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.
Specht Modules and the Irreducibles of the Symmetric Group
1 · Prerequisites
- Algebraic Closure, Embeddings, and Separability
- Algebraic Extensions, Extension Degree, and Finite Fields
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Chain Conditions, Semisimple Modules and the Wedderburn–Artin Theorem
- Composition Series, the Jordan–Hölder Theorem and Solvable Groups
- Congruences, the Integers Modulo n and the Chinese Remainder Theorem
- Conjugacy in Sₙ, Generation, and the Simplicity of Aₙ
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Cyclic Groups and Direct Products
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Diagonalisation and the Minimal Polynomial
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Dual Spaces, Bilinear and Quadratic Forms, and Sylvester's Law of Inertia
- Eigenvalues, Eigenvectors and the Characteristic Polynomial
- Finite Averaging and Character-Theory Prerequisites
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Free Modules, Exact Sequences, Projective and Injective Modules
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Hilbert Space Geometry and Riesz Representation
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Inner Product Spaces, Gram-Schmidt, Projections and Adjoints
- Limits of Real Functions
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Maschke's Theorem, Complete Reducibility and the Structure of k[G]
- Matrices, the Matrix of a Linear Map, and Change of Basis
- Metric Spaces
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Normed and Banach Spaces
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Permutation Statistics, Inversions and Eulerian Numbers
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Primes, Euclid's Lemma and the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Rⁿ as a Normed Space; Vector-Valued Functions
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Splitting Fields
- Suprema and Infima
- Sylow's Theorems, p-Groups and Nilpotent Groups
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- Tensor Products of Modules
- The Determinant of a Linear Operator, Cofactors and Cramer's Rule
- The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra
- The Fundamental Theorem of Finite Abelian Groups
- The Galois Correspondence
- The Group Algebra and Representations of Finite Groups
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topology of ℝ
- Triangularisation, Generalised Eigenspaces and Jordan Canonical Form
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
- Young Diagrams Tableaux and Permutation Modules
2 · Summary
This page constructs the Specht module inside the tabloid permutation module by applying the signed column antisymmetrizer to tabloids. It establishes covariance, the column-cancellation and dominance properties, and the James submodule theorem. Over , the invariant tabloid pairing gives nondegeneracy and irreducibility; together with the class count for , this identifies the Specht modules as a complete irredundant list of complex irreducibles.
The final results order tabloids and use adjacent-column Garnir relations to straighten polytabloids. Standard polytabloids then give an explicit basis of each Specht module, including the empty-shape convention.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules
Definition
Let , let , and let be a -tableau (Partitions, English diagrams, and conjugation, Tableaux and standard tableaux). Use the left action of on tableaux, tabloids, and (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules). For each , let be its inversion sign in . The order-preserving relabelling , , carries each inversion pair bijectively to ; thus this sign is exactly the published inversion sign on the finite ordinal (Inversions, inversion number, the sign , and even and odd permutations). For , both groups are trivial and the sign is .
The column antisymmetrizer, polytabloid, and Specht space are The elements of the sum are in the finite subgroup , and each acts by the declared left action on the tabloid basis, so these are well-defined finite expressions.
For every tableau, : a permutation in both stabilizers preserves the row and column of each entry, and each row-column intersection contains at most one node. Thus are distinct as ranges over , and the coefficient of in is . In particular, . When , the empty tableau has , so , , and .
Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule
Statement
For every , , -tableau , and , one has For every , Consequently is an -submodule of and is generated by any one .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , a -tableau , , and .
The column antisymmetrizer is the finite group-algebra sum (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
The polytabloid is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
is the complex span of all for -tableaux (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
is the direct product of the symmetric groups on its pairwise disjoint column sets (Row and column stabilizers).
Sign is a group homomorphism (The sign is a homomorphism , surjective exactly when ).
A -tableau is a bijection from to (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
The tabloid module has the tabloids as basis and carries the linear extension of their left -action (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
Proof
Write for the set of labels in column and . By [F4], the have pairwise disjoint supports and every has a unique factorization with . The product expands over these tuples, and by [F6] the coefficient at is . Hence , where . If , both sides are the empty product .
For every , [F6] gives , since the homomorphism property makes .
For , reindex [F1] by . Since , this gives . Applying both sides to and using [F2] proves .
By [F5], conjugation by bijects with . Reindexing [F1] by and using step 1.2 gives .
