2011
DOI: 10.1007/s10468-011-9326-y
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Pseudocompact Algebras and Highest Weight Categories

Abstract: We develop a new approach to highest weight categories C with good (and cogood) posets of weights via pseudocompact algebras by introducing ascending (and descending) quasihereditary pseudocompact algebras. For C admitting a Chevalley duality, we define and investigate tilting modules and Ringel duals of the corresponding pseudocompact algebras. Finally, we illustrate all these concepts on an explicit example of the general linear supergroup GL(1|1).

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus M can be embedded into an injective envelope I(λ) of L(λ). By Lemma 7.1 (c) of [14], we infer that I(λ) = L(λ). By Chevalley duality, if Ext 1 G (L(λ), L(µ) = 0, then Ext 1 G (L(µ), L(λ)) = 0 and we conclude that B(λ) = {λ}.…”
mentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Thus M can be embedded into an injective envelope I(λ) of L(λ). By Lemma 7.1 (c) of [14], we infer that I(λ) = L(λ). By Chevalley duality, if Ext 1 G (L(λ), L(µ) = 0, then Ext 1 G (L(µ), L(λ)) = 0 and we conclude that B(λ) = {λ}.…”
mentioning
confidence: 87%
“…Finally, assume p||λ|. If Ext 1 G (L(λ), L(µ)) = 0 or Ext 1 G (L(µ), L(λ)) = 0, then by Lemma 7.1 (c) of [14] we obtain that λ = µ ± α. Conversely, if λ = µ ± α, then Ext 1 G (L(λ), L(µ)) = 0 and Ext 1 G (L(µ), L(λ)) = 0 using Lemma 7.1 (c) of [14] again. Therefore B(λ) = λ + Zα.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recall Definition 3.8 of [13] stating that a weight µ is a predecessor of λ if µ ✁ λ, and there is no weight π such that µ ✁ π ✁ λ. Since any weight λ ∈ X(T ) + has only finitely many predecessors, the poset X(T ) + is good in the sense of Definition 3.9 of [13] (cf. [9], Example 5.1).…”
Section: Standard and Costandard Supermodules Over General Linear Sup...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Otherwise, λ ′ k is incompatible with all weights µ such that H 0 + (−µ)⊗H 0 − (µ) is a quotient of a good filtration of U/W k . In this case, Lemma 4.2 of [13] implies that the embedding W k → U splits, that is, U = R ⊕ W k and R ≃ U/W k . Since the projection U → W k maps M to zero, we have M ⊆ R, which implies N ⊆ R. Thus N ∩ V ′ k = 0, contradicting the minimality of k. For a dominant weight λ, let W (λ) denote a finite-dimensional G-supermodule that satisfies the following conditions:…”
Section: Proposition 52 There Is Omentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation