11
$\begingroup$

$\DeclareMathOperator\GL{GL}$Let $V=\mathbb C^n$ be the natural representation of $\GL_n(\mathbb C)$ and let $W=\operatorname{Sym}^2(V)$ be the symmetric square representation. Let $W^k$ denote the direct sum of $k$-copies of $W$. A version of the first fundamental theorem gives a generating set for $\mathbb C[V^k \oplus (V^*)^k]^{\GL_n(\mathbb C)}$. Is a generating set for the ring of invariants $\mathbb C[W^k \oplus (W^*)^k]^{\GL_n(\mathbb C)}$ known?

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

9
$\begingroup$

When $k=1$ the ring of invariants of degree $d$ separately in each of $W = \mathrm{Sym}^2 V$ and $W^\star = \mathrm{Sym^2} V^\star$ has dimension equal to the number of partitions of $d$ with at most $n$ parts. The full ring of invariants $\mathbb{C}[\mathrm{Sym}^2 V \oplus \mathrm{Sym}^2 V^\star]^{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})}$ has one generator in each of degrees $1, 2, \ldots, n$. While this may sounds like the Fundamental Theorem for $V$, one should note that the invariant ring when $k=1$ for $\mathbb{C}[V \oplus V^\star]^{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})}$ has a single generator in degree $1$, so the comparison is a bit misleading.

Proof. It is well known that

$$\mathrm{Sym}^d \mathrm{Sym}^2 V \cong \bigoplus_{\lambda \in \mathrm{Par}_{\le n}(d)} \nabla^{2\lambda} V$$

where $\nabla^\mu$ is the Schur functor for the partition $\mu$ and $2\lambda$ is obtained from $\lambda$ by doubling each part. To make this explicit, we take a basis $e_1, \ldots, e_n$ for $V$ and define for each $\ell \in \mathbb{N}$ a vector $W(\ell) \in \mathrm{Sym}^\ell \mathrm{Sym}^2 V$ by $$W(\ell) = \sum_{\sigma \in S_\ell} \mathrm{sgn}(\sigma) (e_1 e_{1\sigma}) \ldots (e_\ell e_{\ell \sigma}).$$ One can show that $W(\ell)$ is a highest-weight vector generating $\nabla^{(2^{\ell})}V$: see Example 1.10 in Plethysms of symmetric functions and highest weight representations by Melanie de Boeck, Rowena Paget and me. More generally, $\nabla^{2\lambda}V$ is generated by the product of highest-weight vectors $W(\lambda_1')\ldots W(\lambda_a')$ where $\lambda_1 = a$. Now chasing through the isomorphisms in

$$\begin{aligned} \mathrm{Sym}^{2d}&(\mathrm{Sym}^2 V \oplus \mathrm{Sym}^2 V^\star)^{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})} \\&\cong \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})}(\mathrm{Sym}^d (\mathrm{Sym}^2 V) \otimes \mathrm{Sym}^d (\mathrm{Sym}^2 V)^\star, \mathbb{C}) \\ & \cong \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})} (\mathrm{Sym}^d \mathrm{Sym}^2 V, \mathrm{Sym}^d \mathrm{Sym}^2 V) \\ & \cong \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})}(\bigoplus_{\lambda \in \mathrm{Par}_{\le n}(d)} \nabla^{2\lambda}V, \bigoplus_{\lambda \in \mathrm{Par}_{\le n}(d)} \nabla^{2\lambda}V) \\ & \cong \bigoplus_{\lambda \in \mathrm{Par}_{\le n}(d)} \mathrm{Hom}_{\mathrm{GL}_n(\mathbb{C})} (\nabla^{2\lambda}V, \nabla^{2\lambda}V ) \end{aligned} $$ we get the dimension result. (Note in the first line we use that the degrees of an invariant with respect to $V$ and $V^\star$ must agree.) Moreover, this shows that there is an invariant in degree $d$ for each $d \le n$ defined (up to a duality) by

$$W(d) \otimes W(d)^\star \mapsto 1.$$

Since $\nabla^{(2^d)} V$ appears first in degree $d$, this invariant is not in the subalgebra of the invariant ring generated by invariants of lower degree. This gives algebraically independent generators in each degree $1,2, \ldots, n$. Finally by dimension counting, again using the isomorphism above, one sees these generate the full invariant ring. $\Box$

For general $k$ one can in principle determine the dimensions using symmetric functions calculations. Maybe the highest weight vectors $W(\ell)$ can still be used to define some of the invariants, but I'm not sure this will give a complete set.

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

In classical terms, this is about joint invariants of $k$ quadratic forms $Q^{(1)}(x),\ldots,Q^{(k)}(x)$ in point coordinates $x=(x_1,\ldots,x_n)$ as well as $k$ quadratic forms $R^{(1)}(u),\ldots,R^{(k)}(u)$ in dual coordinates $u=(u_1,\ldots,u_n)$. By the FFT for $GL_n$, these invariants are linear combinations of graphs which tell you how to build invariant polynomials by contracting indices (along edges). Here the latter are made of two types of vertices of degree two (two incident edges), ones for the $Q$'s and ones for the $R$'s. Moreover all edges are $QR$, i.e., no $QQ$ or $RR$ edges. So basically these are disjoint collections of cycles of even length made by alternating $Q$'s and $R$'s.

For a proof of the relevant FFT see my two answers to

How to constructively/combinatorially prove Schur-Weyl duality?

Another description of these invariants involves introducing the $k^2$ matrices $A^{(a,b)}$ with matrix elements $$ A^{(a,b)}_{ij}=\sum_{\ell=1}^{n} Q_{i\ell}^{(a)} R_{\ell j}^{(b)}\ . $$ Then the basic invariants are traces of arbitrary products or words made of $A$ matrices.

In the $k=1$ case, there is only one matrix $A$ and the generators are simply the traces of the powers $A,A^2,\ldots,A^n$ and they are algebraically independent because one can take $R$ to be the identity, and $Q$ some generic diagonal matrix and the result follows from the algebraic independence of the elementary symmetric functions. So one recovers the result in Mark's answer.

For general $k$ and $n$, finding a minimal set of (algebra) generators and a description of their relations, sounds to me like a hopeless task. Note that one may get some information via the relation to invariants under conjugation of $k^2$ matrices. This subject has been extensively investigated in work of Procesi, Rasmyslov, Formanek, etc.

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ Finding a minimal set of generators may be hopeless, but what about using this description to get a finite set of generators? To me it seems not completely hopeless to get a bound for the size of the cycles you need to generate this ring. $\endgroup$
    – Will Sawin
    Commented Dec 31, 2021 at 18:18
  • $\begingroup$ That is what I hinted at at the end of my quick answer. For matrices there are bounds on how long the words need to be in order to have a finite generating set. There are also conjectures (by Formanek?) about optimizing such bounds but I think they are open even for $n=2$. $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 31, 2021 at 18:20
  • $\begingroup$ Maybe it's not as bad as I thought, since this article by Drensky seems to have a minimal system for $n=2$ on page 194: link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1023266314025 $\endgroup$ Commented Dec 31, 2021 at 18:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @jack: The proof in my other two answers (on Schur-Weyl) gives the FFT for arbitrary collections of tensors and not just the particular case where this collection consists of a bunch of vectors and covectors. There are at least two ways to see that. Way1: reduce the the FFT for more general reps like $Sym^2$ to the vector and covector case. Way2: just write the invariant polynomial as a contraction of indices between a bunch of $Q$ and $R$ tensors on one side and a big $T$ tensor (like in my other answers) on the other side. Then the same proof applies. Invariance means you can insert $g$'s... $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 1, 2022 at 20:09
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ...or transposes of $g$ inverses, where these contractions are. Then integrating with respect to $g$ in the group essentially transversely cuts these contraction so you end with a sum of terms where you have the $T$ tensor with self contractions, i.e., a numerical scalar, times self contractions of the collection of $Q$ and $R$ tensors which give the graphs I talked about. Sorry if this sounds vague, because I would need to draw pictures for you to understand this rigorous proof as I did in this talk ipam.ucla.edu/abstract/?tid=11945&pcode=CCGWS2 $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 1, 2022 at 20:17

You must log in to answer this question.