, 2008.
- 8[JKS 16] B. T. Jensen, A. D. King, and X. Su. A categorification of Grassmannian cluster algebras. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) , 113(2):185–212, 2016.
