text:
# COMBINATORIAL TANGENT SPACE AND RATIONAL SMOOTHNESS OF SCHUBERT VARIETIES

## 1 Introduction

In this paper, we introduce a combinatorial tool in the study of the singular locus of a Schubert variety, called the combinatorial tangent space. This space is built from a Bott-Samelson resolution of such a variety and is extracted from the work of Contou Carrere \[CC\]. Using a combinatorial result of Carrell and Peterson \[CP, Theorem C\] which characterizes, via the Kashdan-Lusztig polynomials, the rational smoothness of a Schubert variety, we show our main result (Section 4, Theorem 4):

Theorem. The Schubert variety $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ is rationally smooth at a $`T`$fixed point $`x=u(P)`$ if and only if for all $`uvw`$, the dimension of the combinatorial tangent space of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ at $`v(P)`$ is equal to the dimension of the variety.

Here is an outline of the paper, in $`\mathrm{\S }`$2, we state some definitions and some combinatorial settings. In particular, we recall from \[CC\], the universal Schubert scheme and the construction of the Bott-Samelson variety as a variety of galleries in the Tits building associated to any semi-simple (adjoint) group $`G`$. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$3, we give the definition of the combinatorial tangent space and state some of these properties. In $`\mathrm{\S }`$4, we relate explicitly the combinatorial tangent space and the rational smoothness of a Schubert variety. And we show how this space is connected to the set of $`T`$invariant curves in such a variety.

Althought the construction of the combinatorial tangent space of a Schubert variety is presented here in the theory of semi-simple groups, this construction is still valid in the more general setting of Kac-Moody groups and their Schubert varieties \[G\]. Indeed, in this context, Bott-Samelson and Schubert varieties can be defined \[Ma\] and they have a combinatorial interpretation, of course, by taking into account the building associated to such a group. The notion of " pinglage" (cf. Section 2 below) does not exist for a Kac-Moody group $`G`$, but we still have a basis (infinite this time) of the tangent space of $`G/B`$ at any $`T`$fixed point (given by the presentation of the Kac-Moody algebra). Moreover, the characterization of rational smoothness we use generalizes to this case (\[KL\] and \[C1\]). So does our main result : the rational smoothness of the Schubert varieties is characterized by the combinatorial tangent space.

This approach, i.e. studying the smoothness of a Schubert variety via the Bott-Samelson resolution (viewed as variety of galleries), follows the work of Contou Carrere \[CC\]. And it has many others applications, some of them could be found in my Ph. D. thesis \[G\] that I am working out at Universit Monpellier 2 (France).

I would like to thank my supervisor, C. Contou Carrere, for his guidance through these topics. I also thank Ph. Elbaz-Vincent and P. L. Montagard for their comments and their careful readings of the manuscript and Ph. Malbos for his initiation into Pstricks.

## 2 Settings and Definitions

In this section, we use partially the notations of \[SGA3\] and we present the Schubert variety, following Contou Carrere \[CC\], in a non usual way, which is quite near from the point of view of Kazhdan and Lusztig \[KL\].

Let $`G=(G,T,M,R)`$ be a semi-simple (adjoint) split group over an algebraically closed field $`k`$. That is, $`T`$ is a maximal torus of $`G`$, $`M`$ is an abelian group such that $`Hom_{kgr}(T,𝔾_m(k))M_k`$ and $`R`$ is a root system of $`(G,T)`$. We have the following decomposition of $`𝒢=Lie(G)`$ under the $`T`$adjoint action :

$$𝒢=𝒯\underset{\alpha R}{}𝒢^\alpha ,$$

where the $`𝒢^\alpha `$’s are one dimensional vector spaces.

Let $`\epsilon =(R_0,\{X_\alpha \}_{\alpha R_0})`$ be an “ pinglage” of $`G`$. That is, we choose a set $`R_0`$ of simple roots in $`R`$ (this choice corresponds to the choice of a Borel subgroup $`B`$ of $`G`$ such that $`TBG`$) and for each $`\alpha R_0`$, we choose $`X_\alpha `$ a generator of the vector space $`𝒢^\alpha `$.

Let $`W=Norm_G(T)/T`$ denote the Weyl group of $`(G,T)`$ and let $`S`$ be a set of generators of $`W`$ adapted to the choice of $`BG`$ (in particular, there is a bijection between $`R_0`$ and $`S`$, we thus index the elements of $`S`$ by simple roots). Moreover, for a part $`t`$ of $`S`$, $`W_tW`$ is the subgroup of $`W`$ generated by $`\{s_\alpha \}_{\alpha t}`$.

### 2.1 Universal Schubert Scheme

Following \[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$4\], we introduce the universal Schubert scheme, we refer to this work for more details and a full description of these notions.

For any set $`E`$, $`𝒫(E)`$ stands for the set of all his parts. Let $`Par(G)`$ denote the $`k`$variety of all the parabolic subgroups of $`G`$. Herewith the “ pinglage” of $`G`$, we get a decomposition of this variety:

$$Par(G)=\underset{t𝒫(R_0)}{}Par_t(G),$$

where $`Par_t(G)`$ is defined as the variety of parabolic subgroups of type $`t`$. The variety of Borel subgroups of $`G`$ is then $`Bor(G)=Par_{\mathrm{}}(G)`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ denote the variety $`Par(G)\times _kPar(G)`$. The group $`G`$ acts diagonally on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and the quotient is denoted by $`t.st=\mathrm{\Sigma }/G`$. This is the constant $`k`$scheme :

$$\underset{t,t^{}𝒫(R_0)}{}W_t\backslash W/W_t^{}.$$

In the sequel of what we wrote, we can define an immersion :

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }Par(G)\times _kt.st\times _kPar(G),$$

and state the following definition.

###### Definition 1.

We call $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ the universal Bruhat cell and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}`$, the scheme theoretic image of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ in $`Par(G)\times _kt.st\times _kPar(G)`$ by this immersion, is called the universal Schubert scheme.

###### Remark 1.

If we fix a parabolic subgroup $`P`$ of type $`t_P`$ such that $`PB`$, where $`B`$ is the Borel subgroup of $`G`$ given by the “ pinglage”, and an element $`\overline{w}W/W_{t_P}`$, then by taking fibres in the previous definition, we recover the Bruhat cell $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(B,\overline{w})`$ and the Schubert variety $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ :

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})\{B\}\times \{\overline{w}\}\times Par_{t_P}(G)G/P.$$

The cell $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(B,\overline{w})`$ is the variety of parabolic subgroups of type $`t_P`$ of $`G`$ in relative position $`\overline{w}`$ with $`B`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ is the variety of parabolic subgroups of type $`t_P`$ of $`G`$ in relative position $`\overline{u}`$ with $`B`$ for $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ in $`W/W_{t_P}`$ (here $``$ represent the relative Chevalley-Bruhat order).

In the following, we will only consider Schubert varieties in $`Par_{t_P}(G)G/P`$, where $`PB`$ is a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ of type $`t_P`$.

### 2.2 Tits Building

Now, let us go into a succint description of a combinatorial object naturally associated to a semi-simple group, the Tits building (actually, this construction is valid without any hypothesis on the ground field $`k`$).

We denote by $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ the set of all parabolic subgroups of $`G`$ ordered by the opposite relation of the inclusion between parabolic subgroups. This operation endowes this set with a structure of simplicial complex. The variety $`Par(G)`$ and the complex $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ have the same underlying set, but different structures.

As we have fixed a maximal torus, $`TG`$, we can define a subcomplex $`𝔸`$ associated to $`T`$, called an apartment, as follows :

$$𝔸=\{PPar(G),TP\},$$

if $`P𝔸`$ then there exists a parabolic subgroup $`Q`$ containing $`B`$ and $`nN=Norm_G(T)`$ such that $`P=nQn^1`$.

And the building can be expressed as $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)=G\times 𝔸/`$ where $``$ is the equivalence relation :

$$(x,P)(x^{},P^{})\{\begin{array}{c}P=P^{}\hfill \\ x^1x^{}P.\hfill \end{array}$$

For each maximal torus in $`G`$ there is an apartment corresponding to it and in order to recover $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ we paste all these subcomplexes with respect to the equivalence relation $``$. This description of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ as a “union” of apartments provides a better handing to deal with the building.

Elements of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ are called faces, to each parabolic subgroup $`P`$ of $`G`$ is associated a face, denoted by $`F_P`$. A chamber of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ is a maximal face. The chambers are associated to the Borel subgroups of $`G`$.

The group $`W`$ acts on the faces of $`𝔸`$ and in a simply transitively way on the set of all the chambers of $`𝔸`$. Moreover, we can define a distance between two chambers of $`𝔸`$ :

$$d(C,C^{})=l(w_{CC^{}}),$$

where $`w_{CC^{}}`$ is the element of $`W`$ which maps $`C`$ to $`C^{}`$ and $`l(w)`$, for $`wW`$ is the length of any reduced decomposition of $`w`$.

To each face $`F_P`$ contained in the chamber $`F_B`$, we associate its type :

$$typ(F_P)=tS,$$

where $`t`$ is defined by $`W_t=Stab_W(F_P)`$. Therefore, we get $`typ(F_B)=\mathrm{}`$ since $`Stab_W(F_B)=\{1\}=W_{\mathrm{}}`$. The action of $`W`$ allows us to define the type of each face of $`𝔸`$. Moreover, thanks to the retraction of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ onto $`𝔸`$ with centre $`F_B`$ \[T, 3,3, p.42\], we can define the type of all the faces (as there is a bijection between $`R_0`$ and $`S`$, the two notions of type mentionned are the same).

