Tableau Stabilization and Rectangular Tableaux Fixed by Promotion Powers
Connor Ahlbach

TL;DR
This paper introduces tableau stabilization, a new concept based on jeu de taquin, and uses it to construct large rectangular tableaux fixed by promotion powers, connecting to cyclic sieving phenomena.
Contribution
It develops the theory of tableau stabilization and applies it to explicitly construct fixed points of promotion powers in rectangular tableaux.
Findings
Defined tableau stabilization and analyzed its properties.
Established bounds and shape characteristics of stabilized tableaux.
Constructed large rectangular tableaux fixed by promotion powers.
Abstract
We introduce tableau stabilization, a new phenomenon and statistic on Young tableaux based on jeu de taquin. We investigate bounds for tableau stabilization, the shape of stabilized tableaux, and tableau stabilization as a permutation statistic. We apply tableau stabilization to construct the sufficiently large rectangular tableaux fixed by powers of promotion, which were counted by Brendon Rhoades via the cyclic sieving phenomenon
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.
Tableau Stabilization and Rectangular Tableaux Fixed by Promotion Powers
Connor Ahlbach
Abstract.
We introduce tableau stabilization, a new phenomenon and statistic on Young tableaux based on jeu de taquin. We investigate bounds for tableau stabilization, the shape of stabilized tableaux, and tableau stabilization as a permutation statistic. We apply tableau stabilization to construct the sufficiently large rectangular tableaux fixed by powers of promotion, which were counted by Brendon Rhoades via the cyclic sieving phenomenon [Rho10, Theorem 1.3].
Department of Mathematics, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA; [email protected]
1. Introduction
In this paper, we introduce tableau stabilization, a new phenomenon we found in order to construct sufficiently large rectangular tableaux that are fixed by promotion powers. Central to defining and investigating tableau stabilization are Schütenberger’s jeu de taquin and the rectification operator, which are already well-established algorithms in the theory of Young tableaux. Tableau stabilization is the phenomenon that if we attach sufficiently many shifted copies of a skew tableau to its right and then rectify, some copy and all of those to its right only experience horizontal slides. We will investigate when the vertical slides stop, i.e. when the skew tableau stabilizes. We will also determine the shape of the stabilized tableau if the initial skew tableau has same size rows. The case where all rows have the same size is used to construct sufficiently large rectangular tableaux that are fixed by promotion powers. We leave the reader with open problems on tableau stabilization, most notably extending our bound from equal row sizes and finding its distribution as a permutation statistic. See LABEL:sec:bkgd for definitions and further background.
Definition 1.1**.**
For any standard skew tableau , let denote the result of attaching shifted copies of to the right of so that the result is a standard skew tableau. Let denote the size of and be a positive integer. We say stabilizes at if the entries in lie in the same rows in and . Let denote the minimum value at which stabilizes.
Example 1.2**.**
Let denote the rectification operator. Consider
[TABLE]
Note that does not lie in the same row in and , but do. Hence, . As also stay in the same row in and , stabilizes at 3 as well. Note does not lie in the same row in and , but do. Hence, .
Also consider
Then,
[TABLE]
Since , but , we have .
Remark 5.3**.**
Similarly to LABEL:rem:rowsizes, if does not have increasing row vector, need not be a standard skew tableau. Hence, the notions of stabilization and anti-stabilization only make sense simultaneously when the row vector is constant.
Anti-stabilization has many of the same properties as stabilization. If we apply the same reasoning using anti-rectification instead of rectification and instead of , we get the following analogues of LABEL:lem:stabrse, LABEL:thm:dualequivstab, LABEL:lem:stabcontinues, LABEL:thm:stabweaklydecrows, and LABEL:thm:stab for anti-stabilization.
Corollary 5.4**.**
Suppose is a standard skew tableau with rows and increasing row vector. Then,
- (a)
Anti-stabilization is well-defined up to row shift equivalence. 2. (b)
is constant on dual equivalence classes of standard skew tableaux. 3. (c)
anti-stabilizes eventually, and if anti-stabilizes at , it anti-stabilizes at any . 4. (d)
If , then anti-stabilizes at . 5. (e)
If has constant row vector, then anti-stabilizes at .
