arxiv: v4 [math.co] 18 Nov 2017

Transcription

1 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I: INVARIANT TRILINEAR FORMS ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN arxiv:76.9v4 [math.co] 8 Nov 7 ABSTRACT. The puzzle rules for computing Schubert calculus on -step flag manifols, proven in [KT] for -step, in [BKPT6] for -step, an conjecture in [CV9] for -step, lea to vector configurations (one vector for each puzzle ege label) that we recognize as the weights of some minuscule representations. The R-matrices of those representations (which, for -step flag manifols, involve triality of D 4 ) egenerate to give us puzzle formulæ for two previously unsolve Schubert calculus problems: K T (-step flag manifols) an K(-step flag manifols). The K(-step flag manifols) formula, which involves 5 new puzzle pieces, implies Buch s correction to the first author s 999 conjecture for H (- step flag manifols). CONTENTS. Introuction.. Puzzles for the case, of Grassmannians.. Puzzles for flag manifols 4.. Puzzles for flag manifols 7.4. Plan of the paper 9 Acknowlegments. The general construction.. Schubert classes.. Functoriality.. The vectors f X.4. The Gram matrix.5. Signature, an special values of the parametera.6. Deriving roots an weights from the Gram matrix.7. Inversion numbers of paths 5. Proofs of the main theorems 7.. Puzzles via the calculus of tensors 7.. The require properties: quantum integrability 8.. Consequences of the properties.4. Main theorems 7.5. an triality in D Interlue: ouble Grothenieck polynomials.7. ane 6 7 Appenix A. The R-matrix 4 Appenix B. The K-triangles 44 Appenix C. The cyclic Yang Baxter equation 46 References 48 Date: November, 7. PZJ was supporte by ARC grant FT5.

2 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN. INTRODUCTION In 9 Weyl aske what the spectrum of a sum of two Hermitian matrices coul be, knowing the spectra of the matrices iniviually. This receive two solutions in the 99s (we recommen the surveys [Ful98, Zel99]): a geometric one ue to Klyachko (extening work of Helmke Rosenthal, Hersch Zwahlen, an Totaro, among others) base on Schubert calculus of Grassmannians, an a combinatorial one [KTW4] in terms of certain triangular tilings calle puzzles. We take from this coincience the oracular statement that puzzles shoul be relate to Schubert calculus; hopefully not just for orinary cohomology of Grassmannians, but also for more exotic cohomology theories of -step flag manifols {V V... V C n : imv i n i }. Many Schubert calculus problems have been solve with puzzles, some in no other ways; see [KT, Vak6, BKPT6, KP, Buc5, PY5, WZJ6a, WZJ6b]... Puzzles for the case, of Grassmannians. We will inex the Schubert classes {S } on P \GL n (C) (precise efinitions given in ) by strings in,,...,, where the number of js in the string is n j+ n j (by convention n,n + n). In particular those on the Grassmannian Gr k (C n ) of k-planes have content k n k. We efine three ege labelsl : {,,}, an three puzzle pieces: () plus all rotations, but not reflections A Grassmannian puzzle of size n is a size n triangle (oriente like ) ecompose into n puzzle pieces, whose bounary labels are onlyor, not. For example, here are the two puzzles whose NW an NE bounaries are both labele,,,: The connection to Schubert calculus, the stuy of the prouct of Schubert classes {S }, is simple [KTW4]: () S S µ ν # puzzles labele ν µ left to right (not clockwise) Sν One can get away with the ual conventionk n k when ealing with only Grassmannians, but this becomes untenable when going to higher.

3 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I In particular, the right-han sie woul be nonsensical if, µ, ν were strings with ifferent content (numbers of s ans). Here is one proof that that can t happen: Lemma. To each ege of a triangle in a puzzle P, we assign a-imensional vector, rotationequivariantly: Then every puzzle piece has vector sum : To eges of triangles, we assign the negatives of these vectors, obtaining a cancelation at each internal ege ofp. Then by Green s theorem the bounary of P has vector sum, which forces the content (the numbers of s an s) on the three sies to be the same. The original result [KTW4] about orinary cohomology of Grassmannians has been generalize (for Grassmannians) to equivariant cohomology [KT, ZJ9a], to K-theory [Vak6], an recently to equivariant K-theory [PY5, WZJ6b], in each case aing some pieces. Our methos in this paper are closest to those of [WZJ6b], which recognizes the three vectors above as the weights of the stanar representation V A ω of SL (C) an makes use of the corresponing R-matrix an the Yang Baxter equation it satisfies. However, our proof in is cleaner than that of [WZJ6b] even in the case, through exploitation of the bootstrap equation of the relevantr-matrix. There is another way to label the eges of a an still get vector sum :. An inee, if we a this piece but only in the orientation we get a rule for the K-theory prouct, with respect to the basis of structure sheaves of Schubert varieties [Vak6, theorem 4.6]; whereas if we a this piece but only in the orientation we get a rule for the K-theory prouct, with respect to the ual basis (the ieal sheaves of bounaries of Schubert varieties) [WZJ6b]. To be precise, equation () is moifie in this K-theory prouct, because each K-piece carries a fugacity of, an the fugacity of a puzzle is efine as the prouct of the fugacities of its pieces. Then we sum the fugacities of the puzzles, rather than simply counting them. Luckily, in this formula all the puzzle fugacities contributing to a given coefficient have the same sign so there is no cancelation. If one inclues both orientations, the resulting prouct rule is again commutative associative. We will aress this in a future publication [KZJ]. In prior publications it seeme natural to call this a weight, but that might cause confusion with the weights we assign to ege labels, an fugacity is a stanar term in the physics literature for such local contributions.