From [F2], step 2.1, and the left module action [F8], .
Every spanning vector of has the form by [F3], and step 3.1 sends it under to , which is again a spanning vector. Thus is an -submodule of .
Fix any -tableau and let be any other one. By [F7], the rule defines a unique permutation ; for it is the identity. Then and step 3.1 gives . Therefore the orbit of spans all the generators of , so generates as an -module. This holds for every choice of .
Invariant Hermitian product on a tabloid module
Definition
Let and write vectors in the finite tabloid basis of as and , where ranges over the -tabloids (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules). Give this complex permutation space the Hermitian product conjugate-linear in the first argument and linear in the second. This is the Hermitian version of the tabloid-basis form: Chan defines the symmetric bilinear version on a permutation basis (Chapter 9, Definition 9.1 and Remark 9.2, printed pp. 31–32), while the complex Hermitian form used here is specified explicitly.
The tabloid basis is orthonormal. Also , which is positive for every nonzero , so the form is positive definite. Each permutes the tabloid basis, hence . Thus the action is unitary and its adjoint is . Extend the group-algebra adjoint conjugate-linearly; since and permutes , Every column antisymmetrizer is therefore self-adjoint.
Column collision cancels antisymmetrization
Statement
Let have shape and let be a -tabloid of the same . If two entries lie in one row of and in one column of , then
Facts & Assumptions
Given: An integer , partitions , a -tableau , a -tabloid , and distinct labels lying in one row of and one column of .
The row stabilizer preserves each row set, and the column stabilizer preserves each column set (Row and column stabilizers).
A tabloid records row sets, so the order of entries within each row is forgotten (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The column antisymmetrizer is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
The sign function is a group homomorphism (The sign is a homomorphism , surjective exactly when ).
Sign is defined by (Inversions, inversion number, the sign , and even and odd permutations).
The library's sign convention is transported by the canonical relabelling from the finite-ordinal convention (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
Proof
Put . Since are in the same column of , preserves every column set and lies in by [F1]. Since they are in the same row of , it preserves every row set of ; therefore by [F1,F2].
The labels are distinct, so . The canonical relabelling in [F6] preserves order and inversion number. If , the one-line permutation for has one inversion from and two inversions for each intermediate label, so its inversion number is , which is odd. Thus by [F5]. Order permutations by one-line notation and take the least element in each right coset of . These canonical representatives partition into pairs , whence by [F3,F4]. The least representative is uniquely defined in each finite coset, so no choice principle is used.
Applying the last expression to , every term is zero because by step 1.1. Thus , as claimed.
Nonzero antisymmetrizer image detects dominance
Statement
For every , partitions , and -tableau , if , then dominates in the published order .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , a -tableau , and the hypothesis .
The -tabloids form a basis of , with the linear extension of the left action of (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The column antisymmetrizer is the group-algebra element (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
If two entries in one row of lie in one column of , then (Column collision cancels antisymmetrization).
If every row of meets each column of in at most one entry, then for tableaux of shapes and one has (Basic row-column incidence lemma).
The notation means that every prefix sum of is at least the corresponding prefix sum of , with both partitions padded by zeros (Dominance order on partitions).
Proof
By [F1,F2], acts linearly on . If it killed every -tabloid, it would kill their span , contrary to the hypothesis; therefore some -tabloid satisfies .
By the contrapositive of [F3], no row of contains two entries from one column of . Thus the basic combinatorial lemma [F4] applies to these tableaux and gives ; by [F5] this is exactly the published dominance order in the statement.
The antisymmetrizer image in its own tabloid module is one-dimensional
Statement
For every , partition , and -tableau , the image of the column antisymmetrizer on the tabloid module is exactly the nonzero line
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , and a -tableau .
The column antisymmetrizer is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
The polytabloid is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
The coefficient of in is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
The -tabloids form a basis of , and its action extends linearly from the left action on tabloids (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The stabilizer of the tabloid is (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
If a row of a tabloid contains two entries from one column of , then sends that tabloid to zero (Column collision cancels antisymmetrization).
If every row of a tableau meets every column of in at most one entry and have shape , then there are and with (Basic row-column incidence lemma).
The sign function is a group homomorphism to (The sign is a homomorphism , surjective exactly when ).
Proof
The coefficient of in is by [F2], so .
Let be any basis tabloid. If , its image already lies in . Otherwise, [F5] implies that each row of meets each column of in at most one entry, and [F6] gives and with ; since stabilizes by [F4], this yields .
