Proposition I and proof

Definitions
  • Symmetric space

    Work over \(k=\mathbb C\) with complex coefficients. Fix a connected reductive group \(G\) and an involution \(\theta\) of \(G\) whose fixed subgroup \(G^\theta\) is connected.

    $$X=G/G^\theta,\qquad x_0=eG^\theta.$$

    Two tori, two jobs. \(T\) belongs to the group: its dominant cocharacters label the Satake sheaves. \(S\subseteq T\) belongs to the space: its dominant cocharacters label the orbits on \(LX\) (see the index sets).

    The θ-split torus \(S\). A torus is θ-split when \(\theta\) inverts it, and \(S\) is a maximal one. All such are \(G^\theta\)-conjugate, and their dimension is the rank of \(X\). \(S\) is the torus that \(X\) sees: the Cartan embedding \(\tau\) lands in the elements that \(\theta\) inverts, and each orbit has a representative with \(\tau(x_\mu)=t^\mu\in S(F)\).

    $$\theta(s)=s^{-1}\quad(s\in S),\qquad\dim S=\operatorname{rank}X.$$

    The maximal torus \(T\). \(T\) is a maximal torus of \(G\) that contains \(S\) and is θ-stable. \(\theta\) splits it into a fixed part and the split part, which is \(S\):

    $$S=\{t\in T:\theta(t)=t^{-1}\}^\circ,\qquad T=(T^\theta)^\circ\cdot S.$$

    Positive roots. A Borel \(B\supseteq T\) inside a minimal θ-split parabolic \(P\) fixes the positive roots \(\Phi^+\). The Levi \(L\) centralizes \(S\).

    $$P\cap\theta(P)=L=Z_G(S).$$

    Loops and arcs. Loop spaces use Laurent series \(F=k(\!(t)\!)\) and arc spaces power series. The arc group \(L^+G\) acts on the loop space \(LX\).

    $$LX(k)=X(F),\qquad L^+X(k)=X(k[\![t]\!]).$$

    Examples. In the group case \(G=H\times H\), \(\theta(g_1,g_2)=(g_2,g_1)\), and \(T_H\) is a maximal torus of \(H\). In \(\mathrm{GL}_2/\mathrm{Sp}_2\), \(\theta(g)=g/\det g\) (worked out here).

    Table 1. \(X\) and \(T\) and \(S\)
    \(X\)\(T\)\(S\)\(\operatorname{rank}X\)
    \((H\times H)/H\)\(T_H\times T_H\)\(\{(s,s^{-1}):s\in T_H\}\)\(\operatorname{rank}H\)
    \(\mathrm{GL}_2/\mathrm{Sp}_2\)\(\{\operatorname{diag}(t_1,t_2)\}\)\(\{\operatorname{diag}(a,a)\}\)\(1\)
  • Two index sets, two roles

    Hecke labels. Cocharacters of \(T\) label the Satake sheaves \(V_\lambda\). A dominant \(\lambda\) is a highest weight of the dual group.

    $$\Lambda_T=X_*(T),\qquad\Lambda_T^+=\{\lambda\in\Lambda_T:\langle\alpha,\lambda\rangle\ge0\text{ for all }\alpha\in\Phi^+\}.$$

    Orbit labels. Dominant cocharacters of \(S\) label the arc-group orbits on \(LX\). The Cartan embedding \(\tau\) picks a representative \(x_\mu\) of each orbit (Chen–Yi, Proposition 17).

    $$\Lambda_S=X_*(S)\subseteq\Lambda_T,\qquad\Lambda_S^+=\Lambda_S\cap\Lambda_T^+,$$ $$\tau:X\hookrightarrow G,\quad gG^\theta\longmapsto g\theta(g)^{-1},\qquad\tau(x_\mu)=t^\mu,$$ $$LX=\bigsqcup_{\mu\in\Lambda_S^+}\mathcal O_\mu,\qquad\mathcal O_\mu=L^+G\cdot x_\mu.$$

    The leading-term map. Translating the base point by a Hecke label lands in one orbit, and \(\varphi\) names it.

