arxiv:math/ v1 [math.gt] 13 Jun 2005

arxiv:math/0506229v1 [math.gt] 13 Jun 2005 LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER ABSTRACT. We investigate Khovanov homology of stable equivalence classes of link diagrams on oriented surfaces. We apply Bar-Natan s geometric formalism to this setting and using unoriented 1+1-dimensional topological quantum field theories we define new link homology theories for stable equivalences classes. 1. INTRODUCTION In this paper we consider link diagrams on oriented surfaces up to the relation of stable equivalence, that is up to homeomorphisms of surfaces, Reidemeister moves, the addition or subtraction of handles or surface components disjoint from the diagram. Stable equivalence classes of link diagrams have an equivalent formulation in terms of so called virtual link diagrams pioneered by Kauffman (see for example the review articles [6] and [4] and references therein). Many constructions for link diagrams on R 2 can be reproduced for stable equivalence classes of link diagrams on surfaces, for example, one can define the Jones polynomial. In his seminal work [7] Khovanov provided a new way to look at the Jones polynomial interpreting it as the Euler characteristic of a homology theory for links in R 3. This approach provides an invariant that is not only stronger than the Jones polynomial but also has nice functorial properties with respect to link cobordisms. The Jones polynomial may be viewed as a state sum over the 2 n smoothings of an n-crossing link diagram on R 2, with each state making a contribution to the polynomial. Each smoothing is a collection of circles being the result of resolving each crossing in one of two possible ways (indicated in Figure 3). Khovanov s insight was to associate a graded vector space to each smoothing and arrange these in such a way that by using a certain topological quantum field theory a differential may be defined leading to a chain complex associated to the link diagram. Remarkably the homotopy type of this complex is independent of the chosen diagram so its homology is an invariant. Bar-Natan has written a wonderful exposition of all this in [3]. The functorial properties of this construction were conjectured by Khovanov [7], proven by Jacobsson [5] and later re-proved in more generality by Bar-Natan [2]. Khovanov s work does not immediately extend to link diagrams on arbitrary oriented surfaces. The main difficulty arising is the following. For classical links Khovanov s complex is constructed by organising the 2 n smoothings into a cube with each edge making a contribution to the differential. These edges join smoothings with different numbers of circles and the corresponding term of the differential may be seen as fusing two circles into one circle or splitting one circle into two. For links on surfaces this is no longer the case and there may be edges joining smoothings with the same number of circles. This difficulty arises when the surface is part of the structure (as in the work of by Asaeda, Przytycki and Sikora [1]) and also for stable equivalence classes. In the latter case Manturov [10] solves this problem over the two element field F 2 by setting the differential corresponding to such 1

2 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER cube edges to be zero. The motivation for the current work was to find other possibilities for stable equivalence classes. We work geometrically following Bar-Natan [2]. The key new idea is to extend the category of cobordisms to allow unoriented cobordisms, and then to apply an unoriented topological quantum field theory to this geometric picture to obtain a link homology theory for stable equivalence classes of diagrams on surfaces. The reason for this is that now we can use projective plane minus two discs as a non-trivial cobordism from one circle to one circle extending the definition of the differential in the Khovanov picture. Here is an outline of the paper. In Section 2 we define the category of unoriented cobordisms UCob and a quotient of this, UCob /m where we quotient by a certain relation on cobordisms which we call the Möbius relation. In the manner of Bar-Natan s complex of cobordisms associated to a link diagram on R 2 (see [2]) we then define a complex of cobordisms [D] associated to a link diagram D on a closed oriented surface. In Section 3 we take a further quotient of the cobordism category, UCob /r quotienting this time by Bar-Natan s sphere, torus and 4-Tu relations. Defining Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) to be the associated homotopy category of complexes our first result is as follows. Theorem 3.2 Let D be a link diagram on a closed oriented surface. The isomorphism class of [D] in Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) is an invariant of the stable equivalence class of D. In Section 4 we introduce the notion of a 1+1-dimensional unoriented topological quantum field theory and show that such a thing is equivalent to a Frobenius algebra with one additional piece of information. Finally in Section 5 we apply an unoriented topological quantum field theory to the complex of cobordisms defined in Section 2 to obtain a complex of modules. Taking homology yields a link homology. Our main theorem is the following. Theorem 5.1 Let R be a commutative ring with unit. Let (λ, µ, t) be a solution in R to the equation 2λµ λ 2 µ 2 µ 4 t = 2. Then the triple (λ, µ, t) defines a link homology theory for stable equivalence classes of diagrams on oriented surfaces. Over a field one obtains a two parameter family of solutions (λ, µ) with µ 0. Over F 2 there are also solutions for µ = 0 and the solution (λ, µ, t) = (0, 0, 0) is Manturov s theory. In this case he obtains a bigraded theory and, as he points out, the graded Euler characteristic of this is the unnormalised Jones polynomial. Often theories will be only singly graded. For example over Q all theories from the above theorem are singly graded. One can see in this case that for any (λ, µ), µ 0 the resulting theory has Euler characteristic (now an integer) equal to the reduced Jones polynomial evaluated at q = 1. Each singly graded theory possesses a filtration and it is this that may contain interesting information. We end the paper by discussing a number of examples. 2. THE COMPLEX OF COBORDISMS FOR A LINK DIAGRAM ON A SURFACE We consider oriented link diagrams on closed oriented surfaces and define an equivalence relation on such diagrams as follows. Two diagrams are said to be stably equivalent if they are related by (1) surface homeomorphisms (2) Reidemeister moves