4 4 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN An important ifference between K(Gr k (C n )) an H (Gr k (C n )) is that the latter is a grae ring. Equation () for H then implies that l()+l(µ) l(ν), where l(κ) : #{i < j : κ i > κ j } egsκ is the number of inversions of the string κ. In.7 we efine the inversion number of a path through a puzzle, an in particular, the inversion number of (a clockwise path aroun) a puzzle piece. If two paths γ, γ through a puzzle have the same start an en points, then the ifference of their inversion numbers is proven in.7 to be the sum of the inversion numbers of the pieces in between γ an γ. It is straightforwar to calculate the inversion numbers of puzzle pieces; the ones in () have vanishing inversion number, whereas the K-pieces have inversion number. We ll always raw our pieces with their inversion numbers in the center, e.g. it only when the inversion number is zero., omitting.. Puzzles for flag manifols. In 999 the first author truste the oracle an looke for puzzles to compute Schubert calculus of -step flag manifols, where the Schubert classes (hence the bounaries of the puzzles) are strings in,,. Alreay with puzzles of ege-length, one iscovers the following eight labelsl an puzzle pieces: () () () (again permitting rotations but not reflections). We will call parenthesize expressions X such as these (really encoing planar binary trees with labele leaves) multinumbers, an call a multinumber X vali if it appears in a puzzle rule (i.e., on one of the puzzle piece eges here in (), or later in.). Write X for the number of igits in X (i.e. X exactly for single-numbers ). Proving the analogue of equation () for, an its generalization to equivariant cohomology, took until 4 [BKPT6, Buc5]. The analogue of lemma is an assignment with values in D 4 s weight lattice of row vectors{(a,a,a,a 4 ) : a i Z, a i a j Z}. We regar the rotationτas acting on this lattice on the right by τ an mention that the corresponing automorphism of the Lie algebra D 4 is outer, the triality automorphism. Lemma. To each of the bottom labelsl in the puzzle pieces above, we assign a weight in thed 4 weight lattice: (+,,,) (,+,,) (,,+,) (,,,+) () (,,,) (,,,) () (,,,) (,,, ) an assignd 4 weights to labels on other sies in a rotation-equivariant way, using the4 4 matrix above.

5 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 5 Then every puzzle piece has vector sum. By Green s theorem the bounary of the whole puzzle oes too, which forces the content (the numbers of s,s, an s) on the three sies to be the same. These eight vectors are the weights of the stanar representation V D 4 ω of so(8), whose Z/ rotations are the two spin representations τ V D 4 ω V D 4 ω anτ V D 4 ω V D 4 ω. At this point, the assignments in lemmas an may look quite magical. In we will explain a recipe that prouces them without effort, at least up to 4. With the clue provie by lemma, the methos of [WZJ6b] generalize straightforwarly to give our first major theorem of this paper. To state it, we first recall Theorem. [Buc5][KT, for ] To compute Schubert calculus in T-equivariant cohomology of a -step flag manifol, whose coefficients live in H T (pt) : Z[y,...,y n ], one nees the following equivariant rhombi: () () () () These may not be rotate. The fugacity of an equivariant rhombus isy i y j H T (pt), where lines rawn Southwest an Southeast from the rhombus hit the bottom ege at positions i < j. The fugacity fug(p) of a puzzle P is the prouct of the fugacities of its rhombi. Then (4) S S µ ν { fug(p) : puzzles P with bounary ν µ } Sν The s in these pieces are to inicate that they, too, spoil lemma 5 s inversion count, but in the opposite way from K-theory; more etail will come in.7. This formula (4) is positive in the sense of [Gra]. We come to our first major new result of the paper, the extension of the above to T- equivariant K-theory, for which there was no known positive formula (in the sense of [AGM]) or even extant conjecture for the structure constants. These live in K T (pt) Z[u ±,...,u± n ]. Theorem. Equation (4) generalizes to compute Schubert calculus in equivariant K-theory of a -step flag manifol. One nees the equivariant rhombi from theorem, whose fugacities are now u j /u i, an also the followingk-pieces: () () () () () () () () () () () () () () ()

6 6 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN (no other rotations!) each with fugacity, or ( ) for the last one. W Some vertical rhombi Z X Y also acquire an extra monomial fugacity u j /u i (which oes not factor as a prouct over triangles): a rhombus gets a u j /u i if W + Z > X + Y, or in the case W + Z X + Y an max(z) > max(y). In particular, rotation-invariant rhombi (such as equivariant rhombi) get no u j /u i, an among a rhombus an its 8 rotation, assuming they re istinct an vali (i.e., not involving unrotatable K-pieces), exactly one gets a u j /u i. Example. c, is compute from one puzzle whose fugacity is u /u, whereas the opposite multiplication c, comes from two puzzles () whose fugacities are an( )( u /u ), respectively. Theorem is recovere by writing u i exp(y i ) an expaning at first nontrivial orer in the y i.

7 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 7 Define ual Schubert classes {S } by S S µ δ µ, where is the K-theoretic analogue of integration, efinable by S. Then theorem also provies a ual puzzle rule S S µ { ν } fug(p) : puzzlesp with bounary µ S ν ν where bounary labels are again rea left-to-right. For future reference, we comment that the tensor square ofv A ω τ V A ω is (V A ω ) V A ω (V A ω ) an similarly, the tensor prouct of two of D 4 s minuscule funamental irreps is V D 4 ω V D 4 ω V D 4 ω +ω (V D 4 ω ) (though note, (V D 4 ω ) V D 4 ω ) We get away with tensoring V A ω with itself because the action of Z/ on the A lattice is by an inner automorphism, but with D 4 we must face up to the three ifferent representations associate with the three ege orientations. Our rules for K T (Gr k (C n )) an H T (-step) have a uality symmetry: one may reflect a puzzle left-right while replacing each numberiwith i. This K T (-step) rule oes not, irectly, enjoy this symmetry (even though the structure constants o); rather this gives us a secon puzzle rule for K T (-step)... Puzzles for flag manifols. The labels an pieces turn out to be (up to rotation) i i i,,, i j i i < j ji (5) kj i (kj)i k ji i < j < k k(ji) ()() (()) ((())) () (())() () ()(()) (()) ((())) where the bottom four are Buch s correction [CV9] to the first author s incomplete 999 conjecture. Lemma. There is an action of Z/ on E 6 s weight lattice, an a map from the 7 ege labels above to the weights of the stanar representation V E 6 ω of E 6 (then extene to other ege orientations Z/-equivariantly), such that each puzzle piece has vector sum. By Green s theorem the bounary of the whole puzzle oes too, which forces the content (the numbers ofs,s,s, ans) on the three sies to be the same. Rather than writing out the vectors, we give the corresponence with the crystal of the 7-imensional representation, whose eges are labele by the simple roots ofe 6 : b c a a b c

