Introduction

The Grothendieck–Teichmüller Lie algebra records the infinitesimal symmetries of the associativity and braiding constraints for parenthesized braids. Its defining equations are short, but they place conditions in every weight on a free Lie algebra in two letters. The Deligne–Drinfeld conjecture predicts that these conditions leave exactly a free Lie algebra with one generator in each odd weight starting at three. We prove this conjecture, including generation of the entire solution space.

The statement

Let L=Lie⁡Q⟨x,y⟩L = \operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle x,y\rangle, graded by the total number of letters. We call this degree the weight. For a finite set of labels, the infinitesimal pure braid Lie algebra tn\mathfrak{t}_n has generators tij=tjit_{ij} = t_{ji}, i≠ji \ne j, and relations

[tij,tkℓ]=0(i,j,k,ℓ distinct),[tij,tik+tjk]=0(i,j,k distinct).(1)[t_{ij},t_{k\ell}] = 0 \quad(i,j,k,\ell\ \text{distinct}), \qquad[t_{ij},t_{ik} + t_{jk}] = 0 \quad(i,j,k\ \text{distinct}). \tag*{(1)}

Every generator has weight one. Let W⊂LW \subset L be the graded vector space of polynomials satisfying

ψ(x,y)+ψ(y,x)=0.(2)\psi(x,y)+\psi(y,x)=0. \tag*{(2)}
ψ(x,y)+ψ(y,−x−y)+ψ(−x−y,x)=0.(3)\psi(x,y)+\psi(y,-x-y)+\psi(-x-y,x)=0. \tag*{(3)}
ψ(t12,t23+t24)+ψ(t13+t23,t34)=ψ(t23,t34)+ψ(t12+t13,t24+t34)+ψ(t12,t23).(4)\begin{aligned} \psi(t_{12},t_{23}+t_{24})+\psi(t_{13}+t_{23},t_{34}) \\ =\psi(t_{23},t_{34})+\psi(t_{12}+t_{13},t_{24}+t_{34})+\psi(t_{12},t_{23}). \tag*{(4)} \end{aligned}

The last equation is imposed in t4t_4. These are the usual defining equations of grt1\mathfrak{grt}_1; see [16], Section 6.1. We work first with their polynomial solution space W=⨁nWnW=\bigoplus_n W_n, where WnW_n is its weight-nn piece. The usual completed algebra is W^=∏nWn\widehat{W}=\prod_n W_n.

For ψ∈L\psi\in L, define the derivation

Dψ(x)=0,Dψ(y)=[y,ψ].(5)D_\psi(x)=0,\qquad D_\psi(y)=[y,\psi]. \tag*{(5)}

The Ihara bracket, with the convention used throughout this paper, is

{ψ,ϕ}=Dψ(ϕ)−Dϕ(ψ)+[ψ,ϕ].(6)\{\psi,\phi\}=D_\psi(\phi)-D_\phi(\psi)+[\psi,\phi]. \tag*{(6)}

Theorem 1.1. There are homogeneous elements σ2k+1∈W2k+1\sigma_{2k+1}\in W_{2k+1}, one for each k≥1k\ge1, for which

Lie⁡Q⟨e3,e5,e7,…⟩⟶(W,{ , }),e2k+1⟼σ2k+1,\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle e_3,e_5,e_7,\ldots\rangle\longrightarrow(W,\{\ ,\ \}),\qquad e_{2k+1}\longmapsto\sigma_{2k+1},

is an isomorphism of graded Lie algebras. In particular, WW is closed under the bracket (1.6). The induced map on completions by weight is a continuous graded isomorphism.

The generators in Theorem 1.1 are not canonical. The assertion combines two requirements: there are no additional Lie relations among them, and they span every solution of (1.2)–(1.4).

Context and the main estimate

The arithmetic study of the fundamental group of the projective line minus three points provides a central setting for these symmetry questions; Deligne developed its motivic and tangential-basepoint framework in [5], Introduction and Section 15. Drinfeld’s associators express compatibility between reassociation and braiding, and their symmetries led to the Grothendieck–Teichmüller group and its Lie algebra [6]. The equations above are the corresponding infinitesimal compatibility conditions.

The conjecture has three parts: existence of the proposed odd-weight elements, freeness of the Lie algebra they generate, and exhaustion of the equation space. Drinfeld’s Proposition 6.3 credits Ihara with the odd-weight existence result and gives an associator proof. Brown’s work on mixed Tate motives over Z\mathbb{Z} proves the faithfulness of the motivic action on the fundamental group of the three-punctured line [3]. The graded Lie algebra of the prounipotent motivic Galois group is free on generators corresponding to weights 3,5,7,…3,5,7,\ldots; its inclusion in the associator symmetry algebra therefore supplies a free Lie subalgebra of WW [4], Section 1.4.2. Willwacher subsequently proved freeness for any homogeneous family of solutions, one in each odd weight 2k+1≥32k+1\ge3, whose corresponding element has nonzero coefficient of x2kyx^{2k}y [17], Theorem 1.2. This coefficient lies in the depth-one component, consisting of words with exactly one occurrence of yy.

Freeness leaves open whether there are additional solutions of the defining equations; see [16], Section 9. Naef and Willwacher’s computations of the linearized Kashiwara–Vergne algebra, together with the known inclusions, establish the required equality through weight 29 [13], Theorem 5 and Corollary 7. Our main estimate is the all-weight upper bound

dim⁡QWn≤dim⁡QLie⁡Q⟨e3,e5,e7,…,en⟩,wt⁡(ej)=j,\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} W_n \le\dim_{\mathbb{Q}}\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle e_3,e_5,e_7,\ldots,e_n\rangle,\qquad\operatorname{wt}(e_j)=j,

proved in Corollary 5.4 for the full rational equation space. The known free subalgebra gives the reverse inequality. The proof here also obtains that lower bound internally: Sections 6–8 construct a rational subspace of solutions closed under the Ihara bracket, supply its odd-weight depth-one values, and choose integral generators attaining the bound. These choices connect the rational construction to the characteristic-two argument.

The completed assertion has a graph-theoretic consequence. Over Q\mathbb{Q}, Willwacher’s isomorphism [16] [Theorem 1.1] identifies the zeroth cohomology of Kontsevich’s graph complex with W^\widehat{W}. Thus

H0(GC2)≅Lie⁡Q⟨e3,e5,e7,…⟩.H^{0}(\mathrm{GC}_{2}) \cong\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle e_{3},e_{5},e_{7},\ldots\rangle.

The graph complex and its completion are taken in the conventions of that source. The superscript zero is a cohomological degree, whereas the generator indices specify weights; no other cohomological degree is computed here.

Proof strategy

The main step is a degeneration of the pentagon in characteristic two. Inside the free associative algebra, put

A=x2,C=[x,y],B=y,A=x^{2},\qquad C=[x,y],\qquad B=y,

and filter by the number of occurrences of BB. The pentagon for a leading part becomes a relation in the enveloping algebra of the level-two cyclotomic hyperplane arrangement [7], [Section 1.4], modulo terms of lower count. The comparison uses a common ordering procedure: corrections raise the count in the braid algebra and lower it in the arrangement algebra. Keeping only the common count-preserving terms transfers the relation without any independence assumption on the target algebra.

Integral deletion operators on words then detect the leading part after setting A=0A=0. Their analytic antecedents are the total-differential formulas for iterated integrals and hyperlogarithms of Goncharov [8] [Theorem 2.1] and Panzer [14] [Lemma 3.3.30]. The operators used here specialize the integral algebraic differential operators of Hirose and Sato [10] [Section 2]; their use with cyclotomic braid algebras and ratios of sums and differences follows Hirose’s construction [9] [Sections 4.3 and 6]. Here the arrangement relations are proved over the integers before reduction, and the characteristic-two comparison is proved directly. A shift symmetry B↦B+s(C)B\mapsto B+s(C), followed by a Vandermonde argument, confines the image to the ordinary free Lie algebra on

ad⁡CkB,k≥1.\operatorname{ad}_{C}^{k}B,\qquad k\geq1.

These letters have exactly the weights predicted by the conjecture. The ordering comparison and the integral deletion test provide separate tools for extracting information from filtered braid relations.

To attain the bound within the proof, we construct rational solutions with a nonzero coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y in every odd weight n≥3n\geq3. Following Drinfeld’s associator proof [6] [Proposition 6.3], we compare regularized braid holonomy with the rule obtained by conjugating paths and negating the chord generators. We implement this comparison in the parenthesized-chord formalism of Bar-Natan [2] [Sections 2–3], with the required operations and limits proved explicitly. The logarithm of the comparison, evaluated on a reassociation arrow, has the required nonzero coefficient. This uses the nonvanishing of a convergent integral, and requires no arithmetic independence assertion about its values.

Finally, we work with saturated lattices over Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}. The characteristic-two bound applies to reductions of rational solutions. Independent Hall words in previously chosen generators, together with a new depth-one value in odd weight, attain the bound at each step. Equality forces the next integral generator to occupy the required leading filtration piece. This proves generation and freeness simultaneously.

Organization and conventions

Section 2 establishes the integral algebra and a special-derivation identity. Sections 3–5 prove the dimension bound. Sections 6 and 7 construct the odd-weight values. Section 8 completes the induction.

All Lie algebras in characteristic two are ordinary Lie algebras, with [u,u]=0[u,u]=0. Their enveloping algebras are ordinary associative enveloping algebras. We never identify all primitive elements in characteristic two with ordinary Lie elements. All completions are by weight, and all infinite constructions are interpreted first in each finite weight quotient.

Integral Lie algebras and the special identity

Throughout, a Lie algebra is an ordinary Lie algebra: its bracket is alternating, including in characteristic two. Put R=Z(2)={a/b∈Q:b is odd}R=\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}=\{a/b\in\mathbb{Q}: b\text{ is odd}\}, with residue field F2=R/2R\mathbb{F}_2=R/2R. We will pass from the rational solution space to an embedded reduction of the same dimension. For this passage we need torsion-free integral targets for the defining equations, together with an additional identity proved over Q\mathbb{Q} before reduction.

Lemma 2.1. The solution spaces W1W_1 and W2W_2 are zero.

Proof. For ψ(x,y)=αx+βy\psi(x,y)=\alpha x+\beta y, the left side minus the right side of the pentagon is −αt12−βt34-\alpha t_{12}-\beta t_{34}. The degree-one braid generators are linearly independent, so α=β=0\alpha=\beta=0. The degree-two free Lie algebra is spanned by [x,y][x,y], and the three-term expression for this polynomial is 3[x,y]3[x,y]. Thus it too has no nonzero rational solution.

Lemma 2.2 (Ordinary Lie lattices). Let XX be a finite alphabet, and let K(X)K(X) be the RR-span of all bracket monomials in the free associative algebra R⟨X⟩R\langle X\rangle. It is the free ordinary Lie algebra over RR. Each multihomogeneous piece is finite free, and its rationalization and reduction are, respectively,

K(X)⊗RQ=Lie⁡Q⟨X⟩,K(X)/2K(X)=Lie⁡F2⟨X⟩⊂F2⟨X⟩.K(X)\otimes_R\mathbb{Q}=\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle X\rangle,\qquad K(X)/2K(X)=\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle X\rangle\subset\mathbb{F}_2\langle X\rangle.

In particular, this reduction is injective in associative words, and free ordinary Lie dimensions in every multidegree agree over Q\mathbb{Q} and F2\mathbb{F}_2. The same statements hold for an alphabet with positive integer weights and finitely many letters in each bounded weight.

Proof. We recall the integral free-Lie and PBW facts being used. The Hall–Lyndon construction gives a basis of the free Lie algebra over Z\mathbb{Z}: iterated use of alternation and Jacobi expresses bracket monomials in the standard Lyndon brackets, and the associative expansion of each such bracket has its Lyndon word as leading word, with coefficient one. Distinct leading words give independence over every coefficient ring. Thus base change to RR identifies the abstract free Lie algebra with precisely the displayed bracket span. PBW applies to this free RR-module; in particular its universal enveloping algebra is R⟨X⟩R\langle X\rangle. These are the usual integral versions of the free-Lie basis and PBW theorems [15]; the integral Lyndon and PBW bases are also recalled in [12].

The same Lyndon brackets form bases after base change to Q\mathbb{Q} and F2\mathbb{F}_2, with unchanged multidegrees. This proves the asserted injectivity and equality of dimensions. For a weighted alphabet,

with a new depth-one value in odd weight, attain the bound at each step. Equality forces the next integral generator to occupy the required leading filtration piece. This proves generation and freeness simultaneously.

Organization and conventions

Section 2 establishes the integral algebra and a special-derivation identity. Sections 3–5 prove the dimension bound. Sections 6 and 7 construct the odd-weight values. Section 8 completes the induction.

All Lie algebras in characteristic two are ordinary Lie algebras, with [u,u]=0[u,u]=0. Their enveloping algebras are ordinary associative enveloping algebras. We never identify all primitive elements in characteristic two with ordinary Lie elements. All completions are by weight, and all infinite constructions are interpreted first in each finite weight quotient.

Integral Lie algebras and the special identity

Throughout, a Lie algebra is an ordinary Lie algebra: its bracket is alternating, including in characteristic two. Put R=Z(2)={a/b∈Q:b is odd}R=\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}=\{a/b\in\mathbb{Q}: b\text{ is odd}\}, with residue field F2=R/2R\mathbb{F}_2=R/2R. We will pass from the rational solution space to an embedded reduction of the same dimension. For this passage we need torsion-free integral targets for the defining equations, together with an additional identity proved over Q\mathbb{Q} before reduction.

Lemma 2.1. The solution spaces W1W_1 and W2W_2 are zero.

Proof. For ψ(x,y)=αx+βy\psi(x,y)=\alpha x+\beta y, the left side minus the right side of the pentagon is −αt12−βt34-\alpha t_{12}-\beta t_{34}. The degree-one braid generators are linearly independent, so α=β=0\alpha=\beta=0. The degree-two free Lie algebra is spanned by [x,y][x,y], and the three-term expression for this polynomial is 3[x,y]3[x,y]. Thus it too has no nonzero rational solution.

Lemma 2.2 (Ordinary Lie lattices). Let XX be a finite alphabet, and let K(X)K(X) be the RR-span of all bracket monomials in the free associative algebra R⟨X⟩R\langle X\rangle. It is the free ordinary Lie algebra over RR. Each multihomogeneous piece is finite free, and its rationalization and reduction are, respectively,

K(X)⊗RQ=Lie⁡Q⟨X⟩,K(X)/2K(X)=Lie⁡F2⟨X⟩⊂F2⟨X⟩.K(X)\otimes_R\mathbb{Q}=\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle X\rangle,\qquad K(X)/2K(X)=\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle X\rangle\subset\mathbb{F}_2\langle X\rangle.

In particular, this reduction is injective in associative words, and free ordinary Lie dimensions in every multidegree agree over Q\mathbb{Q} and F2\mathbb{F}_2. The same statements hold for an alphabet with positive integer weights and finitely many letters in each bounded weight.

Proof. We recall the integral free-Lie and PBW facts being used. The Hall–Lyndon construction gives a basis of the free Lie algebra over Z\mathbb{Z}: iterated use of alternation and Jacobi expresses bracket monomials in the standard Lyndon brackets, and the associative expansion of each such bracket has its Lyndon word as leading word, with coefficient one. Distinct leading words give independence over every coefficient ring. Thus base change to RR identifies the abstract free Lie algebra with precisely the displayed bracket span. PBW applies to this free RR-module; in particular its universal enveloping algebra is R⟨X⟩R\langle X\rangle. These are the usual integral versions of the free-Lie basis and PBW theorems [15]; the integral Lyndon and PBW bases are also recalled in [12].

The same Lyndon brackets form bases after base change to Q\mathbb{Q} and F2\mathbb{F}_2, with unchanged multidegrees. This proves the asserted injectivity and equality of dimensions. For a weighted alphabet, restriction to any bounded weight leaves finitely many letters, so the same basis argument applies.

In particular, ordinary Lie membership is a condition stronger than being primitive in a characteristic-two enveloping algebra. For example, x2x^2 is primitive in F2⟨x⟩\mathbb{F}_2\langle x\rangle, whereas the ordinary Lie algebra generated by xx is just F2x\mathbb{F}_2x. We will always retain ordinary Lie membership when using associative words.

For a coefficient ring k∈{R,Q,F2}k \in\{\mathbb{R},\mathbb{Q},\mathbb{F}_2\}, write tq(k)\mathfrak{t}_q(k) for the infinitesimal braid Lie algebra on qq strands, with the presentation in eq:1.

Lemma 2.3 (The free fiber). The map tq(k)⟶tq−1(k)\mathfrak{t}_q(k) \longrightarrow\mathfrak{t}_{q-1}(k) which forgets the last strand is split, and its kernel is the free ordinary Lie algebra on si=tiqs_i=t_{iq}, 1≤i<q1 \leq i < q. Explicitly,

tq(k)=Lie⁡k⟨s1,…,sq−1⟩⋊tq−1(k),(7)\mathfrak{t}_q(k)=\operatorname{Lie}_k\langle s_1,\ldots,s_{q-1}\rangle\rtimes\mathfrak{t}_{q-1}(k), \tag*{(7)}

where a base generator tijt_{ij} acts by the derivation

Dij(si)=[si,sj],Dij(sj)=[sj,si],Dij(sh)=0(h∉{i,j}).D_{ij}(s_i)=[s_i,s_j],\qquad D_{ij}(s_j)=[s_j,s_i],\qquad D_{ij}(s_h)=0\quad(h\notin\{i,j\}).

Multiplication gives an isomorphism of kk-modules

k⟨s1,…,sq−1⟩⊗kU(tq−1(k))→∼U(tq(k)).(8)k\langle s_1,\ldots,s_{q-1}\rangle\otimes_k U(\mathfrak{t}_{q-1}(k))\xrightarrow{\sim}U(\mathfrak{t}_q(k)). \tag*{(8)}

Thus recursive products of free associative fiber words are a basis. Over RR, the Lie algebra and its enveloping algebra are torsion free, and this normal form commutes with rationalization and reduction.

Proof. Any prescription on free generators extends uniquely to a derivation. Derivations DijD_{ij} and DhkD_{hk} with disjoint supports commute. For three distinct indices i,j,hi,j,h, put Sijh=si+sj+shS_{ijh}=s_i+s_j+s_h. On the free subalgebra on these three letters,

Dij+Dih+Djh:z⟼[z,Sijh].D_{ij}+D_{ih}+D_{jh}:z\longmapsto[z,S_{ijh}].

Moreover Dij(Sijh)=0D_{ij}(S_{ijh})=0, so DijD_{ij} commutes with this sum. On every other free generator all these derivations vanish. It follows that [Dij,Dih+Djh]=0[D_{ij},D_{ih}+D_{jh}]=0 on the whole free Lie algebra. Hence (2.2) defines an action of the presented base algebra.

Form its semidirect product with the free Lie algebra on the sis_i. The braid relations involving the last strand say precisely

[tij,sh]=0(h∉{i,j}),[tij,si+sj]=0,[si,tij+sj]=[sj,tij+si]=0.[t_{ij},s_h]=0\quad(h\notin\{i,j\}),\qquad[t_{ij},s_i+s_j]=0,\qquad[s_i,t_{ij}+s_j]=[s_j,t_{ij}+s_i]=0.

They hold by (2.2). Conversely, these relations in the presented braid algebra give exactly that action. The maps between the presented algebra and the semidirect product, taking each generator to its namesake, are consequently inverse. This proves both the presentation and the assertion about the actual kernel.

Inductively the base is a free kk-module. Choose Lie bases for fiber and base, and place the entire fiber basis before the base basis. PBW identifies their ordered products with a basis of the enveloping algebra. Since the enveloping algebra of a free Lie algebra is the free associative algebra, this is exactly (2.3). Induction, starting with one strand, gives the asserted word basis. Lemma 2.2 and the same basis over RR, Q\mathbb{Q}, and F2\mathbb{F}_2 give the last assertions.

We next deduce an additional identity from the defining equations. The first conclusion below is Drinfeld’s special identity [6]. We give a direct proof that also establishes the stated linearization. We use the convention ad⁡a(z)=[a,z]\operatorname{ad}_a(z)=[a,z].

Lemma 2.4 (The special identity). Let ψ∈Wn\psi\in W_n, where n>2n>2. In the free Lie algebra on a,ba,b, with c=−a−bc=-a-b, one has

[a,ψ(b,a)]+[c,ψ(b,c)]=0.[a,\psi(b,a)]+[c,\psi(b,c)]=0.

