Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Generalized Temperley–Lieb Trick

Updated 20 January 2026
  • Generalized Temperley–Lieb trick is a framework that extends recursive polynomial methods from Hecke algebras to quotients defined by fully commutative elements in Coxeter groups.
  • It provides explicit constructions of t–basis algebras and introduces polynomial families (R, a, D, and L) with well-defined recurrence relations and closed-form expressions.
  • The approach reveals pattern-avoidance, positivity, and combinatorial properties, underpinning advanced applications in representation theory and algebraic combinatorics.

The generalized Temperley–Lieb trick constitutes a comprehensive framework for transferring foundational polynomial constructs and recursive techniques of Kazhdan–Lusztig and R-polynomials from Hecke algebras to generalized Temperley–Lieb algebras of Coxeter groups. This paradigm enables the explicit construction, manipulation, and combinatorial analysis of polynomial families central to the representation theory of Coxeter groups and their related algebras, with particular emphasis on fully commutative elements and non-branching Coxeter graphs (Pesiri, 2014).

1. Construction of Generalized Temperley–Lieb Algebras

Given a fixed Coxeter system (W,S)(W,S) with associated length function \ell and Bruhat order \leq, the Hecke algebra H(W)\mathsf{H}(W) over A=Z[q,q1]\mathbb{A} = \mathbb{Z}[q,q^{-1}] is equipped with generators {Tw:wW}\{T_w : w \in W\} and an involution ι\iota defined by ι(q)=q1\iota(q) = q^{-1}, ι(Tw)=(Tw1)1\iota(T_w) = (T_{w^{-1}})^{-1}. The generalized Temperley–Lieb algebra TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W) is constructed as the quotient of H(W)\mathsf{H}(W) by the two-sided ideal JJ generated by all TxT_x, where xx belongs to any rank–2 parabolic subgroup si,sj\langle s_i, s_j \rangle having m(si,sj)<m(s_i,s_j)<\infty and sisjsjsis_is_j\neq s_js_i:

TL(W):=H(W)/J.\mathrm{TL}(W) := \mathsf{H}(W) / J.

Fully commutative elements, whose reduced expressions differ only by commutation, form the subset WcWW_c \subset W. Graham's theorem establishes {tw:=TwmodJ:wWc}\{t_w := T_w \bmod J : w \in W_c\} as an A\mathbb{A}–basis for TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W), termed the t–basis. For non-branching Coxeter graphs (excluding type F4F_4), the projection property asserts that the quotient homomorphism o:HTL(W)o : \mathsf{H} \to \mathrm{TL}(W) satisfies o(Cw)=0o(C_w) = 0 for wWcw \notin W_c and o(Cw)=cwo(C_w) = c_w for wWcw \in W_c, where {Cw}wW\{C_w\}_{w \in W} is the Kazhdan–Lusztig basis and {cw}wWc\{c_w\}_{w \in W_c} is the analogous IC–basis for TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W).

2. Polynomial Families: R, D, a, and L

Two polynomial families fulfill analogous roles in TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W) to the R- and Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomials in H(W)\mathsf{H}(W):

  • R–polynomials (Rx,w(q)R_{x,w}(q)) in H(W)\mathsf{H}(W): Defined by the inversion formula

(Tw1)1=xwεxRx,w(q)Tx,(T_{w^{-1}})^{-1} = \sum_{x \leq w} \varepsilon_x R_{x,w}(q) T_x,

with εx=(1)(x)\varepsilon_x = (-1)^{\ell(x)}, Rw,w(q)=1R_{w,w}(q)=1, Rx,w(q)=0R_{x,w}(q)=0 for x≰wx \not\leq w.

  • a–polynomials (ax,w(q)a_{x,w}(q)) in TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W): Provide an analogous expansion

(tw1)1=q(w)xWc,xwax,w(q)tx,(t_{w^{-1}})^{-1} = q^{-\ell(w)} \sum_{x \in W_c, x \leq w} a_{x,w}(q)t_x,

where aw,w(q)=1a_{w,w}(q) = 1.

  • D–polynomials (Dx,w(q)D_{x,w}(q)): Serve as change–of–basis coefficients from arbitrary wWw \in W to fully commutative xx

tw=xWc,xwDx,w(q)tx,t_w = \sum_{x \in W_c, x \leq w} D_{x,w}(q) t_x,

with Dw,w(q)=1D_{w,w}(q) = 1.

  • L–polynomials (Lx,w(Q)L_{x,w}(Q)): When TL(W)\mathrm{TL}(W) admits an IC–basis, one writes

cw=xWc,xwq(x)(w)Lx,w(q1)tx.c_w = \sum_{x \in W_c, x \leq w} q^{\ell(x) - \ell(w)} L_{x,w}(q^{-1}) t_x.

