Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

The symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $[n]:=\{1,\ldots,n\}$, thereby inducing an action on the set $$\wp_k(n)=\{\: A\subseteq[n] \::\: \#A=k \:\}$$ of subsets of cardinality $k$, simply by $$(g,A)\mapsto g(A)=\{\: g(a) \::\: a\in A \:\}.$$ This finally yields an action on $V_k:=\mathbb C[\wp_k(n)]$. By Lemma 4 in this paper (arXiv:0903.2864), the character of $V_k$ is given as $$\tag1 \sum_{r=0}^k \chi_{(n-r,r)}$$ where $\chi_\lambda$ is the irreducible character of $S_n$ corresponding to the partition $\lambda\vdash n$. There is no proof of Lemma 4 in the above reference, but the author says that the result is due to Frobenius. I would like to have a reference of $(1)$ - it doesn't have to be the original paper of Frobenius, in fact I would prefer a more recent work which also has a proof.

share|improve this question
2  
See also exercise 8 here: dpmms.cam.ac.uk/study/II/RepresentationTheory/2010-2011/…. To compute the inner product, as in the exercise, observe that under the permutation action of $S_n$ on $X_k\times X_l$, the pairs $(A,B), (C,D)\in X_k\times X_l$ lie in the same $S_n$-orbit if and only if $\#(A\cap B) = \#(C\cap D)$. –  Alex B. Mar 6 '13 at 9:49
1  
I think it makes sense to do this with combinatorial species: the cycle index series (aka Frobenius character) of the species of sets of cardinality $k$ is $h_k$, so the species of subsets of cardinality $k$ of an $n$-element set has cycle index series $h_{n-k}\cdot h_k=h_{n-k,k}$ which equals the sum in display. –  Martin Rubey Mar 6 '13 at 19:55
    
@Karl, please contact the moderators at moderators@mathoverflow.net –  Scott Morrison Jun 1 '13 at 13:46
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 4 down vote accepted

A classical construction of the Specht modules of $S_n$ says that $\chi_{(n-k,k)}$ is present in the character $\pi_k$ of the action $S_n$ on $V_k$, with multiplicity 1. Indeed $M^\lambda:=V_k$ is the permutation module arising along the way of constructing the Specht module $S^\lambda$ for the partition $\lambda=(n-k,k)$.

Moreover, it is easy to see that the centralizer of the action of $S_n$ on $V_k$ in the full matrix algebra of $\binom{n}{k}\times\binom{n}{k}$ is commutative, and has dimension $k+1$ (The centralizer is spanned as an algebra by the 0-1 matrices corresponding to the orbits of $S_n$ on the ordered pairs of $k$-subsets - this is a general fact about permutation representations of finite groups; here these matrices are symmetric, and thus it's a commutative algebra). Thus $\pi_k$ is a sum of $k+1$ irreducible characters, each of them with multiplicity 1. At this moment we know two of them, namely $\chi_{(n-k,k)}$ and $\chi_{(n)}$ (the latter is there, as it's the trivial character, present in every permutation character).

There is a description (see e.g. Volume 2 of the Richard Stanley's book) of irreducible characters arising in $M^\lambda$, for any $\lambda$. Namely, $$M^\lambda=S^\lambda\oplus \oplus_{\mu\triangleright\lambda} K_{\lambda\mu} S^\mu,$$ where $\triangleright$ stands for the dominance partial ordering on the partitions of $n$, and the $K_{\lambda\mu}$'s are famous Kostka numbers (in our case they are all 0 or 1). Using this, one can easily complete the proof of (1).


PS. In Stanley's book, this question is Example 7.18.8 on p.355, Volume 2.

share|improve this answer
    
Where exactly in the book can I find that classical construction of $M^\lambda$? –  Karl Mar 6 '13 at 14:11
    
No, not in Stanley's book. Any book on the representation theory of $S_n$ will have it, or you can look in these notes, Sect 4.12: ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/… Or Sect.1 of my old lecture notes: www1.spms.ntu.edu.sg/~dima/mas722/2011/notes/snreprs.pdf –  Dima Pasechnik Mar 6 '13 at 15:11
    
Stanley mostly does the corresponding character theory, in terms of symmetric functions. –  Dima Pasechnik Mar 6 '13 at 15:16
    
Hm. I don't really see how this all proves the statement, and I still hope that there is a less obscure reference for the statement. I'm sorry, I am quite new to this. –  Karl Mar 6 '13 at 15:21
1  
As you read arXiv:0903.2864, I expected that you know some representation theory of $S_n$. It is not something one can explain in one mathoverflow answer, IMHO. –  Dima Pasechnik Mar 6 '13 at 15:30
show 2 more comments

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.