In addition, for an extra free letter TT,

∂2ψ(a,−a)T=0,\partial_2\psi(a,-a)T=0,

where ∂2\partial_2 means the coefficient of a central parameter tt in ψ(a,−a+tT)\psi(a,-a+tT).

Proof. All calculations in this proof take place over Q\mathbb{Q}. We first rewrite the pentagon in a free kernel, then linearize at a+b+c=0a+b+c=0. Equality of mixed derivatives will force the possible linearization coefficient to vanish.

The free-fiber identity. Forget strand 2 in t4(Q)\mathfrak{t}_4(\mathbb{Q}), and put

a=t12,b=t23,c=t24,u=t13,v=t34.a=t_{12},\qquad b=t_{23},\qquad c=t_{24},\qquad u=t_{13},\qquad v=t_{34}.

By Lemma 2.3, the kernel is the actual free Lie algebra on a,b,ca,b,c. Define

Fa=ψ(u+b,v)−ψ(u,v),Fb=ψ(u+a,v+c)−ψ(u,v),Fc=ψ(u,v+b)−ψ(u,v).\begin{aligned} F_a&=\psi(u+b,v)-\psi(u,v),\\ F_b&=\psi(u+a,v+c)-\psi(u,v),\\ F_c&=\psi(u,v+b)-\psi(u,v). \end{aligned}

Forgetting the fiber sends each displayed difference to zero, so Fa,Fb,FcF_a,F_b,F_c are elements of this free kernel. They are homogeneous of degree nn.

Each of the three expressions before subtracting ψ(u,v)\psi(u,v) commutes with its corresponding letter. For example, [a,u+b]=[a,v]=0[a,u+b]=[a,v]=0 and [b,u+a]=[b,v+c]=0[b,u+a]=[b,v+c]=0; the third case is the same braid relation at cc. The base action fixes S=a+b+cS=a+b+c. Summing the resulting commutators therefore gives

[a,Fa]+[b,Fb]+[c,Fc]=0.[a,F_a]+[b,F_b]+[c,F_c]=0.

Set Δa=Fb−Fa\Delta_a=F_b-F_a and Δc=Fb−Fc\Delta_c=F_b-F_c. We obtain the identity in the free fiber

[S,Fb]=[a,Δa]+[c,Δc].[S,F_b]=[a,\Delta_a]+[c,\Delta_c].

The pentagon gives Δa=ψ(a,b+c)−ψ(a,b)−ψ(b,v)\Delta_a=\psi(a,b+c)-\psi(a,b)-\psi(b,v). The element v+b+cv+b+c is central in the subalgebra on v,b,cv,b,c. A Lie polynomial of degree greater than one is unchanged when a central element is added to an argument: every term in the difference contains that element in a bracket. Thus ψ(b,v)=ψ(b,−b−c)\psi(b,v)=\psi(b,-b-c). Exchanging strands 1 and 4 in the same calculation and using antisymmetry gives the second formula below:

Δa=ψ(a,b+c)−ψ(a,b)−ψ(b,−b−c),(9)\Delta_a=\psi(a,b+c)-\psi(a,b)-\psi(b,-b-c), \tag*{(9)}
Δc=−ψ(c,a+b)+ψ(c,b)+ψ(b,−b−a).(10)\Delta_c=-\psi(c,a+b)+\psi(c,b)+\psi(b,-b-a). \tag*{(10)}

Both differences vanish when S=0S=0: the two remaining terms cancel by antisymmetry and ψ(z,−z)=0\psi(z,-z)=0 in degree greater than one.

The ideal generated by SS is stable under the base action, so the quotient fiber is Lie⁡Q⟨a,b⟩\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle a,b\rangle, with c=−a−bc=-a-b. In this quotient the actions of u,vu,v are ad⁡c,ad⁡a\operatorname{ad}_c,\operatorname{ad}_a, respectively. For example,

[u,a]=[a,b]=[c,a],[u,b]=[b,a]=[c,b],[u,c]=0,[u,a]=[a,b]=[c,a],\qquad[u,b]=[b,a]=[c,b],\qquad[u,c]=0,

and [v,a]=0[v,a]=0, [v,b]=[b,c]=[a,b][v,b]=[b,c]=[a,b], [v,c]=[c,b]=[a,c][v,c]=[c,b]=[a,c]. It follows that ψ(u,v)\psi(u,v) acts on the quotient fiber by ad⁡ψ(c,a)\operatorname{ad}_{\psi(c,a)}. Since the expression defining Fb+ψ(u,v)F_b+\psi(u,v) commutes with bb, we have

[b,Fb+ψ(c,a)]=0[b,F_b+\psi(c,a)]=0

in this free Lie quotient.

The centralizer of bb in the ordinary free Lie algebra on a,ba,b is Qb\mathbb{Q}b. To see this directly, embed it in associative words. For a homogeneous polynomial P=∑wpwwP=\sum_w p_w w commuting with bb, comparison in bP=PbbP=Pb gives pav=0p_{av}=0 and pbjav=pbj−1avbp_{b^j av}=p_{b^{j-1}avb} for every word vv and j>0j>0. Iterating shows that every word containing aa has coefficient zero. Hence PP is a polynomial in bb. Setting a=0a=0 now shows that a Lie element of this form belongs to the one-dimensional ordinary Lie algebra on bb. The homogeneous element at hand has degree n>1n>1, and is therefore zero. We have proved an equality of quotient fiber elements, not just of their induced derivations:

Fb∣S=0=−ψ(c,a).(11)\left.F_b\right|_{S=0}=-\psi(c,a). \tag*{(11)}

The first variation at S=0S=0. We have determined the quotient value of FbF_b. We now differentiate (2.6) transversely to this quotient and compare the result with the derivative of the expression in (2.4). All subsequent derivatives mean coefficient extraction after adjoining free direction letters and commuting scalar parameters. Thus

∂1ψ(p,q)T=[t]ψ(p+tT,q),∂2ψ(p,q)T=[t]ψ(p,q+tT).\partial_1\psi(p,q)T=[t]\psi(p+tT,q),\qquad\partial_2\psi(p,q)T=[t]\psi(p,q+tT).

The degree-nn Lie polynomials on a,Ta,T containing exactly one TT and n−1n-1 copies of aa form the one-dimensional space spanned by ad⁡an−1T\operatorname{ad}_a^{n-1}T: in a nonzero bracket monomial, each branch not containing TT must be a single aa. Consequently there is a scalar k∈Qk\in\mathbb{Q}, depending only on ψ\psi, such that

∂2ψ(a,−a)T=kad⁡an−1T.(12)\partial_2\psi(a,-a)T=k\operatorname{ad}_a^{n-1}T. \tag*{(12)}

Differentiating the identity ψ(a,−a)=0\psi(a,-a)=0 while varying both arguments gives

∂1ψ(a,−a)T=∂2ψ(a,−a)T.(13)\partial_1\psi(a,-a)T=\partial_2\psi(a,-a)T. \tag*{(13)}

Take c=S−a−bc=S-a-b, keep a,ba,b fixed, and extract the coefficient linear in S=tTS=tT. In these same coordinates the two differences are

Δa=ψ(a,S−a)−ψ(a,b)−ψ(b,a−S),Δc=−ψ(S−a−b,a+b)+ψ(S−a−b,b)+ψ(b,−b−a).\begin{aligned} \Delta_a&=\psi(a,S-a)-\psi(a,b)-\psi(b,a-S),\\ \Delta_c&=-\psi(S-a-b,a+b)+\psi(S-a-b,b)+\psi(b,-b-a). \end{aligned}

Writing c=−a−bc=-a-b after differentiation, their derivatives at zero are exactly

dSΔa(T)=kad⁡an−1T+∂2ψ(b,a)T,d_S\Delta_a(T)=k\operatorname{ad}_a^{n-1}T+\partial_2\psi(b,a)T,
dSΔc(T)=−∂1ψ(c,−c)T+∂1ψ(c,b)T=−kad⁡cn−1T−∂2ψ(b,c)T.\begin{aligned} d_S\Delta_c(T)&=-\partial_1\psi(c,-c)T+\partial_1\psi(c,b)T\\ &=-k\operatorname{ad}_c^{n-1}T-\partial_2\psi(b,c)T. \end{aligned}

The last equality uses (13) and antisymmetry. In differentiating (2.6), the left side becomes [T,Fb∣S=0][T,F_b|_{S=0}]: its other product-rule term has outside letter S=0S=0. On the right the outside aa is fixed, and the derivative of the outside cc contributes [T,Δc∣S=0]=0[T,\Delta_c|_{S=0}]=0. Thus no outside-letter term remains, and (11) gives

−[T,ψ(c,a)]=k(ad⁡an−ad⁡cn)T+[a,∂2ψ(b,a)T]−[c,∂2ψ(b,c)T].(14)-[T,\psi(c,a)] = k(\operatorname{ad}_a^n-\operatorname{ad}_c^n)T +[a,\partial_2\psi(b,a)T]-[c,\partial_2\psi(b,c)T]. \tag*{(14)}

Now define G(a,b)=[a,ψ(b,a)]+[c,ψ(b,c)]G(a,b)=[a,\psi(b,a)]+[c,\psi(b,c)], where c=−a−bc=-a-b. Hold bb fixed and vary aa in direction TT, so that cc varies in direction −T-T. The full product rule is

daG(T)=[T,ψ(b,a)−ψ(b,c)]+[a,∂2ψ(b,a)T]−[c,∂2ψ(b,c)T].d_aG(T)=[T,\psi(b,a)-\psi(b,c)] +[a,\partial_2\psi(b,a)T]-[c,\partial_2\psi(b,c)T].

The three-term identity and antisymmetry give ψ(b,a)−ψ(b,c)=ψ(c,a)\psi(b,a)-\psi(b,c)=\psi(c,a). Comparing with (14), we conclude that

daG(T)=−k(ad⁡an−ad⁡cn)T.(15)d_aG(T)=-k(\operatorname{ad}_a^n-\operatorname{ad}_c^n)T. \tag*{(15)}

Vanishing of the scalar obstruction. Equation (15) expresses the derivative of GG in terms of the single scalar kk. To show that this scalar is zero, introduce two independent constant directions U,VU,V. The coefficients of their two commuting scalar parameters in GG are unchanged when the differentiations are interchanged. After forming these mixed derivatives, specialize

a=a0,b=−a0,c=0,U=a0,V=T.a=a_0,\qquad b=-a_0,\qquad c=0,\qquad U=a_0,\qquad V=T.

where a0,Ta_0,T are free letters. The derivative of ad⁡cn\operatorname{ad}_c^n vanishes there, since every summand contains n−1>0n-1>0 copies of ad⁡c\operatorname{ad}_c. The two derivatives of the other term are

dU(ad⁡anV)=nad⁡a0nT,d_U(\operatorname{ad}_a^nV)=n\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^nT,
dV(ad⁡anU)=∑j=0n−1ad⁡a0jad⁡Tad⁡a0n−1−ja0=−ad⁡a0nT.d_V(\operatorname{ad}_a^nU)=\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^j\operatorname{ad}_T\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^{n-1-j}a_0=-\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^nT.

Only j=n−1j=n-1 survives in the second sum. Equality of the mixed derivatives in (15) implies

(n+1)kad⁡a0nT=0.(n+1)k\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^nT=0.

The word a0nTa_0^nT has coefficient one in ad⁡a0nT\operatorname{ad}_{a_0}^nT. Since the calculation is over Q\mathbb{Q}, it follows that k=0k=0. This proves (2.5).

Equation (15) now says that every directional derivative of GG in aa vanishes. Equivalently, setting the direction equal to aa multiplies its component with jj occurrences of aa by jj. In characteristic zero every such component with j>0j>0 is zero. Thus GG is independent of aa, and evaluation at a=0,c=−ba=0,c=-b gives G=0G=0. This is (2.4).

Proposition 2.5 (Saturated reduction). Let

Kn=Lie⁡R⟨x,y⟩n,Ln=Wn∩Kn.K_n=\operatorname{Lie}_{R}\langle x,y\rangle_n,\qquad L_n=W_n\cap K_n.

Then LnL_n is a saturated finite free RR-submodule of KnK_n, and its reduction embeds in Kn/2KnK_n/2K_n. Writing its image as L‾n\overline{L}_n, one has

dim⁡F2L‾n=dim⁡QWn.(16)\dim_{\mathbb{F}_2}\overline{L}_n=\dim_{\mathbb{Q}}W_n. \tag*{(16)}

More generally, for any rational subspace Vn⊂WnV_n \subset W_n, the lattice Mn=Vn∩KnM_n = V_n \cap K_n has an embedded reduction M‾n⊂L‾n\overline{M}_n \subset\overline{L}_n of dimension dim⁡QVn\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} V_n.

Every element of L‾n\overline{L}_n satisfies the reductions of the three defining identities. If n>2n > 2, it also satisfies (2.4) and (2.5) after reduction, together with all formal coefficient consequences of these identities. In particular, putting z=x+yz = x + y,

[x,ψ‾(x,y)+ψ‾(z,y)]+[y,ψ‾(z,y)]=0(ψ‾∈L‾n).(17)[x,\overline{\psi}(x,y) + \overline{\psi}(z,y)] + [y,\overline{\psi}(z,y)] = 0 \qquad(\overline{\psi} \in\overline{L}_n). \tag*{(17)}

Proof. An intersection of a rational subspace with a finite free RR-module is saturated: if v∈Knv \in K_n and 2v∈Ln2v \in L_n, then v∈Wnv \in W_n, hence v∈Lnv \in L_n. Thus Ln∩2Kn=2LnL_n \cap2K_n = 2L_n, which gives the asserted injection after reduction. It is a finite free module because RR is a principal ideal domain. Clearing denominators in a rational basis of WnW_n shows that QLn=Wn\mathbb{Q}L_n = W_n, so its rank and its reduction dimension are dim⁡QWn\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} W_n. Exactly the same argument applies to MnM_n; embedding both reductions in Kn/2KnK_n/2K_n proves their stated inclusion.

For a representative ψ∈Ln\psi\in L_n, each defining identity is an expression with coefficients in RR. Its target is either a free Lie lattice or the braid Lie algebra over RR. These targets embed in their rationalizations by Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3. An expression which vanishes over Q\mathbb{Q} therefore already vanishes over RR, and can be reduced modulo two. The identical argument applies to the special identity and its linearization, which were established over Q\mathbb{Q} in Lemma 2.4. Adjoining free letters and commuting parameters preserves the word bases; extracting a parameter coefficient involves no division and commutes with reduction. This justifies the assertion about formal coefficient consequences.

Finally, reduce (2.4), take a=xa = x, b=yb = y, c=x+yc = x + y, and use the reduced antisymmetry to replace ψ‾(y,x)\overline{\psi}(y,x) and ψ‾(y,x+y)\overline{\psi}(y,x + y) by ψ‾(x,y)\overline{\psi}(x,y) and ψ‾(x+y,y)\overline{\psi}(x + y,y). Expanding the outside bracket with x+yx + y gives (2.15).

In the characteristic-two arguments that follow, the permitted polynomials are these reductions of rational solutions. No identification of L‾n\overline{L}_n with the full solution space of equations written over F2\mathbb{F}_2 is asserted or needed. In particular, the characteristic-zero mixed-derivative argument proving (n+1)k=0(n + 1)k = 0 has already been completed before reduction.

A filtered degeneration of the pentagon

We now work over F2\mathbb{F}_2. The elements to which we apply the argument are the reductions ψ‾∈L‾n\overline{\psi} \in\overline{L}_n of Proposition 2.5, with n>2n > 2. In particular, they are ordinary Lie polynomials and satisfy the reduced pentagon. We first introduce a filtration in which a leading part of that pentagon can be tested in a different Lie algebra.

Lemma 3.1. The assignments

A⟼x2,C⟼[x,y],B⟼yA \longmapsto x^2,\qquad C \longmapsto[x,y],\qquad B \longmapsto y

define an injective homomorphism F2⟨A,C,B⟩⟶F2⟨x,y⟩\mathbb{F}_2\langle A,C,B\rangle\longrightarrow\mathbb{F}_2\langle x,y\rangle. Its restriction embeds the ordinary free Lie algebra Lie⁡F2⟨A,C,B⟩∗inthelatterassociativealgebra.Everyhomogeneouselementof∗\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle A,C,B\rangle*in the latter associative algebra. Every homogeneous element of*\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle x,y\rangle of weight greater than one belongs to this embedded Lie algebra.

Proof. Order words of each fixed length lexicographically with x>yx > y. The leading words of x2x^2, [x,y][x,y], yy are respectively xxxx, xyxy, yy, each with coefficient one. These form a prefix code: none is a proper initial segment of another. Thus their concatenations have unique decodings, so distinct words in A,C,BA,C,B have distinct leading words. Split a putative relation by its total x,yx,y length and take the largest leading word in each part; its coefficient proves associative injectivity. Ordinary free Lie algebras embed in their free associative enveloping algebras, so the Lie assertion follows as well.

We use the ordinary free-Lie elimination construction [15], whose needed instance can be seen directly. Set ej=ad⁡xjye_j=\operatorname{ad}_x^j y for j≥0j\geq0. The Lie subalgebra generated by the eje_j is stable under ad⁡x\operatorname{ad}_x, because ad⁡x(ej)=ej+1\operatorname{ad}_x(e_j)=e_{j+1} and ad⁡x\operatorname{ad}_x is a derivation. Its sum with the line F2x\mathbb{F}_2x is therefore a Lie algebra containing x,yx,y, hence the whole free Lie algebra. The subalgebra is thus an ideal with one-dimensional quotient spanned by the class of xx. Every homogeneous Lie polynomial of weight greater than one consequently lies in this subalgebra. It is itself free on the eje_j: their leading words xjyx^jy form a prefix code, which proves injectivity of the corresponding free associative algebra and hence of its ordinary free Lie algebra.

In characteristic two, the associative identity ad⁡x2(P)=[x2,P]\operatorname{ad}_x^2(P)=[x^2,P] gives

e2i=ad⁡AiB,e2i+1=ad⁡AiC(i≥0).(18)e_{2i}=\operatorname{ad}_A^i B,\qquad e_{2i+1}=\operatorname{ad}_A^i C\qquad(i\geq0). \tag*{(18)}

Both expressions belong to the ordinary Lie algebra on the three abstract letters A,C,BA,C,B, which proves the final assertion.

The statement does not assert that x2x^2 is an ordinary Lie polynomial in x,yx,y. Rather, it embeds an ordinary Lie algebra on three new letters into an associative algebra; the original Lie polynomials of weight greater than one happen to lie in its image.

Give A,CA,C weight two and BB weight one, and let FrF^r be the span of ordinary Lie monomials containing at least rr occurrences of BB. The multigrading of the free Lie algebra makes this a decreasing filtration. Through Lemma 3.1, we regard LnL_n as a subspace of Lie⁡F2⟨A,C,B⟩\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle A,C,B\rangle and give it the induced filtration FrLn=Ln∩FrF^rL_n=L_n\cap F^r; write gr⁡FrLn=FrLn/Fr+1Ln\operatorname{gr}_F^rL_n=F^rL_n/F^{r+1}L_n. Write Ψ(A,C,B)\Psi(A,C,B) for the unique polynomial representing ψ‾\overline{\psi} under Lemma 3.1. If Ψ∈Fr\Psi\in F^r, let χ(A,C,B)\chi(A,C,B) be its component containing exactly rr letters BB. Whenever χ≠0\chi\ne0, there is an integer m≥0m\geq0 such that

n=2m+r,n=2m+r,

and every associative word of χ\chi has mm letters from {A,C}\{A,C\} and total length m+rm+r. The case m=0m=0 is zero: an ordinary Lie polynomial in BB alone has only its degree-one component, whereas n>2n>2. Thus a nonzero leading part always has m>0m>0, and in particular n>rn>r. We shall later study the ordinary Lie polynomial f=χ(0,C,B)f=\chi(0,C,B). This section establishes the relation satisfied by χ\chi before that projection.