8 8 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN c b (()) b c a b (()) c a () a b a c ()(()) b b a b a () a c () b a () c a () b (())() b a b b c c ()() a () (()) a c () c () c ((())) c (()) ((())) In this case the techniques of [WZJ6b] o not work right out of the box; uring the egeneration there is a ivergence, ue to the proliferation of equivariant rhombi with negative inversion number. It also seems relate to the fact that (V E 6 ω ) V E 6 ω (V E 6 ω ) V E 6 ω has three summans (the Cartan prouct, the invariant trilinear form, an another) unlike the, cases that ha only two summans. We can partially rescue the argument, but at the cost of T-equivariance. This gives our other main result: Theorem. Buch s correction hols: the puzzle pieces above (an their rotations) correctly compute Schubert calculus in the orinary cohomology of -step flag manifols. One can also obtain formulæ for Schubert calculus in the K-theory of -step flag manifols, with respect to either the stanar basis (of structure sheaves) or the ual basis (of ieal sheaves of the bounaries). This requires another 5 pieces, which we list in appenix B. Example. c, 4 (in nonequivariant K-theory), as counte by the following puzzles:

9 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 9 () () () () (()) () () () (())() () (()) () () () (()) () () (()) () (())() () (()) (()) () () () () The situation is even worse for 4, in the sense that even nonequivariant triangles with negative inversion number proliferate, leaing to more ivergences. We shall not formulate any puzzle rule for 4 in the present paper. In all three cases,,, as observe above, there exists a trilinear invariant form acting on a tensor prouct of three minuscule representations of A,D 4,E 6, relate by an automorphism of orer (whose action on the weight lattice is given by τ). In fact, we shall see that the nonequivariant puzzle rules are nothing but a iagrammatic escription of (a egenerate, an in K-theory, q-eforme, version of) this trilinear invariant form..4. Plan of the paper. In, after proviing basic efinitions (.), we lay out the general construction of the vectors f X we assign to multinumbers X (.), from which we erive the A,D 4,E 6 representations above (.6). We also explain the counting of inversions (.7). is concerne with the proofs of the main results: first, a general framework is introuce, leaing to our main theorem (.4), which is then applie to equivariant Schubert calculus in.5, an to nonequivariant Schubert calculus in.7, thus proving theorems an.

10 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN Acknowlegments. We are grateful to Sergey Fomin, Gleb Koshevoy, Bernar Leclerc, Davi E Speyer, Terry Tao, an Michael Wheeler for useful iscussions, an AK is especially grateful to Aners Buch for persevering with -step puzzles when AK ha given up hope.. THE GENERAL CONSTRUCTION.. Schubert classes. Let B ± GL n (C) enote the upper/lower triangular matrices, with intersection T the iagonal matrices, an let P B be a stanar parabolic with Levi factor i GL p i (C). Our Schubert cycles X w : P \P wb + are right B-orbit closures on P \GL n (C), inexe by i S p i \S n, which we ientify with strings of length n in an orere alphabet with multiplicities given by the (p i ). The coimension of the cycle is given by the number of inversions in the string. Schubert cycles efine classes in cohomology, T-equivariant cohomology, K-theory, an T-equivariant K-theory. In each case, these classes form a basis for whatever sort of cohomology group, consiere as a moule over the same cohomology of a point: H(pt) K(pt) Z, H T (pt) Z[y,...,y n ], K T (pt) Z[u ±,...,u± n ]. Our goal is to compute as in (4) the coefficients, living in this base ring, of the expansion in the basis of the prouct of two basis elements. One benefit of working equivariantly is that we can replace equation (4) with its restriction to T-fixe points, as this operation is well-known to be injective. The equation becomes a list of equations between elements of the base ring K T, one for each T-fixe point σ: (6) S σ S µ σ ν { fug(p) : puzzlesp with bounary ν µ } Sν σ These restrictions S π σ themselves have interpretations as state sums, much like puzzles, an in.4 it is this equation (6) we will fin most amenable to the framework of quantum integrable systems... Functoriality. If Q P, then we have a projection P \GL n (C) Q \GL n (C), an pullback maps on these cohomology theories. Uner these maps Schubert classes go to Schubert classes (an proucts to proucts), taking a string with content (q i ) to the unique string with content(p i ) that refines it an has the same number of inversions. For example, + (+) + (+) aa fffgg jkkk aa fffff jjjj f j akfakfgkg f j ajfajffjf where the top two rows inicate the coarsening (Q P ) an the bottom row gives an example of a refinement. This rule tells us what to o with the bounary labels on a (Q ) puzzle to make them into the bounary of a (P ) puzzle computing the same coefficient. So we can naturally hope that the refinement rule extens to the interior of the puzzle as well, giving a corresponence on puzzles, not just on their bounaries. In this way, for each > we get a lower boun on the set of expecte multinumber labels, erive from each <. For example, at we expect to see,, (in aition to the numbers,,) erive from, but the(),() labels are new. At

