2
$\begingroup$

edit: I added conjecture 2 that looks much more accessible.

Here is the elementary combinatorial translation of the problem (read below for the homological background):

Let $n \geq 2$. A Nakayama algebra is a list $[c_0,c_1,...,c_{n-1}]$ of $n$ integers with $c_i \geq 2$, $c_{i+1} \geq c_i-1$ and $c_{n-1}=c_0+1$ (it can be interpreted as a periodic Dyck path). Read the indices $i$ in the $c_i$ mod $n$ so that they are defined for any $i \in \mathbb{Z}$. A module is a tuple $(i,k)$ with $0 \leq i \leq n-1$ (the first entry $i$ is always viewed mod $n$) and $1 \leq k \leq c_i$. A proper module is a module with $k < c_i$. A proper module $M=(i,k)$ is called weird in case with $k=s+tn$ with $0 \leq s <n$ we have $n \leq k$ and $max(0,2k-c_i) \leq s+(t-1)n$ (this should be equivalent to $Ext_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ ). Define the $i$-th syzygy of a proper module $(i,k)$ as follows: $\Omega^0(i,k)=(i,k)$, $\Omega^1(i,k)=(i+k,c_i-k)$ and $\Omega^l(i,k)=\Omega^1(\Omega^{l-1}(i,k))$ for $l \geq 2$. A proper module $M=(i,k)$ is called periodic with period $q$ in case $M = \Omega^q(M)$ and it is called quasi-periodic in case $\Omega^u(M)$ is periodic for some $u \geq 0$.

The below guess can now be stated completely elementary (I state it here as a conjecture, but it is hard to check since there are infinitely many Nakayama algebras for a given $n$):

Conjecture: Any weird module is quasi-periodic.

Conjecture 2: In case $M$ is weird, also $\Omega^1(M)$ is weird.

Conjecture 2 implies conjecture 1 and looks much easier but I cant find a good argument yet.

Example: The Nakayama algebra [3,4] has the unique weird module (1,2) , which is periodic of period 1.

Homological background:

The strong no loop conjecture states that for a simple module $S$ over a finite dimensional algebra $A$ we have that $S$ has infinite projective dimension in case $Ext_A^1(S,S) \neq 0$. In general this is not true for arbitrary indecomposable modules instead of simple modules, but it seems that it might be true for Nakayama algebras.

Guess: In case $A$ is a Nakayama algebra with an indecomposable module $M$ with $Ext_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ then $M$ has infinite projective dimension.

I can prove this for algebras with finite global dimension (which includes all Nakayama algebras with a linear quiver and thus we can focus on cyclic quivers). I should note that maybe there is an easy argument and Im too blind to see it at the moment.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think I might have found a homological proof. We have $Ext_A^1(M,M)= Hom(\Omega^1(M),M)$ and $Ext_A^1(M,M) \neq 0$ implies $Ext_A^1(\Omega^1(M),\Omega^1(M)) \neq 0$. Thus $Ext_A^1(\Omega^k(M),\Omega^k(M)) \neq 0 $, which forces $\Omega^k(M)$ to be nonzero for all $k$ and $M$ has infinite projective dimension. $\endgroup$ – Mare Aug 14 at 9:43
  • $\begingroup$ My proof had a gap. Does anyone see why $Hom(\Omega^1(M),M) \neq 0$ implies $Hom(\Omega^2(M), \Omega^1(M)) \neq 0$ for Nakayama algebras? It looks so elementary that I probably miss something easy. This statement corresponds exactly to conjecture 2. $\endgroup$ – Mare Aug 14 at 15:56
  • $\begingroup$ These periodic Dyck paths, seem to be very much related with the following entry in OEIS: oeis.org/A194460 (with the circular area sequence definition). Is it possible to elaborate on this connection? $\endgroup$ – Per Alexandersson Aug 14 at 19:14
  • $\begingroup$ @PerAlexandersson See arxiv.org/abs/1811.05846 . $\endgroup$ – Mare Aug 14 at 19:15
  • $\begingroup$ ah, we obtain some counting results here, on circular Dyck paths: arxiv.org/abs/1903.01327 $\endgroup$ – Per Alexandersson Aug 15 at 7:27
2
$\begingroup$

I think you have a typo in the definition of a Nakayama algebra list and it should read "$c_{i+1}\geq c_i-1$." If this is the case then conjecture 2 has a simple proof:

The condition for a module $M=(i,k)$ to be weird is that $n\le k\le c_i-n$. We have to show that this implies that $\Omega^1(M)=(i+k,c_i-k)$ is also weird. This means that we have to check that $$n\le c_i-k\le c_{i+k}-n.$$ Now, the inequality $n\le c_i-k$ follows immediately from the weirdness of $M$. The second inequality follows from observing that $$c_{i+k}-c_i=c_{i+k}-c_{i+n}=\sum_{j=n+1}^{k}(c_j-c_{j-1})\geq \sum_{j=n+1}^k (-1)=n-k.$$ After rearranging the terms we get $c_i-k\le c_{i+k}-n$ as desired.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It is so simply ? I feel stupid now :( $\endgroup$ – Mare Aug 14 at 17:12
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, for noting the typo and the nice solution! $\endgroup$ – Mare Aug 14 at 17:25

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.