alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Monomial Immanants of Totally Nonnegative Matrices

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

We prove that every monomial immanant is nonnegative on the totally nonnegative real matrices, establishing a conjecture of Stembridge. We identify the corresponding normalized symmetric function of annular holonomy with a single cluster theta function.

Introduction

A real matrix is totally nonnegative if all its minors are nonnegative, and strictly totally positive if all its minors are positive. For a class function ff on the symmetric group SnS_n, its immanant is the polynomial

Imm⁡f(A)=∑w∈Snf(w)∏i=1nai,w(i),A=(aij)i,j=1n.\operatorname{Imm}_{f}(A)=\sum_{w\in S_n}f(w)\prod_{i=1}^{n}a_{i,w(i)},\qquad A=(a_{ij})_{i,j=1}^{n}.

The determinant and permanent correspond respectively to the sign and trivial characters. The immanants of the irreducible characters χλ\chi^\lambda, indexed by partitions λ\lambda of nn, interpolate between these two examples. Stembridge proved that these irreducible immanants are nonnegative on totally nonnegative matrices; in fact,

Imm⁡χλ(A)≥χλ(1)det⁡A\operatorname{Imm}_{\chi^\lambda}(A)\geq\chi^\lambda(1)\det A

for every such AA [20 Corollaries 3.3–3.4]. His proof combines a factorization of totally nonnegative matrices with positivity in the group algebra of SnS_n.

The Frobenius characteristic identifies class functions with homogeneous symmetric functions of degree nn:

ch⁡(f)=∑ρ⊢nf(ρ)zρpρ,zρ=∏j≥1jmj(ρ)mj(ρ)!.(1)\operatorname{ch}(f)=\sum_{\rho\vdash n}\frac{f(\rho)}{z_\rho}p_\rho,\qquad z_\rho=\prod_{j\geq1}j^{m_j(\rho)}m_j(\rho)! . \tag*{(1)}

Here pj(x)=∑a≥1xajp_j(x)=\sum_{a\geq1}x_a^j is the jjth power sum, pρ=∏ipρip_\rho=\prod_i p_{\rho_i}, mj(ρ)m_j(\rho) is the multiplicity of jj in ρ\rho, and f(ρ)f(\rho) is the common value of ff on that cycle type. We write λ⊢n\lambda\vdash n for a weakly decreasing sequence of positive integers of sum nn, and append zeros when regarding it as an nn-tuple. The characteristic of χλ\chi^\lambda is the Schur function sλs_\lambda.

For a partition λ⊢n\lambda\vdash n, let ϕλ\phi^\lambda be the virtual character determined by

ch⁡(ϕλ)=mλ,\operatorname{ch}(\phi^\lambda)=m_\lambda,

where mλm_\lambda is the sum of the distinct monomials whose exponent sequence is a permutation of λ\lambda, padded with zeros. The polynomial Imm⁡ϕλ\operatorname{Imm}_{\phi^\lambda} is the monomial immanant indexed by $\lambda. The change of basis

sλ=∑μ⊢nKλμmμ,χλ=∑μ⊢nKλμϕμ,s_\lambda=\sum_{\mu\vdash n}K_{\lambda\mu}m_\mu,\qquad\chi^\lambda=\sum_{\mu\vdash n}K_{\lambda\mu}\phi^\mu,

has nonnegative integral Kostka coefficients KλμK_{\lambda\mu}. Thus nonnegativity of the monomial immanants implies nonnegativity of every irreducible immanant. In Some conjectures for immanants, Stembridge formulated this stronger assertion [21 Conjecture 2.1]. We prove it for every partition and every matrix size.

Theorem 1.1. Let n≥1n \ge1 and λ⊢n\lambda\vdash n. For every totally nonnegative real n×nn \times n matrix AA,

Imm⁡ϕλ(A)≥0.\operatorname{Imm}_{\phi^\lambda}(A) \ge0.

Stembridge’s terminology in [20, 21] calls a matrix totally positive when all its minors are nonnegative; this is the class called totally nonnegative here. His formulation also singles out the monomial characters among all class functions. Indeed, let JμJ_\mu be the block diagonal matrix whose blocks are all-one square matrices of orders μ1,μ2,…\mu_1,\mu_2,\ldots. Stembridge proved [21 Proposition 2.3] that

Imm⁡ϕλ(Jμ)=(∏iμi!)δλμ.(2)\operatorname{Imm}_{\phi^\lambda}(J_\mu)=\left(\prod_i\mu_i!\right)\delta_{\lambda\mu}. \tag*{(2)}

Here δλμ\delta_{\lambda\mu} is the Kronecker delta. To see the normalization, only permutations in the Young subgroup Sμ1×Sμ2×⋯S_{\mu_1}\times S_{\mu_2}\times\cdots contribute. Their sum is the order of this subgroup times the scalar product of ϕλ\phi^\lambda with its induced trivial character. Under the Frobenius characteristic the latter character is hμ=∏ihμih_\mu=\prod_i h_{\mu_i}, where hj(x)=∑a1≤⋯≤ajxa1⋯xajh_j(x)=\sum_{a_1\le\cdots\le a_j}x_{a_1}\cdots x_{a_j}. The Hall scalar product is determined by ⟨pρ,pσ⟩=zρδρσ\langle p_\rho,p_\sigma\rangle=z_\rho\delta_{\rho\sigma}; the bases mλm_\lambda and hμh_\mu are dual for this product. Since JμJ_\mu is totally nonnegative, these tests force every class function whose immanant is nonnegative on all totally nonnegative matrices to have nonnegative coefficients in the basis {ϕλ}λ⊢n\{\phi^\lambda\}_{\lambda\vdash n}. The theorem proves that this necessary condition is sufficient.

The conjecture belongs to a group of positivity questions involving Jacobi–Trudi matrices and Hecke algebra characters. For a partition β\beta with at most nn parts, its Jacobi–Trudi matrix is

Hβ=(hβi−i+j)i,j=1n,h0=1,hj=0(j<0).H_\beta=\left(h_{\beta_i-i+j}\right)_{i,j=1}^n,\qquad h_0=1,\qquad h_j=0\quad(j<0).

Goulden and Jackson conjectured that irreducible immanants of these matrices have nonnegative coefficients in the underlying variables [10]. Greene proved this conjecture by studying Young’s seminormal representations [11]. Haiman then proved the stronger Schur positivity of Imm⁡χλ(Hβ)−χλ(1)det⁡Hβ\operatorname{Imm}_{\chi^\lambda}(H_\beta)-\chi^\lambda(1)\det H_\beta [13 Theorem 1.4]; Schur positivity means nonnegative coefficients when the symmetric function is expanded in the Schur basis.

Haiman also introduced Hecke algebra deformations of the monomial characters and conjectured positivity of their values on normalized Kazhdan–Lusztig basis elements [13 Conjecture 2.1]. At q=1q=1, this gives a nonnegative expansion of each monomial immanant in the Kazhdan–Lusztig immanant basis. The latter immanants are nonnegative on totally nonnegative matrices [17 Proposition 2.2], so this specialization implies Stembridge’s conjecture. The graded conjecture additionally asks for positivity in the Hecke parameter qq. These formulations connect the matrix inequality with canonical bases and give stronger coefficient assertions for particular shapes.

Several families were known before the general result. Stembridge proved the conjecture for rectangular partitions and for (2,1n−2)(2,1^{n-2}) [21 Theorems 2.7–2.8]. Clearman, Shelton, and Skandera gave nonnegative expansions in Temperley–Lieb immanants and path-tableau interpretations for partitions with λ1≤2\lambda_1\le2 [2 Theorems 5.6–5.7]. More recently, Dong, Wu, and Gao proved the inequality for every hook (a,1k)(a,1^k), a+k=na+k=n, under the hypothesis that all minors of order at most k+1k+1 are nonnegative [4 Theorem 1.2]. McNulty proved Kazhdan–Lusztig positivity at q=1q=1 for all hooks [14], and separately verified Haiman’s graded conjecture for n≤10n\le10 by exact computation [15].

We prove the theorem by studying the normalized spectral function mλ(eig)/det⁡gm_\lambda(e^{\mathrm{i}g})/\det g on PGL⁡n\operatorname{PGL}_n. Pulling this function back by the holonomy of a marked annulus places it in a cluster Poisson algebra. A finite sequence of mutations reduces its matrix evaluation to a tridiagonal matrix. Its characteristic coefficients are the independent-set polynomials of a path with alternating anchor and bridge vertices.

The identification of monomial symmetric functions evaluated on triangular interval graphs with single theta sections was proved in [16 §5.4, Theorem 5.8]. We use the version of its rotations with one bridge on each level [16 §§5.1–5.2] and establish the comparison with the full annular theta basis. A finite Newton-polytope lemma shows that every extremal exponent of a finite family belongs to a unique theta function. It follows that each summand of the annular spectral function descends to the path lattice. Rotating the bridges through n+1n+1 periods forces every label to be a dominant sum of anchor vectors. A finite bound on bend increments then determines the coefficient of each such label and identifies the spectral function with a single theta function. Theta positivity in the original annular chart and a simultaneous constant term give the immanant inequality.

We use the theta-function construction and positivity theorems of Gross–Hacking–Keel–Kontsevich [12] and Davison–Mandel [3], together with the surface results of Goncharov–Shen [8, 9] and Shen [19]. The finite form of valuative independence needed here is proved in § 5. The annular charts, all-rank word reduction, lattice comparisons, and coefficient extraction are given explicitly. We use N=Z≥0\mathbb{N} = \mathbb{Z}_{\geq0}. For a Laurent polynomial ff, [Xa]f[X^{a}]f denotes the coefficient of the monomial XaX^{a}; the same convention applies to any explicitly named variables.

The Frobenius coefficient identity

If gg is a complex n×nn \times n matrix, a symmetric polynomial in eig⁡g\operatorname{eig} g means its expression in the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial of gg. This convention also applies when gg is not diagonalizable. For an invertible matrix put

Fλ(g)=mλ(eig⁡g)det⁡g.(3)F_{\lambda}(g) = \frac{m_{\lambda}(\operatorname{eig} g)}{\det g}. \tag*{(3)}

The numerator is polynomial in the matrix entries. The denominator is invertible on GLn\mathrm{GL}_{n}, and both numerator and denominator have scalar degree nn. Thus FλF_{\lambda} is a regular conjugation-invariant function on PGLn\mathrm{PGL}_{n}.

Lemma 2.1. Let Z=diag⁡(z1,…,zn)Z = \operatorname{diag}(z_{1}, \ldots, z_{n}). For every n×nn \times n matrix AA,

[z1⋯zn]mλ(eig⁡(ZA))=Imm⁡φλ(A).(4)[z_{1} \cdots z_{n}]m_{\lambda}(\operatorname{eig}(ZA)) = \operatorname{Imm}_{\varphi_{\lambda}}(A). \tag*{(4)}

If AA is invertible, then

Imm⁡φλ(A)=det⁡(A)[z10⋯zn0]Fλ(ZA).(5)\operatorname{Imm}_{\varphi_{\lambda}}(A) = \det(A)[z_{1}^{0} \cdots z_{n}^{0}]F_{\lambda}(ZA). \tag*{(5)}

Proof. The power sum pj(eig⁡(ZA))p_{j}(\operatorname{eig}(ZA)) is tr⁡((ZA)j)\operatorname{tr}((ZA)^{j}). A term of squarefree row degree z1⋯znz_{1} \cdots z_{n} in a product of traces pρ(eig⁡(ZA))p_{\rho}(\operatorname{eig}(ZA)) specifies a permutation of cycle type ρ\rho. Each cycle of length jj has jj choices of starting point in its trace, and the mj(ρ)m_{j}(\rho) traces of that length can be assigned to the cycles in mj(ρ)!m_{j}(\rho)! ways. Therefore

[z1⋯zn]pρ(eig⁡(ZA))=zρ∑w∈Sntype⁡(w)=ρ∏i=1nai,w(i).[z_{1} \cdots z_{n}]p_{\rho}(\operatorname{eig}(ZA)) = z_{\rho}\sum_{\substack{w \in S_{n}\\ \operatorname{type}(w)=\rho}}\prod_{i=1}^{n} a_{i,w(i)}.

Apply (1.1) with f=φλf = \varphi^{\lambda}; the factors zρz_{\rho} cancel. This proves (2.2). For invertible AA, the identity

det⁡(ZA)=(z1⋯zn)det⁡(A)\det(ZA) = (z_{1} \cdots z_{n})\det(A)

then gives (2.3) by division by the indicated row monomial.

:::

It remains to establish positive Laurent coefficients for FλF_\lambda in a chart whose row weights can be read off directly. We assume n≥2n \ge2 until the proof of Theorem 1.1 is completed.

An annular chart

Assume n≥2n \ge2, put r=n−1r = n - 1, and let G=PGL⁡n(C)G = \operatorname{PGL}_n(\mathbb{C}). Let SS be an oriented annulus with one marked point on each boundary component. We use its moduli space XG,S\mathcal{X}_{G,S} of framed local systems: a flag is specified at each marked point, and no boundary pinning is specified. Write B+,B−B^+, B^- for the opposite standard Borel subgroups, H=B+∩B−H = B^+ \cap B^-, and w0w_0 for the longest Weyl group element. Choose a representative w˙0∈G\dot{w}_0 \in G.