For any , reindex the defining sum by to obtain , using [F1,F7] and ; applying this to the tabloid equality of step 1.2 gives in its nonzero case. Thus every basis tabloid maps into , and linearity with [F3] gives .
Since by [F8], the vector belongs to the image ; step 1.1 makes its span nonzero, so step 2.1 gives and proves the statement.
∎
James's submodule theorem over the complex numbers
Statement
For every , partition , and -submodule , either where orthogonality is for the invariant positive definite Hermitian tabloid product.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , and an -submodule .
The tabloids form a basis of , and the -action extends linearly from the tabloid action (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
An -submodule is a linear subspace stable under each element of (Subrepresentations, direct sums of representations, and irreducibility).
The column antisymmetrizer, polytabloid, and Specht space are
for each -tableau (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For every , and (The antisymmetrizer image in its own tabloid module is one-dimensional).
The Specht space is generated as an -module by any one polytabloid (Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule).
The tabloid product is conjugate-linear in its first argument and linear in its second (Invariant Hermitian product on a tabloid module).
Each is self-adjoint for the tabloid product (Invariant Hermitian product on a tabloid module).
This Hermitian product is positive definite: if , then (Invariant Hermitian product on a tabloid module).
The orthogonal complement is (Orthogonality and the orthogonal complement).
Every shape has a canonical standard row-filled tableau ; for it is the empty tableau (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
No form of the Axiom of Choice is used. The first branch uses only witnesses to one existential statement, and all group-algebra sums are finite.
Proof
If for some and -tableau , then [F4] gives with ; by [F1]-[F3] the finite group-algebra sum lies in , so division gives .
Otherwise for every and every ; self-adjointness in [F7] and from [F3] give .
By [F5], the polytabloid from step 1.1 generates under ; stability of from [F2] and step 1.1 therefore give .
Since the span by [F3] and the product is linear in its second argument by [F6], step 1.2 gives for every and ; by [F9], .
The cases “some ” and “all ” are exhaustive; if both conclusions held, , so the nonzero canonical from [F3], [F4], [F10] would satisfy by [F9], contradicting [F8]. Thus exactly one alternative holds.
Complex Specht modules have nondegenerate Hermitian self-pairing
Statement
For every , is nonzero and for the positive definite invariant Hermitian tabloid product.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: and .
The tabloid-basis Hermitian product is positive definite: whenever (Invariant Hermitian product on a tabloid module).
is the complex span of the polytabloids (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For every tableau , the coefficient of in is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For every partition, the canonical row-filled -tableau exists (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The orthogonal complement is defined by vanishing of the inner product against every vector of the subspace (Orthogonality and the orthogonal complement).
Proof
If , take its empty tableau; otherwise take the canonical row-filled tableau from [F4]. By [F2], , and by [F3] its coefficient at is . Thus and .
Let . By [F5], for every ; taking gives . Positive definiteness [F1] implies . The zero vector belongs to both spaces by [F2] and [F5], so .
Complex Specht modules are irreducible
Statement
For every and , the nonzero complex -representation is irreducible.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , and a nonzero -subrepresentation .
is the complex span of its polytabloids, which lie in the tabloid module (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
is a finite-dimensional complex representation of (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
is an -subrepresentation of (Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule).
For every -submodule , either or (James's submodule theorem over the complex numbers).
A subrepresentation is a linear subspace stable under every group element (Subrepresentations, direct sums of representations, and irreducibility).
A representation is irreducible when it is nonzero and its only subrepresentations are and the whole representation (Subrepresentations, direct sums of representations, and irreducibility).
No form of the Axiom of Choice is used.
Proof
By [F1]-[F3], is a finite-dimensional subrepresentation of . Since the given is a subrepresentation of , [F6] makes stable under every also as a subspace of . Therefore [F4] applies to .
If the second branch of [F4] holds, then the given also satisfies . By [F5], this forces , contrary to the nonzero hypothesis. Thus the first branch gives .
The given inclusion and step 2.1 imply .
By [F5], is nonzero, and step 3.1 shows that every nonzero subrepresentation equals . Thus [F7] gives that is irreducible.
Homomorphisms from Specht to Young permutation modules obey dominance
Statement
For over , a nonzero -map implies . At , every -map is a scalar multiple of the inclusion; equivalently,
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , partitions , and a complex -module homomorphism .