    $$\varphi:\Lambda_T^+\longrightarrow\Lambda_S^+,\qquad\lambda\longmapsto\lambda-\theta(\lambda),$$ $$\tau(t^\lambda x_0)=t^\lambda\theta(t^\lambda)^{-1}=t^{\varphi(\lambda)},\qquad t^\lambda x_0\in\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}.$$
    Why the leading-term map is well defined
    1. For \(t\in T\), \(\theta\) inverts \(t\theta(t)^{-1}\), and the image of \(T\) is connected; so the image lies in \((T^{-\theta})^\circ\), which is \(S\) by maximality of \(S\). On cocharacters the map is \(\lambda\mapsto\lambda-\theta(\lambda)\): $$T\longrightarrow S,\quad t\longmapsto t\theta(t)^{-1},\qquad\lambda-\theta(\lambda)\in\Lambda_S.$$
    2. Roots of \(L\) vanish on \(S\), and \(T=(T^\theta)^\circ\cdot S\), so \(\theta\) fixes them. Since \(B\subseteq P\) and \(P\cap\theta(P)=L\), the parabolic \(\theta(P)\) is opposite to \(P\), so \(\theta\) sends the roots \(\Phi^+\setminus\Phi_L\) of the unipotent radical of \(P\) to negative roots: $$\theta\alpha=\alpha\quad(\alpha\in\Phi_L),\qquad-\theta\alpha\in\Phi^+\quad(\alpha\in\Phi^+\setminus\Phi_L).$$
    3. Since \(\langle\alpha,\theta\lambda\rangle=\langle\theta\alpha,\lambda\rangle\), a dominant input gives an output that pairs nonnegatively with every positive root: $$\langle\alpha,\lambda-\theta\lambda\rangle=\begin{cases}0,&\alpha\in\Phi_L^+,\\\langle\alpha,\lambda\rangle+\langle-\theta\alpha,\lambda\rangle\ge0,&\alpha\in\Phi^+\setminus\Phi_L.\end{cases}$$ Therefore the map has the stated domain and codomain: $$\boxed{\varphi:\Lambda_T^+\longrightarrow\Lambda_S^+,\quad\lambda\longmapsto\lambda-\theta(\lambda).}$$
    4. The Cartan embedding is injective, and \(\tau(t^\lambda x_0)=t^{\varphi(\lambda)}=\tau(x_{\varphi(\lambda)})\). So the translate is the orbit representative: $$t^\lambda x_0=x_{\varphi(\lambda)}\in\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}.$$

    For a symmetric space, H5 forces \(\varphi\) to be onto, and under H3 Proposition III proves the converse. The example page computes \(\varphi\) for the group case of \(\mathrm{SL}_2\), where it is onto, and for \(\mathrm{SL}_2/\mathrm{SO}_2\), where it doubles.

    Leading-term map · two minimal examples →

  • Categories

    For an \(L^+G\)-stable locally closed \(W\subseteq LX\), let \(\mathcal C_W\) be the small, idempotent-complete, stable \(\infty\)-category of bounded \(L^+G\)-equivariant constructible complexes on \(W\) with coefficients in \(k\). Proposition I concerns the one on all of \(LX\):

    $$\mathcal C=\mathcal C_{LX}=\operatorname{Shv}_{\mathrm{cons}}(L^+G\backslash LX),\qquad\mathcal C_Z=\operatorname{Shv}_{\mathrm{cons}}(L^+G\backslash Z),$$ $$\mathcal C_\mu=\operatorname{Shv}_{\mathrm{cons}}(L^+G\backslash\mathcal O_\mu),\qquad\widehat{\mathcal C}=\operatorname{Ind}(\mathcal C).$$
  • Orbit order and supports

    Order \(\Lambda_S^+\) by the dominance order of \(\Lambda_T\):

    $$\nu\le\mu\iff\mu-\nu\in\textstyle\sum_{\check\alpha\in\check\Phi^+}\mathbb Z_{\ge0}\,\check\alpha.$$

    A closed finite union of orbits is a closed \(L^+G\)-stable \(Z\subseteq LX\) that is the union of finitely many orbits. \(I(Z)\) lists its orbits, and \(r_Z\) is its inclusion:

    $$I(Z)=\{\mu:\mathcal O_\mu\subseteq Z\},\qquad r_Z:Z\hookrightarrow LX.$$

    An object \(M\in\mathcal C\) is supported on \(Z\) when the unit of \(r_Z^*\dashv r_{Z*}\) is an isomorphism on \(M\):

    $$\operatorname{supp}(M)\subseteq Z\quad:\Longleftrightarrow\quad M\xrightarrow{\ \sim\ }r_{Z*}r_Z^*M.$$
  • Boundary, orbit inclusions and standards