Equivalently, with Q=q2Q = q^2,

cw=xwQ((x)(w))/2Lx,w(Q)tx,c_w = \sum_{x \leq w} Q^{(\ell(x)-\ell(w))/2} L_{x,w}(Q) t_x,

with Lw,w=1L_{w,w}=1 and Lx,w=0L_{x,w}=0 unless xwx\leq w.

3. Recursion Relations

The families admit recursive formulations that extend classical relations:

  • R–Polynomial Recursion (in H(W)\mathsf{H}(W)): For sSs \in S, (ws)<(w)\ell(ws)<\ell(w),

Rx,w(q)={Rxs,ws(q),(xs)<(x) qRxs,ws(q)+(q1)Rx,ws(q),(xs)>(x)R_{x,w}(q) = \begin{cases} R_{xs, ws}(q), & \ell(xs) < \ell(x) \ q\, R_{xs, ws}(q) + (q-1) R_{x, ws}(q), & \ell(xs) > \ell(x) \end{cases}

  • D–Polynomial Recursion (Theorem 2.1): For wWcw \notin W_c, sSs \in S with (ws)<(w)\ell(ws)<\ell(w), wsWcws \notin W_c, and xWc,xwx \in W_c, x \leq w,

Dx,w(q)={Dx,ws(q)+yWc,ysWc,ys>yDx,ys(q)Dy,ws(q),(xs)<(x) qDxs,ws(q),(xs)>(x),xsWc Dxs,ws(q)+(q1)Dx,ws(q),(xs)>(x),xsWcD_{x,w}(q) = \begin{cases} D_{x,ws}(q) + \displaystyle\sum_{y \in W_c, ys \notin W_c, ys > y} D_{x,ys}(q)D_{y,ws}(q), & \ell(xs)<\ell(x) \ q D_{xs,ws}(q), & \ell(xs) > \ell(x), xs \notin W_c \ D_{xs,ws}(q) + (q-1) D_{x,ws}(q), & \ell(xs) > \ell(x), xs \in W_c \end{cases}

  • a–Polynomial Recursion (Proposition 2.5): Under identical conditions,

ax,w(q)={ax,ws(q)+yWc,ysWc,ys>yDx,ys(q)ay,ws(q),(xs)<(x) qaxs,ws(q),(xs)>(x),xsWc axs,ws(q)+(1q)ax,ws(q),(xs)>(x),xsWca_{x,w}(q) = \begin{cases} a_{x,ws}(q) + \displaystyle\sum_{y \in W_c, ys \notin W_c, ys > y} D_{x,ys}(q) a_{y,ws}(q), & \ell(xs)<\ell(x) \ -q a_{xs,ws}(q), & \ell(xs) > \ell(x), xs \notin W_c \ a_{xs,ws}(q) + (1-q) a_{x,ws}(q), & \ell(xs) > \ell(x), xs \in W_c \end{cases}

Notably, if xsWcxs \notin W_c, ax,w(q)=qax,ws(q)a_{x,w}(q) = -q a_{x,ws}(q) (Corollary 2.6).

  • L–Polynomial Recursion:

    • “Mixed–inversion” closed-form (Theorem 3.5) for non-branching graphs:

    Lx,w(Q)=Q((x)(w))/2[Px,w(q)+x<y<w,yWcDx,y(q)Py,w(q)]L_{x,w}(Q) = Q^{(\ell(x)-\ell(w))/2} \left[ P_{x,w}(q) + \sum_{x < y < w, y \in W_c} D_{x,y}(q) P_{y,w}(q) \right]

    where Px,w(q)P_{x,w}(q) denotes the usual Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomial. - “Simple vanishing” and descent rules (Lemmas 3.6, Theorem 3.7): - If sSs \in S, sw<wsw < w, - x<xsWc    Lx,w(Q)=0x < xs \notin W_c \implies L_{x,w}(Q) = 0, - x<xsWc    Lx,w(Q)=q1cLsx,w(Q)x < xs \in W_c \implies L_{x,w}(Q) = q^{1-c} L_{sx,w}(Q), with c=1c=1 if sx<xsx < x and c=0c=0 otherwise.

4. Closed–form Expressions

  • Type AA closed-form for a–polynomials (Proposition 2.8): For

w=sisi+1si+ksijsisi+k1,x=sisi+1si+k,w = s_i s_{i+1}\cdots s_{i+k} s_{i-j}\cdots s_i\cdots s_{i+k-1}, \quad x = s_i s_{i+1}\cdots s_{i+k},

ax,w(q)=(q)k(1q)j.a_{x,w}(q) = (-q)^k (1-q)^j.