We need two algebras with the same named symbols. The source is the ordinary enveloping algebra of the infinitesimal braid Lie algebra on strands 0,1,…,d0,1,\ldots,d, over F2\mathbb{F}_2. In it put

Xi=t0i,uij=tij,ai=Xi2,X_i=t_{0i},\qquad u_{ij}=t_{ij},\qquad a_i=X_i^2,
vij=[Xi,uij]=[Xj,uij]=[Xi,Xj].(19)v_{ij}=[X_i,u_{ij}]=[X_j,u_{ij}]=[X_i,X_j]. \tag*{(19)}

The equalities defining vijv_{ij} follow from the three-strand braid relations and characteristic two. Here the aia_i are associative squares.

For the target, let Ad\mathcal{A}_d be the arrangement in Qd\mathbb{Q}^d with hyperplanes

zi=0(1≤i≤d),z_i=0\qquad(1\leq i\leq d),
zi−zj=0,zi+zj=0(1≤i<j≤d).z_i-z_j=0,\qquad z_i+z_j=0\qquad(1\leq i<j\leq d).

Let hZ,d\mathfrak{h}_{\mathbb{Z},d} be the ordinary Lie algebra over Z\mathbb{Z} with one generator tHt_H for each H∈AdH \in\mathcal{A}_d and relations

[tH,∑K⊃TtK]=0(H⊃T),\left[t_H,\sum_{K \supset T} t_K\right]=0 \qquad(H \supset T),

where TT ranges over the codimension-two intersections of the arrangement and the sum ranges over its hyperplanes containing TT. This is the level-two cyclotomic infinitesimal braid arrangement [7]. We use the integral incidence presentation (3.4), not a characteristic-zero freeness assertion. All intersections in this definition are taken over Q\mathbb{Q}. Set hd=hZ,d⊗F2\mathfrak{h}_d=\mathfrak{h}_{\mathbb{Z},d}\otimes\mathbb{F}_2, and write

ai=t{zi=0},uijs=t{zi−szj=0}(s∈{+1,−1}),a_i=t_{\{z_i=0\}},\qquad u_{ij}^{s}=t_{\{z_i-sz_j=0\}}\qquad(s\in\{+1,-1\}),
uij=uij+1,vij=uij+1+uij−1.u_{ij}=u_{ij}^{+1},\qquad v_{ij}=u_{ij}^{+1}+u_{ij}^{-1}.

Thus plus and minus hyperplanes remain distinct generators even after scalar reduction. For d=3d=3 abbreviate these Lie algebras to hZ\mathfrak{h}_{\mathbb{Z}} and h\mathfrak{h}. Each target symbol aia_i, vijv_{ij}, uiju_{ij} has enveloping degree one.

The count of a word in either named alphabet is its number of uu symbols; a,va,v symbols have count zero. Count is attached to an expression in the generators, not asserted to be a grading of either quotient algebra. We can now state the relation to be transferred.

Proposition 3.2. Let ψˉ∈L‾n\bar{\psi}\in\overline{L}_n, n>2n>2, and suppose its expression Ψ(A,C,B)\Psi(A,C,B) lies in FrF^r. Let χ\chi be its component of count rr, and write n=2m+rn=2m+r, with m>0m>0. In U(h)U(\mathfrak{h}) let Uℓ,<rU_{\ell,<r} be the span of all products of exactly ℓ\ell symbols from {ai,vij,uij}\{a_i,v_{ij},u_{ij}\} that contain fewer than rr symbols uu. Then

0=χ(a1,v12+v13,u12+u13)+χ(a2+v12,v23,u23)+χ(a1+a2+v12,v13+v23,u13+u23)+χ(a1,v12,u12)(modUm+r,<r).(20)\begin{aligned} 0={}&\chi(a_1,v_{12}+v_{13},u_{12}+u_{13})+\chi(a_2+v_{12},v_{23},u_{23})\\ &+\chi(a_1+a_2+v_{12},v_{13}+v_{23},u_{13}+u_{23})\\ &+\chi(a_1,v_{12},u_{12})\pmod{U_{m+r,<r}}. \tag*{(20)} \end{aligned}

For r=0r=0 the indicated lower-count subspace is zero.

The lower-count remainder belongs to the stated linear subspace of words of fixed target length m+rm+r. In the next section, scalar deletion tests on words of length m+rm+r containing rr zeros will annihilate this subspace. To prove the proposition, we compare ordering calculations in the two alphabets; no homomorphism between the two algebras is used. In the source, terms omitted from the leading pentagon have higher count; in the target, the permitted remainder has lower count. We will show that source ordering never lowers count and target ordering never raises it, with identical count-preserving parts.

Add a newest strand dd. The old symbols are called base symbols; the new symbols are called fiber symbols. In the source write

X=Xd,H=X2,Ui=uid,Vi=[X,Ui](i<d),X=X_d,\qquad H=X^2,\qquad U_i=u_{id},\qquad V_i=[X,U_i]\qquad(i<d),

and in the target write

H=ad,Uis=uids,Ui=Ui+1,Vi=Ui+1+Ui−1.H=a_d,\qquad U_i^s=u_{id}^s,\qquad U_i=U_i^{+1},\qquad V_i=U_i^{+1}+U_i^{-1}.

In this notation count includes the UU symbols, while H,VH,V have count zero. The following exact formulas will justify the two opposite count inequalities.

Lemma 3.3. All commutators of a base symbol with a fiber symbol are given by the following formulas. In both algebras use the abbreviations

Ri=[H,Ui],Qi=[H+Vi,Ui],Wij=[Vi,Uj]+[Ui,Vj].R_i=[H,U_i],\qquad Q_i=[H+V_i,U_i],\qquad W_{ij}=[V_i,U_j]+[U_i,V_j].

In the source the exact formulas are

[ai,H]=[H,Vi]+[Ri,Ui],[ai,Ui]=Qi,[ai,Uk]=0(k≠i),[ai,Vi]=[H,Vi]+[[Vi,Ui],Ui],[ai,Vk]=[Qi,Uk](k≠i).(21)\begin{aligned} [a_i,H]&=[H,V_i]+[R_i,U_i],\\ [a_i,U_i]&=Q_i, & [a_i,U_k]&=0\quad(k\ne i),\\ [a_i,V_i]&=[H,V_i]+[[V_i,U_i],U_i],\\ [a_i,V_k]&=[Q_i,U_k]\quad(k\ne i). \tag*{(21)} \end{aligned}
[uij,H]=0,[uij,Ui]=[uij,Uj]=[Ui,Uj],[uij,Vi]=[uij,Vj]=Wij,[uij,Uk]=[uij,Vk]=0(k∉{i,j}).(22)\begin{aligned} [u_{ij},H]&=0,\\ [u_{ij},U_i]&=[u_{ij},U_j]=[U_i,U_j],\\ [u_{ij},V_i]&=[u_{ij},V_j]=W_{ij},\\ [u_{ij},U_k]&=[u_{ij},V_k]=0\quad(k\notin\{i,j\}). \tag*{(22)} \end{aligned}

and

[vij,H]=[H,[Ui,Uj]],[vij,Ui]=[Ui,Vj],[vij,Uj]=[Uj,Vi],[vij,Vi]=[Vi,Vj]+[Wij,Ui]+[Ui,Rj],[vij,Vj]=[Vi,Vj]+[Wij,Uj]+[Uj,Ri],[vij,Uk]=0(k∉{i,j}),[vij,Vk]=[Wij,Uk](k∉{i,j}).\begin{aligned} [v_{ij},H]&=[H,[U_i,U_j]],\\ [v_{ij},U_i]&=[U_i,V_j], & [v_{ij},U_j]&=[U_j,V_i],\\ [v_{ij},V_i]&=[V_i,V_j]+[W_{ij},U_i]+[U_i,R_j],\\ [v_{ij},V_j]&=[V_i,V_j]+[W_{ij},U_j]+[U_j,R_i],\\ [v_{ij},U_k]&=0\quad(k\notin\{i,j\}),\\ [v_{ij},V_k]&=[W_{ij},U_k]\quad(k\notin\{i,j\}). \end{aligned}

In the target the exact formulas are

[ai,H]=[H,Vi],[ai,Ui]=Qi,[ai,Vi]=[H,Vi],[ai,Uk]=[ai,Vk]=0(k≠i).(23)\begin{aligned} [a_i,H]&=[H,V_i], & [a_i,U_i]&=Q_i,\\ [a_i,V_i]&=[H,V_i], & [a_i,U_k]&=[a_i,V_k]=0\quad(k\ne i). \tag*{(23)} \end{aligned}
[uij,H]=0,[uij,Ui]=[uij,Uj]=[Ui,Uj],[uij,Vi]=[uij,Vj]=Wij+[Vi,Vj],[uij,Uk]=[uij,Vk]=0(k∉{i,j}).(24)\begin{aligned} [u_{ij},H]&=0,\\ [u_{ij},U_i]&=[u_{ij},U_j]=[U_i,U_j],\\ [u_{ij},V_i]&=[u_{ij},V_j]=W_{ij}+[V_i,V_j],\\ [u_{ij},U_k]&=[u_{ij},V_k]=0\quad(k\notin\{i,j\}). \tag*{(24)} \end{aligned}

and

[vij,H]=0,[vij,Ui]=[Ui,Vj],[vij,Uj]=[Uj,Vi],[vij,Vi]=[vij,Vj]=[Vi,Vj],[vij,Uk]=[vij,Vk]=0(k∉{i,j}).\begin{aligned} [v_{ij},H]&=0,\\ [v_{ij},U_i]&=[U_i,V_j], & [v_{ij},U_j]&=[U_j,V_i],\\ [v_{ij},V_i]&=[v_{ij},V_j]=[V_i,V_j],\\ [v_{ij},U_k]&=[v_{ij},V_k]=0\quad(k\notin\{i,j\}). \end{aligned}

Every source output has at least the count of its input pair; every target output has at most that count. The parts preserving count are identical in the two lists and have symbolic length two.

Proof. For the source, the braid relations give the following derivations on its free fiber on X,U1,…,Ud−1X,U_1,\ldots,U_{d-1}:

δi=ad⁡Xi:X⟼Vi,Ui⟼Vi,Uk⟼0 (k≠i),\delta_i=\operatorname{ad}_{X_i}: \quad X\longmapsto V_i,\quad U_i\longmapsto V_i,\quad U_k\longmapsto0\ (k\ne i),
ϵij=ad⁡uij:X⟼0,Ui,Uj⟼[Ui,Uj],Uk⟼0 (k∉{i,j}).\epsilon_{ij}=\operatorname{ad}_{u_{ij}}: \quad X\longmapsto0,\quad U_i,U_j\longmapsto[U_i,U_j],\quad U_k\longmapsto0\ (k\notin\{i,j\}).

The derivation rule and [X,Vi]=[X2,Ui]=Ri[X,V_i]=[X^2,U_i]=R_i imply

δiH=Ri,δiVi=Qi,δiVk=[Vi,Uk](k≠i).\delta_iH=R_i,\qquad\delta_iV_i=Q_i,\qquad\delta_iV_k=[V_i,U_k]\quad(k\ne i).

Since ad⁡ai=δi2\operatorname{ad}_{a_i}=\delta_i^2, applying δi\delta_i again gives (21). For its incident ViV_i entry, in particular, Ri+Qi=[Vi,Ui]R_i+Q_i=[V_i,U_i] gives

δiQi=[Ri+Qi,Ui]+[H+Vi,Vi]=[[Vi,Ui],Ui]+[H,Vi].\delta_iQ_i=[R_i+Q_i,U_i]+[H+V_i,V_i]=[[V_i,U_i],U_i]+[H,V_i].

Applying ϵij\epsilon_{ij} to H,VkH,V_k gives (22), since [X,[Ui,Uj]]=Wij[X,[U_i,U_j]]=W_{ij}.

Next ad⁡vij=[δi,ϵij]\operatorname{ad}_{v_{ij}}=[\delta_i,\epsilon_{ij}] sends XX to WijW_{ij}, sends UiU_i to [Ui,Vj][U_i,V_j], sends UjU_j to [Uj,Vi][U_j,V_i], and kills the other UkU_k. Its action on HH is [X,Wij]=[H,[Ui,Uj]][X,W_{ij}]=[H,[U_i,U_j]]. Its remaining actions follow uniformly from

[vij,Vk]=[Wij,Uk]+[X,[vij,Uk]],[v_{ij},V_k]=[W_{ij},U_k]+[X,[v_{ij},U_k]],

which proves (3.8), including the nonincident entries.

For the target, the flat where zi=zd=0z_i=z_d=0 lies in exactly the four hyperplanes with generators ai,H,Ui+1,Ui−1a_i,H,U_i^{+1},U_i^{-1}. Its relations give

[ai,H]=[H,Vi],[ai,Uit]=[H+Vi,Uit](t∈{+1,−1}).[a_i,H]=[H,V_i],\qquad[a_i,U_i^t]=[H+V_i,U_i^t]\quad(t\in\{+1,-1\}).

Summing the second formula over tt proves the ViV_i entry of (23). The signed triple flat containing uijs,Uit,Ujstu_{ij}^s,U_i^t,U_j^{st} gives

[uijs,Uit]=[Ujst,Uit],[uijs,Ujt]=[Uist,Ujt].[u_{ij}^s,U_i^t]=[U_j^{st},U_i^t],\qquad[u_{ij}^s,U_j^t]=[U_i^{st},U_j^t].

Substitute Uk−1=Uk+VkU_k^{-1}=U_k+V_k. For example,

[uij,Vi]=[Uj,Ui]+[Uj+Vj,Ui+Vi]=Wij+[Vi,Vj].\begin{aligned} [u_{ij},V_i]&=[U_j,U_i]+[U_j+V_j,U_i+V_i]\\ &=W_{ij}+[V_i,V_j]. \end{aligned}

Summing also over ss gives [vij,Ui]=[Ui,Vj][v_{ij},U_i]=[U_i,V_j] and [vij,Vi]=[Vi,Vj][v_{ij},V_i]=[V_i,V_j]; exchanging i,ji,j gives the other incident entries. Every remaining pair in the claimed zero entries meets in a flat contained in just those two hyperplanes, so its generators commute. This proves all target formulas.

The count assertions can now be read term by term. In the source, the terms beyond the common quadratic terms add two UU's. In the target, the only extra term is [Vi,Vj][V_i,V_j] in (24), whose count is zero instead of one. This also proves agreement of the parts preserving count.

For clarity, their common incident actions are the short table

HHUiU_iViV_i
aia_i[H,Vi][H,V_i][H+Vi,Ui][H+V_i,U_i][H,Vi][H,V_i]
uiju_{ij}00[Ui,Uj][U_i,U_j][Ui,Vj]+[Vi,Uj][U_i,V_j]+[V_i,U_j]
vijv_{ij}00[Ui,Vj][U_i,V_j][Vi,Vj][V_i,V_j]

Table 3.12.

with the exchanged-index versions supplied by the full formulas above and zero common actions at nonincident indices.

We next specify exactly how to use the tables. At a fixed newest strand, scan a word from left to right for its first adjacent pair bfbf consisting of a base symbol followed by a fiber symbol. Replace it by

bf=fb+[b,f],bf = fb + [b,f],

using the appropriate exact formula of Lemma 3.3 and expanding brackets into associative words. Fix the order of those expansions once and for all. On each resulting branch the lexicographic pair

(number of base symbols,number of base-before-fiber inversions)(\text{number of base symbols},\text{number of base-before-fiber inversions})

strictly decreases. The swapped branch lowers the second entry; every commutator branch removes a base symbol and inserts only fiber symbols, hence lowers the first entry. This proves termination even for a source correction that increases symbolic length. When all fiber letters precede the base suffix, repeat the procedure on that suffix with one fewer strand. The result is an iterated ordered expression with the newest fiber first.

There are two further facts about this algorithm. First, in the source its ordered products are linearly independent. Indeed, Lemma 2.3 identifies the ordinary enveloping algebra, as a vector space, with the tensor product of the free associative fiber algebras in this order. In each fiber the subalgebra generated by H,Vi,UiH,V_i,U_i is free associative: with XX larger than all UiU_i, these elements have the respective leading words

XX,XUi,Ui.XX,\qquad XU_i,\qquad U_i.

They again form a prefix code. Thus distinct words in each restricted fiber alphabet are independent, and so are their ordered products over all fibers. At the final one-strand stage this says simply that the powers of X12X_1^2 are independent.

Second, source ordering never lowers count, while target ordering never raises it. This remains true through every recursive stage, since the unchanged surrounding word contributes the same count and the action formulas have the required inequality term by term. A source branch that has acquired count greater than rr can never contribute at count rr; a target branch of count less than rr can never return to count rr. Consequently the branches that preserve count throughout are described in both algebras by exactly the same algorithm using (3.12).

Proof of Proposition 3.2. Relabel the four braid strands 0,1,2,30,1,2,3. Since signs disappear over F2\mathbb{F}_2, the reduced pentagon says that the sum of

ψˉ(X1,u12+u13),ψˉ(X2+u12,u23),ψˉ(u12,u23),\bar{\psi}(X_1,u_{12}+u_{13}),\qquad\bar{\psi}(X_2+u_{12},u_{23}),\qquad\bar{\psi}(u_{12},u_{23}),
ψˉ(X1+X2,u13+u23),ψˉ(X1,u12)\bar{\psi}(X_1+X_2,u_{13}+u_{23}),\qquad\bar{\psi}(X_1,u_{12})

is zero in the source. Express these five terms using Ψ\Psi. Their exact triples of arguments (A,C,B)(A,C,B) are, in the same order,

(a1,v12+v13,u12+u13),(a2+v12+u122,v23+[u12,u23],u23),(u122,[u12,u23],u23),(a1+a2+v12,v13+v23,u13+u23),(a1,v12,u12).(25)\begin{aligned} &(a_1,v_{12}+v_{13},u_{12}+u_{13}),\\ &(a_2+v_{12}+u_{12}^{2},v_{23}+[u_{12},u_{23}],u_{23}),\\ &(u_{12}^{2},[u_{12},u_{23}],u_{23}),\\ &(a_1+a_2+v_{12},v_{13}+v_{23},u_{13}+u_{23}),\\ &(a_1,v_{12},u_{12}). \tag*{(25)} \end{aligned}

In particular,

(X2+u12)2=a2+v12+u122,(X1+X2)2=a1+a2+v12.(X_2+u_{12})^2=a_2+v_{12}+u_{12}^{2},\qquad(X_1+X_2)^2=a_1+a_2+v_{12}.

Only the former square has a u122u_{12}^{2} summand.

Expand the pentagon as a polynomial in the restricted source symbols before ordering. Its part of count exactly rr is precisely the four-term polynomial PP on the right of (3.5). To verify this, the higher components of Ψ\Psi already have more than rr occurrences of BB, each of which becomes a single uu. Either extra summand u122u_{12}^{2} or [u12,u23][u_{12},u_{23}] in the second triple increases count by two. The third triple, being entirely in the uu alphabet, gives count n>rn>r. All remaining replacements preserve the original BB-count. Thus the full source pentagon has the form P+E=0P+E=0, where every word of EE has count greater than rr.

The distinction between original weight and symbolic length is essential here. Assign source weight two to each a,v,H,Va,v,H,V and weight one to each u,Uu,U. A word of length ℓ\ell and count qq has original weight

n=2ℓ−q.n=2\ell-q.

All source action formulas preserve this weight. Thus a correction that raises count by two raises length by one, and every ordered word of weight nn and count rr has length (n+r)/2=m+r(n+r)/2=m+r. In particular PP has that length, while the higher-count expressions are allowed to have greater length.

Apply the deterministic source ordering to P+E=0P+E=0. Since count never decreases, EE contributes nothing at count rr. Independence of the ordered restricted source products, proved above from the free fibers, implies that every ordered coefficient of count rr in PP is zero separately. This conclusion uses independence across all the restricted words, so expressions of other lengths or counts cannot cancel a coefficient under consideration.

Now interpret only the polynomial PP, of length m+rm+r, in the target. Apply the same deterministic ordering, discarding a branch as soon as its count falls below rr. Such a branch can never return to count rr. The retained branches use the identical quadratic formulas that retained count rr in the source. Their ordered coefficient vector is therefore the zero vector just obtained. Every target replacement preserves length, so every discarded branch has length m+rm+r and count less than rr. Their sum belongs to Um+r,<rU_{m+r,<r}, proving (3.5).

Only source independence enters this argument. In the target the ordering procedure is a sequence of valid equalities yielding a spanning expression; no independence or free-fiber assertion for h\mathfrak{h} is required.

