, ,

Theorem 2.12. The operators

E_{i}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, F_{i}, 1 \leq i \leq n - 1

, on

M

satisfy the relations ( 1 )– ( 5 ). Equivalently, the operators

e_{i}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, f_{i}, 1 \leq i \leq n - 1

, on

M

satisfy the relations ( 1 ), ( 9 )– ( 12 ).

The relations ( 1 ) and ( 2 ) are evident. The relation ( 3 ) for

i \neq j

follows from a transversality property formulated in the next subsection.

2.13

We consider the subvarieties

p_{12}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i})

and

p_{23}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j})

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}

. Similarly, we consider the subvarieties

p_{12}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, j})

and

p_{23}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, i})

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} - j} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}

Lemma 2.14. For

i \neq j

the intersection (a)

p_{12}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j})

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}

(resp. (b)

p_{12}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, j}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, i})

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} - j} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}

) is transversal.

(c)

p_{12}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j}) ≃ p_{12}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, j}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, i})

Proof. We prove (a). By definition, $p_{12}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i})$ is the moduli space of pairs of flags $(0 \subset W_{1}^{'} = W_{1} \subset W_{2}^{'} = W_{2} \subset \dots \subset W_{i}^{'} \subset W_{i} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1}^{'} = W_{n - 1} \subset W,$ $0 \subset W_{1}^{'''} \subset W_{2}^{'''} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1}^{'''} \subset W)$ of prescribed ranks and degrees, while $p_{23}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j})$ is the moduli space of pairs of flags $(0 \subset W_{1} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1} \subset W,$ $0 \subset W_{1}^{'} = W_{1}^{'''} \subset W_{2}^{'} = W_{2}^{'''} \subset \dots \subset W_{j}^{'} \subset W_{j}^{'''} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1}^{'} = W_{n - 1}^{'''} \subset W)$ of prescribed ranks and degrees.
Their intersection is the moduli space of flags (say, $i < j$ ) $0 \subset W_{1}^{'} = W_{1} = W_{1}^{'''} \subset \dots \subset W_{i}^{'} = W_{i}^{'''} \subset W_{i} \subset \dots \subset W_{j}^{'} =$ $= W_{j} \subset W_{j}^{'''} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1}^{'} = W_{n - 1} = W_{n - 1}^{'''} \subset W$ of prescribed ranks and degrees which is smooth according to [10] , 2.10. Hence the intersection is transversal. This completes the proof of (a).
In (b) we prove similarly that $p_{12}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, j}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, i})$ is the moduli space of flags (say, $i < j$ ) $0 \subset W_{1} = W_{1}^{'''} = W_{1}^{''} \subset \dots \subset W_{i}^{'''} \subset W_{i} = W_{i}^{''} \subset \dots \subset W_{j} \subset$ $\subset W_{j}^{'''} = W_{j}^{''} \subset \dots \subset W_{n - 1} = W_{n - 1}^{'''} = W_{n - 1}^{''} \subset W$ of prescribed ranks and degrees which is smooth according to [10] , 2.10. Hence the intersection is transversal. This completes the proof of (b).
Part (c) was proved in [6] , 3.6. We just recall that the mutually inverse isomorphisms send a triple $(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{'}, W_{∙}^{'''})$ to $(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{''}, W_{∙}^{'''})$ where $W_{∙}^{''} : = W_{∙} + W_{∙}^{'''}$ , and a triple $(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{''}, W_{∙}^{'''})$ to $(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{'}, W_{∙}^{'''})$ where $W_{∙}^{'} : = W_{∙} \cap W_{∙}^{'''}$ . □

2.15

We return to the proof of relation ( 3 ) for

i \neq j

. The composition

E_{i} F_{j}

is given by the action of correspondence

f (\underset{̲}{t}) g (v) p_{13 *} (p_{12}^{*} L_{i} {\overset{L}{\otimes}}_{O_{Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}}} p_{23}^{*} O_{^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j}})

where

f

(resp.

g

) is a certain monomial in

\underset{̲}{t}

(resp.

v

Because of the transversality in 2.14 (a),

p_{12}^{*} L_{i} {\overset{L}{\otimes}}_{O_{Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j}}} p_{23}^{*} O_{^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j}}

is a line bundle

L_{i, j}

p_{12}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} + i - j, j})

whose fiber at a point

(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{'}, W_{∙}^{'''})

is equal to

Γ (C, W_{i} / W_{i}^{'''})

Similarly, due to the transversality in 2.14 (b), the composition

F_{j} E_{i}

is given by the action of correspondence

f^{'} (\underset{̲}{t}) g^{'} (v) p_{13 *} (L_{i, j}^{'})

where

f^{'}

(resp.

g^{'}

) is a certain monomial in

\underset{̲}{t}

(resp.

v

), and

L_{i, j}^{'}

is a line bundle on

p_{12}^{- 1} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, j}) \cap p_{23}^{- 1} (E_{\underset{̲}{d} - j, i})

whose fiber at a point

(W_{∙}, W_{∙}^{''}, W_{∙}^{'''})

is equal to

Γ (C, W_{i} / W_{i}^{'''})

Now the isomorphism in 2.14 (c) clearly takes

L_{i, j}

L_{i, j}^{'}

, and a routine check shows that

f (\underset{̲}{t}) g (v) = f^{'} (\underset{̲}{t}) g^{'} (v)

. This completes the proof of the relations ( 3 ) for

i \neq j

2.16

To prove the relation ( 3 ) for

i = j

we use the localization to the fixed points.

According to the Thomason localization theorem (see e.g. [3] ), restriction to the

{\underset{̲}{t}}^{0}

-fixed point set induces an isomorphism

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t))

(resp.

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)))

The classes of the structure sheaves

[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]

of the

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

-fixed points

\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}

(see 2.4 ) form a basis in

\oplus_{\underset{̲}{d}} K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t))

. In order to compute the matrix coefficients of

E_{i}, F_{i}

in this basis, we have to know the character of the

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

-action in the tangent spaces

T_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

and also in the tangent spaces to the fixed points in the correspondences. This is the subject of the following Proposition.

2.17

Note that a point

(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})

lies in the correspondence

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

d_{k, j} = d_{k, j}^{'}

with a single exception

d_{i, j}^{'} = d_{i, j} + 1

for certain

j \leq i

Proposition 2.18. a) The character

χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

in the tangent space

T_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

equals

\sum_{1 \leq k, j \leq n - 1} t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} (\sum_{l = 0}^{d_{k - 1, j}} v^{2 l} - \sum_{l = d_{k - 1, j} - d_{k, k} + 1}^{d_{k - 1, j}} v^{2 l} + \sum_{n - 1 \geq i \geq k, j} \sum_{l = d_{i, j} - d_{i, k} + 1}^{d_{i, j} - d_{i + 1, k}} v^{2 l}) - \sum_{1 \leq j < k \leq n - 1} t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2}

where we set

d_{n, k} = 0

b) The character

χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})}

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

in the tangent space

T_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

equals

χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} + \sum_{k \leq i} t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, k}^{'} - 2 d_{i, j}} - \sum_{k \leq i - 1} t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i - 1, k} - 2 d_{i, j}}

d_{i, j}^{'} = d_{i, j} + 1

for certain

j \leq i

c) The character

λ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})}

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

in the fiber of

L_{i}

at the point

(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})

equals

t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i, j}}

d_{i, j}^{'} = d_{i, j} + 1

Proof. Let $Q$ be the moduli space of flags of locally free subsheaves $0 \subset W_{1} \subset W_{2} \subset \dots \subset W_{r} \subset W$ of fixed ranks. Then the tangent space $T_{W_{∙}} Q$ equals the kernel of $\sum_{1 \leq l < r} p_{l - 1}^{*} \otimes Id - Id \otimes q_{l} : \oplus_{l} Hom (W_{l}, W / W_{l}) ↠ \oplus_{l} Hom (W_{l}, W / W_{l + 1})$ where $p_{l} : W_{i} ↪ W_{l + 1}; q_{l} : W / W_{l} ↠ W / W_{l + 1}$ (see e.g. [7] , 3.2).
The parts a), b) follow easily. The part c) is obvious. □

