arxiv: v3 [math.co] 14 Dec 2017

Transcription

1 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE arxiv: v3 [math.co] 14 Dec 2017 Abstract. In this paper, we define the combinatorial wall crossing transformation and the generalized column regularization on partitions and prove that a certain composition of these two transformations have the same effect on the one-row partition (n). As corollaries we explicitly describe the quotients of the partitions arise in this process. We also prove that the one-row partition is the unique partition that stays regular at any step of the wall crossing transformation. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. Preliminaries Two Definitions of Mullineux Transpose Column Regularization 6 3. Two Series of Transformations and the Main Theorem 7 4. Detailed Descriptions of the Sequence of Partitions Uniqueness of Monotonicity 15 Appendix A. Example of n = 5 and a General Conjecture 16 References Introduction Wall crossing functors appear in the context of infinite dimensional representations of complex semisimple Lie algebras, and Beilinson and Ginzburg studied its relation with translation functors in [BG99]. More recently, wall crossing functors have appeared in the study of quantized symplectic resolutions of singularities as perverse equivalences between different categories of modules, for more details one can look at [ABM11, BL17, Los15b]. These perverse equivalences induce bijections between irreducible objects in the corresponding derived categories, which are referred to as the combinatorial wall crossing. In the classical case of Lie algebra representations they are related to the cactus group actions [HKRW17, Los15a]. Our work is motivated by combinatorial wall crossing for representations of rational Cherednik algebras in large positive characteristic, where the combinatorial wall crossing is given by the extended Mullineux involution due to Losev [Los15b]. This collection of permutations on the set of partitions is our main object of study. Based on Kleshchev s work in [Kle96, FK97], the irreducible p-modular representations of thesymmetric groups n arelabeledbythep-regular partitionsofn; wedenotetheirreducible representation corresponding to the p-regular partition λ by ρ λ. The Mullineux involution M p is then defined to be the involution on the set of p-regular partitions satisfying ρ λ Mp = ρ λ sgn 1

2 2 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE where sgn is the sign representation. There are a few combinatorial ways to define M p in [Kle96,FK97], where p is not necessarily prime, and this is the foundation of our investigation. In this paper, we study the case of one-row partition (n) under composition of a series of wall crossing transformations intensively. A strong monotonicity property motivates a generalized version of column regularization on partitions, which was originally defined in [JK]. The relationship of Mullineux map and the original column regularization was studied by Walker, Bessenrodt, Olsson and Xu in [Wal96, Wal94, BOX99, BO98]. We generalize the definition of column regularization to two co-prime parameters, which can be understood as a rational number in the unit interval. This construction leads to the main result of this paper, which is the combinatorial wall crossing and a certain composition of generalized column regularization procedures have the same effect on the one-row partition. The most important consequence of this result, stated as Theorem 5.4, is that this one-row partition case is the only case where monotonicity holds at each step of the composition of the transformations. We were kindly informed by Losev that he has an alternative proof of Theorem 5.4 using Heisenberg actions and perverse equivalences where our method is purely combinatorial. Also Theorem 5.4 answers a question by Bezrukavnikov which is motivated by potential applications to the study of nabla operators and Haiman s n! conjecture in [H + 02]. The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is an overview of preliminaries. The combinatorial wall crossing transformation is defined in Section 3 and is followed by the main theorem. Then in Section 4 a description of the quotients of the series of partitions that arise when we apply the wall crossing transformation to the one-row partition is presented and the property of uniqueness of monotonicity is proved in Section 5. We end with an explicit demonstration of the wall crossing transformation to every partition of 5, and a general conjecture given by Bezrukavninov in the Appendix A. Acknowledgements. The authors would like to thank Roman Bezrukavnikov for suggesting this project to us and continuous discussions and help throughout the whole process. Also, the authors are grateful to Ivan Losev and to Galyna Dobrovolska for many discussions and to Seth Shelley-Abrahamson for useful revision suggestions. 2. Preliminaries Apartitionλofn Nisafinitetupleofweakly decreasingpositiveintegersλ = (λ 1,...,λ k ) where λ 1... λ k > 0 and λ := k i=1 λ i = n. The exponential version of a partition is λ = (λ s 1 1,...,λ s k k ), where the superscript s i indicates the number of repetitions of the part λ i and λ 1 >... > λ k. Denote all partitions by P and partitions of n by P n. The Young diagram corresponding to a given partition λ is the set of unit boxes specified as follows. Fix the x-axis pointing south and the y-axis pointing to the east. Then the coordinates of the southeast vertices of the boxes of the diagram are given by: (i,j) {N N 1 i,1 j λ i }. We also label by (i,j) the box whose southeast vertex has coordinates (i,j). The transpose λ T of a Young diagram λ is given by: {(i,j) N N 1 j,1 i λ j }. Given a box (i,j) λ, the arm a ij = a ij (λ) is the set of boxes (i,j ) λ with j < j. We use a ij to denote either the above set or the number of elements of the above set interchangeably. Similarly, the leg = (λ) is the set of boxes (i,j) λ with i < i. We use to denote either the above set or the number of elements of the above set interchangeably as well.