The set of types, denoted by $`typ\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(G)\right)`$ is still a complex and $`typ:\mathrm{\Delta }(G)typ\left(\mathrm{\Delta }(G)\right)`$ is a morphism of complex.

A folding of $`𝔸`$ is an idempotent and type preserving morphism of complex $`\varphi :𝔸𝔸`$ such that each chamber $`C`$ belonging to $`\varphi (𝔸)`$ is the image of exactly two chambers of which itself \[T, 1,8, p.7\]. The image of a folding $`\varphi (𝔸)`$ is called a root of $`𝔸`$.

If $`\alpha `$ is a root of $`𝔸`$, we define $`M_\alpha `$, the wall associated to $`\alpha `$, as the subcomplex of $`𝔸`$ composed by the faces $`F`$ such that there are two adjacent chambers $`C`$ and $`C^{}`$ (i.e. $`CC^{}`$ is a codimension 1 face of $`C`$ and of $`C^{}`$) with $`C\alpha ,C^{}\alpha `$ and $`FCC^{}`$.

If we look at a graphic representation of $`𝔸`$ as the root system of $`(G,T)`$ (for instance see \[BOU, Planche X\]), the roots correspond to the roots of $`(G,T)`$ and the walls correspond to the hyperplans related to the reflections. To each wall $`M_\beta `$ in $`𝔸`$, we can associate two foldings $`\varphi _\beta `$ and $`\varphi _\beta `$, corresponding to the roots $`\beta `$ and $`\beta `$.

Moreover, we say that a folding $`\varphi `$ is towards a chamber $`C`$ if $`C`$ belongs to the image of $`\varphi `$. For example, the foldings towards $`F_B`$ are indexed by the positive roots.

### 2.3 Generalized Galleries

The notion of gallery that we are using is a bit more general than the one presented in Tits’ book \[T\]. So, in order to make a difference, we will use the expression $`g`$gallery to denote such a gallery.

###### Definition 2 (\[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$2\]).

Let $`(E,<)`$ be an ordered set. A sequel $`(e_n,\mathrm{},e_0)`$ of elements of $`E`$ is a $`g`$gallery if those elements fit into one of the following situations :

$$\begin{array}{c}(e_n>e_{n1}<\mathrm{}>e_1<e_0)\\ (e_n<e_{n1}>\mathrm{}>e_1<e_0)\\ (e_n>e_{n1}<\mathrm{}<e_1>e_0)\\ (e_n<e_{n1}>\mathrm{}<e_1>e_0).\end{array}$$

For example, let $`g`$ be a $`g`$gallery of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ of which faces verify the following incidence relations :

$$g=(F_rF_r^{}F_{r1}\mathrm{}F_1^{}F_0F_0^{}).$$

We define the type of $`g`$ to be the $`g`$gallery of types $`\tau `$ :

$$\tau =typ(g)=(t_rt_r^{}t_{r1}\mathrm{}t_1^{}t_0t_0^{}),$$

where each $`t_i`$ (resp. $`t_j^{}`$) is the type of the corresponding face.

Actually, $`g`$ corresponds to a configuration of parabolic subgroups verifying the following inclusions :

$$g=(Q_rP_rQ_{r1}\mathrm{}P_1Q_0P_0),$$

where the $`Q_j`$’s are of type $`t_j`$ and the $`P_i`$’s, of type $`t_i^{}`$.

###### Definition 3.

If $`F_r`$ and $`F_0^{}`$ are two faces of $`𝔸`$ (resp. of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$), we denote by

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau ,F_r,F_0^{})(resp.\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Delta }(G),\tau ,F_r,F_0^{}))$$

the finite set (resp. the set) of all $`g`$galleries contained in $`𝔸`$ (resp. in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$), of type $`\tau `$, of source $`F_r`$ and of target $`F_0^{}`$.

Now, we present the notion of minimality for $`g`$galleries.

For two faces $`F`$ and $`F^{}`$ of $`𝔸`$ such that $`F^{}F`$, we denote by $`_F^{}(F)`$ the set of walls $`M`$ such that $`F^{}M,FM`$.

###### Definition 4 (\[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$5\]).

A g-gallery $`\gamma =(F_rF_r^{}F_{r1}\mathrm{}F_1^{}F_0F_0^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau ,F_r,F_0^{}),`$ between the chamber $`F_r=F_B`$ and the face $`F_0^{}`$ is said to be minimal if :

i) for $`ri1`$ the sets $`_{F_i^{}}(F_{i1})`$ are disjoint ;

ii) $`(F_B,F_0^{})=_{ri1}_{F_i^{}}(F_{i1})`$, where $`(F_B,F_0^{})`$ denote the set of walls which separate $`F_B`$ from $`F_0^{}`$.

For a discussion on further properties of minimal $`g`$galleries, we refer to \[CC\].

### 2.4 Chamber Galleries

###### Definition 5.

A g-gallery $`g=(F_rF_r^{}F_{r1}\mathrm{}F_1^{}F_0F_0^{})`$ is called a chamber g-gallery if

i) for $`ri0`$, $`F_i`$ is a chamber ;

ii) for $`rj1`$, $`F_j^{}`$ is a face of codimension 1 in $`F_j`$ and $`F_{j1}.`$

The chamber $`g`$galleries are nearly galleries in the sense of Tits \[T\], except that we allow their target face to be of any type (instead of being a chamber). By the way, we will make the abuse of language and call our $`g`$galleries, simply galleries.

So, the minimality of a chamber gallery $`g`$ is expressed in the same way as in \[T\]. Keeping the notations as in definition 5, $`g`$ is minimal if :

i) for $`ri1`$, $`F_i`$ and $`F_{i1}`$ are adjacent chambers inside $`𝔸`$ ;

ii) $`\mathrm{\#}(F_B,F_0^{})=r.`$

Now, if we fix $`\tau =(t_rt_r^{}t_{r1}\mathrm{}t_1^{}t_0t_0^{})`$ a minimal chamber gallery type, then $`t_i=typ(B)=\mathrm{}`$ for $`ri0`$ and $`t_j^{}=\{s_{i_j}\}`$ where $`s_{i_j}S`$ is a generator of $`W`$ and $`t_0^{}`$ is any type. The word $`s_{i_r}\mathrm{}s_{i_1}`$ built with these reflections, is a reduced decomposition of an element of $`W`$.

More precisely, we have the following

###### Proposition 1.

i) We keep the notations and $`\tau `$ is fixed as above. If $`F_r`$ and $`F_0`$ are two chambers of $`𝔸`$ such that $`d(F_r,F_0)=r0`$ and $`F_0^{}`$ is the face of type $`t_0^{}`$ contained in $`F_0`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau ,F_r,F_0^{})=\left\{\gamma _w\right\}`$ is reduced to a single element.

ii) For any type $`t_P`$ ($`t_P`$ is the type of a parabolic subgroup $`PB`$), the construction above states a bijection between minimal chamber gallery types and reduced decompositions of minimal length coset representatives of the classes in $`W/W_{t_P}`$.

We define an operation on the galleries of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau ,F_r,)`$ by applying to all the faces of a gallery a folding towards $`F_r`$. Therefore, all these galleries can be obtained from $`\gamma _w`$, by a finite number of foldings towards $`F_r`$.

### 2.5 Configuration Variety

Now, we use the combinatorial setting of the building and of the galleries to describe the Bott-Samelson variety.

Let $`PB`$ be a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ and let $`\overline{w}W/W_{t_P}`$. Also, let $`w`$ denote the element of minimal length in $`\overline{w}`$, and let $`w=s_{i_r}\mathrm{}s_{i_1}`$ be a reduced decomposition of $`w`$, denoted by $`\underset{¯}{i}=(i_r,\mathrm{},i_1)`$.

In the rest of this paper, $`w`$ will always mean this element.

We fix $`F_0^{}=F_{\overline{w}(P)}`$, where $`\overline{w}(P)`$ stands for $`\overline{w}P\overline{w}^1`$. Let

$$\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}=(t_rt_r^{}t_{r1}\mathrm{}t_1^{}t_0t_0^{})$$

be the type of chamber gallery in $`𝔸`$ between $`F_B`$ and $`F_{\overline{w}(P)}`$ associated to the reduced decomposition $`\underset{¯}{i}`$, that is $`t_j^{}=\{s_{i_j}\}`$, for $`rj1`$ and $`t_0^{}=t_P`$. The type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ is therefore a minimal chamber gallery type.

###### Definition-Proposition 1 (\[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\]).

The configuration variety
$`CONF_{\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}}(G)_B`$ is defined as the subvariety of the product

$$\mathbb{\Pi }(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})=\underset{ri0}{}Par_{t_i}(G)\times Par_{t_i^{}}(G)$$

which consists of all the configurations of parabolic subgroups of the form :

$$g=(B_rP_rB_{r1}\mathrm{}P_1B_0P_0),$$

where $`B_r=B`$ and $`typ(g)=\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$.

As we saw it before, these configurations are the chamber galleries in $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$, of type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ and of source $`F_B`$.

To each gallery $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Delta }(G),\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$, we associate its target which is a face of type $`t_0^{}=t_P`$, associated to a parabolic subgroup in relative position $`\overline{u}`$ with $`B`$, for $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ in $`W/W_{t_P}`$. Thus, we obtain a morphism of variety :

$$\pi :CONF_{\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}}(G)_B\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w}).$$

Beside, from the decomposition $`\underset{¯}{i}=(i_r,\mathrm{}i_1)`$, we can construct the Bott-Samelson variety $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})=P_{i_r}\times _B\mathrm{}\times _B(P_{i_1}/B)`$, where for $`rj1`$, $`P_{i_j}=Bs_{i_j}BB`$ is the unique parabolic subgroup of type $`t_j^{}`$ containing $`B`$ (see for example \[De, $`\mathrm{\S }`$3, Definition 1\]). We denote by $`[x_r,\mathrm{},x_1]`$ the $`k`$points of this variety.