2.19

Let us denote by

S χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} = Λ^{- 1} χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}

(resp.

S χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} = Λ^{- 1} χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})}

) the character of

\tilde{T} \times C^{*}

in the symmetric algebra

{Sym}^{∙} T_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

(resp.

{Sym}^{∙} T_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

). It is the inverse of the character of the corresponding exterior algebra, thus it lies in the fraction field

Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t))

According to the Bott-Lefschetz fixed point formula, the matrix coefficient

p_{*} q_{[{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}, \tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]}^{*}

p_{*} q^{*} : M_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}} \to M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

with respect to the basis elements

[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}] \in K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}), [{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}] \in K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (Q_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}})

(see 2.16 ) equals

S χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} / S χ_{{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}}

. Similarly, the matrix coefficient

q_{*} (L_{i} \otimes p^{*})_{[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}]}

q_{*} (L_{i} \otimes p^{*}) : M_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to M_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}}

equals

λ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} S χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} / S χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}

Hence, the matrix coefficient

E_{i [\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}]}

E_{i} : M_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to M_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}}

equals

- t_{i + 1}^{- i - 1} t_{i}^{i - 1} v^{(i - 1) d_{i - 1} + (i + 1) d_{i + 1} - 2 i d_{i} - i} λ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} S χ_{(\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'})} / S χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}} .

And the matrix coefficient

F_{i [\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}]}

F_{i} : M_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to M_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}}

equals

t_{i + 1}^{i} t_{i}^{- i} v^{2 i d_{i} - i d_{i - 1} - i d_{i + 1} - i} S χ_{({\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}, \tilde{\underset{̲}{d}})} / S χ_{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}

Thus, Proposition 2.18 admits the following Corollary.

Corollary 2.20.

E_{i [\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}]} = - t_{i + 1}^{- i - 1} t_{i}^{i - 1} v^{(i - 1) d_{i - 1} + (i + 1) d_{i + 1} - 2 i d_{i} - i} t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i, j}} \times

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1} \prod_{j \neq k \leq i} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, k} - 2 d_{i, j}})^{- 1} \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i - 1, k} - 2 d_{i, j}})

d_{i, j}^{'} = d_{i, j} + 1

for certain

j \leq i

;

F_{i [\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, {\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}^{'}]} = t_{i + 1}^{i} t_{i}^{- i} v^{2 i d_{i} - i d_{i - 1} - i d_{i + 1} - i} \times

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1} \prod_{j \neq k \leq i} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i, k}})^{- 1} \prod_{k \leq i + 1} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, k}})

d_{i, j}^{'} = d_{i, j} - 1

for certain

j \leq i

; All the other matrix coefficients of

E_{i}, F_{i}

vanish.

Now the relation ( 3 ) boils down to the following identity.

Proposition 2.21.

\frac{t_{i} t_{i + 1}^{- 1} v^{d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i} + d_{i + 1} - 1} - t_{i}^{- 1} t_{i + 1} v^{- d_{i - 1} + 2 d_{i} - d_{i + 1} + 1}}{v - v^{- 1}} (1 - v^{2})^{2} v^{d_{i - 1} - d_{i + 1}} t_{i} t_{i + 1} =

\sum_{j \leq i} t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i, j} + 2} (1 - t_{i}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, i}}) (1 - t_{i + 1}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, i + 1}}) \times

\times^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i, k}})^{- 1} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, k} - 2 d_{i, j} + 2})^{- 1} \times

\times \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, k}}) (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i - 1, k} - 2 d_{i, j} + 2}) -

- \sum_{j \leq i} t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i, j}} (1 - t_{i}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, i} + 2}) (1 - t_{i + 1}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, i + 1} + 2}) \times

\times^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i, k} + 2})^{- 1} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, k} - 2 d_{i, j}})^{- 1} \times

\times \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (1 - t_{k}^{2} t_{j}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, j} - 2 d_{i + 1, k} + 2}) (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i - 1, k} - 2 d_{i, j}}) .

Proof. We introduce the new variables $q : = v^{2}; s_{j} : = t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i j}}, 1 \leq j \leq i; r_{k} : = t_{k}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i + 1, k}}, 1 \leq k \leq i + 1; p_{k} : = t_{k}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i - 1, k}}, 1 \leq k \leq i - 1$ . Then the LHS of 2.21 equals $(1 - q) (q^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} {r_{k}}^{i} \prod_{j = 1} s_{j}^{- 1} -^{i} \prod_{j = 1} {s_{j}}^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} p_{k}^{- 1})$ while the RHS of 2.21 equals $^{i} \prod_{j = 1} {s_{j}}^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} p_{k}^{- 1} (q \sum_{j \leq i} {s_{j}^{- 2}}^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} (s_{j} - r_{k})^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} (p_{k} - q s_{j})^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (s_{j} - s_{k})^{- 1} (s_{k} - q s_{j})^{- 1} -$ $\sum_{j \leq i} {s_{j}^{- 2}}^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} (s_{j} - q r_{k})^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} (p_{k} - s_{j})^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (s_{j} - q s_{k})^{- 1} (s_{k} - s_{j})^{- 1})$ Dividing both the LHS and the RHS by $\prod_{j = 1}^{i} s_{j} \prod_{k = 1}^{i - 1} p_{k}^{- 1}$ we arrive at $(1 - q) (q^{i} \prod_{j = 1} {s_{j}^{- 2}}^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} {p_{k}}^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} r_{k} - 1) =$ $q \sum_{j \leq i} {s_{j}^{- 2}}^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} (s_{j} - r_{k})^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} (p_{k} - q s_{j})^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (s_{j} - s_{k})^{- 1} (s_{k} - q s_{j})^{- 1} -$ $\sum_{j \leq i} {s_{j}^{- 2}}^{i + 1} \prod_{k = 1} (s_{j} - q r_{k})^{i - 1} \prod_{k = 1} (p_{k} - s_{j})^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (s_{j} - q s_{k})^{- 1} (s_{k} - s_{j})^{- 1} .$ If we subtract the LHS from the RHS we obtain a rational expression in $s_{j}$ of degree 0, that is, the degree of numerator is not bigger than the degree of denominator. We see easily that as $s_{j}$ tends to $\infty$ , the difference of the RHS and the LHS tends to 0. The possible poles of the difference can occur at $s_{j} = 0, s_{j} = s_{k}, s_{j} = q s_{k}, s_{j} = q^{- 1} s_{k}$ . We see easily that the principal parts of the difference at these points vanish. We conclude that the difference is identically 0.
This completes the proof of the Proposition. □