3 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 3 Finally the hook H ij = H ij (λ) is the union of sets (i,j) a ij. The number of elements of the hook is also denoted by H ij and is equal to 1+a ij +. Let λ P n. A box A λ is called a removable box of λ if λ \A P n 1. A box B / λ is called an addable box of λ, if λ B P n+1. The rim of λ consists of the boxes (i,j) λ such that (i+1,j +1) / λ. The boundary of λ is defined to be the rim of λ where λ = λ (i,j). (i,j) addable to λ A skew shape λ/µ, where µ λ, is the collection of boxes in λ but not in µ. If λ/µ does not contain any 2 2 squares, then it is called a ribbon. Note that every (i,j) λ corresponds to a ribbon of size H ij containing in the rim of λ. Fix a number b N. We will call a Young diagram λ b-regular if there exist no i N such that λ i = λ i+1 =... = λ i+b 1 > 0. Also for a box A = (i,j) the residue of A with respect to b, denoted by resa, is the residue class (j i) mod b. Definition 2.1. Given a partition λ and a positive integer b, λ can be uniquely written as a union of multisets λ = ν µ where each part of ν has multiplicity less than b and each part of µ has multiplicity being a multiple of b. Denote Reg b (λ) = ν as the regular part of λ and the irregular part Irr b (λ) is defined by µ = b Irr b (λ), where the operator b is to repeat each part of the partition b times. This decomposition is called the b-regular decomposition of λ. Next, we define the core and quotient of a partition following [H + 02]. Definition 2.2. A partition λ is a b-core if it does not contain any ribbon of length b. The b-core Core b (λ) of any partition λ is the partition that remains after one removes as many b-ribbons in succession as possible. The result is independent of choices of removals. Definition 2.3. For any box A = (i,j) λ, let B and C be the boxes at the end of the arm a ij and the leg respectively. Then H ij is divisible by b precisely when res B = k and res C = k +1 for some k {0,1,...,b 1}. Now for some fixed k the boxes A with res B = k and resc = form an exploded copy of a partition which we denote λ k. The quotient of a partition λ is defined to be the b-tuple of partitions, Quot b (λ) = (λ 0,λ 1,...,λ b 1 ). Example 2.4. Let λ = (6,5,3,3,2,1,1) and b = 4, and the residue of the rim of λ are labelled in the picture After removing the 4 pieces of 4-ribbons, we obtain Core 4 (λ) = (4,1). Quot 4 (λ) = ((1),(2,1),, ), as shown in the above picture.

4 4 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE 2.1. Two Definitions of Mullineux Transpose. Now we define the notion of good and cogoodboxes as well as goodand co-goodsequence, which will be used to give the construction of Mullineux transpose with respect to some b N >1. Definition 2.5. A good box of residue i where i {0,1,...,b 1} of a partition λ is defined through the following procedure: First label the boxes on the boundary of λ by their residues. Then moving from southwest to northeast, we produce a word by writing R for the removable boxes and A for addable boxes of residue i, thus obtaining a sequence, which is called an RA-sequence. Then write ( for R and ) for A, and inductively cancel the consecutive () s until there is no () appearing. Then the removable box of residue i corresponding to first ( from left is called a good box of residue i. If there are no ( in the word after the cancellation, there is no good box of residue i. Remark 2.6. This definition is equivalent to Kleshchev s original definition in [Kle96]. It follows that for each residue i = 0,1,...,b 1, there is at most one good box and Kleshchev proved there is always a good box of some residue. Definition 2.7. A co-good box of residue i for i {0,1,...,b 1} of a partition λ is defined through the following procedure: Label the boxes of the boundary of λ by their residue and for a given residue i, write its corresponding RA sequence. Then write ( for A and ) for R, and cancel the consecutive () s iteratively until there is no () appearing. Now the removable box of residue i corresponding to the first ) from right is called an co-good box of residue i. (As with good boxes, for each i {0,1,...,b 1} there exists at most one co-good box and there is at least one value of i for which such a box exists.) Remark 2.8. It is clear from the definitions that if A = (i,j) is a good box for λ with resa = k mod b, then A = (j,i) is a co-good box for λ T with resa = k. Definition 2.9. For λ a b-regular partition on n, a sequence (r 1,...,r n ) (mod b) of residues is called good (resp. co-good) if λ has a good (resp. co-good) box A 1 of residue r 1, λ\a 1 has a good (resp. co-good) box A 2 of residue r 2,... λ\ n 1 A i has a good (resp. co-good) box A n of residue r n. i=1 We call the sequence A 1,...,A n as the good (resp. co-good) decomposition sequence of λ. Then we consider the Mullineux involution M b. Since we are dealing with the composition of Mullineux map with transpose throughout the paper, we will deal with M b T rather than M b. The following Theorem is a reformulation of [Mat99, Theorem 6.42] due to Klechshev and Brundan, where it gives an combinatorial way to do Mullineux transpose, and b is not necessarily restricted to be prime. Theorem For any b-regular partition λ, consider the following procedure: (1) Find a good box A 1 for λ, record its residue resa 1 = r 1 and delete the box from the partition to obtain a smaller partition λ 1. Repeat the above step n times until we get the empty partition. Then by construction the sequence (r 1,...,r n ) is a good sequence of λ.