Deletion operators and injectivity of the leading projection

Our goal is to show that setting A=0A=0 loses no leading part χ(A,C,B)\chi(A,C,B) of a reduced rational solution. We use deletion operators to test the four-term relation of Proposition 3.2. These tests first show that a leading part killed by A=0A=0 can involve only A,BA,B; the special identity then excludes this remaining kernel.

The integral deletion representation

The operators below specialize the integral algebraic differential operators of Hirose and Sato [10], Section 2. Their logarithmic-form and cyclotomic braid interpretation follows Hirose’s construction [9], Section 4.3. Here we construct an integral representation of the signed-hyperplane algebra of Section 3. After reduction modulo two it will turn the leading pentagon into individual coefficient equations. Throughout the integral construction, hyperplanes and their incidences are taken over characteristic zero.

Following the ratio alphabet in [9], Section 6, put

e=1,p=z2−z3z2+z3,w=z2−z1z2+z1.e = 1,\qquad p = \frac{z_2-z_3}{z_2+z_3},\qquad w = \frac{z_2-z_1}{z_2+z_1}.

For an integer N≥0N \ge0, let ENE_N be the free abelian group with basis the words of length at most NN in the alphabet {0,e,p}\{0,e,p\}, including the empty word. Every word has fixed left and right endpoints 0,w0,w; these endpoints are never deleted. If P,Q∈{0,e,p,w}P,Q \in\{0,e,p,w\} are distinct, and H∈A3H \in\mathcal{A}_3, write

νH(P,Q)=ord⁡H(P−Q).\nu_H(P,Q)=\operatorname{ord}_H(P-Q).

For equal letters we set νH(P,P)=0\nu_H(P,P)=0, rather than taking the order of the zero function. Thus the convention is part of the definition of the operators.

Define an endomorphism THT_H of ENE_N by

TH(P1⋯Pk)=∑j=1k(νH(Pj,Pj+1)−νH(Pj−1,Pj))P1⋯Pj^⋯Pk,P0=0,Pk+1=w.T_H(P_1\cdots P_k)=\sum_{j=1}^{k}\left(\nu_H(P_j,P_{j+1})-\nu_H(P_{j-1},P_j)\right)P_1\cdots\widehat{P_j}\cdots P_k,\qquad P_0=0,\quad P_{k+1}=w.

In particular THT_H kills the empty word. Every THT_H is a finite integer matrix. The specialization from [10], Section 2, uses the field Q(z1,z2,z3)\mathbb{Q}(z_1,z_2,z_3), the valuation ord⁡H\operatorname{ord}_H, and endpoints 0,w0,w, with the same zero-difference convention.

Proposition 4.1. The assignment tH↦THt_H \mapsto T_H defines a representation of hZ\mathfrak{h}_{\mathbb{Z}} on ENE_N. Equivalently, for every codimension-two flat XX and every hyperplane H0⊃X,H_0 \supset X,

[TH0,∑H⊃XTH]=0.\left[T_{H_0},\sum_{H\supset X}T_H\right]=0.

It therefore extends to the ordinary enveloping algebra, over Z\mathbb{Z} and after reduction over F2\mathbb{F}_2.

Proof. For distinct letters put ωPQ=dlog⁡(P−Q)\omega_{PQ}=d\log(P-Q), and put ωPP=0\omega_{PP}=0. Signs of differences have no effect on these forms. The nonconstant differences, up to sign, factor as

p=z2−z3z2+z3,w=z2−z1z2+z1,p=\frac{z_2-z_3}{z_2+z_3},\qquad w=\frac{z_2-z_1}{z_2+z_1},
1−p=2z3z2+z3,1−w=2z1z2+z1,1-p=\frac{2z_3}{z_2+z_3},\qquad1-w=\frac{2z_1}{z_2+z_1},
p−w=2z2(z1−z3)(z2+z3)(z2+z1).(26)p-w=\frac{2z_2(z_1-z_3)}{(z_2+z_3)(z_2+z_1)}. \tag*{(26)}

The remaining nonzero difference 1−01-0 is constant. Consequently every ωPQ\omega_{PQ} is an integer linear combination of dlog⁡ℓHd\log\ell_H, where ℓH\ell_H is a linear defining equation of HH.

Consider the matrix-valued rational one-form

Ω=∑H∈A3TH dlog⁡ℓH.\Omega=\sum_{H\in\mathcal{A}_3}T_H\,d\log\ell_H.

The coefficient of a deletion at PjP_j is exactly ωPjPj+1−ωPj−1Pj\omega_{P_jP_{j+1}}-\omega_{P_{j-1}P_j}. We claim that Ω∧Ω=0\Omega\wedge\Omega=0. For two nonadjacent deleted positions, neither deletion changes the neighbors of the other, so the contributions of the two orders cancel by antisymmetry of the wedge product. For two adjacent positions, denote the four successive letters by L,P,Q,RL,P,Q,R. The sum of the contributions, with the rightmost matrix acting first, is

(ωQR−ωLQ)∧(ωPQ−ωLP)+(ωPR−ωLP)∧(ωQR−ωPQ).(27)(\omega_{QR}-\omega_{LQ})\wedge(\omega_{PQ}-\omega_{LP})+(\omega_{PR}-\omega_{LP})\wedge(\omega_{QR}-\omega_{PQ}). \tag*{(27)}

Expanding this expression cancels the cross terms involving ωLP\omega_{LP} and ωQR\omega_{QR}. The remaining terms are the two logarithmic triangle identities for (L,P,Q)(L,P,Q) and (P,Q,R)(P,Q,R). The triangle identity is

ωIJ∧ωJK+ωJK∧ωKI+ωKI∧ωIJ=0.\omega_{IJ}\wedge\omega_{JK}+\omega_{JK}\wedge\omega_{KI}+\omega_{KI}\wedge\omega_{IJ}=0.

For three distinct letters it follows by differentiating the relation (I−J)+(J−K)+(K−I)=0(I-J)+(J-K)+(K-I)=0 and putting the terms over a common denominator. If exactly two letters agree, one form is zero and the other two are equal; if all three agree, all three forms are zero. Thus it also holds in every repeated-letter case. This proves that (4.5) vanishes, including when other pairs among L,P,Q,RL,P,Q,R agree. It proves the claimed matrix identity.

Take its residue first along a fixed H0H_0. Terms involving no dlog⁡ℓH0\mathrm{d}\log\ell_{H_0} have no pole at a generic point of H0H_0, and the result is the rational one-form identity on H0H_0

∑H≠H0[TH0,TH] dlog⁡(ℓH∣H0)=0.\sum_{H\ne H_0}[T_{H_0},T_H]\,\mathrm{d}\log(\ell_H|_{H_0})=0.

Now take the residue on H0H_0 along a codimension-one subspace X⊂H0X\subset H_0 which is a flat of the arrangement. For H≠H0H\ne H_0, the restricted nonzero linear form ℓH∣H0\ell_H|_{H_0} has order one along XX precisely when H⊃XH\supset X, and has order zero otherwise. This gives (4.3); including H0H_0 in the sum adds a zero commutator.

This residue calculation is performed over Q\mathbb{Q}. Distinct hyperplanes may restrict to multiples of the same equation on H0H_0; each matrix then contributes separately with coefficient one. In particular, restrictions proportional to zz, −z-z, or 2z2z all have residue one. There is no division by the number of coincident restrictions, nor by the constant 2. Finally every matrix in (4.3) has integer entries. Its vanishing over Q\mathbb{Q} is therefore its vanishing over Z\mathbb{Z}, which permits reduction modulo two without changing the characteristic-zero incidence relations.

For a word ss of length ℓ\ell, and an enveloping-algebra element qq of length ℓ\ell, choose N≥ℓN\ge\ell and define its scalar deletion test by

⟨q,s⟩=[∅]T(q)s,\langle q,s\rangle=[\varnothing]T(q)s,

where [∅][\varnothing] extracts the coefficient of the empty word and T(q1⋯qℓ)=T(q1)⋯T(qℓ)T(q_1\cdots q_\ell)=T(q_1)\cdots T(q_\ell). Thus the rightmost factor acts first. This convention will make successive deletion at the right endpoint read an associative coefficient in its usual left-to-right order.

Lemma 4.2. In the integral generator basis ai=tzi=0a_i=t_{z_i=0}, uij=tzi−zj=0u_{ij}=t_{z_i-z_j=0}, vij=tzi−zj=0+tzi+zj=0v_{ij}=t_{z_i-z_j=0}+t_{z_i+z_j=0}, the complete nonzero edge weights are the following linear functionals:

edgea,va,v partuu part
0p0p00u23∗u_{23}^{*}
0w0w00u12∗u_{12}^{*}
0e0e0000
epepa3∗−v23∗a_{3}^{*}-v_{23}^{*}00
ewewa1∗−v12∗a_{1}^{*}-v_{12}^{*}00
pwpwa2∗+v13∗−v12∗−v23∗a_{2}^{*}+v_{13}^{*}-v_{12}^{*}-v_{23}^{*}u13∗u_{13}^{*}

Table 4.6.

Equal-letter edges have weight zero. After reduction modulo two, a word containing rr zeros has zero scalar test on every product with fewer than rr factors of type uu. For a product with exactly rr such factors, every uu-factor must delete a zero in any nonzero contribution.

Proof. If a difference has orders λ−\lambda_{-} and λ+\lambda_{+} along zi−zj=0z_i-z_j=0 and zi+zj=0z_i+z_j=0, its evaluations on uiju_{ij} and vijv_{ij} are respectively λ−\lambda_{-} and λ−+λ+\lambda_{-}+\lambda_{+}. Applying this to (4.4) gives every entry of (4.6). For example pp has orders 11, −1-1, so its v23v_{23} weight is zero already integrally; the factor 2 in p−wp-w contributes no hyperplane valuation.

Every aa- or vv-weight on an edge touching 0 is zero. Thus an aa- or vv-operation cannot delete a zero, regardless of preceding deletions, because all remaining letters and endpoints still belong to {0,e,p,w}\{0,e,p,w\}. Each uu-operation removes at most one zero. Emptying rr zeros consequently requires at least rr such operations. If there are exactly rr, using even one to remove a nonzero letter makes it impossible to remove the remaining zeros. The same conclusion holds for linear combinations within the indicated slots. □

Detecting mixed terms

We now work over F2\mathbb{F}_2. Let ψˉ∈L‾n\bar{\psi}\in\overline{L}_n have leading BB-count rr and leading part χ(A,C,B)\chi(A,C,B), with n=2m+r>2n=2m+r>2. Every word of χ\chi has mm letters from {A,C}\{A,C\} and rr letters BB. Proposition 3.2, tested on a word with mm nonzero internal letters and rr zeros, is an exact scalar identity: the lower-count remainder is killed by Lemma 4.2. We use this exact identity to eliminate every component involving both AA and CC from a possible kernel of the projection A=0A=0.

Lemma 4.3. If χ(0,C,B)=0\chi(0,C,B)=0, then χ\chi belongs to the ordinary free Lie algebra on A,BA,B; in particular it has the form P(A,B)P(A,B) with exactly mm letters AA and rr letters BB.

Proof. The associative multihomogeneous components of an ordinary Lie polynomial are again ordinary Lie polynomials. Since the component with no AA vanishes, suppose that h>0h>0 is the least AA-count of a nonzero component χh\chi_h. We will rule out h<mh<m.

Fix any internal word ss with hh letters ee, m−hm-h letters pp, and rr zeros. In each summand of (3.5), an AA-, CC-, or BB-slot means the corresponding first, second, or third argument of χ\chi. Every BB-slot must delete a zero by Lemma 4.2. The other relevant actions follow directly from the edge table; the four rows are in the order of that equation:

AA-slotCC-slot on nonzero lettersBB-slot on zeros
1terminal eeterminal eeterminal 0
2terminal eepp adjacent to ee or ww; ee adjacent to pp0 adjacent to pp
30unneededunneeded
4terminal eeterminal ee or ppterminal 0

Table 4.7.

Here “terminal” means the last remaining internal letter, adjacent to ww. Each indicated boundary contributes weight one, so two such boundaries contribute zero. For instance, the third AA-slot is a1+a2+v12a_1+a_2+v_{12}: its weights on epep, ewew, pwpw are respectively 0, 1+11+1, 1+11+1, and its weights on edges touching zero vanish. Its deletion operator is identically zero. In the second row the CC-slot is v23v_{23} and the BB-slot is u23u_{23}.

A nonzero contribution from an AA-count-tt component must use each AA-slot to delete an ee, so t≤ht\le h. Minimality gives t≥ht\ge h. Hence only χh\chi_h can contribute, and all hh letters ee must be deleted by its AA-slots. In particular, the possible CC-deletions of ee in the table cannot occur in a surviving contribution. This also excludes contributions from every larger AA-count.

In the fourth summand every deletion is therefore at the right endpoint, and a slot word has at most one complete deletion sequence. It succeeds precisely when it is the word s′s' obtained by e↦Ae \mapsto A, p↦Cp \mapsto C, 0↦B0 \mapsto B, in which case its weight is one. Thus the fourth summand evaluates to the coefficient [s′]χh[s']\chi_h. The first summand cannot delete any pp, so it vanishes because m−h>0m-h>0. The third summand vanishes because h>0h>0 and its AA-operator is zero.

Consider the second summand. Suppose an ee is followed by a nonempty maximal block consisting of pp’s and zeros, ending at the next ee or at ww. Its left ee cannot disappear while any of this block remains: all ee’s must be removed by AA-slots, which remove only a terminal ee. If the right boundary is an ee and that ee disappears before the block does, it must already be terminal, so the new right boundary is ww. Thus a surviving nonempty part of the block always has boundaries e,ee,e or e,we,w. The final surviving letter of this block cannot be removed. If that letter is pp, its CC-weight is 1+1=01+1=0; if it is 00, its BB-weight is 0+0=00+0=0. Consequently the second summand has no complete deletion sequence whenever some ee occurs before a non-ee. Figure 1 records the two possible boundaries and the last-letter obstruction.

A nonempty block and its boundaries: $e$ followed by a nonempty block of letters in $\{p,0\}$, followed by $e$ and $w$; after the right $e$ is removed, the boundaries are $e$ and $w$; the final surviving block letter is $p$ or $0$, with $q \in \{e,w\}$; $C$-weight: $1+1=0$ and $B$-weight: $0+0=0$

Figure 1. The obstruction in the second summand of the leading pentagon, after the minimal AA-count forces every ee to be removed by an AA-operation. Such an operation removes only a terminal ee. While the displayed p,0p,0 block is nonempty, its left boundary remains ee; removing a terminal right boundary changes ee to ww. With either right boundary, the final surviving pp or 00 has deletion weight zero in F2\mathbb{F}_2. Thus no nonzero deletion sequence empties the block.

The scalar leading pentagon now gives [s′]χh=0[s']\chi_h=0 for every such ss. The only remaining words have the form vehve^h, with vv a word of pp’s and zeros. Because m−h>0m-h>0, the word vv is nonempty. Let rev⁡\operatorname{rev} denote reversal of associative words. For every ordinary homogeneous Lie polynomial qq of associative length dd,

rev⁡(q)=(−1)d−1q.\operatorname{rev}(q)=(-1)^{d-1}q.

Indeed reversal sends [q1,q2][q_1,q_2] to −[rev⁡(q1),rev⁡(q2)]-[\operatorname{rev}(q_1),\operatorname{rev}(q_2)], proving the formula by induction on Lie monomials. In characteristic two it fixes χh\chi_h. The coefficient of vehve^h therefore equals the coefficient of ehrev⁡(v)e^h\operatorname{rev}(v), which has already been shown to vanish. Every coefficient of χh\chi_h is zero, a contradiction.

Thus a least nonzero AA-count can only be mm. All AA-counts are at most mm, so only the component using A,BA,B remains. It is an ordinary Lie polynomial as asserted. ∎

Excluding the residual kernel

Deletion has reduced the possible kernel to polynomials P(A,B)P(A,B). To exclude them, we now use the special identity rather than further deletion tests. Its lowest-count part compares coefficients obtained by exchanging an AA and a BB; antisymmetry will handle the remaining case with only one AA.

Proposition 4.4. For n>2n > 2 and every r≥0r \ge0, the leading projection

gr⁡rLn⟶Lie⁡F2⟨C,B⟩,χ⟼χ(0,C,B)\operatorname{gr}^{r} L_n \longrightarrow\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle C,B\rangle,\qquad\chi\longmapsto\chi(0,C,B)

is injective. Its source is zero unless n=2m+rn = 2m+r for an integer m≥0m \ge0; in that case its image has CC-count mm and BB-count rr.

Proof. The map is well defined because changing a representative by an element of Fr+1F^{r+1} does not change its count-rr component. The parity assertion and the multidegree of its image follow from wt⁡(A)=wt⁡(C)=2\operatorname{wt}(A)=\operatorname{wt}(C)=2 and wt⁡(B)=1\operatorname{wt}(B)=1. If m=0m=0, the leading part is an ordinary Lie polynomial in BB alone and is zero in the weights at issue. We may therefore assume m>0m>0.

Suppose that χ(0,C,B)=0\chi(0,C,B)=0. By Lemma 4.3, χ=P(A,B)\chi=P(A,B). If r=0r=0, this is an ordinary Lie polynomial in AA alone, and hence zero except possibly in weight two. Thus a nonzero kernel would require r≥1r\ge1.

Apply the reduction of Lemma 2.4 and antisymmetry with z=x+yz=x+y. They give

[x,ψ‾(x,y)+ψ‾(z,y)]+[y,ψ‾(z,y)]=0.(28)[x,\overline{\psi}(x,y)+\overline{\psi}(z,y)]+[y,\overline{\psi}(z,y)]=0. \tag*{(28)}

Indeed the special identity with a=xa=x, b=yb=y, c=zc=z becomes [x,ψ‾(y,x)]+[z,ψ‾(y,z)]=0[x,\overline{\psi}(y,x)]+[z,\overline{\psi}(y,z)]=0, and antisymmetry in characteristic two interchanges each pair of arguments.

Under x↦x+yx\mapsto x+y, the three associative elements become

A↦A+C+B2,C↦C,B↦B.A\mapsto A+C+B^2,\qquad C\mapsto C,\qquad B\mapsto B.

Moreover, on their free associative algebra,

[x,A]=0,[x,B]=C,[x,C]=[A,B].[x,A]=0,\qquad[x,B]=C,\qquad[x,C]=[A,B].

The part of ad⁡x\operatorname{ad}_x that lowers BB-count by one is consequently the derivation

D(A)=D(C)=0,D(B)=C;D(A)=D(C)=0,\qquad D(B)=C;

its other part raises BB-count by one. The substitution A↦A+C+B2A\mapsto A+C+B^2 never lowers that count. Therefore components of ψ‾\overline{\psi} with count greater than rr cannot contribute to count r−1r-1 in (4.8), and its outside bracket with yy has count at least r+1r+1. Within the leading part, using any B2B^2 in the substitution also raises the count by two. The count-r−1r-1 component of (4.8) is exactly

D(P(A+C,B)+P(A,B))=0.D\bigl(P(A+C,B)+P(A,B)\bigr)=0.

Write c(v)c(v) for the coefficient of a word vv with mm letters AA and rr letters BB in PP. Fix any target word with m−1m-1 letters AA, r−1r-1 letters BB, and two letters CC. Its coefficient on the left of (4.9) is the sum of exactly two coefficients of PP: fill the two marked CC-positions with (A,B)(A,B) or with (B,A)(B,A). In each case the original AA is replaced by CC in the substitution and the original BB by CC under DD; these are the only possibilities. The term D(P(A,B))D(P(A,B)) has only one CC and contributes nothing here. Thus the coefficients of PP are invariant under exchanging any chosen AA-position and BB-position. These exchanges connect all words with the specified multiplicities, so

c(v)=λfor every such word vc(v)=\lambda\quad\text{for every such word }v

for one λ∈F2\lambda\in\mathbb{F}_2.

If m≥2m \ge2, fix a target word with m−2m-2 letters AA, r−1r-1 letters BB, and three letters CC. Exactly one of its three CC-positions must have been the BB differentiated by DD; the other two must have been AA’s replaced in the substitution. There are exactly three choices. Its coefficient is therefore 3λ=λ3\lambda=\lambda, which (4.9) forces to vanish. Hence P=0P=0.

It remains to consider m=1m=1. The polynomial PP has original (x,y)(x,y)-bidegree (2,r)(2,r). An A,C,BA,C,B word with counts (a,c,b)(a,c,b) has original bidegree (2a+c,c+b)(2a+c,c+b). Solving for bidegree (2,r)(2,r) gives only

(a,c,b)=(1,0,r)or(0,2,r−2).(a,c,b)=(1,0,r)\quad\text{or}\quad(0,2,r-2).