    Boundary. The boundary of the orbit \(\mathcal O_\mu\) is its closure minus the orbit. By H1(a) it is the union of the orbits below \(\mu\), a closed finite union of orbits:

    $$\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\setminus\mathcal O_\mu=\bigsqcup_{\nu\lt\mu}\mathcal O_\nu.$$

    Inclusions. The orbit inclusion \(a_\mu\) is locally closed and the boundary inclusion \(i_\mu\) is closed. Inside a closed finite union \(Z\), the orbit includes by \(a_{\mu,Z}\).

    $$a_\mu:\mathcal O_\mu\hookrightarrow LX,\qquad i_\mu:\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\setminus\mathcal O_\mu\hookrightarrow LX,\qquad a_{\mu,Z}:\mathcal O_\mu\hookrightarrow Z.$$

    Top and boundary parts. The top part of \(M\in\mathcal C\) restricts it to the orbit and extends by zero. The boundary part restricts it to the boundary and pushes forward:

    $$a_{\mu!}a_\mu^*M\ \ \text{(top part)},\qquad i_{\mu*}i_\mu^*M\ \ \text{(boundary part)}.$$

    Standards. A standard object extends the constant sheaf of an orbit by zero. \(\mathrm{IC}_0\) is the standard of \(\mathcal O_0=L^+X\), the orbit of the base point, which is closed.

    $$\Delta_\mu=a_{\mu!}\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}\in\mathcal C,\qquad\Delta_{\mu,Z}=a_{\mu,Z!}\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}\in\mathcal C_Z,\qquad\mathrm{IC}_0=\Delta_0.$$

    The constant objects are unshifted; a fixed normalization shift does not affect thick generation.

  • Thick span

    For a set \(\mathcal S\) of objects of a stable \(\infty\)-category \(\mathcal D\), \(\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal D}(\mathcal S)\) is the smallest full subcategory that contains \(0\) and \(\mathcal S\) and is closed under isomorphisms, shifts, cofibers and retracts. Two of its properties are used:

    $$\text{(T1)}\quad A\to B\to C\xrightarrow{+1}\ \text{exact},\ \ A,C\in\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal D}(\mathcal S)\ \Longrightarrow\ B\in\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal D}(\mathcal S),$$ $$\text{(T2)}\quad F:\mathcal D\to\mathcal D'\ \text{exact}\ \Longrightarrow\ F\big(\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal D}(\mathcal S)\big)\subseteq\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal D'}\big(F(\mathcal S)\big).$$

    Proofs of (T1) and (T2) → · Thick versus the draft's two spans →

  • Spherical Hecke action

    The action uses the contracted product, where the arc group acts on the right on the first factor and on the left on the second.

    $$\operatorname{Gr}_G=LG/L^+G,\qquad\mathcal H=\operatorname{Shv}_{\mathrm{cons}}(L^+G\backslash LG/L^+G),$$ $$m:LG\mathbin{\times^{L^+G}}LX\longrightarrow LX,\qquad[g,x]\longmapsto gx,$$ $$\boxed{\ast:\mathcal H\times\mathcal C\longrightarrow\mathcal C,\qquad\mathcal A\ast\mathcal F=m_!(\mathcal A\mathbin{\widetilde\boxtimes}\mathcal F).}$$

    The twisted external product descends the equivariant external product to the contracted product. Hypothesis H4 requires the result to stay in the constructible category.

  • Satake objects

    Geometric Satake identifies representations of the dual group with spherical perverse sheaves. \(V_\lambda\) is the sheaf of the irreducible representation with highest weight \(\lambda\).

    $$\operatorname{Sat}:\operatorname{Rep}_k(\check G)\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{Perv}(L^+G\backslash\operatorname{Gr}_G)\subseteq\mathcal H,\qquad V_\lambda=\operatorname{Sat}(V_\lambda^{\mathrm{rep}}).$$

    The Satake objects are the convolutions \(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\), \(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\). Chen–Yi (2025), §10.2 defines the spherical action in its sheaf theory; we assume its realization in the category specified here.