5 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 5 (2) Start with the empty partition µ n = and at step i add the unique box B n i+1 to the partition µ n i+1 such that B i is a co-good square of µ n i+1 B n i+1 of residue r n i+1. Such a box can always be found uniquely. Label the resulting partition by µ = µ 1 B 1. Then λ M bt = µ. Example Consider λ = (5,4,2) and b = 4. We label the boxes in λ and their residues as follows: A 1 A 2 A 3 A 4 A 5 A 6 A 7 A 8 A 9 A 10 A 11 By Definition 2.5, we decompose λ as with good sequence (0,3,2,2,1,3,0,2,1,3,0) A 5,A 11,A 10,A 9,A 8,A 4,A 7,A 3,A 2,A 6,A 1, B 1 B 2 B 3 B 4 B 5 B 6 B 7 B 8 B 9 B 10 B Using Definition 2.7 and the same sequence (0,3,2,2,1,3,0,2,1,3,0) as a co-good sequence, partition (4, 2, 2, 2, 1) can be rebuild using the co-good decomposition sequence B 11,B 4,B 3,B 10,B 9,B 8,B 6,B 7,B 2,B 5,B 1. Hence by Theorem 2.10, (5,4,2) M 4T = (4,2,2,2,1). Bessenrodt, Olsson and Xu introduced in [BOX99] an equivalent definition of Mullineux transpose in the following way, which is used in Section 5 of the monotonicity properties. First we define the b-rim of a b-regular partition and the operator I of removing the b-rim. Definition For a b-regular partition λ, the b-rim of λ is defined to be a subset of the rim consisting of the following pieces. Each piece, except possibly the last one, contains b boxes. We choose the first b boxes from the rim, beginning with the rightmost box of the first row and moving southeastwards. If the last box of this piece is chosen from the i 0 -th row of λ, then we choose the second piece of b boxes beginning with the rightmost box of row i Continue this procedure until we reach the last piece ending in the last row. Define λ I to be the partition obtained from λ by removing its b-rim. Next we define an operator J for a b-regular partition λ. Definition Given λ = (λ 1,...,λ k ), if λ I = (µ 1,...,µ k ), where some of the µ i in the end are allowed to be zero, and φ(λ) = λ λ I, define where λ J := (µ 1 +1,...,µ k 1 +1,µ k +δ) δ = { 0 if b φ(λ) 1 if b φ(λ)

6 6 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE Finally, the operator X b for a b-regular partition λ is defined as λ X b := (j1,...,j l ), where j i = λ Ji 1 λ Ji. Proposition 2.14 ( [BOX99, Proposition 3.6]). For any b-regular partition λ, we have λ X b = λ M bt. We extend the definition of Mullineux transpose to all partitions using the b-regular decomposition in Definition 2.1 as follows. Definition The extended Mullineux transpose transformation W b : P P is defined to be λ W b := (ν M b b µ T ) T where λ = ν b µ is the b-regular decomposition. In particular, if λ is b-regular, then λ W b = λ M b T. The following lemma is some basic properties of a core. Lemma Let λ be a b-core, then (1) λ T is also a b-core; (2) The b-rim and the rim of λ coincide; (3) Given any residue in {0,1,...,b 1}, the RA-sequence of this residue contains only A s or R s. Proof. (1) and (2) are straightforward from the definition of a core. (3) R A A R If the RA sequence contains A R or R A, then the specific hook corresponding to these addable and removable boxes has length divisible by b, which contradicts λ be a b-core Column Regularization. For an arbitrary partition λ, [JK] defined b-regularization of λ as sliding the boxes of λ upwards on all ladders of slope 1, and denote the resulting partition by λ reg b, which is b-regular. And column regularization λ p 1 colreg b is defined to be ((λ T ) reg b ) T. This is a special case of our generalized column regularization with two parameters. Definition For two co-prime nonnegative integers 0 < a < b, we define a partial transformation colreg a,b : P P as follows. For any partition λ (identifying as a set of integer points in the plane), ladders are defined as lines L c : y + b a a x = c a

