How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Asymptotic induction identifies leading modular simples
Statement
In the finite-Weyl setting of Finite-Weyl Lusztig data and the precise basic-set hypotheses, assume its specified Lusztig properties and let have characteristic zero or satisfy for every generic simple label . Write , and let be the corresponding simple module of the split asymptotic algebra , supported in degree . A star denotes restriction through .
For each simple -module , let , where . There is an injective assignment such that , occurs once in , and all its other simple factors have strictly smaller -value. Moreover is split: every simple -module remains simple over every field extension.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The stated finite-Weyl data, exact Lusztig-property hypotheses and good-characteristic specialization.
The finite filtration has two-sided ideals, , , and layers carrying commuting left and right actions. The original left action equals restriction through . The left action on is supported in degree (Finite-Weyl Lusztig data and the precise basic-set hypotheses, The asymptotic algebra, filtered layers and the specialization homomorphism).
is split semisimple, with simples supported in degree (Leading Schur coefficients and split good-characteristic asymptotic specializations).
Proof
Every simple -module is finite-dimensional, since for the map , , is surjective. Since , the maximum exists; and . Set . Its map , , is well-defined: changing by changes no value, and the tensor balancing relation is respected. It is -linear by multiplication and nonzero by , so it is surjective.
If and , then by tensor balancing. Thus annihilates . Every simple factor of that kernel has , because all with belong to . In particular . Every -simple factor of has degree , by the degree support of .
Decompose the semisimple -module . Restriction preserves the direct sum. The equality implies that exactly one occurring label has as a factor of , and both and equal one. Define this label to be . Its degree is . The direct-sum inclusion of this into and step 2.1 show that all its other simple factors have strictly smaller -value. If , differing -values would contradict their common degree; at equal degree the unique factor just proved forces . This proves the assignment's injectivity.
Put . A nonzero endomorphism of the simple finite-dimensional module is bijective, so is a division -algebra. It acts on by , commuting with . Consequently it preserves every -isotypic component. The -component has multiplicity one, so restriction gives a unital homomorphism . The equality on the right follows from the full matrix block of the split algebra . The homomorphism's kernel is zero because is a division algebra, and its image contains all scalar maps. Thus .
We verify explicitly that implies absolute simplicity here. A finite direct sum of copies of a simple module is semisimple: by induction, every submodule has a complement. Indeed, in , split its intersection with by the induction hypothesis, quotient that intersection, and consider its projection to ; this is zero or , and in the latter case the remaining submodule is the graph of a homomorphism from into the remaining summand of . That graph has the remaining as a complement. Now choose a -basis of . The image of , , is a submodule. If it were proper, semisimplicity would give a nonzero map vanishing on that image. Its components belong to , so they are scalars , not all zero. Evaluating at would give , contrary to basis independence. Thus the map is surjective. Every prescribed list of images of the basis is realized by some , proving that is surjective. After any field extension, its image remains the full matrix algebra acting on the extended vector space; its standard module is simple. Hence every is absolutely simple, and is split.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
10 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Meinolf Geck, Modular Representations of Hecke Algebras (standard reference, not scraped)