alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Disproof of Xi’s conjecture on the representation dimension of idempotent corners

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

We disprove Xi’s conjecture on the representation dimension of idempotent corners. Over every field and for each integer (L\ge3), we construct an algebra of representation dimension (L+1) with a corner of representation dimension (2L-1).

Introduction

Auslander introduced representation dimension in 1971 to measure how far an Artin algebra is from finite representation type [1]. Let CC be a finite-dimensional algebra over a field kk. Write D=Hom⁡k(−,k)D = \operatorname{Hom}_{k}(-,k), let DCDC be the dual of the right regular module, and let add⁡M\operatorname{add} M consist of the direct summands of finite direct sums of copies of MM, up to isomorphism. Write pd⁡C\operatorname{pd}_{C} for projective dimension over CC and gl.dim⁡C\operatorname{gl.dim} C for its supremum over CC-modules. The representation dimension is

repdim⁡C=inf⁡C⊕DC∈add⁡Mgl.dim⁡End⁡C(M).\operatorname{repdim} C = \inf_{C \oplus DC \in\operatorname{add} M} \operatorname{gl.dim} \operatorname{End}_{C}(M).

The infimum ranges over finite-dimensional left CC-modules satisfying the displayed condition, called generator-cogenerators. For Artin algebras the definition uses duality over the commutative Artinian base. Auslander’s criterion says that repdim⁡C≤2\operatorname{repdim} C \le2 exactly when there are finitely many indecomposable finite-dimensional CC-modules up to isomorphism. Xi’s early work gave upper bounds for tensor products and triangular matrix algebras and raised the finiteness question [6, 7]. Iyama proved finiteness for Artin algebras [2]. Rouquier proved that the exterior algebra on an nn-dimensional vector space has representation dimension n+1n+1 for n≥1n \ge1 [5 Theorem 4.1].

Xi traced to Auslander the question of how representation dimension changes on passing to the endomorphism algebra of a finitely generated projective module [8 §7]. If AA is an Artin algebra and e2=e∈Ae^{2}=e \in A, right multiplication identifies eAeeAe with End⁡A(Ae)op⁡\operatorname{End}_{A}(Ae)^{\operatorname{op}}. Indeed, f∈End⁡A(Ae)f \in\operatorname{End}_{A}(Ae) is determined by f(e)∈eAef(e) \in eAe, and f(ae)=af(e)f(ae)=af(e). Duality exchanges left and right generator-cogenerators and reverses their endomorphism rings. Since left and right global dimensions agree for Artin algebras, the comparison for AeAe is the comparison between repdim⁡(eAe)\operatorname{repdim}(eAe) and repdim⁡A\operatorname{repdim} A. Xi proved the inequality when the two adjoints of X↦eXX \mapsto eX, namely Ae⊗eAe−Ae \otimes_{eAe} - and Hom⁡eAe(eA,−)\operatorname{Hom}_{eAe}(eA,-), are isomorphic [8 Theorem 7.2]. He conjectured that for every Artin algebra AA and idempotent ee,

repdim⁡(eAe)≤repdim⁡A.\operatorname{repdim}(eAe) \le\operatorname{repdim} A.

His problem list records the Artin-algebra formulation in January 2003 and a finite-dimensional formulation in December 2012 [9]. He restated the conjecture in [10 p. 40].

When AA is representation-finite, so is eAeeAe. Indeed, every finite eAeeAe-module YY is the image under e(−)e(-) of Ae⊗eAeYAe \otimes_{eAe} Y. By Krull–Schmidt, every indecomposable YY therefore occurs as a summand of the image of one of the finitely many indecomposable AA-modules. For repdim⁡A≤3\operatorname{repdim} A \le3, Zhang and Zhang proved that eAeeAe has finite finitistic dimension, the supremum of the finite projective dimensions of its finitely generated modules [11]. Psaroudakis proved repdim⁡(eAe)≤3\operatorname{repdim}(eAe) \le3 in the same range by studying recollements of module categories [4 Corollary 5.2.5]. The first possible increase thus occurs at ambient representation dimension four.

A finite-dimensional kk-algebra is Frobenius if it admits a linear functional λ\lambda for which the pairing (x,y)↦λ(xy)(x,y) \mapsto\lambda(xy) is nondegenerate.

Theorem 1. For every field kk and integer L≥3L \ge3, there is a Frobenius kk-algebra ALA_L and an idempotent e∈ALe \in A_L with commutative local corner BL=eALeB_L = eA_Le such that

repdim⁡AL=L+1,repdim⁡BL=2L−1.\operatorname{repdim} A_L = L + 1,\qquad\operatorname{repdim} B_L = 2L - 1.

For L=3L = 3, the algebras A3A_3 and B3B_3 have dimensions 132 and 33, respectively.

In the proof kk is an arbitrary field. Algebras are unital and finite-dimensional over kk, and modules are finite-dimensional left modules, except for families over parameter rings. Opposite endomorphism rings make Hom⁡C(M,−)\operatorname{Hom}_{\mathcal{C}}(M,-) left-module-valued.

The difference L−2L - 2 is unbounded. The lower bounds use products of first-order extensions. For the corner, the calculation is made on the projective and injective summands present in the additive closure of every generator-cogenerator. The upper bound for the corner uses radical quotients together with modules defined by coefficient multiplication.

The algebras

For the rest of the paper fix L≥3L \ge3 and put

Σ=k[x0,…,x2L−3]/(x02,…,x2L−32),BL=k1⊕⨁a=1L−1taΣ⊆Σ[t]/(tL).\Sigma= k[x_0,\ldots,x_{2L-3}]/(x_0^2,\ldots,x_{2L-3}^2),\qquad B_L = k1 \oplus\bigoplus_{a=1}^{L-1} t^a\Sigma\subseteq\Sigma[t]/(t^L).

The indeterminate tt is central. Write J=⨁a=1L−1taΣJ = \bigoplus_{a=1}^{L-1} t^a\Sigma. This ideal is nilpotent with quotient kk, so it is the Jacobson radical of BLB_L. Since 1∈Σ1 \in\Sigma, Jj=⨁a=jL−1taΣJ^j = \bigoplus_{a=j}^{L-1} t^a\Sigma for 1≤j≤L1 \le j \le L, with the empty sum zero.

Let τ:Σ→k\tau: \Sigma\to k take the coefficient of x0⋯x2L−3x_0\cdots x_{2L-3} in the squarefree monomial basis. The pairing (a,b)↦τ(ab)(a,b) \mapsto\tau(ab) is nondegenerate because each monomial pairs with its complement.

Give DBLDB_L the bimodule action (bfc)(x)=f(cxb)(bfc)(x) = f(cxb) for b,c,x∈BLb,c,x \in B_L and f∈DBLf \in DB_L. On (BL×BL)⊕DBL⊕DBL(B_L \times B_L) \oplus DB_L \oplus DB_L, define ALA_L by

(b0,b1,f,g)(c0,c1,h,j)=(b0c0,b1c1,b0h+fc1,b1j+gc0).(b_0,b_1,f,g)(c_0,c_1,h,j) = (b_0c_0,b_1c_1,b_0h+fc_1,b_1j+gc_0).

Here bi,ci∈BLb_i,c_i \in B_L for i=0,1i = 0,1 and f,g,h,j∈DBLf,g,h,j \in DB_L. The first dual copy has left action from the first factor and right action from the second factor of BL×BLB_L \times B_L; the second has the actions reversed. The bimodule identities give associativity of the square-zero extension. The unit is (1,1,0,0)(1,1,0,0), and the corner for e=(1,0,0,0)e=(1,0,0,0) identifies with the first copy of BLB_L. The functional λ(b0,b1,f,g)=f(1)+g(1)\lambda(b_0,b_1,f,g)=f(1)+g(1) defines the pairing

λ((b0,b1,f,g)(c0,c1,h,j))=h(b0)+f(c1)+j(b1)+g(c0).\lambda((b_0,b_1,f,g)(c_0,c_1,h,j))=h(b_0)+f(c_1)+j(b_1)+g(c_0).

Each coordinate pairs with its full dual, so ALA_L is Frobenius. The pairing identifies its left regular module with the dual of its right regular module by y↦(x↦λ(xy))y\mapsto(x\mapsto\lambda(xy)). Thus the regular module is injective.

Lemma 2. repdim⁡AL≤L+1\operatorname{repdim} A_L\leq L+1.

Proof. Consider the ideal

R=(J×J)⊕(DBL⊕DBL).R=(J\times J)\oplus(DB_L\oplus DB_L).

Its quotient is k×kk\times k. A product in RR with two off-diagonal factors is zero, since the off-diagonal bimodule has square zero. For n≥1n\geq1, the diagonal blocks of RnR^n are JnJ^n, and each off-diagonal block is

∑i+j=n−1Ji(DBL)Jj.\sum_{i+j=n-1}J^i(DB_L)J^j.

The sum is over nonnegative i,ji,j, with J0=BLJ^0=B_L. If i+j≥Li+j\geq L, then (afb)(x)=f(bxa)=0(afb)(x)=f(bxa)=0 for a∈Ji,b∈Jja\in J^i,b\in J^j, because bxa∈Ji+j=0bxa\in J^{i+j}=0. Hence RL+1=0R^{L+1}=0, and the semisimple quotient gives R=rad⁡ALR=\operatorname{rad} A_L. Choose 0≠a∈JL−10\ne a\in J^{L-1} and f∈DBLf\in DB_L with f(a)≠0f(a)\ne0. Then afaf is a nonzero element of an off-diagonal copy of DBLDB_L in RLR^L, since (af)(1)≠0(af)(1)\ne0.

The Loewy length, the least exponent killing the radical, is therefore L+1L+1. We give the radical-layer argument for the self-injective Loewy-length bound [5 Proposition 3.9].

The idempotents (1,0,0,0)(1,0,0,0) and (0,1,0,0)(0,1,0,0) give two nonisomorphic indecomposable projective left modules P1,P2P_1,P_2, since AL/R≅k2A_L/R\cong k^2. They are injective. Each has a simple essential socle, so every nonzero RaPiR^aP_i is indecomposable. For each ii the dimensions of the nonzero radical powers strictly decrease by Nakayama’s lemma. For different ii their socles differ because the injective hulls P1,P2P_1,P_2 differ. Put

M=⨁i=12⨁a=0LRaPi,Λ=End⁡AL(M)op⁡,H=Hom⁡AL(M,−).M=\bigoplus_{i=1}^{2}\bigoplus_{a=0}^{L}R^aP_i,\qquad\Lambda=\operatorname{End}_{A_L}(M)^{\operatorname{op}},\qquad H=\operatorname{Hom}_{A_L}(M,-).

The projective-injective summands at a=0a=0 make MM a generator-cogenerator.