7 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 7 with c Z, and identify L c with the set of integer points on it. Denote L + c = L c {(x,y) x > 0,y > 0}. For each c Z, if λ L + c, slide those boxes in the intersection down the ladder L + c to the bottom. The resulting set of boxes is λcolreg a,b, which may form a partition or not. Remark The previous definition satisfies λ colreg b = λ colreg 1,b. Example (3,2,2,1) colreg 2,3 = (2,2,2,1,1) where box C slides to where B is and box B slides down to the position A, as shown in the picture. C B = C A However, after doing colreg 2,3 to (3,2,2), it is not a partition any more. The box C slides to where B is, B slides to position A, and F slides to position E, shown in the picture below. C F B E A = B C F B 3. Two Series of Transformations and the Main Theorem We first define the combinatorial wall crossing transformation due to Bezrukavnikov and Losev. For λ being a partition of n, consider the Farey sequence F n which is a set of reduced fractions between 0 and 1 with denominator at most n. Each a F b n is called a wall. Every two consecutive elements a i b i and a i+1 b i+1 (reduced fractions) of this sequence define an interval I = [ a i b i, a i+1 b i+1 ] [0,1]. We define the wall crossing transformation at the wall a b F n, where a b is reduced, to be the extended Mullineux transpose W b : P P given in Definition Now we compose them in the following way: Definition 3.1. Fix a positive integer n. We define a collection of maps B I : P n P n where I are all intervals whose endpoints are consecutive rational numbers in F n. For the first interval, B 1 [0, (λ) = λ for every λ P. Inductively, suppose we already [ n] [ defined B I where I = ai 1 b i 1, a i b i ]. Suppose the next interval is I a = i b i, a i+1 b i+1 ], we define B I (λ) := B I (λ) W b [ i. Also we define an integer function D I (λ) := b i Irr bi (B I (λ)) when I = ai 1 b i 1, a i b i ]. Remark 3.2. For each interval I, B I : P n P n is a bijection. In fact, we can consider the process of starting with any λ in [ 0, 1 n], and do a series of wall crossing transformations W b, then {B I (λ)} I gives a series of partitions, one in each interval and one is obtained from the previous one by crossing a wall via combinatorial wall crossing. Moreover, consider another procedure where we begin with λ in the first interval, and cross the wall a b F n by performing the generalized column regularization colreg a,b to the

8 8 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE partition in the previous interval. We denote the corresponding partition in I by B I (λ). Since colreg ai,b i is only a partial transformation, at the moment we cannot guarantee the validity of doing such a process throughout the unit interval. But we have the following lemma which guarantees that if we start with the one-row partition (n), BI ((n)) is well defined. Lemma 3.3. If we start with (n), then at each step of the second procedure (of crossing walls by generalized column regularization), we have B I ((n)) P n. The proof of Lemma 3.3 is provided in Step 1 of the proof of the main theorem. We separate and state it here for the sake of the notations. What we are going to prove is that when λ is the row partition (n), the above two procedures have the same effect. For simplicity, from now on, we will denote λ I := B I ((n)), λ I := B I ((n)). Example 3.4. In case of n = 7, the Farey sequence is 1 7, 1 6, 1 5, 1 4, 2 7, 1 3, 2 5, 3 7, 1 2, 4 7, 3 5, 2 3, 5 7, 3 4, 4 5, 5 6, 6 7, and we start with (7) in [ 0, 1 7]. Then either of the above two procedures give the following sequence of partitions in each interval (for simplicity, if the partitions in consecutive intervals are the same, we just write them once by pointing out the union of those small intervals): Table 1. n=7, starting with (n) [ [ Intervals 0, 1 1 7], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], ] [ 6 6,1] Partitions (7) (6,1) (5,2) (4,2,1) (3,2,1 2 ) (2 2,1 3 ) (2,1 5 ) (1 7 ) Now for the combinatorial wall crossing operation, we denote the endpoints where the partition is not identical in the consecutive two intervals (sharing the endpoints) by p 0 = 0,p 1,...,p s, andcall thembreaks forthecombinatorial wall crossing. Anddenote λ k to bethe partitionin[p k 1,p k ]. Similarly, wedenoteq 1,...,q t tobethebreaksofcolumnregularization. And let λ k be the partition in [q k 1,q k ] under a series of column regularization. Theorem 3.5 (Main Theorem). Using the above notation, we have (1) s = t and p k = q k = min (i,j) λ k +1 H ij = max. (i,j) λ H ij (2) λ k = λ k for all k, i.e. the two operations are exactly the same when we start with the row partition (n). Before proving Theorem 3.5, we state the following result from [BOX99]. Proposition 3.6 ( [BOX99]). For a b-regular partition, λ M bt = λ if and only if λ is a b-core.