Each is a finite-dimensional complex representation of (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The -tabloids form a basis of , with the linear extension of the left -action (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
For a -tableau , , , and is the complex span of the (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
Every is nonzero, since its coefficient at is (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
is an -subrepresentation generated by any one (Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule).
A subrepresentation is a linear subspace stable under each group element (Subrepresentations, direct sums of representations, and irreducibility).
For a finite group over a field whose characteristic does not divide the group order, every subrepresentation has a complementary subrepresentation; this applies over (Maschke's theorem for finite groups over fields whose characteristic does not divide ).
The space consists of complex-linear -equivariant maps and is a subspace of the complex vector space of linear maps (Intertwiners, the spaces and , equivalent representations, and faithful representations).
A complex-linear map is -equivariant exactly when it is a -module homomorphism (For a commutative ring , -linear -actions are exactly the compatible left -module structures).
If , then (Nonzero antisymmetrizer image detects dominance).
For every -tableau , (The antisymmetrizer image in its own tabloid module is one-dimensional).
means every prefix sum of is at least the corresponding prefix sum of (Dominance order on partitions).
Every shape has a canonical standard row-filled tableau (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The label set is finite (empty when ), and the set of bijections of a finite set is finite; hence is finite (The natural numbers (von Neumann), Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules, A finite set with has exactly bijections onto itself, and bijections onto any set of the same cardinality).
No form of the Axiom of Choice is used. The proof uses one complement supplied by Maschke's theorem and existential witnesses from spanning families; it does not choose from an arbitrary indexed family.
Proof
By [F1] and [F15], is a finite group; by [F2], is a finite-dimensional complex representation; by [F6]-[F7], is a subrepresentation. Since does not divide , [F8] gives a subrepresentation with .
Define by for . The direct sum makes a well-defined linear projection with ; since both summands are stable, for every , so is equivariant.
Set . By [F9]-[F10] and step 2.1, is a -module homomorphism, and .
If , some -tableau has because the polytabloids span by [F4]. The tabloid is a basis vector by [F3]; then [F4] and step 3.1 give , so .
If , step 4.1 and [F11] imply , which by [F13] is the stated dominance order; if , the nonzero-map implication is vacuous.
Suppose and , and use the tableau from step 4.1. By [F12], ; since by [F5], write with . For every , equivariance gives ; by [F6], this extends linearly to all of . Hence , where is inclusion.
If , it is ; step 5.2 covers every nonzero map when . Each scalar multiple of inclusion is equivariant by [F6]. The canonical from [F14] has by [F4] and by [F5], so is nonzero. Therefore is a linear bijection from to .
Distinct complex Specht modules are inequivalent
Statement
If and as complex -representations, then .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , partitions , and an isomorphism of complex -representations.
Each shape has a canonical standard row-filled tableau (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The Specht space is the complex span of its polytabloids, each lying in the tabloid module (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For every tableau , the coefficient of in is ; in particular (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For each , is an -submodule of (Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule).
An isomorphism of representations is an invertible intertwiner (Intertwiners, the spaces and , equivalent representations, and faithful representations).
A complex-linear map of -representations is equivariant exactly when it is a -module homomorphism (For a commutative ring , -linear -actions are exactly the compatible left -module structures).
A nonzero -module map implies (Homomorphisms from Specht to Young permutation modules obey dominance).
The dominance relation on partitions of is antisymmetric: and imply (Dominance order on partitions).
No form of the Axiom of Choice is used. The proof uses only the canonical tableaux in [F1] and the given isomorphism.
Proof
Let be the canonical tableau from [F1]. By [F2]-[F3], in . Let be inclusion and set . Since and inclusion are injective, . By [F4]-[F5], both maps are -equivariant, so [F6] makes a -module homomorphism.
The inverse is equivariant: for , surjectivity and equivariance of give for every . Let be the canonical tableau from [F1] and let be inclusion. By [F2]-[F3], in ; since and inclusion are injective, is nonzero. By [F4]-[F6], it is a -module homomorphism.
Apply [F7] to the nonzero map from step 1.1; it gives .
Apply [F7] with and to from step 1.2. It gives .
Steps 2.1 and 2.2 give both dominance relations, so [F8] yields .