A map RbPj→RaPiR^bP_j\to R^aP_i, composed with inclusion into PiP_i, extends to PjP_j by injectivity. Its image on RbPjR^bP_j lies in RbPiR^bP_i, and hence in Ra+1PiR^{a+1}P_i if b>ab>a. If b=ab=a and the original map is noninvertible, its extension is noninvertible, since an isomorphism restricts to an isomorphism of the layers. A map between these indecomposable projectives that is nonzero on the target top is surjective by Nakayama’s lemma, hence splits and is an isomorphism. Thus the noninvertible extension has image in RPiRP_i, and its restriction again lands in Ra+1PiR^{a+1}P_i.

For each nonzero RaPiR^aP_i, let TT be the simple top of H(RaPi)H(R^aP_i), and put Δ=H(RaPi)/H(Ra+1Pi)\Delta=H(R^aP_i)/H(R^{a+1}P_i). Both Hom modules are projective, so pd⁡ΛΔ≤1\operatorname{pd}_{\Lambda}\Delta\leq1. By the factorization just proved, the kernel of Δ→T\Delta\to T is supported only on the idempotents for the summands RbPjR^bP_j with b<ab<a. Applying these idempotent functors to a composition series shows that the kernel has only simple composition factors indexed by such summands. At a=0a=0 the kernel is zero and T=ΔT=\Delta. Inductively the factors have projective dimension at most aa, and so does the kernel by the long exact Ext sequences of its composition series. Thus TT has projective dimension at most a+1a+1. Every simple has projective dimension at most L+1L+1, giving gl.dim⁡Λ≤L+1\operatorname{gl.dim}\Lambda\leq L+1. □

Parameter extensions

Lemma 3. Let CC be a finite-dimensional kk-algebra and let G∈add⁡(C⊕DC)G \in\operatorname{add}(C \oplus DC). Put Γ=End⁡C(G)op⁡\Gamma= \operatorname{End}_{C}(G)^{\operatorname{op}}. For an integer d≥1d \ge1, let R=k[λ1,…,λd]R = k[\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_d], and let XRX_R be a C⊗kRC \otimes_k R-module which is finite free over RR. Write VT=V⊗kTV_T = V \otimes_k T for base change of a kk-vector space VV to a commutative kk-algebra TT. Assume that Hom⁡C(G,XR)\operatorname{Hom}_{C}(G,X_R) is free over RR and commutes with base change to every commutative RR-algebra. For α=(α1,…,αd)∈Kd\alpha= (\alpha_1,\ldots,\alpha_d) \in K^d over a field extension K/kK/k, let XαX_\alpha be the fiber given by λj↦αj\lambda_j \mapsto\alpha_j. For 1≤i≤d1 \le i \le d, specializing by λj↦αj+δijϵ\lambda_j \mapsto\alpha_j + \delta_{ij}\epsilon to the dual numbers K[ϵ]/(ϵ2)K[\epsilon]/(\epsilon^2) gives an extension of the fiber by itself. Here δij=1\delta_{ij}=1 if i=ji=j and 00 otherwise. The submodule is the image of ϵ\epsilon, and the quotient is the reduction modulo ϵ\epsilon. Applying Hom⁡CK(GK,−)\operatorname{Hom}_{C_K}(G_K,-) gives an exact extension by the freeness and base-change hypotheses. Let ξi\xi_i be its class. Assume that the Yoneda product ξd⋯ξ1\xi_d\cdots\xi_1, with ξ1\xi_1 applied first, is nonzero for every K,αK,\alpha. Then

repdim⁡C≥d+2.\operatorname{repdim} C \ge d+2.

Proof. The proof uses the parameter-lattice method of [3]. Fix a generator-cogenerator MM, adding GG as a summand if necessary. This preserves add⁡M\operatorname{add} M and the Morita class of its endomorphism ring. Write Λ=End⁡C(M)op⁡\Lambda= \operatorname{End}_{C}(M)^{\operatorname{op}} and let p∈Λp \in\Lambda project onto GG. Then pΛp=Γp\Lambda p = \Gamma. The functor Y↦pYY \mapsto pY is exact and sends Hom⁡C(M,X)\operatorname{Hom}_{C}(M,X) to Hom⁡C(G,X)\operatorname{Hom}_{C}(G,X).

In a finite free presentation Ca→Cb→M→0C^a \to C^b \to M \to0, application of Hom⁡C(−,XR)\operatorname{Hom}_{C}(-,X_R) identifies Hom⁡C(M,XR)\operatorname{Hom}_{C}(M,X_R) with the kernel of a matrix between finite free RR-modules. If its rank over the fraction field is zero, the matrix vanishes. Otherwise, write ss for that rank and invert a nonzero determinant of an ss-by-ss submatrix. After permutations the matrix has blocks

(UVWZ),\begin{pmatrix} U & V \\ W & Z \end{pmatrix},

with UU invertible. Row and column operations give the blocks UU and Z−WU−1VZ-WU^{-1}V. The second vanishes over the fraction field by the rank condition, hence over the localization. The kernel is thus free and commutes with every base change on this principal open.

Choose a point α\alpha of this open over K=kK=k if kk is infinite, or over a sufficiently large finite extension K/kK/k otherwise. Such a point exists because a nonzero polynomial cannot vanish at all points of a field with more elements than its degree in each variable. Flat base change applied to a finite presentation gives

ΛK=End⁡CK(MK)op⁡.\Lambda_K = \operatorname{End}_{C_K}(M_K)^{\operatorname{op}}.

Let Y=Hom⁡CK(MK,Xα)Y=\operatorname{Hom}_{C_K}(M_K,X_\alpha). The two base changes to KK and to the dual numbers K[ϵ]/(ϵ2)K[\epsilon]/(\epsilon^2) identify the coordinate extensions of YY with those from the localized Hom family. They are exact, since the Hom family is free over the localization and the dual-number extension is obtained from

0⟶K⟶K[ϵ]/(ϵ2)⟶K⟶0,0 \longrightarrow K \longrightarrow K[\epsilon]/(\epsilon^2) \longrightarrow K \longrightarrow0,

with the first map given by multiplication by ϵ\epsilon. Multiplication by pp sends these extensions to the given coordinate extensions for GKG_K. Exactness preserves Yoneda splicing, so the product in Ext⁡ΛKd(Y,Y)\operatorname{Ext}_{\Lambda_K}^{d}(Y,Y) is nonzero.

Embed XαX_\alpha into a finite injective I0I^0 and its cokernel into a finite injective I1I^1. Apply Hom⁡CK(MK,−)\operatorname{Hom}_{C_K}(M_K,-) and call the cokernel of the induced map QQ. This gives

0⟶Y⟶P0⟶P1⟶Q⟶0,Pj=Hom⁡CK(MK,Ij).0 \longrightarrow Y \longrightarrow P_0 \longrightarrow P_1 \longrightarrow Q \longrightarrow0,\qquad P_j=\operatorname{Hom}_{C_K}(M_K,I^j).

Both PjP_j are projective because DCK≅(DC)K∈add⁡MKDC_K \cong(DC)_K \in\operatorname{add} M_K, hence Ij∈add⁡MKI^j \in\operatorname{add} M_K. Splitting the sequence at the image of P0→P1P_0 \to P_1 into two short exact sequences and applying Hom⁡ΛK(−,Y)\operatorname{Hom}_{\Lambda_K}(-,Y) gives Ext⁡ΛKd+2(Q,Y)≅Ext⁡ΛKd(Y,Y)\operatorname{Ext}_{\Lambda_K}^{d+2}(Q,Y) \cong\operatorname{Ext}_{\Lambda_K}^{d}(Y,Y). It follows that gl.dim⁡ΛK≥d+2\operatorname{gl.dim}\Lambda_K \ge d+2.

For finite kk, the chosen extension is separable. A separability tensor ∑iai⊗bi∈K⊗kK\sum_i a_i \otimes b_i \in K \otimes_k K satisfies ∑iaibi=1\sum_i a_i b_i=1 and ∑icai⊗bi=∑iai⊗bic\sum_i ca_i \otimes b_i=\sum_i a_i \otimes b_i c for all c∈Kc \in K. For every ΛK\Lambda_K-module ZZ these identities show that z↦∑iai⊗bizz \mapsto\sum_i a_i \otimes b_i z is a ΛK\Lambda_K-linear section of K⊗kZ→ZK \otimes_k Z \to Z, where ZZ in the tensor product is restricted to Λ\Lambda. Inducing a projective resolution from Λ\Lambda and passing to the summand ZZ gives gl.dim⁡ΛK≤gl.dim⁡Λ\operatorname{gl.dim}\Lambda_K \le\operatorname{gl.dim}\Lambda. Taking the infimum over MM proves the lemma.

The lower bound for the corner

Lemma 4. repdim⁡BL≥2L−1\operatorname{repdim} B_L \ge2L-1.

Proof. Put n=2L−3n=2L-3.

Matrices and the parameter family. Write h=L−2h=L-2, so n=2h+1n=2h+1. If char⁡k≠2\operatorname{char} k \ne2, put r=2hr=2^h and use

X=(0110),Y=(01−10),Z=(100−1).X=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\1&0\end{pmatrix},\qquad Y=\begin{pmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{pmatrix},\qquad Z=\begin{pmatrix}1&0\\0&-1\end{pmatrix}.

Write IjI_j for the jj-by-jj identity matrix. A zeroth tensor power means the scalar 11. For 1≤j≤h1 \le j \le h, define

P2j−1=Z⊗(j−1)⊗X⊗I2⊗(h−j),P2j=Z⊗(j−1)⊗Y⊗I2⊗(h−j),P2h+1=Z⊗h.P_{2j-1}=Z^{\otimes(j-1)}\otimes X\otimes I_2^{\otimes(h-j)},\qquad P_{2j}=Z^{\otimes(j-1)}\otimes Y\otimes I_2^{\otimes(h-j)},\qquad P_{2h+1}=Z^{\otimes h}.

These integer matrices anticommute in pairs. For matrices from different tensor positions there is exactly one interchange of XX or YY with ZZ, and the same-position assertion is XY=−YXXY=-YX. Moreover,

P2jP2j−1=I2⊗(j−1)⊗Z⊗I2⊗(h−j).P_{2j}P_{2j-1}=I_2^{\otimes(j-1)}\otimes Z\otimes I_2^{\otimes(h-j)}.

The latter matrices commute, so

PnPn−1⋯P1=Ir.(1)P_nP_{n-1}\cdots P_1=I_r. \tag*{(1)}

In characteristic two instead take r=1r=1 and Pi=(1)P_i=(1) for all ii. The pairwise anticommutator is still zero, (1) still holds, and r≠0r\ne0 in the field. Thus in both cases rr is nonzero in kk.