11 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I we expect to seeji for j > i from, ank(ji),(kj)i for k > j > i from, but e.g. the ()() label is new. Each T-fixe point on P \GL n (C) is uniquely of the form P \P w for w i S p i \S n ; for convenience we write this setw P \W. Letbe an element ofw P \W, an its image in W Q \W. Let µ W Q \W, an µ W P \W its refinement as iscusse above. (So ( µ) µ, but ( ) isn t necessarily.) Then consiering the functoriality of the composite pt P \P Q \Q gets us a match on restrictions, S µ S µ. In particular, if, W P \W lie over the same W Q \W, then S µ S µ... The vectors f X. Fix, the number of steps in the flag. At, we learn there are two types of puzzle pieces, up to rotation: (7) i i i,...,, an i Y X YX for certain pairs of labelsx,y Let Λ : A enote the -im weight lattice of A, on which τ acts by counterclockwise rotation. Let f Λ enote the first funamental weight, so f,τ f are a basis an f+τ f+τ f. Now we consier ( f i,τ f i ) i,..., as a basis of Λ +, an for YX any multinumber (not necessarily vali) we efine f YX : τ f X τ fy with the salutary effect that the vectors on the eges of a puzzle piece Y X a to. For YX,,, these vectors { f X : X a vali multinumber} are not yet quite the ones we use in lemmas,,, since they live in ( + )-imensional space instea of -imensional. They are quite close to the auras use in [Buc5] for similar Green s theorem bookkeeping, though he worke in C + an in t worry about integrality..4. The Gram matrix. In orer to make use of the R-matrices of irreps of the quantize affine algebras, our weights ( f X ) will nee to be the weights of a representation. In the simplest possible case, the representation is minuscule, meaning it has only extremal weights, which are therefore all of the same norm. So we make the following guess: There shoul be aτ-invariant symmetric form onλ + with respect to which, for each vali multinumberx, we have f X. In particular, on each iniviual Λ the form is etermine by the above conition (as we will now recalculate), but the ifferent Λ factors will not be orthogonal to one another Here f τ f τ f f τ f f + f,τ f + τ f 4+ [ f,τ f. ] Hence the Gram matrix w.r.t. the orere basis( f,τ f ) is thea Cartan matrix. When we go to >, the blocks on the iagonal will all look like this.

12 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN.4... To begin with, the Gram matrix in the basis f,τ f, f,τ f is A B C D A C B D Since is a vali multinumber, f τ f τ f f +τ f + f,τ f + so as in, we learn that a certain off-iagonal entry (in this case, B) is. The require τ-invariance gives us A f, f τ f,τ f D τ f,τ f f τ f, f τ f f +τ f, f +τ f f, f + f,τ f + τ f, f + τ f,τ f A+B+C+D A+C so C A. The off-iagonal block begins to look like the iagonal: to emphasize the similarity we will take A a, an obtain a a a a a a When we go to >, the blocks above the iagonal will each have the same form as this off-iagonal upper block From the analysis above, an the vali multinumbers,,, we alreay know the Gram matrix looks like a b a a b b a a c a c c b b c c b c Now we use f () τ f τ f τ ( τ f τ f ) τ f τ f + f τ f

13 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I so that f () τ f + f τ f f + f + f + ( τ f, f + τ f, τ f + f, τ ) f 6+( ( b) (a )) +(b a) to learna b. The valiity of() gives usb c by a similar computation. In short, the blocks above the iagonal are all equal; the only freeom left is in the parametera The multinumbers erive using. s functoriality from are alreay enough to tie own the matrix, except for this single parameter a in the off-iagonal blocks. For it remains to verify that the other multinumbers X from. alreay have f X, an inee they o, putting no conition on a..5. Signature, an special values of the parametera. This matrixg is rankata, i.e. its eterminant is a multiple of a. Mysteriously, this multiple seems to be perioic in of perio 6 for >, much as in [BGZ6, example.6]. The multiples (which are necessarily squares, since the τ-invariance leas to uplicity in the eigenvalues) are a etg (a ) (a ) (a ) (a ) a a so we efine a : / We checke this 6-perioicity to 5, but since we will soon restrict to at most 4, we in t pursue it further. For each > to at least5 (an probably forever), there is an interval [,a ] of values of a outsie which G is inefinite. For,,,4, the matrix is positive efinite for a in the open interval (,a ). For 5,6 there is no open interval, since a. For 7 (an 5,6 mo 6, at least up to 5) there is again an interval, but G is not efinite in there. Proposition. For,,, the only integer vectors inλ + with norm-square(inepenent of a!) are {±τ fx for vali multinumbersx}, i.e. those associate to a label on a sie of a or. We omit the proof as this is a quick computer search, since for a (,a ), the positive efiniteness says we only have to check the integral vectors insie a certain compact ball. For 4 there are4 such vectors, arrange in the root system ofe 8, about which more in a moment. Note that our previous efinition of vali multinumber X was historical, base on whetherxha occurre in a proven or conjectural puzzle rule. Now we can use proposition to give an alternate efinition: those X such that f X..6. Deriving roots an weights from the Gram matrix. LetK be the kernel of the summation mapλ + Λ, with evient basis(α i : f i f i,τα i ) i,...,. The Gram matrix on