###### Proposition 2 (\[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\]).

The morphism

$$f:\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})CONF_{\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}}(G)_B$$

defined in the following way, is an isomorphism :

$$f([x_r,\mathrm{},x_1])=(B_rP_rB_{r1}\mathrm{}P_1B_0P_0)$$

where

$`B_i=x_r\mathrm{}x_{i+1}B(x_r\mathrm{}x_{i+1})^1`$, for $`r1i0`$,

$`P_j=x_r\mathrm{}x_{j+1}P_{i_j}(x_r\mathrm{}x_{j+1})^1`$, for $`r1j1`$,

$`B_r=B`$ and $`P_0=x_r\mathrm{}x_1P(x_r\mathrm{}x_1)^1`$.

Thus, we arrive to the well-known

###### Theorem 1 (\[Ha\], \[De\], \[CC, Part I, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\]).

The couple $`(CONF_{\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}}(G)_B,\pi )`$ is a smooth equivariant resolution of the Schubert variety $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$, called the Bott-Samelson resolution.

In particular, $`\pi `$ is a birational proper morphism.

###### Remark 2.

Demazure \[De\] and Hansen \[Ha\] have first shown independently that the Bott-Samelson variety is a smooth resolution of the schubert variety, but Contou Carrere \[CC\] enunciates this theorem in the more general setting of the universal Schubert scheme over any base scheme.

## 3 Combinatorial Tangent Space

From now on, we will denote the configuration variety as the Bott-Samelson variety by $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$. And we will call the galleries of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$, combinatorial galleries. Furthermore, we will use freely the two writings of galleries i.e. $`\gamma =[\gamma _r,\mathrm{},\gamma _1]=(F_B=F_rF_r^{}F_{r1}\mathrm{}F_1^{}F_0F_0^{})`$. Let us remark that $`\gamma =[\gamma _r,\mathrm{},\gamma _1]`$ is a combinatorial gallery iff $`\gamma _j=s_{i_j}`$ or $`\gamma _j=1`$.

### 3.1 The tangent space at $`\gamma `$ of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$

Let $`QT`$ be a parabolic subgroup of $`G`$. As $`G`$ is “ pingl ”, we know that $`Lie(Q)=𝒯\left(_{\alpha R_Q}𝒢^\alpha \right)`$, where $`R_Q`$ is the set of roots of $`(Q,T)`$ and where $`𝒢^\alpha =<X_\alpha >`$.

If $`x`$ denote the $`k`$point of $`Par_{t_Q}(G)`$ given by $`Q`$, then

$$T_xPar_{t_Q}(G)Lie(G)/Lie(Q)=\underset{\alpha RR_Q}{}𝒢^\alpha .$$

Let $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}=(t_rt_r^{}t_{r1}\mathrm{}t_1^{}t_0t_0^{})`$ be the type of a minimal chamber gallery given by a fixed reduced decomposition of $`w\overline{w}`$. Let also $`\gamma =(F_{B_r}F_{P_r}F_{B_{r1}}\mathrm{}F_{P_1}F_{B_0}F_{P_0})`$ denote a gallery of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_{\overline{u}(P)})`$, where $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ in $`W/W_{t_P}`$ ($`P_0=\overline{u}(P)=\overline{u}P\overline{u}^1`$).

From the definition-proposition 1, we deduce that $`T_\gamma \widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ is a vector subspace of the product :

$$(\gamma )=\left(𝒢/Lie(B_r)\times 𝒢/Lie(P_r)\right)\times \mathrm{}\times \left(𝒢/Lie(B_0)\times 𝒢/Lie(P_0)\right).$$

Now, we explain, following \[CC, Part II, $`\mathrm{\S }`$5\] how to construct a basis of this vector space.

Let $`E(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})=\{t_r,t_r^{},t_{r1},\mathrm{},t_1^{},t_0,t_0^{}\}`$ be the set of types which appears in $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ totally ordered by the reading order (i.e. $`t_rt_r^{}t_{r1}\mathrm{}`$). Let

$$𝔼(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})=\underset{\theta E(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})}{}\{\theta \}\times (RR_\theta )\mathrm{where}R_\theta =\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill R_{B_i}& \mathrm{if}\theta =t_i\hfill \\ \hfill R_{P_j}& \mathrm{if}\theta =t_j^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$

We define an equivalence relation $``$ on $`𝔼(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ :

$$(\theta ,\alpha )(\theta ^{},\alpha ^{})\{\begin{array}{c}\alpha =\alpha ^{}\hfill \\ \alpha (RR_\theta )(RR_{\theta 1})\mathrm{}(RR_\theta ^{})(\theta \theta ^{}).\hfill \end{array}$$

Define $`𝔹(\gamma )=𝔼(\gamma )/`$ and $`𝔹(\gamma ,B)=\{C𝔹(\gamma ),C\left(\{t_r\}\times (RR_B)\right)=\mathrm{}\}`$. For $`C𝔹(\gamma ,B)`$, denote $`X_C`$ the element of $`(\gamma )`$ with $`\theta `$component equals to $`X_\alpha `$ if $`(\theta ,\alpha )C`$ and 0 otherwise.

###### Proposition 3 (\[CC, Part II, $`\mathrm{\S }`$5\]).

The set of vectors $`\{X_C\}_{C𝔹(\gamma ,B)}`$ is a basis of $`T_\gamma \widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},B)`$.

###### Remark 3.

For $`C𝔹(\gamma ,B)`$, a vector $`X_C`$ has the form :

$$X_C=((0,0),\mathrm{},(0,0),X_\alpha ,\mathrm{},X_\alpha ,\underset{\mathrm{eventually}}{\underset{}{0,0,\mathrm{},0}}).$$

### 3.2 Combinatorial Tangent Space

Let $`x`$ be the $`k`$point of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ given by a parabolic subgroup of type $`t_P`$ containing $`T`$. That is $`x=\overline{u}(P)`$ for $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ in $`W/W_{t_P}`$. Let us denote $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$, the finite set of galleries in $`𝔸`$, of type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$, of source $`F_B`$ and of target $`F_x`$. These combinatorial galleries are the $`T`$fixed points of the fibre $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})_x=\pi ^1(x)`$ (we shall discuss more precisely this point in section 4).

###### Definition 6.

The combinatorial tangent space, $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$, is the vector subspace of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ generated by the union of the images of tangent spaces $`T_\gamma \widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ for all $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$,

$$T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})=<\underset{\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }}{}T_\gamma \pi \left(T_\gamma \widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})\right)>.$$

This is a vector subspace of $`Lie(G)/Lie(\overline{u}(P))=_{\alpha RR_{\overline{u}(P)}}𝒢^\alpha `$ and by construction we know a basis of it, composed by the $`X_\alpha `$ with $`\alpha RR_{\overline{u}(P)}`$, which comes from a $`X_C`$, such that $`X_C=((0,0),\mathrm{},(0,0),X_\alpha ,\mathrm{},X_\alpha )`$.

So, $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})=_{\alpha _x}𝒢^\alpha ,`$ where $`_xRR_{\overline{u}(P)}`$ defines the combinatorial tangent space as a $`T`$weighted subspace of $`Lie(G)/Lie(\overline{u}(P))`$.

We give here some definitions to understand how a gallery will contribute to the construction of the combinatorial tangent space.

From now on, we will only consider galleries inside $`𝔸`$.

###### Definition 7.

A bend $`(F_B^{},F_P^{})`$ is a gallery of the form $`F_B^{}F_P^{}F_B^{}`$, where $`F_B^{}`$ is a chamber of $`𝔸`$ and $`F_P^{}`$ is a codimension 1 face of $`F_B^{}`$ carried by a wall $`M_\beta ^{}`$.

###### Remark 4.

A generator vector $`X_\beta `$ of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ comes from a gallery $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\beta `$ is associated to a wall $`M_\beta `$ of $`𝔸`$. Two cases arise

1) $`\gamma `$ crosses $`M_\beta `$ in such a way that $`X_\beta `$ appears in the last component of a $`X_C`$, $`C𝔹(\gamma ,B)`$ (this is the case for all the walls separating $`F_B`$ from $`F_x`$);

2) $`\gamma `$ contains a bend $`(F_B^{},F_P^{})`$ where $`F_P^{}`$ is carried by $`M_\beta `$, again in such a way that $`X_\beta `$ appears in the last component of an $`X_C`$, $`C𝔹(\gamma ,B)`$. Such bends are called generating bends.

A chamber gallery which contains no bend is minimal, and it crosses one and only one time each wall which separates its source from its target.

As an example, let us suppose that $`G`$ is the simple group of type $`B_2`$ and let us take $`P=B`$ the "standard" Borel subgroup and $`w=s_\alpha s_\beta s_\alpha `$ in the Weyl group which is the dihedral group generated by $`s_\alpha `$ and $`s_\beta `$. Let us denote by $`P_\alpha `$ (resp. $`P_\beta `$) the unique parabolic subgroup of type $`\left\{s_\alpha \right\}`$ (resp. $`\left\{s_\beta \right\}`$) containing $`B`$.