  • Mapping convention

    Every Map denotes the full derived mapping complex, with its category as a subscript.

    $$\Map_{\mathcal D}:\mathcal D^{\mathrm{op}}\times\mathcal D\longrightarrow D(k),$$ $$\Map_{\mathcal D}(A,B)=0\quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad\operatorname{Hom}_{h\mathcal D}(A,B[n])=0\ \text{ for every }n\in\mathbb Z.$$
Hypotheses
  • H1 · Finite orbit filtration.
    1. Each orbit closure is the disjoint union of the finitely many orbits below it: $$\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}=\bigsqcup_{\nu\le\mu}\mathcal O_\nu,\qquad\#\{\nu\in\Lambda_S^+:\nu\le\mu\}\lt\infty.$$
    2. Every object of \(\mathcal C\) is supported on a finite union of orbit closures: $$\forall M\in\mathcal C\ \ \exists J\subseteq\Lambda_S^+\ \text{finite}:\qquad\operatorname{supp}(M)\subseteq\bigcup_{\mu\in J}\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}.$$
  • H2 · Equivariant recollement. Let \(D\subseteq Z\) be closed finite unions of orbits and \(\mathcal O_\mu\subseteq Z\) an orbit, with embeddings $$i:D\hookrightarrow Z,\qquad r_Z:Z\hookrightarrow LX,\qquad a_{\mu,Z}:\mathcal O_\mu\hookrightarrow Z.$$
    1. Restriction \(f^*\) and extension by zero \(f_!\) along these embeddings and their composites are defined and exact. For a closed embedding \(f\), the extension \(f_!=f_*\) is right adjoint to \(f^*\).
    2. If \(\mathcal O_\mu\) is open in \(Z\) with complement \(D\), then \(j=a_{\mu,Z}\) and \(i\) give every \(M\in\mathcal C_Z\) a localization triangle: $$j_!j^*M\longrightarrow M\longrightarrow i_*i^*M\xrightarrow{+1}.$$
    3. Restriction and extension by zero respect composition: \((fg)^*\simeq g^*f^*\) and \((fg)_!\simeq f_!g_!\).
    Kuijper (2026), Definition 2.3.4 and Lemma 4.3.3 supply the abstract recollement mechanism; preservation of these constructible subcategories is part of H2.
  • H3 · Constant coefficients. Each orbit category has a bounded t-structure whose heart consists of the finite direct sums of the constant sheaf: $$\mathcal C_\mu^\heartsuit\simeq\operatorname{Vect}_k^{\mathrm{fd}},\qquad V\longmapsto\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}\otimes_kV.$$ For the ordinary t-structure the heart is \(\operatorname{Rep}^{\mathrm{fd}}_k\big(\pi_0(\operatorname{Stab}_{L^+G}(x_\mu))\big)\) (draft Construction 3.34), so connected stabilizers give H3.
  • H4 · Constructible Hecke action. The action is defined and takes values in \(\mathcal C\): $$\ast:\mathcal H\times\mathcal C\longrightarrow\mathcal C,\qquad V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\in\mathcal C\quad(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+).$$
  • H5 · Nonzero top splitting. Let \(a_\mu:\mathcal O_\mu\hookrightarrow LX\) be the orbit inclusion. For every \(\mu\in\Lambda_S^+\) there is \(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\) whose Satake object \(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\) has two properties:
    1. It lives on the closure of \(\mathcal O_\mu\): $$\operatorname{supp}(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\subseteq\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}.$$
    2. Its restriction to \(\mathcal O_\mu\) is a finite, nonzero sum of shifted constant sheaves: $$a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\simeq\bigoplus_{s=1}^{N_\mu}\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}[d_s]\ \text{ in }\mathcal C_\mu,$$ $$0\lt N_\mu\lt\infty,\qquad d_s\in\mathbb Z.$$
    Discussion · H5 forces φ(λ) = μ

    Proposition I does not use \(\varphi\): any \(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\) satisfying H5 at \(\mu\) completes the induction step at \(\mu\). For a symmetric space such a \(\lambda\) must lie over \(\mu\):

    $$\lambda\ \text{satisfies H5 at }\mu\implies\varphi(\lambda)=\mu,\qquad\mathrm{H5}\implies\varphi(\Lambda_T^+)=\Lambda_S^+.$$

    Why. The Satake object lives on \(\overline{\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}}\) and is nonzero at \(t^\lambda x_0\in\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}\) (Proposition III, steps 2 and 6). H5(a) therefore puts \(\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}\) inside \(\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\), and H5(b) puts \(\mathcal O_\mu\) inside \(\overline{\mathcal O_{\varphi(\lambda)}}\); H1(a) turns the two inclusions into \(\varphi(\lambda)\le\mu\le\varphi(\lambda)\).

    Under H3 the converse holds, and Proposition III combines both directions. For \(\mathrm{SL}_2/\mathrm{SO}_2\), \(\varphi\) doubles, so H5 fails at odd labels (examples).