14 4 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN K with respect to this basis 4 comes out to be the Northwest block of a times Theorem 4. Consier the inner prouct G from.4 on Λ +4, but set a making it positive semiefinite. Then the kernel Ra(G a ) is generate by ν : 4 i ( τ ) i fi an τ ν, an the composite map K 4 Λ +4 Λ +4 /Ra(G a ) is an isomorphism, making both latticese 8. There is an orere system of simple roots for thise 8 such that Then the first of them generate K K 4, for,,,4; an the ( )st root in the list is α : f f, an for, f is the corresponing funamental weight of K. () From this simple system we see that the symmetric forms on K,K,K,K 4 are (a times) those on the root latticesa,d 4,E 6,E 8. 5 () The weights f,..., f are vertices of the convex hull{ f X : X vali}, an form one (simplicial) face of that polytope. () For, the weights { f X : X only uses numbers i an is vali} are those of the K minuscule irrep with highest weight f. (4) The weights{ f X : X only uses numbersi 4 an is erive from. s functoriality} are some of those of thek 4 E8 ajoint representation. Proof. We first check that K 4 s symmetric form is (a times) that of E 8. It is integral, unimoular (et ), even (even-iagonal), positive efinite, an imension 8; Witt prove in 94 that the only such lattice is E 8 (our reference is [CS99]). The computation of the raical is straightforwar. 4 The basis ( ( ) i α i,( ) i τ α i ) makes the Gram matrix Toeplitz, but this basis seeme more natural. 5 Davi Speyer points out that the corresponing cluster varieties are Gr (C n ) for n 5,6,7,8; for n > 8 these varieties are still cluster, but of infinite type [Sco6]. This seems likely to be connecte to the fact that these matrices are almost (an have the same eterminants as) the crossing matrices of the stanar projections of the torus knots T(,n) [Slo], from whose projections are built these cluster varieties in [STWZ5]. For another mysterious connection, note that the number of positive roots ofa,d 4,E 6,E 8 is three times the number of inecomposable preprojective moules for the A,A,A,A 4 quivers [GLS5], a bit of numerology that oes not seem to have been observe before.

15 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 5 Here is a simple system satisfying the conitions, an its inuce Dynkin iagram. 6 α τα α τα α τα α 4 τα 4 a a b b c c b c a a b c Checking the first two conitions is straightforwar from the Gram matrices. The thir is much more teious, an for results in the crystal picture after lemma. (Note that the crystal of a minuscule representation is particularly simple given two weights, +αwhere α is a simple root, there is a irecte ege +α.) In fact the conitions on the simple system in theorem 4 make the choice of the first seven simple roots unique; alas, there is no choice for the eighth that woul make f 4 funamental. For,,,4, if instea ofa we setaequal to the a from.5 (,,, respectively), then the form onλ + becomes positive semiefinite with two null irections, an its quotient is the weight lattice of A,D 4,E 6,E 8 respectively. This is how the vectors in lemmas - arise. Theorem 4 is very suggestive that 4-step Schubert calculus might be approache using ege labels base on the roots ofe 8. However, as briefly inicate in the introuction, the situation is somewhat complicate, an will be iscusse in a separate publication [KZJ]..7. Inversion numbers of paths. This subsection oes not particularly follow the flow from the previous subsections, but its results are of intrinsic interest, besies which we nee it for the proofs in the next section. Fix an antisymmetric form B on Λ +, to be specifie soon, but whose actual shape is not yet important. Let P be a puzzle an γ a path through P s eges. For each ege γ i in this oriente path, we coörient it by consiering it as part of a triangle to its left, an associate a vector f(γ i ) ±τ k fx epening on the coörientation an label. Define the inversion number of γ as i<j B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )). It is something like the area of a surface boune by γ: Lemma 4. If the N-step path γ repeats a vertex, i.e. after step b fins itself in the same location as before stepa, then we can breakγinto the pathγ [,a) (b,n] an the loopγ [a,b]. In this situation, the inversion number of γ is the sum of the inversion numbers of the path an the loop. 6 To check this, let the two matrices above begans, an observe that SGS T is the ajacency matrix for the graph picture.

16 6 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN Proof. B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ i<j + i<j<a a i<j b + i<a j b B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ i<j<ab( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ i<a a i b<j B a i<j bb( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ b<j B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ i<a,b<j B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) ( f(γ i ), B ( a i b a j b f(γ j ) ) f(γ i ), f(γ j ) b<i<j + ) i<a,b<j B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) + B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) The Green s theorem property of the vectors f(γ j ), in the close loop γ [a,b], says that a j bf(γ j ). Canceling those two terms, B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ B( f(γ i ), f(γ j ))+ B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) i<j + i<j<a a i<j b B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) i<a,b<j b<i<j b<i<j giving the state aition of inversion numbers. (What s really going on is that the-formbonλ + with constant coefficients is exact, i.e. is of the form α for some -form α with linear coefficients, an the inversion number is the integral over the triangle i j N of the pullback of B. We coul rewrite the inversion number as the integral of the pullback of α to the bounary of that triangle, but this in t seem useful.) In the simplest case of the lemma,b a+, i.e. the(a+)st step retraces theath step, an the inversion number of the -step close loop is. Consequently we can consier these paths as equivalent moulo insertion or removal of such retracings. The next simplest application comes when γ a,γ a+ are two sies of a small or. We first use the lemma to insert two more steps, jogging back an forth along the thir sie of the triangle. Now by secon use of the lemma, the triangle can be broken off as a close loop. We now get specific aboutbon Λ +, efining it on our bases as s r (mo ) B(τ r fi,τ s fj ) sign(i j) s r+sign(i j) (mo ) otherwise. Lemma 5. Fix a partial flag manifol {V V... V C n : imv i n i }, therefore of imensiond : i<j (n i n i )(n j n j ). Let P be a puzzle with bounaries,µ,ν as usual, an γ,γ paths through P from the SW corner to the SE corner. Ifγis the straight path across the bottom, then the inversion number of γ isl(ν) D. Ifγ follows the NW then NE sies ofp, then the inversion number ofγ isl()+l(µ) D.