  • The mixed-inversion formula for Lx,w(Q)L_{x,w}(Q) provides a closed-form in terms of RR-, DD-, and Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomials.

5. Combinatorial and Structural Properties

All Dx,w(q)D_{x,w}(q), ax,w(q)a_{x,w}(q), and Lx,w(Q)L_{x,w}(Q) lie in Z[q]\mathbb{Z}[q] or Z[Q]\mathbb{Z}[Q]. For non-branching Coxeter graphs, positivity results for LL-coefficients parallel those in classical Kazhdan–Lusztig theory. For type AA, the cardinality Wc(An1)|W_c(A_{n-1})| equals the nn-th Catalan number, and numerous pattern-avoidance characterizations for WcW_c are documented.

The leading coefficient M(x,w)M(x,w) of Lx,w(Q)L_{x,w}(Q) coincides with the leading coefficient u(x,w)u(x,w) of Px,w(q)P_{x,w}(q), implying that “head” and “tail” phenomena of Kazhdan–Lusztig polynomials extend to their generalized counterparts.

An orthogonality-type identity (Proposition 3.8) holds for the sum

Fw(Q)=x<wεxQ(x)Lx,w(Q),F_w(Q) = \sum_{x<w} \varepsilon_x Q^{\ell(x)} L_{x,w}(Q),

yielding Fw(Q)=δe,wF_w(Q) = \delta_{e,w}, analogous to the relation xεxRx,w(q)=0\sum_x \varepsilon_x R_{x,w}(q) = 0 for wew \neq e in H(W)\mathsf{H}(W).

6. Canonical Example: Coxeter Graph A2A_2

In the Coxeter system W=S3W = S_3 with generators S={s1,s2}S = \{s_1, s_2\}, m(s1,s2)=3m(s_1,s_2) = 3, fully commutative elements are {e,s1,s2,s1s2,s2s1}\{e, s_1, s_2, s_1s_2, s_2s_1\}; thus TL(A2)\mathrm{TL}(A_2) has t–basis {te,t1,t2,t12,t21}\{t_e, t_1, t_2, t_{12}, t_{21}\}.

  • R–polynomials: Re,s1(q)=Re,s2(q)=1R_{e,s_1}(q) = R_{e,s_2}(q) = 1, Re,s1s2(q)=qR_{e,s_1s_2}(q) = q, Rs1,s1s2(q)=1R_{s_1,s_1s_2}(q) = 1, Rs2,s1s2(q)=0R_{s_2,s_1s_2}(q) = 0.
  • a–polynomials: ae,s1(q)=1a_{e,s_1}(q) = 1, as1,s1(q)=1a_{s_1,s_1}(q) = 1, ae,s1s2(q)=qa_{e,s_1s_2}(q) = q, as1,s1s2(q)=1a_{s_1,s_1s_2}(q) = -1.
  • L–polynomials: Le,s1(Q)=qL_{e,s_1}(Q) = q, Ls1,s1(Q)=1L_{s_1,s_1}(Q) = 1; for w=s1s2w = s_1s_2, Le,12(Q)=qL_{e,12}(Q) = q, Ls1,12(Q)=q2L_{s_1,12}(Q) = q^2, following Ls1,12(Q)=qLe,12(Q)L_{s_1,12}(Q) = q L_{e,12}(Q).
  • t–basis multiplication: t1t2=t12t_1 t_2 = t_{12}, t2t1=t21t_2 t_1 = t_{21}, t12t1=qt12+(q1)t21t_{12} t_1 = q t_{12} + (q-1) t_{21}.

This explicit computation verifies recurrence relations, recovers classical Temperley–Lieb dimensions, and demonstrates appropriate t–basis multiplications.

7. Significance and Implications

The generalized Temperley–Lieb trick affords a parallelism between classical and generalized polynomial structures, enabling the transfer of recursive, combinatorial, and closed-form techniques from the Hecke algebra setting to a larger class of quotients influenced by Coxeter combinatorics. This framework underpins extensions of positivity, orthogonality, and pattern-avoidance phenomena, and enables explicit calculations in both classical and generalized contexts. A plausible implication is the broad applicability of these recursions and combinatorial insights beyond type AA, subject to Coxeter graph conditions such as non-branchingness, thus illuminating new avenues in algebraic combinatorics and representation theory (Pesiri, 2014).

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (1)

Topic to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this topic yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this topic yet.

Follow Topic

Get notified by email when new papers are published related to Generalized Temperley Trick.