If is a standard skew tableau with constant row vector, then and are both standard tableaux with the same reading word. Thus, by LABEL:lem:rectP,
[TABLE]
Lemma 5.5**.**
For any standard skew tableau ,
[TABLE]
where is Schützenberger’s evacuation operator.
Proof.
Let be the reading word of , so is a permutation of size . Anti-rectifying and rectifying differ by a rotation of , implying
[TABLE]
As reverses the order of the cells in the reading word and reverses the entry values, the reading word of is , where is the reversal permutation of size . Thus, by LABEL:lem:rectP,
[TABLE]
Moreover, by [Sag01, Theorem 3.9.4], so
[TABLE]
by LABEL:lem:rectP. Combining (141), (142), and (143) gives 5.5.
∎
Lemma 5.6**.**
Suppose that is a standard skew tableau with row vector . Then, for all , and ,
[TABLE]
In addition,
[TABLE]
Proof.
For any , we have by (140). Thus, by 5.5,
[TABLE]
for all and , proving (144). By LABEL:def:stab2(c), stabilizes at if and only if
[TABLE]
Similarly, anti-stabilizes at if and only if
[TABLE]
By (144), (146) holds if and only if (147) holds. Thus, stabilizes at if and only if anti-stabilizes at , and (145) follows.
∎
6. Sufficiently Large Tableaux Fixed by Powers of Promotion
In this section, we first give an alternative method for doing multiple promotions at once. Recall denotes Schützenberger’s promotion operator, see LABEL:def:pr. We then construct the sufficiently large rectangular standard tableaux fixed by promotion powers. In particular, we construct the tableaux in for and prove LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs. LABEL:thm:stabshape plays a key role in showing these tableaux are rectangular, tableau stabilization is central in showing these tableaux are fixed by , and the bound in LABEL:thm:stab lets us control the size of these rectangular tableaux. We also prove LABEL:cor:prfixedpr, which describes the action of promotion on .
Lemma 6.1**.**
Suppose and . For any tableau and , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
Equation (148) follows from LABEL:def:pr and rectification being well-defined. By LABEL:thm:prnid, on , so . Then, (149) follows from the fact that is rectangular, meaning demotion and promotion are inverses, LABEL:def:pr, and anti-rectification being well-defined.
∎
Definition 6.2**.**
Suppose is a standard skew tableau with row vector , and let . For any , let denote the filling of rectangular shape formed by row-concatenating and together from left to right.
Example 6.3**.**
Let
[TABLE]
which has , and let . Observe that
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
Theorem 6.4**.**
Suppose that is a standard skew tableau with row vector . Then, for any integer ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let and . First, we check that has rectangular shape . By LABEL:cor:stabshapeearly and (144),
[TABLE]
for all . Hence, for ,
[TABLE]
which shows . Since is left-justified, it is a filling of shape .
Secondly, we check that is a standard tableau. We break into three pieces:
- •
, because stabilizes at
- •
,
- •
.
The fillings and are skew tableaux because they are the rectification and anti-rectification of skew tableaux, respectively. The filling is a skew tableau since it is formed by row-concatenating shifted copies of . Since use the entries , , and respectively, uses each of exactly once. Because adjoins to the right of and adjoins to the right of , the rows and columns of are increasing. Hence, is a standard tableau.
Thirdly, we check that is fixed by promotions. Since stabilizes at ,
[TABLE]
By 5.6, also anti-stabilizes at , so similarly,
[TABLE]
Note that both sides of (156) are empty when . Then, for all ,
[TABLE]
Similarly, for all ,
[TABLE]
Putting (157) and (158) together,
[TABLE]
In particular, because , we have , so
[TABLE]
∎
Notation 6.5**.**
Fix , and let be the block anti-diagonal skew shape
[TABLE]
Although 6.4 holds for any standard skew tableau with row vector , is row shift equivalent to a standard skew tableau of shape by performing horizontal slides. Thus, by LABEL:lem:stabrse, and , which means for all . Hence, any rectangular tableau of the form for some standard skew tableau with row vector is also of the form for some .
Corollary 6.6**.**
For all ,
[TABLE]
Proof.
For fixed , is defined for . Thus, for fixed and all with , is defined and lies in by 6.4.
It remains to show the elements of are distinct. Suppose that for . Letting , we have and hence as well. This and 6.2 mean
[TABLE]
forcing because .