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 3 (3) addition or subtraction of handles to the surface (when no part of the diagram is on the handle) (4) addition or subtraction of a surface component disjoint from the diagram. As mentioned above there is an equivalent formulation in terms of link diagrams on R 2 with an additional type of virtual crossing and new virtual and semi-virtual Reidemeister moves for determining equivalence of diagrams. Given a link diagram on a closed oriented surface we wish to define a complex of cobordisms along the lines of Bar-Natan s complex for link diagrams given in [2]. First we need to establish the category of cobordisms in which we will work. Definition 2.1. UCob is the category whose objects are closed 1-manifolds and whose morphism set Mor(Γ 0, Γ 1 ) consists of triples (γ 0,, γ 1 ) where is a (possibly nonorientable) compact surface, γ i : Γ i are injective, Im(γ 0 ) Im(γ 1 ) = and Im(γ 0 ) Im(γ 1 ) =. Two such triples (γ 0,, γ 1 ) and (γ 0,, γ 1 ) are identified if there exists a homeomorphism T : such that γ i = T γ i. For a morphism (γ 0,, γ 1 ) we refer to Im(γ 0 ) as the input of and to Im(γ 1 ) as the output. The composition ( γ 0,, γ 1 ) (γ 0,, γ 1 ) is formed from the disjoint union by identifying the output of with the input of via γ 0 γ1 1. Let M be the real projective plane with two discs removed. Alternatively this can be viewed as a Möbius strip with a disc removed or a cylinder with a Möbius strip attached. Either way we think of this (non-orientable) surface as having one input and one output (up to homeomorphism it makes no difference which we choose) and refer to it as the Möbius cobordism, see Figure 1. M = FIGURE 1. The Möbius cobordism In order to obtain a complex of cobordisms for a link diagram on a surface à la Bar- Natan we need to introduce a relation among cobordisms. The Möbius relation says that the composition of M with itself is the same thing as a torus with two discs removed (see Figure 2). FIGURE 2. The Möbius relation Throughout we will follow the notational convention that cobordisms are to be read down the page. Thus G F = GF = GF.

4 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER Definition 2.2. UCob /m is the category obtained from UCob by quotienting morphisms by the equivalence relation generated by the Möbius relation. Given an additive category C the additive category Mat(C) is that as defined by Bar- Natan in [2]. Its objects are finite families {C i } i of objects C i C which for convenience will be denoted C i. A morphism F : C i C j j is a matrix F = [Fi ] of morphisms F j i : C i C j j in C. We will refer to the Fi as the matrix elements of the morphism F. Composition is defined in terms of matrix elements by the rule [F G] k i = j F j k Gj i and addition of morphisms given by matrix addition. If C is not additive then it is made so by allowing formal Z-linear combinations of morphisms. Given an oriented link diagram D on a surface we now define a complex [D] in Mat(UCob /m ), which is a generalisation of Bar-Natan s complex. Number the crossings of the diagram 1,...,n. 0-smoothing 1-smoothing FIGURE 3. A resolution of each of the n crossings of D as in Figure 3 will be called a smoothing. There are 2 n such smoothings and each is indexed by a sequence s of n 0 s and 1 s, the i th entry informing us whether the i th crossing is a 0- or 1-smoothing. The smoothing itself consists of a number of circles Γ s which we regard as an object in UCob /m. Smoothings form a poset via s < t iff all 1-smoothings in s are 1-smoothings in t. Let r(s) = number of 1-smoothings in s and k(s) = number of circles in s. If s and t are smoothings such that r(t) = r(s) + 1 and s < t then t must be identical to s outside a small disc around a 1-smoothing in t. We refer to this disc as the changing disc. In this situation we define s, t to be the number of 1-smoothings among the first j 1 crossings of t where the j th crossing is the one in the changing disc. Set [D] i = Γ s Ob(Mat(UCob /m )) where the sum is over all smoothings s with r(s) = i + n. Here n is the number of negative crossings in D. We now define a morphism d i : [D] i [D] i+1 in Mat(UCob /m )). In order to define d i we define its matrix elements (d i ) t s : Γ s Γ t where s and t are smoothings such that r(s) = i + n and r(t) = i + 1 + n. If s < t then define t s to be the surface made of cylinders except for the circle(s) making an appearance in the changing disc for which we take the cobordism M if k(s) = k(t) and a saddle cobordism (pair-of-pants) if k(s) k(t).

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 5 Now set { (d i ) t s = ( 1) s,t t s if s < t 0 else. Figure 5 gives an example of the complex [D] for the diagram D shown in Figure 4. Each smoothing has been projected onto the plane, thus revealing a virtual crossing. This is simply a by-product of the projection from the surface to the plane. Dotted arrows in the complex are zero. 1 2 3 FIGURE 4. A knot diagram on the torus 100 110 000 010 101 111 001 011 FIGURE 5. The complex of the diagram in Figure 4 It remains to show that d is indeed a differential. The situation is somewhat more complicated than in Bar-Natan s cobordism complex since we now have cobordisms formed both from saddles and from Möbius cobordisms. It is here that the Möbius relation is needed. We denote the category of complexes in the additive category Mat(UCob /m ) by Kom(Mat(UCob /m )).

6 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER Proposition 2.3. Given a diagram D, the morphism d defined above satisfies d 2 = 0 i.e. ([D], d) is an object of Kom(Mat(UCob /m )). Proof. The formula for d 2 in terms of matrix elements is (d i+1 d i ) t s = (d i+1 ) t u (d i ) u s. u This can only be non-zero when s < t in which case the sum on the right has only two non-zero terms corresponding to smoothings u and u each having exactly one of the additional 1-smoothings in t. This situation is illustrated in Figure 6, where we only show the changing disks around crossings of the additional two 1-smoothings in t. The condition that (d i+1 d i ) t s = 0 is equivalent to the anti-commutativity of this diagram. (d i ) u s (d i+1 ) t u u s (d i ) u s t (d i+1 ) t u u FIGURE 6. To show d 2 = 0 it is enough to show that all such squares anti-commute. Staring at the way the matrix elements were given a sign ±1 reveals that each square has an odd number of minus signs. Hence to show the squares above anti-commute it is equivalent to show t u u s = t u u s. One may show this by considering the corresponding planar pictures to Figure 6 in a case by case manner depending on the strands appearing in the changing circle (see [1] for a similar situation). However a slightly more abstract point of view has fewer cases and simplifies the argument. All possibilities arise in the following way. We form the cobordism of cylinders Γ s [0, 1] and to Γ s {1} we then sew on two strips. The two possible orders in which we sew these on determine the two sides of the the equation t u u s = t u u s. We can orient Γ s {1} in an arbitrary way and then each strip is compatible with this orientation or not. Three cases now arise (we write M for the Möbius cobordism and S for a saddle). Case I: both strips are compatible. In this case all cobordisms are formed from saddles and as saddles can always be re-ordered up to diffeomorphism the required equality holds. Case II: one strip compatible the other not. If the compatible strip connects two different circles then we either obtain a triviality when three circles are involved or the equality M S = M S when the non-compatible strip joins a circle to itself, or M S = S (M id) when the non-compatible strip joins the two circles. Each of these equalities is evidently true. If, on the other hand, the compatible strip connects a circle to itself we get a triviality if the non-compatible strip involves another circle, and S M = (M id) S or M M = S S if the non-compatible strip connects the same circle. For the latter case the Möbius relation ensures we have the desired equality. Case III: both strips incompatible. If there are at least three circles involved we can change orientation of one of the circles in Γ s {1} to reduce everything to Case II. If two

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 7 circles are involved we either have a triviality or M S = S (M id). When both strips are attached to the same circle then we have M M = M M or S M = S M. 3. INVARIANCE Given a diagram D on a closed oriented surface, the complex [D] defined above is clearly invariant under surface homeomorphisms. Moreover, the underlying surface of the diagram plays no role in the construction so [D] is also independent of the addition and subtraction of handles and addition and subtraction of disjoint components. It is clear that [D] cannot be invariant under Reidemeister moves and so [D] is not an invariant of stable equivalence classes of diagrams, but as in [2] by further quotienting the category UCob /m and moving to the homotopy category we obtain an invariant. We quotient UCob /m further by the relations introduced by Bar-Natan. Theses are the relations S,T, 4-Tu (Sphere, Torus and 4-Tube) as illustrated below in Figure 7. = 0 = 2 + = + S T FIGURE 7. Bar-Natan s relations 4-Tu Definition 3.1. Let UCob /r be the category obtained from UCob /m by quotienting by the equivalence relation generated by relations S,T,4-Tu. We will write Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) for the homotopy category of complexes in Mat(UCob /r ). Recall that two chain maps f, g: C1 C 2 are homotopic if there is a map h: C2 C1 1 so that f g = dh+hd. In Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) two chain maps are identified if they are homotopic. Theorem 3.2. Let D be a link diagram on a closed oriented surface. The isomorphism class of [D] in Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) is an invariant of the stable equivalence class of D. The remainder of this subsection is devoted to the proof of this theorem. We have already noted that the only thing requiring proof is invariance under Reidemeister moves. We examine these in the order RII, RIII and RI. An important difference with the work of Bar-Natan arises here in that we do not have the nice locality properties enjoyed by classical links. Also, the fact that we now have Möbius cobordisms as well as saddles in the definition of the differential creates additional difficulties. None the less, the proofs below can be seen as elaborations of those in [2]. 3.1. Reidemeister II. Let D and D be link diagrams on a surface that are identical everywhere except within a small disc within which they are as depicted in Figure 8. We will define maps of complexes F : [D ] [D] and G: [D] [D ] and a map h: [D] [D] such that GF = I and FG I = dh + hd i.e. h is a homotopy between FG and I. Once we have such F,G and h we know that [D] and [D ] are homotopy equivalent and hence in Kom /h (Mat(UCob /r )) the isomorphism class of [D] is invariant under the second Reidemeister move.