Let S=k[x1,…,xn]/(xi2)S=k[x_1,\ldots,x_n]/(x_i^2), let R=k[λ1,…,λn]R=k[\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_n], and define

Cλ=∑i=1nλixiPi,NR=SRr.C_\lambda=\sum_{i=1}^{n}\lambda_i x_iP_i,\qquad N_R=S_R^r.

All cross terms in Cλ2C_\lambda^2 vanish by pairwise anticommutation, and the diagonal terms contain xi2x_i^2. Give NRN_R its ordinary left ΣR\Sigma_R-module structure by letting xix_i for i≥1i\ge1 act as scalar multiplication and x0x_0 act as −Cλ-C_\lambda. This is well defined: Cλ2=0C_\lambda^2=0, and CλC_\lambda commutes with the scalar actions of the other generators. The family is RR-free of rank r22nr^2 2^n.

At a parameter point α\alpha over a coefficient field KK, put

Cα=∑iαixiPi,Q+=x0Ir+Cα,Q−=x0Ir−Cα.C_\alpha=\sum_i\alpha_i x_iP_i,\qquad Q_+=x_0I_r+C_\alpha,\qquad Q_-=x_0I_r-C_\alpha.

These are fixed matrices in Matr⁡(ΣK)\operatorname{Matr}(\Sigma_K) while the parameters λ\lambda vary. They satisfy

Q+Q−=Q−Q+=0.(2)Q_+Q_-=Q_-Q_+=0. \tag*{(2)}

The action on the canonical Hom module. Put I=DBLI = DB_L and let v∈Iv \in I take the degree-zero coefficient of BLB_L. The functionals

gi(s)(tL−1−ia)=τ(as),0≤i≤L−2,g_i(s)(t^{L-1-i}a)=\tau(as), \qquad0\le i\le L-2,

are defined for a,s∈Σa,s\in\Sigma and are zero on the other summands. For 1≤a≤L−11\le a\le L-1, the action of tabt^a b, b∈Σb\in\Sigma, is

(tab)gi(s)={gi+a(bs)i+a≤L−2,τ(bs)vi+a=L−1,0i+a≥L.(t^a b)g_i(s)= \begin{cases} g_{i+a}(bs) & i+a\le L-2,\\ \tau(bs)v & i+a=L-1,\\ 0 & i+a\ge L. \end{cases}

For 1≤m≤L1\le m\le L and a Σ\Sigma-module NN, let Fm(N)=NmF_m(N)=N^m, with coordinates 0,…,m−10,\ldots,m-1. For 1≤a<L1\le a<L and b∈Σb\in\Sigma, tabt^a b multiplies by bb and advances aa coordinates, with indices beyond the last sent to zero. The Hom space has the following description, valid also after extension to any commutative kk-algebra, with the modules and Hom spaces taken over the extended algebras.

Hom⁡BL(I,FL(N))=NL−2⊕JN,JN=Hom⁡k(Σ,N).(3)\operatorname{Hom}_{B_L}(I,F_L(N))=N^{L-2}\oplus J_N,\qquad J_N=\operatorname{Hom}_k(\Sigma,N). \tag*{(3)}

The tuple (m1,…,mL−2,f)(m_1,\ldots,m_{L-2},f) corresponds to

g0(s)⟼(0,sm1,…,smL−2,f(s)),v⟼0,g_0(s)\longmapsto(0,sm_1,\ldots,sm_{L-2},f(s)),\qquad v\longmapsto0,

and the image of gi(s)g_i(s) for i≥1i\ge1 is the image of g0(s)g_0(s) shifted by ii layers. For a homomorphism h:I→FL(N)h:I\to F_L(N), the vector h(v)h(v) is killed by tt, so h(v)=(0,…,0,z)h(v)=(0,\ldots,0,z). Applying hh to tL−1g0(s)=τ(s)vt^{L-1}g_0(s)=\tau(s)v gives h0(g0(s))=τ(s)zh_0(g_0(s))=\tau(s)z, where h0h_0 is the first coordinate of hh. Since τ(1)=0\tau(1)=0, the relation (tL−1x0⋯xn)g0(1)=v(t^{L-1}x_0\cdots x_n)g_0(1)=v gives z=(x0⋯xn)h0(g0(1))=0z=(x_0\cdots x_n)h_0(g_0(1))=0. Comparing (tb)g0(s)(tb)g_0(s) with tg0(bs)tg_0(bs) makes the middle components Σ\Sigma-linear; the final component is arbitrary. These elementary equations suffice: tabt^a b shifts the first L−1L-1 components by aa and multiplies them by bb, and kills the final component. This gives the prescribed image of gi+a(bs)g_{i+a}(bs) if i+a≤L−2i+a\le L-2, and zero otherwise. All equations hold over the coefficient ring. In particular the final summand is DΣ⊗kND\Sigma\otimes_k N, compatibly with base change.

For p,q∈Σp,q\in\Sigma, define BLB_L-maps

Cp:I→BL,Cp(gi(s))=ti+1sp,Cp(v)=0,Gq:BL→I,Gq(1)=g0(q).C_p:I\to B_L,\qquad C_p(g_i(s))=t^{i+1}sp,\quad C_p(v)=0,\qquad G_q:B_L\to I,\qquad G_q(1)=g_0(q).

The first is BLB_L-linear even at the last dual layer: one side then contains Cp(v)=0C_p(v)=0, and the other has tt-degree LL. For matrices P=(pij)P=(p_{ij}), Q=(qij)Q=(q_{ij}) over Σ\Sigma, let CPC_P and GQG_Q have these maps as their entries, with row ii specifying the target and column jj the source, for 1≤i,j≤r1\le i,j\le r. In the opposite ring we use the same vector-space elements and reverse the order of multiplication. Set

G^=BLr⊕Ir,Γ^=End⁡BL(G^)op,AP=CPop,BQ=GQop.\widehat{G}=B_L^r\oplus I^r,\qquad\widehat{\Gamma}=\operatorname{End}_{B_L}(\widehat{G})^{\mathrm{op}},\qquad A_P=C_P^{\mathrm{op}},\quad B_Q=G_Q^{\mathrm{op}}.

The two compositions are CPGQ=t(PQ)C_PG_Q=t(PQ) on BLrB_L^r and GQCP=t(QP)G_QC_P=t(QP) on IrI^r. Indeed, CpGq(1)=tpqC_pG_q(1)=tpq, and GqCp(gi(s))=(ti+1sp)g0(q)=(tqp)gi(s)G_qC_p(g_i(s))=(t^{i+1}sp)g_0(q)=(tqp)g_i(s), while both sides kill vv. Matrix composition sums these identities over the common index. In particular, writing A0=AIrA_0=A_{I_r}, B0=BIrB_0=B_{I_r}, A±=AQ±A_\pm=A_{Q_\pm}, B±=BQ±B_\pm=B_{Q_\pm}, we have exact algebra identities

A0B−=A−B0,B0A+=B+A0.(4)A_0B_-=A_-B_0,\qquad B_0A_+=B_+A_0. \tag*{(4)}
A−B+=B+A−=A+B−=B−A+=0.(5)A_-B_+=B_+A_-=A_+B_-=B_-A_+=0. \tag*{(5)}

The Hom module is

EN=Hom⁡BL(G^,FL(N))=UN⊕VN,UN=(Nr)L,VN=(Nr)L−2⊕JNr.(6)E_N = \operatorname{Hom}_{B_L}(\widehat{G},F_L(N)) = U_N \oplus V_N,\qquad U_N = (N^r)^L,\qquad V_N = (N^r)^{L-2} \oplus J^r_N. \tag*{(6)}

Write UaU_a for the copy of NrN^r in UNU_N of index 0≤a≤L−10 \leq a \leq L-1, and VaV_a for the copy of NrN^r in VNV_N of index 1≤a≤L−21 \leq a \leq L-2. For N=NRN=N_R, identify NrN^r with Matr⁡(SR)\operatorname{Matr}(S_R) by taking the rr vectors as columns. In the family N=NRN=N_R and its specializations, write σλ\sigma_\lambda for the coefficient action and ρλ\rho_\lambda for the induced action on ENE_N. For TT with columns TiT_i and f=(fi)∈JNrf=(f_i)\in J^r_N, put

(RP(T))j=∑iσλ(pij)Ti,(ηλ(T))j(s)=σλ(s)Tj,\left(\mathcal{R}_P(T)\right)_j = \sum_i \sigma_\lambda(p_{ij})T_i,\qquad\left(\eta_\lambda(T)\right)_j(s)=\sigma_\lambda(s)T_j,
(ev⁡Q(f))j=∑ifi(qij).\left(\operatorname{ev}_Q(f)\right)_j=\sum_i f_i(q_{ij}).

Then APA_P takes UaU_a to Va+1V_{a+1} by RP\mathcal{R}_P for 0≤a≤L−30 \leq a \leq L-3, and takes UL−2U_{L-2} to JNrJ^r_N by ηλRP\eta_\lambda\mathcal{R}_P; it kills the last UU-coordinate and all of VV. The map BQB_Q takes VaV_a to UaU_a by RQ\mathcal{R}_Q, and takes JNrJ^r_N to UL−1U_{L-1} by ev⁡Q\operatorname{ev}_Q; it is zero on UU. The APA_P action follows by evaluating CPC_P on g0(s)g_0(s) and shifting the image of 11 once. The BQB_Q action evaluates at GQ(1)G_Q(1), with entries g0(qij)g_0(q_{ij}). In particular,

RQ±(T)=−CλT±TCα.(7)\mathcal{R}_{Q_\pm}(T)=-C_\lambda T\pm TC_\alpha. \tag*{(7)}

Endpoint identities. At λ=α\lambda=\alpha, take uu to be IrI_r in U0U_0, zero elsewhere, and put u′=A0uu'=A_0u. Let θ:Matr⁡(SK)→K\theta:\operatorname{Matr}(S_K)\to K be the coefficient of x1⋯xnx_1\cdots x_n in the ordinary matrix trace. Let ϕU\phi_U apply θ\theta to UL−1U_{L-1}, zero on all other coordinates, and define

ϕV=ϕUB+.\phi_V=\phi_U B_+.

The bottom component of B+B_+ is evaluation at the fixed matrix Q+Q_+; it is parameter independent. Consequently ϕUρλ(B+)=ϕV\phi_U\rho_\lambda(B_+)=\phi_V throughout the parameter family.