17 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 7 If one path γ is always weakly above another path γ (e.g. like the two just mentione), then the ifference in their inversion numbers is the sum of the inversion numbers of the pieces in between them. Proof. The inversion number of the path along the Southern ege is B( f(γ i ), f(γ j )) sign(ν i ν j ) l(ν) D i<j n i<j n Similarly, the inversion number of the path along the NW then NE ege is l()+l(µ) D plus the cross-terms from the first half of the path with the secon half. The only nonvanishing cross-terms B(τ fi,τ f j ) come from pairs i < j with i on the NW an j on the NE. There are D such pairs, so the inversion number of the secon path is l() + l(µ)) D. The last statement follows irectly from lemma 5.. PROOFS OF THE MAIN THEOREMS The proofs of theorems an follow the same general philosophy as in [ZJ9a] an [WZJ6b]: they consist in fining an appropriate quantum integrable system (that is, in the present context, a set of fugacities collectively satisfying the Yang Baxter equation), from which can be built both the Schubert basis of K T (G/P) an the structure constants of that basis. However, we use a much more straightforwar approach here base on the bootstrap equation ()-(), siestepping some of the ifficulties foun in these articles (choice of representative, issues of stability). In appenix C, we briefly sketch an alternative route which is closer to [ZJ9a, WZJ6b]. In the whole of this section,... Puzzles via the calculus of tensors. We begin with a brief attempt to bring Schubert calculators into the integrable-systems tent, which essentially requires a proper linear algebra unerstaning of puzzles an their matching rule. Return to equation (4) of theorem. The requirement of matching between an ege label on a, an that on a neighboring, we will reinterpret as a ot prouct v X, v Y δ X,Y between elements of ual bases. To set this up, we nee to assign two vector spaces in involution to the South sie of an North sie of, with ual bases inexe byl (an similarly choose pairs of ual vector spaces for the other two orientations). For the moment, let s call these vector spacesn,s,nw,se,ne,sw. Let us start with nonequivariant Schubert calculus. Define a tensor U NW S NE ( ) } U : { fug X Z Y X Y Z : X Z is a vali piece Y NW S NE an efine D SE N SW using pieces similarly. Now consier a iagramdmae ofn s ann s, some eges share, some eges labele. To such a iagram we assign a tensorfug(d) as follows: start withu N D N, contract the ual vector spaces at each share unlabele ege, an contract with the ual basis vector at each labele ege. The result is a tensorfug(d) living in the tensor prouct of the vector spaces of all unmatche, unlabele eges of D. (Observe that if D is a just a puzzle piece, then this efinition gives the usual fugacity for the piece, an gives if applie to labele triangles that aren t vali puzzle pieces. Or ifd is an unlabele, then fug(d) U.)

18 8 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN The basic case to keep in min is D a size n triangle mae of n little s an s, with bounary labele by,µ,ν as usual. Now all internal eges are matche an all external eges are labele, so the resulting tensor is just a number exactly the coefficient appearing in the nonequivariant puzzle rule, the case being equation (). Because we use the same labelsl for our basis an ual basis, ifeis a share unlabele ege of D, then (8) fug(d) X L {fug(d ) : D isd with ege E labelex} To involve equivariant pieces, we also efine a tensorřliving insw SE NE NW En(SW SE), constructe as a sum Ř : W Z fug X Y Z W : X Y W Z X Y can be fille in where the fugacities epen on the location of the rhombus (ultimately, they will epen on the equivariant parameters). Finally, each vector space associate to eges will be enowe with the action of a Hopf algebra, in such a way thatu,danřare invariant uner that action (i.e., they live in the trivial representation); in particular, U an D are the trilinear invariant forms avertise in the title. A subtlety here is that the lack of involutivity of the antipoe means that the notion of ual representation is not uniquely efine. This will force us to coörient all eges, as will be iscusse in the next section... The require properties: quantum integrability. It is convenient to introuce the ual graphical representation which is more traitional in quantum integrable systems: we enote a rhombus with its four eges labele by L W Z X Y The colors of lines are a reminer of the irection of the corresponing ege of the rhombus. This information may seem reunant since lines themselves have a given irection; however it is sometimes useful to eform the lines (in a way that is harer to realize with rhombi), an then their irection may vary (but not their color). We will say more about this after proposition. We then attach a parameter (usually calle the spectral parameter) to each line, in such a way that the fugacity of the rhombus / crossing epens on the ratio 7 of these two 7 We work in the multiplicative group, or equivalently with trigonometric solutions of the Yang-Baxter equation, since our goal is to compute in K-theory. The corresponing aitive group / rational solutions compute Schubert calculus in orinary cohomology. W X Z Y

19 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 9 parameters: W Z (9) Ř(u)WZ XY Q(u,u,...) u u /u u u X Y The fugacity lives in some appropriate ring of rational functions in u, u an possibly other ineterminates. The graphical convention (as explaine in.) is that a rawn rhombus / crossing represents its own fugacity, an that when rhombi are glue together, the labels of the internal eges are summe over as in (8), or in the ual language, when lines emerging from crossings are reconnecte, the labels of these lines shoul match an are summe over. We impose an important conition on the fugacity of (9): that there is a special value α/β of the ratio of spectral parameters such that the fugacity factorizes : Property. W Z W βu Z αu () αu βu αu u βu X Y X Y where the blue line, or equivalently the iagonal of the rhombus, carries a label inl. Equivalently, in the original graphical language, the r.h.s. can be picture as W Z. X Y This is the way that the invariant trilinear form appears in this integrable setting. The assignment of the parameter u to the intermeiate blue line is at the moment purely a efinition, but it will be useful below. The constants α an β coul be set to by a reefinition of the spectral parameters, but as we shall see this woul not match with usual quantum group conventions. We nee more general types of crossings, where two lines with arbitrary colors can cross each other, e.g., u u. 8 In the argument from proposition, it will become clear that the same-color crossings are closely relate to the (5, ) rhombi in [Pur8] an more istantly relate to the gashes in [KT, BKPT6]. 8 Many of theser-matrices were efine in the stuy of the cohomology of in [ZJ9a]; in particular, crossings of ientical colors were caller there.

