text:
# Dissipative dynamics of spins in quantum dots

(March 16, 2024)

## Abstract

We present a theory for the dissipation of electronic spins trapped in quantum dots due to their coupling to the host lattice acoustic phonon modes. Based on the theory of dissipative two level systems for the spin dynamics, we derive a relation between the spin dissipative bath, the electron confinement, and the electron-phonon interaction. We find that there is an energy scale, typically smaller than the electronic lateral confinement energy, which sets the boundary between different dissipative regimes .

Manipulating quantum states of matter to achieve new ways of processing information has been a subject of intense research in the last decade Chuang00 . There is now a wide variety of proposals to take advantage of the internal transformations of quantum systems to perform the so-called quantum information processing (QIP) Loss98 . In particular, condensed matter systems such as SQUIDS and semiconductor quantum dots are seen as possible candidates for future implementations of QIP devices. In these systems, it is possible to find or create well defined two-level quantum states that potentially fulfill the minima criteria proposed by Di Vicenzo to be quantum bits (qubits) Vicenzo95 . However, apart from the technical difficulties to implement acceptable qubits, nature imposes another limitation which is ubiquitous. This comes from the impossibility of perfectly isolating a complex quantum system from its environment that results in the loss of quantum coherence amir83 ; Leggett87 .

In this paper we investigate the decoherence of electronic spins in quantum dots due to their coupling to the acoustic phonon modes of the host lattice. In few-electron quantum dots the electronic spin is a good candidate for a qubit and the confinement of the electronic wave function plays a major role in isolating the spins from most energy relaxation channels. In fact, using a second order perturbation approach, Khaetskii and Nazarov Khaetskii  have evaluated the spin-flip transition rate between Zeeman sublevels due to its coupling to acoustic phonons. They showed that, since angular momentum conservation requires the spin-flip process to involve a virtual transition between excited orbital states, the spin-flip rates are suppressed as $`\omega _0^4`$, where $`\omega _0`$ is the lateral confinement energy. According to their result, even for $`\omega _01meV`$ , the spin-flip rates can be of the order of milliseconds.

Quantum dots can be fabricated by confining a two dimensional electron gas of a semiconductor heterostructure into a region of the order of the Fermi wavelength. In the “lateral quantum dots” (LQD) this confinement is done laterally, by means of surface electrostatic metallic gates. In “vertical quantum dots” (VQD) the electron gas is confined vertically by etching techniques that create a circular pillar heterostructure. The typical lateral confinement length achieved with these fabrication techniques are of the order of hundreds of nanometers, which leads to $`\omega _01meV`$ for LQD Hanson03  and $`\omega _035meV`$ for the VQD Fujisawa02 . Much higher confinement energies can be achieved in self-assembled quantum dots (SAQD) which consist of ensembles of dislocation free semiconductor nano-crystals embedded into a semiconducting matrix of different band gap BimbergBook . For InAs:GaAs SAQD Gilberto99  the electronic wave function extent is of the order of $`50\text{Å}`$, resulting in $`\omega _050meV`$. For all the above systems single electron charging is easily observable due to their large Coulomb blockade gap, which can be of the order of $`2meV`$ for LQD and VQD and as large as $`20meV`$ for SAQD.

Although no experiment has so far been able to determine directly the decoherence rate, $`\frac{1}{T_2}`$, of spins in quantum dots, there are several attempts to indirectly determine lower bounds to the spin relaxation rate $`\frac{1}{T_1}`$. Paillard and co-workers Paillard01  have studied the time-resolved photoluminescence of InAs:GaAs SAQD and observed that, within the time scale of an exciton lifetime, the carrier spins are totally frozen. Fujisawa and co-workers Fujisawa02  have demonstrated that orbital sublevel transitions of VQD involving spin-flips have relaxation times that are 4 to 5 orders of magnitude longer than those which do not involve spin-flips. This gives an idea of the degree of isolation of the spins in the VQD. More recently, Hanson and co-workers Hanson03  used short voltage pulse sequences to measure the relaxation time of spins in LQD and concluded that the lower bound of $`T_1`$ is $`50`$$`\mu s`$ for a magnetic field of $`7.5T`$.

In quantum dots, the most important channels of dissipation for the spin are indirect and via the spin-orbit interaction. The orbital dissipative dynamics on its turn is dominated by the electron-phonon interactions. It is thus desirable to have a theoretical description which can connect the spin and orbital dissipation channels. A similar problem of indirect dissipation appears on a completely different context of electron tunneling between the atoms of a diatomic molecule embedded in a viscous environment Onuchic95 . Here we analyze the spin dissipation in a quantum dot from the same perspective. We derive an effective “bath” spectral density seen by the spins that results from the spin-orbit coupling and the orbital damping.

Following previous theoretical works we treat the electrons in the effective mass approximation and consider the confining potential for the envelope wave function as parabolic. This was shown Matagne02  to be a good approximation for the LQD and VQD with low electronic filling. Also, for SAQD this phenomenological model describes the orbital electronic density of states probed by magneto-capacitance measurements with fine accuracy up to the 3th excited level of the dot Gilberto99 . We further assume that the harmonic frequency in the direction perpendicular to the quantum dot plane, $`\omega _{}`$, is much higher than the lateral harmonic frequency $`\omega _0`$. Therefore the relevant low energy orbital degrees of freedom are in the $`xy`$ plane whereas the orbital dynamics in the $`z`$ direction is practically frozen. This is a reasonable assumption even for typical InAs:GaAs SAQD since $`\frac{\omega _{}}{\omega _0}810`$ Gilberto99 . For the spin degrees of freedom, besides the Zeeman term arising from an external magnetic field in the $`z`$ direction, we include the Dresselhaus spin-orbit interaction projected on the $`x,y`$ plane Ivchenko95  which is responsible for the coupling between the spins and the dissipative phonon bath. Thus, apart from a zero point energy on the $`z`$ direction, the spin-orbit Hamiltonian will be

$`H_{SO}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}}\sigma _z+\omega _0\left(a_x^{}a_x+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)\beta \sigma _xP_x`$ (1)
$`+\omega _0\left(a_y^{}a_y+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right)+\beta \sigma _yP_y`$
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=g\mu _BB_z`$ (we use $`\mathrm{}=1`$), $`\beta \gamma _ck_z^2=\gamma _cm^{}\omega _{}`$ (with $`\gamma _c`$ being the Kane parameter Ivchenko95 ), $`m^{}`$ is the electron effective mass and $`g`$ its gyromagnetic factor. The operators $`a_{x\left(y\right)}`$ are the usual ladder operator for the $`x\left(y\right)`$ direction. Notice that although we set an external field for the spins, we are neglecting any diamagnetic contribution for the orbital degrees of freedom like in the Fock-Darwin description. This simplification allows us to separate the degrees of freedom in the $`x`$ and $`y`$ directions and can be well justified for $`\omega _0\frac{\omega _c}{2}`$, where $`\omega _c=eB/\left(m^{}c\right)`$. One should also notice that, as opposed to the notation on reference Leggett87 , $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ here plays the role of a “tunneling” field rather than the “bias” field, even though it refers to the $`z`$ direction. This happens because dissipation occurs only in the $`xy`$ plane of the dot.

The electron-phonon coupling in this restricted subspace can be written as

$$H_{eph}=\underset{𝐪,\lambda }{}\omega _{𝐪,\lambda }b_{𝐪,\lambda }^{}b_{𝐪,\lambda }+\frac{C_{𝐪,\lambda }}{\sqrt{V}}e^{i𝐪.𝐫}\left(b_{𝐪,\lambda }^{}+b_{𝐪,\lambda }\right)$$
(2)
where $`C_{𝐪,\lambda }`$ is the electron-phonon coupling for phonons with polarization $`\lambda `$ and frequency $`\omega _{𝐪,\lambda }`$ , and $`𝐫=(x,y,z)`$ is the electron position operator. Here we consider only the piezoelectric and deformation potential interactions with acoustic phonon modes in zinc-blende structures Cardona . It can be shown that within the linear response approximation for the phonon system the electron-phonon Hamiltonian (Eq.2) is mapped into the *bath of oscillators* model amir83  with the spectral function given by

$$J_s\left(\omega \right)=m^{}\omega _D^2\delta _s\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^s\theta \left(\omega _D\omega \right),$$

where $`s=3`$ for the piezoelectric interaction, with dimensionless coupling $`\delta _3=\frac{\left(e_m\right)_{14}^2\omega _D}{35\pi m^{}\rho }\left(\frac{4}{3v_t^5}+\frac{1}{v_l^5}\right)`$, and $`s=5`$ for the deformation potential, with $`\delta _5=\frac{a_{c\mathrm{\Gamma }}^2\omega _D^3}{2\pi \rho m^{}v_l^7}`$, where $`\omega _D`$ is the Debye frequency, $`v_l`$ and $`v_t`$ are the longitudinal and transverse sound velocities respectively, $`\rho `$ is the material density, $`\left(e_m\right)_{14}`$ is the electromechanical tensor for zinc-blende structures Cardona , and $`a_{c,\mathrm{\Gamma }}`$ is the deformation potential in the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ point Cardona . $`\theta `$ is the Heaviside step function.

Now, since the spin degree of freedom is coupled to the orbital motion of the electron, we can adopt the prescription of reference Onuchic95  to extract the spectral function of the effective heat bath to which the spin is now coupled. As opposed to the case of reference Onuchic95  where both the “spin” and the phonon degrees of freedom are coupled to the position of the orbit, here we have the phonon coupled to the position (Eq.2) and the spin to the momentum of the electron (Eq.1). This leads to a significant change on the “effective bath” spectral function, namely

$$J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)=m^{}\beta ^2\frac{\delta _s\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^{s+2}}{Z\left(\omega \right)^2+\delta _s^2\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^{2s}}\theta \left(\omega _D\omega \right),$$
(3)
where $`Z\left(\omega \right)\left(\frac{\omega _0}{\omega _D}\right)^2\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^2\left(1+\delta _s\varphi _s\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)\right)`$, and $`\varphi _s\left(x\right)\frac{2}{\pi }𝒫_0^1x^s/\left(y^3yx^2\right)𝑑y=\frac{x^{s2}}{\pi }\left(B(x,s,0)+\left(1\right)^sB(x,s,0)\right)`$, with $`B`$ being the generalized incomplete *beta function*. For $`x1`$ we can approximate $`\varphi _s\left(x\right)\frac{2}{\pi }\left(\frac{1}{s2}+\frac{x^2}{s4}\right)`$

For most semiconductors used in the fabrication of quantum dots the dimensionless constants $`\delta _3`$ and $`\delta _5`$ are of the order of $`10^2`$ and $`10^6`$ respectively. For instance, using the bulk physical paramenters Cardona  we obtain, in $`GaAs`$ $`\delta _3=355`$ and $`\delta _5=1.95\times 10^6`$ and in $`InAs`$ $`\delta _3=149`$ and $`\delta _5=5.03\times 10^6`$. Furthermore, the typical frequency for the spin dynamics is much smaller than $`\omega _D3050meV`$, which suggests an asymptotic analysis of $`J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)`$. In order to do that we should first notice that $`J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)`$, Eq. 3, is peaked at $`\omega =\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$, where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ is defined as the solution of $`Z\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_s\right)=0`$. For $`\omega _0\omega _D`$ this solution is given by:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_s\omega _0\sqrt{\frac{(s2)}{(s2)+\frac{2\delta _s}{\pi }}}.$$

In the weak coupling limit, i.e., $`\delta _s1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s\omega _0\left(1\frac{\delta _s}{\pi \left(s2\right)}\right)`$ and the resonance at $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ corresponds to the harmonic frequency of the orbital dynamics, shifted by the electron-phonon coupling. However, for $`\delta _s1`$, the peak originally centered at the lateral confinement frequency, $`\omega _0`$, is drastically shifted to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s=\omega _0\sqrt{\frac{(s2)\pi }{2\delta _s}}`$. In the low frequency range, defined by $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ and $`\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\left(\frac{\omega _0}{\omega _D}\frac{1}{\delta _s}\right)^{1/s}`$, we obtain

$$J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)m^{}\beta ^2\delta _s\left(\frac{\omega _D}{\omega _0}\right)^4\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^{s+2}.$$
(4)
Note that in this limit the effective spectral function felt by the spins is always super-ohmic, with a power $`s+2`$. On the other hand, in the high frequency limit, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s\omega \omega _D`$, the spectral function can be approximated by

$$J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)m^{}\beta ^2\frac{\pi ^2\left(s2\right)^2}{4\delta _s}\left(\frac{\omega }{\omega _D}\right)^{s2}.$$
(5)
In this limit the spectral function has a power $`s2`$ that can even be sub-ohmic. The behavior of $`J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)`$ is sketched in figure 1 for the piezoelectric interaction ($`s=3`$).