∎
Example 6.7**.**
Consider
[TABLE]
which have
[TABLE]
Thus, the smallest we can construct with 6.2 are
[TABLE]
On the other hand, neither
[TABLE]
is of the form for because and never use all 4 rows for any value of .
The containment in 6.6 can be strict in general, as illustrated by in 6.7. However, equality in 6.6 holds for , when holds for all by LABEL:thm:stab. Thus, 6.6 specializes to
[TABLE]
The fact that equality holds in (172) is the content of LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs.
Remark 6.8**.**
In LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs, is defined by row concatenating shifted copies of , , and instead of shifted copies of and where as in 6.2. These 2 constructions agree by the definition of tableau stabilization, see 1.1, and because for , see LABEL:thm:stab.
Proof of LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs.
Fix a positive integer . Equality in (172) will follow from the fact that both sides have the same size. By LABEL:lem:rectquotients, we have the quotient
[TABLE]
Thus, because . By LABEL:cor:prfixedribbontab and (173),
[TABLE]
which shows both sides of (172) have the same size. Therefore,
[TABLE]
Finally, we can choose by choosing the sets of elements that go in each of rows, which determines uniquely since each row of is increasing. Thus,
[TABLE]
∎
Not only can we describe the elements of for , but we can also describe the action of promotion on , which is closed under promotion. In fact, using the definition of promotion for skew shapes, see LABEL:def:pr, promotion commutes with the operator:
[TABLE]
as in LABEL:cor:prfixedpr.
Proof of LABEL:cor:prfixedpr.
For any , we have
[TABLE]
Thus, is closed under promotion. So, fixing ,
[TABLE]
by LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs. It suffices to show . As rectification is well-defined, we get the same result whether we perform an inner slide at 1’s cell before or after rectification, so
[TABLE]
Since , the inner slide started by removing 1’s cell in consists of only horizontal slides, so
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
By LABEL:thm:stab, and each have row vector , which together with (176), forces to be in the same cell in and . Combining this with (176) again,
[TABLE]
In particular,
[TABLE]
forcing since . ∎
Corollary 6.9**.**
Let and . Then, for all integers , , and ,
[TABLE]
the Littlewood-Richardson coefficient from LABEL:def:LRCs.
Proof.
Note that . By LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs and , we have
[TABLE]
by LABEL:def:LRCs. ∎
7. Other Tableaux Fixed by Promotion Powers
In this section, we present the construction of by White and Rhee [Whi06] [Rhe12], see LABEL:thm:fixedbyab/2prom, using a similar construction to LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs. Then, we describe the action of promotion on in 7.4. Next, we characterize the block diagonal skew tableaux fixed by a power of promotion in terms of tableaux of straight shape fixed by certain powers of promotion, see 7.7, inspired by White [Whi06]. This has consequences for describing the tableaux in in terms of rectangular tableaux fixed by smaller promotion powers, see 7.9.
We next describe the tableaux in when . Using LABEL:lem:rectquotients and that when is even, we have the quotient
[TABLE]
Therefore, by LABEL:cor:prfixedribbontab,
[TABLE]
Definition 7.1**.**
Fix and let . For , let be the filling formed by row-concatenating and together from left to right.
Example 7.2**.**
Suppose , and choose
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
We use the name because the construction is similar to the definition of if we set . Note that we cannot just set in 6.2 because 6.2 requires . Similar to 6.4, we will show has shape , is a standard tableau, and is fixed by .
Lemma 7.3**.**
The map
[TABLE]
is bijective.
Proof.
Say as a skew shape. By [Sta86, Lemma 3.3], we have the Littlewood-Richardson coefficient
[TABLE]
for all . 7.3 follows immediately from (183) and LABEL:def:LRCs.
∎
Proof of LABEL:thm:fixedbyab/2prom.
[Whi06] [Rhe12] Fix . For all and
[TABLE]
Indeed, is a filling of shape . The fillings and are skew tableaux using the entries and , repsectively. Thus, their row-concatenation from left to right, , is a standard tableau.
Similar to the proof of 6.4,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Putting (184) and (185) together gives . Thus,
[TABLE]
The fact that is a set and not a multiset is a consequence of 7.3. By (178), both sides of (186) have the same size, so
[TABLE]
Finally, we count these tableaux by first partitioning into two blocks of size and . Then, we choose a filling of with the first block and a filling of with the second block so that both fillings have increasing rows and columns. This yields
[TABLE]
∎
We also describe the action of promotion on , which is closed under promotion. Like in LABEL:cor:prfixedpr, the operator also commutes with promotion.