The surface chart and its character lattice

Cutting the annulus along an arc between its marked points and transporting the two flags to a common fiber gives the description

(g,F0,F1)/G,(g,F_0,F_1)/G,

where gg is the holonomy around the oriented core. On the locus where F0,F1F_0,F_1 are opposite, normalize them to the standard pair. Their stabilizer is HH, which acts on gg by conjugation. The two boundary genericity conditions say that a standard flag and its image under gg are opposite, for each of the two standard flags. Thus the resulting open part of the moduli space is

Gw0,w0/Ad⁡H,Gw0,w0=B+w˙0B+∩B−w˙0B−.(6)G^{w_0,w_0}/\operatorname{Ad} H,\qquad G^{w_0,w_0}=B^+\dot{w}_0B^+\cap B^-\dot{w}_0B^-. \tag*{(6)}

The double-word coordinates below parametrize a dense seed torus in this quotient.

We recall how the surface cluster coordinates restrict to this chart. For a root i∈{1,…,r}i \in\{1,\ldots,r\} put

Ei=I+ei,i+1,Fi=I+ei+1,i,Hi(t)=diag⁡(t,…,t,1,…,1).E_i=I+e_{i,i+1},\qquad F_i=I+e_{i+1,i},\qquad H_i(t)=\operatorname{diag}(t,\ldots,t,1,\ldots,1).

The matrix units are denoted by eije_{ij}; the displayed matrices represent elements of GG. A signed word uses EiE_i for the letter ii and FiF_i for the letter −i-i. Its coordinates are attached to intervals between successive occurrences of each root, with an additional interval at each end. Evaluation inserts HiH_i with the corresponding coordinate in each root-ii interval. Since HiH_i commutes with root factors of every other root, its position within that interval is immaterial. These are the double-word coordinates of [5, 9].

The compatibility with surface gluing includes an orientation convention which we shall need. If p,qp,q are the boundary-oriented pinnings of the cut rectangle and q∗q^* is the opposite pinning obtained by reversing the boundary orientation, its transport is defined by q∗=gpq^*=gp in [9 Theorem 5.3, (198)]. Consequently, for g=UhLg=UhL with UU upper unipotent, h∈Hh\in H, and LL lower unipotent, the four flags in cyclic order are

(B+,B−,gB−,gB+),gB−=UB−.(B^+,B^-,gB^-,gB^+),\qquad gB^-=UB^-.

The two triangles cut out by the diagonal have the one-sign word coordinates. Amalgamating their diagonal coordinates multiplies matching coordinates and adds the exchange forms, giving the double-word product gg; see [9 Theorems 5.3–5.4 and §13.1]. Gluing the remaining sides identifies their pinnings up to HH, giving precisely (3.1). In particular, the holonomy in this convention is gg itself. The root label at the right endpoint of a word is i∗=n−ii^*=n-i; the boundary gluing reverses labels by the same involution [9 §§13.1.2–13.1.3, (503)–(506)]. It therefore joins the two endpoints of the same word-root ii.

After this gluing, the two extremal root-ii coordinates are replaced by their product; all internal coordinates remain. These are coordinates on an integral torus, as follows directly from the seam action. Its weights on the two extremal coordinates are αi,−αi\alpha_i,-\alpha_i, where αi(diag⁡(h1,…,hn))=\alpha_i(\operatorname{diag}(h_1,\ldots,h_n))= hi/hi+1h_i/h_{i+1}. The simple roots form a Z\mathbb{Z}-basis of X∗(H)X^*(H) because GG is adjoint. An invariant character has equal exponents at the two extremities of each root. Hence the endpoint products, together with the internal coordinates, form a basis of the invariant character lattice. In the resulting cyclic word there is one coordinate for each interval between successive occurrences of a root, including the interval across the cut. All these coordinates are mutable in the unpinned surface seed: the frozen coordinates on the two original boundary edges are deleted [9 §13, opening paragraphs]. Each of the two triangles has n(n−1)/2−rn(n-1)/2-r interior coordinates, and the diagonal and the glued seam each have rr coordinates. Thus the full seed has n(n−1)=r(r+1)n(n-1)=r(r+1) mutable coordinates.

Positive matrix parameters

For prescribed reduced expressions of w0w_0 in the upper and lower blocks, every strictly totally positive real matrix has a factorization

A=U(u)diag⁡(t1,…,tn)L(ℓ),ua,ℓb,tj>0,(7)A=U(\mathbf{u})\operatorname{diag}(t_1,\ldots,t_n)L(\boldsymbol{\ell}),\qquad u_a,\ell_b,t_j>0, \tag*{(7)}

where the elementary factors in U,LU,L occur in the prescribed orders [7 Theorem 23]. The cyclic coordinates of this factorization are obtained from the identities

I+uei,i+1=Hi(u)EiHi(u−1),I+ℓei+1,i=Hi(ℓ−1)FiHi(ℓ),I+u e_{i,i+1}=H_i(u)E_iH_i(u^{-1}),\qquad I+\ell e_{i+1,i}=H_i(\ell^{-1})F_iH_i(\ell),

and diag⁡(t1,…,tn)\operatorname{diag}(t_1,\ldots,t_n) represents ∏iHi(ti/ti+1)\prod_i H_i(t_i/t_{i+1}) in GG. Collecting the Cartan factors of root ii in (7) gives, in cyclic order,

unextuprevious,ti/ti+1ulastℓfirst,ℓpreviousℓnext,oi=ℓlastufirst.(8)\frac{u_{\mathrm{next}}}{u_{\mathrm{previous}}},\qquad \frac{t_i/t_{i+1}}{u_{\mathrm{last}}\ell_{\mathrm{first}}},\qquad \frac{\ell_{\mathrm{previous}}}{\ell_{\mathrm{next}}},\qquad o_i=\ell_{\mathrm{last}}u_{\mathrm{first}}. \tag*{(8)}

The first and third expressions are taken over successive occurrences in the corresponding sign block. The initial factor Hi(ufirst)H_i(u_{\mathrm{first}}) and the final factor Hi(ℓlast)H_i(\ell_{\mathrm{last}}) combine across the cyclic cut to give oio_i. Thus every source coordinate is positive. We call oio_i the outer coordinate of root ii; the remaining coordinates are internal.

Reduction to a path

We next make the holonomy depend on 2r2r coordinates of a mutated annular seed. The other coordinates will remain mutable coordinates of the full seed. The reduction is a version of the cyclic word construction in [18 §§5.4–5.6]; we give the word order and the local identities that produce the path needed here.

Local word transformations

For a seed basis (ev)(e_v) write Buv=Ω(eu,ev)B_{uv}=\Omega(e_u,e_v). Our convention for XX-mutation at kk is

Xk′=Xk−1,Xv′=Xv(1+Xk−sgn⁡Bvk)−Bvk(v≠k).(9)X'_k=X_k^{-1},\qquad X'_v=X_v\left(1+X_k^{-\operatorname{sgn} B_{vk}}\right)^{-B_{vk}}\quad(v\ne k). \tag*{(9)}

The exchange matrix is mutated by changing the signs in row and column kk and, for u,v≠ku,v\ne k, by

Buv′=Buv+[Buk]+[Bkv]+−[−Buk]+[−Bkv]+,[a]+=max⁡(a,0).B'_{uv}=B_{uv}+[B_{uk}]_+[B_{kv}]_+-[-B_{uk}]_+[-B_{kv}]_+,\qquad[a]_+=\max(a,0).

The word seed is obtained by adding elementary tile forms. For a positive root-ii tile, let L,RL,R be its two root-ii endpoints, and let jj denote the interval of a neighboring root through the tile. Its nonzero entries, up to skew-symmetry, are

BL,R=−1,BL,j=12,BR,j=−12.(10)B_{L,R}=-1,\qquad B_{L,j}=\frac{1}{2},\qquad B_{R,j}=-\frac{1}{2}. \tag*{(10)}

A negative tile has the opposite form. This is the elementary word form of [9 (416)]. The same rule defines its amalgamation on a cyclic word. For two cyclic intervals of neighboring roots, the number of interval endpoints contributing to their pairing is even. Their half-integral tile contributions therefore sum to an integer.

We shall use commutations, braids, mixed swaps, and merges. Opposite signs of distinct roots commute, as do equal signs of nonadjacent roots. These are just commutations of the corresponding elementary matrices. The remaining transformations are single mutations, as the following identities show.

First, with c=x/(1+x)c=x/(1+x), a merge is given by

EiHi(x)Ei=Hi(1+x)EiHi(c),FiHi(x)Fi=Hi(c)FiHi(1+x).(11)\begin{aligned} E_iH_i(x)E_i &= H_i(1+x)E_iH_i(c),\\ F_iH_i(x)F_i &= H_i(c)F_iH_i(1+x). \tag*{(11)} \end{aligned}

The middle column has entries (−1,+1)(-1,+1) at the two exterior root-ii intervals in the positive case, and the opposite entries in the negative case. Formula (9) gives the two Cartan factors on the right of (11). The mutated middle coordinate is x−1x^{-1} and does not occur in the shorter product.

For a braid with ∣i−j∣=1|i-j|=1, set

a′=a(1+x),d′=dx1+x,b′=bx1+x,c′=c(1+x).a'=a(1+x),\qquad d'=\frac{dx}{1+x},\qquad b'=\frac{bx}{1+x},\qquad c'=c(1+x).

Then

Hi(a)Hj(b)EiHi(x)EjHj(c)EiHi(d)=Hi(a′)Hj(b′)EjHj(x−1)EiHi(d′)EjHj(c′).(12)\begin{aligned} H_i(a)H_j(b)E_iH_i(x)E_jH_j(c)E_iH_i(d) ={}&H_i(a')H_j(b')E_jH_j(x^{-1})E_iH_i(d')E_jH_j(c'). \tag*{(12)} \end{aligned}

The mutating column on (iL,iR,jL,jR)(i_L,i_R,j_L,j_R) is (−1,+1,+1,−1)(-1,+1,+1,-1). Replacing the EE’s by FF’s negates this column; the same identity holds with

a′=ax1+x,d′=d(1+x),b′=b(1+x),c′=cx1+x.a'=\frac{ax}{1+x},\qquad d'=d(1+x),\qquad b'=b(1+x),\qquad c'=\frac{cx}{1+x}.

To check both identities, factor out Hi(a)Hj(b)H_i(a)H_j(b) on the left and Hi(d)Hj(c)H_i(d)H_j(c) on the right. The two positive products have the common 3×33\times3 blocks

(xx+11011001)(j=i+1),(xxx0xx+1001)(j=i−1).\begin{pmatrix} x & x+1 & 1\\ 0 & 1 & 1\\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \quad(j=i+1),\qquad \begin{pmatrix} x & x & x\\ 0 & x & x+1\\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \quad(j=i-1).

The negative products give the transposes of these blocks. Above the affected block the common diagonal factor is xx, and below it the common factor is 11.

Finally, define H0(t)=IH_0(t)=I and Hn(t)=tIH_n(t)=tI. The two mixed identities, valid as identities of GL⁡n\operatorname{GL}_n matrices, are

\begin{aligned} E_iH_i(x)F_i&=H_{i-1}(c)H_i(1+x)F_iH_i(x^{-1})E_iH_i(1+x)H_{i+1}(c),\\ F_iH_i(x)E_i&=H_{i-1}(1+x)H_i(c)E_iH_i(x^{-1})F_iH_i(c)H_{i+1}(1+x), \end{aligned} \qquad c=\frac{x}{1+x}. \tag*{(13)}\end{aligned}

Their affected 2×22\times2 blocks are respectively

(x+1111),(xxxx+1).\begin{pmatrix} x+1 & 1\\ 1 & 1 \end{pmatrix}, \qquad \begin{pmatrix} x & x\\ x & x+1 \end{pmatrix}.

Above the block both sides have diagonal factor xx, since c2(1+x)2/x=xc^2(1+x)^2/x=x, and below it both have factor 11. For EiFi↦FiEiE_iF_i\mapsto F_iE_i, the middle column is (−1,−1)(-1,-1) on the exterior root-ii intervals and +1+1 on each neighboring-root interval. The reverse move negates this column. Thus (13) gives precisely (9). When i=ri=r, the factor HnH_n is scalar and is omitted in GG. The function FλF_\lambda is invariant under this scalar factor.

The exchange forms can be checked on the same local intervals. Write bu=Bukb_u = B_{uk} for the displayed mutating column. Before cyclic gluing its nonzero entries are 11 or −1-1, and for u,v≠ku,v \ne k the change is

Buv′−Buv={1,bu=1, bv=−1,−1,bu=−1, bv=1,0,otherwise.B'_{uv}-B_{uv}= \begin{cases} 1, & b_u=1,\ b_v=-1,\\ -1, & b_u=-1,\ b_v=1,\\ 0, & \text{otherwise}. \end{cases}

For a positive merge this changes the pairing of the two exterior root-ii intervals by −1-1, giving a single positive tile. For a positive braid, in the order (iL,iR,jL,jR)(i_L,i_R,j_L,j_R), the changed upper-triangular entries are −1,−1,+1,+1-1,-1,+1,+1 on (iL,iR),(iL,jL),(iR,jR),(jL,jR)(i_L,i_R),(i_L,j_L),(i_R,j_R),(j_L,j_R), respectively. For a mixed swap the change is −1-1 from each exterior root-ii interval to each neighboring-root interval. Negating a local column negates these changes. Together with the sign reversal of the mutating row and column, these are the sums of the new tiles in (10). Entries outside the column’s support are unchanged. At a merge the shorter word uses the principal submatrix on the remaining intervals.