The latter possibility is excluded by the assumption ψ‾∈F‾r\overline{\psi}\in\overline{F}^{r}, and the former is precisely PP. Thus if P≠0P\ne0, the entire bidegree-(2,r)(2,r) component of ψ‾\overline{\psi} is nonzero. Symmetry under x↔yx\leftrightarrow y forces a nonzero component of bidegree (r,2)(r,2). Its BB-count is at most its yy-count, namely two, so F‾r\overline{F}^{r} forces r≤2r\le2.

For r=2r=2, the ordinary free Lie component with one AA and two BB’s is spanned by

[B,[A,B]]=ABB+BBA.[B,[A,B]]=ABB+BBA.

To see the spanning assertion directly, every three-letter bracketing with two identical BB’s either has the inner bracket [B,B]=0[B,B]=0, or is [B,[A,B]][B,[A,B]] up to sign and skew-symmetry. The coefficients on ABBABB, BABBAB, BBABBA are therefore (μ,0,μ)(\mu,0,\mu), which are all equal as required by (4.10) only when μ=0\mu=0.

For r=1r=1, the forced swapped bidegree is (1,2)(1,2). The count equations 2a+c=12a+c=1, c+b=2c+b=2 have the unique nonnegative solution (a,c,b)=(0,1,1)(a,c,b)=(0,1,1). Thus this nonzero component is a multiple of [C,B][C,B], lies in count one, and survives the projection A=0A=0. No higher-filtration component has this bidegree, so it cannot cancel this projection. This contradicts χ(0,C,B)=0\chi(0,C,B)=0. Both exceptional cases are excluded, proving injectivity.

The image of the leading projection

Throughout this section the coefficient field is F2\mathbb{F}_2. Recall that L‾n\overline{L}_n denotes the reduction of the saturated Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}-lattice of rational solutions of weight nn, and that F‾r\overline{F}^{r} consists of polynomials containing at least rr occurrences of BB in the free associative algebra on

A=x2,C=[x,y],B=y.A=x^2,\qquad C=[x,y],\qquad B=y.

We use the ordinary free Lie algebra on A,C,BA,C,B inside this associative algebra, as justified in Lemma 3.1. For ψ∈F‾rL‾n\psi\in\overline{F}^{r}\overline{L}_n, let χ(A,C,B)\chi(A,C,B) be its component with exactly rr occurrences of BB, and put

f(C,B)=χ(0,C,B).f(C,B)=\chi(0,C,B).

If this component is nonzero, then n=2m+rn=2m+r, where mm is the total number of AA’s and CC’s in χ\chi. Proposition 4.4 says that this projection is injective on the corresponding associated graded space. We shall identify a free Lie algebra containing its image.

The argument begins with a restriction on products of iterated adjoints, obtained from symmetry in x,yx,y in Lemma 5.1. This restriction gives invariance under the polynomial shifts B↦B+s(C)B \mapsto B+s(C), and a Vandermonde argument then places ff in the ordinary free Lie algebra generated by ad⁡CkB\operatorname{ad}_{C}^{k}B, k≥1k \ge1. This proves the all-weight dimension bound. We then establish a separate compatibility: projected leading Ihara brackets become ordinary brackets. It will provide the independent Hall words in Section 8.

Symmetry and polynomial shifts

Lemma 5.1 (The even-index bound). Suppose that n>2n>2, ψ∈FrL‾n\psi\in F^{r}\overline{L}_{n}, and n=2m+rn=2m+r. The component of ψ\psi of original (x,y)(x,y)-bidegree (m,m+r)(m,m+r) is an associative linear combination of products

(ad⁡yj1x)⋯(ad⁡yjmx)(29)(\operatorname{ad}_{y}^{j_{1}}x)\cdots(\operatorname{ad}_{y}^{j_{m}}x) \tag*{(29)}

in which at least rr of the indices j1,…,jmj_{1},\ldots,j_{m} are even, with zero counted as even. Its image under A=0A=0 is exactly f(C,B)f(C,B). In particular, if r>mr>m, then f=0f=0.

Proof. By the elimination argument in Lemma 3.1, every homogeneous Lie polynomial in x,yx,y of weight greater than one is a Lie polynomial in Uj=ad⁡yjxU_j=\operatorname{ad}_{y}^{j}x, j≥0j \ge0. In characteristic two these elimination letters are

U2i=Ei=ad⁡AiB,U2i+1=Oi=ad⁡AiC.U_{2i}=E_i=\operatorname{ad}_{A}^{i}B,\qquad U_{2i+1}=O_i=\operatorname{ad}_{A}^{i}C.

Associative words in the Ei,OiE_i,O_i are linearly independent. Indeed, order the letters with AA largest and use degree followed by lexicographic order. The leading words of these letters are AiB,AiCA^iB,A^iC, respectively, with coefficient one. They form a prefix code: one reads a string of AA's up to its next BB or CC, thereby determining each successive codeword. Distinct products consequently have distinct leading words.

Each EiE_i is homogeneous of BB-count one, whereas each OiO_i has BB-count zero. Thus the expansion of ψ\psi in independent associative words in this alphabet is graded by the number of EE-factors. The hypothesis ψ∈Fr\psi\in F^r forces the coefficients of all words with fewer than rr such factors to vanish separately. This establishes a termwise restriction before any substitution or quotient is taken.

Select the component of original bidegree (m+r,m)(m+r,m). Every UjU_j has exactly one yy, so every product in this component has exactly mm factors. The reduced antisymmetry equation gives ψ(x,y)=ψ(y,x)\psi(x,y)=\psi(y,x). Swapping xx and yy therefore gives the desired expression (5.1) for bidegree (m,m+r)(m,m+r), with the same lower bound on the number of even indices. If r>mr>m, no such product exists.

For completeness, an A,C,BA,C,B-word with respective counts (a,c,b)(a,c,b) has original bidegree (2a+c,c+b)(2a+c,c+b). In bidegree (m,m+r)(m,m+r) this means

c=m−2a,b=r+2a.c=m-2a,\qquad b=r+2a.

The terms with a>0a>0 have higher BB-count and vanish under A=0A=0; the terms with a=0a=0 have c=m,b=rc=m,b=r and are precisely ff. Thus the even-index bound applies to the whole bidegree component, including every term subsequently removed by the projection. □

Lemma 5.2 (Polynomial shift invariance). For every ff obtained as above and every polynomial s(C)s(C),

f(C,B+s(C))=f(C,B).f(C,B+s(C))=f(C,B).

The identity holds after adjoining any finite collection of commuting scalar indeterminates to the coefficients; in particular, it is a polynomial identity in the coefficients of ss.

Proof. Let RR be any commutative F2\mathbb{F}_2-algebra, and work in S=R⟨C,B⟩S=R\langle C,B\rangle. Define an RR-linear derivation DD by

DB=C,DC=0.DB=C,\qquad DC=0.

In characteristic two the square of a derivation is again a derivation: the two middle terms in the twice-applied product rule cancel. Since D2D^2 vanishes on B,CB,C, it vanishes on all of SS. Consequently the Ore extension, followed by the indicated quotient,

E=S[X;D]/(X2),Xq=qX+Dq(q∈S),\mathcal{E}=S[X;D]/(X^2),\qquad Xq=qX+Dq\quad(q\in S),

has underlying left SS-module S⊕SXS\oplus SX. Indeed X2q=qX2+D2q=qX2X^2q=qX^2+D^2q=qX^2, so X2X^2 is central in the Ore extension and its quotient introduces no relation in SS. In particular, SS embeds in E\mathcal{E}. The substitutions x↦Xx\mapsto X, y↦By\mapsto B give

x2↦0,[x,y]↦C.x^2\mapsto0,\qquad[x,y]\mapsto C.

Equivalently, E\mathcal{E} acts on SS with XX acting by DD and elements of SS acting by left multiplication. For an element written q+q′Xq+q'X, its value on 11 is its constant term qq.

Fix s∈R[C]s\in R[C], and put F=B+s(C)F=B+s(C). The substitution B↦FB\mapsto F, C↦CC\mapsto C commutes with DD, since D(s)=0D(s)=0. It therefore extends to an automorphism of E\mathcal{E} fixing XX. Let h(x,y)h(x,y) be the whole bidegree-(m,m+r)(m,m+r) component in Lemma 5.1. Evaluation at x=X,y=Bx=X,y=B kills the terms containing AA in its A,C,BA,C,B expression, so that h(X,B)=f(C,B)h(X,B)=f(C,B) in the embedded subalgebra SS of E\mathcal{E}. Applying the shift automorphism just constructed gives h(X,F)=f(C,F)h(X,F)=f(C,F). We may therefore evaluate the even-index product expansion of hh term by term in E\mathcal{E}. Its sum belongs to SS, so its value on 11 is exactly f(C,F)f(C,F). The factors of positive index become elements of SS:

ad⁡FjX=Pj:=ad⁡Fj−1C(j≥1),\operatorname{ad}_F^jX=P_j:=\operatorname{ad}_F^{j-1}C\quad(j\ge1),

whereas the index-zero factor is XX. We shall bound the BB-degree of the constant term of each product separately.

Write

L=ad⁡B,Q=ad⁡s(C),K=ad⁡C,Pj=(L+Q)j−1C.L=\operatorname{ad}_B,\qquad Q=\operatorname{ad}_{s(C)},\qquad K=\operatorname{ad}_C,\qquad P_j=(L+Q)^{j-1}C.

Here LL raises BB-degree by one and QQ preserves it. The relations needed below are

Q(C)=0,QK=KQ,DL=LD+K,DQ=QD.Q(C)=0,\qquad QK=KQ,\qquad DL=LD+K,\qquad DQ=QD.

For the two smallest positive indices one has

P1=C,DP1=0,P2=[B,C],DP2=0.P_1=C,\qquad DP_1=0,\qquad P_2=[B,C],\qquad DP_2=0.

For j≥2j\ge2, every nonzero operator word in (L+Q)j−1C(L+Q)^{j-1}C has rightmost operator LL, because Q(C)=0Q(C)=0. Thus PjP_j has no BB-degree-zero component, and its degree-one component is

(Pj)[1]=Qj−2LC.(P_j)_{[1]}=Q^{j-2}LC.

This is killed by DD, since DLC=KC=[C,C]=0DLC=KC=[C,C]=0. As DD lowers BB-degree by one, DPjDP_j has no degree-zero component for any j≥1j\ge1.

For j≥3j\ge3, the degree-two component is explicitly

(Pj)[2]=∑a+b=j−3QaLQbLC.(P_j)_{[2]}=\sum_{a+b=j-3}Q^aLQ^bLC.

Upon applying DD, differentiating the rightmost LL gives zero, and differentiating the other LL gives QaKQbLCQ^{a}KQ^{b}LC. The commutation of QQ and KK therefore gives

(DPj)[1]=(j−2)Qj−3KLC.(DP_j)_{[1]}=(j-2)Q^{j-3}KLC.

For even jj this is zero in RR. Together with (5.4), these calculations prove the following lower bounds; the zero polynomial satisfies every listed bound:

PjP_jDPjDP_j
j≥1j \ge1 odd01
j≥2j \ge2 even12

Table 1. (minimum BB-degree).

The bound for odd PjP_j is deliberately weak, so that it includes P1=CP_1=C. All these calculations allow constant terms in ss and arbitrary scalar coefficients in RR.

Now consider one product with qq index-zero factors and ee positive even-index factors. Move each XX to the right using XP=PX+DPXP=PX+DP, and apply the resulting expression to 1. Every surviving term must use each of the original qq copies of XX as a differentiation, since a terminal XX kills 1. Repeated use of the product rule assigns these differentiations to positive-index factors to their right. An allocation assigning two differentiations to the same factor vanishes, because D2=0D^2=0. Hence every surviving term is a product in which exactly qq distinct positive-index factors have been differentiated once. An undifferentiated positive even-index factor contributes a lower bound of one, and an odd-index factor contributes a lower bound of zero. Differentiating either type increases the respective lower bound by one. The resulting BB-degree is therefore at least

e+qe+q

which is precisely the number of all even indices, including zero. If no such allocation is possible the constant term is zero, which also satisfies the bound. Cancellations among allocations cannot create lower-degree terms.

Lemma 5.1 now shows that f(C,B+s(C))f(C,B+s(C)) has no BB-degree below rr. On the other hand, ff is homogeneous of BB-degree rr, and replacing BB by B+s(C)B+s(C) cannot increase that degree. Its degree-rr component is exactly f(C,B)f(C,B), obtained by choosing BB at every occurrence. This proves (5.3) over RR, and in particular over any polynomial ring in scalar indeterminates. □

The ordinary Lie image and the dimension bound

Proposition 5.3 (The image bound). Set gk=ad⁡CkBg_k=\operatorname{ad}_C^k B for k≥1k \ge1. These elements freely generate an ordinary free Lie algebra inside Lie⁡F2⟨C,B⟩\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle C,B\rangle. For n>2n>2, the image of the leading projection of gr⁡rFLn\operatorname{gr}^{r}F L_n belongs to its weight-nn, length-rr component, where wt⁡(gk)=2k+1\operatorname{wt}(g_k)=2k+1 and each gkg_k has length one. The associated graded piece with r=0r=0 is zero.

Proof. First suppose r≥1r \ge1. Encode the associative words of BB-degree rr by the vector-space isomorphism

Pr:Ci0BCi1⋯BCir⟼s0i0s1i1⋯sririn F2[s0,…,sr].\mathcal{P}_r:C^{i_0}BC^{i_1}\cdots BC^{i_r}\longmapsto s_0^{i_0}s_1^{i_1}\cdots s_r^{i_r}\quad\text{in }\mathbb{F}_2[s_0,\ldots,s_r].

Put P=Pr(f)P=\mathcal{P}_r(f). For 1≤i≤r1\le i\le r, let RiPR_iP be its restriction obtained by identifying si−1s_{i-1} and sis_i, written in the same polynomial ring F2[t0,…,tr−1]\mathbb{F}_2[t_0,\ldots,t_{r-1}] for every ii:

RiP=P(t0,…,ti−2,ti−1,ti−1,ti,…,tr−1).R_iP=P(t_0,\ldots,t_{i-2},t_{i-1},t_{i-1},t_i,\ldots,t_{r-1}).

Empty initial or final strings in this formula are omitted. In the coefficient of λ\lambda in f(C,B+λCj)f(C,B+\lambda C^j), replacing the iith BB merges its two neighboring powers of CC and adds jj to their exponent. Its encoding with r−1r-1 remaining BB’s is consequently ti−1jRiPt_{i-1}^{j}R_iP. Lemma 5.2, applied with the independent scalar λ\lambda, gives

∑i=1rti−1jRiP=0(j≥0).(30)\sum_{i=1}^{r} t_{i-1}^{j}R_iP = 0 \qquad(j \ge0). \tag*{(30)}

Taking j=0,…,r−1j=0,\ldots,r-1 produces a Vandermonde matrix whose determinant is

∏0≤a<b≤r−1(tb−ta).\prod_{0\le a<b\le r-1}(t_b-t_a).

It is a nonzero polynomial over F2\mathbb{F}_2, because the tit_i are independent indeterminates. Thus the matrix is invertible over F2(t0,…,tr−1)\mathbb{F}_2(t_0,\ldots,t_{r-1}), and all RiPR_iP vanish. This argument also applies to even rr; it never divides by rr or specializes the tit_i to elements of the two-element field. For r=1r=1 the matrix is simply (1)(1).

The kernel of the iith identification is the principal ideal generated by di=si−1−sid_i=s_{i-1}-s_i. These did_i are distinct nonassociate prime linear polynomials. Their individual divisibility therefore implies

d1⋯dr∣Pin F2[s0,…,sr].(31)d_1\cdots d_r \mid P \quad\text{in } \mathbb{F}_2[s_0,\ldots,s_r]. \tag*{(31)}

It remains to translate this associative statement into an ordinary Lie statement.

Temporarily include g0=Bg_0=B. The ordinary Lie ideal generated by BB in Lie⁡F2⟨C,B⟩\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle C,B\rangle is the subalgebra generated by gk=ad⁡CkBg_k=\operatorname{ad}_C^k B, k≥0k\ge0. Indeed, this subalgebra contains BB and is stable under ad⁡C\operatorname{ad}_C by the derivation rule and [C,gk]=gk+1[C,g_k]=g_{k+1}; the reverse inclusion is immediate. Since ff has positive BB-degree, it belongs to this ordinary Lie subalgebra.

Expanding the iterated adjoints gives the useful product formula

Pr(gk1⋯gkr)=∏i=1r(si−1−si)ki=d1k1⋯drkr.(32)\mathcal{P}_r(g_{k_1}\cdots g_{k_r})=\prod_{i=1}^{r}(s_{i-1}-s_i)^{k_i}=d_1^{k_1}\cdots d_r^{k_r}. \tag*{(32)}

The variables d1,…,dr,srd_1,\ldots,d_r,s_r are an invertible linear change of coordinates from s0,…,srs_0,\ldots,s_r. In particular, the monomials in the right side of (5.8) are linearly independent. For different product lengths the BB-degrees differ, so all associative words in the gkg_k, k≥0k\ge0, are independent. Their ordinary Lie algebra is therefore the ordinary free Lie algebra on these letters, by its embedding in the free associative algebra.

Write the associative expansion of ff uniquely in these independent words. Its encoding lies in F2[d1,…,dr]\mathbb{F}_2[d_1,\ldots,d_r]. By (5.7), every monomial appearing with nonzero coefficient has positive exponent of every did_i. Equivalently, the expansion of ff contains no word with any factor g0g_0. The ordinary free Lie algebra on g0,g1,…g_0,g_1,\ldots has a retraction

ρ(g0)=0,ρ(gk)=gk(k≥1).\rho(g_0)=0,\qquad\rho(g_k)=g_k \qquad(k\ge1).

Its extension to the free associative algebra fixes the expansion of ff. Hence ρ(f)=f\rho(f)=f, proving that ff belongs to the ordinary free Lie algebra on gkg_k, k≥1k\ge1. This retraction preserves ordinary Lie membership throughout; no identification with all primitive elements in characteristic two is being made.

Each gkg_k contains one BB and kk copies of CC. The original weight is therefore 2k+12k+1, and the BB-count of a Lie word is its length in these generators. This proves the asserted weight and length statement.

If r=0r=0, then ff is an ordinary Lie polynomial in CC alone. The ordinary Lie algebra on one generator is its one-dimensional linear span, of original weight two; thus f=0f=0 for n>2n>2.

Proposition 4.4 then gives gr⁡F0L‾n=0\operatorname{gr}_{F}^{0}\overline{L}_{n}=0. The possible boundary m=0m=0 also contributes nothing: its leading component would be an ordinary Lie polynomial in BB alone, whose only possible positive weight is one. □\square

Define the ordinary free Lie algebra

fodd=Lie⁡F2⟨zk:k≥1⟩,wt⁡(zk)=2k+1,\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd}}=\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_{2}}\langle z_k:k\geq1\rangle,\qquad\operatorname{wt}(z_k)=2k+1,

and give each zkz_k length one. Write fodd,n,r\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd},n,r} for its component of weight nn and length rr, and set

dn,r=dim⁡F2fodd,n,r,dn=∑r≥0dn,r.(33)d_{n,r}=\dim_{\mathbb{F}_{2}}\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd},n,r},\qquad d_n=\sum_{r\geq0}d_{n,r}. \tag*{(33)}

These are also the corresponding dimensions over Q\mathbb{Q}, by the ordinary free Lie lattice of Lemma 2.2. The sum is finite: a length-rr word has weight at least 3r3r, and only finitely many generators can occur in any fixed weight.