2.22

To finish the proof of relation ( 3 ) we note that the commutator correspondence

E_{i} F_{i} - F_{i} E_{i}

is concentrated on the diagonal of

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

. This is proved exactly as in Lemma 2.14 . In other words,

E_{i} F_{i} - F_{i} E_{i}

is given by tensor product

? \mapsto ? \overset{L}{\otimes} X_{i}

for certain

X_{i} \in M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

. This means that in the basis

[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]

the operator

E_{i} F_{i} - F_{i} E_{i}

is diagonal. Now the Proposition 2.21 computes the matrix coefficient

(E_{i} F_{i} - F_{i} E_{i})_{[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}, \tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]}

and proves that it equals

\frac{K_{i} - K_{i}^{- 1}}{v - v^{- 1}} |_{M_{\underset{̲}{d}}}

. This completes the proof of the relation ( 3 ).

2.23

Alternatively, the relation ( 3 ) follows from the next Lemma. We consider a 2-dimensional vector space with a basis

w_{1}, w_{2}

. Let

T

be a torus acting on

w_{1}

(resp.

w_{2}

) via a character

τ_{1}^{2}

(resp.

τ_{2}^{2}

). Let

ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}

be the moduli stack of flags of coherent sheaves

W_{1} \subset W_{2}

C

locally free at

\infty \in C

, equipped with a trivialization

W_{1} |_{\infty} = 〈 w_{1} 〉, W_{2} |_{\infty} = 〈 w_{1}, w_{2} 〉

, and such that

deg W_{1} = - d_{1}, deg W_{2} / W_{1} = - d_{2}

. We have a natural correspondence

E_{d_{1}} \subset ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}} \times ℨ_{d_{1} + 1, d_{2} - 1}

formed by the pairs

(W_{1}, W_{2}; W_{1}^{'}, W_{2}^{'})

such that

W_{1}^{'} \subset W_{1} \subset W_{2} = W_{2}^{'}

. The projection

E_{d_{1}} \to ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}

(resp.

E_{d_{1}} \to ℨ_{d_{1}^{'}, d_{2}}

) is denoted by

p

(resp.

q

). Finally,

E_{d_{1}}

is equipped with the line bundle

L_{d_{1}}

whose fiber at the point

(W_{1}, W_{2}; W_{1}^{'}, W_{2}^{'})

equals

Γ (C, W_{1} / W_{1}^{'})

The stack

ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}

is smooth, and acted upon by

T \times C^{*}

. So it makes sense to consider the operators

f : = p_{*} q^{*} :

K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1} - 1, d_{2} + 1}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)),

e : = - τ_{1}^{- 1} τ_{2}^{- 1} v^{d_{1} + d_{2}} q_{*} (L_{d_{1}} \otimes p^{*}) :

K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1} + 1, d_{2} - 1}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)),

K = τ_{1}^{- 1} τ_{2} v^{d_{1} - d_{2} + 1} :

K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t))

Lemma 2.24.

e f - f e = \frac{K - K^{- 1}}{v - v^{- 1}}

2.25

To derive the relation ( 3 ), or equivalently, ( 10 ) for

j = i

from Lemma 2.24 we consider the map

z_{\underset{̲}{d}} : Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}, d_{i + 1} - d_{i}}, W_{∙} \mapsto (W_{i} / W_{i - 1}, W_{i + 1} / W_{i - 1}) .

Then we have

(Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1} + 1, d_{i + 1} - d_{i} - 1}) \times_{ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}, d_{i + 1} - d_{i}} \times ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1} + 1, d_{i + 1} - d_{i} - 1}} E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}} = E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \subset Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times Q_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} .

We also have the natural maps

e_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} : E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}},

^{T} e_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} :^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to^{T} E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}},

h_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} : E_{\underset{̲}{d} - i, i} \circ^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d} - i, i} \to E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1} - 1} \circ^{T} E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1} - 1},

^{'} h_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} :^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \circ E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to^{T} E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}} \circ E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}} .

We may consider

e_{i}

(resp.

f_{i}, e, f

) as an element of

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i})

(resp.

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}), K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}}), K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (^{T} E_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}})

). We evidently have

e_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}^{*} e = e_{i},^{T} e_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}^{*} f = f_{i} .

Moreover, according to [12] , 8.2 (Restriction of the convolution to submanifolds), we have

\begin{matrix} h_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}^{*} (e * f) = e_{i} * f_{i},^{'} h_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}^{*} (f * e) = f_{i} * e_{i} . \end{matrix}

(13)

We already know from the argument in 2.22 that the correspondence

e_{i} * f_{i} - f_{i} * e_{i}

acts as tensor multiplication with a certain class

X_{i} \in M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

. Similarly, the correspondence

e * f - f * e

acts in

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}, d_{i + 1} - d_{i}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t))

as tensor multiplication with a certain class

X \in K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}, d_{i + 1} - d_{i}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*}} (p t))

By ( 13 ) we must have

X_{i} = z_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{*} X

. Thus the relation ( 10 ) for

j = i

follows from Lemma 2.24 .

2.26

Unfortunately, we do not know an intelligent proof of this Lemma. Instead we reverse the argument and derive it from the relations ( 10 ) for all

n, i

. In effect, we must compute

X \in K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t))

while we know

z_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{*} X

for all

n, i, \underset{̲}{d}

such that

d_{i} - d_{i - 1} = d_{1}, d_{i + 1} - d_{i} = d_{2}

(also, the homomorphism of tori

{\tilde{T}}_{n} \to T

acts on the characters as

τ_{1} = t_{i}, τ_{2} = t_{i + 1}

However, the direct product of inverse images

\prod_{n, i, \underset{̲}{d}} z_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{*} : K^{T \times C^{*}} (ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}) \otimes_{K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{T \times C^{*}} (p t)) \to \prod_{n, i, \underset{̲}{d}} M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

is an embedding. This completes the proof of Lemma 2.24 .

2.27

To complete the proof of Theorem 2.12 it remains to check the relations ( 4 ), ( 5 ). To this end we consider the algebra

\tilde{U}

given by the generators

E_{i}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, F_{i}, 1 \leq i \leq n - 1

, and the relations ( 1 )– ( 3 ). Thus,

U

is the quotient of

\tilde{U}

by the Serre relations.