Cyclic gluing and retained coordinates

The local transformations descend to cyclic words by the following elementary amalgamation observation. Replace coordinates in an identified fiber by their product and exchange entries by their sums. Mutation at a singleton fiber commutes with this operation provided that the entries from each other fiber to the mutating vertex have one weak sign. For the coordinates, multiply the factors in (9). For the exchange matrix, use [∑bj]+=∑[bj]+[\sum b_j]_+ = \sum[b_j]_+ for numbers of one weak sign in the displayed mutation formula.

In all the words below, each root occurs with each sign. For a same-sign braid or merge, an occurrence of the opposite sign lies outside the local patch. It separates the two exterior intervals of that root. In a braid this holds for both roots, so exterior entries of opposite signs are not identified. In a mixed swap, the two exterior root-ii intervals can coincide, but their entries have the same sign; the resulting entry is 22 or −2-2. The mutating interval is a singleton. The amalgamation observation therefore applies to every local transformation. Changing the cut of a cyclic word replaces a product ABAB by BA=A−1(AB)ABA=A^{-1}(AB)A and preserves its holonomy class.

To keep track of the full seed, call an interval active if it occurs in the current word evaluation. Initially all intervals are active. At a merge, perform the mutation in the full seed and then mark its middle interval inactive. Its coordinate still belongs to the full mutable seed. Inductively, the active principal submatrix is the current word matrix and the holonomy class depends only on active coordinates. Indeed, a later mutation at an active vertex updates active coordinates using only that coordinate and the active principal submatrix; matrix mutation restricts to the same submatrix. The inactive coordinates and all mixed entries are simultaneously updated by the full mutation. This proves the induction statement at every stage.

The word reduction

For integers a,ba,b write [a∣b]=(a,a−1,…,b)[a\mid b]=(a,a-1,\ldots,b), with the empty word understood when a<ba<b, and put

Sb=[r↓b],Wr=S1S2⋯Sr,Cr=(1,…,r),ρ(i)=r+1−i.S_b=[r\downarrow b],\qquad W_r=S_1S_2\cdots S_r,\qquad C_r=(1,\ldots,r),\qquad\rho(i)=r+1-i.

Both WrW_r and ρ(Wr)\rho(W_r) are reduced words for w0w_0. We choose the source word

D0=(ρ(Wr),−Wr).(14)D_0=(\rho(W_r),-W_r). \tag*{(14)}

where the minus sign changes each letter without reversing its order. Formula (7) applies to this prescribed source.

Lemma 4.1. There is a finite sequence of mutations of the full annular seed (4.6) for which the active cyclic word is

ErEr−1⋯E1F1F2⋯Fr.(15)E_rE_{r-1}\cdots E_1F_1F_2\cdots F_r. \tag*{(15)}

The holonomy conjugacy class is given by its cyclic evaluation. The full seed has r(r+1)r(r+1) mutable coordinates, of which 2r2r are active at the endpoint.

Proof. First consider (b,Wr)(\mathbf{b},W_r), where b\mathbf{b} is any all-negative word containing every root. We reduce its positive block to CrC_r, restoring the order of b\mathbf{b} after each step. The intermediate positive words are

Tj,k=(1,…,j)[r−k↓j+1]Sj+2⋯Sr,0≤j≤r−1,0≤k≤r−j−1.T_{j,k}=(1,\ldots,j)[r-k\downarrow j+1]S_{j+2}\cdots S_r,\qquad0\le j\le r-1,\qquad0\le k\le r-j-1.

Here T0,0=WrT_{0,0}=W_r, Tj,r−j−1=Tj+1,0T_{j,r-j-1}=T_{j+1,0} for j<r−1j<r-1, and Tr−1,0=CrT_{r-1,0}=C_r. Suppose k≤r−j−2k\le r-j-2 and set a=r−ka=r-k. Move the first displayed letter aa to the left through 1,…,j1,\ldots,j, which is possible because a≥j+2a\ge j+2. Move it through b\mathbf{b} by opposite-sign commutations and mixed equal-root swaps. Rotate this initial letter through the cut to the end of the cyclic word, and commute it left through Sa+2,…,SrS_{a+2},\ldots,S_r. It remains to perform the absorption

SaSa+1a⟶SaSa+1.(16)S_aS_{a+1}a\longrightarrow S_aS_{a+1}. \tag*{(16)}

This absorption follows by induction on r−ar-a. For a=ra=r it is the merge rr⟶rrr\longrightarrow r. For a<ra<r, commutations and a single braid give

SaSa+1a=Sa+1aSa+2(a+1)a⟷Sa+1Sa+2a(a+1)a⟷Sa+1Sa+2(a+1)a(a+1).\begin{aligned} S_aS_{a+1}a&=S_{a+1}aS_{a+2}(a+1)a\\ &\longleftrightarrow S_{a+1}S_{a+2}a(a+1)a\\ &\longleftrightarrow S_{a+1}S_{a+2}(a+1)a(a+1). \end{aligned}

Apply the induction hypothesis to the initial Sa+1Sa+2(a+1)S_{a+1}S_{a+2}(a+1), then commute aa back through Sa+2S_{a+2}. The result is SaSa+1S_aS_{a+1}. The whole step has therefore changed (b,Tj,k)(\mathbf{b},T_{j,k}) into (b,Tj,k+1)(\mathbf{b},T_{j,k+1}). The displayed finite set of indices proves termination at (b,Cr)(\mathbf{b},C_r).

Apply the Dynkin-reflected version of this procedure to (−Wr,ρ(Wr))(-W_r,\rho(W_r)), obtained from (4.6) by a change of cut. This gives (−Wr,(r,…,1))(-W_r,(r,\ldots,1)). Change the cut again and use the sign-reversed versions of the same local identities to reduce the negative block. The result is (r,…,1,−1,…,−r)(r,\ldots,1,-1,\ldots,-r), as required.

For clarity, the procedure also determines the mutation vertices. Attach to each signed letter the label of the interval of its root immediately following it. A commutation interchanges the two letter-label pairs. The other update rules are

(a,u),(−a,v)⟼(−a,u),(a,v),mixed swap,(a,u),(b,v),(a,w)⟼(b,u),(a,w),(b,v),braid,(a,u),(a,v)⟼(a,v),merge.\begin{aligned} (a,u),(-a,v)&\longmapsto(-a,u),(a,v),\qquad\text{mixed swap},\\ (a,u),(b,v),(a,w)&\longmapsto(b,u),(a,w),(b,v),\qquad\text{braid},\\ (a,u),(a,v)&\longmapsto(a,v),\qquad\text{merge}. \end{aligned}

In each row the mutated interval is uu; in the last row it is retained as an inactive mutable coordinate. These rules are exactly the coordinate placements in (4.3)–(4.5). Each root retains at least one occurrence of each sign throughout, so the cyclic amalgamation conditions continue to hold. The preceding full-seed induction lifts every step to an annular mutation. Finally, the initial word has r(r+1)r(r+1) letters and the terminal word has 2r2r; a cyclic word has one interval per letter. All initial coordinates remain in the full seed.

The terminal determinant and its lattice {#sec:4.4}

Denote the active interval following EiE_i by xix_i and the one following FiF_i by yiy_i. Thus the terminal product is

ErHr(xr)⋯E1H1(x1)F1H1(y1)⋯FrHr(yr).E_rH_r(x_r)\cdots E_1H_1(x_1)F_1H_1(y_1)\cdots F_rH_r(y_r).

Set

dn=1,di=xiyidi+1,bi=yidi+1(i<n).(17)d_n = 1,\qquad d_i = x_i y_i d_{i+1},\qquad b_i = y_i d_{i+1}\qquad(i<n). \tag*{(17)}

Moving the Cartan factors to the middle gives the matrix

M=(I+∑i=1rei,i+1)diag⁡(d1,…,dn)(I+∑i=1ryiei+1,i).(18)M = \left(I+\sum_{i=1}^{r} e_{i,i+1}\right)\operatorname{diag}(d_1,\ldots,d_n)\left(I+\sum_{i=1}^{r} y_i e_{i+1,i}\right). \tag*{(18)}

The descending upper order and ascending lower order make the outer factors bidiagonal. In particular, MM is tridiagonal, with diagonal entries di+bid_i+b_i for i<ni<n and dnd_n for i=ni=n, and

Mi,i+1Mi+1,i=bidi+1.M_{i,i+1}M_{i+1,i}=b_i d_{i+1}.

For a weighted graph PP, let Ek(P)\mathcal{E}_k(P) be the sum of the weight products of its independent sets of size kk.

Lemma 4.2. Let PP be the path with successive weights d1,b1,d2,b2,…,br,dnd_1,b_1,d_2,b_2,\ldots,b_r,d_n. Then

det⁡(I+tM)=∑k=0nEk(P)tk,det⁡M=∏i=1ndi.(19)\det(I+tM)=\sum_{k=0}^{n}\mathcal{E}_k(P)t^k,\qquad\det M=\prod_{i=1}^{n}d_i. \tag*{(19)}

In the active order (x1,y1,…,xr,yr)(x_1,y_1,\ldots,x_r,y_r) the exchange form is

Bj,j+1=2,Bj,j+2=−1,Bj,k=0(k>j+2).(20)B_{j,j+1}=2,\qquad B_{j,j+2}=-1,\qquad B_{j,k}=0\qquad(k>j+2). \tag*{(20)}

Its determinant is n2n^2.

Proof. Let Ii(t)I_i(t) be the independent-set generating polynomial of the tail path starting at did_i, and let Ji(t)J_i(t) be that of the tail starting at bib_i, with Jn=In+1=1J_n=I_{n+1}=1. Splitting at the first vertex gives

Ii=Ji+tdiIi+1,Ji=Ii+1+tbiJi+1.I_i=J_i+td_iI_{i+1},\qquad J_i=I_{i+1}+tb_iJ_{i+1}.

Eliminating Ji+1=Ii+1−tdi+1Ii+2J_{i+1}=I_{i+1}-td_{i+1}I_{i+2} yields

Ii=(1+t(di+bi))Ii+1−t2bidi+1Ii+2,In=1+tdn,In+1=1.I_i=(1+t(d_i+b_i))I_{i+1}-t^2b_id_{i+1}I_{i+2},\qquad I_n=1+td_n,\qquad I_{n+1}=1.

The trailing principal minors of I+tMI+tM satisfy the same recurrence and initial conditions. This proves the first equality in (19). The unique independent set of size nn consists of the nn vertices did_i, giving the second equality.

For the exchange form, the positive and negative tiles of root ii each contribute 1 to B(xi,yi)B(x_i,y_i). For consecutive roots, adding their endpoint contributions from (10) gives

(u,v)(xi,xi+1)(yi,yi+1)(yi,xi+1)(xi,yi+1)B(u,v)−1−120\begin{array}{c|cccc} (u,v) & (x_i,x_{i+1}) & (y_i,y_{i+1}) & (y_i,x_{i+1}) & (x_i,y_{i+1})\\ \hline B(u,v) & -1 & -1 & 2 & 0 \end{array}

Nonadjacent roots have zero pairing. This is (20). Let prp_r be its Pfaffian. For r≥2r\ge2, the first row has entries 2, −1-1 in columns 2, 3. Deleting rows and columns 1, 2 leaves the same band matrix of size 2r−22r-2, contributing 2pr−12p_{r-1}. After deleting 1, 3, the first remaining vertex 2 has its sole nonzero entry B2,4=−1B_{2,4}=-1, so that minor has Pfaffian −pr−2-p_{r-2}. The Pfaffian expansion therefore gives

pr=2pr−1−pr−2,p0=1,p1=2.p_r=2p_{r-1}-p_{r-2},\qquad p_0=1,\qquad p_1=2.

Thus pr=r+1=np_r=r+1=n and det⁡B=pr2=n2\det B=p_r^2=n^2.

The ratios of successive path weights are xi=di/bix_i=d_i/b_i and yi=bi/di+1y_i=b_i/d_{i+1}. We reverse the path, so that its forward ratios, in order, are (yr,xr,…,y1,x1)(y_r,x_r,\ldots,y_1,x_1). This is a permutation of the actual active coordinates.

Introduce the free vertex lattice

L=ZD1⊕ZB1⊕ZD2⊕⋯⊕ZBr⊕ZDn.L = \mathbb{Z}D_1 \oplus\mathbb{Z}B_1 \oplus\mathbb{Z}D_2 \oplus\cdots\oplus\mathbb{Z}B_r \oplus\mathbb{Z}D_n.