Specht modules classify the complex irreducibles of
Statement
For every , the modules form a complete irredundant list, up to isomorphism, of finite-dimensional irreducible complex -representations.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: . Let be the set of partitions of , the set of conjugacy classes of , and the set of isomorphism classes of finite-dimensional irreducible complex -representations.
A partition is a finite weakly decreasing list of positive integers with sum (Partitions, English diagrams, and conjugation).
is finite and (The Lehmer code gives again).
is a field containing the embedded copy (The complex numbers as , with the real embedding and imaginary unit , is a field, every element is uniquely , and every nonzero element has inverse ); this field embedding preserves and addition (Field homomorphism and embedding).
is an ordered field and, for every integer , its canonical natural is positive (The reals form a totally ordered field, Canonical naturals are positive and strictly increasing).
A ring has characteristic zero exactly when no positive integer multiple of its identity is zero (The characteristic of a ring is the additive order of , with recording infinite order; holds exactly when ; and in an integral domain every nonzero element has the same additive order as ).
The natural-to-integer embedding preserves order, and zero divides no positive integer (The naturals embed in the integers, Invertibility of a positive natural scalar in a field).
is algebraically closed (The complex numbers are algebraically closed).
For a finite group and algebraically closed field with , the finite set of irreducible representation classes has cardinality equal to the finite set of conjugacy classes (If is algebraically closed and , the number of irreducible representations of equals the number of conjugacy classes).
Conjugacy classes of are in bijection with the tuples of nonnegative integers satisfying ; when the unique empty tuple indexes the identity class (The conjugacy classes of are indexed by the tuples with ).
Each is a nonzero irreducible complex representation of (Complex Specht modules are irreducible).
If for , then (Distinct complex Specht modules are inequivalent).
A representation is finite-dimensional as specified in A finite-dimensional representation over a field, and its degree, is irreducible when it is nonzero and has no proper nonzero subrepresentation (Subrepresentations, direct sums of representations, and irreducibility), and two representations are equivalent exactly when an invertible intertwiner exists (Intertwiners, the spaces and , equivalent representations, and faithful representations).
For finite sets, a bijection transports cardinality (The cardinality of a finite set).
If and is finite, then is finite and implies (A subset of a finite set is finite, with , and equality holds if and only if ).
A map is injective when equal outputs force equal inputs, is surjective when its image is the codomain, and is bijective when it is both injective and surjective (Injection, surjection, bijection).
For the only partition is the empty list (Partitions, English diagrams, and conjugation).
Cardinality is defined for finite sets, and a finite set has cardinality only as a natural number (The cardinality of a finite set).
For , the unique empty tuple indexes the identity class of (The conjugacy classes of are indexed by the tuples with ).
A finite set has cardinality zero exactly when it is empty (The cardinality of a finite set).
No Axiom of Choice is used.
Proof
For each , [F5] gives . The embedding in [F4] sends this canonical real scalar to ; if the latter were zero, injectivity would make the positive real scalar zero, a contradiction. Thus no positive integer multiple of is zero, and [F6] yields .
The identity permutation belongs to , so [F3] makes a nonempty finite group and [F20] gives . The natural-to-integer embedding in [F7] preserves positivity, so characteristic zero does not divide this order; [F8] supplies the algebraic-closure hypothesis. Applying [F9] shows that and are finite and .
For a tuple from [F10], form the finite list containing copies of for each . Its entries are positive, weakly decreasing and sum to , so [F1] makes it a partition. The inverse map sends a partition to the multiplicity of each part . For , [F17] and [F19] make both constructions the empty list/tuple. Thus the tuple set in [F10] is in bijection with , and [F10] then gives .
Define by . Fact [F11] makes this a well-defined map into , and [F12] makes it injective.
By [F14] and step 1.2, the bijection in step 1.3 transports finiteness and cardinality, so is finite and .
Let . The map is injective by step 1.4, and its corestriction to its image is surjective by the definition of ; [F16] therefore makes this corestriction a bijection. Hence by step 2.1. Since is finite by step 1.2, [F15] gives . Thus is surjective as well as injective.
The surjectivity in step 3.1 says every finite-dimensional irreducible complex -representation is isomorphic to some ; injectivity in step 1.4 says no two distinct partitions give isomorphic modules. These are exactly completeness and irredundancy, proving the statement.
Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening
Definition
Fix a partition . If is a -tabloid, let be the row containing label . For distinct tabloids , let be the largest label for which . Define This is the reverse lexicographic order on the row-index vectors : any two distinct vectors have a largest differing coordinate, and the row numbers there are comparable. Thus it is a finite strict total order on the -tabloids.