The following figure shows the graphic representation of the apartment $`𝔸`$ associated to the "standard" torus $`TB`$ and of the root system of type $`B_2`$. We draw the eight combinatorial galleries of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$ ($`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ is the type associated to the reduced decomposition $`w=s_\alpha s_\beta s_\alpha `$) as curves in the graphic representation of $`𝔸`$. For example $`\gamma _0^0`$ is the unique gallery of type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ contained in the chamber $`F_B`$, so its curve stay inside the chamber while bending the walls corresponding to the faces $`F_{P_\alpha }`$ and $`F_{P_\beta }`$. And the curve corresponding to $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }=[s_\alpha ,s_\beta ,1]=\left(F_BF_{P_\alpha }F_{s_\alpha (B)}F_{s_\alpha (P_\beta )}F_{s_\alpha s_\beta (B)}F_{s_\alpha s_\beta (P_\alpha )}F_{s_\alpha s_\beta (B)}\right)`$ follows the faces which appear in its second writing. And so on for the other galleries. The bullet at the beginning of each curve stands for the source of the gallery and the arrow at the end shows the direction and the target.

As we can see on this picture, if $`x=s_\alpha Bs_\alpha `$, the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ admits the basis $`\{X_\beta ,X_{2\alpha \beta },X_\alpha \}`$. And these generators are all given by generating bends of the two galleries of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)=\{\gamma _\alpha ^1,\gamma _\alpha ^2\}`$.

On the other hand, if $`x=s_\alpha s_\beta (B)=s_\alpha s_\beta B(s_\alpha s_\beta )^1`$, then $`T_x\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)=T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)=<X_\alpha ,X_{2\alpha +\beta },X_{\alpha \beta }>`$. This time, the two first generators are given by the fact that $`\gamma _{\alpha \beta }`$ crosses the walls $`M_\alpha `$ and $`M_{2\alpha +\beta }`$ and the third by the generating bend $`(F_{s_\alpha s_\beta (B)},F_{s_\alpha s_\beta (P_\alpha )})`$.

It seems that $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ depends on the choice of a type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$, i.e. on the choice of a reduced decomposition of $`w`$, but it is not the case.

###### Proposition 4.

The combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ is independent from the choice of the reduced decomposition of $`w`$.

Proof. Take two decompositions $`\underset{¯}{i}`$ and $`\underset{¯}{j}`$ of $`w`$. The decomposition $`\underset{¯}{j}`$ can be obtained from $`\underset{¯}{i}`$ by the action of an element of the generalized braid group. This element can be written as a finite sequence of generalized braid relations. So, it suffices to show that generators of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ are the same if we “calculate” them with $`\underset{¯}{i}`$ or with a transform of $`\underset{¯}{i}`$ by a generalized braid relation $`r_t`$. Let $`\underset{¯}{j}=r_t(\underset{¯}{i})`$, the relation $`r_t`$ induces a $`T`$equivariant isomorphism of variety

$$f_{r_t}:\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},B)\stackrel{}{}\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\tau _{\underset{¯}{j}},B),$$

(hence, $`f_{r_t}\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})\right)=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\tau _{\underset{¯}{j}})`$). Let $`X_\beta `$ be a generator of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ coming from $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }(\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$. Whether $`\gamma `$ contains a minimal chamber gallery $`\delta `$ which crosses $`M_\beta `$, then $`f_{r_t}(\gamma )`$ will contain $`f_{r_t}(\delta )`$ which still crosses $`M_\beta `$. Whether $`\beta `$ is given by a generating bend $`\mu `$ of $`\gamma `$, again $`f_{r_t}(\mu )`$ will be a generating bend of $`f_{r_t}(\gamma )`$ and will still give $`X_\beta `$ as a generator of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$. So, in the two cases, proposition holds.

$`\mathrm{}`$

In the following, we will study more closely the set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ of all the combinatorial galleries above $`F_x`$. This will allow us to show a pleasant property of the combinatorial tangent space. In order to do that, we need some definitions.

###### Definition 8.

Let $`\gamma =[\gamma _r,\mathrm{},\gamma _1]=(F_B=F_rF_r^{}F_{r1}\mathrm{}F_1^{}F_0F_0^{})\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$. A buckle of $`\gamma `$ is a sub-gallery of $`\gamma `$ of the shape

$$𝔟=(F_j^{}F_{j1}\mathrm{}F_{i+1}^{}F_iF_i^{}),$$

where $`rj>i0`$, such that $`F_j^{}`$ and $`F_i^{}`$ are two faces of the same wall $`M^𝔟`$ and such that all the chambers $`F_l`$, for $`j1li`$, are on the same side of $`M^𝔟`$.

If all the reflections $`s_{i_j}`$ that compose the gallery of types $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ are distinct (including those given by the type $`t_P`$) then any gallery $`\gamma `$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ does not contain any buckle. Furthermore, any minimal gallery does not contain any buckle neither. Actually, if all the walls met by a gallery $`\gamma `$, $`(\gamma )=\{M_{\beta _r},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _1},\{M_{x(\nu )}\}_{s_\nu t}\}`$, are distinct, then $`\gamma `$ does not contain any buckle.

Moreover, a buckle of a combinatorial gallery contains at least one bend (Definition 7).

###### Definition 9.

We say that a buckle $`𝔟`$ of a gallery $`\gamma `$ is maximal if all the buckles of $`\gamma `$ on the wall $`M^𝔟`$ are contained in $`𝔟`$ (i.e. are sub-galleries of $`𝔟`$).

Now, we describe the set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ using an operation analogous to the one that allowed us to describe the set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$ in the section 2.4.

###### Definition 10.

A part-folding $`\overline{\varphi }`$ of a combinatorial gallery $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ which contains a buckle $`𝔟`$ is the following operation. We take the part of $`\gamma `$ determined by $`𝔟`$ and we replace it by its image by the reflection $`s_{M^𝔟}`$ associated to the wall $`M^𝔟`$. We thus obtain a new combinatorial gallery $`\overline{\varphi }(\gamma )\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$.

Further, we say that the part-folding $`\overline{\varphi }`$ is towards $`F_B`$ if all the chambers of the new buckle $`s_{M^𝔟}(𝔟)`$ and $`F_B`$ are on the same side of $`M^𝔟`$.

The set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ is invariant by part-foldings ($`x=\overline{u}(P)`$). Let us denote

$$\gamma _{u,w}\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)$$
(1)
the unique gallery obtained from any other gallery of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ by applying the maximum of part-foldings towards $`F_B`$. This gallery corresponds to the unique way to construct a reduced sub-decomposition of $`u`$ from the chosen reduced decomposition of $`w`$ by taking the reflections which define $`u`$ the most possible towards the right.

So, we can recover all the combinatorial galleries above $`F_x`$ by applying some part-foldings opposed to $`F_B`$ (i.e. $`F_B`$ does not belong to the image of the associated folding) to $`\gamma _{u,w}`$. For example, if $`u=1`$, $`\gamma _{1,w}`$ is equal to $`\gamma _0=[1,\mathrm{},1]`$, the unique gallery of type $`\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}}`$ contained in the chamber $`F_B`$ and all the galleries having $`F_1F_B`$ as target can be obtained from $`\gamma _{1,w}`$ thanks to part-foldings opposed to $`F_B`$.

The gallery $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ carries all the generator vectors of the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$.

###### Proposition 5.

Still keeping the same notations,

$$dimT_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})r=dim\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w}).$$

Proof.  Set $`\gamma _{u,w}=[x_r,\mathrm{},x_1]P_{i_r}\times _B\mathrm{}\times _B(P_{i_1}/B)`$. Recall that the set of all the walls met by $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ is denoted $`(\gamma _{u,w})=\{M_{\beta _r},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _1},\{M_{u(\nu )}\}_{s_\nu t}\}`$ , where $`\beta _j=x_r\mathrm{}x_j(\alpha _{k_j})`$ and $`u=x_r\mathrm{}x_1`$.

Let us suppose that all the walls met by $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ are not distinct (otherwise $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)=\left\{\gamma _{u,w}\right\}`$ and we have $`dimT_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})=r`$).

On one side, let $`𝒯(\gamma _{u,w})\{M_{\beta _r},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _1}\}`$ denote the set of walls crossed by $`\gamma _{u,w}`$, i.e. walls which separate $`F_B`$ from $`F_x`$. Then $`\mathrm{\#}𝒯(\gamma _{u,w})=l(u)`$ and $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ never crosses again one of these walls, otherwise $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ would admits a buckle that we could fold towards $`F_B`$. Hence, from the remark 4, we obtain $`l(u)`$ generator vectors of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$. Furthermore, the roots associated to the walls which contain $`F_x`$ cannot give any generator of the combinatorial tangent space. Hence, only the $`m=l(w)l(u)`$ walls of $`(\gamma _{u,w})𝒯(\gamma _{u,w})=\{M_{\beta _{i_m}},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _{i_1}}\}`$ may provide some new generators.

On the other side, the hypothesis done (i.e. all the walls met by $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ are not all distinct), implies that there exists only $`p`$ walls, $`𝒟(\gamma _{u,w})=\{M_{\beta _{i_p^{}}},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _{i_1^{}}}\}\{M_{\beta _{i_m}},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _{i_1}}\}`$ with $`m>p1`$, all distinct and also distinct from the walls crossed by $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ on which this gallery admits a generating bend. So, they give $`p`$ more generator vectors of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ (Remark 4).

The rest of the walls, $`(\gamma _{u,w})=\{M_{\beta _{i_m}},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _{i_1}}\}\{M_{\beta _{i_p^{}}},\mathrm{},M_{\beta _{i_1^{}}}\}`$ are then equal to some crossed walls or some walls containing $`F_x`$ or some walls of $`𝒟(\gamma _{u,w})`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{\#}(\gamma _{u,w})=mp=t+f+c`$, where $`t`$ is the number of walls of $`(\gamma _{u,w})`$ equal to crossed walls, $`f`$ those equal to walls containing $`F_x`$ and $`c`$ those equal to walls of $`𝒟(\gamma _{u,w})`$. Moreover, $`t=t_1+\mathrm{}+t_s`$, $`f=f_1+\mathrm{}+f_e`$ and $`c=c_1+\mathrm{}+c_b`$, where the $`t_j`$’s, $`f_j`$’s and $`c_j`$’s are respectively the numbers of walls of $`(\gamma _{u,w})`$ equal to a same wall of $`𝒯(\gamma _{u,w})`$, of $`\{M_{u(\nu )}\}_{s_\nu t}`$ and of $`𝒟(\gamma _{u,w})`$.

By the way, the gallery $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ admits $`s`$ maximal buckles on crossed walls, $`e`$ maximal buckles on walls containing $`F_x`$ and $`b`$ maximal buckles on walls of $`𝒟(\gamma _{u,w})`$ (cf. Definition 9). And each of these buckles provides, by applying part-foldings opposed to $`F_B`$, at least as much galleries containing a generating bend as the number $`t_j`$, $`f_j`$ or $`c_j`$ which corresponds to the maximal buckle we started with.

Indeed, let $`𝔟`$ be one of these buckle, $`𝔟`$ owns at least as much bends as the number $`t_j`$, $`f_j`$ or $`c_j`$ which corresponds to it. Let us apply to $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ the part-folding $`\overline{\varphi }`$ fixed by $`𝔟`$ (Definition 10), we obtain a new gallery $`\overline{\varphi }(\gamma _{u,w})`$ which owns a buckle, image of $`𝔟`$. Let $`(C^{},F^{})`$ be a bend of this new buckle, then two cases may arise :

a) $`(C^{},F^{})`$ is a generating bend on a wall that $`\gamma _{u,w}`$ did not meet ;

b) the gallery $`\overline{\varphi }(\gamma _{u,w})`$ crosses the wall containing $`F^{}`$, that means that it has a buckle on this wall, then we can apply a part-folding to it and repeat the discussion.

At the end, each maximal buckle will give at least as much generator vectors of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ as the number $`t_j`$, $`f_j`$ or $`c_j`$ corresponding to it.

Hence, if we recount the number of generators which may arise from $`\gamma _{u,w}`$, we see that $`dimT_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\overline{w})r=l(w)`$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 5.

All the combinatorial galleries above $`F_x`$ are obtained by part-foldings opposed to $`F_B`$ from $`\gamma _{u,w}`$. So, all the generators of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ will be given using the process shown in the previous proof. Hence, the $`T`$weights of this space, $`_x`$, will come from the walls we consider above.

To close this section, we mention an important result of C. Contou Carrere.

###### Theorem 2 (\[CC, Part II, $`\mathrm{\S }`$10\]).

Let $`G`$ be a $`k`$semi-simple group of type $`A`$. For any parabolic subgroup $`PB`$ and for all $`T`$fixed point $`x\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$, the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ is equal to the Zariski tangent space $`T_x\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$.

Thus, we can describe the singular locus of any Schubert variety in case of a group of type $`A`$.

## 4 Rational Smoothness of Schubert Varieties

First of all, we recall one of the definitions of rational smoothness \[CP\]. A projective variety $`Y`$ of dimension $`r`$ is rationally smooth at $`yY`$ if there exists an neighborhood $`U`$ of $`y`$ such that the $`l`$adic cohomology $`H_{<y>}^i(U)=0`$ if $`i2r`$ and is one dimensional if $`i=2r`$. The variety $`Y`$ is rationally smooth if it is rationally smooth at every point.

A smooth point is rationally smooth, but there are rationally smooth Schubert varieties which are not smooth. This is the case for our example of the figure 3.2, see \[C2, $`\mathrm{\S }`$7\] for other examples.

### 4.1 Combinatorial Tangent Space and Rational Smoothness

###### Proposition 6.

Let $`\overline{w}W/W_t`$. For all $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$, we set $`x=\overline{u}(P)`$, then

$$dimT_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})=\mathrm{\#}\left\{\beta R_+,\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{w}\text{ and }\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{u}\right\}.$$

Proof.  First, let $`\beta R_+`$ such that $`\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{w}`$ and $`\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{u}`$, we denote by $`M_\beta `$ the wall associated to this root. Two cases may appear :

1) $`M_\beta `$ separates $`C`$ from $`F_x`$, the face associated to $`\overline{u}(P)`$. Then $`X_\beta `$ is a generator vector of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$.

2) $`C`$ and $`F_x`$ are on the same side of $`M_\beta `$. Thus, the gallery $`\gamma _{s_\beta u,w}`$ (cf. (1) of the previous section for the definition) crosses this wall. Let us consider the gallery $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ image of the folding towards $`F_B`$ associated to $`M_\beta `$ of the gallery $`\gamma _{s_\beta u,w}`$. Then $`\gamma `$ contains a generating bend on this wall and that gives a generator vector $`X_\beta `$ of the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$.

Moreover, the face $`F_x`$ cannot belong to the wall $`M_\beta `$ since this is equivalent to the fact that $`\overline{s_\beta u}=\overline{u}`$.

Second, let $`M_\alpha `$ be a wall that provides a generator vector of the combinatorial tangent space (i.e. $`X_\alpha `$ or $`X_\alpha `$ belongs to $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$). Let $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_x)`$ denote a gallery which gives this generator. Then the gallery obtained from $`\gamma `$ by keeping $`\gamma `$ until the wall $`M_\alpha `$ and by following it with $`s_\alpha (\gamma )`$ is a combinatorial gallery that admits $`F_{\overline{s_\alpha u}(P)}`$ as a target. Hence, $`\overline{s_\alpha u}w`$ and $`\overline{s_\alpha u}\overline{u}`$ since a wall which gives a generator vector of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ does not contain $`F_x`$.

These two constructions are inverse of each other, so they establish a bijection between the set of generator vectors of $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ and $`\left\{\beta R_+,\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{w}\text{ and }\overline{s_\beta u}\overline{u}\right\}`$, hence the proposition is proved.

$`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ inside $`W/W_t`$. Let us consider, following Carrell and Peterson (\[CP\]), the property $`𝐏(\overline{u},\overline{w})`$ defined by :

$$𝐏(\overline{u},\overline{w})\overline{v},\overline{u}\overline{v}\overline{w},\mathrm{\#}\{\beta R_+,\overline{u}<\overline{s_\beta v}\overline{w}\text{ and }\overline{s_\beta v}\overline{v}\}=l(\overline{w})l(\overline{u}),$$

where the lengths are taken on the elements of minimal length of each class.

As it is remarked in \[C1\], this property is equivalent to the following, for all $`\overline{u}\overline{v}\overline{w},\mathrm{\#}\left\{\beta R_+,\overline{s_\beta v}\overline{w}\text{ and }\overline{s_\beta v}\overline{v}\right\}=l(\overline{w})`$.

Now, let us suppose that $`P=B`$, i.e. we consider the Schubert varieties inside the variety of Borel subgroups. Then the last conditions, $`\overline{s_\beta v}\overline{v}`$, in the above properties, are superfluous.

Let $`u,w`$ be two elements of the weyl group such that $`uw`$. We denote by $`P_{u,w}`$ the Kashdan-Lusztig polynomial (cf. \[KL\], \[D90\]). We recall the following result due to Carrell and Peterson.

###### Theorem 3 (\[CP, Theorem C\]).

Let $`uw`$ inside the Weyl group $`W`$, then the property $`𝐏(u,w)`$ is equivalent to $`P_{u,w}=1`$.

But, in our case, the rational smoothness of a Schubert variety $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ at the point $`u(B)`$ is characterized by the fact that $`P_{u,w}=1`$ (see for exemple \[KL\] in the case the ground field has positive characteristic and \[CP\] for any algebraically closed field). Thus, as a corollary of what we said from the begining of this section (in particular, from Proposition 6), we get :

###### Theorem 4.

A Schubert variety $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ is rationally smooth at $`u(B)`$, for $`uw`$, if and only if for all $`uvw`$, the dimension of the combinatorial tangent space $`T_{v(B)}^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ is equal to $`r=l(w)`$.

Furthermore, combining Theorem 2 of section 3.2 and Theorem 4, we have the following result, first obtained by Deodhar \[D85\] :

###### Corollary 1.

If $`G`$ is of type $`A`$, then smoothness and rational smoothness for Schubert varieties in $`G/B`$ are equivalent.

###### Remark 6.

This characterization seems to go through in the parabolic case, that is for any $`PB`$. But, in this case, it has to be taken into account the parabolic Kashdan-Lusztig polynomials to characterize the rational smoothness of Schubert varieties in $`G/P`$ (cf. \[D91, $`\mathrm{\S }`$6\]).

### 4.2 Combinatorial Tangent Space and $`T`$invariant Curves

In this section, we keep the notations as in section 3 and we follow the definitions of Carrell and Peterson \[CP\] about $`T`$invariant curves.

For any projective $`T`$variety $`Y`$, a $`T`$invariant curve in $`Y`$ is the closure of a one dimensional orbit of $`T`$. Let us denote by $`E(Y)`$ the set of all the $`T`$invariant curves in $`Y`$ and if $`x`$ is a $`T`$fixed point of $`Y`$, $`E(Y,x)`$ denotes the set of all the $`T`$invariant curves containing $`x`$.