We call DiD_i the anchor vectors and BiB_i the bridge vectors; their vertex weights are the characters XDiX^{D_i} and XBiX^{B_i}. They homogenize the reversed weights dn+1−i,bn−id_{n+1-i}, b_{n-i}: specializing XD1=1X^{D_1}=1 recovers (4.9). Give every vertex weight one, let L0=ker⁡(wt⁡:L→Z)L_0=\ker(\operatorname{wt}:L\to\mathbb{Z}), and put

c2i−1=Bi−Di,c2i=Di+1−Bi(1≤i<n).(21)c_{2i-1}=B_i-D_i,\qquad c_{2i}=D_{i+1}-B_i \qquad(1\le i<n). \tag*{(21)}

These forward differences form a Z\mathbb{Z}-basis of L0L_0. Together with D1D_1 they form a Z\mathbb{Z}-basis of LL; in this auxiliary vertex seed the gaps are mutable and D1D_1 is frozen. More explicitly, if V1,…,V2n−1V_1,\ldots,V_{2n-1} denote the vertices in the displayed order, then for ∑jaj=0\sum_j a_j=0,

∑j=12n−1ajVj=−∑j=12n−2(∑h=1jah)cj.\sum_{j=1}^{2n-1}a_jV_j=-\sum_{j=1}^{2n-2}\left(\sum_{h=1}^{j}a_h\right)c_j.

In particular, a vector of L0L_0 belongs to ∑jNcj\sum_j\mathbb{N}c_j precisely when all its proper vertex prefix sums are nonpositive.

Define Ω\Omega on LL, extending by skew-symmetry, by Ω(Vj+1,Vj)=1\Omega(V_{j+1},V_j)=1 and zero on nonadjacent vertices. Its restriction to the ordered gaps in (4.13) has first superdiagonal −2-2 and second superdiagonal 11. It therefore agrees with (4.12) after the preceding permutation. The character map

ι(yn−i)=Xc2i−1,ι(xn−i)=Xc2i(22)\iota(y_{n-i})=X^{c_{2i-1}},\qquad\iota(x_{n-i})=X^{c_{2i}} \tag*{(22)}

identifies the actual active character lattice with L0L_0 integrally. The vector

δ=D1+⋯+Dn(23)\delta=D_1+\cdots+D_n \tag*{(23)}

is radical: each bridge pairs with its two neighboring anchors with opposite signs, and the anchors pair trivially with each other. Since the restriction to L0L_0 is nondegenerate, Rδ\mathbb{R}\delta is the entire radical. Since wt⁡(δ)=n\operatorname{wt}(\delta)=n, the sublattice L0+ZδL_0+\mathbb{Z}\delta has index nn in LL. We retain L0L_0 as the active integral lattice.

From now on PP denotes the reversed path with the formal weights XD1,XB1,…,XBr,XDnX^{D_1},X^{B_1},\ldots,X^{B_r},X^{D_n}. Finally, let YY denote its formal spectral alphabet, defined by ek(Y)=Ek(P)e_k(Y)=E_k(P) for 1≤k≤n1\le k\le n, where eke_k is the kkth elementary symmetric polynomial. The map (4.14) satisfies

ι(dn+1−i)=XDi−D1,ι(bn−i)=XBi−D1.\iota(d_{n+1-i})=X^{D_i-D_1},\qquad\iota(b_{n-i})=X^{B_i-D_1}.

Thus the common factor X−D1X^{-D_1} cancels between the degree-nn numerator and denominator of FλF_\lambda. Since En(P)=XδE_n(P)=X^\delta, (4.11) gives

ι(Fλ)=X−δmλ(Y).(24)\iota(F_\lambda)=X^{-\delta}m_\lambda(Y). \tag*{(24)}

Both sides have vertex weight zero, so this is an identity in the active Laurent ring.

Theta functions and finite Newton polytopes

We use the classical theta functions of Gross–Hacking–Keel–Kontsevich [12], with the XX-realization and positivity results of Davison–Mandel [3]. We first specify the realization, since its chamber convention and its coefficient grading will both enter the proof.

The chamber convention

Let MM be the character lattice of a full unpinned seed, with basis e1,…,ede_1,\ldots,e_d and integral skew form Ω\Omega. We write the matrix of the form in this basis also as Ω\Omega, so that Ω(v,w)=vTΩw\Omega(v,w)=v^{\mathsf T}\Omega w. Put

C=∑i=1dZ≥0ei.C=\sum_{i=1}^{d}\mathbb{Z}_{\geq0}e_i.

The positive root degree is recorded by variables y1,…,ydy_1,\ldots,y_d. The monomial belonging to a root q∈Cq\in C is xqyqx^qy^q; in particular, the root map on the character lattice is the identity.

It is useful to allow the form Ω\Omega to be degenerate. For this purpose use the position lattice

M^=M⊕Zd,P^(v)=(v,0),Q^(v)=(ΩTv,v)∈M^∗.(25)\widehat{M}=M\oplus\mathbb{Z}^d,\qquad\widehat{P}(v)=(v,0),\qquad\widehat{Q}(v)=(\Omega^{\mathsf T}v,v)\in\widehat{M}^{*}. \tag*{(25)}

where coordinate bases identify the displayed dual lattices. The initial wall of root eie_i has normal Q^(ei)\widehat{Q}(e_i) and factor 1+xeiyi1+x^{e_i}y_i. Labels and root increments lie in E=M⊕0E=M\oplus0. The second summand of M^\widehat{M} is used for wall positions; the variables yiy_i separately record root degrees. The initial negative chamber is nonempty, since (0,−1)(0,-1) has negative pairing with each initial normal. We always choose an endpoint QQ in this chamber such that

Q∉Hfor every proper rational linear hyperplane H⊂M^R.(26)Q\notin H\quad\text{for every proper rational linear hyperplane }H\subset\widehat{M}_{\mathbb{R}}. \tag*{(26)}

Such points are dense in every nonempty open set.

Here this negative chamber gives the usual seed expression of an XX-theta function. To check this integrally, consider

T(m,a)=(ΩTm−a,m),T−1(u,v)=(v,Ωv−u).(27)T(m,a)=(\Omega^{\mathsf T}m-a,m),\qquad T^{-1}(u,v)=(v,\Omega v-u). \tag*{(27)}

The standard principal AA-datum has root and normal maps

PA(v)=(ΩTv,v),QA(v)=(v,0).P_A(v)=(\Omega^{\mathsf T}v,v),\qquad Q_A(v)=(v,0).

Directly,

TP^=PA,T∗(−QA)=Q^.T\widehat{P}=P_A,\qquad T^{*}(-Q_A)=\widehat{Q}.

Reversing a normal reverses both its crossing orientation and the sign of its pairing in the wall action, so it leaves that action unchanged. Thus our negative chamber corresponds to the positive chamber for the principal AA-datum. Moreover,

T(ν,0)=(ΩTν,ν)T(\nu,0)=(\Omega^{\mathsf T}\nu,\nu)

is precisely the integral embedding which defines the XX-theta functions in [3 §§4.3–4.4 and 4.7.2]. This integral comparison fixes the labels and the chamber convention also for a degenerate full form. The construction in [3 §4.7.2] permits generic endpoints in the full principal position space and identifies its chamber charts with the usual XX-cluster charts.

We recall the properties of positive scattering used below. Its wall supports are rational cones in central hyperplanes, and each joint cone has a rational linear span of codimension at least two. Modulo any fixed positive root degree, only finitely many walls are nontrivial. A broken line is a piecewise linear path Γ:(−∞,0]→M^R\Gamma:(-\infty,0]\to\widehat{M}_{\mathbb{R}}, ending at QQ, whose velocity on a segment with attached exponent m∈Em\in E is −m-m. It has finitely many nontrivial bends. At a joint-free crossing, the next monomial is chosen from the wall action on the preceding monomial. The theta function sums the resulting terminal monomials with their coefficients.

The positive scattering theorem gives a representative in which these coefficients are nonnegative integers. In the chamber just fixed, the principal expression is pointed:

Θν(x,y)=xν∑q∈Caν,qxqyq,aν,q∈Z≥0,aν,0=1.(28)\Theta_{\nu}(x,y)=x^{\nu}\sum_{q\in C}a_{\nu,q}x^qy^q,\qquad a_{\nu,q}\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq0},\qquad a_{\nu,0}=1. \tag*{(28)}

Strong positivity also gives, coefficientwise in the principal completion,

Θkν≤Θνk(k∈Z>0).(29)\Theta_{k\nu} \le\Theta_\nu^k \qquad(k \in\mathbb{Z}_{>0}). \tag*{(29)}

Give xmyqx^m y^q the degree m−q∈Mm-q \in M. Then Θν\Theta_\nu is homogeneous of degree ν\nu, so a product term indexed by ν+μ+r\nu+\mu+r carries the factor yry^r. The positive product expansion is

ΘνΘμ=Θν+μ+∑0≠r∈CαryrΘν+μ+r,αr∈N.\Theta_\nu\Theta_\mu=\Theta_{\nu+\mu}+\sum_{0\ne r\in C}\alpha_r y^r\Theta_{\nu+\mu+r},\qquad\alpha_r\in\mathbb{N}.

Iterating its leading term proves (29). We use the classical specializations of [3 Theorems 3.9–3.10]; their compatibility with the XX-construction follows from [3 Lemma 4.6 and Proposition 4.8].

Finite principal expressions

Suppose that the actual XX-theta function ϑν\vartheta_\nu is a Laurent polynomial in the chosen seed. Then Θν\Theta_\nu in (28) is finite as well. To see this, remove the coefficient monomial yqy^q on the displayed support graph. Distinct qq have distinct character exponents ν+q\nu+q, so this is an injective coefficientwise map to the completion in the cone CC. By the preceding principal comparison, its image is the formal seed expansion of ϑν\vartheta_\nu. Laurentness of the latter therefore forces all but finitely many aν,qa_{\nu,q} to vanish. After this observation one can write

ϑν(x)=Θν(x,1)\vartheta_\nu(x)=\Theta_\nu(x,1)

as an ordinary substitution in a finite polynomial.

For a nonzero Laurent polynomial ff write Newt⁡(f)\operatorname{Newt}(f) for the convex hull of its character exponents, and put

vw⁡(f)=min⁡a∈Supp⁡(f)⟨w,a⟩(w∈MR∗).\operatorname{vw}(f)=\min_{a\in\operatorname{Supp}(f)}\langle w,a\rangle\qquad(w\in M_{\mathbb{R}}^*).

The following finite form of valuative independence will be needed. It is a special case of [1 Theorem 3.10]. We give a proof from positive scattering and (29).

Lemma 5.1. Let νs\nu_s, s∈Ss\in S, be a nonempty finite set of distinct theta labels whose seed expressions ϑνs\vartheta_{\nu_s} are Laurent polynomials. If cs∈C×c_s\in\mathbb{C}^{\times}, then ∑s∈Scsϑνs≠0\sum_{s\in S}c_s\vartheta_{\nu_s}\ne0 and

Newt⁡(∑s∈Scsϑνs)=conv⁡⋃s∈SNewt⁡(ϑνs).(30)\operatorname{Newt}\left(\sum_{s\in S}c_s\vartheta_{\nu_s}\right)=\operatorname{conv}\bigcup_{s\in S}\operatorname{Newt}(\vartheta_{\nu_s}). \tag*{(30)}

Equivalently, for every w∈MR∗w\in M_{\mathbb{R}}^*,

vw⁡(∑s∈Scsϑνs)=min⁡s∈Svw⁡(ϑνs).(31)\operatorname{vw}\left(\sum_{s\in S}c_s\vartheta_{\nu_s}\right)=\min_{s\in S}\operatorname{vw}(\vartheta_{\nu_s}). \tag*{(31)}

Proof. All principal expressions in the statement are finite by the preceding argument. We work at the single endpoint QQ chosen in (26). We extend each covector on MRM_{\mathbb{R}} to M~R\widetilde{M}_{\mathbb{R}} by zero on the auxiliary summand.

Rational broken lines. At a joint-free crossing, combine the wall factors having the same supporting hyperplane. Choose its primitive normal ℓ\ell so that ℓ(m)>0\ell(m)>0 for the incoming exponent mm. If an individual normal has absolute multiplicity bb relative to ℓ\ell, include its factor to the power bb. The resulting positive factor ff, with constant term one, has crossing rule

xm⟼xmfℓ(m).x^m\longmapsto x^m f^{\ell(m)}.

Every exponent in ff lies in ker⁡ℓ\ker\ell. Coefficient degrees are understood throughout. A rational bend is a choice

m′=m+ℓ(m)r,r∈conv⁡QSupp⁡x(f).(32)m'=m+\ell(m)r,\qquad r\in\operatorname{conv}_{\mathbb{Q}}\operatorname{Supp}_x(f). \tag*{(32)}

where Supp⁡x(f)\operatorname{Supp}_{x}(f) is the set of character exponents occurring in ff, and conv⁡Q\operatorname{conv}_{\mathbb{Q}} is the set of their finite rational convex combinations. Thus ℓ(r)=0\ell(r)=0, and the bend is the shear

Tr=I+r⊗ℓ,Tr−1=I−r⊗ℓ.T_r=I+r\otimes\ell,\qquad T_r^{-1}=I-r\otimes\ell.