All this complex structure of the effective spectral function will provide us with a new physics for the system. Within the adiabatic renormalization scheme, the fast modes of the bath, i.e. those with frequency much higher than $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, can quickly adjust to the spin flip motion and are successively integrated out by a Born-Oppenheimer approximation Leggett87 .

At long times the spin flips coherently with a renormalized Zeeman frequency $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$, dressed by a Franck-Condon (FC) factor, which represents the polarization cloud of the high frequency phonon-orbit complex, given by :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_r=\mathrm{\Delta }e^{F_s\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_r\right)},$$
(6)
where $`F\left(z\right)=\frac{1}{2}_{pz}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \frac{J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)}{\omega ^2}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\omega }{2T}\right)`$ is the FC factor Leggett87  with $`p`$ being an unimportant dimensionless number much larger than 1. In the low frequency limit $`z\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ the FC factor is dominated by the region $`\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ where $`\frac{J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)}{\omega ^2}`$ can be well approximated by a Lorentzian of weight $`\frac{1}{\left|Z^{}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_s\right)\right|}`$ and width $`ϵ_s=\frac{\omega _D\delta _s\mathrm{\Omega }_s^s}{\left|Z^{}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_s\right)\right|}`$. For $`\delta _s1`$, to the leading order in $`\delta _s^1`$ we have $`Z^{}\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_s\right)=2\frac{\omega _D}{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}\left(\frac{\omega _0}{\omega _D}\right)^2`$ and thus $`ϵ_s\frac{\omega _D\pi \left(s2\right)}{4}\left(\frac{\omega _0}{\omega _D}\sqrt{\frac{(s2)\pi }{2\delta _s}}\right)^{s1}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r\mathrm{\Delta }`$, the solution for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ involves integration over the entire spectrum of $`J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)`$, where most of the weight is concentrated around the peak centered at $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$, and thus the lower limit of integration can be extended to zero, yielding

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_r\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}{2T_0}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_s}{2T}\right)\right\},$$

where $`T_0=\frac{2\omega _0^2}{\pi m^{}\beta ^2}`$. For temperatures $`T\mathrm{\Omega }_s`$ we then have $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{T}{T_0}\right\}`$. From this point onwards we restrict our discussion to the piezoelectric electron-phonon coupling which leads to a larger bath spectral density at low frequencies. In the low frequency limit, defined by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$ , the dynamics is dominated by a super-ohmic relaxation with a power $`s+2`$ (see Eq. 4). This allows the spin to present coherent damped oscillations with a decoherence rate Leggett87  $`\frac{1}{T_2}=2J_{eff}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_r\right)\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}{2T}\right)`$, given by

$$\frac{1}{T_2}2m^{}\beta ^2\delta _3\left(\frac{\omega _D}{\omega _0}\right)^4\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}{\omega _D}\right)^5\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}{2T}\right).$$

Except for the renormalized Zeeman frequency $`\mathrm{\Delta }_r`$, this is essentially the spin-flip rate from Khaetskii and Nazarov Khaetskii  which, for $`GaAs`$ quantum dots with $`m^{}\beta ^2O\left(\mu eV\right)10^9s^1`$, $`\omega _0=1meV`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0.025meV`$, gives decoherence times of the order of milliseconds . One should note however that, since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_3O\left(0.1\omega _0\right)`$, for Zeeman splittings in the range $`\mathrm{\Delta }0.11meV`$ the perturbative result is only applicable for dots with lateral confinement energies $`\omega _01meV`$. This is usually the case then for SAQD, in which one can have $`\omega _050meV`$. For the LQD and VQD $`\omega _0O\left(1meV\right)`$ and thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ can go beyond this perturbative limit. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$, the relaxation is dominated by the resonance of the spin with the orbit-plus-phonons composite at frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }_3`$. This resonance has a linewidth of $`ϵ_3\left(\frac{\omega _0^2}{\omega _D}\right)\frac{\pi ^2}{8\delta _s}`$ which qualitatively determines the decoherence rate of the spin in this intermediate range of frequencies.

In the higher frequency range $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _D`$ the integral on equation (6) is dominated by the high frequency part of $`J_{eff}\left(\omega \right)`$. For $`s>3`$ this integral is algebraic and only leads to a small correction. However, if $`s3`$ the behavior is qualitatively different and dominated by the lower limit of the integration which has an “infrared divergence”. For the piezoelectric interaction ($`s=3`$), it behaves at low temperatures $`T\mathrm{\Theta }_D`$ as

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}{\omega _D}=\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\omega _D}\right)^{\frac{1}{1K}},$$

where $`K=\frac{m^{}\beta ^2}{\omega _D}\frac{\pi ^2\left(s2\right)^2}{8\delta _s}1.`$ In this “high frequency region”, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_s\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _D,`$ that can be achieved for $`\omega _01meV`$ (“large” quantum dots), the decoherence will be dominated by an ohmic-like dissipation given by Eq. 5, which yields a decoherence rate

$$\frac{1}{T_2}m^{}\beta ^2\frac{\pi ^2}{2\delta _s}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_r}{\omega _D}\right).$$

Figure 2 shows the behavior of $`J_{eff}`$ for $`GaAs`$ and $`InAs`$ quantum dots. The darkest region to the left (right) of the brighter stripe (corresponding to the peak) is the super-ohmic (ohmic) dissipation. A perpendicular magnetic field will increase the lateral confinement according to the Fock-Darwin energy $`\omega _{FD}=\sqrt{\omega _0^2+\frac{1}{4}\omega _c^2}`$. This is the case for the experiment on reference Hanson03  where the magnetic fields are of the order of $`10T`$ and thus the cyclotron frequency $`\omega _c`$ contribution can be higher than $`\omega _0`$. The density map of Figure 2 is then a guide for one to reach lowest decoherence rates given the lateral confinement energy of the dot and the Zeeman splitting $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$.

Thus, we conclude that the piezoelectric electron-phonon coupling only leads to large decoherence times, as predicted by the second-order perturbation theory, if the $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{\omega _0}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\delta _3}}`$. Otherwise the decoherence rate has a completely different behavior leading to much higher decoherence rates. This suggests that as far as the decoherence due to acoustic phonons is concerned, SAQD better decouple the electronic spin degree of freedom from the environment. Nevertheless one should note that there are other decoherence mechanisms due to phonons. In reference woods02  other electron phonon mechanisms were considered extending the analysis of Khaetskii and Nazarov Khaetskii . It has also been argued Li98 ; Verzelen00 ; Sauvage02  that in SAQD, a resonance between the lateral confinement frequency and the longitudinal optical (LO) phonon mode can lead to a more efficient channel of orbital energy dissipation. In this scenario the orbital relaxation rate should be determined by the LO relaxation rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{op}`$(in bulk $`GaAs`$ $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{op}^17ps`$). Since the approach developed here connects the spin dissipation to the orbital dissipation and thus must also apply to these other orbital dissipation mechanisms if we replace $`J\left(\omega \right)`$ by the appropriate bath spectral function.

This research was partially supported by Hewlett-Packard Brazil. The authors also acknowledge partial support from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) and Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa no Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP).


format: text

text:
# Irreducible Modules for the Quantum Affine Algebra 𝑈_𝑞((𝔰𝔩)̂₂) and its Borel Subalgebra 𝑈_𝑞((𝔰𝔩)̂₂)^{≥0}

## 1 The quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$

The affine Kac-Moody Lie algebra $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2`$ has played an essential role in diverse areas of mathematics and physics. Elements of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2`$ can be represented as vertex operators, which are certain generating functions that appear in the dual resonance models of particle physics (see  and ). The algebra $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2`$ also features prominently in the study of Knizhnik-Zamolodchikov equations and conformal field theory (see for example,  and ). Our main object of interest is a $`q`$-analogue of $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2`$, the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$, which also has a representation by vertex operators  and has many important connections with quantum field theory and symmetric functions, in particular with Kostka-Foulkes polynomials (, ). In this paper, we focus on the finite-dimensional irreducible modules of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$. These modules have been classified up to isomorphism by V. Chari and A. Pressley . Our aim here is to relate them to the finite-dimensional irreducible modules of the Borel subalgebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$.

Throughout the paper $`𝔽`$ will denote an algebraically closed field. We fix a nonzero scalar $`q𝔽`$ that is not a root of unity and adopt the following notation:

$$[n]=\frac{q^nq^n}{qq^1},n=0,1,\mathrm{}$$
(1.1)
###### Definition 1.2

The quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ is the unital associative $`𝔽`$-algebra with generators $`e_i^\pm `$, $`K_i^{\pm 1}`$, $`i\{0,1\}`$ which satisfy the following relations:

$$K_iK_i^1=K_i^1K_i=1,$$
(1.3)
$$K_0K_1=K_1K_0,$$
(1.4)
$$K_ie_i^\pm K_i^1=q^{\pm 2}e_i^\pm ,$$
(1.5)
$$K_ie_j^\pm K_i^1=q^2e_j^\pm ,ij,$$
(1.6)
$$[e_i^+,e_i^{}]=\frac{K_iK_i^1}{qq^1},$$
(1.7)
$$[e_0^\pm ,e_1^{}]=0,$$
(1.8)
$$(e_i^\pm )^3e_j^\pm [3](e_i^\pm )^2e_j^\pm e_i^\pm +[3]e_i^\pm e_j^\pm (e_i^\pm )^2e_j^\pm (e_i^\pm )^3=0,ij.$$
(1.9)
We call $`e_i^\pm `$, $`K_i^{\pm 1}`$, $`i\{0,1\}`$ the Chevalley generators for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ and refer to (1.9) as the $`q`$-Serre relations. We denote by $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$ the subalgebra of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ generated by the elements $`e_i^+`$, $`K_i^{\pm 1}`$, $`i\{0,1\}`$. We call $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$ the Borel subalgebra of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$, because of its similarity to the universal enveloping algebra of the standard Borel subalgebra of a finite-dimensional simple Lie algebra over the complex numbers.

It is apparent from the definitions that in $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ or $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$, $`K_0K_1`$ is central and so by Schur’s Lemma must act as a scalar on any finite-dimensional irreducible module. Therefore, finite-dimensional irreducible modules of the Borel subalgebra are closely related to the finite-dimensional irreducible modules of the following algebra.

###### Definition 1.10

The algebra $`U^0`$ is the unital associative $`𝔽`$-algebra with generators $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$, which satisfy the defining relations:

$`KK^1=K^1K=1,`$ (1.11)
$`KRK^1=q^2R,`$ (1.12)
$`KLK^1=q^2L,`$ (1.13)
$`R^3L[3]R^2LR+[3]RLR^2LR^3=0,`$ (1.14)
$`L^3R[3]L^2RL+[3]LRL^2RL^3=0.`$ (1.15)
Our first goal is to explain the exact relationship between the finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-modules and the finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-modules. In order to state our results precisely, it is necessary to make a few comments.

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module. Then the actions of $`K_0`$ and $`K_1`$ on $`V`$ are semisimple \[1, Prop. 3.2\]. Furthermore (also by \[1, Prop. 3.2\]), there exists an integer $`d0`$ and scalars $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ chosen from $`\{1,1\}`$ such that

1. the set of distinct eigenvalues of $`K_0`$ on $`V`$ is $`\{\epsilon _0q^{2id}0id\}`$; and
2. $`K_0K_1\epsilon _0\epsilon _1I`$ vanishes on $`V`$.

We call the ordered pair $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ the type of $`V`$.