In the following identities the algebra elements act at λ=α\lambda=\alpha. By (7), RQ+(Ir)=0\mathcal{R}_{Q_+}(I_r)=0, giving A+u=0A_+u=0 and B+u′=0B_+u'=0 since u′u' is IrI_r in V1V_1. Cyclicity of trace and B+A−=0B_+A_-=0 give the other endpoint identities

A+u=0,A0u=u′,B+u′=0,ϕVA0=0,ϕVA−=0,ϕUB+=ϕV.(8)A_+u=0,\qquad A_0u=u',\qquad B_+u'=0,\qquad\phi_VA_0=0,\qquad\phi_VA_-=0,\qquad\phi_UB_+=\phi_V. \tag*{(8)}

Indeed, ϕVA0\phi_VA_0 is zero outside UL−2U_{L-2}, and there sends TT to θ(−CαT+TCα)=0\theta(-C_\alpha T+TC_\alpha)=0. Write Di=∂λiρλ∣αD_i=\partial_{\lambda_i}\rho_\lambda|_\alpha for the derivative of the complete representation on (6). We also have

ϕUDi(B+)=0,ϕVDi(A−)=0.(9)\phi_UD_i(B_+)=0,\qquad\phi_VD_i(A_-)=0. \tag*{(9)}

The first holds because the bottom evaluation component is constant. For the second, differentiate the algebra identity B+A−=0B_+A_-=0, then apply ϕU\phi_U; the first identity removes the other derivative term.

The bar functional. For 1≤j≤n1\leq j\leq n, define an nn-tuple of algebra elements WjW_j: its letter types are A,B,A,…,AA,B,A,\ldots,A; position jj is A0A_0 or B0B_0 according to type; before that position the letters are A−,B+A_-,B_+; after it they are A+,B−A_+,B_-. Let

W∗=(B+,A−,B+,…,A−,B+).W_*=(B_+,A_-,B_+,\ldots,A_-,B_+).

For a KK-algebra TT and left TT-module EE, an ordinary bar cochain of degree jj is a KK-linear map T⊗Kj→End⁡K(E)T^{\otimes_K j} \to\operatorname{End}_K(E). Here T=Γ^b⊗kKT = \widehat{\Gamma}_b \otimes_k K and E=EαE = E_\alpha, the specialization of the Hom module at α\alpha. For a cochain ff of degree jj, its differential evaluated at a1,…,aj+1∈Ta_1,\ldots,a_{j+1} \in T is

a1f(a2,…,aj+1)+∑i=1j(−1)if(a1,…,aiai+1,…,aj+1)+(−1)j+1f(a1,…,aj)aj+1.a_1f(a_2,\ldots,a_{j+1})+\sum_{i=1}^{j}(-1)^i f(a_1,\ldots,a_i a_{i+1},\ldots,a_{j+1})+(-1)^{j+1}f(a_1,\ldots,a_j)a_{j+1}.

The end terms compose with the action on EE. These cochains are obtained by applying Hom⁡T(−,E)\operatorname{Hom}_T(-,E) to the free left TT-modules T⊗K(j+1)⊗KET^{\otimes_K(j+1)}\otimes_K E. The bar differential multiplies consecutive factors with alternating signs, using the module action for the last multiplication. Augmentation is the action T⊗KE→ET\otimes_K E\to E. Inserting 11 on the left gives a KK-linear contraction of the augmented complex: its first face is the identity and all later faces cancel with those obtained by inserting 11 after applying the differential. Thus the cochains compute Ext⁡T∙(E,E)\operatorname{Ext}^\bullet_T(E,E).

For any ordinary bar nn-cochain FF, with arbitrary values in End⁡K(Eα)\operatorname{End}_K(E_\alpha), set

Zn(F)=∑j=1n(−1)j−1ϕVF(Wj)u+ϕUF(W∗)u′.(10)Z_n(F)=\sum_{j=1}^{n}(-1)^{j-1}\phi_VF(W_j)u+\phi_UF(W_*)u'. \tag*{(10)}

Consider an arbitrary ordinary (n−1)(n-1)-cochain ff. All left faces of the WjW_j vanish by ϕVA0=ϕVA−=0\phi_VA_0=\phi_VA_-=0. All right faces vanish except the last unit position, by A+u=0A_+u=0. Every internal product away from the unit position vanishes by (5). The product adjoining the unit between positions jj and j+1j+1 is identical in WjW_j and Wj+1W_{j+1}, by (4). Its bar-face sign is the same in the two words and the word coefficients are opposite, so these faces cancel in pairs.

The sole surviving right face from the unit words has total coefficient (−1)n−1(−1)n=−1(-1)^{n-1}(-1)^n=-1, and is

−ϕVf(A−,B+,…,A−,B+)u′.-\phi_Vf(A_-,B_+,\ldots,A_-,B_+)u'.

For W∗W_*, the internal faces vanish by (5), the right face vanishes by B+u′=0B_+u'=0, and the left face is precisely the opposite of this remaining term, since ϕUB+=ϕV\phi_UB_+=\phi_V. Thus

Zn(df)=0for every ordinary bar cochain f.(11)Z_n(df)=0\quad\text{for every ordinary bar cochain }f. \tag*{(11)}

The parameter product. On the ii-th coordinate extension the action is ρα+ϵDi\rho_\alpha+\epsilon D_i. Its off-diagonal part DiD_i satisfies Di(ab)=ρα(a)Di(b)+Di(a)ρα(b)D_i(ab)=\rho_\alpha(a)D_i(b)+D_i(a)\rho_\alpha(b) for a,b∈Ta,b\in T. The splitting over KK into the constant and ϵ\epsilon coordinates identifies the extension with the bar 11-cocycle DiD_i. To compose these classes, a cocycle DiD_i lifts to maps from bar degree j+1j+1 to degree jj by

a0⊗⋯⊗aj+1⊗w⟼a0⊗⋯⊗aj⊗Di(aj+1)w.a_0\otimes\cdots\otimes a_{j+1}\otimes w\longmapsto a_0\otimes\cdots\otimes a_j\otimes D_i(a_{j+1})w.

These maps commute with the differentials in positive degrees: the earlier faces commute term by term, and the last two faces give the derivation identity. At degree zero augmentation recovers the cocycle. Composing the lifts therefore represents the Yoneda product by

Φ(cn,…,c1)=Dn(cn)⋯D1(c1).\Phi(c_n,\ldots,c_1)=D_n(c_n)\cdots D_1(c_1).

On the coefficient coordinates, the derivative of either RQ+\mathcal{R}_{Q_+} or RQ−\mathcal{R}_{Q_-}, with the matrices Q±Q_\pm held fixed, is

T⟼−xiPiT.T\longmapsto-x_iP_iT.

For W1W_1, the first n−1=2L−4n-1=2L-4 derivative factors, applied from right to left, alternate between Ua→Va+1U_a \to V_{a+1} and Va+1→Ua+1V_{a+1} \to U_{a+1} for 0≤a≤L−30 \leq a \leq L-3. They move IrI_r to UL−2U_{L-2} and give (−1)n−1(xn−1⋯x1)Pn−1⋯P1(-1)^{n-1}(x_{n-1}\cdots x_1)P_{n-1}\cdots P_1. The last derivative is Dn(A0)D_n(A_0). Evaluation at Q+Q_+ after applying A0A_0 on UL−2U_{L-2} gives ev⁡Q+ηλ=RQ+\operatorname{ev}_{Q_+}\eta_\lambda=R_{Q_+}. Evaluation is constant in the parameters, so the derivative contributes left multiplication by −xnPn-x_nP_n. Therefore (1) gives

ϕVΦ(W1)u=(−1)nθ((xn⋯x1)Pn⋯P1)=−tr⁡(Ir)=−r≠0.(12)\phi_V\Phi(W_1)u=(-1)^n\theta((x_n\cdots x_1)P_n\cdots P_1)=-\operatorname{tr}(I_r)=-r\ne0. \tag*{(12)}

Every WjW_j with j>1j>1 starts with A−A_-, and its contribution vanishes by ϕVDn(A−)=0\phi_VD_n(A_-)=0. The W∗W_* term vanishes by ϕUDn(B+)=0\phi_UD_n(B_+)=0. Hence

Zn(Φ)=−r≠0.(13)Z_n(\Phi)=-r\ne0. \tag*{(13)}

Equations (11) and (13) prove nonvanishing in Ext⁡Γ^⊗kKn(Eα,Eα)\operatorname{Ext}_{\widehat{\Gamma}\otimes_k K}^n(E_\alpha,E_\alpha) at every parameter point over every extension field.

The hypotheses of Lemma 3 hold with C=BLC=B_L, G=BLr⊕(DBL)rG=B_L^r\oplus(DB_L)^r and d=nd=n. The Hom formula (3) gives freeness and commutation with base change, and the bar functional gives nonvanishing at every point.

The lower bound for the Frobenius algebra

Lemma 5. repdim⁡AL≥L+1\operatorname{repdim} A_L\geq L+1.

Proof. Put d=L−1d=L-1. In characteristic different from two, put h=⌊d/2⌋h=\lfloor d/2\rfloor and r=2hr=2^h. Use the matrices X,Y,ZX,Y,Z from the proof of Lemma 4.

Take

P2j−1=Z⊗(j−1)⊗X⊗I2⊗(h−j),P2j=Z⊗(j−1)⊗Y⊗I2⊗(h−j)P_{2j-1}=Z^{\otimes(j-1)}\otimes X\otimes I_2^{\otimes(h-j)},\qquad P_{2j}=Z^{\otimes(j-1)}\otimes Y\otimes I_2^{\otimes(h-j)}

for 1≤j≤h1\leq j\leq h; for odd d=2h+1d=2h+1, append Pd=Z⊗hP_d=Z^{\otimes h}. These matrices anticommute in pairs. Write Ω=Z⊗h\Omega=Z^{\otimes h}. Then

Pd⋯P1={Ird odd,Ωd even,Ω2=Ir.P_d\cdots P_1= \begin{cases} I_r & d\ \text{odd},\\ \Omega& d\ \text{even}, \end{cases} \qquad\Omega^2=I_r.

For even dd, Ω\Omega anticommutes with every PiP_i. These assertions follow from YX=ZYX=Z, the tensor-position rule, and the displayed definitions. In each PiP_i exactly one factor anticommutes with the corresponding ZZ in Ω\Omega.

In characteristic two, instead take r=1r=1, all Pi=1P_i=1, and Ω=1\Omega=1. The same anticommutator identities hold and rr is nonzero in every case.

Parameter family. Let

S=k[x1,…,x2L−3]/(xi2),R=k[λ1,…,λd],Cλ=∑i=1dλixiPi.S=k[x_1,\ldots,x_{2L-3}]/(x_i^2),\qquad R=k[\lambda_1,\ldots,\lambda_d],\qquad C_\lambda=\sum_{i=1}^{d}\lambda_i x_iP_i.

