2
$\begingroup$

Can someone create an example using these notes:

Let $\rho : G \rightarrow GL(V)$ be a linear representation of $G$. We define below a direct sum decomposition of $V$ which is ''weaker'' than the decomposition into irreducible representations since the latter has the advantage of being unique. Consider the following:

Definition

Let $\chi_i$ be the distinct characters of the irreducible representations $W_i$ of $G$ and $n_i$ be their degrees. Let $V=U_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus U_m$ be a decomposition of $V$ into a direct sum of irreducible representations. Let $V_i$ for $i=1, \cdots, h$ be the direct sum of those the $U_1, \cdots, U_m$ which are isomorphic to $W_i$. So $$ V=V_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus V_h $$ This is the canonical decomposition.

That is, we have decomposed $V$ into a direct sum of irreducible representations and ``collected together'' the isomorphic representations with the following properties

Theorem

(i) The decomposition $V=V_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus V_h$ does not depend on the initially chosen decomposition of $V$ into irreducible representations.

(ii) The projection $P_i$ of $V$ onto $V_i$ associated with this decomposition is $$ P_i = \frac{n_i}{\,|G|}\sum_{t\in G} \chi_i(t)^* \rho_t $$

Proof

We shall prove claim $(ii)$ since this will prove $(i)$ as the projections $P_i$ dictate the $V_i$. Let $$ q_i = \frac{n_i}{\,|G|} \sum_{t\in G} \chi_i(t)^*\rho_t $$

Proposition 2.5.1* tells us that the restriction of $q_i$ to an irreducible representation $W$ with character $\chi$ and of degree $n$ is a multiple in the ratio $\frac{n_i}{n}(\chi_i|\chi)$, hence it is $1$ if $\chi = \chi_i$ and $0$ if $\chi \neq \chi_i$ namely $q_i$ is the identity on an irreducible representation isomorphic to $W_i$ and is zero on the others. From the definition of $V_i$, it follows that $q_i$ is the identity on $V_i$ and is zero on $V_k$ for $k\neq i$. Now if we decompose an element $v \in V$ into its components $v_i \in V_i$ we have $$ v= v_1 + \cdots+ v_h $$ so $q_i(v) = q_i(v_1) + \cdots + q_i(v_h) = v_i$. This means $q_i$ is equal to the projection $p_i$ of $V$ onto $V_i$.

We see that the decomposition of a representation can be done via two phases. Initially by deducing the canonical decomposition $V_1 \oplus \cdots \oplus V_n$ using the formulas for $p_i$. Next we decompose $V_i$ into a direct sum of irreducible representations each isomorphic to $W_i$ $$ V_i = W_i \oplus \cdots \oplus W_i $$

*Proposition 2.5.1 Let $f$ be a class function on $G$. Let $\rho: G\rightarrow GL(V)$ be an irreducible representation of $G$. Then $\hat{f}(\rho)=\lambda I$ with $$ \lambda = \frac{1}{n} \sum f(t)\chi_\rho (t) = \frac{\,|G|}{n}(f|\chi_\rho^*) $$

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Since I've been working with this example lately, thought I would show you a slightly esoteric example.

Let $V$ be an $n$-dimensional vector space over a field field $\mathsf{k}$, and let $\mathcal{F} = \mathcal{F}(V)$ be the set of all complete affine flags in $V$, where a complete linear affine $F$ in $V$ is a filtration of $V$ into affine subspaces:

$$ F_0 \subsetneq F_1 \subsetneq F_2 \subsetneq \dots \subsetneq F_{n-1} = V, $$

where $F_k$ is a $k$-dimensional affine subspace of $V$. An affine subspace of a vector space is just a translation of a linear subspace, so think maybe a line, or a plane or something like that. We just drop the assumption that it must contain zero.