Now let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. As we will see in Section 2, the action of $`K`$ on $`V`$ is semisimple. Moreover, there exists an integer $`d0`$ and a nonzero scalar $`\alpha 𝔽`$ such that the set of distinct eigenvalues of $`K`$ on $`V`$ is $`\{\alpha q^{2id}0id\}`$. We refer to $`\alpha `$ as the type of $`V`$.

Our main results concerning $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ and $`U^0`$ are contained in the following two theorems.

###### Theorem 1.16

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. Assume $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ are scalars in $`\{1,1\}`$. Then there exists a unique $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ such that the operators $`e_0^+R,e_1^+L,K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. This $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure is irreducible and of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$.

###### Theorem 1.17

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module, and assume $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ is its type. Let $`\alpha `$ denote a nonzero scalar in $`𝔽`$. Then there exists a unique $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ such that the operators $`e_0^+R,e_1^+L,K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. This $`U^0`$-module structure is irreducible and of type $`\alpha `$.

###### Remark 1.18

Let $`\alpha `$ be a nonzero scalar in $`𝔽`$, and let $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ denote scalars in $`\{1,1\}`$. Combining Theorem 1.16 and Theorem 1.17, we obtain a bijection between the following two sets:

1. the isomorphism classes of finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-modules of type $`\alpha `$;
2. the isomorphism classes of finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-modules of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$.

###### Remark 1.19

As V. Chari and A. Pressley  have shown, each finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module has a realization as a tensor product of evaluation modules. In our proofs below, we never have occasion to invoke this realization. In fact, our arguments are quite elementary and require only linear algebra. It follows from our work and the results of  that all of the finite-dimensional irreducible modules for $`U^0`$ and for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$ can be obtained from tensor products of evaluation modules of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$.

The plan for the paper is as follows. In Section 2, we state some preliminaries concerning $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-modules and $`U^0`$-modules. Sections 3–11 are devoted to proving Theorem 1.16. In Section 12, we prove Theorem 1.17, and in Section 13, we discuss irreducible modules for the Borel subalgebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$.

The proof of Theorem 1.16 is an adaptation of a construction which T. Ito and the second author used to get $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-actions from a certain type of tridiagonal pair . Indeed, the original motivation for our work came from the study of tridiagonal pairs (, ) and the closely related Leonard pairs (, , , , , , ). A Leonard pair is a pair of semisimple linear transformations on a finite-dimensional vector space, each of which acts tridiagonally on an eigenbasis for the other \[23, Defn. 1.1\]. There is a close connection between Leonard pairs and the orthogonal polynomials that make up the terminating branch of the Askey scheme (, , \[23, Appendix A\]). A tridiagonal pair is a mild generalization of a Leonard pair \[10, Defn. 1.1\]. See ,  for related topics.

## 2 Preliminaries

In this section, we present some background material on irreducible modules for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ and $`U^0`$. Towards this purpose, we adopt the following conventions. Assume $`V`$ is a nonzero finite-dimensional vector space over $`𝔽`$. Let $`d`$ denote a nonnegative integer. By a decomposition of $`V`$ of diameter $`d`$, we mean a sequence $`U_0,U_1,\mathrm{},U_d`$ of nonzero subspaces of $`V`$ such that

$`V=U_0U_1\mathrm{}U_d.`$
Note we do not assume that the spaces $`U_0,U_1,\mathrm{},U_d`$ have dimension 1. For notational convenience we set $`U_1:=0`$ and $`U_{d+1}:=0`$.

###### Lemma 2.1

\[1, Prop. 3.2\] Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module. Then there exist scalars $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ in $`\{1,1\}`$ and a decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ of $`V`$ such that

$`(K_0\epsilon _0q^{2id}I)U_i=0\text{and}(K_1\epsilon _1q^{d2i}I)U_i=0`$ (2.2)
hold for all $`i=0,1,\mathrm{},d`$. The sequence $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1;U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is unique. Moreover, for $`0id`$ we have

$`e_0^+U_iU_{i+1},e_1^{}U_iU_{i+1},`$ (2.3)
$`e_0^{}U_iU_{i1},e_1^+U_iU_{i1}.`$ (2.4)
###### Remark 2.5

If $`𝔽`$ has characteristic 2, then in Lemma 2.1 we view $`\{1,1\}`$ as having a single element.

###### Definition 2.6

The ordered pair $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ in Lemma 2.1 is the type of $`V`$ and $`d`$ is the diameter of $`V`$. The sequence $`U_0`$, $`\mathrm{}`$, $`U_d`$ is the weight space decomposition of $`V`$ (relative to $`K_0`$ and $`K_1`$).

###### Lemma 2.7

\[1, Prop. 3.3\] For any choice of scalars $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ from $`\{1,1\}`$, there exists an $`𝔽`$-algebra automorphism of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ such that

$`K_i\epsilon _iK_i,e_i^+e_i^+,e_i^{}\epsilon _ie_i^{}`$
for $`i\{0,1\}`$.

###### Remark 2.8

Given a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module, we can alter its type to any other type by applying an automorphism as in Lemma 2.7.

The next lemma is reminiscent of Lemma 2.1.

###### Lemma 2.9

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Then there exist a nonzero $`\alpha 𝔽`$ and a decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ of $`V`$ such that

$`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)U_i=0(0id).`$ (2.10)
The sequence $`\alpha ;U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is unique. Moreover

$`RU_i`$ $``$ $`U_{i+1}(0id),`$ (2.11)
$`LU_i`$ $``$ $`U_{i1}(0id).`$ (2.12)
Proof: For $`\theta 𝔽`$, let $`V^{(\theta )}=\{vVKv=\theta v\}`$. Using (1.12), (1.13) we find that

$`RV^{(\theta )}V^{(q^2\theta )},LV^{(\theta )}V^{(q^2\theta )}.`$ (2.13)
Since $`𝔽`$ is algebraically closed, $`K`$ has an eigenvalue in $`𝔽`$, so $`V^{(\theta )}0`$ for some $`\theta 𝔽`$. Observe $`\theta 0`$ since $`K`$ is invertible on $`V`$. The scalars $`\theta ,q^2\theta ,q^4\theta ,\mathrm{}`$ are mutually distinct since $`q`$ is not a root of unity, and not all of them can be eigenvalues of $`K`$ on $`V`$. Consequently, there is a nonzero $`\zeta 𝔽`$ such that $`V^{(\zeta )}0`$ and $`V^{(q^2\zeta )}=0`$. There exists an integer $`d0`$ such that $`V^{(q^{2i}\zeta )}`$ is nonzero for $`0id`$ and zero for $`i=d+1`$. Set $`U_i=V^{(q^{2i}\zeta )}`$ for $`0id`$ and define $`U_1=0`$, $`U_{d+1}=0`$. Note that

$`(Kq^{2i}\zeta I)U_i=0(0id).`$ (2.14)
Line (2.10) is an easy consequence of (2.14) by taking $`\alpha :=\zeta q^d`$. Observe that $`\alpha 0`$. Equations (2.11) and (2.12) follow from (2.13). We claim $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is a decomposition of $`V`$. From the construction, each of the spaces $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is nonzero. Lines (2.10)–(2.12) imply $`_{i=0}^dU_i`$ is invariant under $`R,L`$,$`K^{\pm 1}`$. Since $`_{i=0}^dU_i`$ is nonzero and $`V`$ is an irreducible $`U^0`$-module, it must be that $`V=_{i=0}^dU_i`$. The sum is direct, since $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ are eigenspaces for $`K`$ corresponding to distinct eigenvalues. Therefore, $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is a decomposition of $`V`$. It is clear that the sequence $`\alpha ;U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is unique. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 2.15

In Lemma 2.9, $`\alpha `$ is said to be the type and $`d`$ the diameter of $`V`$. The sequence $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is the weight space decomposition of $`V`$ (relative to $`K`$).

###### Lemma 2.16

For each nonzero $`\alpha 𝔽`$, there exists an $`𝔽`$-algebra automorphism of $`U^0`$ such that

$`K\alpha K,RR,LL.`$
Proof: This is immediate from Definition 1.10. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 2.17

Given a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module, we can change its type to any other type by applying an automorphism from Lemma 2.16.

## 3 An outline of the proof for Theorem 1.16

Our proof of Theorem 1.16 will consume most of the paper from Section 4 to Section 11. Here we sketch an overview of the argument.

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. For any choice of $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ from $`\{1,1\}`$, we begin the construction of the $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-action on $`V`$ by requiring that the operators $`e_0^+R`$, $`e_1^+L`$, $`K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. This gives the actions of the elements $`e_0^+,e_1^+,K_0^{\pm 1},K_1^{\pm 1}`$ on $`V`$. We define the actions of $`e_0^{},e_1^{}`$ on $`V`$ as follows. First we prove that $`K+R`$ and $`K^1+L`$ act semisimply on $`V`$. Then we show that the set of distinct eigenvalues of $`K+R`$ (resp. $`K^1+L`$) on $`V`$ is $`\{\alpha q^{2id}0id\}`$ (resp. $`\{\alpha ^1q^{d2i}0id\}`$), where $`d`$ is the diameter of $`V`$. For $`0id`$, we let $`V_i`$ (resp. $`V_i^{}`$) denote the eigenspace of $`K+R`$ (resp. of $`K^1+L`$) on $`V`$ associated with the eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$ (resp. $`\alpha ^1q^{d2i}`$). Then $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ (resp. $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$) is a decomposition of $`V`$. To motivate what comes next, we mention that the weight space decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ of $`V`$ satisfies

$`U_i=(V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{})(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d)(0id).`$
For $`0id`$, we define

$`W_i`$ $`=`$ $`(V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{})(V_0+\mathrm{}+V_{di}),`$
$`W_i^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(V_{di}^{}+\mathrm{}+V_d^{})(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d).`$
We argue that both $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ and $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ are decompositions of $`V`$. Therefore, there exist linear transformations $`B:VV`$ (resp. $`B^{}:VV`$) such that for $`0id`$, $`W_i`$ (resp. $`W_i^{}`$) is an eigenspace for $`B`$ (resp. $`B^{}`$) with eigenvalue $`q^{2id}`$ (resp. $`q^{d2i}`$). We let $`e_0^{}`$ (resp. $`e_1^{}`$) act on $`V`$ as $`\alpha ^1IK^1B`$ times $`\epsilon _0q^1(qq^1)^2`$ (resp. $`\alpha IKB^{}`$ times $`\epsilon _1q^1(qq^1)^2`$). We display some relations that are satisfied by $`B,B^{}`$, and the generators of $`U^0`$. Using these relations, we argue that the above actions of $`e_0^\pm `$, $`e_1^\pm `$, $`K_0^{\pm 1}`$, $`K_1^{\pm 1}`$ satisfy the defining relations for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$. In this way, we obtain the required action of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ on $`V`$.

## 4 The elements $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$

As we proceed with our investigation of $`U^0`$, we find it convenient to work with the elements $`K+R`$ and $`K^1+L`$ instead $`R`$ and $`L`$. Hence we are led to the following definition.

###### Definition 4.1

Let $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ denote the following elements of $`U^0`$:

$`A=K+R,A^{}=K^1+L.`$ (4.2)
We observe $`A,A^{},K^{\pm 1}`$ form a generating set for $`U^0`$.

###### Lemma 4.3

The following relations hold in $`U^0`$:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{qK^1Aq^1AK^1}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`1,`$ (4.4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{qKA^{}q^1A^{}K}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`1.`$ (4.5)
Proof: To verify (4.4), substitute $`A=K+R`$ and simplify the result using (1.12). Relation (4.5) can be verified similarly using (1.13). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 4.6

Each of the equations (4.4) and (4.5) is essentially an instance of the $`q`$-Weyl relation, which is the defining relation of the $`q`$-Weyl algebra (see , for example). A presentation of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ which involves the $`q`$-Weyl relations and the $`q`$-Serre relations can be found in .

###### Lemma 4.7

The elements $`A`$, $`A^{}`$ in Definition 4.1 satisfy these relations:

$`A^3A^{}[3]A^2A^{}A+[3]AA^{}A^2A^{}A^3`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (4.8)
$`A^3A[3]A^2AA^{}+[3]A^{}AA^2AA^3`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (4.9)
Proof: To verify (4.8), substitute $`A=K+R`$ and $`A^{}=K^1+L`$, and simplify the result using (1.12)–(1.14). Line (4.9) can be checked in the same way.