20 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN We also associate to each labele line a weight: the weight of a green (resp. blue, re) line labele X is f X (resp. τ f X, τ fx ). The minus sign for blue lines comes from their opposite orientation at the trivalent vertices. We then require the following conitions: Property. In the pictures below, black lines can have arbitrary (inepenent) colors, an all lines can have arbitrary spectral parameters (as long as they match between l.h.s. an r.h.s.). The fugacity of any vertex is nonzero only if weight is conserve, i.e., if the sum of incoming weights is equal to the sum of outgoing weights. Yang Baxter equation: () Bootstrap equations: () () Unitarity equation: (4) Value at equal spectral parameters: (here, the lines must have the same color for the equality to make sense) (5) u u u u Morally, properties () (4) mean that one can freely slie lines across vertices/intersections of other lines. For example, combining say the secon equation of () with (4), we can also write (6)

21 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I which is an equality that will be use in what follows. We also impose the following normalization conition on the fugacities: Property. For any X,Y L such that f X,τ f Y, (inepenent of u). Y X X Y There is a remaining gauge freeom on the fugacities, namely one can multiply any vertex by the prouct of eges γ(color, label)± where the γs are arbitrary parameters an the sign of the exponent epens on the orientation of the ege; e.g., X Y Z Y X X Y γ(green, X) γ(re, Z) γ(blue, Y) These rescalings preserve properties. We now get ri of this freeom by imposing (7) Y X i i likewise for all rotations an YX i where YX varies over vali multinumbers an i varies over,...,. Inee, we can use the triangles alone (say) to fix the γ(color,x) inuctively in X (number of igits of X), an then the triangle conition follows from property (noting that the weight conservation from property for the triangle X Z implies f X,τ f Y ). The only Y remaining gauge freeom in the choice of basis vectors comes in choosing a weight vector for each weight f i,τ f i, i,...,. These ( + ) remaining scale parameters can be blame on our (+)-torus whose weight lattice isλ +. Finally, one more graphical notation is neee. Given a positive integer n, a permutation σ S n, an a color {re, green, blue}, we consier the iagram of σ mae of lines in that color, with parameters u,...,u n ; say for blue, X Y Z u u u u 4 u 5 σ (45) Thanks to the Yang Baxter equation (), any reuce wor can be use (an in fact, thanks to the unitarity equation (4), reuceness is unnecessary). Note that the numbering of the spectral parameters is the increasing one at the top. In the ual picture, we ll enote the corresponing operation by a rectangle labele σ, the orientation of the rectangle etermining as usual the color of the corresponing lines.

22 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN Equivariant puzzles of size n are efine as collections of vertical rhombi plus a row of n s at the bottom, forming together an equilateral triangle of size n. In the ual picture (which will be isplaye in the proof of the next proposition), the spectral parameters attache to the lines are chosen to be u,...,u n from left to right at the bottom, an therefore βu,...,βu n on the left an αu,...,αu n on the right. In the rest of this section, we assume implicitly that properties are satisfie (in fact, in the present formalism, the very efinition just given of puzzles relies on property ), an that the gauge freeom is fixe by (7)... Consequences of the properties. Proposition. Givenσ S n, one has σ σ σ where the bounaries are fixe to be three given strings of length n. Proof. The proof is essentially obvious since in the ual graphical representation, the various lines connect the same locations on the bounaries in the l.h.s. an the r.h.s. However, since this proposition is crucial, we shall prove it in etail. Clearly, we can limit ourselves to the case that σ is a simple transposition. Once ualize, the require series of equalities looks as follows (where for the purpose of illustration we have setn 4): βu βu βu βu 4 αu αu αu αu 4 l.h.s. u u 4 u u βu βu βu βu 4 αu αu αu αu 4 using () u u u u 4

23 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I αu βu βu βu βu 4 αu αu αu 4 using (6) an () u u u u 4 αu βu βu βu βu 4 αu αu αu 4 using (6) u u u u 4 ru ru ru ru 4 αu αu αu αu 4 r.h.s. using () u u u u 4 It is interesting to note that if we allowe puzzles to have arbitrary bounary labels (multinumbers, not just single numbers) then the multiplication they efine woul not be associative. We nee some results about the importance of this single-number sector, base on the following technical lemma. Lemma 6. LetXbe a vali multinumber, an f X Λ + its associate weight. Then the projection of f X to the th factor of Λ points weakly to the right, an strictly to the right unless X is, is (()), or lacks entirely. To put this statement in context, we raw the vectors f,τ f,τ f Λ: f τ f τ f Proof. Multinumbers come in six types:, X, X(Y), (()), ((())), an those not involving. We raw the first five here in their minimal puzzle environments, the better to calculate the contributions (shown here in blue) of their fs to the th factor of Λ. (The multinumbers not involving contribute nothing in the th factor.)

24 4 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN Y () X X Y () (()) X X(Y) (()) ((())) Proposition. LetPbe a sizentriangle mae of puzzle pieces, where the Northwest an Northeast sies have only single-number labels,,,. IfP has the same content on NW an NE, then the South sie is also single-number labels (with that same content). The,4 rotations of the statement also hol. Conversely, if the contents on the (all single-number) NW an NE sies iffer, then the S sie cannot be all single-number. Proof. Let X(j), j,...,n be the multinumbers across the South sie. The Green s theorem argument an the assumptions about the NW, NE sies tell us that n jf X(j) span( f, f, f, f ), i.e. not using the τ f,τ f,τ f,τ f basis elements. This motivates an equivalent, if more general-looking, proposition: if X(j), j,..., n is a list of multinumbers such that n jf X(j) lies in span( f, f, f, f ), then the only X(j)s involving actually have X(j). Once we excise them from the list, subtract from every number in every remainingx(j) (again obtaining vali multinumbers, by the functoriality property of multinumbers from.), an use inuction on, we fin that each multinumber X(j) is a single-number. We consier now the contribution π ( f X(j) ) of each f X(j) to the th copy of Λ inλ +. A puzzle has only -labels, so trivially achieves the conition we seek, namely that the only multinumbers X(j) involving s are exactly s. In a puzzle, only the labels,, occur. Since we know the sum n j π ( f X(j) ) must be parallel to f (rawn here as vertical), an by lemma 6 these vectorsπ ( f ),π ( f ) point weakly right while π ( f ) points strictly right, there can be no π ( f )s. For that rules out the label, leaving only the, labels. In a puzzle, the only labels incluing are,x,(), an the same rightwarpointing argument applies. Again we learn the only{x(j)} incluingare equal to. In a puzzle, this rightwar-pointing argument shows only that any label involving must be or (()). But the same argument applie to stuy s in labels shows that any label involving must be or(()); in particular, not (()). Consequently, neither the (()) nor (()) labels can appear. So once again, any label involving must be, an we can apply the inuctive argument from above. For the converse, pickisuch that there is a ifferent number ofilabels on the NW an NE sies. Then the projection to theithλfactor is not vertical, an cannot be cancele by single-number f X s from the South sie, since each f i is vertical an each f j i projects to in the ith factor.