Corollary 7.4**.**
[TABLE]
Proof.
Similar to LABEL:cor:prfixedpr, is closed under promotion. Thus, fixing ,
[TABLE]
Our reasoning from the proof of LABEL:cor:prfixedpr still holds through (176), so
[TABLE]
By 7.3, and each have shapes satisfying , which together with (187), forces to be in the same cell in and . Thus,
[TABLE]
Finally, 7.3 forces . ∎
For any ,
[TABLE]
By LABEL:cor:prfixedpr and 7.4, we have, for or ,
[TABLE]
For , we will describe in terms of rectangular tableaux fixed by smaller promotion powers.
Definition 7.5**.**
For a standard tableau of size , , and with and , let denote the skew tableau obtained from by replacing by for all and . For example, if
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Definition 7.6**.**
On a tableau with entries , let promotion act on the indices as it would on a standard tableau. For example, since
[TABLE]
We realize there are other variations on how promotion acts on tableaux with distinct non-standard entries, such as in [Rho10], but this will prove convenient for our purposes.
Theorem 7.7**.**
(inspired by [Whi06]) For any partitions with total size , and ,
[TABLE]
if . Else,
[TABLE]
Example 7.8**.**
Suppose . Let
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Suppose are partitions with total size and . Let
[TABLE]
Consider for and . Let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Also, write
[TABLE]
For each , the entries in are . Thus, since performs a total of decrements modulo , the entries in are
[TABLE]
Thus, the same set of entries appears in and . By this and the fact that of the promotions on slide through ,
[TABLE]
Now,
[TABLE]
for all . Combining (198), (199), and (200) yields , so holds in (196).
On the other hand, suppose . Let , denote the entries in that lie in and . Since , the set of entries in must be fixed by decrements modulo . When applying to , we apply inner slides and decrements modulo to , so letting denote the set of entries of in increasing order, we must have
[TABLE]
Equation (201) means that shifting the indices by modulo corresponds to shifting the entries by modulo . This means for some , , and that the set of entries in is
[TABLE]
As must use exactly the entries , forcing
[TABLE]
Now we have
[TABLE]
Hence, unless .
Now, assume that . Since the set of entries in is , we can write for some . Then,
[TABLE]
for all . This proves that holds in (196) and hence proves 7.7.
∎
Corollary 7.9**.**
For any , and ,
[TABLE]
if . Else,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By LABEL:thm:fixedbyab/2prom and (189),
[TABLE]
7.9 follows from (202) and 7.7. ∎
Example 7.10**.**
Continuing 7.8,
[TABLE]
Remark 7.11**.**
One can generalize 7.9 to give a similar description of for . However, such a generalization would not give us anything new. In order for to be nonempty, we must have or by (LABEL:eq:prfixednonempty). Since , , so
[TABLE]
Note also that . Then, by LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs,
[TABLE]
These tableaux were already constructed in LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs.
8. Stabilization as a Permutation Statistic
We can identify each permutation with the unique skew tableau with shape whose reading word is . Under this identification, we translate the stabilization statistic to the symmetric group. We realize stabilization is invariant on dual equivalence classes and is bounded below strictly by the number of ascents of . We characterize the permutations with stabilization statistic 1 and 2 in terms of their recording tableaux.
Definition 8.1**.**
For , let be the unique standard skew tableau with shape with reading word , and define . Let
[TABLE]
denote the number of ascents of .
Example 8.2**.**
[TABLE]
Recall from (LABEL:eq:DEQ) that are dual equivalent if and only if . As in LABEL:thm:dualequivstab, dual equivalence plays well with stabilization.
Lemma 8.3**.**
If are dual equivalent, then .
Proof.
Since are dual equivalent, and are dual equivalent, see [Hai92, Lemma 2.11]. It follows by LABEL:thm:dualequivstab that
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 8.4**.**
For all , .
Proof.