The square of CλC_\lambda is zero. Give NR=SrN_R=S^r its ordinary left ΣR\Sigma_R action by scalar multiplication by xix_i for i≥1i\geq1 and by −Cλ-C_\lambda for x0x_0. These actions commute, and the x0x_0 action squares to zero. Set XR=FL(NR)=NRLX_R = F_L(N_R) = N_R^L, where tast^a s acts by a shift of aa places and the action of ss. This family is finite free over RR.

Apply the Morita equivalence

H=Hom⁡BL(BLr,−):BL-mod⟶Δ-mod,Δ=End⁡BL(BLr)op⁡.H = \operatorname{Hom}_{B_L}(B_L^r,-): B_L\text{-mod} \longrightarrow\Delta\text{-mod}, \qquad\Delta= \operatorname{End}_{B_L}(B_L^r)^{\operatorname{op}}.

This is an exact equivalence, hence preserves the parameter extensions and their Yoneda products in both directions. In particular, nonvanishing proved in Ext⁡Δ\operatorname{Ext}_{\Delta} below is nonvanishing in ordinary Ext⁡BL\operatorname{Ext}_{B_L}.

Identify each layer of H(XR)H(X_R) with Mat⁡r(SR)\operatorname{Mat}_r(S_R) by taking the rr vectors as columns. At a point α\alpha over a field extension K/kK/k, keep

Q+=x0Ir+Cα,Q−=x0Ir−CαQ_+ = x_0 I_r + C_\alpha,\qquad Q_- = x_0 I_r - C_\alpha

fixed while differentiating the parameters. Both products Q+Q−Q_+Q_- and Q−Q+Q_-Q_+ are zero over ΣK\Sigma_K.

The elements z+z_+ and z−z_- of ΔK=Δ⊗kK\Delta_K = \Delta\otimes_k K represented by the matrices tQ+tQ_+ and tQ−tQ_- act, by precomposition, as a one-layer shift followed by

T⟼−CλT±TCα.(14)T \longmapsto-C_\lambda T \pm T C_\alpha. \tag*{(14)}

The opposite-ring order reverses matrix products, but the two needed products are both zero. Thus z+z−=z−z+=0z_+z_- = z_-z_+ = 0 as algebra identities.

The bar functional. Let vv be IrI_r in the first layer, zero elsewhere. Write ρλ\rho_\lambda for the action on H(XR)H(X_R). At the chosen point, ρα(z+)v=0\rho_\alpha(z_+)v = 0 by (14). Let ϕ\phi be zero except on the last layer and there set

ϕ(T)={[x1⋯xd]tr⁡(T)d odd,[x1⋯xd]tr⁡(ΩT)d even.\phi(T) = \begin{cases} [x_1 \cdots x_d]\operatorname{tr}(T) & d\text{ odd},\\ [x_1 \cdots x_d]\operatorname{tr}(\Omega T) & d\text{ even}. \end{cases}

Here [x1⋯xd][x_1 \cdots x_d] selects the indicated squarefree monomial, with exponent zero on all other generators. For odd dd, cyclicity of matrix trace gives ϕρα(z+)=0\phi\rho_\alpha(z_+) = 0 on the whole module. For even dd, the relation ΩCα+CαΩ=0\Omega C_\alpha+ C_\alpha\Omega= 0 gives

tr⁡(Ω(−CαT−TCα))=0,\operatorname{tr}\bigl(\Omega(-C_\alpha T - T C_\alpha)\bigr) = 0,

so ϕρα(z−)=0\phi\rho_\alpha(z_-) = 0 on the whole module. In characteristic two the displayed trace is zero with Ω=1\Omega= 1, since the trace is cyclic and 2=02 = 0.

Let WW be the alternating word of length dd whose rightmost letter is z+z_+. Its leftmost letter is z+z_+ when dd is odd and z−z_- when dd is even. For an ordinary bar dd-cochain FF, put

Z(F)=ϕF(W)v.Z(F) = \phi F(W)v.

For a cochain ff of degree d−1d-1, every internal face of Z(df)Z(df) contains a zero product z+z−z_+z_- or z−z+z_-z_+. The right face contains ρα(z+)v=0\rho_\alpha(z_+)v = 0. The left face vanishes by the appropriate whole-module identity for ϕ\phi. Consequently

Z(df)=0Z(df) = 0

for every ordinary bar (d−1)(d-1)-cochain. Write DiD_i for the derivative of the Δ\Delta-action in the iith parameter direction. The action on the ii-th coordinate extension is ρα+ϵDi\rho_\alpha+\epsilon D_i. By (14), the derivative of either fixed z+z_+ or z−z_- advances one layer and left-multiplies by −xiPi-x_iP_i. Thus the ordered cup product takes vv to

(−1)dxd⋯x1Pd⋯P1(-1)^d x_d\cdots x_1P_d\cdots P_1

in the last layer. All the xix_i commute. The detector evaluates this to −r-r in odd degree and rr in even degree. This is nonzero in every field by our choice of rr. Hence the parameter product is nonzero at every point, over every extension field.

Inflate the family XRX_R along the unital projection AL→BLA_L\to B_L onto the first diagonal coordinate. The exact functor e(−)e(-) recovers the original family and its coordinate extensions. It therefore takes their product over ALA_L to the nonzero product over BLB_L. Apply Lemma 3 with C=G=ALC=G=A_L, since Hom⁡AL(AL,−)\operatorname{Hom}_{A_L}(A_L,-) identifies with the identity under evaluation at 11. The resulting lower bound is d+2=L+1d+2=L+1.

The upper bound for the corner

Lemma 6. repdim⁡BL≤2L−1\operatorname{repdim} B_L\le2L-1.

Proof. Let s=dim⁡kΣs=\dim_k\Sigma.

Contraction modules. Write S=BL/JS=B_L/J for the simple BLB_L-module, and put

Qa=BL/Ja(1≤a≤L),q=s−1,P=Σ⊗kΣ.Q_a=B_L/J^a\quad(1\le a\le L),\qquad q=s-1,\qquad P=\Sigma\otimes_k\Sigma.

Thus Q1=SQ_1=S and QL=BLQ_L=B_L. Set Q0=0Q_0=0. The multiplication map

μ:P⟶Σ,μ(a⊗c)=ac\mu:P\longrightarrow\Sigma,\qquad\mu(a\otimes c)=ac

is a split epimorphism of left Σ\Sigma-modules; use the section c↦c⊗1c\mapsto c\otimes1. Its kernel ZZ is free of rank qq, since it is projective over the local algebra Σ\Sigma. We use the same fact for subsequent split surjections of finite free Σ\Sigma-modules.

For the strings Fr(E)F_r(E) defined above, set F0(E)=0F_0(E)=0 and write Fr=Fr(Σ)F_r=F_r(\Sigma). In particular F1≅SsF_1\cong S^s.

For 0≤d≤L−20\le d\le L-2, define CdC_d by its layers in degrees 0,…,L−10,\ldots,L-1:

Cd=(Σ,P,…,P⏟d layers,Σ,…,Σ⏟L−2−d layers,k).C_d=\left(\Sigma,\underbrace{P,\ldots,P}_{d\ \mathrm{layers}},\underbrace{\Sigma,\ldots,\Sigma}_{L-2-d\ \mathrm{layers}},k\right).

The parentheses denote the direct sum of the listed kk-spaces, ordered by increasing degree. When d>0d>0, the first action is insertion, (tb)c=b⊗c(tb)c=b\otimes c. Between tensor layers, tbtb multiplies the first factor on the left. At the transition to an ordinary coefficient layer it acts by a⊗c↦baca\otimes c\mapsto bac; thereafter it acts by left multiplication. The last action is the Frobenius pairing c↦τ(bc)c\mapsto\tau(bc), or a⊗c↦τ(bac)a\otimes c\mapsto\tau(bac) if the preceding layer is still a tensor layer. For d=0d=0, all coefficient layers are ordinary. For tabt^ab with a>1a>1, apply tbtb and then tt another a−1a-1 times. The same formulas result if the coefficient bb is applied at any of the aa steps, since insertion is followed by multiplication on the first factor and both contraction and the final trace use the product in order. Thus the action respects multiplication in BLB_L. They identify C0C_0 with DBLDB_L, using the left action (bξ)(x)=ξ(xb)(b\xi)(x)=\xi(xb) on the dual.

Set

M=⨁a=1LQa⊕⨁d=0L−2Cd,Γ=End⁡BL(M)op⁡,H=Hom⁡BL(M,−).M=\bigoplus_{a=1}^{L}Q_a\oplus\bigoplus_{d=0}^{L-2}C_d,\qquad\Gamma=\operatorname{End}_{B_L}(M)^{\operatorname{op}},\qquad H=\operatorname{Hom}_{B_L}(M,-).

The functor HH takes values in left Γ\Gamma-modules. Write pd⁡Γ\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} for projective dimension over Γ\Gamma. Because BLB_L and DBLDB_L occur, MM is a generator-cogenerator.

All 2L−12L-1 displayed summands are indecomposable and pairwise nonisomorphic. Indeed, an endomorphism of CdC_d has scalar top: commutation with the maps tL−1bt^{L-1}b and nondegeneracy of τ\tau force its top component AA to equal λid⁡Σ\lambda\operatorname{id}_{\Sigma}: if the map on the final layer is multiplication by λ\lambda, then τ(bA(c))=λτ(bc)\tau(bA(c))=\lambda\tau(bc) for all b,c∈Σb,c\in\Sigma. Each CdC_d is generated by its degree-zero layer, since tabt^ab on a top vector cc gives b⊗cb\otimes c, bcbc, or τ(bc)\tau(bc) in degree aa. Endomorphisms with zero top raise degree and form a nilpotent ideal. Thus End⁡BL(Cd)\operatorname{End}_{B_L}(C_d) is local with residue field kk. The dimensions of the CdC_d strictly increase with dd; their tops have dimension ss, whereas every QaQ_a has one-dimensional top. The assertions for the QaQ_a follow from their cyclic local quotient structure.

We call an epimorphism X→YX\to Y MM-proper if every map M→YM\to Y lifts through it. An exact sequence is proper if it remains exact after applying HH. For a summand XX of MM, write TXT_X for the simple top of the projective module H(X)H(X). A relative radical approximation of XX is a map from add⁡M\operatorname{add}M whose image under HH is rad⁡H(X)\operatorname{rad}H(X). The latter consists of maps whose component at XX lies in the radical of End⁡BL(X)\operatorname{End}_{B_L}(X), with unrestricted components at the other summands. If the approximation has kernel KK and domain P′P', left exactness gives

0⟶H(K)⟶H(P′)⟶H(X)⟶TX⟶0.0\longrightarrow H(K)\longrightarrow H(P')\longrightarrow H(X)\longrightarrow T_X\longrightarrow0.