We also extend the scalars to

Frac (C [L_{1}^{\pm 1}, \dots, L_{n - 1}^{\pm 1}])

: we set

U^{'} = U \otimes_{C [L_{1}^{\pm 1}, \dots, L_{n - 1}^{\pm 1}]} Frac (C [L_{1}^{\pm 1}, \dots, L_{n - 1}^{\pm 1}]), {\tilde{U}}^{'} = \tilde{U} \otimes_{C [L_{1}^{\pm 1}, \dots, L_{n - 1}^{\pm 1}]} Frac (C [L_{1}^{\pm 1}, \dots, L_{n - 1}^{\pm 1}])

Note that

{\tilde{U}}^{'}

acts in

M

, so

U^{'}

acts in the quotient

\bar{M}

M

by the two-sided ideal

ℐ

{\tilde{U}}^{'}

generated by the Serre relations. So it suffices to check that

\bar{M} = M

, or equivalently,

ℐ M = 0

Now

M

has the size of the universal Verma module over

U^{'}

which is an irreducible

U^{'}

(and

{\tilde{U}}^{'}

-) module. Hence we only have to check that

ℐ M \neq M

. But any element

x \in ℐ

of principal grading degree 0 annihilates the highest vector of

M

since we may shift the generators

e_{i}

in the expression of

x

to the right.

This completes the proof of the Serre relations in

M

along with the proof of Theorem 2.12 .

2.28 Remark

(A. Joseph) We have constructed a basis

{[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]}

in the universal Verma module

M

over

U

Though we can not identify it with any known type of basis, the parametrization of this basis coincides with the polyhedral realization of the crystal base of

U_{v}^{+} (s l_{n})

corresponding to the reduced expression in the Weyl group of

S L_{n}

w_{0} = s_{n - 1} s_{n - 2} \dots s_{1} s_{n - 1} s_{n - 2} \dots s_{2} \dots s_{n - 1} s_{n - 2} s_{n - 1}

(see [13] ).

2.29

Recall that the universal Verma module

M

over

U

is equipped with the symmetric Shapovalov form

(,)

with values in

Frac (C [\tilde{T} \times C^{*}])

. It is characterized by the properties (a)

([{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}_{0}], [{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}_{0}]) = 1

where

[{\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}}_{0}] = [(0, \dots, 0)]

is the highest weight vector; (b)

(E_{i} x, y) = (x, F_{i} y) \forall x, y \in M

We will write down a geometric expression for the Shapovalov form. Evidently, the different weight spaces of

M

are orthogonal with respect to the Shapovalov form. We consider the line bundle

D_{i}

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

whose fiber at the point

(W_{∙})

equals

det R Γ (C, W_{i})

. We also define the line bundle

D : = \otimes_{i = 1}^{n - 1} D_{i}

Proposition 2.30. For

G_{1}, G_{2} \in M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

we have

(G_{1}, G_{2}) = (- 1)^{\sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} d_{i}} {v^{\sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} 2 i d_{i}^{2} - \sum_{i = 2}^{n - 1} (2 i - 1) d_{i} d_{i - 1}}}^{n} \prod_{i = 1} t_{i}^{(2 i - 1) (d_{i - 1} - d_{i})} [R Γ (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}, G_{1} \otimes G_{2} \otimes D)]

Proof. Since $det R Γ$ is multiplicative in short exact sequences, we have an equality of line bundles on the correspondence $E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} : p^{*} D = q^{*} D \otimes L_{i}$ . Now the projection formula shows that the operators $p_{*} q^{*}$ and $q_{*} (L_{i} \otimes p^{*})$ are adjoint with respect to the pairing $G_{1}, G_{2} \mapsto R Γ (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}, G_{1} \otimes G_{2} \otimes D)$ . Finally, it is easy to see that the $v, t$ -factor takes care of the scaling coefficients of our $E_{i}, F_{i}$ . □

2.31

While the operators

E_{i}, F_{i}

are conjugate to each other with respect to the Shapovalov form, the operators

e_{i}, f_{i}

are not. In fact, obviously,

e_{i}^{*} = K_{i}^{2 i} f_{i}

. It is known that a completion of the universal Verma module

M

contains a unique vector

k = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} k_{\underset{̲}{d}}

(resp.

w = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} w_{\underset{̲}{d}}

) such that

k_{(0, \dots, 0)} = w_{(0, \dots, 0)} = [(0, \dots, 0)]

, and

f_{i} k = (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} k

(resp.

e_{i}^{*} w = (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} w

) for any

i

(the Whittaker vectors).

The following proposition gives a geometric construction of the Whittaker vectors

k, w \in M

Proposition 2.32. a)

k_{\underset{̲}{d}} = [O_{\underset{̲}{d}}]

(the class of the structure sheaf of

Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

); b)

w_{\underset{̲}{d}} = v^{\sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} (1 - 2 i) d_{i}^{2} - \sum_{i = 2}^{n - 1} (2 - 2 i) d_{i} d_{i - 1} - \sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} d_{i}} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} t_{i}^{(2 - 2 i) (d_{i - 1} - d_{i})} [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]

Proof. a) We have

q^{*} O_{\underset{̲}{d} + i} = O_{E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}}

. Furthermore, since

p \times r : E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times (C - \infty)

is proper and birational, and both the sourse and the target are smooth, we have

(p \times r)_{*} O_{E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}} = O_{\underset{̲}{d}} ⊠ O_{C - \infty}

Finally,

p r_{*} [O_{\underset{̲}{d}} ⊠ O_{C - \infty}] = (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} [O_{\underset{̲}{d}}]

where

p r : Q_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times (C - \infty) \to Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}

is the projection to the first factor.

b) Recall that

e_{i}^{*} = K_{i}^{2 i} f_{i}

. Thus we have to check that

f_{i} [D_{\underset{̲}{d} + i}^{- 1}] = t_{i}^{2} v^{2 d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i}} (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]

. Furthermore, recall that on

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

we have a canonical isomorphism

q^{*} D_{\underset{̲}{d} + i}^{- 1} = L_{i} \otimes p^{*} D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}

. By the projection formula we are reduced to

\begin{matrix} p_{*} [L_{i}] = t_{i}^{2} v^{2 d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i}} (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} [O_{\underset{̲}{d}}] \end{matrix}

(14)

This can be calculated in the basis

[\tilde{\underset{̲}{d}}]

where we already know the matrix coefficients of our operators (see Corollary 2.20 ). More precisely, by the Bott-Lefschetz fixed point formula, we have to check

\sum_{j \leq i} t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i j}} (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} \prod_{j \neq k \leq i} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i, k} - 2 d_{i, j}})^{- 1} \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (1 - t_{j}^{2} t_{k}^{- 2} v^{2 d_{i - 1, k} - 2 d_{i, j}}) =

= t_{i}^{2} v^{2 d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i}} (1 - v^{2})^{- 1}

Recall the change of variables we used in the proof of Proposition 2.21 :

s_{j} : = t_{j}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i j}}, 1 \leq j \leq i; p_{k} : = t_{k}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{i - 1, k}}, 1 \leq k \leq i - 1

. Then we have to prove

\sum_{j \leq i} {s_{j}}^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (1 - s_{j} s_{k}^{- 1})^{- 1} \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (1 - s_{j} p_{k}^{- 1}) = s_{1} \dots s_{i} p_{1}^{- 1} \dots p_{i - 1}^{- 1}

This follows immediately from the well known identity

\sum_{j \leq i} \prod_{k \leq i - 1} (p_{k} - s_{j})^{k \neq j} \prod_{k \leq i} (s_{k} - s_{j})^{- 1} = 1 .