It fixes its supporting hyperplane pointwise. An ordinary bend is a rational bend, since an exponent of fℓ(m)f^{\ell(m)} is a sum of ℓ(m)\ell(m) exponents of ff.

Consider a rational broken line with initial exponent ν\nu and finitely many nontrivial bends. At each bend choose a finite expression

ri=∑jbijqij,bij∈Q≥0,∑jbij=1,qij∈Supp⁡x(fi).r_i=\sum_j b_{ij}q_{ij},\qquad b_{ij}\in\mathbb{Q}_{\geq0},\qquad\sum_j b_{ij}=1,\qquad q_{ij}\in\operatorname{Supp}_x(f_i).

Choose a positive integer kk clearing all denominators of the slopes and of the numbers ℓi(mi−1)bij\ell_i(m_{i-1})b_{ij}. The positive expansion of fikℓi(mi−1)f_i^{k\ell_i(m_{i-1})} then contains the required increment kℓi(mi−1)rik\ell_i(m_{i-1})r_i. Multiplying all slopes by kk and rescaling time turns the path into an ordinary broken line with initial exponent kνk\nu. If mm was its original terminal exponent, it follows that

km∈Supp⁡(ϑkν)⊆Supp⁡(ϑνk),m∈Newt⁡(ϑν).(33)km\in\operatorname{Supp}(\vartheta_{k\nu})\subseteq\operatorname{Supp}(\vartheta_\nu^k),\qquad m\in\operatorname{Newt}(\vartheta_\nu). \tag*{(33)}

Here (29) first makes Θkν\Theta_{k\nu} finite, because Θνk\Theta_\nu^k is finite. Consequently all the supports used in (33) are finite. Positivity shows that the support of ϑνk\vartheta_\nu^k consists of sums of kk members of Supp⁡(ϑν)\operatorname{Supp}(\vartheta_\nu), which proves the last inclusion.

If fif_i is an infinite product of parallel wall factors, each monomial used in the displayed convex combinations requires only finitely many factors, by local finiteness in each root degree. The remaining factors contribute their constant term. Thus the same denominator-clearing argument applies. In particular, an ordinary line whose terminal exponent minimizes a covector on ϑν\vartheta_\nu also minimizes it among all rational lines with the same initial label and endpoint.

Deformation with a fixed endpoint. Let a minimizing line have successive exponents m0,…,mℓm_0,\ldots,m_\ell and normalized bends rir_i, with

Ti=I+ri⊗ℓi,mi=Timi−1,ℓi(mi−1)>0.T_i=I+r_i\otimes\ell_i,\qquad m_i=T_i m_{i-1},\qquad\ell_i(m_{i-1})>0.

When testing a crossing at which the line is straight, include it in this finite list with ri=0r_i=0. Put

Ai=Tℓ⋯Ti+1,Aℓ=I.A_i=T_\ell\cdots T_{i+1},\qquad A_\ell=I.

Suppose that at crossing jj an admissible rj′r'_j has a smaller pairing than rjr_j with the transported covector Aj∗wA_j^*w. Replace rjr_j by rj(s)=(1−s)rj+srj′r_j(s)=(1-s)r_j+sr'_j, where s>0s>0 is rational, and leave all other normalized bends unchanged. Starting with the same m0m_0, compute the new exponents forward. Starting with the same endpoint, compute the bend positions backward:

zℓ+1(s)=Q,τi(s)=−ℓi(zi+1(s))ℓi(mi(s)),zi(s)=zi+1(s)+τi(s)mi(s)(i=ℓ,…,1).(34)\begin{aligned} z_{\ell+1}(s)&=Q,\\ \tau_i(s)&=-\frac{\ell_i(z_{i+1}(s))}{\ell_i(m_i(s))},\\ z_i(s)&=z_{i+1}(s)+\tau_i(s)m_i(s)\qquad(i=\ell,\ldots,1). \tag*{(34)} \end{aligned}

At s=0s=0 the denominators are nonzero, the segment lengths τi\tau_i are positive, and the specified wall factors contain the bend points in the relative interiors of their supports. For all sufficiently small ss these finitely many conditions persist. Choose beforehand the finitely many factors witnessing the convex combinations for the rir_i and rj′r'_j. Their support conditions persist as well. Extra factors and all unprescribed crossings are traversed using constant terms. The initial geometric ray may move; its exponent remains m0m_0.

It remains to check admissibility for the entire scattering diagram, which can have infinitely many joints. For rational ss, the shears

Ai(s)=Tℓ(s)⋯Ti+1(s)A_i(s)=T_\ell(s)\cdots T_{i+1}(s)

are rational invertible maps. They unfold the spatial segments to one straight line. More precisely, with time zero at the endpoint, on the iith segment

Ai(s)Γs(t)=Q−tmℓ(s).(35)A_i(s)\Gamma_s(t)=Q-tm_\ell(s). \tag*{(35)}

Indeed, all transformed velocities equal −mℓ(s)-m_\ell(s), and the transformed segments join because Ti(s)T_i(s) fixes the iith bend hyperplane pointwise.

If a segment met a joint cone JJ, then

Q∈Ai(s)span⁡R(J)+Rmℓ(s).Q\in A_i(s)\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb R}(J)+\mathbb Rm_\ell(s).

The right side is a proper rational linear subspace of M^R\widehat{M}_{\mathbb R}: span⁡R(J)\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb R}(J) has codimension at least two, and only one direction has been added. This contradicts (26). If a segment lay in a wall hyperplane HH, its direction would satisfy mi(s)∈Hm_i(s)\in H, and hence mℓ(s)=Ai(s)mi(s)∈Ai(s)Hm_\ell(s)=A_i(s)m_i(s)\in A_i(s)H. Equation (35) would then imply Q∈Ai(s)HQ\in A_i(s)H, again a proper rational hyperplane. Thus all crossings are transverse and the perturbed path avoids every joint of the full diagram for every sufficiently small rational ss.

The later shears and the incoming exponent at crossing jj were fixed. Hence the terminal exponent changes by

mℓ(s)−mℓ=sℓj(mj−1)Aj(rj′−rj).m_\ell(s)-m_\ell=s\ell_j(m_{j-1})A_j(r'_j-r_j).

Its pairing with ww is strictly negative, contradicting (33). We have proved that a minimizing line makes a minimizing normalized choice at every crossing, including its straight crossings. Call a line with this property taut.

Backward uniqueness. Choose ww so that its restriction to EE is nonzero on every nonzero rational vector of EE. Every rational invertible shear preserves this property on EE. A local minimum of a transported covector on conv⁡QSupp⁡x(f)\operatorname{conv}_{\mathbb Q}\operatorname{Supp}_x(f), when attained, is therefore attained at a unique point r∗r_*. For a taut line, the outgoing exponent mm and the outgoing transported covector determine the preceding exponent:

min=m−ℓ(m)r∗.m_{\mathrm{in}}=m-\ell(m)r_*.

The normal component is unchanged by the bend, so its positive value ℓ(m)\ell(m) is known. The shear I+r∗⊗ℓI+r_*\otimes\ell, and hence the preceding transported covector, are known as well.

Consequently two taut lines having the same endpoint and terminal exponent must have the same initial label. For a precise backward comparison, take the finite union of their actual nontrivial bends. Starting from their common terminal segment, take the latest remaining bend. At this crossing both lines are taut, even if one of them was originally straight there. The preceding formula forces the same incoming segment for both. Repetition over the finite union proves the assertion. If the common terminal exponent is zero, invertibility of the bend shears forces the initial label to be zero; the constant theta function is handled by the same argument.

The vertices cannot cancel. Let

P=conv⁡⋃s∈SNewt⁡(ϑνs).\mathcal{P}=\operatorname{conv}\bigcup_{s\in S}\operatorname{Newt}(\vartheta_{\nu_s}).

Fix a vertex vv of this finite polytope. There is a nonempty open cone of covectors exposing vv as the unique minimum on P\mathcal{P}. Choose ww in that cone satisfying the genericity used in the preceding paragraph. If vv occurred in two theta functions, choose an ordinary broken line contributing it in each. Both lines minimize ww, and hence are taut. Backward uniqueness would make their initial labels equal. Thus vv belongs to exactly one theta function in the given family. Its coefficient in the proposed sum is a nonzero scalar csc_s times a positive integer, and cannot vanish. Every vertex of P\mathcal{P} survives, while no support exponent of the sum lies outside P\mathcal{P}. This proves (30), including nonvanishing of the sum. Taking minima of linear forms gives (31). □\square

A finite expansion on the active lattice

Let X\mathcal{X} be the framed PGLn\mathrm{PGL}_n-space of the annulus from § 3. All coordinates of a full unpinned seed remain present, including the inactive mutable coordinates produced by Lemma 4.1. We denote by Ocl(X)\mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{cl}}(\mathcal{X}) the intersection of the Laurent rings of all mutation-equivalent seeds.

The full annular expansion

Lemma 6.1. For λ⊢n\lambda\vdash n, the annular holonomy function

Fλ(g)=mλ(eig⁡g)det⁡gF_\lambda(g)=\frac{m_\lambda(\operatorname{eig} g)}{\det g}

belongs to Ocl(X)\mathcal{O}_{\mathrm{cl}}(\mathcal{X}). In every full seed it has an expansion

Fλ=∑s∈Scsϑνsfull,∣S∣<∞,(36)F_\lambda=\sum_{s\in S}c_s\vartheta_{\nu_s}^{\mathrm{full}},\qquad|S|<\infty, \tag*{(36)}

where the labels νs\nu_s are distinct, cs≠0c_s\ne0, and each ϑνsfull\vartheta_{\nu_s}^{\mathrm{full}} is a regular theta function.

Proof. By (2.1), FλF_\lambda is a regular class function on PGLn\mathrm{PGL}_n. Its pullback by holonomy to the space with boundary pinnings is therefore regular.

Shen’s regularity theorem [19 Theorem 1.1 and Definition 2.1] identifies the regular functions on the pinned space with the intersection of the Laurent rings over all its mutation-equivalent seeds. Forgetting the boundary pinnings deletes their frozen coordinates and gives precisely the framed cluster XX-structure [9 Theorem 8.3, §8.2.3, §20.1.3, (704), (708)]. Every mutation word of an unpinned seed lifts to the same word in the pinned seed: the updates of the mutable coordinates and of their principal exchange submatrix do not use the deleted frozen coordinates.

Write xx for the unpinned coordinates and zz for those boundary frozen coordinates in a lifted chart. The pullback of FλF_\lambda is Laurent in x,zx,z and belongs to C(x)\mathbb{C}(x). Algebraic independence gives

C[x±1,z±1]∩C(x)=C[x±1].(37)\mathbb{C}[x^{\pm1},z^{\pm1}]\cap\mathbb{C}(x)=\mathbb{C}[x^{\pm1}]. \tag*{(37)}

This proves Laurentness in every unpinned seed, including seeds obtained by arbitrary mutation words.

The annulus with one marked point on each boundary is an admissible surface in [8 Definition 1.1]. The cluster Donaldson–Thomas transformation of [8 Theorem 1.3] supplies both signs of the initial basis rays in the associated A\mathcal{A} cluster complex. Their positive span is the whole space, so this complex is contained in no proper linear half-space. The full theta-basis criterion [12 Definition 8.27 and Proposition 8.28] therefore applies to the actual unpinned XX-seed. It identifies its upper algebra with the vector space having the regular theta functions as a basis. This is an ordinary vector-space basis, and hence gives the finite expansion (36); see also [8 Theorem 1.4(i)]. The construction uses the character lattice of this seed throughout. □\square

Eliminating the retained directions

At the terminal full seed, write

M=MI⊕MJ,Ω=(BK−KTΩJ).(38)M=M_I\oplus M_J,\qquad\Omega=\begin{pmatrix} B & K \\ -K^{\mathsf T} & \Omega_J \end{pmatrix}. \tag*{(38)}

Here II denotes the active gaps and JJ the retained inactive vertices, and ΩJ\Omega_J is the form on MJM_J. The matrix BB is the active form computed in (20); in particular, det⁡B=n2≠0\det B = n^2 \ne0. The following descent also applies in any full seed satisfying the same hypotheses.

Lemma 6.2. Suppose a nonzero finite linear combination of distinct regular full theta functions depends only on the active variables xIx_I, and the active form BB is nonsingular. Then each summand is a Laurent polynomial in xIx_I alone. Its label lies in MIM_I, and its seed expression equals the theta function of the active datum with that same integral label.

Proof. Let

F=∑s∈Scsϑνsfull,cs≠0.F = \sum_{s \in S} c_s\vartheta^{\mathrm{full}}_{\nu_s}, \qquad c_s \ne0.

The ring intersection (37), now with xI,xJx_I,x_J, makes FF a Laurent polynomial in xIx_I. For every j∈Jj \in J both νej∗(F)\nu_{e_j}^*(F) and ν−ej∗(F)\nu_{-e_j}^*(F) equal zero. Lemma 5.1 therefore makes the corresponding two valuations of each summand nonnegative. Every monomial in every summand has its jjth exponent both nonnegative and nonpositive, and hence equal to zero.