Corollary 5.4 (The all-weight upper bound). For every nn and r≥0r\geq0 there is an injection

gr⁡FrL‾n↪fodd,n,r,\operatorname{gr}_{F}^{r}\overline{L}_{n}\hookrightarrow\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd},n,r},

obtained by the leading projection and the identification gk↔zkg_k\leftrightarrow z_k. In particular,

dim⁡QWn=dim⁡F2L‾n≤∑r≥0dn,r=dn.(34)\dim_{\mathbb{Q}}W_n=\dim_{\mathbb{F}_{2}}\overline{L}_n\leq\sum_{r\geq0}d_{n,r}=d_n. \tag*{(34)}

Proof. For n>2n>2, combine Proposition 4.4 with Proposition 5.3. If n−rn-r is odd or negative the source piece is zero by the weights of A,C,BA,C,B, and the target piece is likewise zero since the weight of a length-rr word in odd-weight letters has parity rr. The cases r=0r=0 and m=0m=0 were disposed of in Proposition 5.3. Weights one and two have zero solution space by Lemma 2.1, and have no generators or Lie words in fodd\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd}}. Finally, Fn+1Ln=0F^{n+1}L_n=0, so this is a finite filtration in weight nn and the dimensions of its associated graded pieces sum to dim⁡F2L‾n\dim_{\mathbb{F}_{2}}\overline{L}_n. The equality of this dimension with dim⁡QWn\dim_{\mathbb{Q}}W_n is Proposition 2.5. □\square

Leading Ihara brackets

The upper bound concerns the full equation space. To attain it in Section 8, we will construct elements whose projected leading terms are the gkg_k and compare their iterated Ihara brackets with ordinary Lie words. The following compatibility is computed in the ambient Lie algebra and does not require closure of WW.

Proposition 5.5 (The leading Ihara bracket). Let ψ∈FrL‾n\psi\in F^{r}\overline{L}_n and ϕ∈FsL‾n′\phi\in F^{s}\overline{L}_{n'}, where n,n′>2n,n'>2 and r,s≥1r,s\geq1. Write f,gf,g for their leading projections at counts r,sr,s. Their Ihara bracket, computed in the ambient Lie algebra in x,yx,y, belongs to Fr+sF^{r+s} in the A,C,BA,C,B presentation, and the projection of its component of count r+sr+s is

[f,g].[f,g].

This assertion does not require prior closure of the full solution space under the Ihara bracket.

Proof. We first prove the filtration assertion before applying A=0A=0. The derivation δ=ad⁡x\delta=\operatorname{ad}_x acts on the free A,C,BA,C,B algebra by

δA=0,δB=C,δC=[A,B].\delta A=0,\qquad\delta B=C,\qquad\delta C=[A,B].

Write δ=δ−+δ+\delta= \delta_{-} + \delta_{+}, where

δ−B=C,δ−A=δ−C=0,δ+C=[A,B],δ+A=δ+B=0.\delta_{-}B = C,\quad\delta_{-}A = \delta_{-}C = 0,\quad\delta_{+}C = [A,B],\quad\delta_{+}A = \delta_{+}B = 0.

These two derivations respectively lower and raise the BB-count by one. In particular, δ(Fr)⊂Fr−1\delta(F^{r}) \subset F^{r-1}. Directly from the definition of the Ihara derivation,

DψA=0,DψB=[B,ψ],DψC=[C,ψ]+[B,δψ].(35)D_{\psi}A = 0,\qquad D_{\psi}B = [B,\psi],\qquad D_{\psi}C = [C,\psi] + [B,\delta\psi]. \tag*{(35)}

The last formula is the derivation identity applied to [x,B][x,B]. Thus DψB∈Fr+1D_{\psi}B \in F^{r+1} and DψC∈FrD_{\psi}C \in F^{r}: the outside BB in [B,δψ][B,\delta\psi] restores the one count that δ−\delta_{-} can remove. Replacing a BB in a word of count ss adds at least rr to its count, and replacing a CC also adds at least rr; the derivative of an AA vanishes. It follows that

Dψ(Fs)⊂Fr+s.D_{\psi}(F^{s}) \subset F^{r+s}.

Interchanging ψ,ϕ\psi,\phi and including their ordinary bracket proves the asserted containment of the Ihara bracket.

Let χ,η\chi,\eta be the components of ψ,ϕ\psi,\phi of counts r,sr,s. In (5.12), only χ\chi can contribute to the part of the derivation that raises count by exactly rr. Its action is

A⟼0,B⟼[B,χ],C⟼[C,χ]+[B,δ−χ].A \longmapsto0,\qquad B \longmapsto[B,\chi],\qquad C \longmapsto[C,\chi] + [B,\delta_{-}\chi].

Indeed, a higher-count component of ψ\psi still has higher count after applying [B,δ−(−)][B,\delta_{-}(-)], while [B,δ+χ][B,\delta_{+}\chi] raises the count by two more. This derivation preserves the ideal generated by AA, so it descends under A=0A = 0. The projection commutes with δ−\delta_{-}, whose induced action on F2⟨C,B⟩F_{2}\langle C,B\rangle is the derivation DD from Lemma 5.2. The induced leading action is consequently

B⟼[B,f],C⟼[C,f]+[B,Df].B \longmapsto[B,f],\qquad C \longmapsto[C,f] + [B,Df].

By Proposition 5.3, ff is an ordinary Lie polynomial in gkg_k, k≥1k \ge1; each of these is killed by DD, because

Dgk=ad⁡Ck(C)=0(k≥1).Dg_k = \operatorname{ad}_{C}^{k}(C) = 0\qquad(k \ge1).

Thus the extra term [B,Df][B,Df] vanishes, and the induced derivation on F2⟨C,B⟩F_{2}\langle C,B\rangle is q↦[q,f]q \mapsto[q,f]. One can also read Df=0Df = 0 directly as the coefficient of λ\lambda in (5.3) with s(C)=λCs(C) = \lambda C.

The two Ihara derivations therefore project to [g,f][g,f] and [f,g][f,g], respectively, and the ordinary bracket projects to [f,g][f,g]. Their specified combination is

[g,f]−[f,g]+[f,g]=[g,f]=[f,g][g,f] - [f,g] + [f,g] = [g,f] = [f,g]

over F2\mathbb{F}_{2}. All higher components of ψ\psi or ϕ\phi have already been excluded by the filtration calculation, so this proves (5.11). ▫

A rational Lie algebra of categorical values

The upper bound on the full equation space is now established. To attain it, we construct a rational subspace that is closed under the Ihara bracket and contains an element with nonzero coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y in every odd weight n≥3n \ge3. This section proves the closure property; the next constructs the nonzero values. Only configurations with at most four labels will be needed. We use the parenthesized-chord formalism of Bar-Natan [2], restricted to the finite arities and operations specified below. All completions in this section are by weight, and all tensor products of completed spaces are completed by total weight.

We use the standard label sets [k]={1,…,k}[k] = \{1,\ldots,k\} for 1≤k≤41 \leq k \leq4; other label sets denote their relabeled copies. For such a finite label set II, let T(I)T(I) be the set of planar binary trees whose leaves are bijectively labeled by II. Thus the objects record both parentheses and a linear ordering. Put tI=0\mathfrak{t}_I = 0 for ∣I∣=1|I| = 1, and otherwise use the infinitesimal braid algebra on II. Over a field KK of characteristic zero define a KK-linear category C(I;K)\mathcal{C}(I;K) by

Hom⁡(p,q)=U^(tI⊗K)(p,q∈T(I)).\operatorname{Hom}(p,q)=\widehat{U}(\mathfrak{t}_I\otimes K)\qquad(p,q\in T(I)).

Composition is multiplication, with the last arrow on the left. Write 1pq1_{pq} for the arrow with coefficient 11, so that 1qr1pq=1pr1_{qr}1_{pq}=1_{pr}. Each arrow space carries the coproduct determined by

Δ(tij)=tij⊗1+1⊗tij,Δ(1pq)=1pq⊗1pq.\Delta(t_{ij})=t_{ij}\otimes1+1\otimes t_{ij},\qquad\Delta(1_{pq})=1_{pq}\otimes1_{pq}.

In particular, the unit coefficient arrow between different objects is distinguished from an identity endomorphism.

Here are all the additional operations that we impose. Relabeling is allowed along every bijection of label sets. For an outer tree on II and fixed trees on disjoint nonempty sets BiB_i, graft the latter at its leaves. On arrows this operation is the algebra homomorphism

tij⟼tBiBj:=∑a∈Bi, b∈Bjtab.(36)t_{ij}\longmapsto t_{B_iB_j}:=\sum_{\substack{a\in B_i,\ b\in B_j}}t_{ab}. \tag*{(36)}

There is also insertion of a varying tree in one fixed leaf of a fixed outer tree: on arrows this retains each inner chord tabt_{ab} with its labels. Both operations are used whenever the resulting number of leaves is at most four; single-leaf trees permit identity insertions. These are functors preserving coproducts. Indeed, the disjoint-chord relations and the three-label relations imply the corresponding relations between the block sums in (6.1), by summing first over labels in each block. Inner chords commute with outer block sums: for a,b∈Bia,b\in B_i and c∉Bic\notin B_i the only possibly nonzero terms are [tab,tac+tbc]=0[t_{ab},t_{ac}+t_{bc}]=0. These observations also show that successive insertions agree with grafting the same trees in one step.

A compatible derivation of weight nn is a family δ\delta of KK-linear maps on these arrow spaces, raising weight by nn, such that

δ(ba)=δ(b)a+bδ(a),Δδ=(δ⊗id⁡+id⁡⊗δ)Δ.\delta(ba)=\delta(b)a+b\delta(a),\qquad\Delta\delta=(\delta\otimes\operatorname{id}+\operatorname{id}\otimes\delta)\Delta.

It must commute with all the operations just specified and vanish on all arrow spaces in arity two. The arity-one derivation is necessarily zero. Let Dn(K)\mathcal{D}_n(K) denote this space. Commutators of such families are again compatible derivations, of the sum of their weights.

Set

a=((12)3),b=(1(23)),α=1ab,x=t12,y=t23.a=((12)3),\qquad b=(1(23)),\qquad\alpha=1_{ab},\qquad x=t_{12},\qquad y=t_{23}.

Evaluation on α\alpha will be understood as its coefficient in U^(t3⊗K)\widehat{U}(\mathfrak{t}_3\otimes K).

Proposition 6.1. For n≥2n\geq2, evaluation δ↦δ(α)\delta\mapsto\delta(\alpha) takes Dn(Q)\mathcal{D}_n(\mathbb{Q}) into WnW_n. Its images

Vn={δ(α):δ∈Dn(Q)},V=⨁n≥2VnV_n=\{\delta(\alpha):\delta\in\mathcal{D}_n(\mathbb{Q})\},\qquad V=\bigoplus_{n\geq2}V_n

form a rational Lie subalgebra under the Ihara bracket (1.6).

Proof. Write ψ=δ(α)\psi= \delta(\alpha). The coderivation rule at the group-like arrow α\alpha says

Δψ=ψ⊗1+1⊗ψ.\Delta\psi= \psi\otimes1 + 1 \otimes\psi.

Primitives in a characteristic-zero enveloping algebra are its Lie algebra: by the PBW filtration, a primitive of filtration degree d>1d > 1 would give a primitive homogeneous polynomial of degree dd in a symmetric algebra, whereas its coproduct has a nonzero component of bidegree (1,d−1)(1,d-1). Induction on filtration degree proves the assertion. Now

t3=Lie⁡K⟨x,y⟩⊕KT,T=t12+t13+t23,(37)\mathfrak{t}_3 = \operatorname{Lie}_K\langle x,y\rangle\oplus K T,\qquad T = t_{12} + t_{13} + t_{23}, \tag*{(37)}

with TT central: replacing t13t_{13} by T−x−yT-x-y transforms exactly the three defining relations into the centrality of TT. Thus a primitive of weight n≥2n \ge2 is a Lie polynomial ψ(x,y)\psi(x,y).

Reversing the two children at any fork is insertion, followed if necessary by an inner insertion, of a unit arrow in arity two. Its δ\delta-value is zero. The values of unit coefficient arrows add under composition, and inverse unit arrows have opposite values. Relabel α\alpha by 1↔31 \leftrightarrow3. Its source ((32)1)((32)1) is carried to bb by fork reversals, and its target (3(21))(3(21)) is carried to aa in the same way. Its value is therefore both ψ(y,x)\psi(y,x) and −ψ(x,y)-\psi(x,y), giving

ψ(x,y)+ψ(y,x)=0.(38)\psi(x,y) + \psi(y,x) = 0. \tag*{(38)}

For the cyclic relation, use the successive trees ((12)3),((23)1),((31)2)((12)3),((23)1),((31)2). Reassociation on the ordered triples (1,2,3),(2,3,1),(3,1,2)(1,2,3),(2,3,1),(3,1,2), each followed by a root-fork reversal, forms a cycle of unit arrows. Consequently

ψ(t12,t23)+ψ(t23,t31)+ψ(t31,t12)=0.\psi(t_{12},t_{23}) + \psi(t_{23},t_{31}) + \psi(t_{31},t_{12}) = 0.

An occurrence of the central TT in a Lie monomial of degree greater than one contributes zero. Substitution of t31=T−x−yt_{31} = T-x-y gives

ψ(x,y)+ψ(y,−x−y)+ψ(−x−y,x)=0.(39)\psi(x,y) + \psi(y,-x-y) + \psi(-x-y,x) = 0. \tag*{(39)}

Figure 2 shows the five four-leaf trees and the two paths of reassociation arrows:

The five parenthesizations of four ordered leaves

Figure 2. The five parenthesizations of four ordered leaves. Each arrow reassociates ((IJ)K)((IJ)K) to (I(JK))(I(JK)), with the appropriate fixed subtrees inserted. The labels p1,…,p5p_1,\ldots,p_5 denote the infinitesimal values in the table, not the arrows themselves. The two paths A →\to D →\to E and A →\to B →\to C →\to E have the same unit arrow as composite. Their infinitesimal values add, yielding the pentagon identity.

A=(((12)3)4),B=((1(23))4),C=(1((23)4)),D=((12)(34)),E=(1(2(34))),A⟶D⟶E,A⟶B⟶C⟶E.\begin{aligned} A &= (((12)3)4),\qquad B = ((1(23))4),\qquad C = (1((23)4)),\\ D &= ((12)(34)),\qquad E = (1(2(34))),\\ A &\longrightarrow D \longrightarrow E,\qquad A \longrightarrow B \longrightarrow C \longrightarrow E. \end{aligned}

The two edge values on the first path are ψ(t13+t23,t34)\psi(t_{13}+t_{23},t_{34}) and ψ(t12,t23+t24)\psi(t_{12},t_{23}+t_{24}). Those on the second are ψ(t12,t23)\psi(t_{12},t_{23}), ψ(t12+t13,t24+t34)\psi(t_{12}+t_{13},t_{24}+t_{34}), and ψ(t23,t34)\psi(t_{23},t_{34}). Both composites are 1AE1_{AE}, hence

ψ(t12,t23+t24)+ψ(t13+t23,t34)=ψ(t23,t34)+ψ(t12+t13,t24+t34)+ψ(t12,t23).(40)\begin{aligned} \psi(t_{12},t_{23}+t_{24}) + \psi(t_{13}+t_{23},t_{34}) &= \psi(t_{23},t_{34})\\ &\quad+ \psi(t_{12}+t_{13},t_{24}+t_{34}) + \psi(t_{12},t_{23}). \tag*{(40)} \end{aligned}

This proves membership in WnW_n using only the stated operations.

It remains to check the bracket, including its sign. Let da,dbd_a,d_b be the loop derivations at a,ba,b. Inner insertion gives da(x)=0d_a(x) = 0 and db(y)=0d_b(y) = 0. Differentiating the equality of arrows αya=ybα\alpha y_a = y_b\alpha gives

ψy+da(y)=yψ,da(y)=[y,ψ].\psi y + d_a(y) = y\psi,\qquad d_a(y) = [y,\psi].

Outer arity-two insertion also kills t13+t23t_{13}+t_{23} at aa, so da(T)=0d_a(T) = 0. In the decomposition (6.2) its restriction is exactly DψD_\psi. An arrow from aa to bb with coefficient hh equals αhα−1\alpha h\alpha^{-1}; therefore

δab(h)=ψh+Dψ(h)(h∈K⟨x,y⟩).(41)\delta_{ab}(h) = \psi h + D_\psi(h)\qquad(h \in K\langle x,y\rangle). \tag*{(41)}

If another derivation ε\varepsilon has value ϕ\phi, their commutator has value

[δ,ε](α)=Dψ(ϕ)−Dϕ(ψ)+ψϕ−ϕψ={ψ,ϕ}.[\delta,\varepsilon](\alpha)=D_{\psi}(\phi)-D_{\phi}(\psi)+\psi\phi-\phi\psi=\{\psi,\phi\}.

Evaluation is thus a Lie homomorphism onto its image. No injectivity of evaluation is required. □

Lemma 6.2 (Rational finite data). For every n>0n>0 and every characteristic-zero extension K/QK/\mathbb{Q},

Dn(K)=Dn(Q)⊗QK.D_n(K)=D_n(\mathbb{Q})\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}K.

For n≥2n\geq2, the image of evaluation is Vn⊗QKV_n\otimes_{\mathbb{Q}}K. In particular, if the coefficient of a fixed associative word is nonzero on a complex categorical value of weight nn, it is nonzero on some rational categorical value of that weight.

Proof. At each arity choose a base object oo. For a composition derivation put hp=δ(1op)h_p=\delta(1_{op}), with ho=0h_o=0, and let dd be its derivation on loops at oo. Since every arrow has the factorization 1oqu1po1_{oq}u1_{po}, the product and inverse rules force

δpq(u)=hqu+d(u)−uhp.\delta_{pq}(u)=h_qu+d(u)-uh_p.

Conversely, an algebra derivation dd and elements hph_p define a composition derivation by this formula. In weight nn the data are

hp∈U(tI)n,d(tij)∈U(tI)n+1.h_p\in U(\mathfrak{t}_I)_n,\qquad d(t_{ij})\in U(\mathfrak{t}_I)_{n+1}.

There are finitely many objects and generators, and every displayed space is finite dimensional over Q\mathbb{Q}.

The conditions that dd preserve the defining braid relations are rational linear equations in these data. The coderivation conditions are equivalent to primitivity of all hph_p and d(tij)d(t_{ij}): necessity follows on the reference unit arrows and generator loops, and sufficiency follows by the product rule and (6.7). These are again finitely many rational linear equations, since coproducts in the indicated weights take values in finite sums of finite-dimensional spaces.

Finally, there are only finitely many label permutations, object graftings, and inner placements through arity four. For each associated functor ρ\rho, the condition δρ=ρδ\delta\rho=\rho\delta need only be checked on the reference unit arrows and generator loops: all other arrows follow by composition, the product rule, and continuity. These checks, and the requirement of zero arity-two action, are rational linear equations. Thus Dn\mathcal{D}_n is the kernel of a linear map between finite-dimensional rational spaces. Kernels and images of such maps commute with scalar extension. Evaluation and coefficient extraction are rational linear maps, proving the last assertion as well.

Holonomy and odd depth-one values

By Lemma 6.2, a complex categorical value with nonzero coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y gives a rational value with the same nonvanishing property. We construct these complex values directly from a flat connection. This follows the associator approach to odd-weight elements in [6]; we include the regularization and compatibility arguments needed here. The section first constructs regularized transport (Proposition 7.1), then compares the two transport rules through their operator logarithm, and finally extracts the nonzero coefficient in Proposition 7.3.

Tree endpoints and regularized transport

Write λ=(2πi)−1\lambda=(2\pi i)^{-1} and

XI={(zi)i∈I∈CI:zi≠zj for i≠j}.X_I=\{(z_i)_{i\in I}\in\mathbb{C}^I:z_i\ne z_j\text{ for }i\ne j\}.

On XIX_I consider the universal logarithmic braid connection [11]

Ω=λ∑i<jtij dlog⁡(zi−zj),dg=Ωg.(42)\Omega=\lambda\sum_{i<j}t_{ij}\,\mathrm{d}\log(z_i-z_j),\qquad\mathrm{d}g=\Omega g. \tag*{(42)}

At every fixed weight this is an ordinary differential equation in a finite-dimensional nilpotent quotient of the enveloping algebra. Its solution is the finite sum of iterated integrals in that quotient, with later differentials multiplying on the left.

The connection is flat. Its coefficients are closed; terms supported on four different labels commute; and the remaining terms in Ω∧Ω\Omega\wedge\Omega vanish by the three-label braid relations and

dlog⁡(zi−zj)∧dlog⁡(zj−zk)+dlog⁡(zj−zk)∧dlog⁡(zk−zi)+dlog⁡(zk−zi)∧dlog⁡(zi−zj)=0.\mathrm{d}\log(z_i-z_j)\wedge\mathrm{d}\log(z_j-z_k)+\mathrm{d}\log(z_j-z_k)\wedge\mathrm{d}\log(z_k-z_i)+\mathrm{d}\log(z_k-z_i)\wedge\mathrm{d}\log(z_i-z_j)=0.