This completes the proof of the Proposition. □

Corollary 2.33. The Shapovalov scalar product of the Whittaker vectors equals

(k_{\underset{̲}{d}}, w_{\underset{̲}{d}}) = (- 1)^{\sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} d_{i}} v^{\sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} d_{i}^{2} - \sum_{i = 2}^{n - 1} d_{i} d_{i - 1} - \sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} d_{i}} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} t_{i}^{d_{i - 1} - d_{i}} [R Γ (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}, O_{\underset{̲}{d}})]

2.34

According to the works [4] , [17] , the appropriate generating function of the Shapovalov scalar product of the Whittaker vectors satisfies a

v

-deformed (

v

-difference) version of the quantum Toda lattice equations. Let us recall the required notations and results.

We introduce the formal variables

z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}

, and we set

Q_{i} = exp (z_{i} - z_{i + 1}), i = 1, \dots, n - 1

We set

ħ = log (v)

, so that

v = exp (ħ)

. We introduce the shift operators

T_{i}, i = 1, \dots, n

, acting on the space of functions of

z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}

invariant with respect to the simultaneous translations

f (z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}) = f (z_{1} + z, \dots, z_{n} + z)

. Namely, we set

T_{i} f (z_{1}, \dots, z_{n}) = f (z_{1}, \dots, z_{i} + ħ, \dots, z_{n})

We define the following

v

-difference operators:

\begin{matrix} S : = \sum_{j = 1}^{n} T_{j}^{2} + v^{- 2} \sum_{i = 1}^{n - 1} Q_{i} T_{i} T_{i + 1} \end{matrix}

(15)

\begin{matrix} G : = T_{1}^{2} + T_{2}^{2} (1 - Q_{1}) + \dots + T_{n}^{2} (1 - Q_{n - 1}) \end{matrix}

(16)

We also consider the following generating functions:

\begin{matrix} ℑ : =^{n - 1} \prod_{i = 1} Q_{i}^{\frac{- log (t_{1} \dots t_{i})}{ħ}} \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} (k_{\underset{̲}{d}}, w_{\underset{̲}{d}}) Q_{1}^{d_{1}} \dots Q_{n - 1}^{d_{n - 1}} \end{matrix}

(17)

\begin{matrix} J : =^{n - 1} \prod_{i = 1} Q_{i}^{\frac{- log (t_{1} \dots t_{i})}{ħ}} \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} [R Γ (Q_{\underset{̲}{d}}, O_{\underset{̲}{d}})] Q_{1}^{d_{1}} \dots Q_{n - 1}^{d_{n - 1}} \end{matrix}

(18)

Then according to the last formula of [17] (or equivalently, the formula (5.7) of [4] ), we have

\begin{matrix} S ℑ = (\sum_{i = 1}^{n} t_{i}^{2}) ℑ \end{matrix}

(19)

Now the argument of [4] , section 6 (see the formula (6.5)) together with Corollary 2.33 , establishes

\begin{matrix} G J = (\sum_{i = 1}^{n} t_{i}^{2}) J \end{matrix}

(20)

thus reproving the Main Theorem 2 of [7] .

3 Parabolic sheaves and affine quantum groups

In this section we want to generalize the previous results to the affine setting.

3.1 Parabolic sheaves

We recall the setup of [5] . Let

X

be another smooth projective curve of genus zero. We fix a coordinate

x

X

, and consider the action of

C^{*}

X

such that

u (x) = u^{- 2} x

. We have

X^{C^{*}} = {0_{X}, \infty_{X}}

. Let

S

denote the product surface

C \times X

. Let

D_{\infty}

denote the divisor

C \times \infty_{X} \cup \infty_{C} \times X

. Let

D_{0}

denote the divisor

C \times 0_{X}

Given an

n

-tuple of nonnegative integers

\underset{̲}{d} = (d_{0}, \dots, d_{n - 1})

, we say that a parabolic sheaf

ℱ_{∙}

of degree

\underset{̲}{d}

is an infinite flag of torsion free coherent sheaves of rank

n

S : \dots \subset ℱ_{- 1} \subset ℱ_{0} \subset ℱ_{1} \subset \dots

such that:

(a)

ℱ_{k + n} = ℱ_{k} (D_{0})

for any

k

; (b)

c h_{1} (ℱ_{k}) = k [D_{0}]

for any

k

: the first Chern classes are proportional to the fundamental class of

D_{0}

; (c)

c h_{2} (ℱ_{k}) = d_{i}

for

i \equiv k (m o d n)

; (d)

ℱ_{0}

is locally free at

D_{\infty}

and trivialized at

D_{\infty} : ℱ_{0} |_{D_{\infty}} = W \otimes O_{D_{\infty}}

; (e) For

- n \leq k \leq 0

the sheaf

ℱ_{k}

is locally free at

D_{\infty}

, and the quotient sheaves

ℱ_{k} / ℱ_{- n}, ℱ_{0} / ℱ_{k}

(both supported at

D_{0} = C \times 0_{X} \subset S

) are both locally free at the point

\infty_{C} \times 0_{X}

; moreover, the local sections of

ℱ_{k} |_{\infty_{C} \times X}

are those sections of

ℱ_{0} |_{\infty_{C} \times X} = W \otimes O_{X}

which take value in

〈 w_{1}, \dots, w_{n - k} 〉 \subset W

\infty_{X} \in X

According to [5] , 3.5, the fine moduli space

P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

of degree

\underset{̲}{d}

parabolic sheaves exists and is a smooth connected quasiprojective variety of dimension

2 d_{0} + \dots + 2 d_{n - 1}

The group

\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}

acts naturally on

P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

, and its fixed point set is finite.

3.2 Correspondences

If the collections

\underset{̲}{d}

and

{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}

differ at the only place

i \in I : = Z / n Z

, and

d_{i}^{'} = d_{i} + 1

, then we consider a correspondence

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \subset P_{\underset{̲}{d}} \times P_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}}

formed by the pairs

(ℱ_{∙}, ℱ_{∙}^{'})

such that for

j ≢ i (m o d n)

we have

ℱ_{j} = ℱ_{j}^{'}

, and for

j \equiv i (m o d n)

we have

ℱ_{j}^{'} \subset ℱ_{j}

It is a smooth quasiprojective algebraic variety of dimension

2 \sum_{i \in I} d_{i} + 1

. In effect, the argument of [5] , Lemma 3.3, reduces this statement to the corresponding fact about Laumon correspondences (see [10] , 2.10).

We denote by

p

(resp.

q

) the natural projection

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

(resp.