A -tableau is column-standard when its entries strictly increase down each column. For a column-standard tableau , let be the column containing label . Since entries within each column are sorted, the assignment determines uniquely. For distinct column-standard tableaux , let be the largest label with , and define
This is a finite strict total order on the column-standard tableaux; in words, the largest label assigned to different columns is farther left in than in . For , there is one tabloid and one tableau, and each is the sole element of its order.
Leading tabloid of a column-standard polytabloid
Statement
For a column-standard -tableau , has coefficient at , and every other tabloid in is strictly below in the fixed tabloid order. Consequently the standard polytabloids are linearly independent.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A partition and a column-standard -tableau .
A tableau is column-standard when its entries strictly increase down each column (Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening).
The tabloid order compares the row of the largest label placed in different rows (Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening).
The polytabloid is the signed column sum (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
A standard tableau has entries strictly increasing along rows and down columns (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
consists of the permutations preserving each row set of (Row and column stabilizers).
consists of the permutations preserving each column set of (Row and column stabilizers).
Proof
If and , then [F5] gives , so . A permutation in this intersection preserves both the row and column of every entry; each row-column intersection contains at most one node, so it fixes every label and is the identity. Thus the identity is the only term of contributing to , and its coefficient is .
Let be nonidentity and let be its largest moved label. Then : the preimage differs from , and if it were larger than it would itself be a moved label larger than . By [F6], and lie in the same column of , so by [F1] the smaller label lies above . Under the left action, places in that higher node; every label larger than is fixed by . Thus is the largest label whose row changes, and [F2] gives . Every nonidentity term of is therefore strictly below .
Distinct standard tableaux have distinct tabloids: their entries are already increasing within each row by [F4], so each row set determines its row uniquely. In a nontrivial linear relation among standard polytabloids, choose the greatest leading tabloid among those with nonzero coefficient; the finite total order [F2] gives this element. By steps 1.1–1.2, its coefficient in the relation is exactly the nonzero coefficient of its own polytabloid, since every other participating leading tabloid is smaller and all its terms are smaller still. This contradicts the relation. Hence the standard polytabloids are linearly independent.
Adjacent-column Garnir relation over C
Statement
Let be a -tableau. Let lie among entries of column and among entries of column , with . Put , choose representatives containing for the left cosets in , and Then in over .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , a -tableau , adjacent columns , subsets of their respective entries with , and a left-coset transversal for containing .
The polytabloid is , where (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
If two entries lie in one row of a tabloid and in one column of a tableau, that tableau's column antisymmetrizer kills the tabloid (Column collision cancels antisymmetrization).
Column has height , and these heights are weakly decreasing with (Partitions, English diagrams, and conjugation).
The column stabilizer preserves each column set (Row and column stabilizers).
A tableau of shape is a bijection from to (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
Sign is multiplicative on products in (The sign is a homomorphism , surjective exactly when ).
Proof
Set and , where fixes labels outside . The columns are disjoint, so . If , both and are empty, contradicting this inequality; hence . For each , every label in lies in one of the first rows of : its preimage under is in column or , and by [F4]. Thus two labels of lie in one row of that tabloid. Form and the -tableau that places the labels of in increasing order down its first column and all remaining labels in increasing order along its first row; this is a tableau by [F6]. Its other columns are singletons, so by [F5] and . Applying [F3] to and each tabloid gives . Expanding by [F1] now gives .
Since permutes labels within the two respective columns, by [F5]. Define ; [F2] gives . The left-coset decomposition and multiplicativity [F7] give . Therefore step 1.1 yields . The positive integer is nonzero in , so division gives . The proof works for every supplied transversal and makes no further choice.
Garnir straightening spans the complex Specht module
Statement
For every , partition , and -tableau , the polytabloid is a finite complex linear combination of standard -polytabloids. This is proved without using the later RSK identity.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: , , and a -tableau .
Column has height , and the column heights weakly decrease with (Partitions, English diagrams, and conjugation).
A tableau is standard exactly when its rows and columns strictly increase (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
The left action is (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
consists of the permutations preserving each column set, so its elements act by permuting labels within columns (Row and column stabilizers).
is the complex span of all -polytabloids (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
Polytabloid covariance gives (Polytabloid covariance and the column sign rule).
A tableau is column-standard when its entries strictly increase down each column (Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening).