8 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER D D FIGURE 8. Suppose D has n crossings which have been numbered 1,..., n such the that the crossings in the disc above are numbered (left to right) with n 1 and n. As usual for a, b {0, 1} we let D( ab) denote the diagram where the last two crossings have been resolved to an a-smoothing and b-smoothing respectively. There is a decomposition of objects in Mat(UCob /r ) [D] = [D( 00)] [D( 10)] [D( 01)] [D( 11)] = [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] Note that here and throughout each pictorial representation is showing only a small part of an implicitly assumed whole diagram. In Bar-Natan s paper this is different: for him such a diagram means the tangle as you see it - later the planar algebra structure is used to extend this to bigger diagrams. Here we have no such planar algebra structure, so the picture shows a small piece of a full diagram. We have also suppressed any shifts. In terms of this decomposition the differential on [D] is given by the matrix d 00 0 0 0 d 10 00 d 10 0 0 d 01 00 0 d 01 0 0 d 11 10 d 11 01 d 11 This presents a notational convention to be used throughout: given a decomposition like the above the components of a map will have the source as a subscript and the target as a superscript. The absence of superscript implies target = source. Thus in the above matrix d 10 00 : [D( 00)] [D( 10)] and d 00 : [D( 00)] [D( 00)]. We now define a morphism F : [D ] [D] in terms of four components using the above decomposition of [D]. Set F 00 = 0, F 11 = 0, F 10 = Id. For the component [D ] [D( 01)] we describe F in terms of its matrix elements. Let s and t be smoothings of D and set { (F 01 ) t01 s11 s10 s = t = s 0 otherwise. Here s10 means the sequence of n 0 s and 1 s given on the first n 2 entries by s followed by 10 (and similarly for s11 and s01). Recall that s11 s10 is the (unsigned) cobordism of d 11 10 (at the smoothing given by s10) and is a disc with one output. Here is the picture that summarises the definition of F.

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 9 0 d 10 00 d 01 00 Id 0 d 11 10 d 11 01 In what follows we will need to show that certain apparently different cobordisms are in fact homeomorphic. It is convenient to use pictures for this and thus we need a pictorial representation of s11 s01. We will use the picture in Figure 9. FIGURE 9. Lemma 3.3. F is a chain map, i.e., Fd = df. [ ] i d=d 10 [ ] i+1 Id Id [ ] i d 10 [ ] d 11 10 i+1 [ ] i d 11 01 [ ] i d 01 [ ] i+1 FIGURE 10.

10 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER Proof. Referring to Figure 10 the statement Fd = df is equivalent to three things: (i) the back square commutes, (ii) the sub-diagram anti-commutes and (iii) the front square commutes. There is nothing to show for (i). For (ii) let be the sign (±1) of d 11 10 (so d11 10 = ). From the way such signs were defined it is clear that the sign of d 11 01 is. Note that the cobordism of d 11 01 is a saddle as it has no option but to join the circle seen in the middle to the left hand strand. The anti-clockwise route gives the left-hand picture in Figure 11 and the clockwise route the right-hand picture. Up to homeomorphism one is evidently the negative of the other. FIGURE 11. For (iii) we first observe that there is an anti-commutative diagram as follows. [ ] i d=d 10 [ ] i+1 d 11 10 d 11 10 [ ] i d 11 [ ] i+1. This anti-commutes because it is part of the bigger complex ([ ], d) for which d 2 = 0. Noticing that the signs of d 11 10 on the left and on the right are opposite (on the right we are in the i + 1 st group so there is one more 1-smoothing) we see that the following diagram commutes: [ ] i d 10 [ ] i+1 [ ] i d 11 [ ] i+1. Combining this with the (obviously commutative) diagram [ ] i d 11 [ ] i+1 shows the front face of Figure 10 commutes. [ ] i d 01 [ ] i+1

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 11 Now we define a map G: [D] [D ] as follows. Let s and t be smoothings of [D ]. Set G 11 = G 00 = 0, G 10 = Id { (G 01 ) t s01 = s10 s11 t = s 0 otherwise. The overline on is to remind us that the input and output of have been exchanged: if s11 s10 = (γ 0,, γ 1 ) is the cobordism of d 11 10 then s10 s11 is the cobordism (γ 1,, γ 0 ). The symbol is a disc with one input circle. Similar arguments to the above show that Gd = dg so G is a chain map. We now wish to show that F and G are homotopy inverse to one another. Lemma 3.4. (i) GF = Id (ii) FG Id. Proof. Part (i) follows immediately from the S relation. For (ii) we first need to define a homotopy. For this we need to define morphisms h i : [ ] i [ ] i 1. As above let be the sign of d 11 10 (this of course depends on the particular smoothing we are dealing with i.e. is really a collection of signs). Set h 01 11 = Id : [ ] [ ] h 00 01 = Id : [ ] [ ] All other components of h are zero. Figure 12 summarises the situation, where h is indicated from right to left, F from top to bottom and G from bottom to top. Components of h,f and G that are zero have been omitted from the diagram. d 10 00 d 01 00 (Id ) Id Id d 11 10 d (Id ) 11 01 FIGURE 12. We now claim FG I = dh + hd, i.e., h is a homotopy from FG to Id. It suffices to show this individually for the four components of [D]. We will only do this for the case of [D( 01)] which is the hardest of the four. Pictorially, starting in [D( 01)], we see that FG I is given in Figure 13 (as always reading down the page)

12 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER FIGURE 13. FG I FIGURE 14. dh + hd Now dh + hd = d 01 00 h00 01 + d10 00 h00 01 + h01 11 d11 01 which is given pictorially in Figure 14. Note that the signs of the cobordisms of d 01 00, d 10 00 and d 11 01 are all. It is clear that the middle term of Figure 13 is homeomorphic to the middle term of Figure 14 and so to show FG I = dh + hd it remains to show the equality in Figure 15. FIGURE 15. Now is either a saddle in which case the left hand term is given in Figure 16 or it is a Möbius cobordism in which case the Möbius relation shows that the left hand term is again given in Figure 16. The required equality now follows by applying the 4-Tu relation. 3.2. Reidemeister III. Let D and D be link diagrams on a surface identical everywhere except in a small disc within which they are depicted in Figure 17 We recall from [2] that for complexes B and D, a morphism G: B D is a strong deformation retraction with inclusion F : D B when GF = I and there exists a homotopy h: B B such that FG I = dh +hd and hf = 0. Proof of following lemma can be found in Bar-Natan [2] (cf. his Lemma 4.5).

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 13 FIGURE 16. The left hand term D D FIGURE 17. ( ) db 0 Lemma 3.5. If A = B C is a complex with differential d C B d and G: B D ( C ) dd 0 is a strong deformation retraction with inclusion F : D B then d C B F d defines C a differential on D C and moreover the resulting complex is homotopy equivalent to B C. We number the vertices in D and D such that the three vertices in the changing disc are from left to right n 2, n, n 1. We have ( d0 0 with differential d 1 0 d 1 ). [D] = [D( 0)] [D( 1)] [ ] = [ ] [ ] It is easy to see that map G of the previous subsection is a strong deformation retraction with inclusion F. This induces a strong deformation retraction G: [ ] [ ] with inclusion F : [ ] [ ]. By Lemma 3.5 we have (1) [ ] [ ] [ ] ( ) d100 0 where the differential on the right is d 1 0 F d (here d 100 is the differential in [ ]). 1 Similarly we have [D ] = [D ( 0)] [D ( 1)] [ ] = [ ] [ ] ( ) d with differential 0 0 d 1 0 d. Again we have a strong deformation retraction G: [ ] 1 [ ] with inclusion F : [ ] [ ] and again by Lemma 3.5 (2) [ ] [ ] [ ]

14 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER ( ) d 100 0 where the differential on the right is d 1 0 F. d 1 Lemma 3.6. d 1 0F = d 1 0F Proof. The map d 1 0F is given by the following diagram. 0 Id Id 0 d 101 100 d 001 000 d 011 010 d 111 110 From this we can see that d 1 0F is given by the cobordisms in Figure 18. FIGURE 18. d 1 0F In a similar way d 1 0F is described in Figure 19. It is not hard to see that the signs of these cobordisms are equal as indicated in the pictures. The left (resp. right) hand term in Figure 18 is homeomorphic to the right (resp. left) hand figure in Figure 19.

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 15 FIGURE 19. d 1 0F Since ([ ], d 1 ) = ([ ], d 1 ) and ([ ], d 100 ) = ([ ], d 100 ) the above lemma implies that the complex on the right hand side of (1) is the same as the complex on the right hand side of (2). Thus proving invariance under Reidemeister III. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] 3.3. Reidemeister I. For this move, Bar-Natan s proof works without further modification. As above we must interpret his pictures as part of a full diagram rather than a one crossing tangle (which is unproblematic) and then it is not hard to see that the Möbius cobordism never appears here so Bar-Natan s proof remains valid. 4. UNORIENTED 1+1-DIMENSIONAL TQFTS Let R be a commutative ring with unit and let Mod R be the category of projective R-modules of finite type. Definition 4.1. An unoriented 1+1-dimensional topological quantum field theory (TQFT) over R is a functor F : UCob Mod R satisfying the following conditions. (1) F( ) = R. (2) For any disjoint closed 1-manifolds Γ and Γ there is a natural identification F(Γ Γ ) = F(Γ) R F(Γ ). (3) If a cobordism is a disjoint union of two cobordisms 1 and 2 then F() = F( 1 ) R F( 2 ). Isomorphism classes of unoriented 1+1-dimensional TQFTs can be described in terms of commutative Frobenius algebras over R together with one additional piece of information. We recall that a commutative Frobenius algebra over R is a unital, commutative R-algebra V which as an R-module is projective of finite type together together with module homomorphisms ǫ: V R and : V V V such that and (Id m) ( Id) = m = (m Id) (Id ) (Id ǫ) = Id = (ǫ Id) where m: V V V is the multiplication in V and i: R V is the unit map.