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.10

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module with type $`\alpha `$ and weight space decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$. Then for $`0id`$ we have

$`(A\alpha q^{2id}I)U_i`$ $``$ $`U_{i+1},`$ (4.11)
$`(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)U_i`$ $``$ $`U_{i1}.`$ (4.12)
Proof: Relation (4.11) follows directly from (2.10), (2.11), and the fact that $`A=K+R`$. Line (4.12) is a consequence of (2.10), (2.12), and $`A^{}=K^1+L`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 4.13

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$ and diameter $`d`$. Then the elements $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$ in Definition 4.1 act semisimply on $`V`$. The set of distinct eigenvalues for $`A`$ on $`V`$ is $`\{\alpha q^{2id}0id\}`$. The set of distinct eigenvalues for $`A^{}`$ on $`V`$ is $`\{\alpha ^1q^{d2i}0id\}`$.

Proof: It is apparent from (4.11) that the product $`_{i=0}^d(A\alpha q^{2id}I)`$ vanishes on $`V`$. Since the scalars $`\alpha q^{2id}`$ $`(0id)`$ are mutually distinct, we find $`A`$ is semisimple on $`V`$. It is clear from (4.11) that the complete set of distinct eigenvalues of $`A`$ on $`V`$ is $`\{\alpha q^{2id}0id\}`$. Our assertions concerning $`A^{}`$ follow similarly. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 The eigenspace decompositions for $`A`$ and $`A^{}`$

###### Definition 5.1

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Referring to Lemma 4.13, we let $`V_i`$ (resp. $`V_i^{}`$) denote the eigenspace of $`A`$ (resp. $`A^{}`$) on $`V`$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$ (resp. $`\alpha ^1q^{d2i}`$) for $`0id`$. Then $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are each decompositions of $`V`$.

###### Lemma 5.2

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module with weight space decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$. Suppose $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are the decompositions in Definition 5.1. Then for $`0id`$ we have

1. $`U_i+\mathrm{}+U_d=V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d`$,
2. $`U_0+\mathrm{}+U_i=V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{}`$,
3. $`U_i=(V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{})(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d)`$.

Proof: (i) Set $`X_i=_{j=i}^dU_j`$ and $`X_i^{}=_{j=i}^dV_j`$. We show $`X_i=X_i^{}`$. Assume $`\alpha `$ is the type of $`V`$, and let $`T_i:=_{j=i}^d(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)`$. Then $`X_i^{}=\{vVT_iv=0\}`$, and $`T_iX_i=0`$ by (4.11) so $`X_iX_i^{}`$. Now let $`S_i:=_{j=0}^{i1}(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)`$. Observe that $`S_iV=X_i^{}`$, and $`S_iVX_i`$ by (4.11) so $`X_i^{}X_i`$. We conclude that $`X_i=X_i^{}`$ holds as required.

(ii) Mimic the proof of (i).

(iii) Combine parts (i) and (ii) above. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 5.3

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$ and diameter $`d`$. Assume $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are the decompositions in Definition 5.1. Then for $`0id`$ we have

1. $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)V_iV_{i+1}`$,
2. $`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)V_iV_{i+1}+\mathrm{}+V_d`$,
3. $`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)V_i^{}V_{i1}^{}`$,
4. $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)V_i^{}V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_{i1}^{}`$.

Proof: (i) Recall that for $`0id`$, $`V_i`$ is an eigenspace for $`A`$ with corresponding eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$. Therefore it suffices to show that

$`(A\alpha q^{2i+2d}I)(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)`$ (5.4)
vanishes on $`V_i`$ for $`0id`$. Since $`A\alpha q^{2id}I`$ vanishes on $`V_i`$, so does

$`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i2}I)(A\alpha q^{2id}I).`$ (5.5)
Using (4.4) we see that

$`qK^1Aq^1AK^1(qq^1)I`$ (5.6)
is 0 on $`V_i`$. Subtracting (5.5) from $`q^1`$ times (5.6) we find that (5.4) vanishes on $`V_i`$. Hence $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)V_iV_{i+1}`$ for $`0id`$.

Part (ii) follows from (i) above, while (iii) can be obtained by an argument similar to the proof of (i). Finally, (iv) is a consequence of (iii). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 5.7

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Let the decompositions $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ be as in Definition 5.1. Then for $`0id`$ we have

1. $`A^{}V_iV_{i1}+V_i+V_{i+1}`$,
2. $`AV_i^{}V_{i1}^{}+V_i^{}+V_{i+1}^{}`$.

Proof: (i) Let $`\alpha `$ denote the type of $`V`$. Recall that for $`0id`$, $`V_i`$ is the eigenspace for $`A`$ corresponding to the eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$. Therefore it suffices to show

$`\left(A\alpha q^{2i2d}I\right)\left(A\alpha q^{2id}I\right)\left(A\alpha q^{2i+2d}I\right)A^{}V_i=0`$
for $`0id`$. For $`vV_i`$ we have

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\left(A^3A^{}[3]A^2A^{}A+[3]AA^{}A^2A^{}A^3\right)v(\text{by}(\text{4.8}))`$
$`=`$ $`\left(A^3A^{}[3]A^2A^{}\alpha q^{2id}+[3]AA^{}\alpha ^2q^{4i2d}A^{}\alpha ^3q^{6i3d}\right)v`$
$`=`$ $`\left(A\alpha q^{2i2d}I\right)\left(A\alpha q^{2id}I\right)\left(A\alpha q^{2i+2d}I\right)A^{}v,`$
which gives the desired result.

(ii) This can be argued analogously. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Yet two more decompositions

###### Definition 6.1

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Assume $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are the decompositions from Definition 5.1. For $`0id`$, we define

$`W_i`$ $`=`$ $`(V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{})(V_0+\mathrm{}+V_{di}),`$ (6.2)
$`W_i^{}`$ $`=`$ $`(V_{di}^{}+\mathrm{}+V_d^{})(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d).`$ (6.3)
Our next goal is to show that the spaces $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ and $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ in Definition 6.1 afford decompositions of $`V`$. Towards this purpose, the following definition will be useful.

###### Definition 6.4

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Assume $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are the decompositions in Definition 5.1. Set

$$W(i,j)=\left(\underset{h=0}{\overset{i}{}}V_h^{}\right)\left(\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}V_k\right)$$
(6.5)
for all integers $`i,j`$. We interpret the left sum in (6.5) to be 0 (resp. $`V`$) if $`i<0`$ (resp. $`i>d`$). Likewise the right sum in (6.5) is interpreted to be 0 (resp. $`V`$) if $`j<0`$ (resp. $`j>d`$).

###### Example 6.6

With reference to Definition 6.4, the following hold.

1. $`W(i,d)=V_0^{}+V_1^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{}(0id)`$.
2. $`W(d,j)=V_0+V_1+\mathrm{}+V_j(0jd)`$.

Proof: To obtain (1), set $`j=d`$ in (6.5) and recall that $`_{k=0}^dV_k=V`$; for (2), use $`i=d`$ and $`_{h=0}^dV_h^{}=V`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.7

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module with type $`\alpha `$ and diameter $`d`$. Then for the spaces $`W(i,j)`$ in Definition 6.4, we have

1. $`(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)W(i,j)W(i+1,j1)`$,
2. $`(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W(i,j)W(i1,j+1)`$,
3. $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W(i,j)W(i1,j+1)`$,
4. $`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)W(i,j)_{h=1}^iW(ih,j+h)`$,

for $`0i,jd`$.

Proof: (i) Using Lemma 5.7 (ii), we find that

$$\left(A\alpha q^{2jd}I\right)\underset{h=0}{\overset{i}{}}V_h^{}\underset{h=0}{\overset{i+1}{}}V_h^{}.$$
(6.8)
Because each $`V_k`$ is an eigenspace for $`A`$ with eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2kd}`$, we have

$$\left(A\alpha q^{2jd}I\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}V_k=\underset{k=0}{\overset{j1}{}}V_k.$$
(6.9)
Evaluating $`(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)W(i,j)`$ using (6.5)–(6.9), we see that it is contained in $`W(i+1,j1)`$.

(ii) This part can be demonstrated using the relations

$`\left(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I\right){\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{i}{}}}V_h^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{i1}{}}}V_h^{},`$ (6.10)
$`\left(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I\right){\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}V_k`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j+1}{}}}V_k`$ (6.11)
in conjunction with (6.5).

(iii) From Lemma 5.3 (iv) and Lemma 5.3 (i), we find that

$`\left(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I\right){\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{i}{}}}V_h^{}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{i1}{}}}V_h^{},`$ (6.12)
$`\left(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I\right){\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j}{}}}V_k`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{j+1}{}}}V_k.`$ (6.13)
Evaluating $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W(i,j)`$ using (6.5), (6.12), and (6.13), we see that it is contained in $`W(i1,j+1)`$.

(iv) This assertion follows from (iii). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.14

For the spaces $`W(i,j)`$ in Definition 6.4,

$$W(i,j)=0\text{if}i+j<d,(0i,jd).$$
(6.15)
Proof: Lemma 6.7 implies that for $`0r<d`$ the sum

$$W:=W(0,r)+W(1,r1)+\mathrm{}+W(r,0)$$
(6.16)
is invariant under $`A,A^{}`$, and $`K^{\pm 1}`$. Since $`A,A^{},K^{\pm 1}`$ is a generating set for $`U^0`$, we find that $`W`$ is a $`U^0`$-submodule of $`V`$. Because $`V`$ is an irreducible $`U^0`$-module, we have $`W=0`$ or $`W=V`$. By (6.5), each term in (6.16) is contained in

$$V_0+V_1+\mathrm{}+V_r,$$
(6.17)
so $`W`$ is contained in (6.17). The containment of $`W`$ in $`V`$ is proper since $`r<d`$. Thus $`W=0`$ and (6.15) follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.18

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Then the sequence $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ from Definition 6.1 is a decomposition of $`V`$.

Proof: First we argue that $`_{i=0}^dW_i=V`$. Comparing (6.2) and (6.5), we find that $`W_i=W(i,di)`$ for $`0id`$; by this and Lemma 6.7, we have that $`_{i=0}^dW_i`$ is invariant under $`A,A^{},K^{\pm 1}`$. Because $`A,A^{},K^{\pm 1}`$ generate $`U^0`$, $`_{i=0}^dW_i`$ must be $`0`$ or $`V`$. Observe that $`_{i=0}^dW_i`$ contains $`W_0=V_0^{}0`$, so $`_{i=0}^dW_i=V`$. To show that the sum $`_{i=0}^dW_i`$ is direct, we prove that

$`(W_0+W_1+\mathrm{}+W_{i1})W_i=0`$
for $`1id`$. From the construction,

$`W_jV_0^{}+V_1^{}+\mathrm{}+V_{i1}^{}`$
for $`0ji1`$, and

$`W_iV_0+V_1+\mathrm{}+V_{di}.`$
Therefore

$`(W_0+W_1+\mathrm{}+W_{i1})W_i`$
$`(V_0^{}+V_1^{}+\mathrm{}+V_{i1}^{})(V_0+V_1+\mathrm{}+V_{di})`$
$`=W(i1,di)`$
$`=0,`$
in view of Lemma 6.14. We have now shown that the sum $`_{i=0}^dW_i`$ is direct. Next we argue that $`W_i0`$ for $`0id`$. We have $`W_0=V_0^{}0`$ and $`W_d=V_00`$. Suppose there exists an integer $`i`$ $`(1id1)`$ such that $`W_i=0`$. By Lemma 6.7, the sum $`_{h=0}^{i1}W_i`$ is a $`U^0`$-submodule of $`V`$ since it is invariant under each of $`A,A^{},K^{\pm 1}`$. Therefore $`_{h=0}^{i1}W_i=0`$ or $`_{h=0}^{i1}W_i=V`$. But $`_{h=0}^{i1}W_i0`$ since $`i1`$ and $`W_00`$; and $`_{h=0}^{i1}W_iV`$ since $`i1<d`$ and $`W_d0`$. We have reached a contradiction. Consequently, $`W_i0`$ for $`0id`$. Thus, the sequence $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ is a decomposition of $`V`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.19

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Then the sequence $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ from Definition 6.1 is a decomposition of $`V`$.

