Let $\mathbf{k}$ be a commutative ring, and $\beta$ an element of $\mathbf{k}$. Fix a positive integer $n$, and set $\left[n\right] = \left\{1,2,\ldots,n\right\}$.

The $n$-th type-A subdivision algebra over $\mathbf{k}$ for parameter $\beta$ is the commutative $\mathbf{k}$-algebra $B$ with

  • generators $x_{i,j}$ indexed by all the $n\left( n-1\right) /2$ pairs $\left( i,j\right) $ of integers satisfying $1\leq i<j\leq n$;

  • relations $x_{i,j}x_{j,k}=x_{i,k}\left( x_{i,j}+x_{j,k}+\beta\right) $ for all $\left( i,j,k\right) \in\left[ n\right] ^{3}$ satisfying $i<j<k$.

Alternatively, we can define $B$ in a more symmetric fashion: Namely, $B$ is the commutative $\mathbf{k}$-algebra with

  • generators $x_{i,j}$ indexed by all the $n\left( n-1\right) $ pairs $\left( i,j\right) $ of distinct integers in $\left[n\right]$;

  • relations $x_{i,j}+x_{j,i}=-\beta$ whenever $i\neq j$, as well as $x_{i,j}x_{j,k}+x_{j,k}x_{k,i}+x_{k,i}x_{i,j}+\beta\left( x_{i,j} +x_{j,k}+x_{k,i}\right) +\beta^{2}=0$ whenever $i,j,k$ are distinct elements of $\left[n\right]$.

The $\mathbf{k}$-algebra $B$ has appeared in various contexts. It was originally introduced by Karola Mészáros as the abelianization of Anatol Kirillov's quasi-classical Yang-Baxter algebra. It is a deformation of the Orlik-Terao algebra of the braid arrangement of type $A_{n-1}$ (with the case $\beta=0$ corresponding to the Orlik-Terao algebra). It is probably isomorphic to a $\mathbf{k}$-subalgebra of the localization of the polynomial ring $\mathbf{k}\left[ q_{1},q_{2} ,\ldots,q_{n}\right] $ at the multiplicative subset generated by the differences $q_{i}-q_{j}$ for $i<j$ (here I say "probably" because I can only show this for $\beta=0$, in which case it is isomorphic to the $\mathbf{k} $-subalgebra generated by all $\dfrac{1}{q_{i}-q_{j}}$). It comes up in the computation of volumes of flow polytopes and evaluations of Grothendieck polynomials. See my recent preprint arXiv:1704.00839 for more on it.

On the other hand, recall that a Rota-Baxter algebra of weight $\beta$ means a $\mathbf{k}$-algebra $R$ equipped with a $\mathbf{k}$-linear map $P:R\rightarrow R$ (called its Rota-Baxter operator) that satisfies \begin{equation} P\left( a\right) P\left( b\right) =P\left( P\left( a\right) b\right) +P\left( aP\left( b\right) \right) +\beta P\left( ab\right) \label{eq.rota-baxter.def} \tag{1} \end{equation} for all $a,b\in R$. (Some authors, like those of the Wikipedia page, prefer to put the $\beta P\left( ab\right) $ addend on the left instead of the right hand side, but this just boils down to replacing $\beta$ by $-\beta$.)

The axiom \eqref{eq.rota-baxter.def} of the Rota-Baxter algebra is uncannily similar to the relations \begin{equation} x_{i,j}x_{j,k}=x_{i,k}\left( x_{i,j}+x_{j,k}+\beta\right) \label{eq.relB} \tag{2} \end{equation} of the algebra $B$. Indeed, represent each monomial in the indeterminates $x_{i,j}$ as a multigraph on the vertex set $\left\{ 1,2,\ldots,n\right\} $, where each indeterminate $x_{i,j}$ appearing in the monomial contributes an edge $ij$ to the multigraph. Then, \eqref{eq.relB} can be visually rewritten as enter image description here (where all vertices other than $i,j,k$ are omitted). Now, imagine writing an "$a$" between the $i$ and the $j$, and writing a "$b$" between the $j$ and the $k$, and interpreting each edge as a signal to apply $P$ to whatever stands under the edge. The above equality thus becomes enter image description here which is precisely \eqref{eq.rota-baxter.def}.

Question. Can this resemblance be turned into anything concrete (e.g., an action of $B$ on Rota-Baxter algebras?). Barring that, can we define "Rota-Baxter algebras of other types"?

  • $\begingroup$ Don't you also want to impose (in the second more symmetric presentation) relations $x_{ij}x_{ji}=0$, or something like this? $\endgroup$ – Vladimir Dotsenko Nov 20 '17 at 10:10
  • $\begingroup$ @VladimirDotsenko: Nope. Maybe I should have said that I mean the "big" Orlik-Terao algebra, not the "small" one (i.e., my variables aren't nilpotent or anything like that). $\endgroup$ – darij grinberg Nov 20 '17 at 10:17

This is too long for a comment.

The reason for my question in comments was as follows. In some cases (Gerstenhaber algebras, Poisson algebras, etc.) an operad describing a certain algebraic structure is an operad in the category of cocommutative coalgebras (some people refer to that as a Hopf operad). Alternatively, one can think about a collection of commutative associative algebras that form a cooperad. For your algebras, the most obvious candidate for cooperad structure does lead to an honest cooperad structure only for $x_{ij}x_{ji}=0$. But in this case this actually leads to an operad of associative algebras presented via unusual generators, see https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0412206 for instance.

A Hopf operad structure on an operad is the same as a functorial rule for defining tensor products for algebras over that operad. I think some people study tensor products of Rota-Baxter algebras, but maybe in some way that their tensor products are not RB structures on the tensor products of the underlying vector spaces. However, if you know a way to equip the tensor product of RB algebras with a RB structure, this would give you a natural sequence of (co)algebras arising from it.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Interesting! I've thought about operads (my original idea was that elements of $B$ should give rise to maps $R^{\otimes n} \to R$ for any Rota-Baxter algebra $R$; but this direction has disappointed me) but not about cooperads. $\endgroup$ – darij grinberg Nov 20 '17 at 17:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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