Suppose , and let , so stabilizes at . In particular, this means has rows. The reading word of is
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
by LABEL:lem:rectP. By LABEL:thm:Greene, must have a decreasing subsequence of size . Yet, at most one of can be in such a decreasing subsequence. Thus, must have a decreasing subsequence of the form
[TABLE]
for some . Since this subsequence is decreasing,
[TABLE]
Therefore, can only have ascents at possibly , so has at most ascents. Hence, .
∎
8.3 and 8.4 give us some information about the distribution of on , but what else can we say about this distribution? By LABEL:thm:stab, we know for . In Figure 3, we give the distribution of on . We have a formula for the number of permutations in with 1 or 2. In fact, we characterize exactly which permutation has 1 and which permutations have in terms of their recording tableaux.
Lemma 8.5**.**
The permutation is the only permutation with .
Proof.
If , then has a single column, so . If with , then consists of rows, forcing .
∎
Notation 8.6**.**
Fix . For , let
[TABLE]
where . This also means
[TABLE]
Theorem 8.7**.**
For all ,
[TABLE]
Consequently,
[TABLE]
See OEIS entry A201686.
We break the proof of 8.7 into 3 steps. First, we use 8.4 to prove (213). Secondly, we calculate the number of standard tableaux of a given size with 1 or 2 columns. Thirdly, we use this result to prove (214).
Proof of (213).
Suppose has . By 8.4, , so we can write where
[TABLE]
for some . We must also have or else , which has . Thus, . Since , must have in distinct rows. Note that we can perform inner slides to to get
[TABLE]
where for all . In order for to stabilize at 2, can only slide horizontally. Since and thus , will slide vertically if the cell above it is vacated while it is in the second column. Since any entry above sliding into column 1 forces to slide up, if slides into column 1, it must do so before any of the entries above it. Hence, must slide up either above or to the top before experience any horizontal slides.
If , then slide to the top and stay still, so
[TABLE]
where . Since , this means during RSK on , the whole first column of was created first. Thus,
[TABLE]
If , then slide up above before experience any horizontal slides, so
[TABLE]
In particular, based on the position of , began with a column of size k followed by a second column of size . Thus,
[TABLE]
As has a decreasing subsequence of size , the first column of must have size at least by LABEL:thm:Greene. As contains , we must have
[TABLE]
This shows that if , then for some , and hence
[TABLE]
In order to show the reverse containment of (262) and thus complete the proof of (213), suppose for some . To show , it suffices to verify for only 1 such word in each dual equivalence class by 8.3. As the recording tableau characterizes dual equivalence classes, it suffices to check that
[TABLE]
by (212). Let so that by (211),
[TABLE]
where . Either way, .
∎
Lemma 8.8**.**
Let denote the set of size standard tableaux with at most 2 columns. Then,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Because RSK: is a bijection,
[TABLE]
For all , let
[TABLE]
which has shape . Now, is the set of size standard tableaux with descents at . Thus,
[TABLE]
by choosing the set from , which determines uniquely.
∎
Proof of (214).
We can add to 2 positions to tableaux in for , but only 1 position to tableaux in , meaning
[TABLE]
Note if is odd. Therefore,
[TABLE]
∎
9. Open Problems
We finish by discussing related open questions about tableau stabilization and promotion. While we have proven some of the important properties of tableau stabilization, much remains unknown. The most glaring open problem is LABEL:conj:stab.
LABEL:conj:stab: Any standard skew tableau with rows and decreasing row vector stabilizes at .
We have proven this bound is tight for skew tableaux with constant row vectors, see LABEL:thm:stab and LABEL:ex:stabatb. Due to LABEL:ex:samecjsdiffhape, our approach to proving LABEL:thm:stab does not readily generalize to proving LABEL:conj:stab.
The distribution of the stabilization statistic remains to be explored as well.
Open Problem 9.1**.**
What is the distribution of on tableaux of a fixed skew shape?
We expect 9.1 to be especially difficult. The permutation case, i.e. shape , could be more tractable. The triangular array in Figure 3 describes stabilization’s distribution on permutations in . The distribution is unimodal and log-concave for these small cases. While we know the leftmost entry is always 1, is the rightmost entry is always 1 as well? In addition, since is invariant on dual equivalence classes, determines .
Conjecture 9.2**.**
The permutation is the only permutation with .
Open Problem 9.3**.**
What is the distribution of on ?
Open Problem 9.4**.**
Is the distribution of on unimodal? Is it log-concave?
