Proceedings of the Second ACM Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Manipulation - SYMSAC '71 1971
DOI: 10.1145/800204.806283
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Some computations involving simple Lie algebras

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
38
0

Year Published

1973
1973
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(38 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
38
0
Order By: Relevance
“…By the general representation theory (Gilkey and Seitz [25]; Burgoyne and Williamson [10]) we have that dim V λ = µ<λ W W µ m µ , where µ ranges over the weights subdominant to λ (that is, λ − µ is a positive integral combination of positive roots and µ is a positive integral combination of the λ i ), m µ is the multiplicity of the weight µ, W is the Weyl group of G = Sym 3 in this case), and W µ is the stabilizer of µ in W . Now a result of Suprunenko [55], as quoted and extended by Premet [47] shows that m µ = 0 for any subdominant weight µ.…”
Section: Visible Flatness For Irreducible Modules Of Groups With Bn-pairmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By the general representation theory (Gilkey and Seitz [25]; Burgoyne and Williamson [10]) we have that dim V λ = µ<λ W W µ m µ , where µ ranges over the weights subdominant to λ (that is, λ − µ is a positive integral combination of positive roots and µ is a positive integral combination of the λ i ), m µ is the multiplicity of the weight µ, W is the Weyl group of G = Sym 3 in this case), and W µ is the stabilizer of µ in W . Now a result of Suprunenko [55], as quoted and extended by Premet [47] shows that m µ = 0 for any subdominant weight µ.…”
Section: Visible Flatness For Irreducible Modules Of Groups With Bn-pairmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The author does not know any details of the program [2], but in view of the remarks above and what is explained in [1] and [2], it seems that our algorithm is crucially more efficient, particularly when p is small.…”
Section: Comparing the Two Methodsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…The method described in [1] and [2] uses commutation rules in ~ and brings p in only at the end. So it yields simultaneously information in any characteristic, but the computations become accordingly laborious.…”
Section: Comparing the Two Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the case when all roots of • have the same length (the 'simply laced' case), only these two possibilities occur. Thus, in this case, the coefficients in the Chevalley formula are completely determined by the structure constants in the corresponding Lie algebra (and, therefore, can be found in the tables [36,60,87,88,142], see the details below). For the general case, the coefficients Naoij are expressed via the constants M,~i, mentioned in Section 2.…”
Section: Chevalley Commutator Formulamentioning
confidence: 99%