9 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 9 Proof of Theorem 3.5. First of all, by direct computation, (n) colreg 1,n = (n) M nt = (n 1,1); 1 n = min +1 = max (i,j) (n) H ij (i,j) (n 1,1) H ij when n 2. Then we induct on k and suppose that until p k = q k, the two operations are exactly the same and the breaks satisfy the property in the theorem. In particular, λ = λ and p k = q k = max = a k. (i,j) λ H ij b k In the meantime, we induct on the fact that λ k is b k -regular. Then we need to prove the following two claims: For any reduced fraction a satisfying b there is Let max < a (i,j) λ H ij b < min +1, (i,j) λ H ij λ M bt = λcolreg a,b = λ. a +1 = min b (i,j) λ H ij be the reduced fraction. If a b = 1, then the process is ended, otherwise λ is b -regular and λ W b = λ M b T = λ colreg a,b λ. For the part of λ M bt = λ in the first claim, we know that it suffices to prove λ is a b-core by Proposition 3.6. Now suppose (i 0,j 0 ) λ, such that H i0,j 0 = k 0 b, where k 0 Z >0, then hence, l i0,j 0 k 0 b = l i 0,j 0 max < a H i0,j 0 (i,j) λ H ij b < min +1 l i 0,j 0 +1 = l i 0,j 0 +1 (i,j) λ H ij H i0,j 0 k 0 b k 0 a 1 < l i0,j 0 < k 0 a and this leads to a contradiction since l i0,j 0 Z. Therefore λ is a b-core, when. max < a (i,j) λ H ij b < min +1 (i,j) λ H ij In order to show that λ colreg a,b = λ, suppose there exists a ladder such that L c : y + b a a x = c a L + c λ and the boxes in the intersection does not lie at the bottom of L + c, we do the following operations. Find A L + c λ, B L + c \λ and A is above B. Then pick A which is a

10 10 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE removable box and southeast to A and an addable box B that is northwest to B, as shown in the picture. A A B B The following inequality holds: b a a = Slope(A,B) Slope(A a,b ij ) max (i,j) λ +1 i.e. a b 1 a 1+max ij (i,j) λ +1 = min (i,j) λ +1 H ij which is a contradiction. Hence we obtain λ colreg a,b = λ. The second claim is equivalent to saying a l b = min ij +1 (i,j) λ H ij (reduced) is exactly the next break p = q, both for column regularization and Mullineux transpose operation. Suppose a b 1 and we prove the second claim via the following steps. Step 1. Since b a a a ij = max (i,j) λ +1, we know when doing colreg a,b to λ, we can use the exactly same procedure as above and find out A = A is a removable box and B = B is an addable box. This is saying on any ladders which are not full, we are sliding those removable boxes to addable boxes, which indicates λ colreg a,b is a partition. Moreover, since λ colreg a,b λ, we know λ k+2 = λ colreg a,b and q k < q = a b p. Remark 3.7. For any ladder L c which are not full in λ, the boxes in L c λ always lies above the boxes in L c \λ.

11 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 11 If thereis a boxin L c \λ that lies above a boxinl c λ, then thereis a hookoflength divisible by b whose endpoint of leg and the box directly right to the endpoint of arm are on the same ladder, as shown in the picture. Suppose this hook has length H i,j = tb, then we have a ij = t(b a ) 1 and = ta. Therefore, which is a contradiction. Step 2. Claim 3.8. = a l uv max = q k < q = a H ij b (u,v) λ H uv b q = a = max b H ij. (i,j) λ k+2 Denote all the sliding boxes in doing colreg a,b to λ by A 1,...,A l, and each A j slides to A j. Let λ := λ \{A 1,...,A l } = λ k+2 \{A 1,...,A l }. By construction, we know that (i 0,j 0 ) λ k+2, we have l i0,j 0 = a max. H i0,j 0 b H ij In addition, for (i,j) λ λ k+2, we have: and hence max (i,j) λ a ij ( λ k+2 )+1 ( λ k+2 ) (i,j) λ k+2 a ij(λ ) (λ )+1 ( λ k+2 ) H ij ( λ k+2 ) (λ )+1 H ij (λ ) ( λ k+2 ) H ij ( λ k+2 ) min (λ )+1 +1 = min = q = a. (i,j) λ H ij (λ ) (i,j) λ H ij b The first equality is due to the fact that (i,j) {A 1,...,A l }, there is (λ )+1 H ij (λ ) = 1. Then max = max{max (i,j) λ k+2 H ij (i,j) λ ( λ k+2 ) H ij ( λ k+2 ), max (i,j) {A 1,...,A l } ( λ k+2 ) H ij ( λ k+2 ) = 0} = a b.

12 12 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE Step 3. Claim 3.9. λ is a b -core. If (ĩ 0, j 0 ) λ, such that H i 0, j 0 = k 0 b, then l i 0, j 0 k 0 b max (i,j) λ < max H ij (i,j) λ k+2 = a +1 = min H ij b (i,j) λ H ij +1 < min (i,j) λ H ij l i 0, j 0 +1 k 0 b. Here the first < is because the arms in λ are the same as the corresponding one in λ k+2, but legs may be the same or decrease by 1. The second < is because the legs in λ are the same as the corresponding one in λ, but arms may be the same or decrease by 1. They are strict inequalities since we already removed those sliding boxes to obtain λ. The above inequalities simplify to l i 0, j 0 < k 0 a < l i 0, j 0 +1, which is a contradiction. Step 4. Claim A 1,...,A l lies on the same ladder. First of all, since gcd(a,b ) = 1, the integer boxes on ladder L c : y + b a x = c a have the same residue because y x = c b x a and consecutive integer boxes on it has x-coordinates differ by a. Hence we ll call the residue of a ladder to be the residue of any integer box on it. Without loss of generality, say A 1 L c0. We suppose there exists some A j L c1 where c 1 c 0. Firstly, if L c0 and L c1 have the same residue, all possible integer boxes in L c0 and L c1 will lie on a grid with rectangles of size a (b a). From Remark 3.7, we know in L + c 0 λ are removable boxes and appear on top of addable boxes L + c 0 \λ, as shown in the picture where the black line is L c0 and black boxes are in λ and red ones are not. L c0 L c1 (c 1 < c 0 ) L c1 (c 1 > c 0 ) Using the definition of addable and removable boxes, we know any box on the grid and southeast to L + c 0 is not in λ and any box on the grid and northwest to L + c 0 is in λ. This indicates when c 1 < c 0, L + c 1 will be full, when c 1 > c 0, L + c 1 will be empty, i.e. L + c 1 λ =. In either case, there will be no A j in L c1.

13 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 13 Then we are left with the case when L c0 and L c1 have different residues. If the distance dist(l c0,l c1 ) > a(b a) a 2 +(b a) 2, then the same reasoning as above will show that L c 1 is either empty or full, which is not possible. If dist(l c0,l c1 ) < a a(b a) 2 +(b a) 2, without loss of generality, we also assume c 1 > c 0 find E L c1 λ, and F L c0 \λ where E is above F. This is always possible since c 1 > c 0 and both ladders contain boxes both in and not in λ. From Step 1, E is removable and F is addable. Now the hook in λ corresponding to E and F will break the inequality b a a a ij. +1 E L c0 L c1 F Now we arrived at the conclusion that A 1,...,A l are on the same ladder. We denote this special ladder L from now on. Step 5. Let s now prove λ is b -regular. If not, there is a box (i 1,j 1 ) λ with the corresponding hook being a strip of length b in the rim. Then we have l i1,j 1 = b 1 max = p k = q k < a. H i1,j 1 b (i,j) λ H ij b This contradicts our assumption that a b 1 and hence λ is b -regular. We llnowconstructλ M b T bydecomposingλ intoagoodboxsequenceandbuildthem back using the same sequence as co-good decomposition sequence as stated in Theorem Assume the integer boxes on L,+ is labelled by A 1,...,A m in order from northeast to southwest. Then from Remark 3.7, the first l are exactly our A 1,...,A l, and the rest A l+1,...,a m are addable boxes. Definition 2.5 of good box indicates A l is a good box of λ anda l 1 isagoodboxofλ \A l anditcontinues. Sowegetagooddecompositionsequence of λ : A l,...,a 1,G 1,...,G n l, where G 1,...,G n l is a good decomposition sequence for the b -core λ. Since λ is a b -core, G 1,...,G n l isalso aco-gooddecomposition sequence by Proposition 3.6. Afterwards, we put A 1 to A m, since by definition, A m is co-good in λ A m. Then we put A j to position A m+1 j in order since A j is co-good in λ A m A j. Hence λ M b T = λ A m A m+1 l, and this is exactly sliding A 1,...,A l in order to the bottom of L,+, so λ M b T = λ colreg a,b.

14 14 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE Corollary The partition in the last interval [ n 1 n,1] is exactly the column (1n ). Proof. In characteristic 2, sign representation is exactly the trivial representation, hence λ M 2 = λ for every 2-regular partition λ. Also, (λ T ) colreg b-a,b = (λ colreg a,b ) T, which is direct by Definition Hence the sequence of partitions are symmetric via transpose at 1. So λ 2 [ n 1 n,1] = λ [ n 1 n,1] = (n)t = (1 n ). 4. Detailed Descriptions of the Sequence of Partitions From the constructions in Section 3, we know the sequence λ I is a series of decreasing partitions starting from the row (n) and ending at the column (1 n ). In this section, we provide more details to the partitions λ k s. Corollary 4.1. The b k -quotient of λ k is Quot bk (λ k ) = (,...,,(h h 1 2 nonempty entry is a rectangle. Here h 1 = L k,+ appears at the (j k +1)-th entry where j k is the residue of L k. λ k and h 2 = L k,+ ),,..., ), where the only \λ k and the rectangle Moreover, the b k -quotient of λ is Quot bk (λ ) = (,...,,(h h 2 1 ),,..., ), where the rectangle appears at the j k -th entry. In addition, the b k -core of λ and λ k are the same. Proof. From [FK97], Core bk (λ ) = Core bk (λ k ) since λ = λ M b k T k. Denote Quot bk (λ ) = (ν k,0,...,ν k,bk 1) from Definition 2.3. ν k,s is exactly the exploded boxes (i,j) with corresponding hook divisible by b k and the residue of the box at the end of the arm has residue s. Let H ij = tb k, and since a k l b k = min ij +1 (i,j) λk H ij have: H ij < a k b k +1 H ij, hence we get = ta k 1 and a ij = t(b k a k ). > max (i,j) λk H ij, we This is exactly saying the endpoint of the arm of (i,j) and the box directly underneath the endpoint of the leg of (i,j) are on L k,+. Hence ν k,s0 = (h h 1 2 ) where s 0 is the residue of L k, h 1 = L k,+ λ k and h 2 = L k,+ \λ k and all other entries in the quotient are.

15 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 15 Now consider λ = λ M b k T k and denote the b k -quotient of it by (ξ k,0,...,ξ k,bk 1). From Theorem 3.5, we have a k +1 = max < min. b k (i,j) λ H ij (i,j) λ H ij When (i,j ) λ satisfies H ij = t b k, we have the following inequality: l i j t b k a k b k < l i j +1 t b k, and this simplifies to l i j = t a k and a i j = t (b k a k ) 1. This indicates the endpoint of the leg of (i,j ) and the box directly right to the endpoint of the arm of (i,j ) are both on L k,+. Therefore, ξ k,s0 1 = (h h 2 1 ) and all other entries in the b k-quotient of λ are empty partitions. 5. Uniqueness of Monotonicity From the proof of Theorem 3.5, we have already seen λ I = B I ((n)) is b-regular if the right endpoint of I has denominator b. Now we will show that (n) is the unique partition that always stays regular under the series of combinatorial wall crossings. Lemma 5.1. Given a b-regular partition λ, if b φ(λ) where φ(λ) = λ λ I, then j 1 = λ λ J λ 1 1. Proof. j 1 = λ λ J, where λ J = λ λ I +k since δ = 1 as in Definition But since the b-rim is a subset of the rim, λ J λ (k +λ 1 1)+k = λ λ Substituting back, we immediately obtain the required inequality. Lemma 5.2. Given a b-regular partition λ, if b H 11, then j 1 λ 1 1. Proof. The condition b H 11 implies that the number of boxes in the rim is divisible by b. If b φ(λ) then we are done from Lemma 5.1. If b φ(λ) then since the b-rim is not divisible by b, it is strictly smaller than the rim so λ J > λ (k +λ 1 1)+(k 1). Substituting to the formula giving j 1 we get the desired inequality.

16 16 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE Proposition 5.3. Begin with any partition λ of n and perform the wall crossing transformation, as long as the partition stays regular, it will hold that l 11 H 11 > a b in the partition exactly after we cross the wall a b F n. Proof. We prove this property by induction. For any partition λ of n, l 11 1 and H 11 n, hence in λ we have l 11 H 11 > 1. n Assume that we have two consecutive terms of the Farey sequence a < c. We know by b d induction that the partition immediately before we cross c satisfies l 11 d H 11 > a. Now since two b consecutive elements in the Farey sequence give two consecutive slopes in an n n square in the cartesian grid, it must hold that l 11 H 11 c. If the inequality is strict then we are done. If d this is an equality, then d H 11, so by Lemma 5.2, a = j 1 λ 1 1 = a 11. Also the fact that Mullineux transpose reduces the partial order [BOX99, Corollary 4.4] implies that the number of rows of λ M dt is at least as much as the number of rows of λ. Thus after crossing c d, l which implies the desired strict inequality. 11 l 11 = l 11 (a 11 +1) l 11 (a 11 +1) H 11 H 11 H 11 H > 0 11 Theorem 5.4. The row partition (n) is the unique partition of n that stays regular after any step of the combinatorial [ wall ] crossing transformation. For any other partition λ of n a there exist an interval I = i b i, a i+1 b i+1 in [0,1] defined by the Farey sequence such that B I (λ) is not b i+1 -regular. Proof. Suppose there is a partition λ (n) of n that stays regular after any step of the combinatorial wall crossing transformation, consider µ = B [ n 1,1](λ). By Proposition 5.3, n l we have that in µ, 11 H 11 > n 1, which is equivalent to a 11+1 n l 11 < 1. But this inequality n 1 happens if and only if µ = (1 n ). But by Remark 3.2 and Corollary 3.11, we know λ = (n), which is a contradiction. Appendix A. Example of n = 5 and a General Conjecture In this appendix, we ll denote B I and D I in Definition 3.1 as BI 2 and D2 I respectively and define another series of transformations as follows. Definition A.1. We define a collection of maps BI 1 : P n P n where I are intervals with endpoints being consecutive terms in F n as follows. First of all B 1 (λ) = λ is the identity [0, n] 1 [ map. Inductively, suppose we defined BI 1 where I = ai 1 b i 1, a i b i ]. Then forthe adjacent interval [ I a = i b i, a i+1 b i+1 ], we define BI 1 (λ) = µ b iν T and DI 1(λ) = b i ν. Here, µ and ν come from the unique decomposition BI 1(λ) = µ b iν where µ has no parts divisible by b i and b i ν is multiplying each part of ν by b i.

17 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 17 Farey sequence of n = 5 is 1 5, 1 4, 1 3, 2 5, 1 2, 3 5, 2 3, 3 4, 4 5. Now we perform the two algorithms as in Definition 3.1 and A.1 to all partitions of 5 and calculate the corresponding number function DI 1 and D2 I respectively indicating the row and column irregular sizes respectively. The results are given in the following tables: Table 2. The First Algorithm, n=5 Interval [0, 1 5 ] [1 5, 1 4 ] [1 4, 1 3 ] [1 3, 2 5 ] [2 5, 1 2 ] [1 2, 3 5 ] [3 5, 2 3 ] [2 3, 3 4 ] [3 4, 4 5 ] [4 5,1] B 1 I (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) D 1 I B 1 I (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) D 1 I B 1 I (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) (3,2) D 1 I B 1 I (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) D 1 I B 1 I (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) (4,1) D 1 I B 1 I (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) D 1 I B 1 I (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) (1 5 ) D 1 I The following conjecture is due to Bezrukavnikov: Conjecture A.2 (Bezrukavnikov). D 1 I (λ) = D2 I (λt ) for every partition λ of n and interval I with endpoints consecutive entries in Farey sequence of n. Remark A.3. The monotonicity of case (n) in the second algorithm is direct if the conjecture is true since BI 1((1n )) = 1 n for every interval I and DI 1((1n )) = 0. Hence DI 2 ((n)) = 0, which is exactly saying BI 2((n)) = λ I is always regular corresponding to the denominator of the right endpoint of I.

18 18 PANAGIOTIS DIMAKIS AND GUANGYI YUE Interval Table 3. n=5, the Second Algorithm [ [ 0, 1 1 5], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], [ ], ] [ 4 4,1] B 1 I (1 5 ) (5) (3,2) (1 5 ) (5) (1 5 ) (5) (2 2,1) (1 5 ) (5) D 2 I B 2 I (2,1 4 ) (1 5 ) (5) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (5) (4,1) (3,2) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) D 2 I B 2 I (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (1 5 ) (4,1) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (2,1 3 ) (5) (3,2) (3,2) D 2 I B 2 I (3,1 2 ) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (5) (4,1) (2,1 3 ) (1 5 ) (4,1) (4,1) (3,1 2 ) D 2 I B 2 I (3,2) (3,2) (2 2,1) (2,1 3 ) (1 5 ) (3,2) (3,2) (1 5 ) (5) (4,1) D 2 I B 2 I (4,1) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (2,1 3 ) (4,1) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (3,1 2 ) (2,1 3 ) D 2 I B 2 I (5) (4,1) (4,1) (3,2) (3,2) (2 2,1) (2 2,1) (2,1 3 ) (2,1 3 ) (1 5 ) D 2 I References [ABM11] Rina Anno, Roman Bezrukavnikov, and Ivan Mirkovic. Stability conditions for slodowy slices and real variations of stability. arxiv preprint arxiv: , [BG99] Alexander Beilinson and Victor Ginzburg. Wall-crossing functors and D-modules. Representation Theory of the American Mathematical Society, 3(1):1 31, [BL17] Roman Bezrukavnikov and Ivan Losev. On dimension growth of modular irreducible representations of semisimple lie algebras. arxiv preprint arxiv: , [BO98] Christine Bessenrodt and Jørn B Olsson. On residue symbols and the mullineux conjecture. Journal of Algebraic Combinatorics, 7(3): , [BOX99] Christine Bessenrodt, Jørn B Olsson, and Maozhi Xu. On properties of the mullineux map with an application to schur modules. In Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical [FK97] Society, volume 126, pages Cambridge University Press, Ben Ford and Alexander S Kleshchev. A proof of the mullineux conjecture. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 226(2): , [H + 02] Mark Haiman et al. Combinatorics, symmetric functions, and hilbert schemes. Current developments in mathematics, 2002:39 111, [HKRW17] Iva Halacheva, Joel Kamnitzer, Leonid Rybnikov, and Alex Weekes. Crystals and monodromy of bethe vectors. arxiv preprint arxiv: , [JK] Gordon James and Adalbert Kerber. The representation theory of the symmetric group. with a foreword by pm cohn. with an introduction by gilbert de b. robinson. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 16.

19 COMBINATORIAL WALL CROSSING AND THE MULLINEUX INVOLUTION 19 [Kle96] Alexander S Kleshchev. Branching rules for modular representations of symmetric groups iii: some corollaries and a problem of mullineux. Journal of the London Mathematical Society, 54(1):25 38, [Los15a] Ivan Losev. Cacti and cells. arxiv preprint arxiv: , [Los15b] Ivan Losev. Supports of simple modules in cyclotomic cherednik categories o. arxiv preprint arxiv: , [Mat99] Andrew Mathas. Iwahori-Hecke algebras and Schur algebras of the symmetric group, volume 15. American Mathematical Soc., [Wal94] Grant Walker. Modular schur functions. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 346(2): , [Wal96] Grant Walker. Horizontal partitions and kleshchev s algorithm. In Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, volume 120, pages Cambridge University Press, address: pdimakis@mit.edu Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA address: gyyue@mit.edu Department of Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA