I have a couple questions regarding the proof of Proposition $3$ (see page $10-11$ of arxiv.org/abs/math/0102039) in Bezrukavnikov's paper "Quasi-exceptional sets and equivariant coherent sheaves on the nilpotent cone" . For simplicity, assume $G$ is simply connected, simple algebraic group (so that $G$ is its own universal cover). Also, $\alpha$ is a simple root, let $P_{\alpha}$ be the associated minimal parabolic and $u_a$ its unipotent radical; $G/B, G/P_{\alpha}$ are the flag variety and a partial flag variety with projection map $p_{\alpha}: G/B \rightarrow G/P_{\alpha}$; $\lambda, \lambda' \in \Lambda$ lie in the weight lattice and satisfy $s_{\alpha}(\lambda) = \lambda - n \alpha, s_{\alpha}(\lambda') = \lambda' - (n-1) \alpha$; and $O_{G/B}(\lambda')$ for instance is the line bundle associated to $\lambda'$. Set $\tilde{\mathcal{N}} = G \times_B \mathfrak{u}$ to be the Springer resolution ($u$ is unipotent radical, as usual).

Question $1$: Set $V_{\lambda'} = p_{\alpha}^* p_{\alpha *} O_{G/B}(\lambda')$.

On the first paragraph of pg $11$ it is claimed that there is a $G$-invariant filtration on $V_{\lambda'}$ with the quotients being $\mathcal{O}_{G/B}(\lambda'-i \alpha)$ for $0 \leq i \leq n-1$; why is this?

Question $2$: Set $\tilde{\mathcal{N}_{\alpha}} = G \times_B u_a$ (I am under the impression this is the same as what Roman defines on pg 11; if not, please correct me). How is the following exact sequence obtained (equation $23$ in the paper)? $0 \rightarrow O_{N'}(\alpha) \rightarrow O_{N'} \rightarrow O_{N'_{\alpha}} \rightarrow 0$

[In the above equation, I have used a ' to replace the tilde, since I cannot get Latex to work.]

Question $3$: Consider the natural projection $\pi': \tilde{\mathcal{N}_{\alpha}} \rightarrow T^{*}(G/P_\alpha)$.

The fibers are clearly projective lines. If $p': \tilde{\mathcal{N}_{\alpha}} \rightarrow G/B$ is the projection, in the last line of the proof (just before Prop $4$), it seems to be claimed that $p'^*(V_{\lambda'}(\lambda - \lambda'-\alpha))$ is isomorphic to a direct sum of copies of $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(-1)$ when restricted to any fibre of $\pi'$. Why is this?

EDIT: In all of the above, I had to simplify many of the Latex formulas to make them work (e.g. replace tilde by '). I think everything should be readable now, at the cost of bad notation.

  • $\begingroup$ Does "Roman" refer to Bexrukavnikov? It is usually more convenient for readers if you link to the ArXiv abstract page, rather than the pdf. $\endgroup$
    – S. Carnahan
    Aug 24, 2011 at 9:41
  • $\begingroup$ Yep; ok, I've edited it now. $\endgroup$ Aug 24, 2011 at 10:53

1 Answer 1


For question 1, let $L_\alpha$ denote the Levi of the parabolic $P_\alpha$; then $L_\alpha$ has derived group $SL_2$. Let $B_\alpha$ denote the Borel of $L_\alpha$ such that $B \cap L_\alpha = B_\alpha$. Note that $V_{\lambda'} = p_\alpha^* O_{G/B}(V_\alpha(\lambda'))$, where $V_\alpha(\lambda')$ is the $L_\alpha$ representation induced from $\lambda'$. That is, $V_\alpha(\lambda') = Ind_{B_\alpha}^{L_\alpha} (\chi_{\lambda'}) = Ind_B^{P_\alpha} (\chi_{\lambda'})$, where $\chi_{\lambda'}$ is the 1-dimensional representation corresponding to the weight $\lambda'$. Since $L_\alpha$ has derived group $SL_2$, the weights of $V_\alpha(\lambda')$ are precisely $\lambda'- i \alpha$, $0 \leq i \leq n-1$. Hence $V_\alpha(\lambda')$ has (considered as a $B$-module now by extending trivially over the unipotent radical of $P_\alpha$) a $B$-equivariant filtration with quotients $\chi_{\lambda' - i \alpha}$, $0 \leq i \leq n-1$, so that $V_{\lambda'}$ has the desired $G$-equivariant filtration.

For question 3, the fibers of $\pi'$ are all isomorphic to $L_\alpha / B_\alpha$, the flag variety of $L_\alpha$; and this flag variety is isomorphic to $\mathbb P^1$. Since $(\lambda - \lambda' - \alpha)(\alpha^\vee) = -1$, under the identification of $L_\alpha / B_\alpha$ with $\mathbb P^1$, we see that the restriction of $p'^* O_{G/B}( \lambda - \lambda' - \alpha )$ to the fibers of $\pi'$ has degree -1, as desired. (I assume you want $p'^* O_{G/B}( \lambda - \lambda' - \alpha )$ here and not $p'^* V_{\lambda'}(\lambda - \lambda' - \alpha)$, since $V_{\lambda'}(\lambda - \lambda' - \alpha)$ is not a bundle on $G/B$).


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.