Open Problem 9.5**.**
Characterize directly in terms of for all .
We have made substantial progress on the problem of specifying the fixed points of the powers of promotion on rectangular tableaux, but some cases remain open. We constructed the tableaux in for in Section 6 and for in Section 7. The case is trivial, and the complete case was solved by Purbhoo and Rhee, see [PR17]. To completely solve the problem of specifying the fixed points of the powers of promotion on rectangular tableaux, 9.6 remains.
Open Problem 9.6**.**
Fix . For each ( for ), describe the tableaux in .
Generalizing Purbhoo and Rhee’s construction for to is a nontrivial potential future task. By LABEL:cor:prfixedribbontab and (173), we have
[TABLE]
Purbhoo and Rhee’s proof relies on the fact that for all , the entries in the anti-diagonal cells of form a permutation in when taken modulo . For example,
[TABLE]
has the anti-diagonal entries . One might hope that for any , the cells have entries that form a permutation in when taken modulo . But, considering such examples as
[TABLE]
this is not the case, since and . In the first case, there is not even a symmetric choice of 3 consecutive entries in row 1 and 3 consecutive entries in row 2 which reduces to a permutation modulo . We want a symmetric choice with respect to reflection so we can attach 2 symmetric shapes together to make a rectangle like we did for tableau stabilization.
The case is even more challenging since changes according to LABEL:lem:rectquotients, using LABEL:cor:prfixedribbontab. Since now the pieces of the quotient are rectangles, one might have to do some tableau stabilization-like procedure with rectangles to find , and it is so far unclear how this would work without just reducing to tableau stabilization. When , row-concatenating the rectification to the anti-rectification works, but this does not easily generalize to . Row-concatenating and will not produce a rectangular tableaux in general.
For example, consider , whence
[TABLE]
by LABEL:cor:prfixedribbontab and LABEL:lem:rectquotients. Choose
[TABLE]
Then, we have
[TABLE]
Row-concatenating these along 6 rows gives
[TABLE]
which is not even partitioned-shaped, let alone rectangular.
In LABEL:thm:prfixedtabs and LABEL:thm:fixedbyab/2prom, our construction of for and White and Rhee’s construction for included a natural bijection . Moreover, promotion commuted with as in LABEL:cor:prfixedpr and 7.4. One would hope these properties extended to a construction of for as well.
Open Problem 9.7**.**
Fix and . Find a bijection
[TABLE]
satisfying for all , or show no such bijection exists.
Acknowledgments
I sincerely thank my advisor, Sara Billey, for helpful discussions and extensive comments on the manuscript. I thank Dennis White very much for his work on the problem of rectangular tableaux fixed by promotion powers, notes that inspired 7.7, helpful notes on proper citation, and for conjecturing LABEL:thm:rhoadesCSP in the first place. We would also like to thank Brendon Rhoades for proving LABEL:thm:rhoadesCSP and posing [Rho10, Problem 9.4], which inspired this work. I would also like to thank Kevin Purbhoo for making and pointing out to me previous progress on this problem in [PR17].
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[DLT 94] J. Désarménien, B. Leclerc, and J.-Y. Thibon. Hall-Littlewood functions and Kostka-Foulkes polynomials in representation theory. Sém. Lothar. Combin. , 32:Art. B 32c, 38, 1994.
- 2[FRT 54] J. S. Frame, G. de B. Robinson, and R. M. Thrall. The hook graphs of the symmetric groups. Canadian J. Math. , 6:316–324, 1954.
- 3[Ful 97] W. Fulton. Young Tableaux , volume 35 of London Mathematical Society Student Texts . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
- 4[GKP 94] Graham, Knuth, and Patashnik. Concrete Mathematics: A Foundation for Computer Science . Addison–Wesley, 2nd edition, 1994.
- 5[Gre 74] C. Greene. An extension of Schensted’s theorem. Advances in Math. , 14:254–265, 1974.
- 6[Hai 92] M. D. Haiman. Dual equivalence with applications, including a conjecture of Proctor. Discrete Mathematics , 99(1):79 – 113, 1992.
- 7[JK 81] G. James and A. Kerber. The Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group , volume 16 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications . Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1981.
- 8[Mac 95] I. G. Macdonald. Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials . Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, second edition, 1995.