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \to P_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}}

). For

j \equiv i (m o d n)

the correspondence

E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

is equipped with a natural line bundle

L_{j}

whose fiber at

(ℱ_{∙}, ℱ_{∙}^{'})

equals

Γ (C, ℱ_{j - n} / ℱ_{j - n}^{'})

. Finally, we have a transposed correspondence

^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i} \subset P_{{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}} \times P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

3.3

We denote by

^{'} ℳ

the direct sum of equivariant (complexified)

K

-groups:

^{'} ℳ = \oplus_{\underset{̲}{d}} K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

. It is a module over

K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (p t) = C [\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}] = C [t_{1}, \dots, t_{n}, v, u : t_{1} \dots t_{n} = 1]

. We define

ℳ =^{'} ℳ \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (p t))

We have an evident grading

ℳ = \oplus_{\underset{̲}{d}} ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}, ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} = K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}) \otimes_{K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (p t)} Frac (K^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (p t))

3.4

The grading and the correspondences

^{T} E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}, E_{\underset{̲}{d}, i}

give rise to the following operators on

ℳ

(note that though

p

is not proper,

p_{*}

is well defined on the localized equivariant

K

-theory due to the finiteness of the fixed point sets):

K_{i} = t_{i + 1} t_{i}^{- 1} u^{δ_{0, i}} v^{2 d_{i} - d_{i - 1} - d_{i + 1} + 1} : ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}

C = u v^{n}

, For

i = 0, \dots, n - 1

we define

L_{i} = t_{1}^{- 1} \dots t_{i}^{- 1} v^{d_{i} + \frac{1}{2} i (n - i)} : M_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to M_{\underset{̲}{d}}

(that is,

L_{0} = v^{d_{0}}

f_{i} = p_{*} q^{*} : ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d} - i}

; For

n > 2

and

i = 0, \dots, n - 1

we define

F_{i} = t_{i + 1}^{- 1} v^{d_{i + 1} - d_{i} + \frac{n + 1}{2} - i} p_{*} q^{*} : ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d} - i}

, For

n = 2

we define

F_{i} = f_{i}

e_{i} = - t_{i}^{- 1} t_{i + 1}^{- 1} u^{δ_{0, i}} v^{d_{i + 1} - d_{i - 1}} q_{*} (L_{i} \otimes p^{*}) : ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d} + i}

, For

n > 2

and

i = 0, \dots, n - 1

we define

E_{i} = - t_{i}^{- 1} u^{δ_{0, i}} v^{d_{i} - d_{i - 1} + \frac{1 - n}{2} + i} q_{*} (L_{i} \otimes p^{*}) : ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d} + i}

, For

n = 2

we define

E_{i} = e_{i}

3.5 Sevostyanov's form of affine quantum $S L_{n}$

Let

I

denote the set

Z / n Z

of residue classes modulo

n

U

is the

C [v, v^{- 1}]

-algebra with generators

E_{i}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, F_{i}, i \in Z / n Z

, subject to the following relations:

\begin{matrix} L_{i} L_{j} = L_{j} L_{i}, K_{i} = L_{i}^{2} L_{i + 1} L_{i - 1} C^{δ_{i, 0}} \end{matrix}

(21)

\begin{matrix} L_{j} E_{i} L_{j}^{- 1} = v^{δ_{i, j}} E_{i}, L_{j} F_{i} L_{j}^{- 1} = v^{- δ_{i, j}} F_{i}, C is central \end{matrix}

(22)

\begin{matrix} E_{i} F_{j} - F_{j} E_{i} = δ_{i, j} \frac{K_{i} - K_{i}^{- 1}}{v - v^{- 1}} \end{matrix}

(23)

\begin{matrix} | i - j | > 1 ⟹ E_{i} E_{j} - E_{j} E_{i} = 0 = F_{i} F_{j} - F_{j} F_{i} \end{matrix}

(24)

\begin{matrix} n > 2 & | i - j | = 1 ⟹ E_{i}^{2} E_{j} - (v + v^{- 1}) E_{i} E_{j} E_{i} + E_{j} E_{i}^{2} = 0 = F_{i}^{2} F_{j} - (v + v^{- 1}) F_{i} F_{j} F_{i} + F_{j} F_{i}^{2} \end{matrix}

(25)

\begin{matrix} n = 2 & | i - j | = 1 ⟹ E_{i}^{3} E_{j} - (v^{2} + 1 + v^{- 2}) E_{i}^{2} E_{j} E_{i} + (v^{2} + 1 + v^{- 2}) E_{i} E_{j} E_{i}^{2} - E_{j} E_{i}^{3} = 0 \end{matrix}

(26)

\begin{matrix} n = 2 & | i - j | = 1 ⟹ F_{i}^{3} F_{j} - (v^{2} + 1 + v^{- 2}) F_{i}^{2} F_{j} F_{i} + (v^{2} + 1 + v^{- 2}) F_{i} F_{j} F_{i}^{2} - F_{j} F_{i}^{3} = 0 \end{matrix}

(27)

For

n > 2

we also consider elements

e_{i}, f_{i} \in U

depending on the following choice of

n \times n

-matrices

n_{i j}, c_{i j}

(cf. [16] , Remark 3):

\begin{matrix} n_{i, i} = 1, n_{i, i + 1} = - 1, n_{i + 1, i} = 0, \end{matrix}

(28)

otherwise

n_{i j} = 0

\begin{matrix} c_{i, i + 1} = - 1, c_{i + 1, i} = 1, \end{matrix}

(29)

otherwise

c_{i j} = 0

Then we set

\begin{matrix} f_{i} : = L_{i} L_{i + 1}^{- 1} F_{i}, e_{i} : = E_{i} L_{i}^{- 1} L_{i + 1} . \end{matrix}

(30)

Clearly, the algebra

U

is generated by

e_{i}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, f_{i}, i \in Z / n Z

, and the relations ( 22 )– ( 25 ) above are equivalent to the relations ( 31 )– ( 34 ) below.

\begin{matrix} L_{j} e_{i} L_{j}^{- 1} = v^{δ_{i, j}} e_{i}, L_{j} f_{i} L_{j}^{- 1} = v^{- δ_{i, j}} f_{i}, C is central \end{matrix}

(31)

\begin{matrix} e_{i} f_{j} - v^{c_{i j}} f_{j} e_{i} = δ_{i, j} \frac{K_{i} - K_{i}^{- 1}}{v - v^{- 1}} \end{matrix}

(32)

\begin{matrix} | i - j | > 1 ⟹ e_{i} e_{j} - e_{j} e_{i} = 0 = f_{i} f_{j} - f_{j} f_{i} \end{matrix}

(33)

\begin{matrix} | i - j | = 1 ⟹ e_{i}^{2} e_{j} - v^{c_{i j}} (v + v^{- 1}) e_{i} e_{j} e_{i} + v^{2 c_{i j}} e_{j} e_{i}^{2} = 0 = f_{i}^{2} f_{j} - v^{c_{i j}} (v + v^{- 1}) f_{i} f_{j} f_{i} + v^{2 c_{i j}} f_{j} f_{i}^{2} \end{matrix}

(34)

3.6

The following conjecture is an affine analogue of Theorem 2.12 . Recall the operators

E_{i}, e_{i}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, F_{i}, f_{i}, i \in I

, on

ℳ

defined in 3.4 .

Conjecture 3.7. The operators

E_{i}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, F_{i}, i \in I

, on

ℳ

satisfy the relations ( 21 )– ( 27 ). Equivalently, if

n > 2

, the operators

e_{i}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, f_{i}, i \in I

, satisfy the relations ( 21 ), ( 31 )– ( 34 ).