First, we recall here some well-known properties of the $`T`$invariant curves in

$$\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})Par_{t_P}(G)G/P.$$

For a positive root $`\alpha R^+`$, we denote by $`U_\alpha `$ the unipotent subgroup of rank 1 of $`G`$ associated to $`\alpha `$. And $`Z_\alpha =<U_\alpha ,U_\alpha >G,`$ denotes the copy of $`Sl_2`$ associated to $`\alpha `$.

Every $`T`$invariant curve $`𝒞`$ in $`Par_{t_P}(G)`$ has the form $`𝒞=Z_\alpha \overline{w}(P)`$ for some $`\overline{w}W/W_{t_P}`$ and $`\alpha R^+`$ \[CP, Theorem F\].

Let $`\overline{u}W/W_{t_P}`$ such that $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ for the relative Chevalley-Bruhat order (defined on the set of minimal length coset representatives for $`W/W_{t_P}`$). Set $`x=\overline{u}(P)`$, the $`T`$fixed point corresponding to $`\overline{u}`$.

Carrell and Peterson proved that $`Z_\alpha \overline{u}(P)E(\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\overline{w},B),x)`$ if and only if $`\overline{u}\overline{w}`$ and $`\overline{s_\alpha u}\overline{w}`$ (and $`\overline{s_\alpha u}\overline{u}`$) \[CP, Theorem F\].

Thus, from the proposition 6 (more precisely from the proof of this proposition), we obtain,

###### Proposition 7.

To each generator vector of the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ corresponds a $`T`$invariant curve in $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\overline{w})`$ which contains $`x`$ and this space is spanned by the tangent vectors to each of these curves. Hence, $`\mathrm{\#}E(\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(\overline{w}),x)=dimT_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$.

Now, we go to the $`T`$invariant curves in the Bott-Samelson variety $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$.

The set of $`T`$fixed points of this variety $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})^T`$ is finite and is equal to the finite set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$ of all the combinatorial galleries of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$. Hence, there are at least $`r`$ $`T`$invariant curves passing through each combinatorial gallery \[CP, $`\mathrm{\S }`$2\].

###### Definition 11.

A $`T`$invariant curve $``$ of the Bott-Samelson variety will be called a combinatorial $`T`$invariant curve if it contains two combinatorial galleries $`\gamma =[\gamma _r,\mathrm{},\gamma _1]`$ and $`\delta =[\delta _r,\mathrm{},\delta _1]`$ for which there exists a unique $`j_0\{r,\mathrm{},1\}`$ such that for all $`jj_0`$, $`\gamma _j=\delta _j`$ and $`\gamma _{j_0}=s_{\alpha _{k_{j_0}}}\delta _{j_0}`$.

Such a curve $``$ maps by $`\pi `$ on a $`T`$invariant curve in the Scubert variety, more precisely $`\pi ()=Z_\beta \pi (\gamma )=Z_\beta \pi (\delta )`$, where $`\beta =\gamma _r\mathrm{}\gamma _{j_0+1}(\alpha _{k_{j_0}})`$. However, there exists some $`T`$invariant curves in the Bott-Samelson variety that are not of this kind. This is due to the fact that the action of the torus $`T`$ on $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ is not "special" in the sense of Carrell and Peterson \[CP, $`\mathrm{\S }`$2\].

So, we use the notation $`=(\gamma \delta )`$ to describe such a $`T`$invariant curve, which contains $`\gamma `$ and $`\delta `$ as two distinct $`T`$fixed points.

Moreover, some of the galleries of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$ can be obtained from the gallery $`\gamma _w\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,F_{\overline{w}(P)})`$ by a finite number of foldings towards $`F_B`$ (cf. 2.4, Proposition 1). Hence, if $`=(\gamma \delta )E\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})\right)`$, where $`\delta `$ is obtained from $`\gamma `$ by a folding $`\varphi _\alpha `$ towards $`F_B`$ ($`\alpha R^+`$), we will denote it by $`_\alpha =(\gamma \stackrel{\varphi _\alpha }{}\delta ).`$ Furthermore, $`\pi (_\alpha )=Z_\alpha \pi (\gamma )=Z_\alpha \pi (\delta )`$.

We now define the finite graph $`S_T^c`$ of the combinatorial $`T`$invariant curves in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$.

The set of vertices $`S_T^c`$ is defined as the set $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})^T`$ of all $`T`$fixed points in the Bott-Samelson variety, i.e. the combinatorial galleries $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$.

And the set of edges $`S_T^c`$ is defined as the set of combinatorial curves in $`E\left(\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})\right)`$. For $`\gamma `$ and $`\delta `$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$, there is an edge between them if $`=(\gamma \delta )`$ is a combinatorial $`T`$invariant curve in $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$. If this curve is associated to a folding $`\varphi _\alpha `$ towards $`F_B`$ ($`\alpha >0`$), we label the corresponding edge of $`S_T^c`$ by $`\varphi _\alpha `$.

Moreover, we form into rows the vertices of the graph (i.e. the combinatorial galleries) depending on the distance that separate the chamber $`F_B`$ from the target of the gallery. Thus the gallery $`\gamma _w`$ will be the unique vertex at the bottom row of the graph and $`\gamma _{1,w}`$ will belong to the top row. As this distance is exactly the length of the element of the Weyl group that gives the target face of the gallery, we have a surjective morphism of graphs from $`S_T^c`$ to the Bruhat subgraph of $`(W,S)`$ associated to $`w`$, hence we say that $`S_T^c`$ is above the Bruhat graph of $`w`$.

Furthermore, from the previous definition, exactly $`r=dim\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ edges meet at each vertex.

To see what such a graph looks like, let us take the example of $`\mathrm{\S }3.2`$ up again. We recall that the group $`G`$ is of type $`B_2`$ and we fix $`P=B`$ and $`w=s_\alpha s_\beta s_\alpha `$. The set of combinatorial galleries $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}},F_B,)`$ is represented in the figure 3.2. And from their expressions in terms of generators of the Weyl group as points of $`P_\alpha \times _BP_\beta \times _BP_\alpha /B`$, it is easy to describe the combinatorial $`T`$invariant curves between them. So in this case the graph $`S_T`$ has the following form.

As we can see on this example, some of the $`T`$invariant curves of $`\widehat{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\tau _{\underset{¯}{i}})`$ are not related to a folding. For the others, the folding can be easily read on the figure 3.2.

Now, we return to the general case and we describe a way to read off the generators of the combinatorial tangent space from the graph $`S_T^c`$.

First, let $`x=\overline{u}(P)`$ be a $`T`$fixed point of $`\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$, i.e. a vertex of the Bruhat graph of $`w`$.

Let us consider all the vertices above $`x`$, that is, all the combinatorial galleries whose target is $`F_x`$. We denote by $`_x^+`$ (resp. $`_x^{}`$) the set of all the distinct roots that, eventually, label the edges leaving to the top (resp. arriving from the bottom to) these vertices. Then, we deduce from what has been said from the begining of this section the following proposition.

###### Proposition 8.

The set $`_x`$ of all the $`T`$weights of the combinatorial tangent space $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,\overline{w})`$ (cf. Section 3.2) actually equals $`_x^+(_x^{})`$.

This proposition shows up a new way to calculate the generator vectors of the combinatorial tangent space. For instance, if we go back to the previous example, it is easy to see on the graph that $`T_{s_\alpha (B)}^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)`$ admits the basis $`\{X_\beta ,X_{2\alpha \beta },X_\alpha \}`$ and if $`x=s_\alpha s_\beta (B)=s_\alpha s_\beta B(s_\alpha s_\beta )^1`$, then $`T_x^c\overline{\mathrm{\Sigma }}(B,w)=<X_\alpha ,X_{2\alpha +\beta },X_{\alpha \beta }>`$. Thus, we recover the results of section 3.2.

## 5 References

N. Bourbaki, Groupes et alg bre de Lie, Chapitres 4,5 et 6, Hermann, Paris (1968).

J. B. Carrell, On the smooth points of a Schubert variety, Can. Math. Soc. Conf. Proc., vol 16, (1995), 15-33.

J. B. Carrell, The span of the tangent cone of a Schubert variety, Algebraic Groups and Lie Groups, Soc. Lectures Series 9, Cambridge Univ. Press, (1997), 51-60.

J. B. Carrell, The Bruhat graph of a Coxeter group, a conjecture of Deodhar, and rational smoothness of Schubert varieties, Proc. Symp. in Pure Math., 56, (1994), Part I, 53-61.

C. Contou Carrere, G om trie des groupes semi-simples, r solutions quivariantes et lieu singulier de leurs vari t s de Schubert, Th se d’ tat, (1983), Universit Montpellier II, published partly as, Le Lieu singulier des vari t s de Schubert, Adv. Math., 71, (1988), 186-221.

M. Demazure, D singularisation des vari t s de Schubert, Ann. Sci. Ecole Norm. Sup. (4), 7, (1974), 53-88.

V. Deodhar, A brief survey of Kashdan-Lusztig theory and related topics, Proc. Symp. in Pure Math., 56, (1991), Part I, 105-124.

V. Deodhar, A combinatorial setting for question in Kashdan-Lusztig theory, Geometriae Dedicata, 36, (1990), 95-119.

V. Deodhar, Local Poincar duality and non singularity of Schubert varieties, Comm. in Algebra, 13(6), (1985), 1379-1388.

S. Gaussent, Etude de la r solution de Bott-Samelson d’une vari t de Schubert, en vue d’un crit re valuatif de lissit , Ph. D. Thesis, Universit Montpellier 2, in preparation, to be defended in january 2001.

