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 $V_{\lambda}$ and $W_{\lambda}$ be the irreducible representations of $S(n)$ and $\mathfrak{su}(N,\mathbb{C})$ associated to the partition $\lambda \in \mathbb{Y}$ of size $| \lambda |=n$ and length $l(\lambda) \leq N$. The following limit $$\frac{\dim V_{\lambda}}{n!} = \lim_{N \rightarrow \infty} \frac{\dim W_{\lambda}}{N^{n}}$$ follows immediately from the well known hook (content) formulas $$\dim V_{\lambda} = \prod_{\square \in \lambda} \frac{n!}{h(\square)} \ \ \ \ \dim W_{\lambda} = \prod_{\square \in \lambda} \frac{N + c(\square)}{h(\square)}$$ which can be found in Macdonald's book. Notice that $n! = \dim_{\mathbb{C}} \mathbb{C}[S(n)]$ and $N^n = \dim_{\mathbb{C}} (\mathbb{C}^N)^{\otimes n}$, so what we're seeing is that as $N \rightarrow \infty$, the relative multiplicity of $V_{\lambda}$ in Schur-Weyl duality approaches the relative multiplicity of $V_{\lambda}$ in the regular representation.

Does anyone have a good feeling for why this is true?

Also, let us not forget the Peter-Weyl theorem! If for a compact group $G$ we write $G^{\vee}$ for its set of finite dimensional irreducible representations over $\mathbb{C}$, we have $$L^2(SU(N)) = \widehat{\bigoplus_{\lambda \in SU(N)^{\vee}}} W_{\lambda} \boxtimes W_{\lambda} $$ $$(\mathbb{C}^N)^{\otimes n}=\bigoplus_{\lambda \in SU(N)^{\vee} \cap S(n)^{\vee}} V_{\lambda} \boxtimes W_{\lambda} $$ $$\mathbb{C}[S(n)] = \bigoplus_{\lambda \in S(n)^{\vee}} V_{\lambda} \boxtimes V_{\lambda}$$

The limit we discussed above relating the second to the third line here actually also happens when we pass from the first to the second line: the ``relative multiplicity'' of $W_{\lambda}$ in its regular representation approaches the relative multiplicity of $W_{\lambda}$ in Schur-Weyl duality.

Can anyone give me some intuition for what's going on here + why I might expect such a result?

share|cite|improve this question
Also, something I really want is some representation theoretic place where I might find a direct sum of $W_{\lambda, N} \boxtimes W_{\lambda, M}$ over all $\lambda \in \mathbb{Y}$ with length $l(\lambda) \leq \min (N,M)$ - a sort of ``unbalanced'' Peter-Weyl theorem for $SU(N)$ on the left and $SU(M)$ on the right. Any thoughts? – Alexander Moll Mar 31 '12 at 7:09
The latter thing is the polynomial functions on N by M matrices. The magic word is Howe duality. – Ben Webster Mar 31 '12 at 13:43
up vote 4 down vote accepted

This is an answer to Alexander's combinatorial reformulation of the question in comments to Bruce's answer.

dim $V_\lambda$/$n$! is the chance that you will get a standard Young tableau if you assign the values 1 to $n$ to the boxes of a tableau of shape $\lambda$ according to a random permutation.

dim $W_\lambda/N^n$ is the chance that you will get a semi-standard Young tableau if you assign a value in $[1,N]$ to each box in a tableau of shape $\lambda$.

Think of the second procedure in the following way: first choose a set of $n$ numbers from 1 to $N$ to serve as entries, and then assign them to boxes. If the entries are all different, then the chances that what you get is a semistandard tableau is the same as the chance that you get a standard tableau starting with 1..$n$.

As $N$ tends to infiniity, the chance that you will choose two entries the same becomes vanishingly small, so in the limit, dim $W_\lambda/N^n$ tends to dim $V_\lambda$/$n$!.

share|cite|improve this answer
This is a very nice argument Hugh - thank you! – Alexander Moll Apr 3 '12 at 22:27

The $q$-analogue of $\dim W_\lambda$ is the specialisation $s_\lambda(q,q^2,\ldots ,q^n)$ and the $q$-analogue of $\dim V_\lambda$ is the principal specialisation $s_\lambda(q,q^2,\ldots )$ which is manifestly given by taking $n\rightarrow\infty$. In fact in Enumerative Combinatorics II by Stanley this is how the hook length formula for $\dim V_\lambda$ is derived.

share|cite|improve this answer
Sorry - I'm familiar with this approach to calculating the limit, and should have included it in my original post, where I was aiming for more of a representation theoretic "Why?". Maybe we can ask this question combinatorially: is there a reason why the number of semi standard Young tableaux of shape $\lambda$ with entries from $\{1, \ldots, N\}$ after dividing by $N^n$ is asymptotic to the number of standard Young tableaux with shape $\lambda$ if we divide by $n!$? – Alexander Moll Apr 1 '12 at 0:16
i.e. is there a ``bijective'' proof of the limit above? – Alexander Moll Apr 1 '12 at 0:16

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.