3.8

We can only prove a weaker statement. Let

ℳ^{'}

be the subspace of

ℳ

generated from

ℳ_{\underset{̲}{0}}

by the action of

E_{i}, i \in I

Theorem 3.9. The operators

E_{i}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, F_{i}, i \in I

, preserve

ℳ^{'}

and satisfy the relations ( 21 )– ( 27 ). Equivalently, if

n > 2

, the operators

e_{i}, K_{i}^{\pm 1}, L_{i}^{\pm 1}, C, f_{i}, i \in I

, preserve

ℳ^{'}

and satisfy the relations ( 21 ), ( 31 )– ( 34 ).

3.10

The proof is completely parallel to the proof of Theorem 2.12 . In effect, the relation ( 32 ) for

i \neq j

follows from the transversality statement absolutely similar to Lemma 2.14 . More precisely, the argument of [5] (Lemma 3.3), reduces the required smoothness to that proved in Lemma 2.14 .

The relation ( 32 ) for

j = i

follows from Lemma 2.24 by the argument of 2.25 . Having established the relations ( 32 ) on the whole of

ℳ

, we see by induction in

\underset{̲}{d}

that

ℳ^{'}

is stable under the operators

f_{i}, i \in I

Now the size of

ℳ^{'}

is not bigger than the size of the universal Verma module over

U

. So the proof of the Serre relations is completed as in 2.27 . The theorem is proved.

3.11

We will write down a geometric expression for the Shapovalov form on the universal Verma module

ℳ^{'}

over

U

. Evidently, the different weight spaces of

ℳ^{'}

are orthogonal with respect to the Shapovalov form. For

i = 0, \dots, n - 1

, we consider the line bundle

D_{i}

P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

whose fiber at the point

(ℱ_{∙})

equals

det R Γ (S, ℱ_{i - n})

. We also define the line bundle

D_{\underset{̲}{d}} : = \otimes_{i = 0}^{n - 1} D_{i}

. The following proposition is proved exactly as 2.30 .

Proposition 3.12. For

G_{1}, G_{2} \in ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}

we have

(G_{1}, G_{2}) = (- 1)^{\sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}} v^{- \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}^{2} + \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i} d_{i + 1} + \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} (n - 2 i) d_{i}} {u^{- d_{0}}}^{n - 1} \prod_{i = 0} t_{i}^{d_{i} - d_{i - 1}} R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, G_{1} \otimes G_{2} \otimes D_{\underset{̲}{d}})

3.13

We define a formal sum in a completion of

ℳ

as follows:

n = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} n_{\underset{̲}{d}} : = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} [O_{\underset{̲}{d}}] = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} [O_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}}]

We also consider the following formal sum:

u = \sum_{\underset{̲}{d}} u_{\underset{̲}{d}}

where

\begin{matrix} u_{\underset{̲}{d}} = v^{2 \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}^{2} - 2 \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i} d_{i + 1} - \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} (n - 2 i + 1) d_{i}} {u^{2 d_{0}}}^{n} \prod_{i = 1} t_{i}^{2 d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i}} [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}] \end{matrix}

(35)

Proposition 3.14. a)

n

is a common eigenvector of the operators

f_{i}

with the eigenvalue

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1}

; b)

u

is a common eigenvector of the operators

e_{i}^{*}

with the eigenvalue

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1}

Proof. a) is proved exactly as Proposition 2.32 (a).

To check b) we argue as in the proof of Proposition 2.32 (b), and reduce it to

\begin{matrix} p_{*} [L_{i}] = t_{i}^{2} u^{- 2 δ_{0, i}} v^{2 d_{i - 1} - 2 d_{i}} (1 - v^{2})^{- 1} [O_{\underset{̲}{d}}] \end{matrix}

(36)

To verify this we recall the setup of 2.23 , and claim that in the notations of loc. cit. we have

\begin{matrix} p_{*} [L_{d_{1}}] = τ_{1}^{2} v^{- 2 d_{1}} [O_{ℨ_{d_{1}, d_{2}}}] \end{matrix}

(37)

In effect, ( 37 ) is deduced from ( 14 ) by the argument of 2.26 . Finally, ( 36 ) is deduced from ( 37 ) by the argument of 2.25 .

The Proposition is proved. □

Corollary 3.15. The Shapovalov scalar product of the Whittaker vectors equals

(n_{\underset{̲}{d}}, u_{\underset{̲}{d}}) = (- 1)^{\sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}} v^{\sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}^{2} - \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i} d_{i - 1} - \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}} u^{d_{0}} \prod_{i = 1}^{n} t_{i}^{d_{i - 1} - d_{i}} R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, O_{\underset{̲}{d}})

Conjecture 3.16. The class of the structure sheaf

[O_{\underset{̲}{d}}]

lies in

ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}

Proposition 3.17. The class of

[D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]

lies in

ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}

Proof. We have

ℳ = ℳ^{'} \oplus ℳ^{''}

where

ℳ^{''}

is the orthogonal complement of

ℳ^{'}

ℳ

with respect to the Shapovalov form. We have to prove that

[D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]

is orthogonal to

ℳ^{''}

. Let

A \in ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{''}

. Suppose

A = e_{i} B

for some

i \in I

and

B \in ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d} - i}^{''}

. Then

(A, [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]) = (B, e_{i}^{*} [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}])

Thus up to (an invertible) monomial in

t, u, v

we have

(A, [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]) = (B, [D_{\underset{̲}{d} - i}^{- 1}])

. Hence, arguing by induction in

\underset{̲}{d}

we may assume that

A \in ℳ_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{''}

is orthogonal to the image of any

e_{i}

. Then

e_{i}^{*} A = 0

or, equivalently,

f_{i} A = 0

for any

i \in I

. Up to (an invertible) monomial in

t, u, v

we have

(A, [D_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{- 1}]) = R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, A)

. Thus we are reduced to the following claim for

\underset{̲}{d} \neq (0, \dots, 0)

\begin{matrix} f_{i} A = 0 \forall i \in I ⟹ R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, A) = 0 . \end{matrix}

(38)

We will derive ( 38 ) from the corresponding claim in the equivariant (complexified) Borel-Moore homology

H_{B M}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

. Let

{Td}_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}}

denote the equivariant Todd class in the completion of the equivariant cohomology. Let also

{ch}_{*}

denote the homological Chern character map from the equivariant

K

-theory to the completion of the equivariant Borel-Moore homology (see e.g. [3] ). We define

a : = {Td}_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}} \cup {ch}_{*} A \in {\hat{H}}_{B M}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

By the bivariant Riemann-Roch Theorem (see e.g. [3] , 5.11.11) we have

{ch}_{*} (f_{i} A) = {ch}_{*} (p_{*} q^{*} A) = p_{*} q^{*} a

where in the RHS

p_{*}

and

q^{*}

refer to the operations in the (localized and completed) equivariant Borel-Moore homology. We also have

R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, A) = \int_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}} a

. Since

{ch}_{*}

is injective, and the operation

? \mapsto {Td}_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}} \cup ?

is invertible, the claim ( 38 ) follows from the corresponding claim in the equivariant Borel-Moore homology

{\hat{H}}_{B M}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

\begin{matrix} f_{i} a = 0 \forall i \in I ⟹ \int_{P_{\underset{̲}{d}}} a = 0 . \end{matrix}

(39)

Here

f_{i} = p_{*} q^{*}

is a part of the action of the affine Lie algebra

{\hat{s l}}_{n}

M : = \oplus_{\underset{̲}{d}} {\hat{\underset{̲}{H}}}_{B M}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

(localized and completed equivariant Borel-Moore homology). The positive generators act as

e_{i} = - q_{*} p^{*}

. This can be checked along the lines of Theorem 3.9 but simpler.