H. C. Hansen, On cycles of flag manifolds, Math. Scand., 33, (1973), 269-274.

D. Kazhdan and G. Lusztig, Representation of Coxeter groups and Hecke algebras, Invent. Math., 53, (1979), 165-184.

O. Mathieu, Formules de caract res pour les alg bres de Kac-Moody g n rales, Ast risque, 159-160, (1988).

A. Grothendieck and M. Demazure, Sch mas en groupes I, II, III, Lectures notes in Math. 151, 152, 153, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1970).

J. Tits, Buildings of spherical type and finite $`BN`$pairs, Lecture notes in Math. 386, Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (1974).


format: text

text:
# Baryon Number Fluctuation and the Quark-Gluon Plasma

## I Introduction

A new state of matter, the quark-gluon plasma, is expected to be formed in heavy ion collisions at ultra-relativistic energies, such as at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) that has just begun its operation at the Brookhaven National Laboratory. Many observables have been proposed as possible signatures for the quark-gluon plasma phase during the collisions , such as strangeness enhancement , $`J/\psi `$ suppression , modification of high $`p_T`$ particle spectrum , and $`M_T`$ scaling  and double phi peaks  in the dilepton spectrum. Recently, event-by-event fluctuations of various particles have also attracted much attention . Since the baryon and charge numbers of quarks are fractional, the net baryon number  and net charge  fluctuations per particle are smaller in the quark-gluon plasma than in the hadronic matter and have also been suggested as possible signatures for the quark-gluon plasma.

Because of conservation of total net baryon number, the net baryon fluctuation is finite only if one considers a part of the full phase space, e.g., in a finite rapidity range. Since the quark-gluon plasma is eventually converted to the hadronic matter, elastic scatterings of baryons and antibaryons would modify their phase space correlations and thus increase the net baryon fluctuation towards that expected from an equilibrated hadronic matter . On the other hand, elastic scatterings of baryons and antibaryons do not change their numbers in the full phase space, so fluctuations of baryon and antibaryon numbers are alternative signatures for the quark-gluon plasma in relativistic heavy ion collisions.

In this study, we shall use a master equation with exact baryon number conservation to derive the baryon and antibaryon number fluctuations in an equilibrated matter, and to study the effects due to finite acceptance and non-zero net baryon number.

## II Kinetic model

Due to the different fundamental units of baryon numbers in quark-gluon plasma and in hadronic matter, fluctuations of baryon and antibaryon numbers, like the fluctuation of the net baryon number, take very different values in the two phases of matter. To study dynamically the baryon number fluctuation in heavy ion collisions, we introduce a kinetic model that takes into account both production and annihilation of quark-antiquark or baryon-antibaryon pairs. We first consider the case of baryon-antibaryon production from and annihilation to two mesons, i.e., $`m_1m_2B\overline{B}`$, in a hadronic matter of net baryon number $`s=0`$ . Following the formalism of Ref. for the production of particles with conserving charges, we have the following master equation for the multiplicity distribution of $`B\overline{B}`$ pairs:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP_n}{d\tau }}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G}{V}}N_{m_1}N_{m_2}\left(P_{n1}P_n\right)`$ (1)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L}{V}}\left[n^2P_n(n+1)^2P_{n+1}\right].`$ (2)
In the above, $`P_n(\tau )`$ denotes the probability of finding $`n`$ pairs of $`B\overline{B}`$ at time $`\tau `$; $`G\sigma _Gv`$ and $`L\sigma _Lv`$ are the momentum-averaged cross sections for baryon production and annihilation, respectively; $`N_k`$ represents the total number of particle species $`k`$; and $`V`$ is the proper volume of the system.

The equilibrium solution to Eq. (2) is

$`P_{n,\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^n}{I_0(2\sqrt{ϵ})(n!)^2}},`$ (3)
where $`I_0`$ is the modified Bessel function, and

$`ϵ{\displaystyle \frac{GN_{m_1}N_{m_2}}{L}}.`$ (4)
Using the generating function at equilibrium,

$`g_{\mathrm{eq}}(x)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}P_{n,\mathrm{eq}}x^n={\displaystyle \frac{I_0(2\sqrt{ϵx})}{I_0(2\sqrt{ϵ})}},`$ (5)
with $`g(1)=P_n=1`$ due to normalization of the multiplicity probability distribution, it is straightforward to obtain all moments of the equilibrium multiplicity distribution . For example, the mean baryon number per event is given by

$`B_{\mathrm{eq}}=b_0n=b_0{\displaystyle \frac{g(1)}{x_1}}=b_0\sqrt{ϵ}{\displaystyle \frac{I_1}{I_0}}b_0\sqrt{ϵ},`$ (6)
In the above, $`b_0`$ is the fundamental unit of baryon number in the matter, and the argument of Bessel functions $`I_\nu `$’s is $`2\sqrt{ϵ}`$. In obtaining the last expression in Eq. (6), we have kept only the leading term in $`\sqrt{ϵ}`$, corresponding to the grand canonical limit, $`\sqrt{ϵ}1`$, as baryons and antibaryons are abundantly produced in heavy ion collisions at RHIC .

The squared baryon number fluctuation is given by

$`D_B`$ $``$ $`B^2B^2=b_0^2\left[{\displaystyle \frac{g(1)}{x_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{^2g(1)}{x_1^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{g(1)}{x_1}}\right)^2\right]`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`b_0^2\left[\sqrt{ϵ}{\displaystyle \frac{I_1}{I_0}}+ϵ\left({\displaystyle \frac{I_2}{I_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_1^2}{I_0^2}}\right)\right]b_0^2{\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{ϵ}}{2}}.`$ (8)
It is seen that the mean number of baryons is proportional to $`b_0`$ while their squared fluctuation is proportional to $`b_0^2`$. The squared baryon number fluctuation per baryon is thus given by

$`\omega _{B,\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_0\left[1\sqrt{ϵ}\left({\displaystyle \frac{I_1}{I_0}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_2}{I_1}}\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{b_0}{2}}.`$ (9)
The mean number of antibaryons $`\overline{B}`$ and their fluctuation $`\omega _{\overline{B}}`$ are the same as those of baryons as a result of zero net baryon number. Since $`b_0`$ is 1/3 in quark-gluon plasma and 1 in hadronic matter, $`w_B`$ and $`w_{\overline{B}}`$ are smaller in the quark-gluon plasma than in an equilibrated hadronic matter by a factor of $`3`$.

We note that the equilibrium multiplicity distribution in Eq. (3) is not Poisson, as pointed out earlier in Ref. . The non-Poisson distribution results from the quadratic dependence on the multiplicity $`n`$ in the loss term of the master equation of Eq. (2) due to baryon number conservation. A Poisson distribution is obtained if the dependence on the multiplicity $`n`$ is linear, which corresponds to production of particles that do not carry conserved charges. The master equation of Eq. (2) also gives a Poisson distribution at early times ($`\tau 0`$) when the loss term can be neglected. This corresponds to either production of particles with conserved charges during the early stage of heavy ion collisions or particle production without chemical equilibration as in $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions. Since a Poisson multiplicity distribution gives

$`D_B^{\mathrm{Poisson}}=b_0B,`$ (10)
the squared baryon number fluctuation per baryon is

$`\omega _B^{\mathrm{Poisson}}=b_0,`$ (11)
which is a factor of 2 larger than that in an equilibrated quark-gluon plasma or hadronic matter. A similar result has been obtained previously by Gavin and Pruneau based on thermodynamic considerations .

## III Finite Acceptance and Non-Zero Net Baryon

Because of experimental limitations, only protons and antiprotons in a certain rapidity and momentum range are usually measured. Moreover, the net baryon number in heavy ion collisions is in general non-zero even at mid-rapidity due to the presence of projectile and target nucleons. To generalize the master equation to include these effects, we first consider the case of two species of antibaryons, e.g., antiproton and antineutron production from meson-meson interactions, i.e., $`m_1m_2B\overline{p}`$ and $`m_1m_2B\overline{n}`$ in a hadronic matter of net baryon number $`s0`$ . Defining $`P^{k,l}`$ as the probability of finding $`k`$ number of antibaryon species $`1`$ and $`l`$ number of antibaryon species $`2`$ in an event ($`k,l=0,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$ for $`s0`$), we then have the following generalized master equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dP^{k,l}}{d\tau }}={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_1L_1}{V}}\left(P^{k1,l}P^{k,l}\right)+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_2L_2}{V}}\left(P^{k,l1}P^{k,l}\right)`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{L_1}{V}}\left[k(k+l+s)P^{k,l}(k+1)(k+l+s+1)P^{k+1,l}\right]`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{L_2}{V}}\left[l(k+l+s)P^{k,l}(l+1)(k+l+s+1)P^{k,l+1}\right].`$ (14)
In the above, $`ϵ_j`$ ($`j=1,2`$) is defined as in Eq. (4) for the process involving antibaryon species $`j`$, and $`G_j`$ and $`L_j`$ denote the momentum-averaged cross sections for the gain and loss terms, respectively. We have neglected effects due to quantum statistics, as they are not expected to be significant .