16 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER Definition 4.2. If V is a commutative Frobenius algebra over R and θ V, we say that θ is a Möbius element if (3) θ 3 = m( (θ)) where m and are the multiplication and comultiplication in V. Two pairs (V, θ) and (V, θ ) are equivalent if there exists an isomorphism of Frobenius algebras f : V V such that f(θ) = θ. An unoriented 1+1-dimensional TQFT F : UCob Mod R has an underlying pair (V, θ) where V is a commutative Frobenius algebra over R and θ is a Möbius element. We take V = F(circle) and θ = F(Möbius strip)(1), where we consider the Möbius strip as a cobordism with empty input and one output circle so F(Möbius strip): R V. To see that V is a commutative Frobenius algebra it suffices to note that there is a functor Cob UCob where Cob is the category of oriented cobordisms. Then the usual discussion of (oriented) TQFTs tells us that V is a commutative Frobenius algebra. To see that θ is a Möbius element note that in UCob we have the relation RP 2 RP 2 RP 2 = T 2 RP 2 By removing a disc (an output) from each of these and noting that connected sum with RP 2 is equivalent to attaching a Möbius band we have the picture in Figure 20 from which it follows that θ 3 = m( (θ)). FIGURE 20. We note also that if M is the Möbius cobordism of the previous sections and F then F(M): V V is multiplication by θ. The (hardly necessary) proof of this fact is contained in Figure 21. FIGURE 21. In fact the above association of a pair (V, θ) to an unoriented TQFT induces a bijection between such TQFTs and commutative Frobenius algebras over R with Möbius element. Proposition 4.3. Isomorphism classes of unoriented 1+1-dimensional TQFTs over R are in bijective correspondence with equivalence classes of pairs (V, θ) where V is a commutative Frobenius algebra over R and θ is a Möbius element.

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 17 Proof. We have already shown that an unoriented 1+1-dimensional TQFT has an underlying commutative Frobenius algebra over R and it is clear that the equivalence class of this depends only on the isomorphism class of the TQFT. We now show that every pair (V, θ) gives rise to an unoriented TQFT. By standard arguments we can produce from V a functor F : Cob Mod R satisfying (1),(2) and (3) above, where Cob is the oriented 1+1-dimensional cobordism category. Given any oriented cobordism there is always an orientation reversing homeomorphism and it follows that F quotients through the subcategory UCob 0 UCob of orientable cobordisms. As a non-orientable surface can be decomposed as an orientable surface with several Möbius strips attached, to extend F : UCob 0 Mod R to UCob it suffices to define F on the Möbius strip viewed as a cobordism between and S 1. We do this by defining F(Möbius strip): R V by 1 θ. There is only one additional relation to consider, namely that the connected sum of a surface with three projective planes is homeomorphic to the connected sum of the surface with a torus and a projective plane. As θ is a Möbius element it satisfies by definition the relation in Figure 20 and hence the functor defined above satisfies F( RP 2 RP 2 RP 2 ) = F( T 2 RP 2 ) as required. Moreover, since multiplication in V is commutative it is clear that our definition of F on cobordisms is independent of the way we decompose our surface. Standard arguments now show that the isomorphism class of the resulting unoriented TQFT depends only on the equivalence class of the pair (V, θ) and moreover that this construction provides the inverse to the above. 5. APPLYING AN UNORIENTED TQFT TO GET LINK HOMOLOGY Suppose we have a 1+1-dimensional unoriented TQFT F : UCob Mod R which satisfies relations S,T, 4-Tu and the Möbius relation. This gives rise to a functor UCob /r Mod R which can be extended (by taking formal direct sums to genuine direct sums) to a functor and hence to a functor Mat(UCob /r ) Mod R F : Kom(Mat(UCob /r )) Kom(Mod R ). It is clear that the composition of this with taking homology factors through the homotopy category on the left. So given a link diagram D on a closed oriented surface, Theorem 3.2 above implies that the homology of F ([D]) is an invariant of the stable equivalence class of D. Thus, F gives a link homology theory for stable equivalence classes of diagrams on surfaces. The task is now to find unoriented 1+1-dimensional TQFTs which satisfy relations S,T,4-Tu and the Möbius relation. In terms of the underlying Frobenius algebra V with Möbius element θ, the relation T says that dimv = 2 and the Möbius relation (see Figure 2) is equivalent to (4) θ 2 = m( (1)). In fact the Möbius relation says θ 2 v = m( (v)) for all v in V, but this is equivalent to (4). Figure 22 shows that m( (v)) = m( (1))v = θ 2 v for all v V. Let V be a commutative Frobenius algebra over R which satisfies relations S,T,4-Tu. Each θ V satisfying equation (4) is a Möbius element and hence by Proposition 4.3 (V, θ) defines an unoriented TQFT. This TQFT satisfies relations S,T,4-Tu and the Möbius