Column-standard tableaux have a finite strict total order, with exactly when the greatest label assigned to different columns is farther left in than in (Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening).
The adjacent-column Garnir relation accepts a supplied left-coset transversal containing the identity (Adjacent-column Garnir relation over C).
If lie in adjacent columns and , the corresponding Garnir sum annihilates over (Adjacent-column Garnir relation over C). For every such transversal ,
No Axiom of Choice (AC) is used. Column sorting, the inversion, and the Garnir representatives below are specified by unique rules on finite sets; there is no AC dependency to propagate.
Proof
Given any -tableau , sort the entries in each column increasingly to obtain the unique column-standard with the same column sets. The rule defines a unique with , so by covariance and the column sign rule and hence . It remains to prove the claim for column-standard tableaux; when , the unique empty tableau is already standard.
Let be column-standard but not standard. There is an adjacent row descent ; take the lexicographically least such , put , for , and for . Because row contains both boxes, ; column-standardness gives , , and . Hence every in exceeds every in and .
Put and . For each -element subset , list and and set , with the empty product the identity. These are disjoint swaps and . Since preserves , two elements of lie in the same left coset exactly when their images of agree; thus the form a canonical transversal and . Apply the Garnir relation and use covariance [F7] to rewrite its terms, isolating .
For , the greatest element of is swapped with an element of and, under the left action, moves from column of to column of . Every other changed label is smaller: changed labels from are below every element of , and is largest among the changed elements of . Sort the columns of to obtain the unique column-standard with the same column sets; then remains in column , so the finite column order gives . The unique column permutation taking to , covariance, and the column sign rule give .
The base case is a greatest column-standard tableau. If it were nonstandard, step 1.2 would give nonempty , so and step 2.1 has a nonidentity representative; step 3.1 would then construct a strictly later column-standard tableau. Thus the greatest tableau is standard, and its polytabloid already has the required form.
For a column-standard , assume as the induction hypothesis that every later has equal to a finite complex linear combination of standard polytabloids. [ih] If is standard the claim is immediate; otherwise step 2.1 expresses as a finite sum of and step 3.1 rewrites each as with . The induction hypothesis then proves the claim for .
Finite reverse induction in the order of [F10] now proves the claim for every column-standard tableau; step 1.1 extends it to every tableau. Since is the span of all polytabloids by [F6], the standard polytabloids span . The empty shape is included, all sums are finite, and RSK is not used. [given, F6, F10, step 1.1, step 5.1, discharge-induction]
Standard polytabloids form a basis of a complex Specht module
Statement
For every and partition , the family is a -basis of . In particular, including .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: and a partition .
A -tableau is a bijection from its finite Young diagram to (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
A standard tableau has entries strictly increasing along rows and down columns (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
The empty tableau is the unique standard tableau of shape (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
is the number of standard -tableaux (Tableaux and standard tableaux).
A canonical standard row-filled -tableau exists; for it is the empty tableau (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
Two tabloids are equal exactly when their corresponding tableaux have the same row sets (Young subgroups, tabloids, and permutation modules).
The tabloid order is a finite strict total order (Tabloid and column orders for Specht straightening).
for every -tableau , and for the empty shape, and (Column antisymmetrizers, polytabloids, and Specht modules).
For a column-standard tableau, the coefficient of its own tabloid in its polytabloid is and every other tabloid in it is strictly lower; the standard polytabloids are linearly independent (Leading tabloid of a column-standard polytabloid).
Every polytabloid is a finite complex linear combination of standard polytabloids (Garnir straightening spans the complex Specht module).
The span of a subset of a vector space is exactly the set of finite linear combinations of its elements ( is exactly the set of linear combinations of finite lists of elements of , and ).
A span is a linear subspace containing its generators (Linear combination of a finite list, and the span as the smallest linear subspace containing ).
A span is contained in every linear subspace containing its generators (Linear combination of a finite list, and the span as the smallest linear subspace containing ).
A basis is a linearly independent subset whose span is the whole vector space (Basis of a vector space: a linearly independent spanning subset; and ordered basis: an injective finite list whose image is a basis).
The dimension of a vector space with a finite basis is the unique natural number equinumerous with that basis (Finite-dimensional vector space, and its dimension ; infinite-dimensional means having no finite basis).
No form of the Axiom of Choice (AC) is used. The tableau set is finite, the row-filled tableau is canonical, and Garnir straightening gives finite sums.
