MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let us consider, for example, the standard irreducible $\mathfrak{sl}_3$-module

$\Gamma_{1,1}$ with the highest weight $(1,1),$ $\dim \Gamma_{1,1}=8.$

The set of all weight of $\dim \Gamma_{1,1}$ is $(0,0),(1,1),(2,-1),(1,-2),(-2,1),(-1,2),(-1,-1).$

Question. What is the Gelfand-Tsetlin basis for $\Gamma_{1,1}$?

As I understood from literature (Zhelobenko ) there is a combinatorial structure $\Lambda$ depended of $(1,1)$ such that a basis of $\dim \Gamma_{1,1}$ can be labeled via the $\Lambda$ but I cant do it. Anybody can help?

share|cite|improve this question
See arXiv:math/0211289v2 [math.RT]. – Claudio Gorodski Jun 23 '11 at 19:25
@Claudio I have read the preprint – Melania Jun 23 '11 at 20:08

Let $V$ denote the standard representation of $sl_3$. Then your $\Gamma_{1,1}$ is $V\otimes V^*/k$. To obtain a GT-basis we have to choose a flag of subspaces $0 \subset V_1 \subset V_2 \subset V_3 = V$ ($\dim V_i = i$) and restrict to $sl(V_i) \subset sl(V)$. First, let us take $U = V_2$. Then $V = U \oplus k$ (as $sl(U)$-module), hence $\Gamma = sl(U) + U + U^* + k$. Now if $e_1,e_2,e_3$ is a basis of $V$ such that $V_i = <e_j>_{j \le i}$ and $e^i$ is the dual basis of $V^*$ then $$ sl(U) = < e_1\otimes e^2, e_2\otimes e^1, e_1\otimes e^1 - e_2\otimes e^2>. $$ Further, $$ U = <e_1\otimes e^3, e_2\otimes e^3>,\ U^* = <e_3\otimes e^1, e_3\otimes e^2>,\ k = < e_1\otimes e^1 + e_2\otimes e^2 - 2e_3\otimes e^3 >. $$ So, collecting all these vectors you get the GT-basis.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you for the exaple – Melania Jun 24 '11 at 19:46

It's more common to talk about the GT basis of $\mathfrak{gl}_n$-modules. In the case of the adjoint representation, the first row of the GT scheme is $(1,0,\ldots,0,-1)$ and each subsequent row satisfies the interlacing condition, which implies that the left (resp, right) edge consists of a string of $1$s (resp $-1$s), followed by a string of $0$s (possibly empty), except that the bottom entry can be $1$ (resp $-1$) if all entries on the left (resp right) are $1$s (resp $-1$), and all other entries are zeros. It follows that the whole scheme can be reconstructed from the positions of the lowest $1$ along the left edge of the triangle and the lowest $-1$ along the right edge. They may occupy any of the $n$ possible rows/positions each, except that both cannot occur in the $n$th row, corresponding to the impossibility of the bottom entry being simultaneously $1$ and $-1.$

In your special case $n=3$ the diagrams will look like this:

$$ \begin{array}{rrrrr} 1 & & 0 & & -1\\ & 1 & & 0 & \\ & & 1 & & \end{array} \quad $$

(this is the highest weight; there are 7 more).

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you. How to reduce $gl_n$ module to $sl_n$ module? – Melania Jun 24 '11 at 19:47
The difference is that $\mathfrak{gl}_n,$ unlike $\mathfrak{sl}_n,$ has one-dimensional center (scalar matrices). Thus every simple $\mathfrak{gl}_n$-module remains simple under restriction to $\mathfrak{sl}_n$, but the same $\mathfrak{sl}_n$-module can be extended to a one-parameter family of $\mathfrak{gl}_n$-modules by making the center act as an arbitrary scalar. – Victor Protsak Jun 25 '11 at 5:11

Your Answer


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.