Note that $\mathcal{F}$ is a finite set, since $V$ is finite as a set. Now we define $C = C(\mathcal{F}, \mathsf{k})$ to be the set of functions from $\mathcal{F}$ to $\mathsf{k}$. Note that we want $C$ to be all functions, we are not supposing any additional structure on $C$. However $C$ is a $\mathsf{k}$ vector space under point wise addition and scalar multiplication. I.e, if $f,g \in C$, $F \in \mathcal{F}$, $\lambda \in \mathsf{k}$ then $(f + \lambda g)(F) = f(F) + \lambda g(F)$.

We are now going to define a vector subspace of $C$ as follows. For each $0 < k < n$, and $F \in \mathcal{F}$, let $$\mathscr{L}_k(F) = \left\{ U < V \mid \operatorname{dim}U = k, F_i < V < F_j \ \text{for all} \ i < j < k \right\}. $$ Essentially, $\mathscr{L}_k(F)$ is the set of $k$-dimensional affine subspaces of $V$ that would fit into the $k^{\text{th}}$-dimensional spot of $F$. Then for $F \in \cal{F}$, $U \in \mathscr{L}_k(F)$ we define $\tau(F,U) \in \cal{F}$ be the complete affine flag in $V$ that agrees with $F$ at every dimension other than the $k^{\text{th}}$-dimension, and at the $k^{\text{th}}$-dimensional we swap out $F_k$ for $U$. Then for each $0 < k < n$ we define the $\mathsf{k}$-linear endomorphism of $C$ as follows, for $f \in C$, $F \in \cal{F}$, define

$$ \sigma_k(f)(F) = \sum_{U \in \mathscr{L}_k(F)} f(\tau(F,U)). $$

Then we define $\Delta = \bigcap_{0 < k < n} \operatorname{ker} \sigma_k$. This is a vector subspace of $C$.

Now let $G$ be the multiplicative group $\mathsf{k}^{\times}$ of $\mathsf{k}$ (i.e the non-zero elements). We will show that $\Delta$ has the structure of a $G$-representation. For $f \in \Delta$, $\lambda \in G$, $F \in \mathcal{F}$ define $(\lambda \cdot f)(F) = f(\lambda F)$ where $\lambda F$ is the complete affine flag with $k^{\text{th}}$-dimensional element equal to $\lambda F_k$. It is clear that this indeed defines a $G$-representation with representation space equal to $\Delta$ (note that $G$ is Abelian). Note that $\Delta$ is finite dimensional.

Now note that $G$ is cyclic of order $q-1$, where $q = \left| \mathsf{k} \right|$. Suppose now that $p = \operatorname{char}(\mathsf{k})$ is the characteristic of $\mathsf{k}$. Then $\left| G \right| \equiv -1 \not \equiv 0 \ (\operatorname{mod} \ p)$, and since $\mathsf{k}$ is the ground field of $\Delta$, we have that the representation $\Delta$ is finite dimensional over a field whose characteristic does not divide the order of $G$, and so is semisimple by Maschke's theorem.

Now, it can be shown with not too much difficulty that the irreducible representation of $\mathsf{k}^{\times}$ over $\mathsf{k}$ are all one-dimensional and given by $a \mapsto a^{k}$ for some $k$. Thus, since $\Delta$ is semisimple, it decomposes as a direct sum $\Delta = \bigoplus_{0 < k < q-1} \Delta^{(k)}$, where

$$ \Delta^{(k)} = \left\{ f \in \Delta \mid f(\lambda F) = \lambda^{k}f(F) \ \text{for every} \ F \in \mathcal{F} \right\}. $$

This is exactly the decomposition that you call the "canonical decomposition". I think it is more widely known as the isotypic decomposition.

We can show this direction directly by calculating the formulae for $f_k \in \Delta^{(k)}$ such that $f = \sum_k f_k$ for any given $f \in \Delta$ by using that $G$ is cyclic (see if you can do this).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Once again, what in particular do you take issue with? $\endgroup$ – Adam Higgins May 9 at 12:02

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.