    The fibre proposition · statement, proof and graph →

Proposition I

Setting. \(G\) is a connected reductive group over \(k=\mathbb C\) with an involution \(\theta\), and the arc group \(L^+G\) acts on the loop space of \(X=G/G^\theta\). \(\mathcal C\) is the small, idempotent-complete, stable \(\infty\)-category of bounded \(L^+G\)-equivariant constructible complexes on \(LX\) with coefficients in \(k\):

$$\mathcal C=\operatorname{Shv}_{\mathrm{cons}}(L^+G\backslash LX).$$

Satake objects. For \(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\), convolve the Satake sheaf \(V_\lambda\) with \(\mathrm{IC}_0\), the constant sheaf on \(L^+X\) extended by zero; H4 puts the result in \(\mathcal C\). The Satake subcategory is the thick span of these convolutions:

$$\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}:=\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C}\{V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0:\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\}.$$

Claim. Assume H1–H5. Then the Satake subcategory is everything, and the Satake objects detect zero in \(\widehat{\mathcal C}\):

$$\boxed{\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}=\mathcal C},\qquad\Map_{\widehat{\mathcal C}}(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0,F)=0\ \ \forall\lambda\ \Longrightarrow\ F=0.$$

Proof

Step 1 reduces the claim to one object per orbit: every standard \(\Delta_\mu\) lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\). Steps 2–6 prove this by induction on \(\mu\), assuming \(\Delta_\nu\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) for all \(\nu\lt\mu\); step 7 concludes.

Dots: orbits. Edges: closure relations. Green: standard generated. Orange ring: current orbit.

  1. Seven orbits drawn as dots in their closure order; each dot carries its standard, and no dot is green yet.
    Each dot carries its standard \(\Delta_\nu\). The claim holds once every dot is green.

    Under H1–H3, the claim is equivalent to placing one object per orbit in the Satake subcategory:

    $$\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}=\mathcal C\quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad\Delta_\mu\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\ \text{ for every }\mu\in\Lambda_S^+.$$
    Proof
    • Standard generation. The standards generate every closed finite union of orbits, and all of \(\mathcal C\): $$\text{(a)}\quad\mathcal C_Z=\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C_Z}\{\Delta_{\nu,Z}:\nu\in I(Z)\},$$ $$\text{(b)}\quad\mathcal C=\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C}\{\Delta_\mu:\mu\in\Lambda_S^+\}.$$ On one orbit, truncation in the t-structure of H3 builds every object from the constant sheaf. In \(Z\), an orbit maximal for \(\le\) is open, and the H2(b) triangle leaves an object on one orbit fewer; H1(b) passes to \(\mathcal C\). Full proof →
    • Reduction. \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) is thick, so if it contains every standard, (b) gives $$\mathcal C=\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C}\{\Delta_\mu:\mu\in\Lambda_S^+\}\subseteq\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\subseteq\mathcal C.$$ Conversely, if \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}=\mathcal C\), it contains every standard.
  2. The dots below the orbit of mu are green; a blue region covers mu and every dot below it, and mu has an orange ring.
    The dots below \(\mu\) are green by induction. The chosen object (blue) lives on \(\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\) and is nonzero at \(\mu\).

    Fix \(\mu\) and assume \(\Delta_\nu\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) for every \(\nu\lt\mu\). The induction step starts from one Satake object that lives on the closure of \(\mathcal O_\mu\) and does not vanish on \(\mathcal O_\mu\):

    $$V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}},\qquad\operatorname{supp}(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\subseteq\overline{\mathcal O_\mu},\qquad a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\ne0.$$

    By H5(a), the object is the middle term of the localization triangle of step 4, whose outer terms are its top part and the boundary part of step 3. By H5(b), a shift of \(\Delta_\mu\) is a direct summand of the top part (steps 5–6).

    Proof
    • H5 gives \(\lambda\in\Lambda_T^+\) whose Satake object lives on \(\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\) by H5(a). By H5(b) its restriction to \(\mathcal O_\mu\) has \(N_\mu\gt0\) summands, so \(a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\ne0\).
    • H4 puts \(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\) in \(\mathcal C\); as a Satake object it lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\).
  3. Only the green dots below mu are shaded blue: the boundary part lives there.
    The boundary part (blue) lives on the green dots below \(\mu\).