Proof: Imitate the proof of Lemma 6.18. $`\mathrm{}`$

We record a few helpful facts for later use.

###### Lemma 6.20

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$ and diameter $`d`$. Then for the decomposition $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ in Definition 6.1, the following hold for $`0id`$.

1. $`(A\alpha q^{d2i}I)W_iW_{i+1}`$.
2. $`(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W_iW_{i1}`$.
3. $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W_iW_{i1}`$.
4. $`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)W_iW_0+\mathrm{}+W_{i1}`$.

Proof: Set $`j=di`$ and $`W(i,di)=W_i`$ in Lemma 6.7. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 6.21

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$ and diameter $`d`$. Then for the decomposition $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ in Definition 6.1, the following hold for $`0id`$.

1. $`(A\alpha q^{2id}I)W_i^{}W_{i+1}^{}`$.
2. $`(A^{}\alpha ^1q^{2id}I)W_i^{}W_{i1}^{}`$.
3. $`(K\alpha q^{2id}I)W_i^{}W_{i+1}^{}`$.
4. $`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)W_i^{}W_{i+1}^{}+\mathrm{}+W_d^{}`$.

###### Lemma 6.22

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Let the decompositions $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ be as in Definition 5.1. Let the decompositions $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ and $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ be as in Definition 6.1. Then the following hold for $`0id`$.

1. $`W_i+\mathrm{}+W_d=V_0+\mathrm{}+V_{di}`$.
2. $`W_0+\mathrm{}+W_i=V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{}`$.
3. $`W_i^{}+\mathrm{}+W_d^{}=V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d`$.
4. $`W_0^{}+\mathrm{}+W_i^{}=V_{di}^{}+\mathrm{}+V_d^{}`$.

Proof: (i) Set $`X_i:=_{j=i}^dW_j`$ and $`X_i^{}=_{j=0}^{di}V_j`$. We show $`X_i=X_i^{}`$. Let $`\alpha `$ denote the type of $`V`$ and set $`T_i:=_{j=0}^{di}(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)`$. Then $`X_i^{}=\{vVT_iv=0\}`$, and $`T_iX_i=0`$ by Lemma 6.20 (i), so $`X_iX_i^{}`$. Now let $`S_i:=_{j=di+1}^d(A\alpha q^{2jd}I)`$. Observe that $`S_iV=X_i^{}`$, and $`S_iVX_i`$ by Lemma 6.20 (i), so $`X_i^{}X_i`$. We conclude $`X_i=X_i^{}`$ and the result follows.

(ii)–(iv) These equations can be verified in a similar fashion. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 7 The linear transformations $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$

###### Definition 7.1

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Let the decompositions $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ and $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ be as in Definition 6.1.

1. Let $`B:VV`$ denote the linear transformation such that for $`0id`$, $`W_i`$ is an eigenspace of $`B`$ with eigenvalue $`q^{2id}`$.
2. Let $`B^{}:VV`$ denote the linear transformation such that for $`0id`$, $`W_i^{}`$ is an eigenspace of $`B^{}`$ with eigenvalue $`q^{d2i}`$.

Next we show that $`A,A^{},B,B^{}`$ satisfy $`q`$-Weyl relations.

###### Lemma 7.2

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. For $`A,A^{}`$ from Definition 4.1 and $`B,B^{}`$ from Definition 7.1,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{qABq^1BA}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha I,`$ (7.3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{qBA^{}q^1A^{}B}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^1I,`$ (7.4)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{qA^{}B^{}q^1B^{}A^{}}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^1I,`$ (7.5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{qB^{}Aq^1AB^{}}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha I.`$ (7.6)
Proof: Let the decomposition $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ be as in Lemma 6.18. To prove (7.3), we show that $`qABq^1BA\alpha (qq^1)I`$ is 0 on $`W_i`$ for $`0id`$. Since $`Bq^{2id}I`$ vanishes on $`W_i`$ by Definition 7.1(i), so does

$`(A\alpha q^{d2i2}I)(Bq^{2id}I).`$ (7.7)
By Lemma 6.20 (i),

$`(Bq^{2i+2d}I)(A\alpha q^{d2i}I)`$ (7.8)
vanishes on $`W_i`$. Subtracting $`q^1`$times (7.8) from $`q`$ times (7.7) we find that $`qABq^1BA\alpha (qq^1)I`$ is 0 on $`W_i`$. Relation (7.3) follows. Lines (7.4)–(7.6) can be proved in a similar manner. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 8 The action of $`B`$ and $`B^{}`$ on the decompositions

In this section we describe how the maps $`B,B^{}`$ act on our five decompositions.

###### Lemma 8.1

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module with weight space decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$. Assume that the decompositions $`V_0,\mathrm{},V_d`$ and $`V_0^{},\mathrm{},V_d^{}`$ are as in Definition 5.1. Let the decompositions $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ and $`W_0^{},\mathrm{},W_d^{}`$ be as in Definition 6.1. Assume $`B,B^{}`$ are as in Definition 7.1. Then the following hold for $`0id`$.

1. $`(Bq^{d2i}I)V_iV_{i1}`$ and $`(Bq^{2id}I)V_i^{}V_{i1}^{}`$.
2. $`(B^{}q^{d2i}I)V_iV_{i+1}`$ and $`(B^{}q^{2id}I)V_i^{}V_{i+1}^{}`$.
3. $`(Bq^{2id}I)U_iU_{i1}`$.
4. $`(B^{}q^{d2i}I)U_iU_{i+1}`$.
5. $`BW_i^{}W_{i1}^{}+W_i^{}+W_{i+1}^{}`$.
6. $`B^{}W_iW_{i1}+W_i+W_{i+1}`$.

Proof: (i), (ii) Let $`\alpha `$ denote the type of $`V`$. Recall that for $`0id`$, $`V_i`$ is the eigenspace for $`A`$ with eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$. To obtain the first half of (i) it is sufficient to show that

$`(A\alpha q^{2i2d}I)(Bq^{d2i}I)`$ (8.2)
vanishes on $`V_i`$ for $`0id`$. Since $`A\alpha q^{2id}I`$ vanishes on $`V_i`$, so does

$`(Bq^{d2i+2}I)(A\alpha q^{2id}I).`$ (8.3)
Equation (7.3) implies that

$`qABq^1BA\alpha (qq^1)I`$ (8.4)
is 0 on $`V_i`$. Adding (8.3) to $`q`$ times (8.4), we find that (8.2) vanishes on $`V_i`$. Consequently, $`(Bq^{d2i}I)V_iV_{i1}`$ for $`0id`$.

The second half of (i) and the relations in (ii) can be established similarly.

(iii) We have

$$\begin{array}{cccc}(Bq^{2id}I)U_i& & (Bq^{2id}I)(U_0+\mathrm{}+U_i)& \\ & =& (Bq^{2id}I)(V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_i^{})& (\text{by Lemma }\text{5.2}\text{(ii)})\\ & & V_0^{}+\mathrm{}+V_{i1}^{}& (\text{by Lemma }\text{8.1}\text{(i)})\\ & =& U_0+\mathrm{}+U_{i1}& (\text{by Lemma }\text{5.2}\text{(ii)}),\end{array}$$

and also

$$\begin{array}{cccc}(Bq^{2id}I)U_i& & (Bq^{2id}I)(U_i+\mathrm{}+U_d)& \\ & =& (Bq^{2id}I)(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d)& (\text{by Lemma }\text{5.2}\text{(i)})\\ & & V_{i1}+\mathrm{}+V_d& (\text{by Lemma }\text{8.1}\text{(i)})\\ & =& U_{i1}+\mathrm{}+U_d& (\text{by Lemma }\text{5.2}\text{(i)}).\end{array}$$

Combining these observations we find $`(Bq^{2id}I)U_iU_{i1}`$.

(iv) To obtain this part, imitate the argument for (iii).

(v) We have

$$\begin{array}{cccc}BW_i^{}& & B(W_0^{}+\mathrm{}+W_i^{})& \\ & =& B(V_{di}^{}+\mathrm{}+V_d^{})& (\text{by Lemma }\text{6.22}\text{(iv)})\\ & & V_{di1}^{}+\mathrm{}+V_d^{}& (\text{by Lemma }\text{8.1}\text{(i)})\\ & =& W_0^{}+\mathrm{}+W_{i+1}^{}& (\text{by Lemma }\text{6.22}\text{(iv)}),\end{array}$$

and also

$$\begin{array}{cccc}BW_i^{}& & B(W_i^{}+\mathrm{}+W_d^{})& \\ & =& B(V_i+\mathrm{}+V_d)& (\text{by Lemma }\text{6.22}\text{(iii)})\\ & & V_{i1}+\mathrm{}+V_d& (\text{by Lemma }\text{8.1}\text{(i)})\\ & =& W_{i1}^{}+\mathrm{}+W_d^{}& (\text{by Lemma }\text{6.22}\text{(iii)}).\end{array}$$

Together these relations imply $`BW_i^{}W_{i1}^{}+W_i^{}+W_{i+1}^{}`$.

(vi) This argument is identical to (v). $`\mathrm{}`$

## 9 Some relations involving $`B,B^{},K^{\pm 1}`$

In this section we show $`B,B^{},K^{\pm 1}`$ satisfy $`q`$-Weyl relations.

###### Lemma 9.1

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. Assume $`B,B^{}`$ are as in Definition 7.1. Then both

$`{\displaystyle \frac{qBK^1q^1K^1B}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^1I,`$ (9.2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{qB^{}Kq^1KB^{}}{qq^1}}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha I.`$ (9.3)
Proof: Let $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ denote the weight space decomposition for $`V`$. Recall that for $`0id`$, $`U_i`$ is an eigenspace for $`K`$ with eigenvalue $`\alpha q^{2id}`$. To obtain (9.2), we show $`qBK^1q^1K^1B\alpha ^1(qq^1)I`$ vanishes on $`U_i`$ for $`0id`$. Observe that $`K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I`$ vanishes on $`U_i`$ so

$`(Bq^{2id2}I)(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i}I)`$ (9.4)
is 0 on $`U_i`$. From Lemma 8.1 (iii) we see that $`(Bq^{2id}I)U_iU_{i1}`$. Therefore

$`(K^1\alpha ^1q^{d2i+2}I)(Bq^{2id}I)`$ (9.5)
vanishes on $`U_i`$. Subtracting $`q^1`$times (9.5) from $`q`$ times (9.4) we find $`qBK^1q^1K^1B\alpha ^1(qq^1)I`$ vanishes on $`U_i`$. Equation (9.2) follows, and relation (9.3) is proved similarly. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 10 The $`q`$-Serre relations

Next we show that the elements $`B,B^{}`$ from Definition 7.1 satisfy the $`q`$-Serre relations.

###### Theorem 10.1

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module. Then the transformations $`B,B^{}`$ in Definition 7.1 satisfy the relations

$`B^3B^{}[3]B^2B^{}B+[3]BB^{}B^2B^{}B^3`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (10.2)
$`B^3B[3]B^2BB^{}+[3]B^{}BB^2BB^3`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (10.3)
Proof: Let the decomposition $`W_0,\mathrm{},W_d`$ be as in Definition 6.1. Recall that for $`0id`$, $`W_i`$ is an eigenspace for $`B`$ with eigenvalue $`q^{2id}`$. In order to prove (10.2) we show that the transformation $`\mathrm{\Psi }:=B^3B^{}[3]B^2B^{}B+[3]BB^{}B^2B^{}B^3`$ is 0 on $`W_i`$ for $`0id`$. Let $`i`$ be given and pick $`vW_i`$. Observe that $`B^{}vW_{i1}+W_i+W_{i+1}`$ by Lemma 8.1(vi). Next note that $`(Bq^{2i2d}I)W_{i1}=0`$, $`(Bq^{2id}I)W_i=0`$, and $`(Bq^{2i+2d}I)W_{i+1}=0`$. By these comments

$`(Bq^{2i2d}I)(Bq^{2id}I)(Bq^{2i+2d}I)B^{}v=0.`$
Therefore,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }v`$ $`=`$ $`\left(B^3B^{}[3]B^2B^{}B+[3]BB^{}B^2B^{}B^3\right)v`$
$`=`$ $`\left(B^3B^{}[3]B^2B^{}q^{2id}+[3]BB^{}q^{4i2d}B^{}q^{6i3d}\right)v`$
$`=`$ $`\left(Bq^{2i2d}I\right)\left(Bq^{2id}I\right)\left(Bq^{2i+2d}I\right)B^{}v`$
$`=`$ $`0.`$
We have now shown $`\mathrm{\Psi }W_i=0`$ for $`0id`$. Consequently $`\mathrm{\Psi }=0`$ and (10.2) follows. Line (10.3) can be proved similarly. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 11  The proof of Theorem 1.16

This section is devoted to a proof of Theorem 1.16.

###### Definition 11.1

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. Using the transformations $`B,B^{}`$ in Definition 7.1, we introduce linear transformations $`r:VV`$ and $`l:VV`$ as follows:

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha IKB^{}}{q(qq^1)^2}},`$
$`l`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^1IK^1B}{q(qq^1)^2}}.`$
###### Lemma 11.2

With reference to Definition 11.1, we have

$`B`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha ^1Kq(qq^1)^2Kl,`$
$`B^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\alpha K^1q(qq^1)^2K^1r.`$
###### Theorem 11.3

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. Then the generators $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$ of $`U^0`$, together with $`r,l`$ from Definition 11.1, satisfy the following relations on $`V`$:

$`KK^1=K^1K=1,`$ (11.4)
$`KRK^1=q^2R,KLK^1=q^2L,`$ (11.5)
$`KrK^1=q^2r,KlK^1=q^2l,`$ (11.6)
$`rLLr={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^1K\alpha K^1}{qq^1}},lRRl={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha K^1\alpha ^1K}{qq^1}},`$ (11.7)
$`lL=Ll,rR=Rr,`$ (11.8)
$`0=R^3L[3]R^2LR+[3]RLR^2LR^3,`$ (11.9)
$`0=L^3R[3]L^2RL+[3]LRL^2RL^3.`$ (11.10)
$`0=r^3l[3]r^2lr+[3]rlr^2lr^3,`$ (11.11)
$`0=l^3r[3]l^2rl+[3]lrl^2rl^3.`$ (11.12)
Proof: The relations in (11.4), (11.5) are defining relations (1.11)–(1.13) of $`U^0`$. To obtain (11.6), evaluate each of (9.2), (9.3) using Lemma 11.2. For (11.7), (11.8), use Definition 4.1, Lemma 11.2, and equations (11.5) and (11.6) to evaluate (7.3)–(7.6). Lines (11.9), (11.10) are just defining relations (1.14), (1.15) respectively. Finally, to demonstrate (11.11) and (11.12), substitute the expressions in Lemma 11.2 into (10.2), (10.3), and apply relations (11.5), (11.6). $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 11.13

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. Assume the maps $`r,l`$ are as in Definition 11.1, and let $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ denote scalars in $`\{1,1\}`$. Then $`V`$ supports an irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ for which the Chevalley generators act as follows:

generator $`e_0^+`$ $`e_1^+`$ $`e_0^{}`$ $`e_1^{}`$ $`K_0`$ $`K_1`$ $`K_0^1`$ $`K_1^1`$  action on $`V`$ $`R`$ $`L`$ $`\epsilon _0l`$ $`\epsilon _1r`$ $`\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K`$ $`\epsilon _1\alpha K^1`$ $`\epsilon _0\alpha K^1`$ $`\epsilon _1\alpha ^1K`$

Proof: To see that the above action on $`V`$ determines a $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module, compare equations (11.4)–(11.12) with the defining relations for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ in Definition 1.2. The $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module $`V`$ is irreducible, since $`V`$ is an irreducible $`U^0`$-module. It is straightforward to check that $`V`$ has type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 1.16: The “existence” part is immediate from Theorem 11.13. Concerning the “uniqueness” assertion, we assume there exists a $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ such that the transformations $`e_0^+R`$, $`e_1^+L`$, $`K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. Observe that $`e_0^+`$, $`e_1^+`$, $`K_0^{\pm 1}`$, $`K_1^{\pm 1}`$ act on $`V`$ according to the table of Theorem 11.13. We show the remaining Chevalley generators $`e_0^{},e_1^{}`$ must act on $`V`$ according to that table also.

First note that the given $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure is irreducible, since $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$ is a generating set for $`U^0`$ and $`V`$ is irreducible as a $`U^0`$-module. Next observe that $`K_0`$ acts on $`V`$ as $`\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K`$. Comparing (2.2) and (2.10), we find that the weight space decomposition of the $`U^0`$-module $`V`$ relative to $`K`$ coincides with the weight space decomposition of the $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module $`V`$ relative to $`K_0`$, $`K_1`$. Let $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ denote this (common) weight space decomposition. Assume $`l,r`$ are as in Definition 11.1. To show $`e_0^{}`$ acts on $`V`$ as $`\epsilon _0l`$, we set $`W=\{vV(e_0^{}\epsilon _0l)v=0\}`$, and argue that $`W=V`$. For this, it suffices to prove that $`W0`$, and $`W`$ is invariant under the operators $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$. Using the right-hand equation in (11.6), we find that $`lU_iU_{i1}`$ for $`0id`$. In particular, $`lU_0=0`$. Also $`e_0^{}U_0=0`$ by (2.4) so $`e_0^{}\epsilon _0l`$ vanishes on $`U_0`$. Therefore $`U_0W`$, so $`W0`$. By (1.7) (with $`i=0`$), the second relation in (11.7), and the fact that both $`e_0^+R`$ and $`K_0\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K`$ vanish on $`V`$, we deduce that the commutator $`[e_0^{}\epsilon _0l,R]`$ vanishes on $`V`$. This implies $`RWW`$. By (1.8) we have $`[e_0^{},e_1^+]=0`$. Therefore, the first equation in (11.8), combined with the fact that $`e_1^+L`$ vanishes on $`V`$ implies that $`[e_0^{}\epsilon _0l,L]`$ vanishes on $`V`$. Using this, we find that $`LWW`$. Observe $`K_0e_0^{}=q^2e_0^{}K_0`$ by (1.5) and $`K_0\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K`$ vanishes on $`V`$, so $`Ke_0^{}q^2e_0^{}K`$ is 0 on $`V`$. Combining this with the second equation in (11.6) we determine that $`K(e_0^{}\epsilon _0l)`$ and $`q^2(e_0^{}\epsilon _0l)K`$ agree on $`V`$. Thus, $`KWW`$ and then $`K^1WW`$. We have now shown that $`W0`$ and $`W`$ is invariant under each of $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$. Therefore $`W=V`$ since $`V`$ is irreducible as a $`U^0`$-module. We conclude $`(e_0^{}\epsilon _0l)V=0`$ so $`e_0^{}`$ acts on $`V`$ as $`\epsilon _0l`$. By a similar argument we find $`e_1^{}`$ acts on $`V`$ as $`\epsilon _1r`$. Consequently, $`e_0^{},e_1^{}`$ must act on $`V`$ according to the table of Theorem 11.13. Hence, the given $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure is unique. We already showed that this $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure is irreducible and it clearly has type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 12 The proof of Theorem 1.17

This section is devoted to a proof of Theorem 1.17. We begin with a few comments about the quantum algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$ and its modules.

###### Definition 12.1

\[13, p. 122\] The quantum algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$ is the unital associative $`𝔽`$-algebra with generators $`e^\pm `$, $`k^{\pm 1}`$ which satisfy the following relations:

$`kk^1`$ $`=`$ $`k^1k=1,`$
$`ke^\pm k^1`$ $`=`$ $`q^{\pm 2}e^\pm ,`$
$`[e^+,e^{}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{kk^1}{qq^1}}.`$
###### Lemma 12.2

\[13, p. 128\] If $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-module, then there exist $`\epsilon \{1,1\}`$ and a basis $`v_0,v_1,\mathrm{},v_d`$ for $`V`$ such that $`kv_i=\epsilon q^{2id}v_i`$ for $`0id`$, $`e^+v_i=[i+1]v_{i+1}`$ for $`0id1`$, $`e^+v_d=0`$$`e^{}v_i=\epsilon [di+1]v_{i1}`$ for $`1id`$, and $`e^{}v_0=0`$.

The proof of the next lemma is straightforward.

###### Lemma 12.3

Let $`V`$ denote a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module. Then for $`i\{0,1\}`$, there exists a unique $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ such that $`e^\pm e_i^\pm `$ and $`k^{\pm 1}K_i^{\pm 1}`$ vanish on $`V`$.

In our proof of Theorem 1.17, we will use the following facts concerning $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-modules.

###### Lemma 12.4

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module, and let $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ denote the corresponding weight space decomposition relative to $`K_0`$, $`K_1`$. Then the following hold for $`0jd/2`$.

1. The restriction of $`(e_0^+)^{d2j}`$ to $`U_j`$ is an isomorphism of vector spaces from $`U_j`$ to $`U_{dj}`$.
2. For all $`vU_j`$, $`(e_0^+)^{d2j+1}v=0`$ if and only if $`e_0^{}v=0`$.
3. The restriction of $`(e_1^+)^{d2j}`$ to $`U_{dj}`$ is an isomorphism of vector spaces from $`U_{dj}`$ to $`U_j`$.
4. For all $`vU_{dj}`$, $`(e_1^+)^{d2j+1}v=0`$ if and only if $`e_1^{}v=0`$.

Proof: For (i) and (ii), we view $`V`$ as a $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-module via Lemma 12.3 (with $`i=0`$). As a $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-module, $`V`$ is a direct sum of irreducible $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-modules (see for example, \[13, p. 144\]). Let $`W`$ denote one of the irreducible $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_2)`$-module summands. Applying Lemma 12.2 to $`W`$, we find there exists an integer $`r`$ $`(0rd/2)`$ such that for $`0id`$, $`WU_i`$ is one-dimensional if $`ridr`$ and is zero otherwise. Moreover $`e_0^+(WU_i)=WU_{i+1}`$ for $`ridr1`$, $`e_0^+(WU_{dr})=0`$, $`e_0^{}(WU_i)=WU_{i1}`$ for $`r+1idr`$, and $`e_0^{}(WU_r)=0`$. Results (i), (ii) follow. The statements in (iii) and (iv) can be shown in exactly the same way. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proof of Theorem 1.17: Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$. We first prove that the desired $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ exists. Let $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$ act on $`V`$ as $`e_0^+`$, $`e_1^+`$, $`\epsilon _0\alpha ^{\pm 1}K_0^{\pm 1}`$ respectively. Then using the defining relations for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ in Definition 1.2, it is easy to see that $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$ satisfy (1.11)–(1.15), and therefore induce a $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$. From the construction, the transformations $`e_0^+R,e_1^+L,K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$ vanish on $`V`$. Since $`K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$ vanish on $`V`$, and since $`K_0K_1\epsilon _0\epsilon _1I`$ also vanishes on $`V`$ by Lemma 2.1, we find that $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. We have now shown the desired $`U^0`$-module structure exists, and it is clear this $`U^0`$-module structure is unique. Next we show the $`U^0`$-module structure is irreducible. Let $`W`$ denote an irreducible $`U^0`$-submodule of $`V`$. Then $`W`$ is invariant under the actions of $`e_0^+`$, $`e_1^+`$, $`K_0^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}`$. We argue that $`e_0^{}WW`$ and $`e_1^{}WW`$. To demonstrate the first of these assertions, it will be enough to show that $`\stackrel{~}{W}=\{wWe_0^{}wW\}`$ is nonzero and invariant under each of $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$. It follows from (1.7) (with $`i=0`$) and the fact that $`e_0^+R`$ and $`\epsilon _0K_0^{\pm 1}\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$ are 0 on $`V`$ that $`R\stackrel{~}{W}\stackrel{~}{W}`$. Also $`[e_0^{},e_1^+]=0`$ by (1.8) and $`e_1^+L`$ vanishes on $`V`$, so that $`L\stackrel{~}{W}\stackrel{~}{W}`$. By (1.5) we have $`K_0e_0^{}K_0^1=q^2e_0^{}`$. By this and since $`K_0\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K`$ is 0 on $`V`$, we find that $`Ke_0^{}q^2e_0^{}K`$ vanishes on $`V`$. Consequently, $`K\stackrel{~}{W}\stackrel{~}{W}`$, and then $`K^1\stackrel{~}{W}\stackrel{~}{W}`$ holds as well.

To verify that $`\stackrel{~}{W}0`$, let $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ denote the weight space decomposition for the $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module $`V`$ relative to $`K_0`$, $`K_1`$. As $`W`$ is invariant under $`K_0`$ and $`K_0K_1`$ acts as $`\epsilon _0\epsilon _1I`$ on $`V`$, it must be that $`W=_{i=0}^d(WU_i)`$. Since $`W0`$, there exists an integer $`i`$ $`(0id)`$ such that $`WU_i0`$. Define $`r=\text{min}\{i0id,WU_i0\}`$ and $`s=\text{max}\{i0id,WU_i0\}`$. We prove that $`r+s=d`$. Suppose for the moment that $`r+s<d`$. As $`rs`$, we must have $`r<d/2`$. Then for any nonzero $`vWU_r`$, $`(e_0^+)^{d2r}v`$ is contained in $`WU_{dr}`$ which is 0 because $`dr>s`$, so $`(e_0^+)^{d2r}v=0`$, contradicting Lemma 12.4(i). Next assume $`r+s>d`$. Then since $`rs`$, we have $`s>d/2`$. For any nonzero $`vWU_s`$, $`(e_1^+)^{2sd}v`$ is contained in $`WU_{ds}=0`$, so $`(e_1^+)^{2sd}v=0`$, which contradicts Lemma 12.4(iii). Thus, $`r+s=d`$ must hold, and from $`rs`$, we deduce that $`rd/2`$. Let $`v`$ denote a nonzero vector in $`WU_r`$. Observe $`(e_0^+)^{d2r+1}v`$ is contained in $`WU_{dr+1}`$, and $`WU_{dr+1}=0`$, so $`(e_0^+)^{d2r+1}v=0`$. Applying Lemma 12.4 (ii) to the $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module $`V`$, we obtain that $`e_0^{}v=0`$. Therefore, $`v`$ is a nonzero element of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$. We have now shown $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is nonzero and invariant under each of the operators $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$. Consequently, by the irreducibility of $`W`$ as a $`U^0`$-module, $`\stackrel{~}{W}=W`$ must hold. Therefore $`e_0^{}WW`$. In just the same fashion, $`e_1^{}WW`$, so that $`W`$ is a $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-submodule of $`V`$. By construction, $`W0`$ so $`W=V`$. We conclude that the $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ is irreducible. It is routine to show the $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ has type $`\alpha `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 13 Irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-modules

In this section we compare the finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-modules with the finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-modules.

Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible module for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$. The central element $`K_0K_1`$ must act as some scalar $`\gamma `$ times the identity map on $`V`$. Arguing as in Lemma 2.9, we see that there exists a nonzero scalar $`\alpha 𝔽`$ and a decomposition $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ of $`V`$ such that $`(K_0\alpha q^{2id})U_i=0`$ for $`0id`$. Then $`(K_1\gamma \alpha ^1q^{d2i})U_i=0`$ for $`0id`$, so each of the spaces $`U_0,\mathrm{},U_d`$ is a common eigenspace for $`K_0,K_1`$. Setting $`\beta =\gamma \alpha ^1`$, we say $`V`$ has type $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ and diameter $`d`$.

Assume $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-module of type $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$. Then $`V`$ remains irreducible when regarded as a module for the subalgebra of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$ generated by $`K_0^{\pm 1}`$, $`e_0^+`$ and $`e_1^+`$. Thus, $`V`$ admits the structure of an irreducible $`U^0`$-module of type $`\alpha `$. By Theorem 1.16, for any choice of scalars $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ from $`\{1,1\}`$, there exists a unique $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ such that the operators $`e_0^+R,e_1^+L,K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. This $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure is irreducible and of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$. When this $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ is then restricted to $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$, we will recover the original $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-structure on $`V`$, provided $`\alpha =\epsilon _0`$ and $`\beta =\epsilon _1`$.

Next suppose that $`V`$ is a finite-dimensional irreducible module for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$. We claim that $`V`$ remains irreducible as a module for the subalgebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$. To see this, let $`W`$ denote a nonzero $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-submodule of $`V`$. We show $`W=V`$. By its definition, $`W`$ is invariant under each of $`e_0^+,e_1^+,K_0^{\pm 1},K_1^{\pm 1}`$. By Theorem 1.17, for any nonzero scalar $`\alpha `$ in $`𝔽`$, there is the structure of a $`U^0`$-module on $`V`$ such that the operators $`e_0^+R,e_1^+L,K_0^{\pm 1}\epsilon _0\alpha ^1K^{\pm 1}`$, and $`K_1^{\pm 1}\epsilon _1\alpha ^{\pm 1}K^1`$ vanish on $`V`$. From this we see that $`W`$ is invariant under each of $`R,L,K^{\pm 1}`$, and is therefore a $`U^0`$-submodule of $`V`$. But the $`U^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ is irreducible by Theorem 1.17, so $`W=V`$ and our claim is proved. Note that if $`V`$ has type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ as a module for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$, then $`V`$ has type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$ as a module for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$.

Let us summarize these findings in our final result.

###### Theorem 13.1

For any scalars $`\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1`$ taken from the set $`\{1,1\}`$ the following hold.

1. Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-module of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$. Then the action of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$ on $`V`$ extends uniquely to an action of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ on $`V`$. The resulting $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module structure on $`V`$ is irreducible and of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$.
2. Let $`V`$ be a finite-dimensional irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-module of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$. When the $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$-action is restricted to $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$, the resulting $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)^0`$-module structure on $`V`$ is irreducible and of type $`(\epsilon _0,\epsilon _1)`$.

## 14 Acknowledgments

The second author would like to thank Kenichiro Tanabe and Tatsuro Ito for many conversations on the subject of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}_2)`$ and its modules.

Georgia Benkart (email: benkart@math.wisc.edu) Paul Terwilliger (email: terwilli@math.wisc.edu)

Department of Mathematics University of Wisconsin 480 Lincoln Drive Madison, WI 53706-1388 USA


text:
# Exotic superconductivity in the coexistent phase of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 : A Cu-NQR study under hydrostatic pressure

## I Introduction

In the last decade, superconductivity has been discovered in several heavy-fermion (HF) antiferromagnets around a quantum critical point (QCP) where the Néel temperature $`T_N`$ is suppressed to zero under pressure ($`P`$) jaccard92 ; movshovich96 ; mathur98 ; hegger00 . In these $`P`$-induced superconductors, the most promising interaction leading to the formation of Cooper pairs is magnetic in origin, presumably due to the closeness to an antiferromagnetic (AFM) phase. However, the nature of superconductivity and magnetism is still unclear when the superconductivity appears very close to the counterpart AFM phase. Therefore, in light of an exotic interplay between these phases, unconventional electronic and magnetic properties around QCP have attracted much attention and a lot of experimental and theoretical works are being extensively made.

In these experimental studies, QCP is realized by applying a critical pressure ($`P_c`$) to HF antiferromagnets such as CeCu2Ge2, CeRh2Si2, CeIn3, CeRhIn5, and so on. Above $`P_c`$ where the AFM order is suppressed, unconventional HF superconducting (SC) nature is indicated from recent studies by means of nuclear-quadrupole-resonance (NQR) measurements on these compounds. The nuclear spin-lattice relaxation rate $`1/T_1`$ in CeRhIn5 is shown to follow a $`T^3`$ behavior below $`T_c`$ 2.1 K at $`P=2.1`$ GPa above $`P_c`$ 1.6 GPa, which indicates the presence of line-node SC gap at the Fermi surface mito01 ; kohori00 . As for CeIn3, the absence of coherence peak in $`1/T_1`$ just below $`T_c0.1`$ K points to an unconventional type of superconductivity at $`P=2.65`$ GPa above $`P_c`$ 2.55 GPa.shinji02  Thus, these observations of unconventional superconductivity above $`P_c`$ are consistent with the model that magnetic interactions play an important role.

On the other hand, the magnetic and SC properties just below $`P_c`$ may be much more exotic than those in the previous examples, since superconductivity could appear in the AFM phase below $`T_c`$. The situation reminds us of the firstly-discovered HF superconductor CeCu2Si2 located just at the border of the AFM phase at ambient pressure ishida99 . This was evidenced by various magnetic anomalies observed above $`T_c`$ nakamura ; steglich79  and by the fact that the magnetic phase $`A`$ appears when the superconductivity is suppressed by a magnetic field bruls94 . Furthermore, the transport, thermodynamic, and NQR measurements have consistently shown that nominally off-tuned Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 is located near $`P_c`$ and crosses QCP by applying a minute pressure of 0.2 GPagegenwart98 ; kawasaki01 .

In our previous papers,kawasaki01 ; kawasaki02  the magnetic and SC properties in CeCu2Si2 were investigated around the QCP as functions of pressure for Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 and of Ge content $`x`$ for CeCu2(Si1-xGex)2 by the Cu-NQR measurements. Figure 1 shows the phase diagram referred from the literature.kawasaki02  Here, $`T_F^{}`$ is an effective Fermi temperature below which $`1/T_1T`$ stays constant and $`T_m`$ is a temperature below which the slowly fluctuating AFM waves start to develop. Note that a primary effect of the Ge doping is assumed to expand the latticetrovarelli97  and that its chemical pressure is $`0.076`$ GPa per 1% Ge doping as suggested from the $`P`$ variation of Cu-NQR frequency $`\nu _Q`$ in CeCu2Ge2 and CeCu2Si2 kitaoka95 .

Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 is just at the border of the AFM phase at ambient pressure. In the normal state, the slowly fluctuating AFM waves propagate over a long range without any trace of AFM order below $`T_m1.2`$ K. The most striking feature may be in the exotic SC state below $`T_c0.65`$ K, where low-lying magnetic excitations seem to remain active, since $`1/T_1`$ shows a rapid decrease below $`T_c`$, followed by the large enhancement in $`1/T_1T`$ well below $`T_c`$. With increasing $`P`$, the slowly fluctuating AFM waves are markedly suppressed and, concomitantly, the exotic superconductivity evolves into a typical HF-SC one characterized by the relation of $`1/T_1T^3`$ above 0.85 GPa.

By substituting only 1% Ge, the AFM order emerges below $`T_N`$ 0.7 K, followed by the SC transition at $`T_c`$ 0.5 K . Nevertheless, $`1/T_1`$ does not show distinct reduction at $`T_c`$, but follows a $`1/T_1T`$ = const. behavior well below $`T_c`$ as observed in Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2. It seems that the exotic superconductivity accompanied by the slowly fluctuating AFM waves coexists with the AFM order below $`T_c`$. As the Ge content increases, $`T_N`$ is progressively increased, while $`T_c`$ is steeply decreased. As a result of the suppression of the slowly fluctuating AFM waves in the samples more than $`x=0.06`$, the magnetic properties above $`T_N`$ progressively change to those in a localized regime as observed in CeCu2Ge2.kitaoka95  It was also proposed that these exotic SC natures around the border of the AFM phase could be accounted for on the basis of SO(5) theory that unifies superconductivity and antiferromagnetism kitaoka01 ; zhang97 .

In order to get further insight into the exotic SC state near the AFM phase and to clarify the role of Ge doping, we have carried out Cu-NQR study on CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 ($`T_N`$ 0.75 K, $`T_c`$ 0.4 K) under pressure. The Cu-NQR measurements have shown that the AFM order in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 is suppressed at pressures exceeding 0.19 GPa and that a typical HF-SC behavior recovers at $`P=`$ 0.91 GPa. These results demonstrate that the primary effect of the Ge doping is to expand the lattice, leading to the sudden emergence of the AFM order. We stress that the anomalous enhancement of $`1/T_1`$ below $`T_c`$ at $`P=0`$ GPa is ascribed not to impurity effect but to the persistence of low-lying magnetic excitations.