The two middle terms are projective, so pd⁡ΓTX≤pd⁡ΓH(K)+2\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma}T_X\leq\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma}H(K)+2.

Radical splittings and the two lifting rules. Write In=DQnI_n=DQ_n for 1≤n≤L1\leq n\leq L, with n−1n-1 coefficient layers and a final scalar layer as in C0C_0. In the positive degrees of CdC_d, split each tensor layer as Z⊕(Σ⊗1)Z\oplus(\Sigma\otimes1). The ZZ-layers have zero action into the first layer after contraction, and the other summands continue through the final trace. This gives

rad⁡Cd≅Fd(Z)⊕IL−1.\operatorname{rad}C_d\cong F_d(Z)\oplus I_{L-1}.

For d≥1d\geq1, there is a quotient πd:Cd→Cd−1\pi_d:C_d\to C_{d-1} that contracts the tensor layer in degree dd and is the identity in every other degree. Its kernel is SsqS^{\mathrm{sq}}, and on radicals it is

[Fd(Z)⟶Fd−1(Z)]⊕id⁡IL−1.\left[F_d(Z)\longrightarrow F_{d-1}(Z)\right]\oplus\operatorname{id}_{I_{L-1}}.

Here the bracketed map truncates the final layer.

All maps below decompose into homogeneous maps, where degree jj means that a source layer of index ii maps to target layer i+ji+j. Each source is generated in degree zero, so only degrees j≥0j\geq0 occur. A zero-top map into a module generated in degree zero has image in its positive layers. When the target is a shifted string, the same tests apply to the portion starting in the image degree.

The following calculation will be used for maps out of CeC_e. For a homogeneous map, let AA be its map from the source top into the first layer of the target portion. The value on (tab)c(t^ab)c must be tabA(c)t^abA(c). When the source layer at distance aa is tensor, this prescribes the value on b⊗cb\otimes c with no relation. At the first ordinary source layer, it must depend only on bcbc. If the target layer at that distance is ordinary, this gives bA(c)=A(bc)bA(c)=A(bc) by setting b=1b=1 in the required factorization. If the target layer is tensor, it gives b⊗A(c)=1⊗A(bc)b\otimes A(c)=1\otimes A(bc). Taking bb linearly independent of 11 forces A=0A=0. If the target ends in a scalar layer at this distance, the equation is τ(bA(c))=f(bc)\tau\left(bA(c)\right)=f(bc) for a functional ff, which implies A(c)=cuA(c)=cu by writing f(x)=τ(xu)f(x)=\tau(xu). When the target has only ordinary layers after the contraction, the relations propagate by multiplication, followed by τ\tau if it has a final scalar layer. At the source’s final scalar layer, a full-length map to CdC_d satisfies τ(bA(c))=λτ(bc)\tau\left(bA(c)\right)=\lambda\tau(bc), so A(c)=λcA(c)=\lambda c. For a degree-zero map to Fr(E)F_r(E), the top map is consequently arbitrary if e≥r−1e\ge r-1, and must be Σ\Sigma-linear if e≤r−2e\le r-2.

A map out of QaQ_a is determined by the image of 1+Ja1+J^a, which must be killed by JaJ^a. In an ordinary string a nonzero vector with bb layers remaining is killed by JaJ^a exactly when a≥ba\ge b, since tt shifts by the identity. In a string ending in a trace the same test holds on coefficient layers: the last coefficient-to-scalar map can detect any nonzero coefficient by varying the multiplier. These tests will also be used for lifts through a quotient or projective cover.

Truncation lifting. Suppose the restriction of a map to radicals, after left Σ\Sigma-linear splittings, has the form

[Fr+1(E)⟶Fr(E)]⊕id⁡R,r+1≤L−1,\left[F_{r+1}(E)\longrightarrow F_r(E)\right]\oplus\operatorname{id}_R,\qquad r+1\le L-1,

where EE is free. Add the cover Qrdim⁡kE⟶Fr(E)Q_r^{\dim_k E}\longrightarrow F_r(E) induced by a kk-basis of the first layer EE. Then every zero-top map from any QaQ_a or CeC_e lifts through the augmented map.

Here RR is the complementary target summand, which lifts by the identity. Maps from a QaQ_a into the first layer of the defect string lift through its QrQ_r-cover; maps landing farther down lift through a left Σ\Sigma-linear section of the coefficient multiplication map. For a CeC_e-source, an arbitrary top occurs only when e≥r−1e\ge r-1, and then factors through the standard QrQ_r-cover. A coefficient-linear top, when e≤r−2e\le r-2, extends to Fr+1(E)F_{r+1}(E). Positive-degree components lift through the positive radical layers of the QrQ_r-cover, again using a left Σ\Sigma-linear section. This treats all homogeneous components.

The kernel contributed by this augmented defect map is the module

Ur(E)=(E,Σ⊗kE,…,Σ⊗kE⏟r−1 layers,E),U_r(E)=\left(E,\underbrace{\Sigma\otimes_k E,\ldots,\Sigma\otimes_k E}_{r-1\text{ layers}},E\right),

with insertion at the first transition, multiplication on the first factor between tensor layers, and coefficient multiplication at the last transition. For r=1r=1, tbtb sends x∈Ex\in E in the first layer to bx∈Ebx\in E in the second. To see the kernel, identify its top with the top of the added cover and write μE(b⊗x)=bx\mu_E(b\otimes x)=bx for its multiplication map. In each degree 1,…,r−11,\ldots,r-1 the pair of coordinates in the two channels is (−μE(z),z)(-\mu_E(z),z) for z∈Σ⊗kEz\in\Sigma\otimes_k E. In degree rr only the first channel remains. Taking its negative as the final coordinate gives the stated last action. For E=ΣbE=\Sigma^b, it is UrbU_r^b, where Ur=Ur(Σ)U_r=U_r(\Sigma). Set U0(E)=EU_0(E)=E, viewed as semisimple. The case r=0r=0 is the semisimple kernel of the contraction itself, without an added quotient cover.

Trace lifting. Every map from a QaQ_a or CeC_e to InI_n, for n≤L−1n\le L-1, lifts through

Fn⟶In,F_n\longrightarrow I_n,

which is the identity on its first n−1n-1 coefficient layers and τ\tau on its last layer. If a homogeneous map starts in degree jj, the two tails beginning there have the same form with length n−jn-j. It suffices to lift into the first layer of those tails.

For a CeC_e-map to the first coefficient layer, if e≥n−1e \ge n-1, its top AA is arbitrary. A lift uses the same AA on top and b⊗c↦bA(c)b \otimes c \mapsto bA(c) on every subsequent layer, including the last. Composing the last map with τ\tau recovers the given map. When e≤n−2e \le n-2, comparison at that contraction yields

τ(xA(c))=f(xc)\tau(xA(c)) = f(xc)

for a functional ff. Write f(x)=τ(xu)f(x)=\tau(xu). Nondegeneracy forces A(c)=cuA(c)=cu, which lifts coefficientwise. If the tail has length one, its maps lift through any kk-linear section of τ\tau. For a QaQ_a-source, a nonzero map into the first coefficient layer requires a≥na \ge n: otherwise its required annihilation by a radical power contradicts nondegeneracy of the final pairing. The chosen image of 1+Ja1+J^a lifts into the first layer of the ordinary tail, which is killed by JaJ^a.

Resolutions of contracted strings. For 1≤d≤L−21 \le d \le L-2, the module

Ud=(Σ,P,…,P⏟d−1 layers,Σ)U_d = \left(\Sigma,\underbrace{P,\ldots,P}_{d-1\ \text{layers}},\Sigma\right)

is the initial d+1d+1-layer truncation of Cd−1C_{d-1}, and

rad⁡Ud≅Fd−1(Z)⊕Fd.\operatorname{rad} U_d \cong F_{d-1}(Z) \oplus F_d.

Notice that U1=F2U_1=F_2 and U0=F1=SsU_0=F_1=S^s.

Choose a basis e1,…,ese_1,\ldots,e_s of Σ\Sigma, and let

ℓ:Σs⟶Σ,ℓ(c1,…,cs)=∑jcjej.\ell:\Sigma^s \longrightarrow\Sigma,\qquad\ell(c_1,\ldots,c_s)=\sum_j c_j e_j.

For the jj-th Cd−1C_{d-1}-summand, truncate to UdU_d and multiply the top and ordinary coefficients on the right by eje_j, acting by a⊗c↦a⊗ceja\otimes c\mapsto a\otimes ce_j on tensor layers. Together with the cover Qd+1s→UdQ_{d+1}^s\to U_d determined by the basis eje_j of its top, these maps define

pd:Cd−1s⊕Qd+1s⟶Ud.p_d:C_{d-1}^s\oplus Q_{d+1}^s\longrightarrow U_d.

This map is proper. On radicals, the Fd−1(Z)F_{d-1}(Z)-summand splits through the Cd−1C_{d-1}-channels, because a scalar combination of the eje_j is 11. The FdF_d-summand splits through the radical of Qd+1sQ_{d+1}^s. In the coordinates Σ⊗kΣ\Sigma\otimes_k\Sigma supplied by the basis eje_j, the section is a↦a⊗1a\mapsto a\otimes1 in each positive layer. Its image in the tensor layers lies in Σ⊗1\Sigma\otimes1 and in the final layer maps to aa. For a degree-zero CeC_e-map, comparison of insertion and contraction shows that the top is zero if e<d−1e<d-1, is coefficient-linear if e=d−1e=d-1, and is arbitrary if e≥de\ge d. The linear top c↦cuc\mapsto cu lifts by writing uu as a linear combination of the eje_j in the Cd−1C_{d-1}-summands. An arbitrary top lifts to Qd+1sQ_{d+1}^s, since the first dd positive layers of CeC_e are tensor. A QaQ_a-map with nonzero top requires a≥d+1a\ge d+1, because tdt^d is the identity from the first to the last layer of UdU_d. Such a map lifts through Qd+1sQ_{d+1}^s, which is killed by JaJ^a. The sections on radicals lift positive-degree maps.

Let Hd′=ker⁡pdH'_d=\ker p_d. Projecting the kernel to Cd−1sC_{d-1}^s identifies its top and layers 1,…,d−11,\ldots,d-1 with Σs\Sigma^s and PdsP_d^s, since the maps from the Qd+1sQ_{d+1}^s-layers there are isomorphisms onto the target layers. In degrees below dd, the coordinate in the Qd+1sQ_{d+1}^s summand is the negative of the image of the Cd−1sC_{d-1}^s coordinate under the first component of pdp_d, transported by the isomorphism. In degree dd the layer is

V={(f,z)∈Σs⊕P:ℓ(f)+μ(z)=0},(15)V=\{(f,z)\in\Sigma^s\oplus P:\ell(f)+\mu(z)=0\}, \tag*{(15)}

and its later layers are Σs\Sigma^{s}, ending in ksk^{s}. There is a map α:Cds→Hd′\alpha: C^{s}_{d} \to H^{\prime}_{d} that is the identity in the common coordinates except in degree dd, where

α(a⊗(cj)j)=((acj)j,−a⊗ℓ((cj)j)).\alpha(a \otimes(c_j)_j) = ((ac_j)_j,-a \otimes\ell((c_j)_j)).