The equilibrium solution to the above equation is given by the product of the equilibrium solution for the total $`B\overline{B}`$ pair number $`(k+l)`$ and a binomial distribution, i.e.,

$`P_{\mathrm{eq}}^{k,l}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ^{k+l+s/2}}{I_s(2\sqrt{ϵ})(k+l)!(k+l+s)!}}\right]\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(k+l)!f_1^kf_2^l}{k!l!}}\right],`$ (15)
with

$`ϵ`$ $``$ $`ϵ_1+ϵ_2,f_j={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_j}{ϵ}}.`$ (16)
The distribution in Eq. (15) can be understood intuitively as resulting from first obtaining the distribution for the total antibaryon number $`(k+l)`$, and then selecting $`k`$ number of antibaryon species $`1`$ and $`l`$ number of antibaryon species $`2`$ from the total antibaryons with probabilities of $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$, respectively.

At equilibrium, the generating function $`g(y_1,y_2)P^{k,l}y_1^ky_2^l`$ is given by:

$`g_{\mathrm{eq}}(y_1,y_2)={\displaystyle \frac{\left(f_1y_1+f_2y_2\right)^{s/2}}{I_s(2\sqrt{ϵ})}}I_s(2\sqrt{ϵ}\sqrt{f_1y_1+f_2y_2}).`$ (17)
The above formulae can be equally applied to study the effects due to finite phase space coverage in experiments. In this case, antibaryon species 1 and 2 denote antibaryons in and out of the observed phase space, respectively; and $`f_1`$ and $`f_2`$ are their respective fractions.

To generalize to $`N`$ numbers of baryon and antibaryon species, we consider $`m_1m_2B_i\overline{B}_j`$ ($`i,j=1,\mathrm{},2N`$), where $`B_i`$ and $`\overline{B}_j`$ with $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ denote baryon species $`i`$ and antibaryon species $`j`$ in the observed phase space, respectively, and $`B_i`$ or $`\overline{B}_j`$ with $`i,j=N+1,\mathrm{},2N`$ denote baryon species $`(iN)`$ and antibaryon species $`(jN)`$ out of the observed phase space, respectively. The joint generating function for both baryons and antibaryons is defined by

$`g(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2N};y_1,\mathrm{},y_{2N})`$ (18)
$`{\displaystyle P_{B_1,\mathrm{},B_{2N}}^{\overline{B}_1,\mathrm{},\overline{B}_{2N}}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{2N}{}}x_i^{B_i}\right)\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{2N}{}}y_j^{\overline{B}_j}\right)},`$ (19)
with the summation over all baryon and antibaryon numbers, $`B_i`$’s and $`\overline{B}_j`$’s ($`i,j=1,\mathrm{},2N)`$. Assuming that particle momentum distributions are thermal, the generating function at equilibrium is given by

$`g_{\mathrm{eq}}(x_1,\mathrm{},x_{2N};y_1,\mathrm{},y_{2N})={\displaystyle \frac{\left(h_ix_i\right)^{s/2}\left(f_jy_j\right)^{s/2}}{I_s\left(2\sqrt{ϵ}\right)}}`$ (20)
$`\times I_s\left(2\sqrt{ϵ}\sqrt{{\displaystyle h_ix_i}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle f_jy_j}}\right),`$ (21)
where

$`ϵ{\displaystyle \underset{i,j}{}}ϵ_{ij},`$ (22)
with $`ϵ_{ij}`$ defined for the process $`m_1m_2B_i\overline{B}_j`$ as in Eq. (4), and

$`h_i=\left({\displaystyle \underset{j}{}}ϵ_{ij}\right)/ϵ,f_j=\left({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}ϵ_{ij}\right)/ϵ.`$ (23)
From Eq. (21), we obtain the mean numbers of baryons and antibaryons,

$`B_i_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_0h_i(\sqrt{ϵ}{\displaystyle \frac{I_{s+1}}{I_s}}+s)b_0h_i\sqrt{ϵ}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2s1}{4\sqrt{ϵ}}}),`$ (24)
$`\overline{B}_j_{\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_0f_j\sqrt{ϵ}{\displaystyle \frac{I_{s+1}}{I_s}}b_0f_j\sqrt{ϵ}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2s+1}{4\sqrt{ϵ}}}\right),`$ (25)
and their fluctuations,

$`\omega _{B_i,\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_0\left[1h_i\left({\displaystyle \frac{ϵ\left(\frac{I_{s+1}^2}{I_s^2}\frac{I_{s+2}}{I_s}\right)+s}{\sqrt{ϵ}\frac{I_{s+1}}{I_s}+s}}\right)\right]`$ (26)
$``$ $`b_0\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{h_i}{2}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2s1}{4\sqrt{ϵ}}}\right)\right],`$ (27)
$`\omega _{\overline{B}_j,\mathrm{eq}}`$ $`=`$ $`b_0\left[1f_j\sqrt{ϵ}\left({\displaystyle \frac{I_{s+1}}{I_s}}{\displaystyle \frac{I_{s+2}}{I_{s+1}}}\right)\right]`$ (28)
$``$ $`b_0\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{f_j}{2}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{2s+1}{4\sqrt{ϵ}}}\right)\right].`$ (29)
In the above, we have kept only the first two leading terms in the expansions as $`s/\sqrt{ϵ}1`$ for ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions. We note that Eqs. (24-25) and (27-29) reduce to Eqs. (6) and (9) in the special case of full phase space coverage with only one baryon and antibaryon species ($`h_1=f_1=1`$) and $`s=0`$.

Keeping only the leading terms in Eqs. (27) and (29) leads to

$`\omega _{B_i,\mathrm{eq}}b_0\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{h_i}{2}}\right),\omega _{\overline{B}_j,\mathrm{eq}}b_0\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{f_j}{2}}\right),`$ (30)
where $`h_i`$ and $`f_j`$ ($`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$) represent, respectively, the fraction of total baryons that are observed baryon species $`i`$ and the fraction of total antibaryons that are observed antibaryon species $`j`$. Eq.(30) thus shows that finite acceptance introduces a phase space correction factor $`(1p/2)`$, with $`p`$ being the faction of the total baryon or antibaryon phase space that is observed, to the baryon or antibaryon number fluctuations in an equilibrated matter. We note that there is no such correction factor due to finite acceptance if the matter is far from equilibrium when the $`B\overline{B}`$ multiplicity distribution is Poisson.

From Eq. (21), we can also derive the following squared net baryon number fluctuation for baryon species $`i`$ and antibaryon species $`j`$:

$`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }N_b^{ij}\right)^2`$ $``$ $`\left(B_i\overline{B}_j\right)^2B_i\overline{B}_j^2`$ (31)
$`=`$ $`b_0B_i+\overline{B}_j\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{h_i+f_j}{2}}\right).`$ (32)
The squared net baryon fluctuation per baryon and antibaryon, $`\left(\mathrm{\Delta }N_b\right)^2/B+\overline{B}`$, is thus a factor of 3 smaller in an equilibrated quark-gluon plasma than in an equilibrated hadronic matter, and is a useful observable as well . If the phase space acceptance is the same for baryons and antibaryons, i.e., $`h_i=f_j=p`$, then the phase space correction factor is $`(1p)`$ as given in Ref. .

## IV Conclusions and Discussions

We have shown that $`\omega _B`$ or $`\omega _{\overline{B}}`$, the squared fluctuation of baryon or antibaryon numbers per baryon or antibaryon, reflects the fundamental units of baryon number in the matter where they are produced. Since their expected values in the quark-gluon plasma are a factor of $`3`$ smaller than those in an equilibrated hadronic matter, they can be used as signatures for the quark-gluon plasma formed in the initial stage of relativistic heavy ion collisions. Using a master equation with exact baryon number conservation, we have found that at equilibrium the baryon multiplicity distribution is not Poisson, and its squared fluctuation is half of that expected from a Poisson distribution. We have also calculated the correction factors due to finite acceptance in experiments. Because of the contamination from the projectile and target nucleons, $`\omega _{\overline{B}}`$ is preferred over $`\omega _B`$.

Although the baryon and antibaryon fluctuations are smaller in the quark-gluon plasma formed in the initial stage of heavy ion collisions, their magnitudes will be affected during the hadronization and subsequent scatterings of baryons and antibaryons in the hadronic matter. In the simplest quark coalescence model for the hadronization of the quark-gluon plasma to the hadronic matter, where three quarks form a baryon and a quark-antiquark pair forms a meson, the baryon number fluctuation is increased as a result of the finite fraction of quarks that form baryons. The correction factor to the baryon fluctuation in this hadronization scenario can be similarly derived as for finite acceptance. On the other hand, if hadronization is through the formation of strings and their subsequent fragmentation , then quark-antiquark pairs can be produced and annihilated during the string fragmentation and such additional processes usually also increase the baryon and antibaryon fluctuations. Furthermore, anomalous fluctuations could arise if the phase transition is first order  or the quark matter is at the QCD tricritical point . As to the effects of hadronic scatterings, elastic scatterings of baryons and antibaryons are not expected to affect baryon and antibaryon number fluctuations in the full phase space. However, baryon-antibaryon pair production and annihilation tend to increase the fluctuations towards the values expected from a hadronic matter . The determination of baryon and antibaryon fluctuations in heavy ion collisions could be further complicated by the existence of gluonic baryon junctions , so that baryon numbers are not necessarily carried fractionally by quarks but instead by the baryon junctions. In order for the baryon number fluctuation to be a viable signature for the quark-gluon plasma, quantitative studies of above effects are needed.

## Acknowledgments

We thank J. Cleymans, L.D. McLerran, K. Redlich, M. Stephanov and X.-N. Wang for fruitful discussions. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-9870038, the Welch Foundation under Grant No. A-1358, and the Texas Advanced Research Program under Grant No. FY99-010366-0081.