18 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER FIGURE 22. relation and hence by the discussion above gives a link homology theory for stable equivalence classes of diagrams on surfaces. We now present our main result. Theorem 5.1. Let R be a commutative ring with unit. Let (λ, µ, t) be a solution in R to the equation (5) 2λµ λ 2 µ 2 µ 4 t = 2. Then the triple (λ, µ, t) defines a link homology theory for stable equivalence classes of diagrams on oriented surfaces. Proof. Consider the polynomial ring Z[h, t]. In [8] Khovanov defined a commutative Frobenius algebra over Z[h, t] as follows. Let V be the rank two free module over Z[h, t] on basis 1 and x and define multiplication by and comultiplication by 11 = 1, 1x = x1 = x, xx = hx + t1 (1) = 1 x + x 1 h1 1, (x) = x x + t1 1. The unit and counit are given by ǫ(1) = 0, ǫ(x) = 1, i(1) = 1. This is a Frobenius algebra which satisfies the S,T and 4-Tu relation and hence gives rise to a link homology theory. Let ψ: Z[h, t] R be a homomorphism of rings such that ψ(1) = 1. This turns R into a Z[h, t]-module and we can define V ψ = V Z[h,t] R with comultiplication and counit defined by 1 and ǫ 1. The resulting algebra V ψ is a commutative Frobenius algebra over R. Now let R and (λ, µ, t) be as in the statement of the theorem. Define ψ: Z[h, t] R by t t, h λ 2 µ 2 t Consider the Frobenius algebra V ψ obtained as above, which again satisfies relations S,T and 4-Tu. Now define An easy computation shows θ = λ1 + µx V. m( (1)) = 2x h1 = 2x + (λ 2 + µ 2 t)1.

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 19 Furthermore θ 2 = λ 2 1 + 2λµx + µ 2 x 2 = λ 2 1 + 2λµx + µ 2 (hx + t1) = λ 2 1 + 2λµx + µ 2 ( λ 2 µ 2 t)x + µ 2 t1 = (λ 2 + µ 2 t)1 + (2λµ µ 2 λ 2 µ 4 t)x = (λ 2 + µ 2 t)1 + 2x. Thus θ 2 = m( (1)) which finishes the proof because we have a commutative Frobenius algebra V ψ satisfying relations S,T and 4-Tu and an element θ satisfying (4). If R is a field the above result can be stated more simply. Corollary 5.2. If R is a field then each pair (λ, µ) with µ 0 defines a link homology. Proof. Since R is a field and µ 0 then t is determined by λ and µ. Notice that over F 2 there are also solutions corresponding to µ = 0 giving a total of six theories: (0, 0, 0), (0, 0, 1), (1, 0, 0), (1, 0, 1), (0, 1, 0) and (1, 1, 1). Khovanov s original link homology is bi-graded which allows him to recover the Jones polynomial. If, following Khovanov, we take deg(1) = 1 and deg(x) = 1 then the ring Z[h, t] should be graded with deg(h) = 2 and deg(t) = 4. To be consistent with this R above must be a graded ring and deg(λ) = 1, deg(µ) = 1 and deg(t) = 4. Over Q the resulting theories are all singly graded. For each of these the Euler characteristic, χ, is the unnormalised Jones polynomial evaluated at q = 1. To see this recall that the Euler characteristic of the homology of a complex is the same as the Euler characteristic of the complex itself and so χ = i ( 1) i dim(h i (D)) = ( 1) i dim(f ([D] i )) i = ( 1) i dim(f(γ s )) = ( 1) i i s smoothings r(s)=i+n s smoothings r(s)=i+n 2 k(s). Comparing with the definition of the Jones polynomial we see that the right hand side is the unnormalised Jones polynomial evaluated at 1. Example 5.3. The most general theory from the above is the theory obtained by taking R = Z[λ, µ, t]/ 2λµ λ 2 µ 2 µ 4 t 2. For convenience we record the structure of the Frobenius algebra for this theory. As an R-module it is free on generators 1 and x and has multiplication and comultiplication 11 = 1, 1x = x1 = x, xx = ( λ 2 µ 2 t)x + t1 (1) = 1 x + x 1 + (λ 2 + µ 2 t)1 1 (x) = x x + t1 1. The counit is ǫ(1) = 0, ǫ(x) = 1 and the Möbius element is θ = λ1 + µx. To get a bigraded theory we must graded R with with deg(λ) = 1, deg(µ) = 1 and deg(t) = 4. We end by discussing the relevance of the above theorem to certain well known link homology theories.

