Proof workspace · Iwahori level

Proposition III, sufficient conditions

One concept graph for Proposition III: three conditions, checked one finite level at a time, that force \(\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}=\mathcal C_I\).

Proposition III and proof

Click a symbol with a dotted underline, or a label such as I3, to recall it.

Definitions
  • Iwahori orbits on \(LX\)

    \(\mathcal V\) is the set of \(I\)-orbits \(O_v\subseteq LX\), ordered by \(u\le v\iff O_u\subseteq\overline{O_v}\). Chen–Yi parametrize \(\mathcal V\) for symmetric \(X\), prove that each \(\overline{O_v}\) is placid and a finite union of orbits, and present \(LX=\varinjlim_v\overline{O_v}\) as an \(I\)-placid ind-scheme (the paper's ). For \(\mathbb A^n\) each closure is a lattice and contains infinitely many orbits (𝔸ⁿ, orbits lemma).

  • Levels, pieces and their standard objects

    A level presentation is

    $$LX=\varinjlim_N Y_N,\qquad Y_N=\varprojlim_M Y_{N,M},\qquad\pi_{N,M}:Y_N\to Y_{N,M},$$

    with \(Y_N\) closed, \(I\)-stable and placid (for instance an orbit closure), \(Y_{N,M}\) of finite type, \(\pi_{N,M}\) smooth, affine and surjective, and \(I\) acting on \(Y_{N,M}\) through a finite-dimensional quotient \(I/I_{N,M}\). Then

    $$\begin{gathered}\text{piece of level }(N,M):\quad P=\pi_{N,M}^{-1}(o),\qquad o\subseteq Y_{N,M}\text{ an }I/I_{N,M}\text{-orbit},\\[6pt]\mathcal P_{N,M}:=\{\text{pieces of level }(N,M)\},\qquad P'\le P\iff P'\subseteq\overline P,\qquad\Delta_P:=j_{P!}\,\underline k_P,\\[6pt]\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)}:=\{\pi_{N,M}^*\bar{\mathcal F}\ \text{extended by zero}:\ \bar{\mathcal F}\in\mathcal D_c(I/I_{N,M}\backslash Y_{N,M})\}\subseteq\mathcal C_I .\end{gathered}$$

    Pieces of one level partition \(Y_N\); each is \(I\)-stable, locally closed and a union of \(I\)-orbits, and \(\overline P=\pi_{N,M}^{-1}(\overline o)\), so \(\partial P:=\overline P\setminus P\) is a union of lower pieces of the same level. An orbit pulled back from a finite level is a piece for \(M\gg0\), with \(\Delta_P=i_{v!}\underline k\); an orbit of infinite codimension, such as \(\{0\}\subseteq L\mathbb A^n\), is never a piece and has no standard object in \(\mathcal C_I\).

    Example A · \(\mathbb A^n\) under \(\mathrm{GL}_n\) (IIa). Lattices give the levels, and the finite-dimensional quotient is a congruence quotient of \(I\):

    $$Y_N=t^{-N}\mathcal O^n,\qquad Y_{N,M}=t^{-N}\mathcal O^n/t^M\mathcal O^n\simeq\mathbb A^{(N+M)n},\qquad I_{N,M}=1+t^{N+M}M_n(\mathcal O).$$

    The \(I/I_{N,M}\)-orbits on \(Y_{N,M}\) are the images of the orbits \(O_{m,j}\) with \(-N\le m<M\) and the point \(0\); so

    $$\mathcal P_{N,M}=\{O_{m,j}:-N\le m<M,\ 1\le j\le n\}\sqcup\{T_M\},\qquad T_M:=\pi_{N,M}^{-1}(0)=t^M\mathcal O^n=\{0\}\sqcup\bigsqcup_{m\ge M,\,j}O_{m,j},\qquad\Delta_{T_M}=\underline k_{T_M}.$$

    The closed piece \(T_M\) contains infinitely many orbits; raising \(M\) splits off \(n\) more of them.

    Example B · the group \(X=H\) under \(H\times H\) (IV.2). Bruhat closures give the levels, and the quotient is by the right action of a congruence subgroup \(I_M=\ker(I\to H(\mathcal O/t^M))\):

    $$Y_N=\bigcup_{\ell(w)\le N}\overline{IwI},\qquad Y_{N,M}=Y_N/I_M,\qquad I_{N,M}=I_{M'}\ \text{ with }M'\ge M\text{ such that }w^{-1}I_{M'}w\subseteq I_M\text{ for all }\ell(w)\le N .$$

    Each \(IvI\) is right \(I_M\)-stable, so it is the preimage of its image, and the pieces are the orbits at every level:

    $$\mathcal P_{N,M}=\{IvI:\ v\le w,\ \ell(w)\le N\},\qquad\Delta_P=\Delta_v=j_{v!}\,\underline k_{IvI},\qquad|\mathcal P_{N,M}|=\#\{v\in\widetilde W:v\le w\text{ for some }\ell(w)\le N\}<\infty .$$

    Every piece is an orbit, so here a level presentation is the Bruhat stratification.

