Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
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.

Finite double and its canonical quasitriangular structure

Statement

Let H be a finite-dimensional Hopf algebra over a field with bijective antipode, and let (hi) and (fi) be dual bases of H and H∗. In the factor order D(H)=H∗op⊗H, the tensor

R=∑i(fi⊗1H)⊗(εH⊗hi)

is basis-independent and invertible, with

R−1=∑i(fi⊗1H)⊗(εH⊗S−1(hi)).

It is quasitriangular in the convention

RΔD(d)=ΔDop(d)R,(ΔD⊗id⁡)R=R13R23,αD,D,D−1(id⁡⊗ΔD)R=R13R12.

On every pair of left D(H)-modules, τ∘R is the Yetter–Drinfeld braiding of Modules over the finite double are left-left Yetter–Drinfeld modules.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A finite-dimensional Hopf algebra H with bijective antipode, its finite double D(H), and the left-left Yetter–Drinfeld equivalence and braiding already proved. Prove the canonical tensor is a basis-independent invertible R and satisfies the three quasitriangular identities.

[F1]

Finite tensor duality and basis-independent coevaluation: for dual bases (hi),(fi), ∑ifi⊗hi is basis-independent and represents id⁡H under H∗⊗H≅End⁡k(H).

[L1]

Finite Drinfeld double: convention and candidate multiplication: D(H)=H∗op⊗H in normal order fh.

[L2]

Double coalgebra, multiplicativity, and antipode: D(H) is a Hopf algebra with ΔD(fh)=∑(f1h1)⊗(f2h2).

[L3]

Modules over the finite double are left-left Yetter–Drinfeld modules: on left D(H)-modules the map c(v⊗w)=∑v−1⋅w⊗v0 is a natural, invertible module braiding satisfying both hexagons.

[F2]

Leg notation and quasitriangular Hopf algebras: in the fixed left-associated triple tensor, the second quasitriangular hexagon is αH,H,H−1(id⁡⊗Δ)(R)=R13R12.

[F3]

The module category of a bialgebra and its tensor action: a bialgebra acts diagonally on tensor products of modules, including its regular left module.

[F4]

Finite Hopf algebras have one-dimensional integral spaces and bijective antipode: the antipode of a nonzero finite-dimensional Hopf algebra is bijective.

[A1]

The antipode S of H is bijective; this is explicit because R−1 uses S−1. Also H≠0: its counit is a unital algebra map, so εH(1H)=1k; consequently the nonzero hypothesis of [F4] is satisfied.

Proof

1.1F1L1construct

By [F1], ∑ifi⊗hi represents id⁡H, so it is independent of the chosen dual bases. Applying the embeddings H∗→D(H) and H→D(H) in the two tensor factors preserves this independence and gives the displayed R.

1.2A1F1F4F5L1L2algebra

Applying S−1 to the two antipode equations, and reversing products by the anti-multiplicativity result [F5], gives ∑x2S−1(x1)=ε(x)1H=∑S−1(x2)x1. Multiplying R by the proposed inverse, the first double factor uses fi⊙fj=fj∗fi and the second uses hiS−1(hj). Pairing the first dual factor with x∈H gives ∑i,jfj(x1)fi(x2)hiS−1(hj)=∑x2S−1(x1)=ε(x)1H. In the reverse product the pairing is ∑i,jfj(x1)fi(x2)S−1(hi)hj=∑S−1(x2)x1=ε(x)1H. Finite dual separation [F1] makes both products 1D⊗1D.

1.3F1L1L3algebra

On any two left D(H)-modules, (τR)(v⊗w)=∑ihi⋅w⊗(fi⊗1H)⋅v=∑ifi(v−1)hi⋅w⊗v0=∑v−1⋅w⊗v0=c(v⊗w) by the dual-basis identity ∑ifi(x)hi=x. Thus τR is the natural invertible module braiding of [L3].

2.1F3L2L3step 1.3algebra

Apply D(H)-linearity of this braiding to the regular left modules V=W=D(H), whose tensor actions are supplied by [F3]. Since c=τ∘LR, pulling the target action on W⊗V back along the flip gives the operator identity LRLΔD(d)=LΔDop(d)LR on D(H)⊗D(H). Evaluating at 1D⊗1D yields RΔD(d)=ΔDop(d)R.

3.1F2F3L2L3step 1.3algebra∎

Apply the hexagon cV,W⊗U=(id⁡W⊗cV,U)(cV,W⊗id⁡U) from [L3] to three regular modules with their tensor actions [F3]. Substituting c=τR and tracking the initial order V,W,U makes its two crossing operators R12 followed by R13; hence their combined operator is R13R12. The left side is the block flip applied to (id⁡⊗ΔD)R, with the fixed reassociation, so [F2] gives αD,D,D−1(id⁡⊗ΔD)R=R13R12. The other hexagon cV⊗W,U=(cV,U⊗id⁡W)(id⁡V⊗cW,U) first crosses positions 2,3 and then 1,3, producing R13R23 and thus (ΔD⊗id⁡)R=R13R23. Evaluating both regular-module operator identities at 1D⊗1D⊗1D proves equality in D(H)⊗3. These are the stated leg conventions, so all three quasitriangular identities hold.

Remarks

No triangularity assertion is made. The exact leg convention, including the associator in the second hexagon, has been checked against the batch-8 definition body.

Depends on

Used by

Cited to discharge well-definedness by Leg notation and quasitriangular Hopf algebras.

Dependency tree · two levels

36 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