Reversing the argument in the beginning of the proof, we see that ( 39 ) is equivalent to the statement that the fundamental cycle

[P_{\underset{̲}{d}}] \in {\hat{\underset{̲}{H}}}_{B M}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

is contained in the subspace

M^{'}

M

generated by the action of

e_{i}, i \in I

, from

[P_{(0, \dots, 0)}]

Recall the semismall resolution morphism

π_{\underset{̲}{d}} : P_{\underset{̲}{d}} \to P_{\underset{̲}{d}}

to the Uhlenbeck flag space, see [5] . By the Decomposition Theorem of Beilinson-Bernstein-Deligne-Gabber, the direct sum of (localized and completed) equivariant Intersection Homology

^{'} M : = \oplus_{\underset{̲}{d}} {\hat{\underset{̲}{I H}}}^{\tilde{T} \times C^{*} \times C^{*}} (P_{\underset{̲}{d}})

is a direct summand of

M

Now [1] defines the action of

{\hat{s l}}_{n}

^{'} M

, and one can check that the action of [1] is the restriction of the above

{\hat{s l}}_{n}

-action on

M

. It follows that

^{'} M = M^{'}

. Finally, it is proved in [1] that

[P_{\underset{̲}{d}}] \in^{'} M

This completes the proof of the Proposition. □

3.18

We conclude that

u

is the unique Whittaker vector in the completion of the Verma module

ℳ^{'}

with the lowest weight component

u_{(0, \dots, 0)} = [(0, \dots, 0)]

(the common eigenvector of

e_{i}^{*}, i \in I

, with the eigenvalue

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1}

Let

n^{'} \in {\hat{ℳ}}^{'}

be the unique common eigenvector of

f_{i}, i \in I

, with the eigenvalue

(1 - v^{2})^{- 1}

and with the lowest weight component

n_{(0, \dots, 0)}^{'} = [(0, \dots, 0)]

. Then

n^{'}

is the orthogonal projection of

n

onto

{\hat{ℳ}}^{'}

along

{\hat{ℳ}}^{''}

. Hence the Corollary 3.15 yields the following

Corollary 3.19. One has

(n_{\underset{̲}{d}}^{'}, u_{\underset{̲}{d}}) = (- 1)^{\sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}} v^{\sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}^{2} - \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i} d_{i - 1} - \sum_{i = 0}^{n - 1} d_{i}} {u^{d_{0}}}^{n} \prod_{i = 1} t_{i}^{d_{i - 1} - d_{i}} [R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, O_{\underset{̲}{d}})] .

3.20 Some further remarks

The next natural step would be to study the generating function of all

[R Γ (P_{\underset{̲}{d}}, O_{\underset{̲}{d}})]

's in a way similar to subsection 2.34 ; let us denote this function by

J_{aff}

. The cohomology (as opposed to

K

-theory) analogue of this is performed in [1] and [2] . In particular, in [1] it is shown that such a function is an eigen-function of a certain linear differential operator of 2nd order (the “non-stationary analogue” of the quadratic affine Toda hamiltonian). This fact is used in [2] in order to show that certain asymptotic of this function is given by the Seiberg-Witten prepotential of the corresponding classical affine Toda system. This agrees well with the results of [14] about a similar asymptotic of the partition function of N=2 supersymmetric gauge theory in 4 dimensions.

Unfortunately, in the present (

K

-theoretic) case we can't derive any good equation for the the function

J_{aff}

. Thus we do not know how to generalize the results of [2] to this case. One can probably show that the results of [14] on 5d gauge theory imply that a similar asymptotic (when the classical affine Toda lattice is replaced by the classical affine relativistic Toda) is valid for the function

J_{aff}

, but we do not know how to derive it from Corollary 3.19 .

References

A. Braverman, Instanton counting via affine Lie algebras I. Equivariant J-functions of (affine) flag manifolds and Whittaker vectors, to appear in the Proceedings of the Workshop on algebraic structures and moduli spaces, Montréal (2003).
A. Braverman and P. Etingof, Instanton counting via affine Lie algebras II: from Whittaker vectors to the Seiberg-Witten prepotential, math.AG/0409441.
N. Chriss, V. Ginzburg, Representation Theory and Complex Geometry, Birkhäuser, Boston (1997).
P. Etingof, Whittaker functions on quantum groups and $q$ -deformed Toda operators, Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2 194 (1999), 9–25.
M. Finkelberg, D. Gaitsgory, A. Kuznetsov, Uhlenbeck spaces for $A^{2}$ and affine Lie algebra ${\hat{s l}}_{n}$ , Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ. 39 (2003), 721–766.
M. Finkelberg, A. Kuznetsov, Global Intersection Cohomology of Quasimaps' spaces, Intern. Math. Res. Notices 7 (1997), 301–328.
A. Givental, Y.-P. Lee, Quantum K-theory on flag manifolds, finite-difference Toda lattices and quantum groups, Invent. math. 151 (2003), 193–219.
A. Givental and B. Kim, Quantum cohomology of flag manifolds and Toda lattices, Comm. Math. Phys. 168 (1995), 609-641.
B. Kim, Quantum cohomology of flag manifolds $G / P$ and quantum Toda lattices, Annals of Math. 149 (1999), 129-148.
G. Laumon, Un Analogue Global du Cône Nilpotent, Duke Math. Journal 57 (1988), 647–671.
G. Laumon, Faisceaux Automorphes Liés aux Séries d'Eisenstein, Perspect. Math. 10 (1990), 227–281.
H. Nakajima, Quiver varieties and finite dimensional representations of quantum affine algebras, Journal of the AMS 14, no. 1 (2001), 145–238.
T. Nakashima, A. Zelevinsky, Polyhedral Realizations of Crystal Bases for Quantized Kac-Moody Algebras, Advances in Mathematics, 131, No.1 (1997), 253–278.
N. Nekrasov and A. Okounkov, Seiberg-Witten theory and random partitions, to appear in “Unity of Mathematics” (proceedings of a conference dedicated to I. M. Gelfand's 90th birthday, Harvard University, 2003).
C. M. Ringel, Hall algebras and quantum groups, Invent. Math. 101 (1990), 583–592.
A. Sevostyanov, Regular Nilpotent Elements and Quantum Groups, Commun. Math. Phys. 204 (1999), 1–16.
A. Sevostyanov, Quantum deformation of Whittaker modules and the Toda lattice, Duke Math. J. 105 (2000), 211–238.

Address:
A.B.: Dept. of Math., Brown Univ., Providence, RI 02912, Einstein Institute of Mathematics Edmond J. Safra Campus, Givat Ram The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jerusalem, 91904, Israel M.F.: Independent Moscow Univ., 11 Bolshoj Vlasjevskij per., Moscow 119002, Russia E-mail address :
braval@math.brown.edu; fnklberg@mccme.ru

Alexander Braverman and Michael Finkelberg