  • The affine Lusztig–Vogan module and the orbit graph

    Chen–Yi's module \(M\) is the free \(\mathbb Z[q^{\pm1/2}]\)-module on the pairs \((\xi,v)\), \(\xi\) an \(I\)-equivariant local system on \(O_v\), with the action of the affine Hecke algebra \(\mathcal H\) of \(G\) given by their formula (29): \(T_s\) acts on \(e_{\xi,v}\) by a combination of \(e_{\xi,v}\) and of \(e_{\xi',v'}\) for the orbits \(v'\) of \(P_s\cdot O_v\), according to the type of \(v\) for \(s\) (the affine form of the Lusztig–Vogan and Mars–Springer tables). The class of \(\mathcal F\in\mathcal C_I\) is \([\mathcal F]=\sum_{v,\xi,i}(-1)^i\operatorname{rk}H^i(i_v^*\mathcal F)_\xi\,e_{\xi,v}\) at \(q=1\), and \([\Delta_s\ast\mathcal F]=T_s\cdot[\mathcal F]\). The orbit graph has vertex set \(\mathcal V\) and an edge \(v\to v'\) for each simple affine \(s\) and each orbit \(v'\ne v\) in \(P_s\cdot O_v\) on which \(T_se_v\) has a nonzero coefficient. It is the tool for checking I3 on a symmetric \(X\).

Hypotheses

Click a label to recall it.

  • I1 · Finite levels.

    \(LX\) has a level presentation such that

    $$\mathcal C_I=\bigcup_{N,M}\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)},\qquad|\mathcal P_{N,M}|<\infty\ \text{ for all }N,M .$$
    Discussion

    The first part says that every coherent \(I\)-equivariant object is supported on some \(Y_N\) and pulled back from a finite level; it is the reading, for coherent equivariant objects, of the paper's , \(\mathcal D^*(Y_N)=\varinjlim_M\mathcal D(Y_{N,M})\) along \(*\)-pullbacks, and is assumed, not proved, here. The second part replaces “every orbit closure is a finite union of \(I\)-orbits” (Chen–Yi for symmetric \(X\); the Iwahori form of the paper's finiteness hypothesis on orbit closures): when that holds, the pieces of \(Y_N=\overline{O_v}\) at large level are its orbits. Function analogue: compact support and local constancy.

  • I2 · Connected stabilizers at each level.

    Every stabilizer of \(I/I_{N,M}\) on \(Y_{N,M}\) is connected.

    Discussion

    On one finite-level orbit \(o=H/S\), \(S\) connected, the equivariant constructible objects are \(\operatorname{Thick}\{\underline k_o\}\): their cohomology sheaves are representations of \(\pi_0S=1\). With disconnected stabilizers replace \(\Delta_P\) by the \(\Delta_{P,\xi}\) for all local systems \(\xi\), in I3 as well.

  • I3 · Triangularity on pieces.

    For every level \((N,M)\) and every \(P\in\mathcal P_{N,M}\) there are \(\mathcal G\in\mathcal H_{c,I}\) and \(Y\in\{\mathrm{IC}_0\}\cup\{\Delta_{P'}:P'\in\mathcal P_{N,M},\ P'<P\}\) such that \(A:=\mathcal G\ast_IY\in\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)}\) and

    $$\operatorname{supp}A\subseteq\overline P,\qquad A|_P\simeq\bigoplus_{s=1}^{r}\underline k_P[d_s],\qquad0<r<\infty .$$
    Discussion

    The Iwahori form of the paper's triangularity hypotheses, with pieces in place of orbits: a Hecke translate of something already generated reaches \(P\) with nonzero constant restriction and does not leak above \(P\). For a closed piece only \(Y=\mathrm{IC}_0\) is available. For \(\mathbb A^n\) a single lattice translate of \(\mathrm{IC}_0\) works for each piece (IIa); for the group it fails at the closed orbits (IV.2).

Proposition III

Proposition III · Sufficient conditionsProved

Assume I1, I2 and I3. Then

$$\boxed{\ \mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}=\mathcal C_I .\ }$$

Checked on three cases, with every hypothesis verified: Proposition IV.