    The boundary part lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\), by the induction hypothesis:

    $$i_{\mu*}i_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}.$$
    Proof
    • By H1, the boundary \(Z=\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\setminus\mathcal O_\mu\) is a closed finite union of orbits whose orbits are exactly the smaller ones (filtration proof). Part (a) of step 1 gives $$i_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\in\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C_Z}\{\Delta_{\nu,Z}:\nu\lt\mu\}.$$
    • The exact functor \(i_{\mu*}\) sends \(\Delta_{\nu,Z}\) to \(\Delta_\nu\) by H2(c). By (T2) and the induction hypothesis: $$i_{\mu*}i_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\in\operatorname{Thick}_{\mathcal C}\{\Delta_\nu:\nu\lt\mu\}\subseteq\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}.$$
  4. Three copies of the closure joined by arrows: the top part on mu alone, the whole object, and the boundary part below mu.
    Top part \(\to V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\to\) boundary part. The right two lie in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\), so the top part does too.

    Removing the boundary part leaves the top part, which therefore lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) too:

    $$a_{\mu!}a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}.$$
    Proof
    • By H5(a), \(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\) lives on \(\overline{\mathcal O_\mu}\), in which \(\mathcal O_\mu\) is open. H2(b) there, pushed to \(LX\) by H2(c), gives a triangle: $$a_{\mu!}a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\longrightarrow V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\longrightarrow i_{\mu*}i_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\xrightarrow{+1}.$$
    • The middle term lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) by step 2 and the right term by step 3. The left term is the fiber of the right-hand map, a cofiber shifted by \([-1]\), so it lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) as well.
  5. The dot mu opens into a stack of shifted copies of its standard.
    On \(\mathcal O_\mu\) the top part is \(N_\mu\ge1\) shifted copies of \(\Delta_\mu\).

    The top part is a finite, nonzero sum of shifted copies of \(\Delta_\mu\):

    $$a_{\mu!}a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\simeq\bigoplus_{s=1}^{N_\mu}\Delta_\mu[d_s],\qquad0\lt N_\mu\lt\infty.$$
    Proof
    • H5(b) splits the restriction to the orbit: $$a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\simeq\bigoplus_{s=1}^{N_\mu}\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}[d_s]\quad\text{in }\mathcal C_\mu.$$
    • The exact functor \(a_{\mu!}\) preserves finite sums and shifts, and \(a_{\mu!}\underline k_{\mathcal O_\mu}=\Delta_\mu\). How H5 is verified →
  6. One copy splits off through maps u and v with vu the identity, and the dot mu turns green.
    One copy is a retract, so \(\Delta_\mu\) lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\): the orange dot turns green.

    This completes the induction step: the standard of \(\mathcal O_\mu\) lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\).

    $$\Delta_\mu\in\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}.$$
    Proof
    • Since \(N_\mu\gt0\), \(\Delta_\mu[d_1]\) is a direct summand of the top part (step 5), which lies in \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}\) (step 4): $$\Delta_\mu[d_1]\xrightarrow{u}a_{\mu!}a_\mu^*(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0)\xrightarrow{v}\Delta_\mu[d_1],\qquad vu=\mathrm{id}.$$
    • A thick subcategory contains retracts and shifts, so it contains \(\Delta_\mu[d_1]\) and then \(\Delta_\mu\).
  7. All seven dots are green, each labelled by the number of dots at or below it.
    Induction on \(h(\nu)=\#\{\nu'\le\nu\}\), the number in each dot, turns every dot green.

    The induction reaches every orbit, so step 1 gives the claim and its consequence:

    $$\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}=\mathcal C,\qquad\Map_{\widehat{\mathcal C}}(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0,F)=0\ \ \forall\lambda\ \Longrightarrow\ F=0.$$
    Proof
    • By H1(a), each \(\mu\) has finitely many \(\nu\le\mu\), so induction on \(h(\mu)=\#\{\nu:\nu\le\mu\}\) reaches every orbit. A minimal orbit has empty boundary, and step 3 is then vacuous.
    • If \(F\in\widehat{\mathcal C}\) is orthogonal to every \(V_\lambda\ast\mathrm{IC}_0\), exactness of \(\Map_{\widehat{\mathcal C}}(-,F)\) extends this to shifts, cofibers and retracts, hence to \(\mathcal C^{\mathrm{Sat}}=\mathcal C\). Objects of \(\mathcal C\) are compact generators of \(\widehat{\mathcal C}\), so \(F=0\).