Each principal refinement is finite and has the form (28). Its leading coefficient is one, so (νs)J=0(\nu_s)_J = 0. For every nonzero coefficient in that refinement the character exponent is νs+q\nu_s + q; its retained part is zero as well. Thus qJ=0q_J = 0 for every term. These conclusions hold for each theta function separately.

Now take the continuous quotient of the root-degree completion obtained by setting

yj=0(j∈J).y_j = 0 \qquad(j \in J).

The monoid Z≥0I×0\mathbb{Z}_{\geq0}^I \times0 is a saturated face of the full free positive monoid. Degrees add under Lie brackets and under consecutive bends, so a term with positive retained degree cannot contribute to degree zero in the retained variables. The quotient diagram is therefore the consistent completion with only the active initial roots. Their root and normal maps, before the auxiliary enlargement, are

P0(v)=(v0),Q0(v)=(BTvKTv).(39)P_0(v) = \begin{pmatrix} v \\ 0 \end{pmatrix}, \qquad Q_0(v) = \begin{pmatrix} B^{\mathsf T}v \\ K^{\mathsf T}v \end{pmatrix}. \tag*{(39)}

In particular, the mixed block KK remains in the normals.

Theta functions of this quotient are the retained-degree-zero parts of the full theta functions. This can also be seen directly from broken lines: a line of total retained degree zero has only active nontrivial bends, and deleted walls are crossed using their constant terms. Conversely, a line in the quotient can be regarded in the full diagram in this way. At the fixed endpoint (26), the unfolding argument (35) excludes the additional joints of the full diagram as well. Since each summand was already proved to have only retained degree zero, it equals its quotient theta function.

It remains to identify the latter with the active theta function. The comparison takes place in real position spaces. Without auxiliary directions it is

π(u,z)=u+B−1Kz,u∈(MI)R,z∈(MJ)R.\pi(u,z) = u + B^{-1}Kz, \qquad u \in(M_I)_{\mathbb{R}}, \quad z \in(M_J)_{\mathbb{R}}.

In the enlargement (25), write the extra position as a=(aI,aJ)a = (a_I,a_J) and use

π(u,z,a)=u+B−1(Kz+aI).(40)\pi(u,z,a) = u + B^{-1}(Kz + a_I). \tag*{(40)}

For every active root vv,

⟨Q^((v,0)),(u,z,a)⟩=vT(Bu+Kz+aI)=vTBπ(u,z,a).\left\langle\widehat{Q}((v,0)),(u,z,a)\right\rangle= v^{\mathsf T}(Bu + Kz + a_I) = v^{\mathsf T}B\pi(u,z,a).

Moreover, π\pi fixes the active root directions. The pullback of the active scattering diagram consequently has exactly the initial normals (39), with the auxiliary components included. Its wall Lie brackets are the same, since the pairing of two active roots is vTBwv^{\mathsf T}Bw. Pullback preserves consistency and outgoingness; uniqueness of consistent completion identifies it with the quotient diagram.

A broken line with active initial exponent has only active exponents, so its retained and auxiliary positions z0z_0, a0a_0 are constant. Applying π\pi sends it to an active broken line. The inverse lift is

γ(t)⟼(γ(t)−B−1(Kz0+(a0)I),z0,a0)\gamma(t) \longmapsto\left(\gamma(t)-B^{-1}(Kz_0+(a_0)I),z_0,a_0\right)

The normal identity preserves each crossing and its coefficient, and identifies the negative chambers. A strongly generic endpoint projects to one which is strongly generic in the active position space, because π\pi is a rational surjection. This proves the claimed equality of theta expressions.

Only real positions have been changed. Roots, labels and character exponents remain in the original integral active lattice. Since the retained components of all labels are zero, their distinctness is preserved by the descent. □

Apply Lemma 6.2 to (36). Lemma 4.1 makes FλF_\lambda an active rational function, and Lemma 6.1 gives the required full regularity. Thus every summand in the terminal chart is an active theta Laurent polynomial.

The vertex lattice

We now use the integral identification

ι:MI⟶∼L0\iota:M_I\overset{\sim}{\longrightarrow}L_0

of (22). Recall that LL has basis D1,B1,…,Bn−1,DnD_1,B_1,\ldots,B_{n-1},D_n, that every vertex has weight one, and that

L0=ker⁡(wt⁡),δ=∑i=1nDi,wt⁡(δ)=n.L_0=\ker(\operatorname{wt}),\qquad\delta=\sum_{i=1}^{n}D_i,\qquad\operatorname{wt}(\delta)=n.

The forward gaps c1,…,c2n−2c_1,\ldots,c_{2n-2} form an integral basis of L0L_0. Together with the frozen vector D1D_1 they form an integral basis of LL. We use the vertex seed with these mutable roots and with frozen vector D1D_1.

By (23), δ\delta is in the radical of the vertex form. The active and vertex scattering diagrams compare by the real projection

ρ:LR⟶(L0)R,ρ(z)=z−wt⁡(z)nδ.(41)\rho:L_{\mathbb R}\longrightarrow(L_0)_{\mathbb R},\qquad\rho(z)=z-\frac{\operatorname{wt}(z)}{n}\delta. \tag*{(41)}

Indeed, ρ\rho fixes all root directions cjc_j, and for every such root

Ω(cj,ρ(z))=Ω(cj,z).\Omega(c_j,\rho(z))=\Omega(c_j,z).

The initial walls, their graded wall groups, and their outgoing completions therefore agree under pullback. For a weight-zero label, all exponents of a broken line have weight zero. The entire path has constant position weight, so (41) is just a translation of it in the radical direction. Translation back by the prescribed multiple of δ\delta gives the inverse comparison and preserves all coefficients. Hence the active theta function of a label ν∈L0\nu\in L_0 equals the vertex theta function ϑνL\vartheta^L_\nu.

The projection acts on real positions. The character lattice remains L0L_0, and L0+ZδL_0+\mathbb Z\delta has index nn in LL, since weight identifies L/(L0+Zδ)L/(L_0+\mathbb Z\delta) with Z/nZ\mathbb Z/n\mathbb Z. Radical translation gives the individual identity

XδϑνL=ϑν+δL.(42)X^{\delta}\vartheta_{\nu}^{L}=\vartheta_{\nu+\delta}^{L}. \tag*{(42)}

A broken line Γ(t)\Gamma(t) for ν\nu is changed to Γ(t)−tδ\Gamma(t)-t\delta for ν+δ\nu+\delta. Wall supports are invariant under translation by δ\delta, and all their normal pairings with δ\delta vanish. Consequently the crossings, their times, and their coefficients are unchanged. The terminal exponent increases by δ\delta, proving (42); this is also [3 Proposition 3.18]. All theta expressions are homogeneous for the weight grading, since every root has weight zero.

Let YY denote the spectral variables of the path, so ek(Y)=Ek(P)e_k(Y)=\mathcal{E}_k(P) as in § 4. The homogenized identity (24) is

ι(Fλ)=X−δmλ(Y).\iota(F_\lambda)=X^{-\delta}m_\lambda(Y).

It incorporates the normalization dn=1d_n=1 of the terminal matrix. Multiplying the descended finite expansion by XδX^\delta and using (42) gives

mλ(Y)=∑s∈ScsϑνsL,ms=ι(νs)+δ,wt⁡(ms)=n.(43)m_\lambda(Y)=\sum_{s\in S}c_s\vartheta_{\nu_s}^{L},\qquad m_s=\iota(\nu_s)+\delta,\qquad\operatorname{wt}(m_s)=n. \tag*{(43)}

Here νs\nu_s is identified with its active component, the labels remain distinct, and each summand is a finite Laurent polynomial in the present chart. The shift is made only in the vertex lattice, where δ\delta is radical. The next section identifies all coefficients in this finite expansion.

Rotations and the spectral theta function

We now identify the summands in the finite expansion (43). Throughout this section n≥2n\ge2 and λ⊢n\lambda\vdash n. We use the vertex lattice and its form from § 4. For a graph Γ\Gamma on a vertex basis of LL, write

Ek(Γ)=∑S independent in Γ∣S∣=kX∑v∈Sv.\mathcal{E}_k(\Gamma)=\sum_{\substack{S\ \mathrm{independent\ in}\ \Gamma\\ |S|=k}}X^{\sum_{v\in S}v}.

The notation f(YΓ)f(Y_\Gamma) means substitution of Ek(Γ)\mathcal{E}_k(\Gamma) for eke_k in a symmetric polynomial ff in nn variables. The rotations below have one bridge on each level. They specialize the interval-graph rotations and monomial-section identity of [16 §§5.1–5.2, Theorem 5.8]. We give the finite coefficient argument needed for the annular comparison.

The local rotation

Place DiD_i at time ii and BiB_i at time i+ηii+\eta_i, where the phases η1,…,ηn−1\eta_1,\ldots,\eta_{n-1} are distinct elements of (0,1)(0,1). Join two vertices when the difference of their times has absolute value less than one. The skew form is specified by

Ω(Di,Dj)=0,Ω(Bi,Dj)={1,j=i,−1,j=i+1,0,otherwise,\Omega(D_i,D_j)=0,\qquad \Omega(B_i,D_j)= \begin{cases} 1, & j=i,\\ -1, & j=i+1,\\ 0, & \text{otherwise}, \end{cases}
Ω(Bi+1,Bi)=1ηi>ηi+1,Ω(Bj,Bi)=0(j>i+1).(44)\Omega(B_{i+1},B_i)=\mathbf{1}_{\eta_i>\eta_{i+1}},\qquad \Omega(B_j,B_i)=0\quad(j>i+1). \tag*{(44)}

Here 1C\mathbf{1}_C is 11 when the condition CC holds and 00 otherwise. The reverse pairings follow by skew-symmetry. Initially take ηi=θi\eta_i=\theta_i, where 0<θ1<⋯<θn−1<10<\theta_1<\cdots<\theta_{n-1}<1; the graph is then the path of Lemma 4.2.

Suppose that ηi\eta_i is the smallest phase. Put

pi=Bi−Di,qi=Di+1−Bi,δi=Di+1−Di=pi+qi.(45)p_i=B_i-D_i,\qquad q_i=D_{i+1}-B_i,\qquad\delta_i=D_{i+1}-D_i=p_i+q_i. \tag*{(45)}

Replace this phase by a phase larger than all the others and replace the corresponding vertex vector by

Bi′=Bi+δi.(46)B_i' = B_i + \delta_i. \tag*{(46)}

All other vertex vectors are unchanged. Only the relative order of the phases matters.

Lemma 7.1. The operation (7.3) is mutation at the actual gap pip_i, followed by an interchange of the two gap indices on level ii. If Γ′\Gamma' is the resulting graph, then

Ek(Γ)=Api(Ek(Γ′)),Ap(Xa)=Xa(1+Xp)Ω(p,a).(47)\mathcal{E}_k(\Gamma) = \mathcal{A}_{p_i}\bigl(\mathcal{E}_k(\Gamma')\bigr), \qquad\mathcal{A}_p(X^a) = X^a(1+X^p)^{\Omega(p,a)}. \tag*{(47)}

Consequently the same identity holds with Ek\mathcal{E}_k replaced by f(YΓ)f(Y_\Gamma) for any symmetric polynomial ff. Individual theta labels transform by

Tp(m)=m+[−Ω(p,m)]+p.(48)T_p(m) = m + [-\Omega(p,m)]_+p. \tag*{(48)}

Proof. The smallest-phase condition and (7.1) give

Ω(pi,Di)=1,Ω(pi,Di+1)=−1,Ω(pi,Bi)=1,\Omega(p_i,D_i)=1,\qquad\Omega(p_i,D_{i+1})=-1,\qquad\Omega(p_i,B_i)=1,

and zero pairing with every other vertex. In the integral vertex seed with mutable basis (p1,q1,…,pn−1,qn−1)(p_1,q_1,\ldots,p_{n-1},q_{n-1}) and frozen vector D1D_1, the nonzero entries in the column of pip_i are

Ω(qi,pi)=2,Ω(pi+1,pi)=−1,Ω(qi−1,pi)=−1,Ω(D1,pi)=−1i=1.(49)\Omega(q_i,p_i)=2,\qquad\Omega(p_{i+1},p_i)=-1,\qquad\Omega(q_{i-1},p_i)=-1,\qquad\Omega(D_1,p_i)=-1_{i=1}. \tag*{(49)}

with nonexistent indices omitted. The basis mutation e↦e+[Ω(e,pi)]+pie\mapsto e+[\Omega(e,p_i)]_+p_i for e≠pie\ne p_i, and pi↦−pip_i\mapsto-p_i, therefore changes the two gaps on this level to (−pi,qi+2pi)(-p_i,q_i+2p_i) and fixes the frozen vector. Interchanging these two indices gives

pi′=Bi′−Di=2pi+qi,qi′=Di+1−Bi′=−pi.p_i'=B_i'-D_i=2p_i+q_i,\qquad q_i'=D_{i+1}-B_i'=-p_i.

The other gaps are unchanged. The only changed bridge pairings are Ω(Bi,Bi−1)=1\Omega(B_i,B_{i-1})=1 becoming 00, and Ω(Bi+1,Bi)=0\Omega(B_{i+1},B_i)=0 becoming 11. These are precisely the changes obtained by moving the smallest phase to the largest. Thus (7.1) holds in the new vertex basis. By the full-seed retention in Lemma 4.1, this mutation is also a mutation of the full annular seed; all retained coordinates and mixed exchange entries undergo that full mutation.