Proof

Step 1 generates one level by standards; step 2 reaches each standard by induction inside the level; step 3 concludes.

  1. $$Z\subseteq Y_N\ \text{a closed union of pieces of level }(N,M)\ \Longrightarrow\ \{\mathcal F\in\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)}:\operatorname{supp}\mathcal F\subseteq Z\}=\operatorname{Thick}\{\Delta_P:\ P\in\mathcal P_{N,M},\ P\subseteq Z\}.$$

    Proof
    • \(\pi_{N,M}^*\) is exact and commutes with \(j_!\) and \(i_*\) along preimages of locally closed subsets (smooth base change), and \(\pi_{N,M}^*j_{o!}\underline k_o=\Delta_P\) for \(P=\pi_{N,M}^{-1}(o)\). So it suffices to prove the statement on \(Y_{N,M}\), which has finitely many \(I/I_{N,M}\)-orbits (I1).
    • Induction on the number of orbits in \(\bar Z:=\pi_{N,M}(Z)\). Choose an orbit \(o\) open in \(\bar Z\), \(\bar Z'=\bar Z\setminus o\) closed. For \(\bar{\mathcal F}\) supported on \(\bar Z\): \(j_!j^*\bar{\mathcal F}\to\bar{\mathcal F}\to i_*i^*\bar{\mathcal F}\); \(j^*\bar{\mathcal F}\in\operatorname{Thick}\{\underline k_o\}\) by I2, so \(j_!j^*\bar{\mathcal F}\in\operatorname{Thick}\{j_{o!}\underline k_o\}\), and \(i_*i^*\bar{\mathcal F}\) is supported on \(\bar Z'\). Conclude by (T1).
  2. $$\Delta_{P'}\in\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\ \text{for all }P'<P\text{ in }\mathcal P_{N,M}\ \Longrightarrow\ \Delta_P\in\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}} .$$

    Proof
    • \(\mathcal P_{N,M}\) is finite (I1), so the induction is well founded even when orbit closures are infinite. Take \(\mathcal G\), \(Y\), \(A\) from I3. \(Y\in\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\) and \(\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\) is an \(\mathcal H_{c,I}\)-submodule (associativity and (T2)), so \(A\in\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\).
    • With \(j:P\hookrightarrow\overline P\), \(i:\partial P\hookrightarrow\overline P\): in \(j_!j^*A\to A\to i_*i^*A\) the third term lies in \(\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)}\) and is supported on \(\partial P\), a closed union of pieces \(P'<P\); by step 1 and induction it lies in \(\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\). By (T1), \(j_!j^*A\in\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\).
    • By I3, \(j_!j^*A\simeq\bigoplus_s\Delta_P[d_s]\) with at least one summand, so \(\Delta_P\) is a retract of an object of \(\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\), hence in it. (The paper's argument for Proposition 4.30, with \(\mathcal H_{c,I}\) and pieces.)
  3. $$\mathcal C_I=\bigcup_{N,M}\mathcal C_I^{(N,M)}=\bigcup_{N,M}\operatorname{Thick}\{\Delta_P:P\in\mathcal P_{N,M}\}\subseteq\mathcal C_I^{\mathrm{Iwa}}\subseteq\mathcal C_I .$$

    Proof
    • I1, then step 1 with \(Z=Y_N\), then step 2 for every piece.
Literature and remarks
  • Template. Proposition III is the paper's proof of spherical generation (its orbit hypotheses and Proposition 4.30), with the pieces of a level in place of orbits; the Spherical generation workspace records that proof. Working level by level removes the paper's finiteness hypothesis on orbit closures, which fails for \(\mathbb A^n\).
  • Orbits. Chen–Yi, Singularities of orbit closures in loop spaces of symmetric varieties, arXiv:2310.20006v4: the \(I_0\)-orbits on \(LX\) and the closed ones (Lemmas 23, 31), placidity of closures (§5), dimensions (Proposition 63), the affine Hecke module \(M\) and formula (29) (Theorem 1, Proposition 74, Lemma 75), the action (21) on \(D(I_0\backslash LX)\). Finite-field model: Mars–Springer, Definition 3.2.7 and table 4.3.1 (located on the note's functions page).
  • Not claimed. The finite-level presentation in I1 is assumed, not derived from the paper's , so every case read in \(\mathcal D_c(I\backslash LX)\) is conditional on it. This page proves no implication between the sheaf statement and its function-level shadow (thick spans contain retracts, functions do not see them); functions ⇒ sheaves over \(\mathbb F_q(\!(t)\!)\) is Proposition II of the Iwahori run. I3 for a symmetric \(X\) other than a torus is open (status by family).