This is Arnold’s logarithmic-form relation [1]. It follows by putting u=zi−zju=z_i-z_j, v=zj−zkv=z_j-z_k and using zk−zi=−u−vz_k-z_i=-u-v. The usual homotopy variation formula for an ordinary differential equation now shows that transport is homotopy invariant: the variation of transport with fixed endpoints is the integral of its curvature conjugated by partial transports, and is zero here. Alternatively this formula follows by differentiating the finite iterated-integral expression in each weight. Since Ω\Omega is primitive, transport is group-like. Indeed its coproduct and the tensor square of transport solve the same equation with form Ω⊗1+1⊗Ω\Omega\otimes1+1\otimes\Omega and initial value 11.

We first define the endpoint data for a fixed choice of scales. For an internal node dd of a tree p∈T(I)p \in\mathcal{T}(I) assign a scale sd=ϵads_d = \epsilon^{a_d}, with aroot=0a_{\mathrm{root}} = 0 and exponents strictly increasing along descent. Anchor the root at 0. The left child of a node has its anchor at that node’s anchor, and the right child has its anchor displaced by sds_d; repeat down the tree. Thus the coordinate of a leaf is explicitly

zi(ϵ)=∑d above i1{i lies in the right child of d}ϵad.(43)z_i(\epsilon) = \sum_{d\ \mathrm{above}\ i} \mathbf{1}_{\{i\ \mathrm{lies\ in\ the\ right\ child\ of\ }d\}}\epsilon^{a_d}. \tag*{(43)}

For sufficiently small positive ϵ\epsilon these are distinct real points in the prescribed leaf order. The curve ϵ↦(zi(ϵ))i∈I\epsilon\mapsto(z_i(\epsilon))_{i\in I} is the collar of pp. For example, the three-leaf objects a=((12)3)a=((12)3) and b=(1(23))b=(1(23)) give respectively (0,ϵu,1)(0,\epsilon^u,1) and (0,1,1+ϵv)(0,1,1+\epsilon^v), with u,v>0u,v>0. Thus the coordinate (z2−z1)/(z3−z1)(z_2-z_1)/(z_3-z_1) approaches 0 and 1 from inside the real interval, as will be used for reassociation. Let

Kd=∑i in the left child of dj in the right child of dtij,Ep(ϵ)=exp⁡(λ∑dKdlog⁡sd)K_d=\sum_{\substack{i\ \mathrm{in\ the\ left\ child\ of\ }d\\j\ \mathrm{in\ the\ right\ child\ of\ }d}}t_{ij},\qquad E_p(\epsilon)=\exp\left(\lambda\sum_d K_d\log s_d\right)

for the object pp. All KdK_d of a fixed tree commute. Disjoint nodes are immediate from the disjoint-chord relation. For nested nodes, any chord within the smaller cluster commutes with the total of the chords from that cluster to a fixed outside point, since the two incident terms give [tij,tik+tjk]=0[t_{ij},t_{ik}+t_{jk}]=0; summing proves the claim.

For these chosen collar families, a path between limiting endpoints means a homotopy class represented by an initial outward collar, a fixed piecewise smooth path between ordinary configurations, and a terminal inward collar. Denote their groupoid by P(I)\mathcal{P}(I). Truncations at different ϵ\epsilon are identified by collar segments. It is an ordinary fundamental groupoid after identifying each limiting endpoint with a chosen point on its collar. Different admissible exponent systems will be compared below, rather than identified in this definition.

For γ:p→q\gamma:p\to q, truncate the collars at ϵ\epsilon and write G(γϵ)G(\gamma_\epsilon) for ordinary transport. The proposed regularized rule is

H+(γ)=lim⁡ϵ→0+Eq(ϵ)−1G(γϵ)Ep(ϵ).H_+(\gamma)=\lim_{\epsilon\to0^+}E_q(\epsilon)^{-1}G(\gamma_\epsilon)E_p(\epsilon).

We also consider the rule H−H_- obtained by conjugating the path and replacing every chord tijt_{ij} by −tij-t_{ij}; its endpoint frame is Ep−1E_p^{-1}. Existence of these limits is part of the next proposition.

The path representatives for the two insertion operations are equally concrete. For outer insertion, replace an outer coordinate zi(s)z_i(s) by the cluster zi(s)+ϵMwiaz_i(s)+\epsilon^M w_{ia}, where the wiaw_{ia} are fixed along the outer path at each ϵ\epsilon and give the coordinates of the inserted tree. For inner insertion, fix the outer anchors and let one such cluster follow a scaled inner path ϵMwia(s)\epsilon^M w_{ia}(s). Use nested smaller scales within each tree, and choose the inserted scale sufficiently small relative to every outer separation. These recipes are used only when the resulting number of labels is at most four. The proof below establishes that they define coherent operations on continued path classes, independent of the sufficiently separated scale choices.

Proposition 7.1 (Regularized transport). For the tree endpoints and frames just defined, (7.3) has a limit in every weight. The limit is independent of the admissible scale exponents under real interpolation of the endpoint collars. The insertion recipes define coherent operations on the continued path classes, and the limit respects relabeling, outer block insertion, and inner insertion. The same assertions hold for H−H_-. The two transport rules agree on all arity-two paths, including paths reversing the two real points.

Proof. Convergence at each endpoint. If dd is the lowest common ancestor of i,ji,j, formula (43) gives

zi−zj=σijϵad(1+rij(ϵ)),σij∈{1,−1},z_i-z_j=\sigma_{ij}\epsilon^{a_d}(1+r_{ij}(\epsilon)),\qquad\sigma_{ij}\in\{1,-1\},

where rijr_{ij} is a finite signed sum of powers ϵae−ad\epsilon^{a_e-a_d} with positive exponents. Choose a positive lower bound η\eta for all these exponent gaps. Then

rij=O(ϵη),rij′=O(ϵη−1),Ω=λ∑dKd dlog⁡sd+R(ϵ) dϵ,r_{ij}=O(\epsilon^\eta),\qquad r'_{ij}=O(\epsilon^{\eta-1}),\qquad\Omega=\lambda\sum_d K_d\,d\log s_d+R(\epsilon)\,d\epsilon,

where every coefficient of RR is O(ϵη−1)O(\epsilon^{\eta-1}). The sign σij\sigma_{ij} contributes no logarithmic differential.

Here and below estimates are at a fixed weight cutoff NN, using any norm on the finite-dimensional quotient by weights greater than NN. Changing from gg to Ep−1gE_p^{-1}g removes the singular term exactly, because the KdK_d commute. The remaining form is Ep−1REp dϵE_p^{-1}R E_p\,d\epsilon. In weight at most NN, conjugation adds only polynomial powers of log⁡ϵ\log\epsilon, so its norm is bounded by

CNϵη−1(1+∣log⁡ϵ∣)N dϵ.(44)C_N\epsilon^{\eta-1}(1+\lvert\log\epsilon\rvert)^N\,d\epsilon. \tag*{(44)}

Its integral between 00 and ϵ\epsilon is ON(ϵη(1+∣log⁡ϵ∣)N)O_N(\epsilon^\eta(1+\lvert\log\epsilon\rvert)^N). The finite iterated-integral formula, or the differential equation in the truncated algebra, therefore proves convergence and gives the same bound for the difference between collar transport in these frames and the identity.

The collar bound proves the limit in (7.3); concatenation, homotopy invariance and group-likeness pass to the limit. Different choices of middle representatives of a continued homotopy class give the same answer by flatness.

Independence of endpoint scales. To check exponent independence, interpolate two systems of exponents linearly with a parameter u∈[0,1]u\in[0,1]. The inequalities between parent and child exponents persist, and their finitely many gaps have a uniform positive lower bound η\eta. On this interpolation at fixed ϵ\epsilon,

∣rij∣≤Cϵη,∣∂urij∣≤Cϵη∣log⁡ϵ∣.\lvert r_{ij}\rvert\le C\epsilon^\eta,\qquad\lvert\partial_u r_{ij}\rvert\le C\epsilon^\eta\lvert\log\epsilon\rvert.

Again the singular part is precisely E−1dEE^{-1}dE before changing frame. The remaining form on the interpolation has integral norm at most CNϵη(1+∣log⁡ϵ∣)N+1C_N\epsilon^\eta(1+\lvert\log\epsilon\rvert)^{N+1} after changing frame. Its transport tends to the identity. Thus identifying endpoints by these real interpolation paths does not change (7.3).

The two insertion identities. We have constructed transport on P(I)\mathcal{P}(I), independently of the endpoint exponents. It remains to verify the insertion operations required of a functor to the chord categories in Section 6. We first compare the connection forms for each kind of insertion, then check the operations on path classes. On a truncated outer path of the above form, there are constants c,K>0c,K>0 such that all distinct outer coordinates are separated by at least cϵKc\epsilon^K. Their total variations are bounded independently of ϵ\epsilon, and the integral norms of their logarithmic differences are O(1+∣log⁡ϵ∣)O(1+\lvert\log\epsilon\rvert). These statements follow from (7.4) on collars and compactness on the middle path.

Insert fixed configurations at offsets of size O(ϵM)O(\epsilon^M), with their own smaller nested scales, and choose M>2KM>2K, also larger than all outer scale exponents. Write D=zi−zjD=z_i-z_j for an outer difference and ee for the constant difference of the two inserted offsets. Then

dlog⁡(D+e)−dlog⁡D=−e dDD(D+e),∫∣dlog⁡(D+e)−dlog⁡D∣≤CϵM−2K.(45)d\log(D+e)-d\log D=-\frac{e\,dD}{D(D+e)},\qquad\int\lvert d\log(D+e)-d\log D\rvert\le C\epsilon^{M-2K}. \tag*{(45)}

Internal differences are constant along the outer path. Replacing all cross-cluster forms by the outer forms gives precisely the connection obtained from (42) by tij↦tBiBjt_{ij}\mapsto t_{B_iB_j}. A difference of iterated integrals of length at most NN is expanded by changing one factor at a time. The error bound (45) and the logarithmic bounds for the other factors give an error bounded by a positive power of ϵ\epsilon times a power of 1+∣log⁡ϵ∣1+|\log\epsilon|. Multiplication by the two endpoint frames preserves convergence to zero: their coefficients of weight at most NN are polynomials in log⁡ϵ\log\epsilon. A single bound sufficient for all these errors is

CNϵγ(1+∣log⁡ϵ∣)3N,γ>0.C_N\epsilon^\gamma(1+|\log\epsilon|)^{3N},\qquad\gamma>0.

The full endpoint frame factors exactly as the outer frame under the block substitution, times the internal frames of the fixed inserted trees. The latter frames are the same at both endpoints, and every inner chord commutes with every outer block sum, as checked in Section 6. They therefore cancel from normalized transport. This proves compatibility with outer insertion.

For inner insertion, keep the outer configuration fixed and insert a varying inner path ξ\xi scaled uniformly by ϵM\epsilon^M. Choose M>KM>K, where cϵKc\epsilon^K bounds the distance between its anchor and outside points from below. Inner coordinate variations are bounded as above. Each cross-cluster differential now has integral norm at most CϵM−KC\epsilon^{M-K}; the inner logarithmic differentials are unchanged by uniform scaling. The same iterated-integral argument gives (7.7). There is one additional frame factor. If BB is the inner label set, it is

exp⁡(λMlog⁡ϵ TB),TB=∑{i,j}⊂Btij=∑d innerKd.(46)\exp(\lambda M\log\epsilon\,T_B),\qquad T_B=\sum_{\{i,j\}\subset B}t_{ij}=\sum_{d\ \mathrm{inner}}K_d. \tag*{(46)}

Indeed scaling multiplies every inner scale by ϵM\epsilon^M. The total chord TBT_B is central in tB\mathfrak{t}_B, by summing its three-label relations. All outer frame factors commute with inner chords as well. These common factors at the two endpoints cancel, leaving the unscaled inner transport embedded with its original labels. The argument includes insertion into a single leaf. For sufficiently small ϵ\epsilon all the cabled paths remain in the configuration space and vary continuously with ϵ\epsilon; after collar identification they consequently define a single continued homotopy class. A homotopy of representatives has a compact middle part, so the inserted scales can be chosen sufficiently small uniformly on it; applying the same insertion throughout gives a homotopy of the cabled paths. Increasing the scale exponent also gives a homotopy through collision-free paths. Thus the path operations are well defined on the continued classes and compatible with concatenation, and the limiting identities are identities for these operations.

Coherence of the path operations. For truncated outer and inner paths, with parameters s,t∈[0,1]s,t\in[0,1] and the uniform bounds above, use the homotopy square

F(s,t)ia=zi(s)+ϵMwia(t).F(s,t)_{ia}=z_i(s)+\epsilon^M w_{ia}(t).

If ∣zi(s)−zj(s)∣≥cϵK|z_i(s)-z_j(s)|\ge c\epsilon^K and ∣wia(t)∣≤C|w_{ia}(t)|\le C, then distinct clusters remain separated by cϵK−2CϵM>cϵK/2c\epsilon^K-2C\epsilon^M>c\epsilon^K/2 for sufficiently small ϵ\epsilon and M>2KM>2K; within a cluster, differences are ϵM(wia(t)−wib(t))≠0\epsilon^M(w_{ia}(t)-w_{ib}(t))\ne0. Thus the two boundary routes give the same path class. Nested insertions agree after flattening, since z+ϵM(w+ϵNv)=z+ϵMw+ϵM+Nvz+\epsilon^M(w+\epsilon^Nv)=z+\epsilon^Mw+\epsilon^{M+N}v. The exponent-interpolation estimate identifies other admissible scale choices with these, with normalized transport tending to the identity. The commuting frame factors above therefore identify these operations exactly. For a one-leaf outer tree, restoring root scale one uses a positive real dilation by ρ\rho; its transport is exp⁡(λlog⁡ρ TB)\exp(\lambda\log\rho\,T_B) and cancels from normalized transport at the two endpoints by centrality of TBT_B.

The second transport rule and arity two. For H−H_-, apply the same construction to γˉ\bar\gamma with tijt_{ij} replaced by −tij-t_{ij} and endpoint frame Eρ−1E_{\rho}^{-1}. All estimates and cancellation identities just proved remain valid; relabeling is immediate for both rules. In arity two the root scale is 11, and the difference of the two endpoint coordinates is 11 or −1-1. Every path has logarithmic-difference integral kπik\pi i for some integer kk, of the parity determined by the endpoint orders. Its first holonomy is exp⁡(kt12/2)\exp(kt_{12}/2). Conjugating the path negates kk, and negating the chord negates it once again, so the second holonomy is the same. This checks both full turns and half-turns.

Comparison of the completed path categories

The two transport rules now respect exactly the operations imposed in Section 6. To compare them by an automorphism of the chord category, we first show that each becomes an isomorphism after completion. Linearize P(I)\mathcal{P}(I) over C\mathbb{C}. At an object, filter its loop group algebra by powers of the augmentation ideal; transport this filtration to every arrow space by any chosen reference path. Changing the reference path multiplies by a group element and preserves each filtration step. Write CP(I)^\widehat{\mathbb{C}\mathcal{P}(I)} for the resulting completion, with coproduct Δγ=γ⊗γ\Delta\gamma= \gamma\otimes\gamma.

The following associated-graded comparison is the standard pure-braid holonomy argument; compare [2], Proposition 3.6. We give the meridian and completion steps for the path categories just constructed.

Lemma 7.2. Each of H+H_{+} and H−H_{-} extends to an isomorphism of the completed linear path categories with C(I;C)\mathcal{C}(I;\mathbb{C}). Both preserve coproducts and all specified operations, and their associated graded maps are identical.

Proof. Fix an object, let P=π1(XI)P = \pi_{1}(X_{I}) and let IPI_{P} be the augmentation ideal in C[P]\mathbb{C}[P]. Pair-collision meridians normally generate PP. To see this directly, fill a loop by a disk in CI\mathbb{C}^{I} and perturb its interior to meet the collision hyperplanes transversely in finitely many smooth points, avoiding their complex-codimension-two intersections. Removing small disks about these points expresses the loop as a product of conjugated positive or negative meridians. Meridians around the same hyperplane are conjugate, since its smooth part outside the other hyperplanes is path connected. It follows that their classes generate IP/IP2I_{P}/I_{P}^{2}. They are also independent: the winding numbers of the functions zi−zjz_i-z_j take value 1 on the corresponding positive meridian and 0 on all the others.

Every augmentation associated graded algebra is generated by its degree-one part, since IPr/IPr+1I_{P}^{r}/I_{P}^{r+1} is spanned by products of rr classes from IP/IP2I_{P}/I_{P}^{2}. These meridian classes satisfy the infinitesimal braid relations. Near a disjoint pair of collisions the two local meridians commute. Near a triple collision, consider the orbit loop rotating the small three-point cluster simultaneously through 2π2\pi. It commutes with every local meridian: a circle action carries any such loop through a homotopy whose two boundary composites are the two orders of these loops. Its degree-one class is the sum of the three pair-meridian classes, because each of the three differences winds once and all other differences wind zero times. The degree-two commutator therefore says [tij,tik+tjk]=0[t_{ij},t_{ik}+t_{jk}]=0 (the commutator with tijt_{ij} itself is zero). Transporting these local loops to the basepoint only changes them by conjugation, which changes their classes by terms in IP2I_{P}^{2} and does not affect their degree-two commutators. Hence there is a surjective graded algebra map

f:U(tI⊗C)⟶gr⁡IPC[P].(47)f: U(\mathfrak{t}_{I}\otimes\mathbb{C}) \longrightarrow\operatorname{gr}_{I_{P}}\mathbb{C}[P]. \tag*{(47)}

Residues show that H+H_{+} of a positive pair meridian is 1+tij+1+t_{ij}+ terms of weight at least two: the integral of the corresponding logarithmic form is 2πi2\pi i. For H−H_{-} both the turn and the chord change sign, giving the same result. Endpoint normalization conjugates loop transport by a series with constant term 1 and hence does not change its degree-one term. Thus both holonomies are filtered and each induces a graded map

g:gr⁡IPC[P]⟶U(tI⊗C)withgf(tij)=tij.g:\operatorname{gr}_{I_{P}}\mathbb{C}[P]\longrightarrow U(\mathfrak{t}_{I}\otimes\mathbb{C}) \quad\text{with} \quad gf(t_{ij})=t_{ij}.

Since the chords generate the enveloping algebra, gf=id⁡gf = \operatorname{id}. Surjectivity of ff now implies that ff and gg are inverse isomorphisms. In particular both associated graded holonomies are the same inverse of (47).

An isomorphism on associated graded spaces lifts inductively to an isomorphism on every finite filtration quotient: lift the constant term, then correct the error successively in each weight; injectivity follows by the first nonzero weight. Passing to inverse limits proves the completed assertion on loop algebras. A reference path identifies each other arrow space with a loop-algebra torsor, so the same assertion holds on the whole category. Coproduct preservation follows from group-likeness, and preservation of insertions and relabeling follows from Proposition 7.1, first on paths and then on their linear completions by continuity.

We can now compare the two isomorphisms on the same category:

S=H−H+−1:C(I;C)⟶C(I;C).S = H_{-}H_{+}^{-1} : \mathcal{C}(I;\mathbb{C}) \longrightarrow\mathcal{C}(I;\mathbb{C}).

It fixes the objects, preserves the coproducts and all operations, and is the identity on arity two. Its associated graded is the identity, so S−id⁡S-\operatorname{id} raises weight on every arrow space. The operator

δ=log⁡S=∑j≥1(−1)j+1j(S−id⁡)j(48)\delta= \log S = \sum_{j \ge1} \frac{(-1)^{j+1}}{j}(S-\operatorname{id})^j \tag*{(48)}

is well defined weight by weight and is a compatible derivation and coderivation. Here is a direct justification of both rules. Modulo weights greater than NN, the binomial polynomial

Ss=∑j=0N(sj)(S−id⁡)jS^s = \sum_{j=0}^{N} \binom{s}{j}(S-\operatorname{id})^j

agrees with the usual power for every nonnegative integer ss. The assertions that it preserve composition, coproduct, and every insertion are polynomial identities in ss. They hold at all such integers and hence identically. For the coproduct use the tensor product truncated by total weight NN. Differentiating at s=0s=0 gives exactly the derivation and coderivation rules for (48), as well as compatibility with the operations. Taking homogeneous components gives δn∈Dn(C)\delta_n \in\mathcal{D}_n(\mathcal{C}) for all n>0n>0.

