MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

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

Is the $F_4$ lattice (i.e. 4-dimensional body-centered hypercubic lattice, spanned by the simple roots of $F_4$) bipartite? And if so, what is a good explicit partition of the vertices?

share|cite|improve this question
What do you mean by a lattice being "bipartite"?$$ $$BTW, as a lattice in $4$-dimensional space $F_4$ is isomorphic with $D_4$ (the $F_4$ roots are the vectors of norm $2$ and $4$ in $D_4$). – Noam D. Elkies Jan 27 '12 at 2:43
Take $\mathbb{Z}^4$. Its points are vertices of an infinite graph, whose edges join the nearest neighbor vertices. This is a standard hypercubic lattice. It is bipartite in the sense that the vertices can be labelled by two colours, say 'red' and 'black', such that every edge only connects red--black (no connection red--red or black--black exists). Just like the vertices in the 3D crystalline form of sodium chloride can be labelled 'Na' and 'Cl' and only Na--Cl bonds exist. If we take the 4D body-centered hypercubic lattice, or $F_4$ lattice, can we label its vertices in a similar way? – helvio Jan 27 '12 at 3:38
up vote 12 down vote accepted

No such labeling can exist because this lattice contains triangles such as $\lbrace(0,0,0,0), \phantom.(2,0,0,0), \phantom.(1,1,1,1)\rbrace$. This is predictable from the root diagram, which contains the $A_2$ root system. [Note that to identify this "body-centered hypercubic lattice" with a root lattice we must use the norm $\langle x,x\rangle = \frac12(x_1^2+x_2^2+x_3^2+x_4^2)$ so that the minimal vectors satisfy $\langle r,r \rangle = 2$.]

Indeed the nearest-neighbor graph of this lattice is not even $3$-colorable, because it has $4$-cliques such as the regular tetrahedron $$ T = \lbrace(0,0,0,0), \phantom.(2,0,0,0), \phantom.(1,1,1,1), \phantom.(1,1,1,-1)\rbrace. $$ This, too, is predictable from the root diagrams once we know that the $F_4$ lattice is the same as the $D_4$ lattice (the $F_4$ roots are vectors of norm $2$ and $4$ in $D_4$): the root diagram of $D_4$ contains $A_3$. In general a root lattice has $n$-dimensional simplices spanned by roots if and only if it contains $A_n$.

There does exist a $4$-coloring: the vectors of norm $4$ (the long $F_4$ roots) span a sublattice $L_0$ of index $4$ isometric with $2^{1/2} D_4$, and we can assign each of its cosets a different color.

In fact this $4$-coloring is unique up to color permutation. To prove this, first observe that each of the vertices of $T$ must have a different color. The same is true for the tetrahedron obtained from $T$ by replacing $(2,0,0,0)$ by $(0,2,0,0)$, so these two minimal vectors must have the same color. They differ by a long root of $F_4$, and all the long roots are equivalent under lattice isometries. Hence any two vectors that differ by a long root have the same color, whence each coset of $L_0$ must have constant color, QED.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you for your answer. It is very clear. :) – helvio Jan 27 '12 at 12:10

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.