To prove the polynomial identity, fix an independent set SS outside {Di,Bi,Di+1}\{D_i,B_i,D_{i+1}\}. Set

a=1Bi−1∉S,b=1Bi+1∉S,a=\mathbf{1}_{B_{i-1}\notin S},\qquad b=\mathbf{1}_{B_{i+1}\notin S},

taking the corresponding value to be 11 at a boundary. Use x=XDix=X^{D_i}, y=XBiy=X^{B_i}, z=XDi+1z=X^{D_{i+1}}, and y′=XBi′=yz/xy'=X^{B_i'}=yz/x. If uu records cardinality, the possible extensions of SS in the old and new triples contribute, respectively,

1+u{a(x+y)+bz}+u2abxz,1+u\{a(x+y)+bz\}+u^2abxz,
1+u{ax+b(z+y′)}+u2abxz.1+u\{ax+b(z+y')\}+u^2abxz.

Indeed, the old bridge has the same outside neighbors as DiD_i, and the new bridge has the same outside neighbors as Di+1D_{i+1}. Both anchors can be chosen together. The automorphism Api\mathcal{A}_{p_i} fixes all outside monomials, and

Api(x)=x+y,Api(z+y′)=z,Api(xz)=xz.\mathcal{A}_{p_i}(x)=x+y,\qquad\mathcal{A}_{p_i}(z+y')=z,\qquad\mathcal{A}_{p_i}(xz)=xz.

It takes the second extension polynomial to the first. Multiplying by X∑v∈SvX^{\sum_{v\in S}v} and summing over SS proves (7.4). Since the elementary symmetric functions generate the symmetric polynomial ring, it proves the assertion for ff as well. Formula (7.5) is the individual XX-theta mutation formula in the negative-chamber normalization of § 5; see [3 Appendix A.3].

We apply these rotations in the repeated order 1,2,…,n−11,2,\ldots,n-1. This is the successive smallest-phase order. One such sequence is called a period. After a period the phase order is the original one, so the original numerical phases may be used again. After kk periods the vertex vectors are

Di,Bi(k)=Bi+kδi.(50)D_i,\qquad B_i^{(k)}=B_i+k\delta_i. \tag*{(50)}

Every intermediate graph contains the anchor–bridge path and has the anchors as its unique independent set of cardinality nn. In particular,

En(Γ)=Xδ,δ=D1+⋯+Dn,(51)\mathcal{E}_n(\Gamma)=X^\delta,\qquad\delta=D_1+\cdots+D_n, \tag*{(51)}

throughout the sequence.

The labels are pure and dominant

Each summand in (6.8) comes from a regular theta function of the full annular variety. After an active mutation its rational expression still involves only the active coordinates: their transformation is autonomous. Its full expression is Laurent by regularity, so the Laurent-ring intersection used in Lemma 6.2 makes it a finite active Laurent polynomial in the new chart. An active basis change has an integral matrix UU with det⁡U=±1\det U=\pm1, and hence det⁡(UTBU)=det⁡B=n2\det(U^{T}BU)=\det B=n^2. Apply that lemma anew in this full seed. It identifies the summand with the active theta having its transported label and retains the full mixed normals in making the comparison.

Index the charts by the number t≥0t\geq0 of individual rotations, with Γ0=P\Gamma_0=P. Write fs(t)f_s^{(t)} for these full theta expressions in a rotated chart, and ιt\iota_t for its integral active-to-vertex embedding. The individual central shift gives finite Laurent polynomials

Ψs(t)=Xδιt(fs(t)),Pt=mλ(YΓt)=∑scsΨs(t).\Psi_s^{(t)}=X^\delta\iota_t(f_s^{(t)}),\qquad P_t=m_\lambda(Y_{\Gamma_t})=\sum_s c_s\Psi_s^{(t)}.

The second equality follows from Lemma 7.1 and (51). For a real covector on LL, extend its pullback along ιt\iota_t to the full seed lattice. Applying Lemma 5.1 there and then making the common affine shift by δ\delta gives

Newt⁡(Pt)=conv⁡{Newt⁡(Ψs(t))}s.(52)\operatorname{Newt}(P_t)=\operatorname{conv}\mathopen{}\left\{\operatorname{Newt}(\Psi_s^{(t)})\right\}_{s}. \tag*{(52)}

Each Ek(Γt)\mathcal{E}_k(\Gamma_t) is an ordinary homogeneous vertex polynomial of degree kk. Hence PtP_t is an ordinary homogeneous vertex polynomial of degree nn. Its support is contained in the simplex

Δn={∑vavv: av≥0, ∑vav=n}.\Delta_n=\left\{\sum_v a_vv:\ a_v\geq0,\ \sum_v a_v=n\right\}.

Equation (7.9) puts the support of each Ψs(t)\Psi_s^{(t)} in this simplex. In particular, its pointed label has nonnegative integral vertex coordinates in every rotated chart.

Lemma 7.2. Every label in (6.8) is of the form

m=∑i=1nμiDi,μ1≥⋯≥μn≥0,∑iμi=n.(53)m=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\mu_iD_i,\qquad\mu_1\geq\cdots\geq\mu_n\geq0,\qquad\sum_i\mu_i=n. \tag*{(53)}

Such a label is fixed by every subsequent rotation.

Proof. Write a current label as m=∑jνjDj+∑jκjBjm=\sum_j\nu_jD_j+\sum_j\kappa_jB_j. At a level-ii rotation put ϵ=[−Ω(pi,m)]+\epsilon=[-\Omega(p_i,m)]_+. Reexpressing (7.5) in the basis with Bi′=Bi+Di+1−DiB_i'=B_i+D_{i+1}-D_i gives

κi′=κi+ϵ,νi′=νi+κi,νi+1′=νi+1−κi′.(54)\kappa_i'=\kappa_i+\epsilon,\qquad\nu_i'=\nu_i+\kappa_i,\qquad\nu_{i+1}'=\nu_{i+1}-\kappa_i'. \tag*{(54)}

All other coordinates stay fixed. Thus each bridge coefficient is nondecreasing. Define

τi=n−∑j≤i(νj+κj).\tau_i = n - \sum_{j \le i}(\nu_j+\kappa_j).

The simplex inclusion gives 0≤τi≤n0 \le\tau_i \le n. An event at another level leaves τi\tau_i unchanged, while an event at level ii decreases it by κi\kappa_i. After n+1n+1 periods,

0≤τiend=τistart−∑a=1n+1κi(a)≤n−(n+1)κi(1).0 \le\tau_i^{\mathrm{end}} = \tau_i^{\mathrm{start}} - \sum_{a=1}^{n+1}\kappa_i^{(a)} \le n-(n+1)\kappa_i^{(1)}.

where κi(a)\kappa_i^{(a)} is the coefficient after the aath event at that level. Nonnegativity and integrality imply κi(1)=0\kappa_i^{(1)}=0. Its initial value and its first increment are therefore both zero. This holds at every level. Consequently all events in the first period fixed the original label, which was already pure. Their inequalities ϵ=0\epsilon=0 say μi−μi+1≥0\mu_i-\mu_{i+1}\ge0, proving (53). Finally,

Ω(pi+aδi,m)=μi−μi+1≥0(a≥0),\Omega(p_i+a\delta_i,m)=\mu_i-\mu_{i+1}\ge0 \qquad(a\ge0),

so (48) fixes mm at every later event. □\square

A finite coefficient extraction

We next recover the scalar coefficient of each pure label. The argument concerns only finitely many root degrees. In the original vertex seed put

c2i−1=pi,c2i=qi,C+=∑j=12n−2Ncj.c_{2i-1}=p_i,\qquad c_{2i}=q_i,\qquad C^+=\sum_{j=1}^{2n-2}\mathbb{N}c_j.

If mm is as in (53), then

h=m−nD1=∑j=12n−2hjcj=∑i=1n−1(∑a>iμa)(c2i−1+c2i),0≤hj≤n.(55)h=m-nD_1=\sum_{j=1}^{2n-2}h_jc_j=\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}\left(\sum_{a>i}\mu_a\right)(c_{2i-1}+c_{2i}),\qquad0\le h_j\le n. \tag*{(55)}

Every pure nonnegative label ν\nu of weight nn also belongs to nD1+C+nD_1+C^+. A broken line from ν\nu with final exponent mm has total increment m−ν∈C+m-\nu\in C^+. Each of its nonzero bend increments therefore belongs to the finite set

Rm={∑j=12n−2ajcj: aj∈N, aj≤hj, ∑jaj>0}.(56)R_m=\left\{\sum_{j=1}^{2n-2}a_jc_j:\ a_j\in\mathbb{N},\ a_j\le h_j,\ \sum_j a_j>0\right\}. \tag*{(56)}

For wall positions it is convenient to use covectors on LL. Set V(u)=Ω(⋅,u)V(u)=\Omega(\mathord{\cdot},u). A wall of degree rr is contained in r⊥r^\perp, and a broken-line segment carrying exponent mm has covector velocity −V(m)-V(m). Since the radical is Rδ\mathbb{R}\delta and the form on (L0)R(L_0)_{\mathbb{R}} is nondegenerate, VV maps LRL_{\mathbb{R}} onto δ⊥\delta^\perp and restricts to an isomorphism (L0)R→δ⊥(L_0)_{\mathbb{R}}\to\delta^\perp. Wall data are constant along the radical in the exponent-position realization. For Q=V(u)Q=V(u), we write ϑν,QL\vartheta^L_{\nu,Q} for the section defined using any lift uu. Two lifts differ by a real multiple of δ\delta; translating each broken line by that difference preserves all coefficients.

Put ℓ=n+1\ell=n+1 and retain the initial phases 0<θ1<⋯<θn−1<10<\theta_1<\cdots<\theta_{n-1}<1. Define a covector by

Qℓ(Di)=n+12−i,Qℓ(pi)=ℓ−θi.(57)Q_\ell(D_i)=\frac{n+1}{2}-i,\qquad Q_\ell(p_i)=\ell-\theta_i. \tag*{(57)}

Then Qℓ(δ)=0Q_\ell(\delta)=0 and Qℓ(δi)=−1Q_\ell(\delta_i)=-1. The final gaps from (50) satisfy

Qℓ(pi+ℓδi)=−θi<0,Qℓ(qi−ℓδi)=−1+θi<0.(58)Q_\ell(p_i+\ell\delta_i)=-\theta_i<0,\qquad Q_\ell(q_i-\ell\delta_i)=-1+\theta_i<0. \tag*{(58)}

Thus this covector lies in the final negative chamber. Every earlier cut has the form pi+aδip_i+a\delta_i, 0≤a<ℓ0\leq a<\ell, and

Qℓ(pi+aδi)=ℓ−θi−a>0,Ω(pi+aδi,m)=μi−μi+1≥0.(59)Q_\ell(p_i+a\delta_i)=\ell-\theta_i-a>0, \qquad \Omega(p_i+a\delta_i,m)=\mu_i-\mu_{i+1}\geq0. \tag*{(59)}

Consequently the whole ray Qℓ+sV(m)Q_\ell+sV(m), s≥0s\geq0, lies on the identity side of every geometric mutation. Indeed, the geometric X\mathcal{X}-map on positions is u↦u+[Ω(u,p)]+pu\mapsto u+[\Omega(u,p)]_+p [3 Appendix A]. Since Ω(u,p)=−Q(p)\Omega(u,p)=-Q(p), it is the identity when Q(p)>0Q(p)>0, and the same applies to the whole lifted ray u+smu+sm.

Lemma 7.3. There is a generic endpoint QQ in the final negative chamber, arbitrarily close to QℓQ_\ell, for which

[Xm]ν,QL=δν,m(60)[X^m]^{\mathcal{L}}_{\nu,Q}=\delta_{\nu,m} \tag*{(60)}

for every pair of pure dominant labels m,νm,\nu of weight $n.

Proof. We first work with the displayed covector QℓQ_\ell. Suppose that a wall with a relevant nonzero degree r∈Rmr\in R_m could meet the ray Qℓ+sV(m)Q_\ell+sV(m). In the mutation of scattering diagrams, [3 Proposition A.1 and Lemma A.2] split each non-cut wall into its two half-space pieces, transport each piece and its wall function by the corresponding linear map, and place each transported wall function in the new positive-root group. We apply this construction to the descended active diagram and pull it back along (41). Choose the representatives recursively by this half-space construction along the rotation sequence, as in [12 Construction 1.30]. Thus every transported wall function belongs to the positive-root group of the current seed. By (7.16), every local map near the hypothetical intersection is the identity, and no mutation cut meets the ray. The actual wall piece and its nonzero degree rr are therefore unchanged there through the sequence. The same degree must belong to the final positive gap cone

Cℓ+=∑i=1n−1(N(pi+ℓδi)+N(qi−ℓδi)).C_\ell^+=\sum_{i=1}^{n-1}\bigl(\mathbb{N}(p_i+\ell\delta_i)+\mathbb{N}(q_i-\ell\delta_i)\bigr).