A nonzero depth-one value

The compatible derivations are now available. We evaluate their homogeneous components on the reassociation unit arrow and compare this operator-logarithm value with the holonomy of a real path.

Proposition 7.3. For every odd n≥3n \ge3 there exists ψn∈Vn\psi_n \in V_n for which the coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y is nonzero. Equivalently, its ordinary yy-depth-one part is a nonzero multiple of ad⁡xn−1y\operatorname{ad}_x^{n-1}y.

Proof. Use the objects a,ba,b and unit arrow α\alpha from Section 6. Let β\beta be the real order-preserving path of reassociation from aa to bb, and put

Φ=H+(β),U=S(α),θ=S∣End⁡(a).\Phi= H_{+}(\beta), \qquad U = S(\alpha), \qquad\theta= S|_{\operatorname{End}(a)}.

We identify Φ,U\Phi,U with arrow coefficients. Since an arrow with coefficient hh is αha\alpha h_a, one has exactly

Sab(h)=Uθ(h).S_{ab}(h) = U\theta(h).

The path β\beta is real, so its conjugate is itself and H−(β)=Φ(−tij)H_{-}(\beta)=\Phi(-t_{ij}). Hence

Uθ(Φ)=Φ(−tij).U\theta(\Phi)=\Phi(-t_{ij}).

Source xx and target yy are fixed by the arity-two insertion operations. Applying SS to αya=ybα\alpha y_a=y_b\alpha therefore yields

θ(x)=x,θ(y)=U−1yU.\theta(x)=x,\qquad\theta(y)=U^{-1}yU.

The source total chord TT is fixed as well.

The linear term of Φ\Phi is zero. Along a real order-preserving path the sign of each difference is constant, so its integral is the logarithm of the ratio of endpoint absolute differences. Normalizing by the frames subtracts the logarithms of their lowest-common-ancestor scales. By (7.4), each remaining ratio tends to 1. This proves the claim for every chord separately. As θ\theta preserves filtration, equation (7.12) implies that UU too has zero linear term. Both series are group-like. Their logarithms are primitive and have weight at least two, so (37) places these logarithms in the completed free Lie algebra on x,yx,y. Every such Lie monomial uses both letters, since the free Lie algebra on one letter has only weight one. Consequently Φ,U\Phi,U depend only on x,yx,y and

Uθ(Φ)=Φ(−x,−y),Φ−1, U−1∈J,U\theta(\Phi)=\Phi(-x,-y),\qquad\Phi-1,\ U-1\in J,

where JJ is the closed two-sided ideal of series having at least one yy in C⟨ ⁣⟨x,y⟩ ⁣⟩\mathbb{C}\langle\!\langle x,y\rangle\!\rangle.

Conjugation in (7.13) changes yy only by terms in J2J^2, because U−1∈JU-1\in J. Substitution therefore gives

(θ−id⁡)(Jr)⊆Jr+1(r≥1),θ≡id⁡(modJ2)(\theta-\operatorname{id})(J^r)\subseteq J^{r+1}\quad(r\geq1),\qquad\theta\equiv\operatorname{id}\pmod{J^2}

on the full series algebra (it fixes the pure-xx terms). Reducing (7.14) modulo J2J^2 gives

U−1=Φ(−x,−y)−Φ(x,y)(modJ2).U-1=\Phi(-x,-y)-\Phi(x,y)\pmod{J^2}.

This is a statement about the image of the unit arrow. To pass to its infinitesimal value, put N=Sab−id⁡N=S_{ab}-\operatorname{id} on this arrow space. By (7.11), for h∈Jh\in J,

N(h)=(U−1)θ(h)+(θ(h)−h)∈J2.N(h)=(U-1)\theta(h)+(\theta(h)-h)\in J^2.

More generally N(Jr)⊆Jr+1N(J^r)\subseteq J^{r+1} for r≥1r\geq1. Since N(1)=U−1∈JN(1)=U-1\in J, all Nj(1)N^j(1) with j≥2j\geq2 belong to J2J^2. The operator logarithm consequently gives

δ(α)=U−1=Φ(−x,−y)−Φ(x,y)(modJ2).\delta(\alpha)=U-1=\Phi(-x,-y)-\Phi(x,y)\pmod{J^2}.

It remains to compute a single convergent coefficient of Φ\Phi. Set the central TT to zero and use s=(z2−z1)/(z3−z1)s=(z_2-z_1)/(z_3-z_1). Writing the three differences as a common factor times s,s−1,1s,s-1,1 shows that the common logarithmic differential has coefficient TT, while the remaining connection is

λ(xdss+ydss−1),0<s<1.\lambda\left(x\frac{ds}{s}+y\frac{ds}{s-1}\right),\qquad0<s<1.

The reassociation path runs from s=0s=0 to s=1s=1 with positive real tangents. With the convention dg=Ωgdg=\Omega g, the coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y has yy at the earliest integration time. Thus for n≥2n\geq2 it is

[xn−1y]Φ=λn∫0<s1<⋯<sn<1ds1s1−1ds2s2⋯dsnsn=−λn(n−1)!∫01(−log⁡t)n−11−t dt=−λn∑q≥11qn.(49)\begin{aligned} [x^{n-1}y]\Phi=\lambda^n\int_{0<s_1<\cdots<s_n<1}\frac{ds_1}{s_1-1}\frac{ds_2}{s_2}\cdots\frac{ds_n}{s_n} \\ &=-\frac{\lambda^n}{(n-1)!}\int_0^1\frac{(-\log t)^{n-1}}{1-t}\,dt=-\lambda^n\sum_{q\geq1}\frac{1}{q^n}. \tag*{(49)} \end{aligned}

Here [w][w] denotes the coefficient of the associative word ww. To justify convergence and the last equality, expand (1−t)−1=∑q≥0tq(1-t)^{-1}=\sum_{q\geq0}t^q and apply monotone convergence to the nonnegative integrand; substitution t=e−ut=e^{-u} gives the individual integrals (n−1)!/(q+1)n(n-1)!/(q+1)^n. The series converges for n≥2n\geq2.

Regularization does not change this coefficient. Its frame factors are pure-yy series on the left and pure-xx series on the right; a nonconstant factor would make a word begin with yy or end with xx, whereas xn−1yx^{n-1}y does neither.

Negating both arguments multiplies a weight-nn word by (−1)n(-1)^n. Equations (7.16) and (49) therefore give, for odd n≥3n\geq3,

[xn−1y]δn(α)=2λn∑q≥11qn≠0.(50)[x^{n-1}y]\delta_n(\alpha)=2\lambda^n\sum_{q\geq1}\frac{1}{q^n}\ne0. \tag*{(50)}

This only uses positivity of the real series, with no arithmetic independence assertion. The functional [xn−1y][x^{n-1}y] is rational on the finite data of Lemma 6.2. Its nonvanishing on δn∈Dn(C)\delta_n\in D_n(\mathbb{C}) implies nonvanishing on some Dn(Q)D_n(\mathbb{Q}), and evaluation gives the required ψn∈Vn\psi_n\in V_n. Finally, Lie elimination, or direct induction on bracketed words with one yy, shows that the weight-nn, depth-one free Lie space is the line spanned by ad⁡xn−1y\operatorname{ad}_x^{n-1}y; its xn−1yx^{n-1}y coefficient is 1.

Integral generators and the dimension squeeze

We now combine the upper bound on the full equation space with the odd-weight values constructed by holonomy. The integral choice of generators is part of the argument: a rational depth-one value need not initially have the desired reduction modulo two.

Depth and integral independence

For a Lie polynomial in x,yx,y, its ordinary yy-depth is the smallest number of occurrences of yy in any nonzero associative word. Write DpLD^pL for the subspace of depth at least pp. A homogeneous Lie polynomial of weight greater than one has depth at least one, since the free Lie algebra on xx alone has no such homogeneous component. This depth is distinct from the BB-count used after reduction modulo two: C=[x,y]C=[x,y] contributes one yy but has BB-count zero.

Lemma 8.1. If ψ∈DpL\psi\in D^pL and ϕ∈DqL\phi\in D^qL, then

{ψ,ϕ}∈Dp+qL.\{\psi,\phi\}\in D^{p+q}L.

Consequently every Lie word of length at least two in homogeneous elements of weights greater than one has zero depth-one component.

Proof. An application of DψD_\psi replaces one occurrence of yy by [y,ψ][y,\psi], while it kills xx. Each nonzero resulting word therefore has at least pp more occurrences of yy than the original word. Thus Dψ(ϕ)∈Dp+qLD_\psi(\phi)\in D^{p+q}L. The same reasoning applies to Dϕ(ψ)D_\phi(\psi), and the ordinary bracket also adds depth. Equation (6) proves the assertion. Its consequence follows by induction on the length of the Lie word.

Lemma 8.2. Let KK be a finite free Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}-module, and suppose that w1,…,ws∈Kw_1,\ldots,w_s\in K have linearly independent reductions in K/2KK/2K. Then they are linearly independent over Q\mathbb{Q}, and

(∑i=1sQwi)∩K=∑i=1sZ(2)wi.\left(\sum_{i=1}^{s}\mathbb{Q}w_i\right)\cap K=\sum_{i=1}^{s}\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}w_i.

Proof. In a nonzero rational relation, multiply by a rational scalar so that every coefficient belongs to Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)} and at least one is a unit. Reduction modulo two gives a contradiction.

Now let v=∑iciwi∈Kv = \sum_i c_i w_i \in K, with ci∈Qc_i \in\mathbb{Q}. If some ci∉Z(2)c_i \notin\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}, let e≥1e \ge1 be the smallest integer for which every 2eci2^e c_i belongs to Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}. At least one of these coefficients is a unit, whereas

∑i(2eci)wi=2ev∈2K.\sum_i (2^e c_i)w_i = 2^e v \in2K.

Reduction gives the same contradiction. Thus all the cic_i belong to Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}, proving the equality.

Let V=⨁n≥2VnV = \bigoplus_{n \ge2} V_n be the rational subalgebra of categorical values from Proposition 6.1, so that Vn⊂WnV_n \subset W_n. Let KnK_n be the ordinary free-Lie Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}-lattice of weight nn, and put

Mn=Vn∩Kn,Ln=Wn∩Kn.M_n = V_n \cap K_n,\qquad L_n = W_n \cap K_n.

By Proposition 2.5, their reductions M‾n⊂L‾n⊂Kn/2Kn\overline{M}_n \subset\overline{L}_n \subset K_n/2K_n have dimensions dim⁡QVn\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} V_n and dim⁡QWn\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} W_n, respectively. The Ihara bracket has integral coefficients on Lie words. Since VV is a Lie subalgebra, M=⨁nMnM = \bigoplus_n M_n is closed under that bracket.

Recall the free Lie algebra

fodd=Lie⁡F2⟨zk:k≥1⟩,wt⁡(zk)=2k+1,\mathfrak{f}_{\mathrm{odd}} = \operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\langle z_k : k \ge1\rangle,\qquad\operatorname{wt}(z_k) = 2k+1,

and let dn,rd_{n,r} and dn=∑rdn,rd_n = \sum_r d_{n,r} be its dimensions in weight nn and length rr, and in weight nn, respectively. These dimensions agree with their characteristic-zero counterparts by Lemma 2.2. Corollary 5.4 gives

dim⁡QVn≤dim⁡QWn=dim⁡F2L‾n≤∑rdn,r=dn.(51)\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} V_n \le\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} W_n = \dim_{\mathbb{F}_2} \overline{L}_n \le\sum_r d_{n,r} = d_n. \tag*{(51)}

All sums here are finite. In particular, we have not assumed that every characteristic-two solution lifts to a rational one.

Choosing the next generator

We construct σ2k+1∈M2k+1\sigma_{2k+1} \in M_{2k+1} inductively so that its reduction has leading BB-count one, with projection

π(in⁡1σ‾2k+1)=ad⁡CkB.(52)\pi(\operatorname{in}_1 \overline{\sigma}_{2k+1}) = \operatorname{ad}_C^k B. \tag*{(52)}

Here in⁡1\operatorname{in}_1 denotes the count-one component and π\pi sets A=0A = 0. We identify the right side with zkz_k.

Suppose the generators of all odd weights below nn have been chosen. Choose a Hall basis for the free Lie algebra on their formal symbols, and consider its words of weight nn. All intermediate values lie in MM, since MM is closed under the Ihara bracket. If such a word has length rr, repeated application of Proposition 5.5 places its reduced value in filtration FrF^r and identifies its projected leading part with the same Hall word in the zkz_k’s. Those leading parts are linearly independent for each rr. They are independent across different rr as well: in any putative relation take the smallest length occurring, pass to that associated graded piece, and project. Its coefficients must all vanish; repeat for the remaining lengths.

Thus the Hall-word values have independent reductions in Kn/2KnK_n/2K_n. Lemma 8.2 proves both their rational independence and the fact that their rational span intersects KnK_n in precisely their Z(2)\mathbb{Z}_{(2)}-span. Each of these Hall words has length at least two, since the available generators have weights below nn. Every integral vector in their rational span therefore still reduces into F2F^2, and cannot provide the required leading-count-one class.

Every free Lie word of weight nn and length at least two uses only generators of weights below nn. The only possible missing Hall word is the single generator of weight nn, which exists exactly when nn is odd and n≥3n \ge3. Therefore the old Hall-word values supply

dn−εnindependent elements of Vn,εn={1,n≥3 odd,0,n even.d_n-\varepsilon_n \quad\text{independent elements of } V_n,\qquad\varepsilon_n=\begin{cases}1,&n\ge3\text{ odd},\\0,&n\text{ even}.\end{cases}

If nn is even, this already attains the upper bound (8.1). If n≥3n\ge3 is odd, Proposition 7.3 gives τn∈Vn\tau_n\in V_n with a nonzero coefficient of xn−1yx^{n-1}y. Every old Hall-word value of weight nn is decomposable and has zero depth-one component by Lemma 8.1. Hence τn\tau_n is independent of them. In both cases,

dim⁡QVn=dim⁡QWn=dn.(53)\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} V_n=\dim_{\mathbb{Q}} W_n=d_n. \tag*{(53)}

For odd n=2k+1n=2k+1, we must still obtain the integral choice (8.2). The filtration on M‾n\overline{M}_n is induced by its embedding in the ambient ordinary Lie algebra on A,C,BA,C,B. Its associated graded embeds in that of L‾n\overline{L}_n, and Corollary 5.4 gives

dim⁡F2gr⁡rM‾n≤dn,r.\dim_{\mathbb{F}_2}\operatorname{gr}^{r}\overline{M}_n\le d_{n,r}.

Equation (8.3) and saturation give equality of the sums of these dimensions. Each individual deficit is nonnegative, so equality holds for every rr. For r=1r=1, the target is the one-dimensional line spanned by zkz_k. The injective projection is therefore an isomorphism onto that line. Choose its nonzero preimage in gr⁡1M‾n\operatorname{gr}^{1}\overline{M}_n, represent it by a vector of F1M‾nF^{1}\overline{M}_n, and lift that vector to MnM_n. This lift is σn\sigma_n. Its projected coefficient is one because the coefficient field is F2\mathbb{F}_2. There is no requirement that the initially constructed τn\tau_n have this reduction.

The induction begins at n=3n=3, with no previously chosen generators. The same argument supplies σ3\sigma_3. Weights one and two vanish by Lemma 2.1. Proceeding through successive weights proves (8.3) in all weights and makes every required choice.

Freeness, spanning, and completion

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Send e2k+1e_{2k+1} to the elements σ2k+1\sigma_{2k+1} just constructed. Since the target VV is a Lie algebra, the universal property gives a graded Lie homomorphism

Lie⁡Q⟨e3,e5,…⟩⟶V.\operatorname{Lie}_{\mathbb{Q}}\langle e_3,e_5,\ldots\rangle\longrightarrow V.

In each weight, its Hall-basis images have independent reductions by the preceding leading-term argument. They are therefore rationally independent, so the map is injective. Their number in weight nn is dnd_n, and (8.3) shows that they span both VnV_n and WnW_n. Thus V=WV=W and the map is surjective. This also proves closure of WW under the stated Ihara bracket without having to assume closure during the upper-bound argument.

Each homogeneous piece is finite-dimensional. The isomorphism therefore extends componentwise to the products of the weight pieces. The bracket in a fixed weight involves only finitely many pairs of positive weights, so it extends to these products and the two mutually inverse maps are continuous for the weight filtration. This proves the completed assertion. ▫

References

  1. [1]V. I. Arnold, The cohomology ring of the colored braid group, Mathematical Notes 5 (1969), no. 2, 138–140; Russian original: Matematicheskie Zametki 5 (1969), no. 2, 227–231. doi:10.1007/BF01098313.DOI
  2. [2]D. Bar-Natan, On associators and the Grothendieck–Teichmüller group I, Selecta Mathematica (N.S.) 4 (1998), no. 2, 183–212. Preprint version cited: arXiv:q-alg/9606021v4.
  3. [3]F. Brown, Mixed Tate motives over ℤ, Annals of Mathematics (2) 175 (2012), no. 2, 949–976. doi:10.4007/annals.2012.175.2.10.DOI
  4. [4]F. Brown, Depth-graded motivic multiple zeta values, Compositio Mathematica 157 (2021), no. 3, 529–572. doi:10.1112/S0010437X20007654. Preprint version cited: arXiv:1301.3053v2.DOI
  5. [5]P. Deligne, Le groupe fondamental de la droite projective moins trois points, in Galois Groups over ℚ, Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications, vol. 16, Springer, New York, 1989, pp. 79–297. Author-hosted text.DOI
  6. [6]V. G. Drinfel’d, On quasitriangular quasi-Hopf algebras and a group closely connected with Gal(ℚ̄/ℚ), Leningrad Mathematical Journal 2 (1991), no. 4, 829–860; Russian original: Algebra i Analiz 2 (1990), no. 4, 149–181. Journal archive.
  7. [7]B. Enriquez, Quasi-reflection algebras and cyclotomic associators, Selecta Mathematica (N.S.) 13 (2007), no. 3, 391–463. doi:10.1007/s00029-007-0048-2. Preprint version cited: arXiv:math/0408035v2.DOI
  8. [8]A. B. Goncharov, Multiple polylogarithms and mixed Tate motives, preprint, 2001. arXiv:math/0103059v4.DOI
  9. [9]M. Hirose, The cyclotomic Grothendieck–Teichmüller group and the motivic Galois group, preprint, 2023. arXiv:2301.04064v1.arxiv.org/abs/2301.04064
  10. [10]M. Hirose and N. Sato, Algebraic differential formulas for the shuffle, stuffle and duality relations of iterated integrals, Journal of Algebra 556 (2020), 363–384. doi:10.1016/j.jalgebra.2020.01.032. Preprint version cited: arXiv:1801.03165v3.DOI
  11. [11]T. Kohno, Monodromy representations of braid groups and Yang–Baxter equations, Annales de l’Institut Fourier 37 (1987), no. 4, 139–160. doi:10.5802/aif.1114.DOI
  12. [12]G. Melançon and C. Reutenauer, Lyndon words, free algebras and shuffles, Canadian Journal of Mathematics 41 (1989), no. 4, 577–591. doi:10.4153/CJM-1989-025-2.DOI
  13. [13]F. Naef and T. Willwacher, Numerical computation of linearized KV and the Deligne–Drinfeld and Broadhurst–Kreimer conjectures, preprint, 2025. arXiv:2508.08081v1.arxiv.org/abs/2508.08081
  14. [14]E. Panzer, Feynman integrals and hyperlogarithms, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, 2015. Updated version cited: arXiv:1506.07243v1.DOI
  15. [15]C. Reutenauer, Free Lie Algebras, London Mathematical Society Monographs, New Series, vol. 7, Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, 1993. doi:10.1093/oso/9780198536796.001.0001.DOI
  16. [16]T. Willwacher, M. Kontsevich’s graph complex and the Grothendieck–Teichmüller Lie algebra, Inventiones Mathematicae 200 (2015), 671–760. doi:10.1007/s00222-014-0528-x. Preprint version cited: arXiv:1009.1654v4.DOI
  17. [17]T. Willwacher, On free generators in the Grothendieck–Teichmüller Lie Algebra, preprint, 2026. arXiv:2607.18793v2.arxiv.org/abs/2607.18793

Paper details

Contents