25 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 5 Proposition 4. () Single-color crossings preserve single-numbers, i.e., k l (8) if, then i,j {,...,} k,l {,...,} i j (where the lines have arbitrary, but ientical, colors). () For i {,...,}, j k i i (9) or i j k i i where again the lines have ientical colors. () Ifωis a weakly increasing single-number string, then j k () µ µ ω ω for all single-number strings an µ, i.e., having ω at the bottom forces it on the other two sies. Moreover, the puzzle is unique, an along each iagonal (NW/SE or NE/SW) the labels on the non-horizontal eges are constant. Similarly, if is a weakly ecreasing single-number string, then ω ω () for all single-number stringsan µ. µ µ The first two of these will erive from the same source: Lemma 7. Let V be a T-representation with weights P an weight basis ( v p ), an F a face of the convex hull of P. Let R En(V V) be T-equivariant. If v p, v q, v r, v s are basis vectors with weightsp,q,r,s F, an R vr v s v p v q or R vp v q v r v s, thenr,s F as well. Proof. Since F is a face of the convex hull, it is efine by the tightness of some inequality a,p c for some a t generating some one-parameter subgroup A T. Equivalently, all the A-weights in V are c, an those on F span the c weight space. Then the only basis vectors v m v n ofa-weightc are those withm,n F, anrmust preserve thisa-weight space ofv V, giving the claim. Proof of proposition 4. We ll apply this lemma when V is a representation V X of X A,D 4,E 6, anp W X ; ourwill be such that its projection to thea weight lattice is the funamental weight ω. Hence the A -subrepresentation containing the high weight ω

26 6 ALLEN KNUTSON AND PAUL ZINN-JUSTIN vector has the stanar basis inexe by {,...,}. To get part (), we take F to be the face containing exactly the vertices{,...,}, an use theorem 4(). ShrinkingFto itsath vertex (then applying the lemma) gets us part (). For part (), first observe that the Green s theorem argument shows that the content on the three sies must be the same. For convenience we assume that the lowest number occurring is, since if it isi > we can simply subtractifrom all numbers appearing an work instea with that equally vali puzzle. By the weak increase across the South sie, the leftmost label is smallest, hence. There are no i i pieces for i > (since f i 4 a ), so the leftmost triangle on the South sie must be a. Let j be the leftmost label on the Northeast sie, an let P be the size n triangle mae by removing the pieces touching the Northwest sie. (We on t know yet that the newly expose Northwest labels are single numbers, i.e. thatp is itself a puzzle.) j P Assume for contraiction that j >. Rotate P counterclockwise for ease of comparison to proposition. The NW sie of the rotate P has one more than the NE sie, so the vector sum over the NW, NE bounary labels (in the projection to the th factor Λ of Λ + ) points strictly rightwar. Now we a in the vectors from the South bounary labels of P (as etermine in lemma 6), each of which points weakly rightwar, an we reach a contraiction with the Green s theorem argument. Now that we ve establishe j, the content of the NE an S sie of (unrotate) P is the same, an we can apply proposition to P. We learn that its Northwest sie is all single numbers. Of course its South sie is weakly increasing, so by inuction on n the present proposition applies, i.e. P is uniquely etermine by its South sie, has fugacity, an its NW sie matches its South sie (both rea left to right). It remains to etermine the pieces in the stripp\p, which we o one rhombus at a time from SW to NE, having alreay etermine the bottom that each rhombus is of the form i i. We will show inuctively. A priori, the rhombus bears j i where i,j are single numbers, so the weight on the NE sie is f (i)j (whether or not that s a vali

27 SCHUBERT PUZZLES AND INTEGRABILITY I 7 multinumber). Its norm-square is f (i)j f i + f j + f i,τ f j 4+ τ f i τ f,τ f j 4 τ f i,τ f j f j,τ f 6 { ifi j a ifi j which is iff i j, in which case (by Green s theorem) the NE label is, continuing the inuction. Hence the Northwest labels on P are copie across these rhombi to the Northwest sie ofp, after the initial, an the fugacities are as claime. Given a permutation σ S n an a single-number string of length n, efine () S N σ : σ ω S NW σ : ω S NE σ : σ σ ω where here ω is the unique weakly increasing string with the same content as..4. Main theorems. This leas us to the heart of the paper: Theorem 5. The following equality hols: ν ν µ S ν N σ S NW σs µ NE σ where the summation is over single-number strings with the same content as an µ. Proof. Start from proposition an set the NW sie to, the NE sie to µ an the bottom sie to ω, the unique weakly increasing string with the same content asanµ. ν ν ω σ µ ω σ µ σ ω σµ σ, µ ω σµ µ σ ω σµ ω The first an thir equations are essentially applications of (8). By the first part of proposition 4, the internal labels ν,, µ are single-number strings (or more precisely, all other contributions to the sum vanish). The thir part of proposition 4 tells us that µ ω, an that the triangle of the r.h.s. is mae of triangles an rhombi which are all of fugacity accoring to property an gauge fixing conition (7). Once ri of this triangle, we recognize on both sies the efinitions (), hence the result. One can reo the whole reasoning after reversal of all the arrows. More precisely, we note that property efines two types of trivalent vertices, one where two eges are outgoing, as was use so far, an one where two eges are incoming, which we shall use now. In property, equations (), (4) an (5) are invariant by reversal of arrows, whereas eq. () turns into eq. ().