In degree dd, the first coordinate is contraction in Cd−1sC^{s}_{d-1}, and the second is the negative of the tensor map from the preceding degree. The next layer receives only the first coordinate, by multiplication or, at the last step, by trace. Thus α\alpha commutes with the tbtb-actions, including d=1d=1, when the preceding degree is the top. To see surjectivity, lift zz through −id⁡Σ⊗ℓ-\operatorname{id}_{\Sigma}\otimes\ell. The discrepancy in the first coordinate then lies in ker⁡ℓ\ker\ell and can be corrected in Σ⊗kker⁡ℓ\Sigma\otimes_k\ker\ell, since coefficient multiplication surjects onto ker⁡ℓ\ker\ell. Its coefficient kernel is

E0=ker⁡(μs)∩ker⁡(id⁡Σ⊗ℓ)≅Σq2.E_0=\ker(\mu^{s})\cap\ker(\operatorname{id}_{\Sigma}\otimes\ell)\cong\Sigma^{q^2}.

Indeed, ker⁡ℓ≅Σq\ker\ell\cong\Sigma^{q}, and E0E_0 is the kernel of the multiplication map Σ⊗kker⁡ℓ→ker⁡ℓ\Sigma\otimes_k\ker\ell\to\ker\ell. For a left Σ\Sigma-basis u1,…,uqu_1,\ldots,u_q of ker⁡ℓ\ker\ell, the map ∑i=1qaiui↦∑i=1qai⊗ui\sum_{i=1}^{q}a_i u_i\mapsto\sum_{i=1}^{q}a_i\otimes u_i, with ai∈Σa_i\in\Sigma, is a left Σ\Sigma-linear section of multiplication for the first-factor action. Hence E0E_0 is projective over the local algebra Σ\Sigma, so it is free of rank sq−q=q2sq-q=q^2.

Using the same left Σ\Sigma-linear splitting of Ps→VP^{s}\to V in degrees 1,…,d1,\ldots,d identifies the radical restriction of α\alpha with

[Fd(E0)⟶Fd−1(E0)]⊕id⁡R.[F_d(E_0)\longrightarrow F_{d-1}(E_0)]\oplus\operatorname{id}_{R}.

The truncation lifting rule therefore supplies a proper cover of the zero-top part after adjoining Qd−1sq2Q^{sq^2}_{d-1}. For a degree-zero map Ce→Hd′C_e\to H'_d, the final scalar layers force its top to be c↦(λjc)c\mapsto(\lambda_jc). If e<de<d, its projection to Qd+1sq2Q^{s q^2}_{d+1} has zero top, so ℓ((λjc)j)=0\ell((\lambda_jc)_j)=0; independence of the eje_j forces all λj=0\lambda_j=0. If e≥de\ge d, its top lifts through the canonical quotient Ce→CdC_e\to C_d. All QaQ_a with a<La<L have zero top into this full-length kernel, and BLB_L lifts by projectivity. Thus there is a proper exact sequence

0⟶Ud−1q2⟶Cds⊕Qd−1sq2⟶Cd−1s⊕Qd+1sq2⟶Ud⟶0.0\longrightarrow U^{q^2}_{d-1}\longrightarrow C^{s}_{d}\oplus Q^{s q^2}_{d-1}\longrightarrow C^{s}_{d-1}\oplus Q^{s q^2}_{d+1}\longrightarrow U_d\longrightarrow0.

Applying HH leaves an exact sequence with two projective middle terms. Since U0≅SsU_0\cong S^{s} belongs to add⁡M\operatorname{add}M, induction gives

pd⁡ΓH(Ud)≤2d.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma}H(U_d)\le2d.

Ordinary strings and the projective summand. For 2≤r≤L−12\le r\le L-1, consider

C0s⊕Qrs⟶Fr,C^{s}_{0}\oplus Q^{s}_{r}\longrightarrow F_r,

using truncation followed by right multiplication by eje_j on the jj-th C0C_0, and the top basis eje_j for the quotient cover. Coefficient-linear CeC_e-tops lift through C0sC^{s}_{0}, using the maps Ce→C0C_e\to C_0 and scalar combinations of the eje_j. Arbitrary tops are allowed when e≥r−1e\ge r-1, and lift through QrsQ^{s}_{r}. A QaQ_a-map with nonzero top requires a≥ra\ge r, so it lifts through QrsQ^{s}_{r}. The radical of the quotient cover splits onto the target radical by a↦a⊗1a\mapsto a\otimes1 in each positive layer, lifting the positive-degree components.

Its kernel HrH_r has top Σs\Sigma^{s}, with the ksk^{s} coordinate fixed by cancellation of the two maps on top. In degrees 1,…,r−11,\ldots,r-1 the equation is ℓ(f)+μ(z)=0\ell(f)+\mu(z)=0, so these layers are VV. At degree rr and above, only the C0sC^{s}_{0} layers remain. The formula for α\alpha on degree dd in the preceding calculation, now used at every degree 1,…,r−11,\ldots,r-1, defines

Cr−1s⟶Hr(16)C^{s}_{r-1}\longrightarrow H_r \tag*{(16)}

with kernel Fr−1q2F_{r-1}^{q^2}. Here the entire radical restriction splits: use the same left Σ\Sigma-linear section of Ps→VP^s \to V in each of the first r−1r-1 layers. It commutes with left multiplication between repeated layers, and its composite with μs\mu^s is projection to the first coordinate of VV, which gives the next transition. Every zero-top map therefore lifts. The full-length final trace again forces scalar-coordinate tops from CeC_e, by projection to C0sC_0^s. If e<r−1e<r-1, the projection to QrsQ_r^s has zero top by the tensor target test, hence ℓ((λjc)j)=0\ell((\lambda_jc)_j)=0 for every c∈Σc\in\Sigma. At c=1c=1, independence of the eje_j gives λj=0\lambda_j=0. If e≥r−1e\ge r-1, the top lifts by contracting Ce→Cr−1C_e\to C_{r-1} in the corresponding channels. A QaQ_a-map into the kernel with nonzero top projects to a QaQ_a-map into C0sC_0^s with nonzero top, requiring a=La=L; it lifts by projectivity. Consequently

0⟶Fr−1q2⟶Cr−1s⟶C0s⊕Qrs⟶Fr⟶00\longrightarrow F_{r-1}^{q^2}\longrightarrow C_{r-1}^s\longrightarrow C_0^s\oplus Q_r^s\longrightarrow F_r\longrightarrow0

is proper. After applying HH, there are two projective middle terms. The base F1≅SsF_1\cong S^s gives

pd⁡ΓH(Fr)≤2r−2.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} H(F_r)\le2r-2.

A map from an indecomposable summand of MM to BLB_L that is nonzero on the top is surjective by Nakayama’s lemma. It splits by projectivity and is therefore an isomorphism by indecomposability. Thus the maps in the radical of H(BL)H(B_L) are exactly those with image in J=FL−1J=F_{L-1}, and 0→H(FL−1)→H(BL)→TBL→00\to H(F_{L-1})\to H(B_L)\to T_{B_L}\to0 is exact. Since H(BL)H(B_L) is projective,

pd⁡ΓTBL≤2L−3.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{B_L}\le2L-3.

The simples attached to the contraction modules. For 0≤d≤L−30\le d\le L-3, a relative radical approximation is

Cd+1⊕Qdsq⟶Cd,C_{d+1}\oplus Q_d^{sq}\longrightarrow C_d,

The first component is πd+1\pi_{d+1}, the contraction at degree d+1d+1. The second covers Fd(Z)F_d(Z) inside the radical. Its kernel is UdqU_d^q, by the truncation lifting rule. The same rule lifts every zero-top map. A nonzero top map from a different CeC_e occurs precisely when e≥d+1e\ge d+1, by the full-length scalar top condition and the tensor target test. It is the corresponding scalar multiple of the iterated contraction. The radical endomorphisms of CdC_d have zero top. Among QaQ_a-sources only QLQ_L can have nonzero top, and it lifts through the surjection by projectivity. Hence

pd⁡ΓTCd≤2d+2.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{C_d}\le2d+2.

For the last contraction module, use

BLs⊕QL−2sq⟶CL−2.B_L^s\oplus Q_{L-2}^{sq}\longrightarrow C_{L-2}.

On radicals, the splitting P=Z⊕ΣP=Z\oplus\Sigma identifies the projective-cover part with

[FL−1(Z)⟶FL−2(Z)]⊕[FL−1⟶IL−1].[F_{L-1}(Z)\longrightarrow F_{L-2}(Z)]\oplus[F_{L-1}\longrightarrow I_{L-1}].

The projective map sends the basis of the top of BLsB_L^s to the basis eje_j of the top of CL−2C_{L-2}. In its positive layers the action is insertion up to degree L−2L-2 and the trace of multiplication in degree L−1L-1, giving the displayed splitting. All CeC_e-maps in the radical have zero top, and the only QaQ_a allowing nonzero top is BLB_L. The two lifting rules handle the zero-top components and projectivity handles the BLB_L-source. The kernel is

UL−2q⊕Sq,U_{L-2}^q\oplus S^q,

where the semisimple term is the kernel of the last trace. Therefore

pd⁡ΓTCL−2≤2L−2.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{C_{L-2}}\le2L-2.

The simples attached to the nonmaximal quotients. Choose a basis ϕ1,…,ϕs\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_s of DΣD\Sigma with ϕ1(1)=0\phi_1(1)=0, possible since s>1s>1. Choose c0∈Σc_0\in\Sigma with ϕ1(c0)=1\phi_1(c_0)=1. For 1≤a≤L−21\leq a\leq L-2, the relative radical approximation is

Qa+1⊕Ca−1s⟶Qa,Q_{a+1}\oplus C_{a-1}^{s}\longrightarrow Q_a,

using the quotient map and the maps with top components ϕj\phi_j, which on tensor layers send b⊗cb\otimes c to bϕj(c)b\phi_j(c). A CeC_e-map can have nonzero top only when e≥a−1e\geq a-1, by the tensor target test on the positive layers of QaQ_a. Its top is a linear combination of the ϕj\phi_j and lifts by contraction to Ca−1sC_{a-1}^{s}. A nonzero top from a different QbQ_b requires b>ab>a, and factors through Qa+1Q_{a+1}. If b=ab=a, the endomorphism is radical exactly when its top is zero. All zero-top maps lift because

b⊗c0−bc0⊗1∈Zb\otimes c_0-bc_0\otimes1\in Z

maps to bb under the first functional channel. This gives a left Σ\Sigma-linear section throughout rad⁡Qa\operatorname{rad}Q_a. For a=1a=1 the radical is zero, and the top argument suffices.