## II Experimental

The same polycrystalline sample of CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 as in the previous workkawasaki02  was used. The detailed preparation method of the sample has been already reported in the literature trovarelli97 . Hydrostatic pressure was applied by utilizing a CuBe piston-cylinder cell with the Daphne oil 7373 as a pressure-transmitting medium. To calibrate a value of $`P`$ at a sample position at low temperatures, the $`P`$-induced variation of $`T_c`$ of Sn was measured by a high-frequency ac-$`\chi `$ measurement using in-situ NQR coil. As $`P`$ increases, $`\nu _Q`$ increases linearly. This result suggests that an increase in the lattice density gives rise to a linear increase of the electric field gradient at the Cu site. The rate of the increase in $`\nu _Q`$, $`d\nu _Q/dp=9.52`$ Hz/bar is in good agreement with those for Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 and CeCu2Ge2 kitaoka95 ; kawasaki01 . The gradual increase of the NQR linewidth with increasing $`P`$ assures that a possible distribution of $`P`$ is as small as $`\pm `$ 0.08 GPa at $`P=0.91`$ GPa.

## III Results and Discussion

The AFM order in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 at $`P`$ = 0 GPa is evidenced by the rapid increase of the NQR linewidth and the peak in $`1/T_1`$ at $`T_N`$ 0.75 K, as reported previously kawasaki02 ; kitaoka01 . Figure 2(a) and the main panel of Fig. 3 show the 63,65Cu-NQR spectra at several temperatures and the $`T`$ dependence of $`1/T_1`$ at $`P`$ = 0 GPa (closed circles), respectively. Here, $`1/T_1`$ is uniquely determined above $`T_N`$, but not below $`T_N`$. This distribution in $`1/T_1`$ is presumably associated with the distribution in the internal field at the Cu site due to the incommensurate magnetic structure in the ordered state.kawasaki02  Only main components in $`1/T_1`$ are shown below $`T_N`$ for simplicity. As seen in Fig. 2(a), the increase in the NQR linewidth indicates an appearance of the internal field at the Cu site below $`T_N`$. Correspondingly, $`1/T_1`$ shows a clear peak at the same temperature, reflecting a critical slowing down as approaching the AFM transition.

Now, we turn to the present results under $`P`$. The $`T`$ dependence of NQR spectrum at 0.19 GPa is shown in Fig. 2(b). Apparently, any broadening of the NQR spectrum is not observed down to 0.05 K at $`P`$ = 0.19 GPa, in contrast to the significant broadening of NQR linewidth below $`T_N`$ at $`P`$ = 0 GPa. This result indicates that the AFM order is suppressed by applying the minute pressure of 0.19 GPa, which is also corroborated by the $`T`$ dependence of $`1/T_1`$ as shown later. Note that $`\nu _Q`$ at 0.19 GPa decreases slightly by 0.02 MHz as $`T`$ decreases below $`T_c0.45`$ K. By contrast, at 0.91 GPa where the superconductivity shows the typical HF-SC behavior as shown later, such a shift in $`\nu _Q`$ is not observed. Therefore, the slight decrease in $`\nu _Q`$ below $`T_c`$ at 0.19 GPa may be related to the exotic SC state due to the closeness to the AFM phase.

In Fig. 3 are shown the $`T`$ dependencies of $`1/T_1`$ at $`P`$ = 0 GPa (closed circles), 0.56 GPa (open circles) and 0.91 GPa (closed squares). Here, the data at $`P`$ = 0.19 GPa are not shown, since they are nearly equivalent to those at $`P`$ = 0.56 GPa. The distribution in $`1/T_1`$ observed below $`T_N`$ at $`P=0`$ GPa is no longer appreciable at these elevated pressures. In the entire $`T`$ range, $`1/T_1`$ is suppressed with increasing $`P`$, evidencing that the low-energy component of spin fluctuations (SF’s) is forced to shift to a high-energy range. As expected from the fact that the AFM order is already suppressed at pressures exceeding 0.19 GPa, any trace of anomaly associated with it is not observed at all down to $`T_c`$ 0.45 K at $`P`$ = 0.56 GPa and 0.91 GPa. It is, therefore, considered that the AFM order in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 is not triggered by some disorder effect but by the intrinsic lattice expansion due to the Ge doping.

In order to demonstrate a systematic evolution of SF’s in the paramagnetic state, in the inset of Fig. 3 are shown the $`T`$ dependencies of $`1/T_1T`$ in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 at $`P`$ = 0 GPa (closed circles) and 0.91 GPa (closed squares) along with the results in Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 at $`P`$ = 0 GPa (open squares) and 0.85 GPa (open triangles).kawasaki01  The $`1/T_1T`$ result in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 at $`P`$ = 0 GPa is well explained by the SF’s theory for weakly AFM itinerant magnets in $`T_c<T<1.5`$ K around $`T_N`$ 0.75 K as reported previously kitaoka01 ; kawasaki02 . The good agreement between the experiment and the calculation indicates a long-range nature of the AFM ordering in the itinerant regime. At $`P=`$ 0.91 GPa, $`1/T_1T`$, which probes the development of magnetic excitations, is suppressed and resembles a behavior that would be expected at an intermediate pressure between $`P`$ = 0 GPa and 0.85 GPa for Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2. This reveals that the Ge doping works as applying a negative chemical pressure to expand the lattice of Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2.

Figure 4 indicates the $`T`$ dependence of NQR intensity multiplied by temperature $`I(T)\times T`$ in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 at $`P=`$ 0, 0.19, 0.56, and 0.91 GPa. Here, $`I(T)`$ normalized by the value at 4.2 K is an integrated intensity over frequencies where the NQR spectrum was observed. Since the NQR intensity depends on a pulse interval $`\tau `$ between two pulses for the spin-echo measurement, $`I(\tau =0)`$ is evaluated through the relation of $`I(\tau )=I(\tau =0)\mathrm{exp}(2\tau /T_2)`$, where $`1/T_2`$ is the spin-echo decay rate. Note that $`I(T)\times T`$ stays constant generally, if $`T_1`$ and/or $`T_2`$ range in the observable time window that is typically more than several microseconds. Therefore, the distinct reduction in $`I(T)\times T`$ upon cooling is ascribed to the development of the slowly fluctuating AFM waves, since it leads to an extraordinary short relaxation time of $``$ 0.14 $`\mu `$sec ishida99 .

The $`I(T)\times T`$ at $`P=0`$ GPa decreases down to about 0.55 at $`T_N0.75`$ K upon cooling below $`T_m`$ 1.2 K. The reduction in $`I(T)\times T`$ stops around $`T_N`$, but does no longer recover with further decreasing $`T`$. Note that the reduction in $`I(T)\times T`$ below $`T_c0.4`$ K is due to the SC diamagnetic shielding of rf field for the NQR measurement. As $`P`$ increases, $`T_m`$ becomes smaller, in agreement with the result presented in the phase diagram of Fig. 1, and the reduction in $`I(T)\times T`$ in the normal state becomes moderate. With further increasing $`P`$ up to 0.91 GPa, eventually, $`I(T)\times T`$ remains nearly constant down to $`T_c0.45`$ K, indicative of no anomaly related to the slowly fluctuating AFM waves. This behavior resembles the result observed at pressures exceeding 0.85 GPa in Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2. These results also assure that the Ge substitution expands the lattice of Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2.

In the previous paper,kawasaki02  we highlighted that the exotic superconductivity in Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 and CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 at $`P=0`$ GPa is characterized by the persistence of low-lying magnetic excitations. It was argued that these excitations may be related to a collective mode in the coexistent phase of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity. However, there remains a possibility that the potential scattering due to non-magnetic Ge impurities brings about a finite density of states at the Fermi surface, leading to a $`T_1T=`$ const. behavior below $`T_c`$ schmitt-rink86 ; hotta93 . Here, we discuss an intimate $`P`$-induced evolution of low lying magnetic excitations in the SC state. As seen in Fig. 3 and its inset, $`1/T_1`$ and $`1/T_1T`$ at $`P=`$ 0 GPa does not show a distinct reduction below $`T_c`$, but instead a $`T_1T=`$ const. behavior emerges well below $`T_c`$. At $`P`$ = 0.56 GPa, the AFM order is absent, but the slowly fluctuating AFM waves develop in the normal state. It is noteworthy that the relation of $`1/T_1T`$ is still valid below $`T_c`$, resembling the behavior for Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 at $`P=0`$ GPa.kawasaki01 ; ishida99  Remarkably at $`P=`$ 0.91 GPa, $`1/T_1`$ follows a relation of $`1/T_1T^3`$ below $`T_c`$ 0.45 K, consistent with the line-node SC gap at the Fermi surface. This typical HF-SC behavior in $`1/T_1`$ was observed in Ce0.99Cu2.02Si2 at pressures exceeding 0.85 GPa as well kawasaki01 . A small deviation from $`1/T_1T^3`$ behavior at $`P=0.91`$ GPa far below $`T_c`$ may be associated with an inevitable Ge-impurity effect for $`d`$-wave superconductors in general schmitt-rink86 ; hotta93 . Therefore, it is considered that the unconventional SC characteristics at $`P`$ = 0 GPa and 0.56 GPa evolve into the typical HF-SC ones with the line-node gap at pressures exceeding 0.91 GPa. Apparently, these results exclude a possible impurity effect as a primary cause for the $`T_1T`$ = const. behavior below $`T_c`$ at $`P=`$ 0 GPa.

While both the magnetic and SC properties undergo the marked change with increasing $`P`$, the value of $`T_c`$ 0.4 K slightly increases up to 0.45 K at 0.19 GPa and saturates for the further increasing $`P`$. Here, $`T_c`$’s are consistently determined by both the kink in $`1/T_1`$ and the onset of SC diamagnetism. The increment in $`T_c`$ is, however, smaller than the value that would be expected from the phase diagram in Fig. 1, where $`T_c`$ goes up to 0.65 K at the SC phase at higher pressures. This means that some impurity effect may be responsible for the reduction in $`T_c`$ due to the Ge doping. In this sense, if the lattice were homogeneously expanded as for CeCu2Si2 without substituting Ge for Si, $`T_c`$ would be not so reduced and remain comparable to $`0.65`$ K. It seems, therefore, that this exotic superconductivity could be rather robust against the appearance of AFM order, although the SC state evolves into the exotic SC state accompanied by low-energy magnetic excitations. Note that $`T_c`$ decreases rapidly with the slight Ge substitution but remains finite with further increasing $`x`$ up to $`x0.15`$, as indicated in Fig. 1 and in the literature trovarelli97 . This $`x`$ dependence of $`T_c`$ is apparently different from the behavior observed in usual $`d`$-wave superconductors with non-magnetic impurities. It may be accounted for by the combined contributions of the impurity effect and of the unknown SC characteristics in the coexistent state of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity.

## IV Conclusion

In conclusion, we have performed the Cu-NQR experiments under $`P`$ on CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 where the AFM order below $`T_N0.75`$ K coexists with the superconductivity below $`T_c0.4`$ K. The AFM order is suppressed by applying the minute pressure of 0.19 GPa. As a result, the typical HF-SC behavior with the line-node gap recovers at $`P`$ = 0.91 GPa, demonstrating that the AFM order in CeCu2(Si0.98Ge0.02)2 is triggered by the lattice expansion caused by the Ge doping. We highlight that the $`1/T_1T`$ = const. relation well below $`T_c`$ at $`P=0`$ GPa is ascribed not to the impurity effect but to the persistence of low-lying magnetic excitations. This feature may be inherent to the coexistent state of antiferromagnetism and superconductivity on a microscopic scale.

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the COE Research grant from MEXT of Japan (Grant No. 10CE2004). One of the authors (Y. Kawasaki) was supported by the JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientists.


text:
# 1 The numerical values (×10⁴) of the different contributions to Δ𝑟 specified in eq. () are given for different values of 𝑀_H and 𝑀_W=80.426 GeV (the W and Z masses have been transformed so as to correspond to the real part of the complex pole). The other input parameters are listed in eq. ().

## Acknowledgements

This work was supported in part by TMR, EC-Contracts No. HPRN-CT-2002-00311 (EURIDICE) and HPRN-CT-2000-00149 (Physics at Colliders), and the KBN Grants 2P03B01025 and 5P03B09320. M.A., M.C. and A.F. would like to thank the Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology of the University of Durham for warm hospitality during the period when part of this work was completed.