Proof
Let . The canonical tableau from [F5] makes the indexing set nonempty, and [F8] gives .
The family is linearly independent by [F9]. The increasing rows [F2] and the row-set characterization [F6] show distinct standard tableaux have distinct tabloids; by the total order [F7], one of is greater, with coefficient in its own polytabloid by [F9] and coefficient in the other, whose terms are below its smaller leading tabloid. Thus is injective.
Put . Garnir straightening [F10] expresses every as a finite complex linear combination of members of , so [F11] gives . Since is a subspace [F12] containing all these generators, [F13] and [F8] give ; conversely, step 1.1 gives , so [F13] gives . Hence .
By [F14], steps 1.2 and 2.1 show that is a basis of .
By [F1], standard tableaux form a finite set, and by [F4] it has members; step 1.2 makes injective, so . Thus [F15] and step 3.1 give . If , [F3] gives the unique empty standard tableau and [F8] gives its nonzero polytabloid and , hence the same singleton-basis argument gives . All sums in [F10] are finite; no RSK identity or axiom of choice is used.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
None yet.
Sources
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Chapter 3, Definition 3.8, printed p. 12
- David A. Craven, Groups, Geometries and Representation Theory, Sections 1.8 and 2.1, printed pp. 16-22
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Lemmas 3.10-3.11 and Definition 3.12, printed p. 13
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Chapter 9, Definition 9.1 and Remark 9.2, printed pp. 31-32; the Hermitian version is defined and checked here
- David A. Craven, Groups, Geometries and Representation Theory, Section 2.1, printed pp. 19-21
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Theorem 4.1(a) proof, printed p. 15
- David A. Craven, Groups, Geometries and Representation Theory, Section 2.1, printed pp. 19-20
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups - Theorem 4.1(a) and proof, printed p. 15
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups - Lemma 2.14 and proof, Definition 3.8, Lemma 3.11(b), and Theorem 4.1(b), printed pp. 9-10, 12-13, 15
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Chapter 9, Definition 9.1, Remark 9.2, Lemma 9.3 and proof, and Theorem 9.4 and proof, printed pp. 31-32; the local product is Hermitian
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Chapter 9, Definition 9.1, Remark 9.2 and Lemma 9.3, printed pp. 31-32; her form is bilinear, and the local form is Hermitian
- David A. Craven, Groups, Geometries and Representation Theory, Section 2.1, Corollary 2.4 and its characteristic-zero conclusion, printed p. 20; the local proof uses Hermitian positivity
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Theorem 4.4(b) and proof, printed p. 16; Theorem 9.4 and complete proof of the submodule dichotomy, printed pp. 31-32
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Chapter 4, Theorem 4.1(a-b) and proof, Corollary 4.2(a-b) and its full proof, Theorem 4.3 (Maschke), and Theorem 4.4(c) and proof, printed pp. 15-16
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Theorem 4.4(a) and complete proof, printed p. 16
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Corollary 4.4 and proof, printed p. 15
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Corollary 4.5 and its proof, printed p. 16; its proof cites Theorem 4.4 and the first corollary of Lecture 2
- Pavel Etingof et al., Introduction to Representation Theory, Theorem 3.5 and Corollary 3.6 with proof, printed pp. 33-34
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Definition 4.8 and Remark 4.10, printed pp. 16-17
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Definitions 6.3 and 6.9, printed pp. 26-27 and 30; the column order is reversed here for increasing Garnir induction
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Definition 4.8, Remark 4.10 and Theorem 4.11 proof, printed pp. 16-17
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Proposition 6.5, printed pp. 27-28
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Definition 6.6, Example 6.7 and Theorem 6.8, printed pp. 28-30; theorem translated from the source's right action to the library's left action over C
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Definition 6.9 and Lemma 6.10 with proof, printed pp. 30-31; the local order reverses Wildon's, and the right-action Garnir step is adapted using the proved left-action relation over C
- Charlotte Chan, Representation Theory of Symmetric Groups, Theorem 4.11 and proof, Remark 4.13, printed pp. 16-17; the local spanning proof uses Garnir straightening instead of Chan's later RSK count
- Mark Wildon, Representation Theory of the Symmetric Group, Theorem 6.2, Proposition 6.5, Theorem 6.8, Definition 6.9 and Lemma 6.10 with proof, printed pp. 26-31