20 VLADIMIR TURAEV AND PAUL TURNER Example 5.4. Khovanov s original link homology (see [7] and [3]). Khovanov s original link homology with coefficients in R can be defined from the universal theory over Z[h, t] via the map ψ: Z[h, t] R taking 1 1, h 0 and t 0. Thus in order to extend this to stable equivalence classes on surfaces we must find a solution to equation (5) with t = 0 also satisfying h = λ 2 µ 2 t = 0 i.e. λ = 0. For R = Z there is no µ making (0, µ, 0) a solution to (5) which shows there is no extension of Khovanov s original theory over Z to stable equivalence classes of links on surfaces (at least using the methods of this paper). Similar comments hold using Q and F p for p 2 a prime. For R = F 2 both (0, 0, 0) and (0, 1, 0) are solutions of (5) and thus over F 2 Khovanov s theory does extend. The first of these corresponding to θ = 0 is bi-graded and was investigated by Manturov [10]. He observes that the graded Euler characteristic (which can be computed from the graded Euler characteristic of the chain complex) is the unnormalised Jones polynomial of the link. For the second solution one can also formulate a bi-graded theory by working over F 2 [u] where deg(u) = 1 and considering the solution of (5) given by (0, u, 0) which corresponds to θ = ux. Example 5.5. Lee theory (see [9]). Lee theory over R is defined by taking h = 0 and t = 1. In order to extend to stable equivalence classes we must find a solution to equation (5) with t = 1 also satisfying h = λ 2 µ 2 t = 0 i.e. we must find λ, µ R such that λ 2 = µ 2 and 2λµ = 2. Over Z there are no such λ and µ, so Lee theory over Z does not extend to stable equivalence classes on surfaces. Over a field the solutions are given by (λ, λ 1, 1) where λ 4 = 1. Over Q there are no solutions and over C there are four solutions corresponding to the four 4 th roots of 1. Over fields of finite characteristic one finds interesting solutions e.g. over F 17 one has the solution (2, 9, 1). In these cases Lee theory extends to stable equivalence classes on surfaces. Over F 2 there are two solutions (0, 0, 1) and (1, 1, 1). These are isomorphic to the two theories arising from Khovanov s original theory over F 2 described above. Example 5.6. Bar-Natan theory (see [2]). Bar-Natan theory over R is obtained by taking h = 1 and t = 0. The equation h = 1 becomes λ 2 µ 2 t = 1 i.e. λ 2 = 1 and equation (5) becomes 2λµ + µ 2 = 2. Over Z or Q there is no solution to these two equations and over F 2 there is a unique solution (1, 0, 0). Over other finite fields there are interesting non-trivial solutions e.g. over F 5 there is the solution (3, 1, 0). In the bigraded setting one can take R = F 2 [v] with v in degree 1. Then (v, 0, 0) gives a theory whose Frobenius algebra has multiplication 11 = 1, 1x = x1 = x, xx = v 2 x and comultiplication (1) = 1 x + x 1 + v 2 1 1, (x) = x x. The counit is ǫ(1) = 0, ǫ(x) = 1 and the Möbius element is θ = v1. This theory is related to Manturov s theory: one can filter the chain complex by powers of v to produce a spectral sequence (similar to that in [11]) whose E 2 -page is Manturov s theory and which converges to this bigraded Bar-Natan theory.

LINK HOMOLOGY AND UNORIENTED TOPOLOGICAL QUANTUM FIELD THEORY 21 As a final remark we note that Khovanov has interpreted some of the algebras defining link homologies in terms of the equivariant cohomology of S 2 and we can do the same here. Let G = Z/2 act on S 2 by a rotation through π about a fixed axis. In this case we have H G(pt; F 2 ) = H (RP ; F 2 ) = F 2 [v]. and H G (S2 ; F 2 ) = F 2 [v, x]/ x 2 = v 2 x = F 2 [v][x]/ x 2 = v 2 x. We see that this is the algebra of bigraded Bar-Natan link homology above and the Möbius element is the image of the generator of H G (pt; F 2) under homomorphism induced from S 2 pt. Acknowledgments The second author was supported by the European Commission through a Marie Curie fellowship and thanks the Institut de Recherche Mathématiques Avancée in Strasbourg for their hospitality. REFERENCES [1] M. Asaeda, J. Przytycki and A. Sikora, Categorification of the Kauffman bracket skein module of I-bundles over surfaces, Alg. Geom. Top., 4 (2004), 1177-1210. [2] D. Bar-Natan, Khovanov s homology for tangles and cobordisms, math.gt/0410495, 2004. [3] D. Bar-Natan, On Khovanov s categorification of the Jones polynomial, Alg. Geom. Top., 2 (2002), 337-370. [4] R. Fenn, L. Kauffman and V. Manturov, Virtual Knot Theory, math.gt/0405428. [5] M. Jacobsson, An invariant of link cobordisms from Khovanov homology, Alg. Geom. Top., 4 (2004), 1211-1251. [6] L. Kauffman and V. Manturov, Virtual Knots and Links, math.gt/0502014. [7] M. Khovanov, A categorification of the Jones polynomial, Duke Math J., 101 (2000), 359-426. [8] M. Khovanov, Link homology and Frobenius extensions, math.qa/0411447, 2004. [9] E. Lee, An endomorphism of the Khovanov invariant, math.gt/0210213, 2002. [10] V. Manturov, The Khovanov complex for virtual links, math.gt/0501317. [11] P. Turner, Calculating Bar-Natan s characteristic two Khovanov homology, math.gt/0411225, 2004. INSTITUT DE RECHERCHE MATHÉMATIQUE AVANCÉE, 7 RUE RENÉ DESCARTES, 67000 STRASBOURG, FRANCE E-mail address: turaev@math.u-strasbg.fr SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICAL AND COMPUTER SCIENCES, HERIOT-WATT UNIVERSITY, EDINBURGH EH14 4AS, SCOTLAND E-mail address: paul@ma.hw.ac.uk