Let HaQH_a^Q be the kernel of this approximation. In degrees 0,…,a−10,\ldots,a-1, projection to Ca−1sC_{a-1}^{s} identifies the kernel with its layers, since the quotient map from Qa+1Q_{a+1} is an isomorphism in those degrees. In degree aa both source layers survive and the target layer is zero, giving Σs⊕Σ\Sigma^s\oplus\Sigma. Above degree aa, only Ca−1sC_{a-1}^{s} contributes. The natural map Cas→HaQC_a^{s}\to H_a^Q is the identity on the common coordinates and in degree aa is

β(b⊗(cj))=((bcj),−b∑jϕj(cj)).\beta\bigl(b\otimes(c_j)\bigr)=\left((bc_j),-b\sum_j\phi_j(c_j)\right).

Given the first coordinate, lift it through the componentwise multiplication Ps→ΣsP^s\to\Sigma^s. The difference in the last coordinate is corrected by the displayed element of ZZ in the first channel. This proves surjectivity. The transition into degree aa multiplies in the Ca−1sC_{a-1}^{s} coordinates and evaluates the negative functional in the quotient coordinate. The transition out of degree aa uses only the first coordinate, so β\beta commutes with both. Its coefficient kernel ES⊆ker⁡μsE_S\subseteq\ker\mu^s is free of rank

bS=s2−s−1.b_S=s^2-s-1.

This is the difference between the ranks s2s^2 of PsP^s and s+1s+1 of Σs⊕Σ\Sigma^s\oplus\Sigma. Choose a left Σ\Sigma-linear section of β\beta and use it in degrees 1,…,a1,\ldots,a. Since the first component of β\beta is μs\mu^s, the complement continues through the remaining coefficient and scalar layers. The ESE_S-component truncates from Fa(ES)F_a(E_S) to Fa−1(ES)F_{a-1}(E_S). Adjoining Qa−1bsQ_{a-1}^{\mathrm{bs}} therefore gives a cover with kernel Ua−1bsU_{a-1}^{\mathrm{bs}}. It is proper on zero-top maps by the truncation lifting rule. A degree-zero CeC_e-map to HaQH_a^Q has scalar-coordinate top. If e<ae<a, its Qa+1Q_{a+1}-component has zero top. The kernel relation on the top then gives ∑jλjϕj(c)=0\sum_j\lambda_j\phi_j(c)=0 for all cc, so λj=0\lambda_j=0 by independence. If e≥ae\geq a, the top lifts through Ce→CaC_e\to C_a. A nonzero top from QbQ_b projects to a nonzero top in Ca−1sC_{a-1}^{s}, so b=Lb=L; it lifts by projectivity. Applying HH to this cover gives pd⁡ΓH(HaQ)≤1+2(a−1)\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma}H(H_a^Q)\leq1+2(a-1). The radical approximation adds two projective terms, giving

pd⁡ΓTQa≤2a+1(1≤a≤L−2).\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma}T_{Q_a}\leq2a+1\qquad(1\leq a\leq L-2).

The maximal proper quotient. For QL−1Q_{L-1}, a relative radical approximation is

CL−2s⟶QL−1,C_{L-2}^{s}\longrightarrow Q_{L-1},

with the same functional channels. For CeC_e, a nonzero top requires e=L−2e=L-2 and lifts through these channels. The same section on radicals as for QaQ_a lifts zero-top maps. The projective BLB_L-source lifts through this surjection. Put

Φ:Σs⟶k,Φ(c)=∑jϕj(cj),W=ker⁡Φ,v=dim⁡kW=s2−1.\Phi:\Sigma^s\longrightarrow k,\qquad\Phi(c)=\sum_j\phi_j(c_j),\qquad W=\ker\Phi,\qquad v=\dim_k W=s^2-1.

The kernel is the module

G(W)=(W,Σ⊗kW,…,Σ⊗kW⏟L−2 layers,ks),G(W)=\left(W,\underbrace{\Sigma\otimes_k W,\ldots,\Sigma\otimes_k W}_{L-2\ \text{layers}},k^s\right),

with (tb)w=b⊗w(tb)w=b\otimes w from the top, left multiplication on the first factor between tensor layers, and a⊗(cj)j↦(τ(bacj))ja\otimes(c_j)_j\mapsto(\tau(bac_j))_j at the last transition.

The subspace WW satisfies

ΣW=Σs,{λ∈ks:(λjc)j∈W for all c∈Σ}=0.\Sigma W=\Sigma^s,\qquad\{\lambda\in k^s:(\lambda_jc)_j\in W\text{ for all }c\in\Sigma\}=0.

For the first, if ΣW\Sigma W were proper, the codimension-one condition would force ΣW=W\Sigma W=W. The one-dimensional quotient would give a character χ:Σ→k\chi:\Sigma\to k satisfying Φ(bc)=χ(b)Φ(c)\Phi(bc)=\chi(b)\Phi(c). Applying this coordinatewise and using that the ϕj\phi_j form a basis gives bc=χ(b)cbc=\chi(b)c for all b,cb,c, hence b=χ(b)1b=\chi(b)1, contrary to s>1s>1. For the second identity, the condition says ∑jλjϕj=0\sum_j\lambda_j\phi_j=0, so every λj=0\lambda_j=0.

Thus the multiplication map

μW:Σ⊗kW⟶Σs,b⊗w⟼bw\mu_W:\Sigma\otimes_k W\longrightarrow\Sigma^s,\qquad b\otimes w\longmapsto bw

is a split left Σ\Sigma-epimorphism, with free kernel EWE_W of rank v−s=s2−s−1v-s=s^2-s-1. On radicals,

rad⁡G(W)≅FL−2(EW)⊕IL−1s.\operatorname{rad}G(W)\cong F_{L-2}(E_W)\oplus I^s_{L-1}.

There is a mixed cover

BLv⊕QL−2s(v−s)⟶G(W).B_L^v\oplus Q_{L-2}^{s(v-s)}\longrightarrow G(W).

The projective part sends the standard generators to a kk-basis of WW, and the second part covers FL−2(EW)F_{L-2}(E_W) inside the radical. On positive layers the projective part is the identity on Σ⊗kW\Sigma\otimes_k W up to degree L−2L-2, followed by μW\mu_W and the coordinatewise trace. After splitting μW\mu_W this gives

[FL−1(EW)⟶FL−2(EW)]⊕[FL−1s⟶IL−1s].[F_{L-1}(E_W)\longrightarrow F_{L-2}(E_W)]\oplus[F^s_{L-1}\longrightarrow I^s_{L-1}].

The added quotient cover and the truncation lifting rule handle the defect string, while the trace lifting rule handles the second summand. The composite of a CeC_e-map into G(W)G(W) with its inclusion in CL−2sC^s_{L-2} has degree-zero top c↦(λjc)jc\mapsto(\lambda_jc)_j, by the trace relation. Its image lies in WW, so the second identity forces λ=0\lambda=0. If a<La<L, a QaQ_a-map has zero top because a nonzero w∈Ww\in W is detected in at least one coordinate by tL−1bt^{L-1}b for a suitable bb; the BLB_L-source lifts by projectivity. Hence the mixed cover is proper. Its kernel is

UL−2v−s⊕Ss(s−1).U^{v-s}_{L-2}\oplus S^{s(s-1)}.

The trace part contributes (ker⁡τ)s(\ker\tau)^s in the final layer, on which JJ acts by zero. The truncation part contributes the other summand by the truncation rule. The projective dimension of $H applied to this kernel is at most 2(L−2)2(L-2). One term for its proper cover and two for the radical approximation give

pd⁡ΓTQL−1≤2L−1.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{Q_{L-1}} \leq2L-1.

The bounds for the simple left Γ\Gamma-modules are

pd⁡ΓTCd≤2d+2(0≤d≤L−2),\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{C_d} \leq2d+2 \qquad(0 \leq d \leq L-2),
pd⁡ΓTQa≤2a+1(1≤a≤L−2),\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{Q_a} \leq2a+1 \qquad(1 \leq a \leq L-2),
pd⁡ΓTQL−1≤2L−1,\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{Q_{L-1}} \leq2L-1,
pd⁡ΓTBL≤2L−3.\operatorname{pd}_{\Gamma} T_{B_L} \leq2L-3.

Therefore gl.dim⁡Γ≤2L−1\operatorname{gl.dim}\Gamma\leq2L-1. Since MM is a generator-cogenerator, repdim⁡BL≤2L−1\operatorname{repdim} B_L \leq2L-1. □\square

Proof of Theorem 1. Lemmas 2 and 5 give the value for ALA_L, and Lemmas 4 and 6 give the value for BLB_L. At L=3L=3 the squarefree monomial basis has 16 elements, so dim⁡kB3=1+2⋅16=33\dim_k B_3=1+2\cdot16=33 and dim⁡kA3=4⋅33=132\dim_k A_3=4\cdot33=132. □\square

Zhili College, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China

Email address: [email protected]

References

  1. [1]M. Auslander, Representation dimension of Artin algebras, Queen Mary College Mathematics Notes, London, 1971.
  2. [2]O. Iyama, Finiteness of representation dimension, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 131 (2003), 1011–1014.DOI
  3. [3]S. Oppermann, Lower bounds for Auslander’s representation dimension, Duke Math. J. 148 (2009), 211–249.DOI
  4. [4]C. Psaroudakis, Homological theory of recollements of abelian categories, Ph.D. thesis, University of Ioannina, 2013.DOI
  5. [5]R. Rouquier, Representation dimension of exterior algebras, Invent. Math. 165 (2006), 357–367.DOI
  6. [6]C. Xi, On the representation dimension of finite dimensional algebras, J. Algebra 226 (2000), 332–346.DOI
  7. [7]C. Xi, Representation dimension and quasi-hereditary algebras, Adv. Math. 168 (2002), 193–212.DOI
  8. [8]C. Xi, The relative Auslander–Reiten theory of modules, preprint, author’s version.
  9. [9]C. Xi, Open problems, https://www.wemath.cn/~ccxi/EngOpenProblem.php.
  10. [10]C. Xi, Frobenius bimodules and flat-dominant dimensions, Sci. China Math. 64 (2021), 33–44.
  11. [11]A. Zhang and S. Zhang, On the finitistic dimension conjecture of Artin algebras, J. Algebra 320 (2008), 253–258.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_py6m7vxp
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 7

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