This statement applies to each transported wall piece. A bend increment that is a positive multiple of its wall direction also belongs to Cℓ+C_\ell^+; we use that actual increment as rr.

Write r=∑jajcj∈Rmr=\sum_j a_jc_j\in R_m and put κi(r)=a2i−1−a2i\kappa_i(r)=a_{2i-1}-a_{2i}. In the original ordered vertex basis the prefix sum of the coefficients of rr through BiB_i is −a2i-a_{2i}. Expressing rr in the final vertex basis (50) changes this prefix sum to

−a2i+ℓκi(r).-a_{2i}+\ell\kappa_i(r).

Every proper vertex prefix of a vector in a forward-gap cone is nonpositive: if the vector is ∑jbj(vj+1−vj)\sum_j b_j(v_{j+1}-v_j) with bj≥0b_j\geq0, its prefix through vjv_j is −bj-b_j. Thus r∈Cℓ+r\in C_\ell^+ gives

−a2i+ℓκi(r)≤0.(61)-a_{2i}+\ell\kappa_i(r)\leq0. \tag*{(61)}

Since a2i≤n<ℓa_{2i}\leq n<\ell and κi(r)\kappa_i(r) is integral, it follows that κi(r)≤0\kappa_i(r)\leq0 for every ii. We obtain

Qℓ(r)=∑i(ℓ−θi)κi(r)−∑ia2i<0,(62)Q_\ell(r)=\sum_i(\ell-\theta_i)\kappa_i(r)-\sum_i a_{2i}<0, \tag*{(62)}
Ω(r,m)=∑iκi(r)(μi−μi+1)≤0.(63)\Omega(r,m)=\sum_i\kappa_i(r)(\mu_i-\mu_{i+1})\leq0. \tag*{(63)}

The first inequality is strict: either some κi(r)<0\kappa_i(r)<0, or all are zero and the nonzero vector rr has some a2i>0a_{2i}>0. These two inequalities imply (Qℓ+sV(m))(r)<0(Q_\ell+sV(m))(r)<0 for every s≥0s\geq0. The supporting hyperplane r⊥r^\perp cannot meet the ray, a contradiction.

We can make the endpoint generic while preserving this argument. There are finitely many earlier cuts, finitely many final gaps, and finitely many nonzero lattice vectors r=∑jajcjr=\sum_j a_jc_j with 0≤aj≤n0\leq a_j\leq n. Preserve the strict inequalities in (7.15), the first line of (7.16), and (7.19) for those vectors belonging to Cℓ+C_\ell^+. They hold on a neighborhood of QℓQ_\ell in δ⊥\delta^\perp. Choose in its inverse image under VV an exponent-position endpoint outside every proper rational linear hyperplane, and let QQ be its image. Such endpoints exist by surjectivity of VV. This perturbation changes only the real endpoint; all labels remain in LL. Inequality (7.20) is independent of the endpoint. The same exclusion of relevant walls consequently holds for Q+sV(m)Q+sV(m), simultaneously for every pure dominant target of weight nn.

Any broken line with final exponent mm has its backward terminal segment on this ray. A last nontrivial bend would have an increment in RmR_m and would lie on one of the excluded walls. There is therefore no nontrivial bend. The straight line has coefficient one and initial label mm, which proves (7.17). If mm is radical, the projected ray is a point and the same inequalities still exclude every possible last bend. Equivalently, a bend of degree rr into mm would have input pairing Ω(r,m−r)=Ω(r,m)=0\Omega(r,m-r)=\Omega(r,m)=0, so its wall fixes that monomial. □

Identification of the spectral function

Lemma 7.4. In the terminal full annular seed, the function FλF_\lambda of (2.1) is the regular theta function

Fλ=ϑμλfull,μλ=∑i=1n(λi−1)Di.(64)F_\lambda=\vartheta^{\mathrm{full}}_{\mu_\lambda},\qquad\mu_\lambda=\sum_{i=1}^{n}(\lambda_i-1)D_i. \tag*{(64)}

Here λ\lambda is padded by zeros, and μλ∈L0\mu_\lambda\in L_0 is interpreted through the actual active gap lattice, with zero component on every retained vertex.

Proof. By Lemma 7.2, the finite vertex expansion consists of pure dominant labels of weight nn. Denote the scalar coefficient of a label mm by cmc_m, setting it to zero if the label is absent. Choose the endpoint QQ of Lemma 7.3. Write ϑν,Qν,L0\vartheta^{\nu,L_0}_{\nu,Q} and ϑν,Qν,L,fin\vartheta^{\nu,L,\mathrm{fin}}_{\nu,Q} for the sections in the original and final scattering diagrams, respectively. The geometric mutation maps fix a lift of QQ and are the identity near it by (7.16), so their induced linear maps on attached monomials are also the identity. The label maps fix every pure dominant label by Lemma 7.2. Individual theta mutation compatibility [3 Proposition A.3, equation (108), and Appendix A.3] therefore gives

ϑν,QL,0=ϑν,QL,fin.\vartheta^{L,0}_{\nu,Q}=\vartheta^{L,\mathrm{fin}}_{\nu,Q}.

The right side is the final negative-chamber expression. There are finitely many summands. Ordinary chart compatibility and Lemma 7.1 therefore identify their sum with the finite polynomial mλ(YFfin)m_\lambda(Y_{F_{\mathrm{fin}}}) in the final vertex variables. It follows from (7.17) that

cm=[Xm]mλ(YFfin).c_m=[X^m]m_\lambda(Y_{F_{\mathrm{fin}}}).

The final vertices form an integral basis of LL, since (7.7) adds only integral combinations of anchors to bridges. A monomial with a positive bridge coordinate cannot equal the pure-anchor monomial XmX^m. We may consequently set all final bridge variables to zero when computing this coefficient. The remaining graph consists of the independent anchors, so, for m=∑iμiDim=\sum_i\mu_iD_i,

cm=[z1μ1⋯znμn]mλ(z1,…,zn).(65)c_m=[z_1^{\mu_1}\cdots z_n^{\mu_n}]m_\lambda(z_1,\ldots,z_n). \tag*{(65)}

Among weakly decreasing nonnegative tuples μ\mu of sum nn, this coefficient is one precisely when μ=λ\mu=\lambda, and is zero otherwise. Thus the finite vertex expansion is the single theta function ϑ∑iλiDiL\vartheta^L_{\sum_i\lambda_iD_i}. Undoing the shift by the radical vector δ\delta and using the individual descent of Lemma 6.2

gives (7.21). Since it is one of the original full theta summands, it is regular on the full annular cluster variety. □

Proof of the immanant inequality

Proof of Theorem 1.1. For n=1n=1 the assertion is a11≥0a_{11} \ge0. Suppose n≥2n \ge2 and first assume that every minor of AA is strictly positive. The prescribed double reduced word in § 4 gives a factorization

A=U(u)diag⁡(t1,…,tn)L(ℓ)A = U(\mathbf{u})\operatorname{diag}(t_1,\ldots,t_n)L(\boldsymbol{\ell})

with every parameter positive [7, 6]. Consequently all the annular source coordinates in (3.3) are positive. By Lemma 7.4 and theta positivity, FλF_\lambda is a finite Laurent polynomial with nonnegative integral coefficients in these coordinates.

For Z=diag⁡(z1,…,zn)Z=\operatorname{diag}(z_1,\ldots,z_n) we have

ZA=(ZUZ−1)(Zdiag⁡(t1,…,tn))L.ZA=(ZUZ^{-1})(Z\operatorname{diag}(t_1,\ldots,t_n))L.

Every upper parameter of root ii is multiplied by zi/zi+1z_i/z_{i+1}, each tit_i by ziz_i, and every lower parameter is unchanged. Substituting in (3.3) shows that all internal gaps are unchanged, whereas the outer gap satisfies

oi⟼(zi/zi+1)oi(1≤i<n).(66)o_i \longmapsto(z_i/z_{i+1})o_i \qquad(1 \le i < n). \tag*{(66)}

The characters zi/zi+1z_i/z_{i+1}, 1≤i<n1 \le i < n, are multiplicatively independent. Hence a source Laurent monomial has zero zz-weight if and only if its exponent on every oio_i is zero. Combining (2.3) and (66), we obtain

Imm⁡φλ(A)=det⁡(A)CT⁡o1,…,on−1Fλ.(67)\operatorname{Imm}_{\varphi_\lambda}(A)=\det(A)\operatorname{CT}_{o_1,\ldots,o_{n-1}}F_\lambda. \tag*{(67)}

The constant term on the right is a Laurent polynomial with nonnegative coefficients in the internal source coordinates. Its value is nonnegative because those coordinates are positive; also det⁡(A)>0\det(A)>0. This proves the desired inequality for strictly totally positive AA.

The strictly totally positive real matrices are dense in the totally nonnegative matrices, including the singular ones [7 Theorem 11 and the paragraph following it]. The immanant is a polynomial in the entries of AA. Passing to the limit proves the inequality for every totally nonnegative AA. □

Zhili College, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Email address: [email protected]

References

  1. [1]M.-W. Cheung, T. Magee, T. Mandel, and G. Muller, Valuative independence and cluster theta reciprocity, preprint (2026), arXiv:2505.09585v2.arxiv.org/abs/2505.09585
  2. [2]S. Clearman, B. Shelton, and M. Skandera, Path tableaux and combinatorial interpretations of immanants for class functions on S_n, Discrete Math. Theor. Comput. Sci. Proc. AO (2011), 233–244; published version.DOI
  3. [3]B. Davison and T. Mandel, Strong positivity for quantum theta bases of quantum cluster algebras, Invent. Math. 226 (2021), 725–843; arXiv:1910.12195v3.
  4. [4]X. Dong, T. Wu, and X. Gao, On the nonnegativity of monomial immanants for hook partitions, preprint (2026), arXiv:2609.36665v1.arxiv.org/abs/2609.36665
  5. [5]V. V. Fock and A. B. Goncharov, Cluster 𝒳-varieties, amalgamation, and Poisson-Lie groups, in Algebraic Geometry and Number Theory, Progr. Math. 253, Birkhäuser, 2006, 27–68; arXiv:math/0508048v2.
  6. [6]S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky, Double Bruhat cells and total positivity, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 12 (1999), 335–380; arXiv:math/9802056.DOI
  7. [7]S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky, Total positivity: tests and parametrizations, Math. Intelligencer 22 (2000), no. 1, 23–33; arXiv:math/9912128.DOI
  8. [8]A. Goncharov and L. Shen, Donaldson–Thomas transformations of moduli spaces of G-local systems, Adv. Math. 327 (2018), 225–348; arXiv:1602.06479v2.arxiv.org/abs/1602.06479
  9. [9]A. Goncharov and L. Shen, Quantum geometry of moduli spaces of local systems and representation theory, arXiv:1904.10491v4 (2024).
  10. [10]I. P. Goulden and D. M. Jackson, Immanants of combinatorial matrices, J. Algebra 148 (1992), no. 2, 305–324, doi:10.1016/0021-8693(92)90196-S.DOI
  11. [11]C. Greene, Proof of a conjecture on immanants of the Jacobi–Trudi matrix, Linear Algebra Appl. 171 (1992), 65–79, doi:10.1016/0024-3795(92)90250-E.DOI
  12. [12]M. Gross, P. Hacking, S. Keel, and M. Kontsevich, Canonical bases for cluster algebras, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 31 (2018), 497–608; arXiv:1411.1394v2.
  13. [13]M. Haiman, Hecke algebra characters and immanant conjectures, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 6 (1993), no. 3, 569–595; author’s version.DOI
  14. [14]K. McNulty, Hook monomial immanants are Kazhdan–Lusztig positive, preprint (2026), arXiv:2610.39021v2.arxiv.org/abs/2610.39021
  15. [15]K. McNulty, Haiman’s conjecture for n ≤ 10: Kazhdan–Lusztig positivity of monomial immanants, preprint (2026), arXiv:2610.41555v2.arxiv.org/abs/2610.41555
  16. [16]OpenAI, Elementary positivity of chromatic quasisymmetric functions, manuscript, September 24, 2026.hub.valency.io/works/W_y4perpsr
  17. [17]B. Rhoades and M. Skandera, Kazhdan–Lusztig immanants and products of matrix minors, J. Algebra 304 (2006), no. 2, 793–811, doi:10.1016/j.jalgebra.2005.07.017.DOI
  18. [18]G. Schrader and A. Shapiro, Continuous tensor categories from quantum groups I: algebraic aspects, preprint (2017), arXiv:1708.08107.arxiv.org/abs/1708.08107
  19. [19]L. Shen, Duals of semisimple Poisson–Lie groups and cluster theory of moduli spaces of G-local systems, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2022, no. 18, 14295–14318; arXiv:2003.07901v2.arxiv.org/abs/2003.07901
  20. [20]J. R. Stembridge, Immanants of totally positive matrices are nonnegative, Bull. London Math. Soc. 23 (1991), no. 5, 422–428, doi:10.1112/blms/23.5.422.DOI
  21. [21]J. R. Stembridge, Some conjectures for immanants, Canad. J. Math. 44 (1992), no. 5, 1079–1099, doi:10.4153/CJM-1992-066-1.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_gftf9qzn
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — published within the last 30 days

Usage

views · 1

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents