format: text

text:
# Defining relations for the exceptional Lie superalgebras of vector fields pertaining to The Standard Model

## §1. Description of simple vectorial Lie superalgebras

### 0.0. On setting of the problem

Selection of Lie algebras with reasonably nice properties is a matter of taste and is under the influence of the problem considered. One of the usual choices is the class of simple algebras: they are easier to study and illuminate important symmetries.

Of simple Lie algebras, finite dimensional algebras are the first to study. They can be neatly encoded by very simple graphs — Dynkin diagrams — or Cartan matrices.

Next on the agenda are $``$-graded Lie algebras of polynomial growth (let us call them SZGLAPGs for short). They resemble finite dimensional simple Lie algebras very much and their theory is very similar, see \[Ka1\]; they proved very useful in various branches of mathematics and theoretical physics. Some of them have no Cartan matrix, but are no less useful; e.g., such are vectorial Lie superalgebras.

### 0.0.1. Types of the classical Lie algebras

Let us qualitatively describe the simple Lie algebras of polynomial growth to better visualize them. They break into the disjoint union of the following types:

1) finite dimensional (growth 0).

2) loop algebras, perhaps, twisted (growth 1); more important in applications are their “relatives” called affine Kac–Moody algebras, cf. \[Ka1\].

3) vectorial algebras, i.e., Lie algebras of vector fields111These algebras are sometimes known under the recently introduced clumsy name “algebras of Cartan type”: just imagine a “Cartan subalgebra in a Lie algebra of Cartan type”. with polynomial coefficients (growth is equal to the number of indeterminates) or their completions with formal power series as coefficients.

4) the stringy algebra222The term induced by the lingo of imaginative physicists who now play with (either cherish, as we do, \[GSW\] or take a calmer attitude \[WL\]) the idea that an elementary particle is not a point but rather a slinky springy string; the term “stringy algebra” means “pertaining to string theory” but also mirrors their structure as a collection of several strings — the modules over the Witt algebra. In our setting this means “vectorial (super)algebra on a supermanifold whose base is a circle or a “ralative” of such an algebra (its central extension, or an algebra of differentiatioins, etc.”. $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱^L(1)=𝔡𝔢𝔯[t^1,t]`$ (the superscript stands for Laurent). This algebra is often called Witt algebra $`𝔴𝔦𝔱𝔱`$ and by physicists the centerless Virasoro algebra because its nontrivial central extension, $`𝔳𝔦𝔯`$, is called the Virasoro algebra.

Strictly speaking, stringy algebras are vectorial, but we retain the generic term vectorial for algebras with polynomial or formal coefficients.

The algebras of types 1)–4) are $``$-graded. Several of the algebras of types 2) and 3) (in supercase all four types) have deformations and some of the deformed algebras are not $``$-graded of polynomial growth. These deformations (studied insufficiently so far) naturally indicate one more type: filtered Lie (super)algebras of polynomial growth:

5) the Lie algebra of matrices of complex size and its generalizations, cf. \[GL3, LS\]. These algebras are simple filtered Lie algebras of polynomial growth whose associated graded are not simple.

### 0.0.2. Superization

After Wess and Zumino made importance of supersymmetries manifest, cf. \[D, WZ\], it was natural to list simple “classical” Lie superalgebras.

Finite dimensional superalgebras. All except vectorial ones were classified by Scheunert, Nahm, Rittenberg \[SNR\] and I. Kaplansky. The unpublished preprint-1975 by Kaplansky appeared with some extensions as \[FK\], \[K\]; it helped Kac to repare gaps in his independent proof, cf. \[K1C\]. For details of the proof (further elucidated in \[Sch\]) in all cases see \[Ka4\] where Kac also considered representation theory, infinite dimensional case and real forms.

(Twisted) loop superalgebras. For an intrinsic characterization of loop superalgebras without apeal to Cartan matrix (rewritten from O. Mathieu) together with same for stringy superalgebras see \[GLS1\]: both types of algebras $`𝔤=\underset{i=d}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}𝔤_i`$ are of infinite depth $`d`$ but

$$\begin{array}{c}\text{for the loop algebras every root vector corresponding to the real root}\hfill \\ \text{acts locally nilpotently in the adjoint representation,}\hfill \\ \text{for the stringy algebras this is not so.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Leites conjectured that, as for Lie algebras, simple twisted loop superalgebras correspond to outer automorphisms of $`𝔤`$. Serganova listed these automorphisms and amended the conjecture, see \[S1\]. J. van de Leur classified twisted loop superalgebras with symmetrizable Cartan \[vdL\]; his list supports Leites-Serganova’s conjecture \[S1\].

Stringy superalgebras. For their conjectural list and partial proof of the completeness of this list see \[GLS1, KvdL\]. Observe that some of the stringy superalgebras possess Cartan matrix, though nonsymmetrizable ones \[GLS1\].

In this paper we consider the remaining type of simple graded Lie superalgebras of polynomial growth:

Vectorial Lie superalgebras. Main examples to keep before mind’s eye are the filtered Lie algebra $`=𝔡𝔢𝔯[[x]]`$ of formal vector fields and $`L=𝔡𝔢𝔯[x]`$ of polynomial vector fields with grading and filtration given by setting $`\mathrm{deg}x_i=1`$ for all $`i`$.

More exactly, we present the exceptional simple vectorial superalgebras in terms of generators and defining relations.

### 1.0. Linear algebra in superspaces. Generalities

A superspace is a $`/2`$-graded space; for any superspace $`V=V_{\overline{0}}V_{\overline{1}}`$ denote by $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ another copy of the same superspace: with the shifted parity, i.e., $`(\mathrm{\Pi }(V))_{\overline{i}}=V_{\overline{i}+\overline{1}}`$. The superdimension of $`V`$ is $`dimV=p+q\epsilon `$, where $`\epsilon ^2=1`$ and $`p=dimV_{\overline{0}}`$, $`q=dimV_{\overline{1}}`$. (Usually, $`dimV`$ is expressed as a pair $`(p,q)`$ or $`p|q`$; this obscures the fact that $`dimVW=dimVdimW`$; this fact is clear with the use of $`\epsilon `$.)

A superspace structure in $`V`$ induces the superspace structure in the space $`\mathrm{End}(V)`$. A basis of a superspace is always a basis consisting of homogeneous vectors; let $`Par=(p_1,\mathrm{},p_{dimV})`$ be an ordered collection of their parities. We call $`Par`$ the format of (the basis of) $`V`$. A square supermatrix of format (size) $`Par`$ is a $`dimV\times dimV`$ matrix whose $`i`$th row and $`i`$th column are of the same parity $`p_i`$.

One usually considers one of the simplest formats $`Par`$, e.g., $`Par`$ of the form $`(\overline{0},\mathrm{},\overline{0};\overline{1},\mathrm{},\overline{1})`$ is called standard. In this paper we can do without nonstandard formats. But they are vital in the classification of systems of simple roots that the reader might be interested in in connection with applications to $`q`$-quantization or integrable systems. Besides, systems of simple roots corresponding to distinct nonstandard formats are related by odd reflections — analogs of our nonstandard regradings. (For an approach to superroots see \[S2\].)

The matrix unit $`E_{ij}`$ is supposed to be of parity $`p_i+p_j`$ and the bracket of supermatrices (of the same format) is defined via Sign Rule:

if something of parity $`p`$ moves past something of parity $`q`$ the sign $`(1)^{pq}`$ accrues; the formulas defined on homogeneous elements are extended to arbitrary ones via linearity.

Examples of how to apply the Sign Rule: setting $`[X,Y]=XY(1)^{p(X)p(Y)}YX`$ we get the notion of the supercommutator and the ensuing notions of the supercommutative superalgebra and the Lie superalgebra (which in addition to superskew-commutativity satisfies the super Jacobi identity, i.e., the Jacobi identity amended with the Sign Rule). The derivation (better say, superderivation) of a superalgebra $`A`$ is a linear map $`D:AA`$ that satisfies the Leibniz rule (and Sign rule)

$$D(ab)=D(a)b+(1)^{p(D)p(a)}aD(b).$$

In particular, let $`A=[x]`$ be the free supercommutative polynomial superalgebra in $`x=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$, where the superstructure is determined by the parities of the indeterminates: $`p(x_i)=p_i`$. Partial derivatives are defined (with the help of super Leibniz Rule) by the formulas $`\frac{x_i}{x_j}=\delta _{i,j}`$. Clearly, the collection $`𝔡𝔢𝔯A`$ of all superdifferentiations of $`A`$ is a Lie superalgebra whose elements are of the form $`f_i(x)\frac{}{x_i}`$.

Given the supercommutative superalgebra $``$ of “functions” in indeterminates $`x`$, define the supercommutative superalgebra $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of differential forms as polynomial algebra over $``$ in $`dx`$, where $`p(d)=\overline{1}`$. Since $`dx`$ is even for an odd $`x`$, we can consider not only polynomials in $`dx`$. Smooth or analytic functions in the differentials of the $`x`$ are called pseudodifferential forms on the supermanifold with coordinates $`x`$, see \[BL1\]. We will need them to interpret $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$. The exterior differential is defined on (pseudo) differential forms by the formulas (mind Leibniz and Sign Rules):

$$d(x_i)=dx_i\text{ and }d^2=0.$$

The Lie derivative is defined (minding same Rules) by the formula

$$L_D(df)=(1)^{p(D)}d(D(f)).$$

In particular,

$$L_D\left((df)^\lambda \right)=\lambda (1)^{p(D)}d(D(f))(df)^{\lambda 1}\text{ for any }\lambda .$$

The general linear Lie superalgebra of all supermatrices of size $`Par`$ is denoted by $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$; usually, $`𝔤𝔩(\overline{0},\mathrm{},\overline{0},\overline{1},\mathrm{},\overline{1})`$ is abbreviated to $`𝔤𝔩(dimV_{\overline{0}}|dimV_{\overline{1}})`$. Any matrix from $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$ can be expressed as the sum of its even and odd parts; in the standard format this is the following block expression:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& 0\\ 0& D\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& B\\ C& 0\end{array}\right),p\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& 0\\ 0& D\end{array}\right)\right)=\overline{0},p\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& B\\ C& 0\end{array}\right)\right)=\overline{1}.$$

The supertrace is the map $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$, $`(A_{ij})(1)^{p_i}A_{ii}`$. Since $`\mathrm{str}[x,y]=0`$, the subsuperspace of supertraceless matrices constitutes the special linear Lie subsuperalgebra $`𝔰𝔩(Par)`$.

There are, however, two super versions of $`𝔤𝔩(n)`$, not one. The other version is called the queer Lie superalgebra and is defined as the one that preserves the complex structure given by an odd operator $`J`$, i.e., is the centralizer $`C(J)`$ of $`J`$:

$$𝔮(n)=C(J)=\{X𝔤𝔩(n|n)[X,J]=0\},\text{ where }J^2=\mathrm{id}.$$

It is clear that by a change of basis we can reduce $`J`$ to the form $`J_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)`$. In the standard format we have

$$𝔮(n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B& A\end{array}\right)\right\}.$$

On $`𝔮(n)`$, the queertrace is defined: $`\mathrm{qtr}:\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B& A\end{array}\right)\mathrm{tr}B`$. Denote by $`𝔰𝔮(n)`$ the Lie superalgebra of queertraceless matrices.

Observe that the identity representations of $`𝔮`$ and $`𝔰𝔮`$ in $`V`$, though irreducible in supersetting, are not irreducible in the nongraded sense: take homogeneous (with respect to parity) and linearly independent vectors $`v_1`$, …, $`v_n`$ from $`V`$; then $`Span(v_1+J(v_1),\mathrm{},v_n+J(v_n))`$ is an invariant subspace of $`V`$ which is not a subsuperspace.

A representation is irreducible of general type or just of $`G`$-type if there is no invariant subspace, otherwise it is called irreducible of $`Q`$-type ($`Q`$ is after the general queer Lie superalgebra — a specifically “superish” analog of $`𝔤𝔩`$); an irreducible representation of $`Q`$-type has no invariant subsuperspace but has an invariant subspace.

Lie superalgebras that preserve bilinear forms: two types. To the linear map $`F:VW`$ of superspaces there corresponds the dual map $`F^{}:W^{}V^{}`$ between the dual superspaces. In a basis consisting of the vectors $`v_i`$ of format $`Par`$, the formula $`F(v_j)=\underset{i}{}v_iA_{ij}`$ assigns to $`F`$ the supermatrix $`A`$. In the dual bases, to $`F^{}`$ the supertransposed matrix $`A^{st}`$ corresponds:

$$(A^{st})_{ij}=(1)^{(p_i+p_j)(p_i+p(A))}A_{ji}.$$

The supermatrices $`X𝔤𝔩(Par)`$ such that

$$X^{st}B+(1)^{p(X)p(B)}BX=0\text{for an homogeneous matrix }B𝔤𝔩(Par)$$

constitute the Lie superalgebra $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B)`$ that preserves the bilinear form $`B^f`$ on $`V`$ whose matrix $`B`$ is given by the formula $`B_{ij}=(1)^{p(B^f)p(v_i)}B^f(v_i,v_j)`$ for the basis vectors $`v_i`$.

Recall that the supersymmetry of the homogeneous form $`B^f`$ means that its matrix $`B`$ satisfies the condition $`B^u=B`$, where $`B^u=\left(\begin{array}{cc}R^t& (1)^{p(B)}T^t\\ (1)^{p(B)}S^t& U^t\end{array}\right)`$ for the matrix $`B=\left(\begin{array}{cc}R& S\\ T& U\end{array}\right)`$. Similarly, skew-supersymmetry of $`B`$ means that $`B^u=B`$. Thus, we see that the upsetting of bilinear forms $`u:\mathrm{Bil}(V,W)\mathrm{Bil}(W,V)`$, which for the spaces and when $`V=W`$ is expressed on matrices in terms of the transposition, is a new operation.

Most popular canonical forms of the nondegenerate supersymmetric form are the ones whose supermatrices in the standard format are the following canonical ones, $`B_{ev}`$ or $`B_{ev}^{}`$:

$$B_{ev}^{}(m|2n)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1_m& 0\\ 0& J_{2n}\end{array}\right),\text{where }J_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1_n& 0\end{array}\right),$$

or

$$B_{ev}(m|2n)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{antidiag}(1,\mathrm{},1)& 0\\ 0& J_{2n}\end{array}\right).$$

The usual notation for $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B_{ev}(m|2n))`$ is $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)`$ or, more precisely, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$. Observe that the passage from $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ sends the supersymmetric forms to superskew-symmetric ones, preserved by the “symplectico-orthogonal” Lie superalgebra, $`𝔰𝔭^{}𝔬(2n|m)`$ or, better say, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)`$, which is isomorphic to $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$ but has a different matrix realization. We never use notation $`𝔰𝔭^{}𝔬(2n|m)`$ in order not to confuse with the special Poisson superalgebra.

In the standard format the matrix realizations of these algebras are:

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}E& Y& X^t\\ X& A& B\\ Y^t& C& A^t\end{array}\right)\right\};𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& X\\ C& A^t& Y^t\\ Y& X^t& E\end{array}\right)\right\},\\ \text{where}\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right)𝔰𝔭(2n),E𝔬(m).\end{array}$$

A nondegenerate supersymmetric odd bilinear form $`B_{odd}(n|n)`$ can be reduced to a canonical form whose matrix in the standard format is $`J_{2n}`$. A canonical form of the superskew odd nondegenerate form in the standard format is $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1_n& 0\end{array}\right)`$. The usual notation for $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B_{odd}(Par))`$ is $`𝔭𝔢(Par)`$. The passage from $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ establishes an isomorphism $`𝔭𝔢^{sy}(Par)𝔭𝔢^{sk}(Par)`$. This Lie superalgebra is called, as A. Weil suggested, periplectic. The matrix realizations in the standard format of these superalgebras is shorthanded to:

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔭𝔢^{sy}(n)=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right),\text{where}B=B^t,C=C^t\};\\ 𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right),\text{where}B=B^t,C=C^t\}.\end{array}$$

Observe that though the Lie superalgebras $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$ and $`𝔭𝔢^{sk}(2n|m)`$, as well as $`𝔭𝔢^{sy}(n)`$ and $`𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)`$, are isomorphic, the difference between them is sometimes crucial, see \[Sh5\].

The special periplectic superalgebra is $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)=\{X𝔭𝔢(n)\mathrm{str}X=0\}`$. Of particular interest to us will be also $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)_{a,b}=𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)\text{+}\text{ }(az+bd)`$, where $`z=1_{2n}`$, $`d=\mathrm{diag}(1_n,1_n)`$. Hereafter $`𝔞\text{+}\text{ }𝔟`$ or $`𝔟\text{+}\text{ }𝔞`$ denote the semidirect product in which $`𝔞`$ is the ideal.

### 1.0.1. What a Lie superalgebra is

Dealing with superalgebras it sometimes becomes useful to know their definition. Lie superalgebras were distinguished in topology in 1930’s or earlier. So when somebody offers a “better than usual” definition of a notion which seemed to have been established about 70 year ago this might look strange, to say the least. Nevertheless, the answer to the question “what is a Lie superalgebra?” is still not a common knowledge. Indeed, the naive definition (“apply the Sign Rule to the definition of the Lie algebra”) is manifestly inadequate for considering the (singular) supervarieties of deformations and applying representation theory to mathematical physics, for example, in the study of the coadjoint representation of the Lie supergroup which can act on a supermanifold but never on a superspace (an object from another category). So, to deform Lie superalgebras and apply group-theoretical methods in “super” setting, we must be able to recover a supermanifold from a superspace, and vice versa.

A proper definition of Lie superalgebras is as follows, cf. \[L3\]\[L5\]. The Lie superalgebra in the category of supermanifolds corresponding to the “naive” Lie superalgebra $`L=L_{\overline{0}}L_{\overline{1}}`$ is a linear supermanifold $`=(L_{\overline{0}},𝒪)`$, where the sheaf of functions $`𝒪`$ consists of functions on $`L_{\overline{0}}`$ with values in the Grassmann superalgebra on $`L_{\overline{1}}^{}`$; this supermanifold should be such that for “any” (say, finitely generated, or from some other appropriate category) supercommutative superalgebra $`C`$, the space $`(C)=\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{Spec}C,)`$, called the space of $`C`$-points of $``$, is a Lie algebra and the correspondence $`C(C)`$ is a functor in $`C`$. (A. Weil introduced this approach in algebraic geometry in 1954; in super setting it is called the language of points or families, see \[D\], \[L4\].) This definition might look terribly complicated, but fortunately one can show that the correspondence $`L`$ is one-to-one and the Lie algebra $`(C)`$, also denoted $`L(C)`$, admits a very simple description: $`L(C)=(LC)_{\overline{0}}`$.

A Lie superalgebra homomorphism $`\rho :L_1L_2`$ in these terms is a functor morphism, i.e., a collection of Lie algebra homomorphisms $`\rho _C:L_1(C)L_2(C)`$ compatible with morphisms of supercommutative superalgebras $`CC^{}`$. In particular, a representation of a Lie superalgebra $`L`$ in a superspace $`V`$ is a homomorphism $`\rho :L𝔤𝔩(V)`$, i.e., a collection of Lie algebra homomorphisms $`\rho _C:L(C)(𝔤𝔩(V)C)_{\overline{0}}`$.

###### Example .

Consider a representation $`\rho :𝔤𝔤𝔩(V)`$. The tangent space of the moduli superspace of deformations of $`\rho `$ is isomorphic to $`H^1(𝔤;VV^{})`$. For example, if $`𝔤`$ is the $`0|n`$-dimensional (i.e., purely odd) Lie superalgebra (with the only bracket possible: identically equal to zero), its only irreducible representations are the trivial one, 1, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{𝟏}\mathrm{𝟏}^{}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})^{}\mathrm{𝟏}`$, and because the superalgebra is commutative, the differential in the cochain complex is trivial. Therefore, $`H^1(𝔤;\mathrm{𝟏})=E^1(𝔤^{})𝔤^{}`$, so there are $`dim𝔤`$ odd parameters of deformations of the trivial representation. If we consider $`𝔤`$ “naively” all of the odd parameters will be lost.

Which of these infinitesimal deformations can be extended to a global one is a separate much tougher question, usually solved ad hoc.

Examples that lucidly illustrate why one should always remember that a Lie superalgebra is not a mere linear superspace but a linear supermanifold are, e.g., deforms $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}(0|2n+1)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{2n}1|2^{2n})`$ with odd parameters considered below and viewed as Lie algebras. In the category of supermanifolds these are simple Lie superalgebras.

### 1.0.2. Projectivization

If $`𝔰`$ is a Lie algebra of scalar matrices, and $`𝔤𝔤𝔩(n|n)`$ is a Lie subsuperalgebra containing $`𝔰`$, then the projective Lie superalgebra of type $`𝔤`$ is $`𝔭𝔤=𝔤/𝔰`$. Lie superalgebras $`𝔤_1𝔤_2`$ described in sect. 3.1 are also projective.

Projectivization sometimes leads to new Lie superalgebras, for example: $`𝔭𝔤𝔩(n|n)`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔩(n|n)`$, $`𝔭𝔮(n)`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔮(n)`$; whereas $`𝔭𝔤𝔩(p|q)𝔰𝔩(p|q)`$ if $`pq`$.

### 1.0.3. What is a semisimple Lie superalgebra

These algebras are needed in description of primitive Lie superalgebras of vector fields — a geometrically natural problem though wild for Lie superalgebras, see \[ALSh\]. Recall that the Lie superalgebra $`𝔤`$ without proper ideals and of dimension $`>1`$ is called simple. Examples: $`𝔰𝔩(m|n)`$ for $`m>n1`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔩(n|n)`$ for $`n>1`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔮(n)`$ for $`n>2`$, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)`$ for $`mn0`$ and $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)`$ for $`n>2`$.

We will not need the remaining simple finite dimensional Lie superalgebras of non-vectorial type. These superalgebras, discovered by I. Kaplansky (a 1975-preprint, see \[K\]) are $`𝔬𝔰𝔭_\alpha (4|2)`$, the deforms of $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(4|2)`$, and the two exceptions that we denote by $`𝔞𝔤_2`$ and $`𝔞𝔟_3`$. For their description we refer to \[K\], \[FK\], \[Sud\], see also \[GL2\] for the description of the system of simple roots see \[Ka4\] completed in \[vdL, S1, S2\].

We say that $`𝔥`$ is almost simple if it can be sandwiched (non-strictly) between a simple Lie superalgebra $`𝔰`$ and the Lie superalgebra $`𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$ of derivations of $`𝔰`$: $`𝔰𝔥𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$.

By definition, $`𝔤`$ is semisimple if its radical is zero. Literally following the description of semisimple Lie algebras over the fields of prime characteristic, V. Kac \[Ka4\] gave the following description of semisimple Lie superalgebras. Let $`𝔰_1`$, …, $`𝔰_k`$ be simple Lie superalgebras, let $`n_1`$, …, $`n_k`$ be pairs of non-negative integers $`n_j=(n_j^{\overline{0}},n_j^{\overline{1}})`$, let $`(n_j)`$ be the supercommutative superalgebra of polynomials in $`n_j^{\overline{0}}`$ even and $`n_j^{\overline{1}}`$ odd indeterminates, and $`𝔰=\underset{j}{}\left(𝔰_j(n_j)\right)`$. Then

$`(\mathrm{0.1.3})`$
$$𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰=\underset{j}{}\left((𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰_j)(n_j)\text{+}\text{ }\mathrm{id}_{𝔰_j}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n_j)\right).$$

Let $`𝔤`$ be a subalgebra of $`𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$ containing $`𝔰`$. If the projection of $`𝔤`$ on $`1𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n_j)_1`$ is onto for each $`j`$, then $`𝔤`$ is semisimple and all semisimple Lie superalgebras arise in the manner indicated, i.e., as sums of almost simple superalgebras corresponding to the summands of $`(\mathrm{0.1.3})`$.

### 1.0.4. A. Sergeev’s central extension

In 70’s A. Sergeev proved that there is just one nontrivial central extension of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)`$. It exists only for $`n=4`$ and we denote it by $`𝔞𝔰`$. Let us represent an arbitrary element $`A𝔞𝔰`$ as a pair $`A=x+dz`$, where $`x𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$, $`d`$ and $`z`$ is the central element. The bracket in $`𝔞𝔰`$ is

$`(\mathrm{0.1.4.1})`$
$$[\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+dz,\left(\begin{array}{cc}a^{}& b^{}\\ c^{}& a^{}^t\end{array}\right)+d^{}z]=[\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}a^{}& b^{}\\ c^{}& a^{}^t\end{array}\right)]+\mathrm{tr}c\stackrel{~}{c}^{}z,$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ is extended via linearity from matrices $`c_{ij}=E_{ij}E_{ji}`$ on which $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}=c_{kl}`$ for any even permutation $`(1234)(ijkl)`$.

The Lie superalgebra $`𝔞𝔰`$ can also be described by means of the spinor representation. For this we need several vectorial superalgebras defined in sect. 0.3. Consider $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$, the Lie superalgebra whose superspace is the Grassmann superalgebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta )`$ generated by $`\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3,\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3`$ and the bracket is the Poisson bracket (0.3.6). Recall that $`𝔥(0|6)=Span(H_ff\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta ))`$.

Now, observe that $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$ can be embedded into $`𝔥(0|6)`$. Indeed, setting $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$ for all $`i`$ we introduce a $``$-grading on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta )`$ which, in turn, induces a $``$-grading on $`𝔥(0|6)`$ of the form $`𝔥(0|6)=\underset{i1}{}𝔥(0|6)_i`$. Since $`𝔰𝔩(4)𝔬(6)`$, we can identify $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)_0`$ with $`𝔥(0|6)_0`$.

It is not difficult to see that the elements of degree $`1`$ in the standard gradings of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$ and $`𝔥(0|6)`$ constitute isomorphic $`𝔰𝔩(4)𝔬(6)`$-modules. It is subject to a direct verification that it is possible to embed $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)_1`$ into $`𝔥(0|6)_1`$.

Sergeev’s extension $`𝔞𝔰`$ is the result of the restriction to $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)𝔥(0|6)`$ of the cocycle that turns $`𝔥(0|6)`$ into $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$. The quantization deforms $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$ into $`𝔤𝔩(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ))`$; the through maps $`T_\lambda :𝔞𝔰𝔭𝔬(0|6)𝔤𝔩(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ))`$ are representations of $`𝔞𝔰`$ in the $`4|4`$-dimensional modules $`\mathrm{spin}_\lambda `$ isomorphic to each other for all $`\lambda 0`$. The explicit form of $`T_\lambda `$ is as follows:

$`(\mathrm{0.1.4.2})`$
$$T_\lambda :\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+dz\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\lambda \stackrel{~}{c}\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+\lambda d1_{4|4},$$

where $`1_{4|4}`$ is the unit matrix and $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ is defined in formula (0.1.4.1). Clearly, $`T_\lambda `$ is an irreducible representation for any $`\lambda `$.

### 1.0.5. Vectorial Lie superalgebras. The standard realization

The elements of the Lie algebra $`=𝔡𝔢𝔯[[u]]`$ are considered as vector fields. The Lie algebra $``$ has only one maximal subalgebra $`_0`$ of finite codimension (consisting of the fields that vanish at the origin). The subalgebra $`_0`$ determines a filtration of $``$: set

$`(\mathrm{0.2.1})`$
$$_1=\text{ and }_i=\{D_{i1}[D,]_{i1}\}\text{for }i1.$$

The associated graded Lie algebra $`L=\underset{i1}{}L_i`$, where $`L_i=_i/_{i+1}`$, consists of the vector fields with polynomial coefficients.

Superization. For a simple Lie superalgebra $``$ (for example, take $`=𝔡𝔢𝔯[u,\xi ]`$), suppose $`_0`$ is a maximal subalgebra of finite codimension. Let $`_1`$ be a minimal subspace of $``$ containing $`_0`$, different from $`_0`$ and $`_0`$-invariant. A Weisfeiler filtration of $``$ is determined by setting for $`i1`$:

$`(\mathrm{0.2.2})`$
$$_{i1}=[_1,_i]+_i\text{ and }_i=\{D_{i1}[D,_1]_{i1}\}.$$

Since the codimension of $`_0`$ is finite, the filtration takes the form

$`(\mathrm{0.2.3})`$
$$=_d\mathrm{}_0\mathrm{}$$

for some $`d`$. This $`d`$ is the depth of $``$ and of the associated graded Lie superalgebra $`L`$.

Considering the subspaces $`(\mathrm{0.2.1})`$ as the basis of a topology, we can complete the graded or filtered Lie superalgebras $`L`$ or $``$; the elements of the completion are the vector fields with formal power series as coefficients. Though the structure of the graded algebras is easier to describe, in applications the completed Lie superalgebras are usually needed.

Observe that not all filtered or graded Lie superalgebras of finite depth are vectorial, i.e., realizable with vector fields on a supermanifold of the same dimension as that of $`/_0`$; only those with faithful $`L_0`$-action on $`L_{}`$ are.

Unlike Lie algebras, simple vectorial superalgebras possess several nonisomorphic maximal subalgebras of finite codimension, see 1.2.2.

1) General algebras. Let $`x=(u_1,\mathrm{},u_n,\theta _1,\mathrm{},\theta _m)`$, where the $`u_i`$ are even indeterminates and the $`\theta _j`$ are odd ones. Set $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m)=𝔡𝔢𝔯[x]`$; it is called the general vectorial Lie superalgebra.

2) Special algebras. The divergence of the field $`D=\underset{i}{}f_i\frac{}{u_i}+\underset{j}{}g_j\frac{}{\theta _j}`$ is the function (in our case: a polynomial, or a series)

$`(\mathrm{0.2.2})`$
$$\mathrm{div}D=\underset{i}{}\frac{f_i}{u_i}+\underset{j}{}(1)^{p(g_j)}\frac{g_i}{\theta _j}.$$

$``$ The Lie superalgebra $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m)\mathrm{div}D=0\}`$ is called the special (or divergence-free) vectorial superalgebra.

It is clear that it is also possible to describe $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m)`$ as $`\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m)L_Dvol_x=0\}`$, where $`vol_x`$ is the volume form with constant coefficients in coordinates $`x`$ (see 0.6) and $`L_D`$ the Lie derivative with respect to $`D`$.

$``$ The Lie superalgebra $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱_\lambda (0|m)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)\mathrm{div}(1+\lambda \theta _1\mathrm{}\theta _m)D=0\}`$, where $`p(\lambda )m(mod2)`$, — the deform of $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)`$ — is called the deformed special (or divergence-free) vectorial superalgebra. Clearly, $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱_\lambda (0|m)𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱_\mu (0|m)`$ for $`\lambda \mu 0`$. So we briefly denote these deforms by $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}(0|m)`$.

Observe that for odd $`m`$ the parameter of deformation, $`\lambda `$, is odd.

###### Remark .

As is customary in differential geometry, where meaningful notations prevail, we sometimes write $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(x)`$ or $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(V)`$ if $`V=Span(x)`$ and use similar notations for the subalgebras of $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$ introduced below. Some algebraists sometimes abbreviate $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)`$ and $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)`$ to $`W_n`$ (in honor of Witt) and $`S_n`$, respectively.

3) The algebras that preserve Pfaff equations and differential 2-forms.

$``$ Set $`u=(t,p_1,\mathrm{},p_n,q_1,\mathrm{},q_n)`$; let

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1=dt+\underset{1in}{}(p_idq_iq_idp_i)+\underset{1jm}{}\theta _jd\theta _j\text{and}\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0=d\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1.$$

The form $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$ is called contact, the form $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0`$ is called symplectic. Sometimes it is more convenient to redenote the $`\theta `$’s and set

$$\xi _j=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\theta _ji\theta _{r+j});\eta _j=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\theta _j+i\theta _{r+j})\text{ for}jr=[m/2](\text{here}i^2=1),\theta =\theta _{2r+1}$$

and in place of $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0`$ or $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$ take $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\omega _0=d\alpha _1`$, respectively, where

$$\alpha _1=dt+\underset{1in}{}(p_idq_iq_idp_i)+\underset{1jr}{}(\xi _jd\eta _j+\eta _jd\xi _j)\{\begin{array}{cc}& \text{ if }m=2r\\ +\theta d\theta & \text{ if }m=2r+1.\end{array}$$

The Lie superalgebra that preserves the Pfaff equation $`\alpha _1=0`$, i.e., the superalgebra

$$𝔨(2n+1|m)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(2n+1|m)L_D\alpha _1=f_D\alpha _1\text{ for some }f_D[t,p,q,\theta ]\},$$

is called the contact superalgebra. The Lie superalgebra

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔭𝔬(2n|m)=\{D𝔨(2n+1|m)L_D\alpha _1=0\}\end{array}$$

is called the Poisson superalgebra. (A geometric interpretation of the Poisson superalgebra: it is the Lie superalgebra that preserves the connection with form $`\alpha `$ in the line bundle over a symplectic supermanifold with the symplectic form $`d\alpha `$.)

$``$ Similarly, set $`u=q=(q_1,\mathrm{},q_n)`$, let $`\theta =(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _n;\tau )`$ be odd. Set

$$\begin{array}{c}\alpha _0=d\tau +\underset{i}{}(\xi _idq_i+q_id\xi _i),\omega _1=d\alpha _0\end{array}$$

and call these forms the odd-contact and periplectic, respectively.

The Lie superalgebra that preserves the Pfaff equation $`\alpha _0=0`$, i.e., the superalgebra

$$𝔪(n)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|n+1)L_D\alpha _0=f_D\alpha _0\text{ for some }f_D[q,\xi ,\tau ]\}$$

is called the odd-contact superalgebra.

The Lie superalgebra

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔟(n)=\{D𝔪(n)L_D\alpha _0=0\}\end{array}$$

is called the Buttin superalgebra (\[L4\]). (A geometric interpretation of the Buttin superalgebra: it is the Lie superalgebra that preserves the connection with form $`\alpha _1`$ in the line bundle of rank $`\epsilon =(0|1)`$ over a periplectic supermanifold, i.e., over a supermanifold with the periplectic form $`d\alpha _0`$.)

The Lie superalgebras

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔰𝔪(n)=\{D𝔪(n)\mathrm{div}D=0\},𝔰𝔟(n)=\{D𝔟(n)\mathrm{div}D=0\}\end{array}$$

are called the divergence-free (or special) odd-contact and special Buttin superalgebras, respectively.

###### Remark .

A relation with finite dimensional geometry is as follows. Clearly, $`\mathrm{ker}\alpha _1=\mathrm{ker}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$. The restriction of $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }_0`$ to $`\mathrm{ker}\alpha _1`$ is the orthosymplectic form $`B_{ev}(m|2n)`$; the restriction of $`\omega _0`$ to $`\mathrm{ker}\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$ is $`B_{ev}^{}(m|2n)`$. Similarly, the restriction of $`\omega _1`$ to $`\mathrm{ker}\alpha _0`$ is $`B_{odd}(n|n)`$.

### 1.0.5.1. Generating functions

A laconic way to describe $`𝔨`$, $`𝔪`$ and their subalgebras is via generating functions.

$``$ Odd form $`\alpha _1`$. For $`f[t,p,q,\theta ]`$ set :

$`(\mathrm{0.3.1})`$
$$K_f=(2E)(f)\frac{}{t}H_f+\frac{f}{t}E,$$

where $`E=\underset{i}{}y_i\frac{}{y_i}`$ (here the $`y_i`$ are all the coordinates except $`t`$) is the Euler operator (which counts the degree with respect to the $`y_i`$), and $`H_f`$ is the hamiltonian field with Hamiltonian $`f`$ that preserves $`d\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$:

$`(\mathrm{0.3.2})`$
$$H_f=\underset{in}{}(\frac{f}{p_i}\frac{}{q_i}\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{}{p_i})(1)^{p(f)}\underset{jm}{}\frac{f}{\theta _j}\frac{}{\theta _j}.$$

The choice of the form $`\alpha _1`$ instead of $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1`$ only affects the shape of $`H_f`$ that we give for $`m=2k+1`$:

$$H_f=\underset{in}{}(\frac{f}{p_i}\frac{}{q_i}\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{}{p_i})(1)^{p(f)}\left(\underset{jk}{}(\frac{f}{\xi _j}\frac{}{\eta _j}+\frac{f}{\eta _j}\frac{}{\xi _j})+\frac{f}{\theta }\frac{}{\theta }\right).$$

$``$ Even form $`\alpha _0`$. For $`f[q,\xi ,\tau ]`$ set:

$`(\mathrm{0.3.3})`$
$$M_f=(2E)(f)\frac{}{\tau }Le_f(1)^{p(f)}\frac{f}{\tau }E,$$

where $`E=\underset{i}{}y_i\frac{}{y_i}`$ (here the $`y_i`$ are all the coordinates except $`\tau `$), and

$`(\mathrm{0.3.4})`$
$$Le_f=\underset{in}{}(\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{}{\xi _i}+(1)^{p(f)}\frac{f}{\xi _i}\frac{}{q_i}).$$

Since

$`(\mathrm{0.3.5})`$
$$\begin{array}{c}L_{K_f}(\alpha _1)=2\frac{f}{t}\alpha _1=K_1(f)\alpha _1,\hfill \\ L_{M_f}(\alpha _0)=(1)^{p(f)}2\frac{f}{\tau }\alpha _0=(1)^{p(f)}M_1(f)\alpha _0,\hfill \end{array}$$

it follows that $`K_f𝔨(2n+1|m)`$ and $`M_f𝔪(n)`$. Observe that

$$p(Le_f)=p(M_f)=p(f)+\overline{1}.$$

$``$ To the (super)commutators $`[K_f,K_g]`$ or $`[M_f,M_g]`$ there correspond contact brackets of the generating functions:

$$[K_f,K_g]=K_{\{f,g\}_{k.b.}};[M_f,M_g]=M_{\{f,g\}_{m.b.}}$$

The explicit formulas for the contact brackets are as follows. Let us first define the brackets on functions that do not depend on $`t`$ (resp. $`\tau `$).

The Poisson bracket $`\{,\}_{P.b.}`$ (in the realization with the form $`\omega _0`$) is given by the formula

$`(\mathrm{0.3.6})`$
$$\{f,g\}_{P.b.}=\underset{in}{}\left(\frac{f}{p_i}\frac{g}{q_i}\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{g}{p_i}\right)(1)^{p(f)}\underset{jm}{}\frac{f}{\theta _j}\frac{g}{\theta _j}.$$

and in the realization with the form $`\omega _0`$ for $`m=2k+1`$ it is given by the formula

$$\begin{array}{c}\{f,g\}_{P.b.}=\underset{in}{}(\frac{f}{p_i}\frac{g}{q_i}\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{g}{p_i})\hfill \\ (1)^{p(f)}\left(\underset{jm}{}(\frac{f}{\xi _j}\frac{g}{\eta _j}+\frac{f}{\eta _j}\frac{g}{\xi _j})+\frac{f}{\theta }\frac{g}{\theta }\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

The Buttin bracket $`\{,\}_{B.b.}`$ is given by the formula

$`(\mathrm{0.3.7})`$
$$\{f,g\}_{B.b.}=\underset{in}{}\left(\frac{f}{q_i}\frac{g}{\xi _i}+(1)^{p(f)}\frac{f}{\xi _i}\frac{g}{q_i}\right).$$

###### Remark .

The what we call here “Buttin bracket” was discovered in pre-super era by Schouten; Buttin was the first to prove that this bracket establishes a Lie superalgebra structure. The interpretations of the Buttin superalgebra similar to that of the Poisson algebra and of the elements of $`𝔩𝔢`$ as analogs of Hamiltonian vector fields was given in \[L1\]. The Buttin bracket and “odd mechanics” introduced in \[L1\] was rediscovered by Batalin with Vilkovisky; it gained a great deal of currency under the name antibracket, cf. \[GPS\]. The Schouten bracket was originally defined on the superspace of polyvector fields on a manifold, i.e., on the superspace of sections of the exterior algebra (over the algebra $``$ of functions) of the tangent bundle, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^\text{.}\left(T\left(M\right)\right)\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}^\text{.}\left(Vect\left(M\right)\right)`$. The explicit formula of the Schouten bracket (in which the hatted slot should be ignored, as usual) is

$`()`$
$$\begin{array}{c}[X_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{}X_k,Y_1\mathrm{}Y_l]=\\ _{i,j}\left(1\right)^{i+j}[X_i,Y_j]X_1\mathrm{}\widehat{X}_i\mathrm{}X_kY_1\mathrm{}\widehat{Y}_j\mathrm{}Y_l.\end{array}$$

With the help of Sign Rule we easily superize formula $`()`$ for the case when $`M`$ is replaced with a supermanifold $``$. Let $`x`$ and $`\xi `$ be the even and odd coordinates on $``$. Setting $`\theta _i=\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\frac{}{x_i}\right)=\stackrel{ˇ}{x}_i`$, $`q_j=\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\frac{}{\xi _j}\right)=\stackrel{ˇ}{\xi }_j`$ we get an identification of the Schouten bracket of polyvector fields on $``$ with the Buttin bracket of functions on the supermanifold $`\stackrel{ˇ}{}`$ whose coordinates are $`x,\xi `$ and $`\stackrel{ˇ}{x}`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\xi }`$.

In terms of the Poisson and Buttin brackets, respectively, the contact brackets are

$`(\mathrm{0.3.8})`$
$$\{f,g\}_{k.b.}=(2E)(f)\frac{g}{t}\frac{f}{t}(2E)(g)\{f,g\}_{P.b.}$$

and

$`(\mathrm{0.3.9})`$
$$\{f,g\}_{m.b.}=(2E)(f)\frac{g}{\tau }+(1)^{p(f)}\frac{f}{\tau }(2E)(g)\{f,g\}_{B.b.}.$$

The Lie superalgebras of Hamiltonian fields (or Hamiltonian superalgebra) and its special subalgebra (defined only if $`n=0`$) are

$$𝔥(2n|m)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(2n|m)L_D\omega _0=0\}\text{ and}𝔰𝔥(m)=\{H_f𝔥(0|m)fvol_\theta =0\}.$$

The “odd” analogues of the Lie superalgebra of Hamiltonian fields are the Lie superalgebra of vector fields $`\mathrm{Le}_f`$ introduced in \[L1\] and its special subalgebra:

$$𝔩𝔢(n)=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|n)L_D\omega _1=0\}\text{ and}𝔰𝔩𝔢(n)=\{D𝔩𝔢(n)\mathrm{div}D=0\}.$$

It is not difficult to prove the following isomorphisms (as superspaces):

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\hfill 𝔨(2n+1|m)& & Span(K_ff[t,p,q,\xi ]);\hfill & \hfill 𝔩𝔢(n)& & Span(Le_ff[q,\xi ]);\hfill \\ \hfill 𝔪(n)& & Span(M_ff[\tau ,q,\xi ]);\hfill & \hfill 𝔥(2n|m)& & Span(H_ff[p,q,\xi ]).\hfill \end{array}$$

Set $`𝔰𝔭𝔬(m)=\{K_f𝔭𝔬(0|m)fvol_\xi =0\}`$ and $`𝔰𝔥(m)=𝔰𝔭𝔬(m)/K_1`$.

### 1.0.5.2. Divergence-free subalgebras

Since, as is easy to calculate,

$$\mathrm{div}K_f=(2n+2m)K_1(f),$$

it follows that the divergence-free subalgebra of the contact Lie superalgebra either coincides with it (for $`m=2n+2`$) or is the Poisson superalgebra. For the “odd” contact series the situation is more interesting: the divergence free subalgebra is simple and new (as compared with the above list).

Since

$`(\mathrm{0.4.1})`$
$$\mathrm{div}M_f=(1)^{p(f)}2\left((1E)\frac{f}{\tau }\underset{in}{}\frac{^2f}{q_i\xi _i}\right),$$

it follows that

$$𝔰𝔪(n)=Span\left(M_f𝔪(n)(1E)\frac{f}{\tau }=\underset{in}{}\frac{^2f}{q_i\xi _i}\right).$$

In particular,

$`(\mathrm{0.4.2})`$
$$\mathrm{div}Le_f=(1)^{p(f)}2\underset{in}{}\frac{^2f}{q_i\xi _i}.$$

The odd analog of the Laplacian, namely, the operator

$`(\mathrm{0.4.3})`$
$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{in}{}\frac{^2}{q_i\xi _i}$$

on a periplectic supermanifold appeared in physics under the name of BRST operator, cf. \[GPS\]. The divergence-free vector fields from $`𝔰𝔩𝔢(n)`$ are generated by harmonic functions, i.e., such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(f)=0`$.

Lie superalgebras $`𝔰𝔩𝔢(n)`$, $`𝔰𝔟(n)`$ and $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|n)`$ have ideals $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n)`$, $`𝔰𝔟{}_{}{}^{}(n)`$ and $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(n)`$ of codimension 1 defined from the exact sequences

$$\begin{array}{c}0𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n)𝔰𝔩𝔢(n)Le_{\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n}0,\\ 0𝔰𝔟{}_{}{}^{}(n)𝔰𝔟(n)M_{\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n}0,\\ 0𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(n)𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|n)\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n\frac{}{t}0.\end{array}$$

### 1.0.5.3. The Cartan prolongs

We will repeatedly use the Cartan prolong. So let us recall the definition and generalize it somewhat. Let $`𝔤`$ be a Lie algebra, $`V`$ a $`𝔤`$-module, $`S^i`$ the operator of the $`i`$-th symmetric power. Set $`𝔤_1=V`$, $`𝔤_0=𝔤`$ and for $`i>0`$ define the $`i`$-th Cartan prolong (the result of Cartan’s prolongation) of the pair $`(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)`$ as

$$𝔤_k=\{X\mathrm{Hom}(𝔤_1,𝔤_{k1})X(v_0)(v_1,v_2,\mathrm{}v_k)=X(v_1)(v_0,v_2,\mathrm{},v_k)\text{ for any }v_i𝔤_1\}.$$

Equivalently, let

$`(\mathrm{0.5.1})`$
$$i:S^{k+1}(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_1S^k(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_1^{}𝔤_1$$

be the natural embedding and

$`(\mathrm{0.5.2})`$
$$j:S^k(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_0S^k(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_1^{}𝔤_1$$

the natural map. Then $`𝔤_k=i(S^{k+1}(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_1)j(S^k(𝔤_1)^{}𝔤_0)`$.

The Cartan prolong of the pair $`(V,𝔤)`$ is $`(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}=\underset{k1}{}𝔤_k`$.

(In what follows $`\text{.}`$ in superscript denotes, as is now customary, the collection of all degrees, while $``$ is reserved for dualization; in the subscripts we retain the old-fashioned $``$ instead of $`\text{.}`$ to avoid too close a contact with the punctuation marks.)

Suppose that the $`𝔤_0`$-module $`𝔤_1`$ is faithful. Then, clearly,

$$\begin{array}{c}(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)=𝔡𝔢𝔯[x_1,\mathrm{},x_n],\text{ where }n=dim𝔤_1\text{ and }\hfill \\ \hfill 𝔤_i=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)\mathrm{deg}D=i,[D,X]𝔤_{i1}\text{ for any }X𝔤_1\}.\end{array}$$

It is subject to an easy verification that the Lie algebra structure on $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)`$ induces same on $`(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}`$.

Of the four simple vectorial Lie algebras, three are Cartan prolongs: $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔤𝔩(n))_{}`$, $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔰𝔩(n))_{}`$ and $`𝔥(2n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔰𝔭(n))_{}`$. The fourth one — $`𝔨(2n+1)`$ — is the result of a trifle more general construction described as follows.

### 1.0.5.4. A generalization of the Cartan prolong

Let $`𝔤_{}=\underset{di1}{}𝔤_i`$ be a nilpotent $``$-graded Lie algebra and $`𝔤_0𝔡𝔢𝔯_0𝔤`$ a Lie subalgebra of the $``$-grading-preserving derivations. Let

$`(\mathrm{0.5.1}^{})`$
$$i:S^{k+1}(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_{}S^k(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_{}^{}𝔤_{}$$

and

$`(\mathrm{0.5.2}^{})`$
$$j:S^k(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_0S^k(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_{}^{}𝔤_{}$$

be the natural embeddings similar to (0.5.1) and (0.5.2), respectively. For $`k>0`$ define the $`k`$-th prolong of the pair $`(𝔤_{},𝔤_0)`$ to be:

$$𝔤_k=(j(S^\text{.}(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_0)i(S^\text{.}(𝔤_{})^{}𝔤_{}))_k,$$

where the subscript $`k`$ in the right hand side singles out the component of degree $`k`$.

Set $`(𝔤_{},𝔤_0)_{}=\underset{id}{}𝔤_i`$; then, as is easy to verify, $`(𝔤_{},𝔤_0)_{}`$ is a Lie algebra.

What is the Lie algebra of contact vector fields in these terms? Denote by $`𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n)`$ the Heisenberg Lie algebra: its space is $`Wz`$, where $`W`$ is a $`2n`$-dimensional space endowed with a nondegenerate skew-symmetric bilinear form $`B`$ and the bracket in $`𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n)`$ is given by the following relations:

$`z`$ is in the center and $`[v,w]=B(v,w)z`$ for any $`v,wW`$.
Clearly, $`𝔨(2n+1)(𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n),𝔠𝔰𝔭(2n))_{}`$.

### 1.0.5.5. Lie superalgebras of vector fields as Cartan’s prolongs

The superization of the constructions from sec. 0.5 are straightforward: via Sign Rule. We thus get infinite dimensional Lie superalgebras

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔤𝔩(m|n))_{};𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔰𝔩(m|n))_{};\\ 𝔥(2m|n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n))_{};\\ 𝔩𝔢(n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n))_{};𝔰𝔩𝔢(n)=(\mathrm{id},𝔰𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n))_{}.\end{array}$$

Remark. Observe that the Cartan prolongs $`(\mathrm{id},𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n))_{}`$ and $`(\mathrm{id},𝔭𝔢^{sy}(n))_{}`$ are finite dimensional.

The generalization of Cartan’s prolongations described in sec. 0.5.1 was first defined in \[ALSh\] (and repeatedly used later, e.g., in \[CK1\]). Observe that after superization it has two analogs associated with the contact series $`𝔨`$ and $`𝔪`$, respectively.

$``$ Define the Lie superalgebra $`𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n|m)`$ on the direct sum of a $`(2n,m)`$-dimensional superspace $`W`$ endowed with a nondegenerate skew-symmetric bilinear form and a $`(1,0)`$-dimensional space spanned by $`z`$.

Clearly, we have $`𝔨(2n+1|m)=(𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n|m),𝔠𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n))_{}`$ and, given $`𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n|m)`$ and a subalgebra $`𝔤`$ of $`𝔠𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)`$, we call $`(𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n|m),𝔤)_{}`$ the $`k`$-prolong of $`(W,𝔤)`$, where $`W`$ is the identity $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)`$-module.

$``$ The “odd” analog of $`𝔨`$ is associated with the following “odd” analog of $`𝔥𝔢𝔦(2n|m)`$. Denote by $`𝔞𝔟(n)`$ the antibracket Lie superalgebra: its space is $`Wz`$, where $`W`$ is an $`n|n`$-dimensional superspace endowed with a nondegenerate skew-symmetric odd bilinear form $`B`$; the bracket in $`𝔞𝔟(n)`$ is given by the following relations:

$`z`$ is odd and lies in the center; $`[v,w]=B(v,w)z`$ for $`v,wW`$.
Set $`𝔪(n)=(𝔞𝔟(n),𝔠𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n))_{}`$ and, given $`𝔞𝔟(n)`$ and a subalgebra $`𝔤`$ of $`𝔠𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)`$, we call $`(𝔞𝔟(n),𝔤)_{}`$ the $`m`$-prolong of $`(W,𝔤)`$, where $`W`$ is the identity $`𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)`$-module.

Generally, given a nondegenerate form $`B`$ on a superspace $`W`$ and a superalgebra $`𝔤`$ that preserves $`B`$, we refer to the above generalized prolongations as to $`mk`$-prolongation of the pair $`(W,𝔤)`$.

### 1.0.5.6. A partial Cartan prolong of $`(\underset{i0}{}𝔤_i,𝔥_1)`$

Consider the generalized Cartan prolong $`(𝔤_{},𝔤_0)_{}`$. Take a $`𝔤_0`$-submodule $`𝔥_1`$ in $`𝔤_1`$ such that $`[𝔤_1,𝔥_1]=𝔤_0`$. If such $`𝔥_1`$ exists (usually, the inclusion $`[𝔤_1,𝔥_1]𝔤_0`$ is strict), define the $`i`$th prolongation of $`(\underset{i0}{}𝔤_i,𝔥_1)`$ for $`i2`$ to be $`𝔥_i=\{D𝔤_i[D,𝔤_1]𝔥_{i1}\}`$. Set $`𝔥_i=𝔤_i`$ for $`i<0`$ and $`𝔥_{}=𝔥_i`$.

Examples: $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|n)`$ is a subalgebra of $`𝔨(1|2n)`$. The former is obtained as Cartan’s prolong of the same nonpositive part as $`𝔨(1|2n)`$ and a submodule of $`𝔨(1|2n)_1`$, cf. Table 1.2.1. The simple exceptional superalgebra $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$ introduced in 1.2.3 is another example.

### 1.0.6. The modules of tensor fields

To advance further, we have to recall the definition of the modules of tensor fields over $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$ and its subalgebras, see \[BL1\], \[L2\]. For any other $``$-graded vectorial Lie superalgebra the construction is identical.

Let $`𝔤=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$ and $`𝔤_{}=\underset{i0}{}𝔤_i`$. Clearly, $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱_0(m|n)𝔤𝔩(m|n)`$. Let $`V`$ be the $`𝔤𝔩(m|n)`$-module with the lowest weight $`\lambda =\mathrm{lwt}(V)`$. Make $`V`$ into a $`𝔤_{}`$-module setting $`𝔤_+V=0`$ for $`𝔤_+=\underset{i>0}{}𝔤_i`$. Let us realize $`𝔤`$ by vector fields on the $`m|n`$-dimensional linear supermanifold $`𝒞^{m|n}`$ with coordinates $`x=(u,\xi )`$. The superspace $`T(V)=\mathrm{Hom}_{U(𝔤_{})}(U(𝔤),V)`$ is isomorphic, due to the Poincaré–Birkhoff–Witt theorem, to $`[[x]]V`$. Its elements have a natural interpretation as formal tensor fields of type $`V`$. When $`\lambda =(a,\mathrm{},a)`$ we will simply write $`T(\stackrel{}{a})`$ instead of $`T(\lambda )`$. We will usually consider $`𝔤`$-modules induced from irreducible $`𝔤_0`$-modules.

Examples: $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$ as $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$\- and $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$-modules is $`T(\mathrm{id})`$. More examples: $`T(\stackrel{}{0})`$ is the superspace of functions; $`Vol(m|n)=T(1,\mathrm{},1;1,\mathrm{},1)`$ (the semicolon separates the first $`m`$ (“even”) coordinates of the weight with respect to the matrix units $`E_{ii}`$ of $`𝔤𝔩(m|n)`$) is the superspace of densities or volume forms. We denote the generator of $`Vol(m|n)`$ corresponding to the ordered set of coordinates $`x`$ by $`vol(x)`$. The space of $`\lambda `$-densities is $`Vol^\lambda (m|n)=T(\lambda ,\mathrm{},\lambda ;\lambda ,\mathrm{},\lambda )`$. In particular, $`Vol^\lambda (m|0)=T(\stackrel{}{\lambda })`$ but $`Vol^\lambda (0|n)=T(\stackrel{}{\lambda })`$. We set: $`Vol_0(0|m)=\{vVolv=0\}`$ and $`T_0(\stackrel{}{0})=\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)/1`$.

If the generator $`vol`$ of $`Vol`$ is fixed, then $`VolT(\stackrel{}{0})`$, as $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$-modules. We set $`T_0^0(\stackrel{}{0})`$ to denote the $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$-module $`Vol_0(0|m)/vol(\xi )`$.

Remark. To view the volume element as “$`d^mud^n\xi `$” is totally wrong: the superdeterminant can never appear as a factor under the changes of variables. We can try to use the usual notations of differentials provided all the differentials anticommute. Then the linear transformations that do not intermix the even $`u`$’s with the odd $`\xi `$’s multiply the volume element $`vol(x)`$, viewed as the fraction $`\frac{du_1\mathrm{}du_m}{d\xi _1\mathrm{}d\xi _n}`$, by the Berezinian of the transformation. But how could we justify this? Let $`X=(x,\xi )`$. If we consider the usual, exterior, differential forms, then the $`dX_i`$’s super anti-commute, hence, the $`d\xi _i`$ commute; whereas if we consider the symmetric product of the differentials, as in the metrics, then the $`dX_i`$’s supercommute, hence, the $`dx_i`$ commute. However, the $`\frac{}{\xi _i}`$ anticommute and, from transformations’ point of view, $`\frac{}{\xi _i}=\frac{1}{d\xi _i}`$. The notation, $`du_1\mathrm{}du_m\frac{}{\xi _1}\mathrm{}\frac{}{\xi _n}`$, is, nevertheless, still wrong: almost any transformation $`A:(u,\xi )(v,\eta )`$ sends $`du_1\mathrm{}du_m\frac{}{\xi _1}\mathrm{}\frac{}{\xi _n}`$ to the correct element, $`\mathrm{ber}(A)(du^m\frac{}{\xi _1}\mathrm{}\frac{}{\xi _n})`$, plus extra terms. Indeed, the fraction $`du_1\mathrm{}du_m\frac{}{\xi _1}\mathrm{}\frac{}{\xi _n}`$ is the highest weight vector of an indecomposable $`𝔤𝔩(m|n)`$-module and $`vol(x)`$ is the notation of the image of this vector in the 1-dimensional quotient module modulo the invariant submodule that consists precisely of all the extra terms.

### 1.0.7. Deformations of the Buttin superalgebra

(After \[ALSh\].) As is clear from the definition of the Buttin bracket, there is a regrading (namely, $`𝔟(n;n)`$ given by $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=0,\mathrm{deg}q_i=1`$ for all $`i`$) under which $`𝔟(n)`$, initially of depth 2, takes the form $`𝔤=\underset{i1}{}𝔤_i`$ with $`𝔤_0=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ and $`𝔤_1\mathrm{\Pi }([\xi ])`$. Replace now the $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$-module $`𝔤_1`$ of functions (with inverted parity) with the module of $`\lambda `$-densities, i.e., set $`𝔤_1\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol(0|n)^\lambda )`$, where

$$L_D(vol_\xi )^\lambda =\lambda \mathrm{div}Dvol_\xi ^\lambda \text{ and }p(vol_\xi )^\lambda =\overline{1}.$$

### 0.7.1

Define $`𝔟_\lambda (n;n)`$ as the Cartan’s prolong $`(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}=(\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol(0|n)^\lambda ),𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n))_{}`$. Clearly, it is a deform of $`𝔟(n;n)`$. The collection of these $`𝔟_\lambda (n;n)`$ for all $`\lambda `$’s is called the main deformation. (Though main, this deformation is not the quantization of the Buttin bracket, cf. \[Ko1\], \[L4\], \[LSh3\].)

The deform $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ of $`𝔟(n)`$ is a regrading of $`𝔟_\lambda (n;n)`$ described as follows. Set

$`(0.7)`$
$$𝔟_\lambda (n)=\{M_f𝔪(n)a\mathrm{div}M_f=(1)^{p(f)}2(abn)\frac{f}{\tau }\}.$$

Taking into account the explicit form (0.4.1) of the divergence of $`M_f`$ we get

$$𝔟_\lambda (n)=\{M_f𝔪(n)(bnaE)\frac{f}{\tau }=a\mathrm{\Delta }f\}=\{D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|n+1)L_D(vol_{q,\xi ,\tau }^a\alpha _0^{abn})=0\}.$$

It is subject to a direct check that $`𝔟_{a,b}(n)`$ is isomorphic to $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ for $`\lambda =\frac{2a}{n(ab)}`$. This isomorphism shows that $`\lambda `$ actually runs over $`P^1`$, not $``$.

Observe that $`𝔟_{nb,b}(n)𝔰𝔪(n)`$. Observe also that $`𝔟_{a,a}(2;2)𝔥_{1/2}(2|2)`$, see (OI).

As follows from the description of $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n)`$-modules (\[BL1\]) and the criteria for simplicity of $``$-graded Lie superalgebras (\[Ka4\]), the Lie superalgebras $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ are simple for $`n>1`$ and $`\lambda 0`$, 1, $`\mathrm{}`$. It is also clear that the $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ are nonisomorphic for distinct $`\lambda `$’s for $`n>2`$.

The Lie superalgebra $`𝔟(n)=𝔟_0(n)`$ is not simple: it has an $`\epsilon `$-dimensional, i.e., $`(0|1)`$-dimensional, center. At $`\lambda =1`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ the Lie superalgebras $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ are not simple either: they has an ideal of codimension $`\epsilon ^n`$ and $`\epsilon ^{n+1}`$, respectively. The corresponding exact sequences are

$$\begin{array}{c}0M_1𝔟(n)𝔩𝔢(n)0,\\ 0𝔟_1{}_{}{}^{}(n)𝔟_1(n)M_{\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n}0,\\ 0𝔟_{\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{}(n)𝔟_{\mathrm{}}(n)M_{\tau \xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n}0.\end{array}$$

### 1.0.7.2. A correction

G. Shmelev \[Sm\] interpreted $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$ of the Lie superalgebra $`𝔥(2|2)`$ of Hamiltonian vector fields as preserving either the pseudodifferential form

$$d\eta ^{\frac{2\lambda 1}{1\lambda }}\left(\lambda dqdp+(1\lambda )d\xi d\eta \right)$$

or, equivalently, as preserving the pseudodifferential form

$$d\eta ^{\frac{1}{\lambda }2}\left(dqdp+d\xi d\eta \right).$$

Careful calculations reveal that this interpretations (that we rewrote, e.g. in \[ALSh\], are incorrect.

### 1.0.8. The exceptional simple vectorial Lie superalgebras as Cartan’s prolongs

For a more detailed description of the “standard” realizations of the exceptions see \[Sh14\], \[ShP\].

### 1.0.9. The structures preserved

It is always desirable to find the structure preserved by the Lie superalgebra under the study. To see what do the vectorial superalgebras in nonstandard realizations preserve, we have to say, first of all, what is the structure that $`𝔤_0=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ preserves on $`𝔤_1=\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)`$.

Let $`𝔤=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$, set further

$$W=\mathrm{\Lambda }(n),V=\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)/1,V_0=\{\phi \mathrm{\Lambda }(n)\phi (0)=0\}.$$

The projection $`p:WV`$ establishes a natural isomorphism between $`V`$ and $`V_0`$. Let $`i:V_0W`$ be the “inverse” embedding.

Denote by $`\mathrm{mult}:WWW`$ the tensor of valency $`(2,1)`$ on $`W`$ which determines the multiplication on $`W`$. Since $`V_0`$ is an ideal in the associative supercommutative superalgebra $`W`$, the image $`\mathrm{mult}|_{V_0V_0}`$ is contained in $`V_0`$. Denote by $`\mathrm{mult}^{}`$ the tensor which coincides with $`\mathrm{mult}`$ on $`V_0V_0`$ and vanishes on $`1WW1`$. By means of the projection $`p`$ and the embedding $`i`$ we can $`𝔤`$-invariantly transport $`\mathrm{mult}^{}`$ to $`V`$. The tensor obtained will be also denoted by $`\mathrm{mult}^{}`$.

For any monomial $`\phi W`$ denote by $`\phi ^{}`$ the dual functional (in the monomial basis $`B(W)`$). Then

$$\mathrm{mult}=\mathrm{mult}{}_{}{}^{}+\underset{\phi B(W)}{}1^{}\phi ^{}\phi =\mathrm{mult}{}_{}{}^{}+1^{}\underset{\phi B(W)}{}\phi ^{}\phi .$$

By definition of $`𝔤`$, it preserves $`\mathrm{mult}`$, i.e., $`L_D(\mathrm{mult})=0`$ for any $`D𝔤`$. Hence,

$$L_D(\mathrm{mult}{}_{}{}^{})=L_D(1^{})\underset{\phi B(W)}{}\phi ^{}\phi (1^{})L_D(\underset{\phi B(W)}{}\phi ^{}\phi ).$$

Under the restriction onto $`V_0V_0`$ the second summand vanishes. Observe that $`_{\phi B(W)}\phi ^{}\phi `$ is the identity operator on $`W`$. Thus,

$$L_D(\mathrm{mult}{}_{}{}^{}|_{V_0V_0}^{})=L_D(1^{})\mathrm{id}|_{V_0}.$$

The lift of this identity operator to $`W`$ reads as follows:

$$L_D(\mathrm{mult})=\alpha (D)\mathrm{id}|_W\text{ for a 1-form }\alpha \text{ on }W.$$

Thus, all the structures preserved by $`𝔤_0`$ on $`𝔤_1`$ are clear, except for those preserved by several of the exceptional algebras. Namely, these structures are: (1) the tensor products $`B\mathrm{mult}`$ of a bilinear or a volume form $`B`$ preserved (perhaps, conformally, up to multiplication by a scalar) in the fiber of a vector bundle over a $`0|r`$-dimensional supermanifold on which the structure governed by $`\mathrm{mult}`$ is preserved, (2) $`\mathrm{mult}^{}`$, or $`\mathrm{mult}`$ twisted by divergence with factor $`\lambda `$. Observe that the volume element $`B`$ may be not just $`vol(\xi )`$ but $`(b+\alpha \xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n)vol(\xi )`$ as well.

The structures of another type, namely certain pseudodifferential forms, preserved by $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$, are already described.

### 1.1. Description of algebras

Consider infinite dimensional complex filtered Lie superalgebras $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ with decreasing filtration of the form

$`(PF)`$
$$\stackrel{~}{}=\stackrel{~}{}_{\stackrel{~}{d}}\stackrel{~}{}_{\stackrel{~}{d}+1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{}_0\stackrel{~}{}_1\mathrm{}$$

where depth $`\stackrel{~}{d}`$ is finite and where

1) $`\stackrel{~}{}_0`$ is a maximal subalgebra of finite codimension;

2) for any non-zero $`x\stackrel{~}{L}_k`$ for $`k0`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{L}_k=\stackrel{~}{}_k/\stackrel{~}{}_{k+1}`$, there exists $`y\stackrel{~}{L}_1`$ such that $`[x,y]0`$;

3) $`\stackrel{~}{}_0`$ does not contain ideals.

The pair $`(\stackrel{~}{},\stackrel{~}{}_0)`$ is called a primitive Lie algebra.

It turns out that there are virtually as many primitive Lie algebras as there are simple ones of polynomial growth and finite depth. Contrarywise, the classification problem of primitive Lie superalgebras is wild, see \[ALSh\].

We assume that these Lie superalgebras $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ are complete with respect to a natural topology whose basis of neighborhoods of zero is formed by the spaces of finite codimension, e.g., the $`\stackrel{~}{}_i`$. (In the absence of odd indeterminates this topology is the most natural one: we consider two vector fields $`k`$-close if their coefficients coincide up to terms of degree $`>k`$.) This topology is naturally (see. §1) called projective limit topology but a more clumsy term “linearly compact topology” is also used.

Observe that the very term “filtered algebra” implies that $`[\stackrel{~}{}_i,\stackrel{~}{}_j]\stackrel{~}{}_{i+j}`$ whereas conditions 1) and 2) manifestly imply that $`dim\stackrel{~}{L}_i<\mathrm{}`$ for all $`k`$ and the $``$-graded Lie superalgebra $`\stackrel{~}{L}=\underset{k\stackrel{~}{d}}{}\stackrel{~}{L}_k`$ associated with $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ grows polynomially, i.e., $`dim\underset{kn}{}\stackrel{~}{L}_k`$ grows as a polynomial in $`n`$.

Weisfeiler endowed every such filtered Lie algebra $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ with another, refined, filtration $`\stackrel{~}{}=`$:

$`(WF1)`$
$$=_d_{d+1}\mathrm{}_0_1\mathrm{}$$

where $`_1`$ is a minimal $`_0`$-invariant subspace and the other terms are defined by the formula (for $`i1`$):

$`(WF2)`$
$$_{i1}=[_1,_i]+_i\text{ and }_i=\{D_{i1}[D,_1]_{i1}\}.$$

This $`d`$ is the depth of $``$ and of the associated graded Lie superalgebra $`L`$.

An advantage of the Weisfeiler filtrations is that for the corresponding regraded Lie superalgebra $``$ the $`L_0`$-action on $`L_1`$ is irreducible (see sec. 1.0.2). These refined filtrations are called Weisfeiler filtrations even for Lie superalgebras, where Weisfeiler’s construction is literally applied; we will shortly write W-filtrations and call the gradings associated with W-filtrations W-gradings.

When the $`L_0`$-module $`L_1`$ is faithful, as is always the case for simple Lie superalgebras $``$, such filtered Lie superalgebras $``$ (and the associated with them graded ones, $`L`$) can be realized by vector fields on $`(/_0)^{}`$ with formal (resp. polynomial) coefficients. So, being primarily interested in simple Lie superalgebras, we will refer to W-filtered and W-graded Lie superalgebras as vectorial ones for short.

In \[LSh0\] we have anounced and in \[LSh1\] we have classified simple W-graded vectorial Lie superalgebras. Observe that the classification results of Cheng and Kac concerning simple W-filtered complete vectorial Lie superalgebras (\[Ka7\], \[CK1\]) should be completed: they have only considered filtered deformations corresponding to one filtration; other filtrations might produce new filtered deformations….

On notations. To simplify grasping the general picture from the displayed formulas of the following theorem, let us immediately inform that the prime example, $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n;r)`$, is the Lie algebra of vector fields whose coefficients are formal power series (or polynomials, depending on the problem) in $`m`$ commuting and $`n`$ anticommuting indeterminates with the filtration (and grading) determined by equating the degrees of $`r`$ ($`0rm`$) odd indeterminates to 0, the degrees of the remaining indeterminates being equal to 1. The regradings of other series are determined similarly, see 1.2.2. We omit indicating parameter $`r`$ if $`r=0`$.

In the sequel for any $`𝔤`$ we write $`𝔠𝔤=𝔤z`$ or $`𝔠(𝔤)`$ to denote the trivial central extension with the 1-dimensional even center generated by $`z`$. Any nontrivial central extension is shorthanded as $`𝔢(𝔤)`$.

If $`d`$ is the operator that determines the $``$ grading of $`𝔤`$ and does not belong to $`𝔤`$, then the Lie algebra $`𝔤\text{+}\text{ }d`$ is denoted by $`𝔡(𝔤)`$. If the operators $`d`$ and $`z`$ described above may be considered as having the same degree with respect to some grading, we write $`𝔤_{a,b}`$ to shorthand $`𝔤\text{+}\text{ }(az+bd)`$.

In proofs we use notations of roots in the simple finite dimensional Lie algebras from \[OV\], Table 5. The standard (identity) representation of a matrix Lie superalgebra $`𝔤`$, i.e., a subalgebra of $`𝔤𝔩(V)`$, in $`V`$ is denoted by $`\mathrm{id}`$ or, for clarity, $`\mathrm{id}_𝔤`$.

Further elucidations. 1) In formulas $`(S)`$ and $`(E)`$ below: parentheses contain the superdimension of the superspace of indeterminates. The semicolon separates the superdimension from a shorthand description of the regrading.

Passing from one regrading to another one we take a “minimal” realization (i.e., with a minimal $`dim/_0`$) as the point of reference. For the exceptional Lie superalgebras another point of reference is often more convenient, the consistent regrading $`K`$.

The regradings of the series are governed by a parameter $`r`$ described in sec. 1.2. All regradings are given in suggestive notations, e.g., $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi (;3\eta )`$ means that having taken $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi `$ as the point of reference we set $`\mathrm{deg}\eta =0`$ for each of the three $`\eta `$’s (certainly, this imposes some conditions on the degrees of the other indeterminates). The exceptional grading $`E_H`$ of $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$ is described in passing in the list of occasional isomorphisms (OI); it is described in detail for another incarnation of this algebra (1.2.1.1). By $`K`$ we initially denoted consistent gradings spelled with Russian accent, later we decided to retain it in order to acknowledge Kac’s skill in using it, $`CK`$ is an exceptional grading found by Cheng and Kac.

2) Several algebras are “drop-outs” from the series. For example: $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(1|n;r)`$ are “drop-outs” from the series $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n;r)`$ since the latter are not simple for $`m=1`$ but contain the simple ideal $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(1|n;r)`$. Similarly, $`𝔩𝔢(n|n;r)`$, $`𝔟_1{}_{}{}^{}(n|n+1;r)`$ and $`𝔟_{\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{}(n|n+1;r)`$ are “drop-outs” from the series $`𝔟_\lambda (n|n+1;r)`$ corresponding to $`\lambda =0`$, 1 and $`\mathrm{}`$, respectively. Though $`𝔰𝔪`$ is not a dropout due to the above reason, it is singled out by its divergence free property, hence, deserves a separate line.

The finite dimensional Lie superalgebra $`𝔥(0|n)`$ of hamiltonian vector fields is not simple either and contains a simple ideal $`𝔰𝔥(0|n)`$.

###### Theorem .

The simple W-graded vectorial Lie superalgebras $`L`$ constitute the following series $`(S)`$ and five exceptional families of fifteen individual algebras $`(E)`$. They are pairwise non-isomorphic, as graded and filtered superalgebras, bar for occasional isomorphisms $`(OI)`$. Parameters at which $`dimL`$ becomes finite are marked by “FD”.

All these algebras are either Cartan prolongs or results of the generalized Cartan prolongations (described in sec 0.5) and, therefore, are determined by the terms $`L_i`$ with $`i0`$ (or $`i1`$ in some cases). These terms are listed in sec. 1.2 (and their form might drastically vary with $`n`$ and $`r`$).

$`(S_{vect})`$

| $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n;r)`$ for $`(m|n)(0|1)`$ and $`0rn`$; FD for $`m=0`$, $`n>1`$ |
| --- |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(m|n;r)`$ for $`m>1`$, $`0rn`$; FD for $`m=0`$ and $`n>2`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(1|n;r)`$ for $`n>1`$, $`0rn`$ |
| $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}(0|n)`$ for $`n>2`$ (FD) |

$`(S_k)`$

| $`𝔨(2m+1|n;r)`$ for $`0r[\frac{n}{2}]`$ unless $`(m|n)=(0|2k)`$ |
| --- |
| $`𝔨(1|2k;r)`$ for $`0rk`$ except $`r=k1`$ |
| $`𝔥(2m|n;r)`$ for $`m>0`$ and $`0r[\frac{n}{2}]`$ |
| $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2;r)`$ for $`\lambda 0,1,\mathrm{}`$, and $`r=0`$, $`1`$ and $`E_H`$ (see (OI) and sec. 1.2.1.1) |
| $`𝔰𝔥(0|n)`$ for $`n>3`$ (FD) |

$`(S_m)`$

| $`𝔪(n|n+1;r)`$ for $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| --- |
| $`𝔰𝔪(n|n+1;r)`$ for $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ and except $`n=3`$ |
| $`𝔟_\lambda (n|n+1;r)`$ for $`n>1`$, where $`\lambda 0,1,\mathrm{}`$ and $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| $`𝔟_\lambda (2|3;r)`$, where $`\lambda 0,1,\mathrm{}`$ for $`r=0`$, $`2`$ and $`E`$ (see sec. 1.2.1.1) |
| $`𝔟_1{}_{}{}^{}(n|n+1;r)`$ for $`n>1`$ and $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| $`𝔟_{\mathrm{}}{}_{}{}^{}(n|n+1;r)`$ for $`n>1`$ and $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| $`𝔩𝔢(n|n;r)`$ for $`n>1`$ and $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n|n;r)`$ for $`n>1`$ and $`0rn`$ except $`r=n1`$ |
| $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})`$ for $`\mu 0`$ and $`n>2`$ |

Our original notations of exceptional simple vectorial superalgebras, though reflect the way they are constructed and the geometry preserved, are rather long. But to write just $`𝔢(dim)`$ is to create confusion: the superdimensions of the superspaces $`(/)^{}`$ on which the algebra $``$ is realized coincide sometimes for different regradings. So we simplify notations only for $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢`$ and, in accordance with description of nonstandard gradings in sec. 1.2, we set:

$`(E)`$

| Lie superalgebra | its regradings (shorthand) |
| --- | --- |
| $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;r)`$, $`r=0,1,K`$ | $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3)`$, $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(5|4)`$, and $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(3|6)`$ |
| $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$ | $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(1|6;r)`$, $`r=0,1,3\xi ,3\eta `$ | $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(1|6)`$, $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(5|5)`$, $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$, and $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(4|3)`$ |
| $`𝔪𝔟(4|5;r)`$, $`r=0,1,K`$ | $`𝔪𝔟(4|5)`$, $`𝔪𝔟(5|6)`$, and $`𝔪𝔟(3|8)`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;r)`$, $`r=0,2,K,CK`$ | $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6)`$, $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(11|9)`$, $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(5|10)`$, and $`𝔠𝔨(9|11)`$ |

Hereafter we inconsistently abbreviate $`𝔪(n|n+1;r)`$, $`𝔟_\lambda (n|n+1;r)`$, $`𝔩𝔢(n|n;r)`$, etc., i.e., algebras from $`(S_m)`$, to $`𝔪(n;r)`$, $`𝔟_\lambda (n;r)`$, etc., respectively.

Sometimes instead of $`𝔟_\lambda (n;r)`$, where $`\lambda =\frac{2a}{n(ab)}\{\mathrm{}\}`$, we write $`𝔟_{a,b}(n;r)`$ for clarity. Parameters $`a,b`$, as natural as $`\lambda `$, are introduced in sec. 0.7. Observe that the exceptional regrading $`E`$ of $`𝔟_\lambda (2)`$ and isomorphisms $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)𝔟_\lambda (2;2)`$ determine the exceptional grading $`E_H`$ of $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$.

(OI): Occasional isomorphisms:

$`(OI)`$
$$\begin{array}{c}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|1)𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|1;1);\hfill \\ 𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(2|1)𝔩𝔢(2;2);𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(2|1;1)𝔩𝔢(2)\hfill \\ 𝔰𝔪(n)𝔟_{2/(n1)}(n);\text{ in particular, }𝔰𝔪(2)𝔟_2(2)\text{, and}\hfill \\ 𝔰𝔪(3)𝔟_1(3)\text{, hence, }𝔰𝔪(3)\text{ is not simple};\hfill \\ 𝔟_{1/2}(2;2)𝔥_{1/2}(2|2)=𝔥(2|2);𝔥_\lambda (2|2)𝔟_\lambda (2;2);𝔥_\lambda (2|2;1)𝔟_\lambda (2);\hfill \\ 𝔟_{a,b}(2;E)𝔟_{b,a}(2)𝔟_{b,a}(2);\text{for }ab\text{ and }b0;\hfill \\ 𝔟_{a,0}(2;E)𝔩𝔢(2)\text{ and }𝔟_{a,a}(2;E)𝔟_{\mathrm{}}^{}(2);\hfill \\ 𝔥_\lambda (2|2)𝔥_{1\lambda }(2|2);\hfill \\ \stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\nu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})\text{ for }\mu \nu 0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Though $`𝔟_\lambda (2)`$ and $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$ are isomorphic, we consider them separately because they preserve very distinct structures.

Warning. Isomorphic abstract Lie superalgebras might be quite distinct as filtered: e.g., regradings provide us with isomorphisms (\[ALSh\])

$$𝔨(1|2)𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|1)𝔪(1)\text{ as abstract algebras}.$$

Observe that of the above three nonisomorphic filtered algebras only one is W-filtered.

Even if the regraded algebra can be realized by vector fields on the superspace of the same dimension, the structures preserved are totally different: e.g., $`𝔨(1|2)𝔪(1)`$ and $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;2)=𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(11|9)𝔠𝔨(9|11)`$.

###### Remark .

1) The excluded regradings $`𝔨(1|2k;k1)`$ as well as $`𝔪(n|n+1;n1)`$ and the ones they induce on $`𝔟_\lambda `$, $`𝔩𝔢`$ and $`𝔰𝔩𝔢`$ are often considered in applications (at least for small values of $`k`$ and $`n`$) though these gradings/filtrations are not Weisfeiler ones: for them the $`𝔤_0`$-module $`𝔤_1`$ is reducible.

2) $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}(0|n)`$, as well as $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})`$, depend on an odd parameter if $`n`$ is odd.

3) The Lie superalgebras $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}`$ and $`𝔰𝔥`$, as well as $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$, $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$ for $`m=0`$, are finite dimensional.

The above Lie superalgebras sometimes admit deformations that do not possess Weisfeiler filtrations. These deformations are considered in detail in \[L4\], \[Ko1\], \[Ko2\], \[LSh3\], \[LSh4\].

The five types of exceptional Lie superalgebras are given below in their minimal realizations as Cartan’s prolongs $`(𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}`$ or generalized (see sect. 0.5) Cartan’s prolongs $`(𝔤_{},𝔤_0)_{}^{mk}`$ for $`𝔤_{}=\underset{di1}{}𝔤_i`$ expressed for $`d=2`$ as $`(𝔤_2,𝔤_1,𝔤_0)_{}^{mk}`$ together with one of the Lie superalgebras from (S) as an ambient which contains the exceptional one as a maximal subalgebra.

$`(E)`$

| $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;r)=(\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(3))/1,𝔠𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|3))_{}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|3),r=0,1,K`$ |
| --- |
| $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)=(\mathrm{spin},𝔞𝔰)_{}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|4)`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi (;r)𝔨(1|6;r),r=0,1,3\xi `$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi (;3\eta )=(Vol_0(0|3),𝔠(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|3)))_{}𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|3)`$ |
| $`𝔪𝔟(4|5;r)=(𝔞𝔟(4),𝔠𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|3))_{}^m𝔪(4|5),r=0,1,K`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;r)=(𝔥𝔢𝔦(8|6),𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|4)_{3,4})_{}^k𝔨(9|6),r=0,2`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;K)=(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(5)},\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(5)}^{}),𝔰𝔩(5))_{}^k𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(5|10;2,2,2,2,2|1,\mathrm{},1)`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;CK)`$ is described at the end of 1.2.2. |

### 1.2.1. Nonstandard realizations

The following are all the nonstandard gradings of the Lie superalgebras indicated. In particular, the gradings in the series $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$ induce the gradings in the series $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$, $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱^{}`$ and the exceptional algebras $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3)`$ and $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$; the gradings in $`𝔪`$ induce the gradings in $`𝔟_\lambda `$, $`𝔩𝔢`$, $`𝔰𝔩𝔢`$, $`𝔰𝔩𝔢^{}`$, $`𝔟`$, $`𝔰𝔟`$, $`𝔰𝔟^{}`$ and the exceptional algebra $`𝔪𝔟`$; the gradings in $`𝔨`$ induce the gradings in $`𝔭𝔬`$, $`𝔥`$ and the exceptional algebras $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$ and $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢`$.

In what follows we consider $`𝔨(2n+1|m)`$ as preserving the Pfaff equation $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=0`$, where

$$\stackrel{~}{\alpha }=dt+\underset{in}{}(p_idq_iq_idp_i)+\underset{jr}{}(\xi _jd\eta _j+\eta _jd\xi _j)+\underset{km2r}{}\theta _kd\theta _k.$$

The standard realizations correspond to $`r=0`$, they are marked by $`()`$. Observe that the codimension of $`_0`$ attains its minimum in the standard realization.

| Lie superalgebra | its $``$-grading |
| --- | --- |
| $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(n|m;r\right)`$, | $`\mathrm{deg}u_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _j=1`$ for any $`i,j`$ $`()`$ |
| $`0rm`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _j=0`$ for $`1jr;`$ |
|  | $`\mathrm{deg}u_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _{r+s}=1`$ for any $`i,s`$ |
|  | $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}q_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$ for any $`i`$ $`()`$ |
| $`𝔪(n;r),`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =\mathrm{deg}q_i=1`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=0`$ for any $`i`$ |
| $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}rn`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =\mathrm{deg}q_i=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=0`$ for $`1ir<n`$; |
| $`rn1`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}u_{r+j}=\mathrm{deg}\xi _{r+j}=1`$ for any $`j`$ |
| $`𝔨\left(2n+1|m;r\right)`$, | $`\mathrm{deg}t=2`$, |
|  | $`\mathrm{deg}p_i=\mathrm{deg}q_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _j=\mathrm{deg}\eta _j=\mathrm{deg}\theta _k=1`$ for any $`i,j,k`$ $`()`$ |
| $`0r\left[\frac{m}{2}\right]`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}t=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=0`$ for $`1ir\left[\frac{m}{2}\right]`$; |
| $`rk1`$ for $`m=2k`$ and $`n=0`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}p_i=\mathrm{deg}q_i=\mathrm{deg}\theta _j=1`$ for $`j1`$ and all $`i`$ |
| $`𝔨\left(1|2m;m\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{deg}t=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=0`$ for $`1im`$ |

### 1.2.1.1. The exceptional nonstandard regrading $`E`$

This is a regrading of $`𝔟_{a,b}(2;E)`$ given by the formulas:

$`(r=E)`$
$$\mathrm{deg}\tau =0;\mathrm{deg}\xi _1=\mathrm{deg}\xi _2=1;\mathrm{deg}q_1=\mathrm{deg}q_2=1.$$

Then for the generic $`a`$ and $`b`$ we have:

$`()`$
$$𝔤_2=\mathrm{\Pi }(\xi _1\xi _2)\text{ and }𝔤_1=Span\{\mathrm{Le}_{\xi _1},\mathrm{Le}_{\xi _2},\mathrm{Le}_{Q_1},\mathrm{Le}_{Q_2}\},$$

where $`Q_1=A\xi _1\xi _2q_1+B\tau \xi _2`$, $`Q_2=A\xi _1\xi _2q_2B\tau \xi _1`$ and where $`A`$ and $`B`$ are some coefficients determined by $`a`$ and $`b`$. The bracket on $`𝔤_1`$ is determined by the odd form $`\omega =cdQ_id\xi _i`$, so $`𝔤_0`$ must be contained in $`𝔪(2)_0`$. The direct calculations show that $`dim𝔤_0=4|4`$ and

$$𝔤_0=𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)X,\text{ where }X=\mathrm{Le}_{a\tau +b{\scriptscriptstyle q_i\xi _i}}.$$

Indeed, $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)_0𝔰𝔩(2)=Span\{\mathrm{Le}_{q_1\xi _2},\mathrm{Le}_{q_2\xi _1},\mathrm{Le}_{q_1\xi _1q_2\xi _2}\}`$, $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)_1=\mathrm{Le}_1`$ and $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)_1=\mathrm{Le}_{\alpha \xi _1\xi _2P(q)+\beta \tau \mathrm{\Delta }(\xi _1\xi _2P(q))}`$, where $`P(q)`$ is a monomial of degree 2 and $`\alpha ,\beta `$ are some coefficients. The eigenvalues of $`X`$ on $`𝔤_1`$ are $`a+b`$ on the even part and $`a+b`$ an the odd part. So $`𝔟_{a,b}(2;E)𝔟_{b,a}(2)𝔟_{b,a}(2)`$.

For $`b=0`$ and $`a=b`$ formula $`()`$ should be modified because then $`𝔤_2=0`$. In these cases $`𝔟_{a,0}(2;E)𝔩𝔢(2)`$ and $`𝔟_{a,a}(2;E)𝔟_{\mathrm{}}^{}(2)`$, respectively.

For $`n>2`$, as well as for $`𝔪(n)`$ for $`n>1`$, similar regradings are not Weisfeiler ones.

The exceptional grading $`E`$ of $`𝔟_\lambda (2)`$ induces the exceptional grading $`E_H`$ of the isomorphic algebra $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$, see (OI).

### 1.2.1.2. The W-regradings of exceptional algebras

###### Theorem .

(\[Sh14\], \[CK2\]) The W-regradings of the exceptional simple vectorial Lie superalgebras are given by the following regradings of their “standard” ambients listed in sec. $`1.1`$:

1) $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;r)=(\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(3)/1),𝔠𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|3))_{}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|3),r=0,1,K`$;

$`r=0`$: $`\mathrm{deg}y=\mathrm{deg}u_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$

$`r=1`$: $`\mathrm{deg}y=\mathrm{deg}\xi _1=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_2=\mathrm{deg}u_3=\mathrm{deg}\xi _2=\mathrm{deg}\xi _3=1`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_1=2`$

$`r=K`$: $`\mathrm{deg}y=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_i=2`$; $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$

2) $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)=(\mathrm{spin},𝔞𝔰)_{}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|4)`$;

3) $`𝔨𝔞𝔰𝔨(1|6;r)`$, $`r=0,1,3\xi `$; $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(;3\eta )𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|3)`$;

$`r=0`$: $`\mathrm{deg}t=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$; $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$;

$`r=1`$: $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _1=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _1=\mathrm{deg}t=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _2=\mathrm{deg}\xi _3=\mathrm{deg}\eta _2=\mathrm{deg}\eta _3=1`$;

$`r=3\xi `$: $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=\mathrm{deg}t=1`$;

$`r=3\eta `$: $`\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=\mathrm{deg}t=1`$

4) $`𝔪𝔟(4|5;r)=(𝔞𝔟(4),𝔠𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|3))_{}^m𝔪(4),r=0,1,K`$;

$`r=0`$: $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$ for $`i=0`$, 1, 2, 3;

$`r=1`$: $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =\mathrm{deg}\xi _0=\mathrm{deg}u_1=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_2=\mathrm{deg}u_3=\mathrm{deg}\xi _2=\mathrm{deg}\xi _3=1`$; $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _1=\mathrm{deg}u_0=0`$

$`r=K`$: $`\mathrm{deg}\tau =\mathrm{deg}\xi _0=3`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_0=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}u_i=2`$; $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$ for $`i>0`$

5) $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;r)=(𝔥𝔢𝔦(8|6),𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱_{3,4}(4))_{}^k𝔨(9|6),r=0`$, 2, K, CK

$`r=0`$: $`\mathrm{deg}t=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}p_i=\mathrm{deg}q_i=\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$;

$`r=2`$: $`\mathrm{deg}t=\mathrm{deg}q_3=\mathrm{deg}q_4=\mathrm{deg}\eta _1=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}q_1=\mathrm{deg}q_2=\mathrm{deg}p_1=\mathrm{deg}p_2=\mathrm{deg}\eta _2=\mathrm{deg}\eta _3=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _2=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _3=1`$; $`\mathrm{deg}p_3=\mathrm{deg}p_4=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _1=0`$;

$`r=K`$: $`\mathrm{deg}t=\mathrm{deg}q_i=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}p_i=0`$; $`\mathrm{deg}\zeta _i=\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$;

$`r=CK`$: $`\mathrm{deg}t=\mathrm{deg}q_1=3`$, $`\mathrm{deg}p_1=0`$; $`\mathrm{deg}q_2=\mathrm{deg}q_3=\mathrm{deg}q_4=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _1=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _2=\mathrm{deg}\zeta _3=2`$; $`\mathrm{deg}p_2=\mathrm{deg}p_3=\mathrm{deg}p_4=\mathrm{deg}\eta _1=\mathrm{deg}\eta _2=\mathrm{deg}\eta _3=1`$

Thus, from the point of view of classification of the W-filtered Lie superalgebras, there are five families of exceptional algebras consisting of 15 individual algebras.

### 1.2.2. Several first terms that determine the Cartan prolongs

To facilitate the comparison of various vectorial superalgebras, we offer the following Table. The most interesting phenomena occur for extremal values of parameter $`r`$ and small values of superdimension $`m|n`$.

The central element $`z𝔤_0`$ is supposed to be chosen so that it acts on $`𝔤_k`$ as $`k\mathrm{id}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)=[\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _r]`$ is the Grassmann superalgebra generated by the $`\xi _i`$ of degree 0 for all $`i`$.

We set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(0)=`$, the $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$-module $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)/1`$ is denoted by $`T_0(\stackrel{}{0})`$; set $`Vol_0(0|m)=\{vVol(0|m)v=0\}`$ whereas the $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱`$-module $`T_0^0(\stackrel{}{0})`$ is defined as $`Vol_0(0|m)/1`$ (for more elucidations see sec. 0.6).

Recall the range of the regrading parameter $`r`$: $`0rm`$, where $`m`$ is the number of odd indeterminates, except for the series $`𝔨`$ and $`𝔥`$ when $`0r[\frac{m}{2}]`$, and $`𝔪(n)`$, $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$, etc. when $`0rn`$ with value $`r=n1`$ excluded. We exclude certain values of $`r`$, namely, $`r=k1`$ for $`𝔨(1|2k)`$ and $`r=n1`$ for $`𝔪(n)`$ and their subalgebras because for these values of $`r`$ the corresponding grading is not a W-grading: the $`𝔤_0`$ module $`𝔤_1`$ is reducible.

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m;r)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔤𝔩(n|mr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|m;m)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|m;r)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔰𝔩(n|mr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(1|m;m)`$ | $``$ | $`Vol_0(0|m)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)\text{+}\text{ }𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱{}_{}{}^{}(1|2)`$ | $``$ | $`T_0(\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|2)𝔰𝔩(1|2)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(2|1)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|2)𝔰𝔩(2|1)`$ |

| $`𝔥(2n|m)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔥(2n|m;r)`$ | $`T_0(\stackrel{}{0})`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m2r|2n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔥(2n|2r;r)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔰𝔭(2n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol^\lambda (0|2))`$ | $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(2|2)𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|2)`$ |
| $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2;1)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔭(2)}Vol^\lambda (0|1)`$ | $`𝔰𝔭(2)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|1)`$ |
| $`𝔨(2n+1|m;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔠𝔬𝔰𝔭(m2r|2n)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔨(1|2m;m)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)`$ |
| $`𝔨(1|2m+1;m)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(m))`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(m)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|m)`$ |

We set $`p(\mu )n(mod2)`$, so $`\mu `$ can be odd indeterminate. The Lie superalgebras $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}_\mu (0|n)`$ are isomorphic for nonzero $`\mu `$’s; hence, so are the algebras $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})`$. So for $`n`$ even we can set $`\mu =1`$, while if $`\mu `$ is odd we should consider it as an additional indeterminate on which the coefficients depend.

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔪(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(r))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔠𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔪(n;n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(n))`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |
| $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{n1}1|2^{n1})`$ | $``$ | $`\frac{\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol(0|n))}{(1+\mu \xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n)vol(\xi )}`$ | $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}_\mu (0|n)`$ |

In what follows $`\lambda =\frac{2a}{n(ab)}0`$, 1, $`\mathrm{}`$; the three exceptional cases (corresponding to the “drop-outs” $`𝔩𝔢(n)`$, $`𝔟_1{}_{}{}^{}(n)`$ and $`𝔟{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}(n)`$, respectively) are considered separately. The irreducibility condition of the $`𝔤_0`$-module $`𝔤_1`$ for $`𝔤=𝔟_{\mathrm{}}^{}`$ excludes $`r=n1`$. The case $`r=n2`$ is extra exceptional, so in the following tables

$$0<r<n2;\text{ additionally, unless specified, }ab\text{ and }(a,b)k(n,n2)\text{.}$$

To further clarify the following tables, denote the superspace of the identity $`k|k`$-dimensional representation of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(k)`$ by $`V`$; let $`d=\mathrm{diag}(1_k,1_k)𝔭𝔢(k)`$. Let $`W=V\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ and $`D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Xi }=\xi _1\mathrm{}\xi _n\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _n)`$. Denote by $`T^r`$ the representation of $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ in $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ given by the formula

$`(T^r)`$
$$T^r(D)=1D+d\frac{1}{nr}\mathrm{div}D.$$

In $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n;r)_{0}^{}`$ for $`rn2`$:

$`(\mathrm{1.2.1.1})`$
$$\begin{array}{c}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)\text{ acts on the ideal }𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{ via }T^r;\hfill \\ \text{ any }Xf𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{ acts in }𝔤_1\text{ as }\mathrm{id}f\text{ and in }𝔤_2\text{ as }0;\hfill \\ \text{any }D𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)\text{ acts in }𝔤_1\text{ via }T^r\text{ and in }𝔤_2\text{ as }D\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

In $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n;n2)_{0}^{}`$, observe that $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)(\mathrm{Le}_{q_1\xi _1q_2\xi _2})\text{+}\text{ }\mathrm{Le}_{\xi _1\xi _2}`$, whereas $`𝔤_2`$ and $`𝔤_1`$ are as above, for $`r<n2`$. Set $`𝔥=(\mathrm{Le}_{q_1\xi _1q_2\xi _2})`$. In this case

$`(\mathrm{1.2.1.2})`$
$$𝔤_0\underset{¯}{\left(𝔥\mathrm{\Lambda }(n2)\text{+}\text{ }\mathrm{Le}_{\xi _1\xi _2}(\mathrm{\Lambda }(n2)\xi _3\mathrm{}\xi _n)\right)}\text{+}\text{ }T^1(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n2)).$$

The action of $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n2)`$, the quotient of $`𝔤_0`$ modulo the underlined ideal is via (1.1.2.1). In the subspace $`\xi _1\xi _2\mathrm{\Lambda }(n2)𝔤_0`$ this action is as in the space of volume forms. So we can throw away $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$.

In the following table the terms “$`𝔤_1`$” denote the superspace isomorphic to the listed one but with the action given by formulas (1.2.1.1) and (1.2.1.2), as indicated.

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔩𝔢(n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`𝔭𝔢(n)`$ |
| $`𝔩𝔢(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔩𝔢(n;n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n;n2)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | see (1.2.1.2) |
| $`𝔰𝔩𝔢{}_{}{}^{}(n;n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0^0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |

We consider $`𝔟_{a,b}(n;r)`$ for $`0<r<n2`$ and $`arbn0`$; in particular, this excludes $`𝔟{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}(n;n)=𝔟{}_{a,a}{}^{}(n;n)`$ and $`𝔟{}_{1}{}^{}(n;n2)=𝔟{}_{n,n2}{}^{}(n;n2)`$. Set

$$c=\frac{a}{arbn}.$$

The case $`ar=bn`$, i.e., $`\lambda ={\displaystyle \frac{2}{nr}}`$ is an exceptional one, the $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$-action on the ideal $`𝔠𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ of $`𝔤_0`$ and on $`𝔤_{}`$ is the same as for $`𝔰𝔩𝔢^{}`$, see (1.2.1.1).

If $`z`$ is the central element of $`𝔠𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)`$ that acts on $`𝔤_1`$ as $`\mathrm{id}`$, then

$$z\psi \text{ acts on }𝔤_1\text{ as }\mathrm{id}\psi \text{, and on }𝔤_2\text{ as }2\mathrm{id}\psi \text{}$$

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔟_\lambda (n)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }()`$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)\text{+}\text{ }(az+bd)`$ |
| $`𝔟_\lambda (n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }((c)\mathrm{str})(Vol(0|r))^{2c}`$ | $`((\frac{c}{2})\mathrm{str})\mathrm{id})(Vol(0|r))^c`$ | $`\left(𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔟_\lambda (n;n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol^\lambda (0|n))`$ | $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔟_{2/(nr)}(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }()\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`𝔠𝔭𝔢(nr)\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}(n)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }()`$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)_{a,a}`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }()\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`\left((𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)_{a,a})\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}(n;n),n>2`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{\Lambda }(n))`$ | $`\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }(n)\mathrm{\Xi }\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{1}{}^{}(n)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }()`$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`(𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)_{n,n2})`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{1}{}^{}(n;r)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol_0(0|r))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | $`\left((𝔰𝔭𝔢(nr)_{n,n2})\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|r)`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{1}{}^{}(n;n2)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(T_0(\stackrel{}{0}))`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }(r)`$ | (1.1.2.1.2) with $`𝔠𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)`$ instead of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(2)`$ |
| $`𝔟{}_{1}{}^{}(n;n)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }(Vol_0(0|n))`$ | $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|n)`$ |

### 1.2.3. The exceptional vectorial Lie subsuperalgebras

Here are the terms $`𝔤_i`$ for $`i0`$ of 14 of the 15 exceptional algebras, the last column gives $`dim𝔤_{}`$:

| $`𝔤`$ | $`𝔤_2`$ | $`𝔤_1`$ | $`𝔤_0`$ | $`dim𝔤_{}`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`𝔳𝔩𝔢\left(4|3\right)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(3\right)/1\right)`$ | $`𝔠\left(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0|3\right)\right)`$ | $`4|3`$ |
| $`𝔳𝔩𝔢\left(4|3;1\right)`$ | $`1`$ | $`\mathrm{id}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(2\right)`$ | $`𝔠(𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(2\right)\text{+}\text{ }T^{1/2}\left(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0\right|2)\right)`$ | $`5|4`$ |
| $`𝔳𝔩𝔢\left(4|3;K\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)}`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)}^{}\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)}1`$ | $`𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)z`$ | $`3|6`$ |
| $`𝔳𝔞𝔰\left(4|4\right)`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{spin}`$ | $`𝔞𝔰`$ | $`4|4`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$ | $`1`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\mathrm{id}\right)`$ | $`𝔠𝔬\left(6\right)`$ | $`1|6`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(;1)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(1\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)}\left(\mathrm{id}_{𝔤𝔩\left(2\right)}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(1\right)\right)`$ | $`\left(𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)𝔤𝔩\left(2\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(1\right)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0|1\right)`$ | $`5|5`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(;3\xi )`$ | $``$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(3\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(3\right)𝔰𝔩\left(1|3\right)`$ | $`4|4`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(;3\eta )`$ | $``$ | $`Vol_0\left(0|3\right)`$ | $`𝔠\left(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0|3\right)\right)`$ | $`4|3`$ |
| $`𝔪𝔟\left(4|5\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(1\right)`$ | $`Vol\left(0|3\right)`$ | $`𝔠\left(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0|3\right)\right)`$ | $`4|5`$ |
| $`𝔪𝔟\left(4|5;1\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(2\right)/1`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(2\right)`$ | $`𝔠(𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(2\right)\text{+}\text{ }T^{1/2}\left(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0\right|2)\right)`$ | $`5|6`$ |
| $`𝔪𝔟\left(4|5;K\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)}`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)}^{}\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)}\right)`$ | $`𝔰𝔩\left(3\right)𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)z`$ | $`3|8`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢\left(9|6\right)`$ | $`1`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(T_0^0\left(\stackrel{}{0}\right)\right)`$ | $`𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱\left(0|4\right)_{3,4}`$ | $`9|6`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢\left(9|6;2\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(3|1\right)}`$ | $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)}\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(3\right)`$ | $`\left(𝔰𝔩\left(2\right)\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(3\right)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔰𝔩\left(1|3\right)`$ | $`11|9`$ |
| $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢\left(9|6;K\right)`$ | $`\mathrm{id}`$ | $`\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\left(\mathrm{id}^{}\right)\right)`$ | $`𝔰𝔩\left(5\right)`$ | $`5|10`$ |

Observe that none of the simple W-graded vectorial Lie superalgebras is of depth $`>3`$ and only two algebras are of depth 3: one of the above, $`𝔪𝔟(4|5;K)`$, for which we have $`𝔪𝔟(4|5;K)_3\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)})`$, and another one, $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(9|6;CK)=𝔠𝔨(9|11)`$.

This $`𝔠𝔨(9|11)`$ is the 15-th exceptional simple vectorial Lie superalgebra; its non-positive terms are as follows (we assume that the $`𝔰𝔩(2)`$\- and $`𝔰𝔩(3)`$-modules are purely even):

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔠𝔨(9|11)_0\left(𝔰𝔩(2)𝔰𝔩(3)\mathrm{\Lambda }(1)\right)\text{+}\text{ }𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(0|1);\hfill \\ 𝔠𝔨(9|11)_1\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)}\left(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(3)}\mathrm{\Lambda }(1)\right);\hfill \\ 𝔠𝔨(9|11)_2\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(3)}^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }(1);\hfill \\ 𝔠𝔨(9|11)_3\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)}).\hfill \end{array}$$

### 1.2.3.1. The exceptional Lie subsuperalgebra $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$ of $`𝔨(1|6)`$

This Lie superalgebra is not determined by its nonpositive part and requires a closer study. The Lie superalgebra $`𝔤=𝔨(1|2n)`$ is generated by the functions from $`[t,\xi _1,\mathrm{},\xi _n,\eta _1,\mathrm{},\eta _n]`$. The standard $``$-grading of $`𝔤`$ is induced by the $``$-grading of $`[t,\xi ,\eta ]`$ given by $`\mathrm{deg}t=2`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$; namely, $`\mathrm{deg}K_f=\mathrm{deg}f2`$. Clearly, in this grading $`𝔤`$ is of depth 2. Let us consider the functions that generate several first homogeneous components of $`𝔤=\underset{i2}{}𝔤_i`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& & & & \\ \text{component}& 𝔤_2& 𝔤_1& 𝔤_0& 𝔤_1\\ & & & & \\ \text{its generators}& 1& \mathrm{\Lambda }^1(\xi ,\eta )& \mathrm{\Lambda }^2(\xi ,\eta )t& \mathrm{\Lambda }^3(\xi ,\eta )t\mathrm{\Lambda }^1(\xi ,\eta )\end{array}$$

As one can prove directly, the component $`𝔤_1`$ generates the whole subalgebra $`𝔤_+`$ of elements of positive degree. The component $`𝔤_1`$ splits into two $`𝔤_0`$-modules $`𝔤_{11}=\mathrm{\Lambda }^3`$ and $`𝔤_{12}=t\mathrm{\Lambda }^1`$. It is obvious that $`𝔤_{12}`$ is always irreducible and the component $`𝔤_{11}`$ is trivial for $`n=1`$.

The partial Cartan prolongs of $`𝔤_{11}`$ and $`𝔤_{12}`$ are well-known:

$$\begin{array}{c}(𝔤_{}𝔤_0,𝔤_{11})_{}^{mk}𝔭𝔬(0|2n)K_t𝔡(𝔭𝔬(0|2n));\\ (𝔤_{}𝔤_0,𝔤_{12})_{}^{mk}=𝔤_2𝔤_1𝔤_0𝔤_{12}K_{t^2}𝔬𝔰𝔭(2n|2).\end{array}$$

Observe a remarkable property of $`𝔨(1|6)`$: only for it does the component $`𝔤_{11}`$ split into 2 irreducible modules that we will denote $`𝔤_{11}^\xi `$ and $`𝔤_{11}^\eta `$: one is generated by $`\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3`$, the other one by $`\eta _1\eta _2\eta _3`$.

Observe further, that $`𝔤_0=𝔠𝔬(6)𝔤𝔩(4)`$. As $`𝔤𝔩(4)`$-modules, $`𝔤_{11}^\xi `$ and $`𝔤_{11}^\eta `$ are the symmetric squares $`S^2(\mathrm{id})`$ and $`S^2(\mathrm{id}^{})`$ of the identity 4-dimensional representation and its dual, respectively.

###### Theorem .

(\[Sh5\], \[Sh14\]) The Cartan prolong $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi =(𝔤_{}𝔤_0,𝔤_{11}^\xi 𝔤_{12})_{}^{mk}`$ is infinite dimensional and simple. It is isomorphic to $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\eta =(𝔤_{}𝔤_0,𝔤_{11}^\eta 𝔤_{12})_{}^{mk}`$.

When it does not matter which of isomorphic algebras $`𝔨𝔞𝔰^\xi 𝔨𝔞𝔰^\eta `$ to take we will write $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$.

For their explicit presentation by generating functions and for related structures on the “stringy” Lie superalgebras see \[GLS1\].

### 1.2.5. Grozman’s theorem and a description of $`𝔤`$ as $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}`$ and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$

In \[CK2\] the exceptional algebras are described as $`𝔤=𝔤_{\overline{0}}𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$. For most of the series such description is of little value because each homogeneous component $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}`$ and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$ has a complicated structure. For the exceptions (and for twisted polyvector fields) the situation is totally different!

Observe that apart from being beautiful, such description is useful for the construction of Volichenko algebras, cf. \[LS\].

Recall in this relation a theorem of Grozman \[Gr\]. He completely described bilinear differential operators acting in tensor fields and invariant under all changes of coordinates. It turned out that almost all of the first order operators determine a Lie superalgebra on its domain. Some of these superalgebras are simple or close to simple. In the constructions below we use some of these invariant operators.

$`𝔤=𝔢(5|10)`$: $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}=𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(5|0)d\mathrm{\Omega }^3`$, $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}=\mathrm{\Pi }(d\mathrm{\Omega }^1)`$ with the natural $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}`$-action on $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$ and the bracketing of odd elements being their product; we identify for any permutation $`(ijklm)`$ of $`(12345)`$:

$$dx_idx_jdx_kdx_lvol^1=\mathrm{sign}(ijklm)\frac{}{x_m}.$$

$`𝔤=𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$: $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(4|0)`$, and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}=\mathrm{\Omega }^1Vol^{1/2}`$ with the natural $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}`$-action on $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$ and the bracketing of odd elements being

$$[\omega _1vol^{1/2},\omega _2vol^{1/2}]=(d\omega _1\omega _2+\omega _1d\omega _2)vol^1],$$

where we identify

$$dx_idx_jdx_kvol^1=\mathrm{sign}(ijkl)\frac{}{x_l}\text{ for any permutation }(ijkl)\text{ of }(1234).$$

$`𝔤=𝔳𝔩𝔢(3|6)`$: $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(3|0)𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}`$, where $`𝔤_0^{(1)}=𝔤[t]`$ , and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }^1Vol^{1/2}\right)\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}}`$ with the natural $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}`$-action on $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}`$.

Recall that $`\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)}`$ is the irreducible $`𝔰𝔩(2)`$-module $`L^1`$ with highset weight 1; its tensor square splits into $`L^2𝔰𝔩(2)`$ and the trivial module $`L^0`$; accordingly, denote by $`v_1v_2`$ and $`v_1v_2`$ the projections of $`v_1v_2L^1L^1`$ onto the skew-symmetric and symmetric components, respectively. For $`f_1,f_2\mathrm{\Omega }^0`$, $`\omega _1,\omega _2\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$ and $`v_1,v_2L^1`$ we set

$$\begin{array}{c}[(\omega _1v_1)vol^{1/2},(\omega _2v_2)vol^{1/2}]=\hfill \\ (\omega _1\omega _2)(v_1v_2)+d\omega _1\omega _2+\omega _1d\omega _2)(v_1v_2))vol^1,\hfill \end{array}$$

where we identify $`\mathrm{\Omega }^0`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }^3_{\mathrm{\Omega }^0}Vol^1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }^2_{\mathrm{\Omega }^0}Vol^1`$ with $`𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(3|0)`$ by setting

$$dx_idx_jvol^1=\mathrm{sign}(ijk)\frac{}{x_k}\text{ for any permutation }(ijk)\text{ of }(123).$$

$`𝔤=𝔪𝔟(3|8)`$: $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(3|0)𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}`$, and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}=𝔤_1𝔤_1`$, where

$$𝔤_1=\left(\mathrm{\Pi }Vol^{1/2}\right)\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}}\text{ and }𝔤_1=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }^1Vol^{1/2}\right)\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}};$$

clearly, one can interchange $`𝔤_{\pm 1}`$.

Multiplication is similar to that of $`𝔤=𝔳𝔩𝔢(3|6)`$. For $`f_1,f_2\mathrm{\Omega }^0`$, $`\omega _1,\omega _2\mathrm{\Omega }^1`$ and $`v_1,v_2L^1`$ we set

$$\begin{array}{c}[(\omega _1v_1)vol^{1/2},(\omega _2v_2)vol^{1/2}]=0,\hfill \\ [(f_1v_1)vol^{1/2},(f_2v_2)vol^{1/2}]=(df_1df_2)(v_1v_2)vol^1,\hfill \\ [(f_1v_1)vol^{1/2},(\omega _1v_2)vol^{1/2}]=\hfill \\ \left(f_1\omega _1(v_1v_2)+(df_1\omega _1+f_1d\omega _1)(v_1v_2)\right)vol^1.\hfill \end{array}$$

$`𝔤=𝔨𝔞𝔰`$: $`𝔤_{\overline{0}}=𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(1|0)𝔰𝔩(4)_0^{(1)}`$, and $`𝔤_{\overline{1}}=𝔤_1𝔤_1`$, where $`𝔤_1=\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}})\right)`$ and $`𝔤_1=\mathrm{\Pi }\left(S^2(\mathrm{id}_{𝔰𝔩(2)_0^{(1)}})\right)`$; clearly, one can interchange $`𝔤_{\pm 1}`$.

$`𝔤=𝔟_\lambda (n;\overline{n})`$: here $`\overline{n}`$ denotes the grading given by the formulas $`\mathrm{deg}q_i=0`$, $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=1`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n`$. Then for $`i=1,0,\mathrm{},n1`$ we have $`𝔤_i=(\mathrm{\Pi }^i(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{i1}(𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n|0)))Vol^{(i1)\lambda }`$.

Consider $`n=2`$ more attentively. Clearly, one can interchange $`𝔤_{\pm 1}`$; this possibility explains a mysterious isomorphism mentioned in (OI); if $`\lambda =1\lambda `$ we have additional automorphisms, whereas for $`\lambda =\frac{1}{2}`$ (and $`\lambda =\frac{3}{2}`$) there is a nontrivial central extension missed in \[Ko1\], \[Ko2\] and studied in \[LSh3\].

## §2. Main result

Recall that we usually skip the wedge sign in the product of supercommuting diferential forms; $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is the change of parity sign. The relations will be devided as in introduction: into Serre relations (S); lowest (for the positive part) or highest (for the negative part) weight relations, (LW) and (HW), respectively; other, new type relations (N). Observe that (LW) and (HW) are of the same form as (S).

$`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢(5|10)`$ Set (positive generators):

$$X_i=x_i\frac{}{x_{i+1}}\text{ for }i=1,2,3,4,\text{ and }Z=\mathrm{\Pi }x_5dx_4dx_5.$$

Relations in $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢_+`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [X_1,X_3]=0,[X_1,X_4]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_4}^2X_3=0,[X_2,X_4]=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2X_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_1=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2X_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2X_4=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2Z=0,[X_1,Z]=0,[X_2,Z]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_4}^2Z=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z,Z]=0,[[X_3,Z],[X_4,Z]]=0,[[X_4,[X_3,Z]],[[X_3,X_4],Z]]=0,\hfill \\ N_3\hfill & [[[X_1,X_2],[X_3,Z]],[[Z,[X_2,X_3]],[Z,[X_3,X_4]]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Set (negative generators):

$$Y_i=x_{i+1}\frac{}{x_i}\text{ for }i=1,2,3,4,\text{ and }Z=\mathrm{\Pi }dx_1dx_2.$$

The relations in $`𝔨𝔰𝔩𝔢_{}`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [Y_1,Y_3]=0,[Y_1,Y_4]=0,[Y_2,Y_4]=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Y_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_3=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_4=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_4}^2Y_3=0,\hfill \\ HW\hfill & [Y_1,Z]=0,[Y_3,Z]=0,[Y_4,Z]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Z=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z,Z]=0;[[[Y_2,Z],[Y_3,Y_4]],[[Z,[Y_1,Y_2]],[Z,[Y_2,Y_3]]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

$`𝔪𝔟(4|5)`$ Set (negative generators):

$$Y_1=\xi _0,Y_2=q_2\xi _1,Y_3=q_3\xi _2,Z=q_0q_1+\xi _2\xi _3.$$

The relations in $`𝔪𝔟(4|5)_{}`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [Y_1,Y_2]=0,[Y_1,Y_3]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_3=0,\hfill \\ HW\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Z=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Z=0,[Y_3,Z]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z,Z]=0,[[[Y_1,Z],[Y_2,Z]],[[Y_1,Z],[Z,[Y_2,Y_3]]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Set (positive generators):

$$\begin{array}{c}X_1=q_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\xi _0q_0q_1\xi _1q_0q_2\xi _2q_0q_3\xi _3+\tau q_0+2\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3,\hfill \\ X_2=q_1\xi _2,X_3=q_2\xi _3,Z_1=q_{3}^{}{}_{}{}^{2},Z_2=\xi _0\xi _1.\hfill \end{array}$$

The relations in $`𝔪𝔟(4|5)_+`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [X_1,X_2]=0,[X_1,X_3]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2X_2=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & [X_2,Z_1]=0,[X_3,Z_2]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2Z_1=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^3Z_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2Z_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2Z_2=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z_1,Z_1]=0,[Z_1,Z_2]=0,[Z_2,Z_2]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z_1,[X_3,[Z_1,X_3]]]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [[X_1,Z_1],[X_3,Z_1]]=4[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]=0;\hfill \\ N_3\hfill & 2[[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[[X_2,X_3],[X_3,Z_1]]]=\hfill \\ & [[Z_1,[X_2,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_3,Z_1]]];\hfill \\ N_4\hfill & [[[X_3,Z_1],[X_2,[X_1,Z_2]]],[[X_2,[X_1,Z_2]],[X_3,[X_3,Z_1]]]]=\hfill \\ & 4[[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,X_3]],[[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]]]]\hfill \\ & [[[X_2,Z_2],[X_3,[X_1,Z_1]]],[[X_2,[X_1,Z_2]],[X_3,[X_3,Z_1]]]].\hfill \end{array}$$

$`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;K)`$ Set (negative generators):

$$\begin{array}{c}Y_1=x_{4}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\frac{}{x_4}x_4x_5\frac{}{x_5}x_4x_6\frac{}{x_6}x_4x_7\frac{}{x_7}+x_5x_6\frac{}{x_3}x_5x_7\frac{}{x_2}+x_6x_7\frac{}{x_1},\hfill \\ Y_2=x_2\frac{}{x_1}+x_5\frac{}{x_6},Y_3=x_3\frac{}{x_2}+x_6\frac{}{x_7},Z=\frac{}{x_5}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The relations in $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;K)_{}`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [Y_1,Y_2]=0,[Y_1,Y_3]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_2=0,\hfill \\ HW\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Z=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Z=0,[Y_3,Z]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z,Z]=0,[[Z,[Y_2,Y_3]],[[Y_1,Z],[Y_2,Z]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Set (positive generators):

$$\begin{array}{c}X_1=\frac{}{x_4},X_2=x_1\frac{}{x_2}+x_6\frac{}{x_5},X_3=x_2\frac{}{x_3}+x_7\frac{}{x_6},\hfill \\ Z_1=x_3x_4\frac{}{x_7}x_3x_5\frac{}{x_2}+x_3x_6\frac{}{x_1}+x_5x_6\frac{}{x_7},\hfill \\ Z_2=x_2x_4\frac{}{x_7}x_2x_5\frac{}{x_2}+x_2x_6\frac{}{x_1}+x_4x_5\frac{}{x_4}+x_5x_6\frac{}{x_6}x_3x_4\frac{}{x_6}\hfill \\ x_3x_5\frac{}{x_3}+x_3x_7\frac{}{x_1}+x_4x_5\frac{}{x_4}+x_5x_7\frac{}{x_7}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The relations in $`𝔳𝔩𝔢(4|3;K)_+`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [X_1,X_2]=0,[X_1,X_3]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2X_2=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & [X_2,Z_1]=0,[X_3,Z_2]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2Z_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2Z_2=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^3Z_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2Z_2=0,\hfill \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cc}N_2\hfill & [Z_1,Z_1]=0,[Z_1,Z_2]=0,[Z_2,Z_2]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z_1,[X_3,[X_3,Z_1]]]=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [[X_1,Z_1],[X_3,Z_1]]=[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [[X_3,Z_1],[X_2,[X_1,Z_2]]]=2[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]+3[[X_1,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_2,X_3]]]\hfill \\ & 2[[X_2,X_3],[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]]]2[[X_2,Z_2],[X_3,[X_1,Z_1]]];\hfill \\ N_3\hfill & [[Z_1,[X_2,X_3]],[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]]]=3[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]]];\hfill \\ N_3\hfill & [[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]]=0,\hfill \\ N_4\hfill & [[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]=0;\hfill \\ N_4\hfill & [[[X_3,Z_1],[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]]],[[X_2,[X_1,Z_2]],[X_3,[X_1,Z_1]]]]=\hfill \\ & 6[[[X_1,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_2,X_3]]],[[X_1,Z_2],[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]]]]+\hfill \\ & 4[[[X_1,Z_2],[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]]],[[X_2,X_3],[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]]]]+\hfill \\ & 2[[[X_1,Z_2],[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]]],[[X_2,Z_2],[X_3,[X_1,Z_1]]]];\hfill \\ N_7\hfill & 6[[[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]],[[Z_2,[X_2,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]]=\hfill \\ & [[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]],[[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]]]]];\hfill \\ N_8\hfill & [[[Z_2,[X_1,Z_1]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]],[[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]],[[X_1,Z_2],[X_2,Z_2]]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

$`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$ A preliminary step to description of presentation of $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$ is the description of

Generators and relations for $`𝔞𝔰`$ We denote the positive generators by $`x`$ and the negative by $`y`$; each even (odd) element has even (odd) index. Set

$$\begin{array}{cccc}x_1=\eta _3,\hfill & x_2=\zeta _2\eta _1\hfill & x_4=\zeta _3\eta _2,\hfill & x_3=\zeta _1\eta _1\eta _3\zeta _2\eta _2\eta _3\hfill \\ y_1=\zeta _3,\hfill & y_2=\zeta _2\eta _3\hfill & y_4=\zeta _1\eta _2,\eta _3,\hfill & y_3=\zeta _1\zeta _3\eta _1\zeta _2\zeta _3\eta _2;\hfill \end{array}$$

and let Cartan subalgebra be spanned by

$$h_0=1,h_i=\zeta _i\eta _i.$$

The relations for positive elements are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{x_2}^2x_4=0,\mathrm{ad}_{x_4}^2x_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{x_4}^2x_1=0,\hfill \\ LW\hfill & [x_1,x_2]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{x_4}^2x_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{x_2}^2x_3=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [x_1,x_1]=0,[x_1,x_3]=0,[x_3,x_3]=0,\hfill \\ N_3\hfill & 2[x_3,[x_2,x_4]]=[x_4,[x_2,x_3]].\hfill \end{array}$$

The relations for negative elements are

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [y_1,y_1]=0,[y_1,y_3]=0,[y_2,y_4]=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & [y_4,y_4]=0,[y_4,y_3]=0,[y_3,y_3]=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{y_2}^2y_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{y_2}^2y_3=0,\hfill \\ N\hfill & [[y_1,y_4],[y_4,[y_1,y_2]]]=0;[[y_3,[y_1,y_2]],[[y_1,y_2],[y_1,y_4]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

The weights with respect to the $`h_i`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cccccccccc}x_1& (0& 0& 0& 1)& y_1& (0& 0& 0& 1)\\ x_2& (0& 1& 1& 0)& y_2& (0& 0& 0& 1)\\ x_4& (0& 0& 1& 1)& y_4& (0& 1& 1& 1)\\ x_3& (0& 0& 0& 1)& y_3& (0& 0& 0& 1)\end{array}$$

Other relations between positive and negative elements:

$$\begin{array}{c}[x_1,y_1]=h_0,[x_1,y_2]=0,[x_1,y_4]=0,\hfill \\ [x_1,y_3]=h_1h_2,[x_2,y_1]=0,[x_2,y_2]=0,[x_2,y_4]=x_3,\hfill \\ [x_2,y_3]=0,[x_4,y_1]=0,[x_4,y_2]=h_2h_3,\hfill \\ [x_4,y_4]=0,[x_4,y_3]=0,[x_3,y_1]=h_1+h_2,\hfill \\ [x_3,y_2]=0,[x_3,y_4]=0,[x_3,y_3]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

### Generators and relations for $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)`$

We denote $`_i=\frac{}{x_i}`$ and $`\delta _i=\frac{}{\theta _i}`$. Set (positive generators):

$$\begin{array}{c}X_1=x_1\delta _4x_4\delta _1+\theta _3_2\theta _2_3,X_2=x_2_1\theta _1\delta _2,\hfill \\ X_3=x_3\delta _3,X_4=x_1\delta _4+x_4\delta _1,\hfill \\ Z=x_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}_4+2x_1\theta _4\delta _1\hfill \end{array}$$

Relations in $`𝔳𝔞𝔰_+`$ (since only $`X_2`$ is even and the representations of $`𝔤_0`$ in $`𝔤_{\pm 1}`$ are not, strictly speaking neither highest nor lowest weight one, all these relations are of (N) type; the same applies for $`𝔳𝔞𝔰_{}`$ since only $`Y_2`$ and $`Y_3`$ are even):

$$\begin{array}{c}[X_1,X_1]=0,[X_1,X_4]=0,[X_2,X_3]=0,[X_3,X_3]=0,\hfill \\ [X_3,X_4]=0,[X_3,Z]=0,[X_4,X_4]=0,\hfill \\ [X_4,Z]=3[X_1,Z],\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_1=0,\hfill \\ \mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_4=0,\mathrm{ad}_Z^2X_1=0,\hfill \\ 2[Z,[X_2,X_4]]=[X_4,[X_2,Z]];\hfill \\ \mathrm{ad}_Z^2X_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^3Z=0,\hfill \\ [[X_1,X_3],[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]]=0,\hfill \\ [[X_4,[X_1,X_2]],[[X_1,X_2],[X_1,X_3]]]=0,\hfill \\ [[[X_1,X_2],[X_2,Z]],[[X_1,X_3],[X_2,Z]]]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Generators in $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)_{}`$. Set:

$$\begin{array}{c}Y_1=x_2\delta _3x_3\delta _2+\theta _4_1\theta _1_4,Y_2=x_2_3\theta _3\delta _2,\hfill \\ Y_3=x_1_2\theta _2\delta _1,Y_4=x_2\delta _3+x_3\delta _2,Z=\delta _4.\hfill \end{array}$$

Relations in $`𝔳𝔞𝔰(4|4)_{}`$:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_2=0,\hfill \\ N\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_4=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_4=0,\hfill \\ N\hfill & [Y_1,Y_1]=0,[Y_1,Y_2]=0,[Y_1,Y_4]=0,[Y_2,Z]=0,\hfill \\ N\hfill & [Y_3,Z]=0,[Y_4,Y_4]=0,[Y_4,Z]=0,[Z,Z]=0,\hfill \\ N\hfill & 2[Y_4,[Y_2,Y_3]]=[Y_3,[Y_2,Y_4]],[[Y_1,Z],[Y_3,Y_4]]=[[Y_1,Y_3],[Y_1,Z]].\hfill \end{array}$$

$`𝔨𝔞𝔰(4|3;K)`$ Set (negative generators):

$$Y_1=\xi _2\eta _1,Y_2=\xi _3\eta _2,Y_3=\eta _2\eta _3,Z=\xi _1.$$

The relations in $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(4|3;K)_{}`$ are:

$$\begin{array}{cc}S\hfill & [Y_2,Y_3]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_2}^2Y_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_3}^2Y_1=0,\hfill \\ S\hfill & \mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Y_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Y_3=0,\hfill \\ HW\hfill & [Y_2,Z]=0,[Y_3,Z]=0,\mathrm{ad}_{Y_1}^2Z=0,\hfill \\ N_2\hfill & [Z,Z]=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

Set (positive generators):

$$X_1=\xi _1\eta _2,X_2=\xi _2\eta _3,X_3=\xi _2\xi _3,Z_1=t\eta _1,Z_2=\xi _3\eta _1\eta _2.$$

The relations in $`𝔨𝔞𝔰(4|3;K)_+`$ (computed up to $`\mathrm{deg}40`$) consist of Serre-type relations:

$$\begin{array}{c}[X_1,Z_2]=0,[X_2,X_3]=0,[X_2,Z_1]=0,[X_3,Z_1]=0,\hfill \\ [X_3,Z_2]=0,[Z_1,Z_1]=0,[Z_1,Z_2]=0,[Z_2,Z_2]=0,\hfill \\ \mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2X_2=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2X_3=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_1}^2Z_1=0,\hfill \\ \mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^2X_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_3}^2X_1=0,\mathrm{ad}_{X_2}^3Z_2=0,\hfill \end{array}$$

and new (awful) type of relations:

$$\begin{array}{c}[Z_2,[X_2,[X_2,Z_2]]]=0,\hfill \\ \\ [[[X_1,X_3],[X_2,Z_2]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]=[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]],\hfill \\ \\ 4[[[Z_2,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]=\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]+\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]],,[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]],\hfill \\ \\ 12[[[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]]],[[[X_1,Z_1],[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]]]]=\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]]],\hfill \\ [[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_2,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]]]],\hfill \\ \\ 24[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]]=\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],\hfill \\ \\ 24[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]]]+\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],\hfill \\ [Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]],,[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]]]],\hfill \\ [[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]]]],\hfill \\ \\ 120[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[X_1,Z_1],[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]]]]]=\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],,[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]]]]],\hfill \\ \\ 120[[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_2,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]]]]],\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]]]=\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],\hfill \\ \\ 120[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]],[[X_2,Z_2],[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]]]]]]]]]+\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],,[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]];\hfill \\ [[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],[[[Z_1,[X_1,X_2]],[Z_1,[X_1,X_3]]],,[[Z_1,[X_3,[X_1,X_2]]],[[X_1,Z_1],[X_2,Z_2]]]]]]]].\hfill \end{array}$$

### Comment

Lie superalgebra $`𝔳𝔞𝔰`$ has only one W-grading, so we consider it. For the remaining exceptional simple Lie superalgebras $`𝔤`$ we take the consistent grading. So $`𝔤_0`$ is a Lie algebra, moreover, a reductive one; $`𝔤_1`$ generates the positive part, and $`𝔤_1`$ generates the negative part, moreover, $`𝔤_1`$ is an irreducible $`𝔤_0`$-module. Therefore, $`𝔤`$ is generated by the Chevalley generators $`X_i^\pm `$ and $`H_i=[X_i^+,X_i^{}]`$ of $`𝔤_0`$, the lowest weight vectors $`v_{\lambda _k}`$ of $`𝔤_1`$ and the highest weight vector $`w_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of $`𝔤_1`$. A number of relations between these generators are already known: the Serre relations for $`X_i^\pm `$ and relations involving $`H_i`$; and also

$`(LW)`$
$$(\mathrm{ad}X_i^+)^{\lambda _k(X_i^+)+1}(v_{\lambda _k})=0$$

$`(HW)`$
$$(\mathrm{ad}X_i^{})^{\mathrm{\Lambda }(X_i^{})+1}(w_\mathrm{\Lambda })=0$$

and the weight relations $`H_i(v_{\lambda _k})=\lambda _k^{(i)}v_{\lambda _k}`$, etc. Since the finite diminsional representations of the reductive algebras are completely reducible, we have to compare $`𝔤_1𝔤_1`$ and $`𝔤_2`$ (the lowest weight vectors of $`𝔤_1𝔤_1/𝔤_2`$ are relations) and similarly for the negative part. If this does not suffice ($`𝔤_1𝔤_1𝔤_1`$ modulo relations is greater than $`𝔤_3`$) we add new relations, etc.

For positive parts of simple vectorial Lie algebras we can use Fuchs’ theorem with Kochetkov’s correction (and direct calculations described above for small dimensions). For exceptional algebras we consider we have no general theory, so having obtained the whole $`𝔤_i`$ and no new relations for several $`i>0`$ we conjecture that we got all. For $`𝔨𝔞𝔰`$ we keep getting new relations in every $`i`$.

## Appendix

### 1.0. Linear algebra in superspaces. Generalities

A superspace is a $`/2`$-graded space; for any superspace $`V=V_{\overline{0}}V_{\overline{1}}`$ denote by $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ another copy of the same superspace: with the shifted parity, i.e., $`(\mathrm{\Pi }(V))_{\overline{i}}=V_{\overline{i}+\overline{1}}`$. The superdimension of $`V`$ is $`dimV=p+q\epsilon `$, where $`\epsilon ^2=1`$ and $`p=dimV_{\overline{0}}`$, $`q=dimV_{\overline{1}}`$. (Usually, $`dimV`$ is expressed as a pair $`(p,q)`$ or $`p|q`$; this obscures the fact that $`dimVW=dimVdimW`$; this fact is clear with the use of $`\epsilon `$.)

A superspace structure in $`V`$ induces the superspace structure in the space $`\mathrm{End}(V)`$. A basis of a superspace is always a basis consisting of homogeneous vectors; let $`Par=(p_1,\mathrm{},p_{dimV})`$ be an ordered collection of their parities. We call $`Par`$ the format of (the basis of) $`V`$. A square supermatrix of format (size) $`Par`$ is a $`dimV\times dimV`$ matrix whose $`i`$th row and $`i`$th column are of the same parity $`p_i`$.

One usually considers one of the simplest formats $`Par`$, e.g., $`Par`$ of the form $`(\overline{0},\mathrm{},\overline{0};\overline{1},\mathrm{},\overline{1})`$ is denoted $`(dimV_{\overline{0}},dimV_{\overline{1}})`$ and called standard. In this paper we can do without nonstandard formats. But they are vital in the classification of systems of simple roots that the reader might be interested in in connection with applications to $`q`$-quantization or integrable systems. Besides, systems of simple roots corresponding to distinct nonstandard formats are related by odd reflections — analogs of our nonstandard regradings. (For an approach to superroots see \[S2\].)

The matrix unit $`E_{ij}`$ is supposed to be of parity $`p_i+p_j`$ and the bracket of supermatrices (of the same format) is defined via Sign Rule:

if something of parity $`p`$ moves past something of parity $`q`$ the sign $`(1)^{pq}`$ accrues; the formulas defined on homogeneous elements are extended to arbitrary ones via linearity.

Examples: by setting $`[X,Y]=XY(1)^{p(X)p(Y)}YX`$ we get the notion of the supercommutator and the ensuing notions of the supercommutative superalgebra and the Lie superalgebra (which in addition to superskew-commutativity satisfies the super Jacobi identity, i.e., the Jacobi identity amended with the Sign Rule). The derivation (better say, superderivation) of a superalgebra $`A`$ is a linear map $`D:AA`$ that satisfies the Leibniz rule (and Sign rule)

$$D(ab)=D(a)b+(1)^{p(D)p(a)}aD(b).$$

In particular, let $`A=[x]`$ be the free supercommutative polynomial superalgebra in $`x=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$, where the superstructure is determined by the parities of the indeterminates: $`p(x_i)=p_i`$. Partial derivatives are defined (with the help of super Leibniz Rule) by the formulas $`\frac{x_i}{x_j}=\delta _{i,j}`$. Clearly, the collection $`𝔡𝔢𝔯A`$ of all superdifferentiations of $`A`$ is a Lie superalgebra whose elements are of the form $`f_i(x)\frac{}{x_i}`$.

Given the supercommutative superalgebra $``$ of “functions” in indeterminates $`x`$, define the supercommutative superalgebra $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of differential forms as polynomial algebra over $``$ in $`dx`$, where $`p(d)=\overline{1}`$. Since $`dx`$ is even for an odd $`x`$, we can consider not only polynomials in $`dx`$. Smooth or analytic functions in the differentials of the $`x`$ are called pseudodifferential forms on the supermanifold with coordinates $`x`$, see \[BL1\]. We will need them to interpret $`𝔥_\lambda (2|2)`$. The exterior differential is defined on (pseudo) differential forms by the formulas (mind Leibniz and Sign Rules):

$$d(x_i)=dx_i\text{ and }d^2=0.$$

The Lie derivative is defined (minding same Rules) by the formula

$$L_D(df)=(1)^{p(D)}d(D(f)).$$

In particular,

$$L_D\left((df)^\lambda \right)=\lambda (1)^{p(D)}d(D(f))(df)^{\lambda 1}\text{ for any }\lambda .$$

The general linear Lie superalgebra of all supermatrices of size $`Par`$ is denoted by $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$ (usually, $`𝔤𝔩(dimV_{\overline{0}}|dimV_{\overline{1}})`$). Any matrix from $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$ can be expressed as the sum of its even and odd parts; in the standard format this is the following block expression:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& D\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& 0\\ 0& D\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& B\\ C& 0\end{array}\right),p\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& 0\\ 0& D\end{array}\right)\right)=\overline{0},p\left(\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& B\\ C& 0\end{array}\right)\right)=\overline{1}.$$

The supertrace is the map $`𝔤𝔩(Par)`$, $`(A_{ij})(1)^{p_i}A_{ii}`$. Since $`\mathrm{str}[x,y]=0`$, the subsuperspace of supertraceless matrices constitutes the special linear Lie subsuperalgebra $`𝔰𝔩(Par)`$.

There are, however, two super versions of $`𝔤𝔩(n)`$, not one. The other version is called the queer Lie superalgebra and is defined as the one that preserves the complex structure given by an odd operator $`J`$, i.e., is the centralizer $`C(J)`$ of $`J`$:

$$𝔮(n)=C(J)=\{X𝔤𝔩(n|n)[X,J]=0\},\text{ where }J^2=\mathrm{id}.$$

It is clear that by a change of basis we can reduce $`J`$ to the form $`J_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)`$. In the standard format we have

$$𝔮(n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B& A\end{array}\right)\right\}.$$

On $`𝔮(n)`$, the queertrace is defined: $`\mathrm{qtr}:\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ B& A\end{array}\right)\mathrm{tr}B`$. Denote by $`𝔰𝔮(n)`$ the Lie superalgebra of queertraceless matrices.

Observe that the identity representations of $`𝔮`$ and $`𝔰𝔮`$ in $`V`$, though irreducible in supersetting, are not irreducible in the nongraded sense: take homogeneous (with respect to parity) and linearly independent vectors $`v_1`$, …, $`v_n`$ from $`V`$; then $`Span(v_1+J(v_1),\mathrm{},v_n+J(v_n))`$ is an invariant subspace of $`V`$ which is not a subsuperspace.

A representation is irreducible of general type or just of $`G`$-type if there is no invariant subspace, otherwise it is called irreducible of $`Q`$-type ($`Q`$ is after the general queer Lie superalgebra — a specifically “superish” analog of $`𝔤𝔩`$); an irreducible representation of $`Q`$-type has no invariant subsuperspace but has an invariant subspace.

Lie superalgebras that preserve bilinear forms: two types. To the linear map $`F:VW`$ of superspaces there corresponds the dual map $`F^{}:W^{}V^{}`$ between the dual superspaces. In a basis consisting of the vectors $`v_i`$ of format $`Par`$, the formula $`F(v_j)=\underset{i}{}v_iA_{ij}`$ assigns to $`F`$ the supermatrix $`A`$. In the dual bases, to $`F^{}`$ the supertransposed matrix $`A^{st}`$ corresponds:

$$(A^{st})_{ij}=(1)^{(p_i+p_j)(p_i+p(A))}A_{ji}.$$

The supermatrices $`X𝔤𝔩(Par)`$ such that

$$X^{st}B+(1)^{p(X)p(B)}BX=0\text{for an homogeneous matrix }B𝔤𝔩(Par)$$

constitute the Lie superalgebra $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B)`$ that preserves the bilinear form $`B^f`$ on $`V`$ whose matrix $`B`$ is given by the formula $`B_{ij}=(1)^{p(B^f)p(v_i)}B^f(v_i,v_j)`$ for the basis vectors $`v_i`$.

Recall that the supersymmetry of the homogeneous form $`B^f`$ means that its matrix $`B`$ satisfies the condition $`B^u=B`$, where for the matrix $`B=\left(\begin{array}{cc}R& S\\ T& U\end{array}\right)`$ we set $`B^u=\left(\begin{array}{cc}R^t& (1)^{p(B)}T^t\\ (1)^{p(B)}S^t& U^t\end{array}\right)`$. Similarly, skew-supersymmetry of $`B`$ means that $`B^u=B`$. Thus, we see that the upsetting of bilinear forms $`u:\mathrm{Bil}(V,W)\mathrm{Bil}(W,V)`$, which for the spaces and when $`V=W`$ is expressed on matrices in terms of the transposition, is a new operation.

Most popular canonical forms of the nondegenerate supersymmetric form are the ones whose supermatrices in the standard format are the following canonical ones, $`B_{ev}`$ or $`B_{ev}^{}`$:

$$B_{ev}^{}(m|2n)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1_m& 0\\ 0& J_{2n}\end{array}\right),\text{where }J_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1_n& 0\end{array}\right),$$

or

$$B_{ev}(m|2n)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{antidiag}(1,\mathrm{},1)& 0\\ 0& J_{2n}\end{array}\right).$$

The usual notation for $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B_{ev}(m|2n))`$ is $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)`$ or, more precisely, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$. Observe that the passage from $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ sends the supersymmetric forms to superskew-symmetric ones, preserved by the “symplectico-orthogonal” Lie superalgebra, $`𝔰𝔭^{}𝔬(2n|m)`$ or, better say, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)`$, which is isomorphic to $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$ but has a different matrix realization. We never use notation $`𝔰𝔭^{}𝔬(2n|m)`$ in order not to confuse with the special Poisson superalgebra.

In the standard format the matrix realizations of these algebras are:

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}E& Y& X^t\\ X& A& B\\ Y^t& C& A^t\end{array}\right)\right\};𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sk}(m|2n)=\left\{\left(\begin{array}{ccc}A& B& X\\ C& A^t& Y^t\\ Y& X^t& E\end{array}\right)\right\},\\ \text{where}\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right)𝔰𝔭(2n),E𝔬(m).\end{array}$$

A nondegenerate supersymmetric odd bilinear form $`B_{odd}(n|n)`$ can be reduced to a canonical form whose matrix in the standard format is $`J_{2n}`$. A canonical form of the superskew odd nondegenerate form in the standard format is $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{2n}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1_n\\ 1_n& 0\end{array}\right)`$. The usual notation for $`𝔞𝔲𝔱(B_{odd}(Par))`$ is $`𝔭𝔢(Par)`$. The passage from $`V`$ to $`\mathrm{\Pi }(V)`$ establishes an isomorphism $`𝔭𝔢^{sy}(Par)𝔭𝔢^{sk}(Par)`$. This Lie superalgebra is called, as A. Weil suggested, periplectic. The matrix realizations in the standard format of these superalgebras is shorthanded to:

$$\begin{array}{c}𝔭𝔢^{sy}(n)=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right),\text{where}B=B^t,C=C^t\};\\ 𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& B\\ C& A^t\end{array}\right),\text{where}B=B^t,C=C^t\}.\end{array}$$

Observe that though the Lie superalgebras $`𝔬𝔰𝔭^{sy}(m|2n)`$ and $`𝔭𝔢^{sk}(2n|m)`$, as well as $`𝔭𝔢^{sy}(n)`$ and $`𝔭𝔢^{sk}(n)`$, are isomorphic, the difference between them is sometimes crucial, see \[Sh5\].

The special periplectic superalgebra is $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)=\{X𝔭𝔢(n)\mathrm{str}X=0\}`$. Of particular interest to us will be also $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)_{a,b}=𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)\text{+}\text{ }(az+bd)`$, where $`z=1_{2n}`$, $`d=\mathrm{diag}(1_n,1_n)`$.

### 1.0.1. What a Lie superalgebra is

Dealing with superalgebras it sometimes becomes useful to know their definition. Lie superalgebras were distinguished in topology in 1930’s or earlier. So when somebody offers a “better than usual” definition of a notion which seemed to have been established about 70 year ago this might look strange, to say the least. Nevertheless, the answer to the question “what is a Lie superalgebra?” is still not a common knowledge. Indeed, the naive definition (“apply the Sign Rule to the definition of the Lie algebra”) is manifestly inadequate for considering the (singular) supervarieties of deformations and applying representation theory to mathematical physics, for example, in the study of the coadjoint representation of the Lie supergroup which can act on a supermanifold but never on a superspace (an object from another category). So, to deform Lie superalgebras and apply group-theoretical methods in “super” setting, we must be able to recover a supermanifold from a superspace, and vice versa.

A proper definition of Lie superalgebras is as follows, cf. \[L3\]\[L5\]. The Lie superalgebra in the category of supermanifolds corresponding to the “naive” Lie superalgebra $`L=L_{\overline{0}}L_{\overline{1}}`$ is a linear supermanifold $`=(L_{\overline{0}},𝒪)`$, where the sheaf of functions $`𝒪`$ consists of functions on $`L_{\overline{0}}`$ with values in the Grassmann superalgebra on $`L_{\overline{1}}^{}`$; this supermanifold should be such that for “any” (say, finitely generated, or from some other appropriate category) supercommutative superalgebra $`C`$, the space $`(C)=\mathrm{Hom}(\mathrm{Spec}C,)`$, called the space of $`C`$-points of $``$, is a Lie algebra and the correspondence $`C(C)`$ is a functor in $`C`$. (A. Weil introduced this approach in algebraic geometry in 1954; in super setting it is called the language of points or families, see \[D\], \[L4\].) This definition might look terribly complicated, but fortunately one can show that the correspondence $`L`$ is one-to-one and the Lie algebra $`(C)`$, also denoted $`L(C)`$, admits a very simple description: $`L(C)=(LC)_{\overline{0}}`$.

A Lie superalgebra homomorphism $`\rho :L_1L_2`$ in these terms is a functor morphism, i.e., a collection of Lie algebra homomorphisms $`\rho _C:L_1(C)L_2(C)`$ compatible with morphisms of supercommutative superalgebras $`CC^{}`$. In particular, a representation of a Lie superalgebra $`L`$ in a superspace $`V`$ is a homomorphism $`\rho :L𝔤𝔩(V)`$, i.e., a collection of Lie algebra homomorphisms $`\rho _C:L(C)(𝔤𝔩(V)C)_{\overline{0}}`$.

###### Example .

Consider a representation $`\rho :𝔤𝔤𝔩(V)`$. The tangent space of the moduli superspace of deformations of $`\rho `$ is isomorphic to $`H^1(𝔤;VV^{})`$. For example, if $`𝔤`$ is the $`0|n`$-dimensional (i.e., purely odd) Lie superalgebra (with the only bracket possible: identically equal to zero), its only irreducible representations are the trivial one, 1, and $`\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})`$. Clearly, $`\mathrm{𝟏}\mathrm{𝟏}^{}\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})\mathrm{\Pi }(\mathrm{𝟏})^{}\mathrm{𝟏}`$, and because the superalgebra is commutative, the differential in the cochain complex is trivial. Therefore, $`H^1(𝔤;\mathrm{𝟏})=E^1(𝔤^{})𝔤^{}`$, so there are $`dim𝔤`$ odd parameters of deformations of the trivial representation. If we consider $`𝔤`$ “naively” all of the odd parameters will be lost.

Which of these infinitesimal deformations can be extended to a global one is a separate much tougher question, usually solved ad hoc.

Examples that lucidly illustrate why one should always remember that a Lie superalgebra is not a mere linear superspace but a linear supermanifold are, e.g., deforms $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱}(0|2n+1)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝔰𝔟}_\mu (2^{2n}1|2^{2n})`$ with odd parameters considered below and viewed as Lie algebras. In the category of supermanifolds these are simple Lie superalgebras.

### 1.0.2. Projectivization

If $`𝔰`$ is a Lie algebra of scalar matrices, and $`𝔤𝔤𝔩(n|n)`$ is a Lie subsuperalgebra containing $`𝔰`$, then the projective Lie superalgebra of type $`𝔤`$ is $`𝔭𝔤=𝔤/𝔰`$. Lie superalgebras $`𝔤_1𝔤_2`$ described in sect. 3.1 are also projective.

Projectivization sometimes leads to new Lie superalgebras, for example: $`𝔭𝔤𝔩(n|n)`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔩(n|n)`$, $`𝔭𝔮(n)`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔮(n)`$; whereas $`𝔭𝔤𝔩(p|q)𝔰𝔩(p|q)`$ if $`pq`$.

### 1.0.3. What is a semisimple Lie superalgebra

These algebras are needed in description of primitive Lie superalgebras of vector fields — a geometrically natural problem though wild for Lie superalgebras, see \[ALSh\]. Recall that the Lie superalgebra $`𝔤`$ without proper ideals and of dimension $`>1`$ is called simple. Examples: $`𝔰𝔩(m|n)`$ for $`m>n1`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔩(n|n)`$ for $`n>1`$, $`𝔭𝔰𝔮(n)`$ for $`n>2`$, $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(m|2n)`$ for $`mn0`$ and $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)`$ for $`n>2`$.

We will not need the remaining simple finite dimensional Lie superalgebras of non-vectorial type. These superalgebras, discovered by I. Kaplansky (a 1975-preprint, see \[K\]) are $`𝔬𝔰𝔭_\alpha (4|2)`$, the deforms of $`𝔬𝔰𝔭(4|2)`$, and the two exceptions that we denote by $`𝔞𝔤_2`$ and $`𝔞𝔟_3`$. For their description we refer to \[K\], \[FK\], \[Sud\], see also \[GL2\] for the description of the system of simple roots see \[Ka4\] completed in \[vdL, S1, S2\].

We say that $`𝔥`$ is almost simple if it can be sandwiched (non-strictly) between a simple Lie superalgebra $`𝔰`$ and the Lie superalgebra $`𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$ of derivations of $`𝔰`$: $`𝔰𝔥𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$.

By definition, $`𝔤`$ is semisimple if its radical is zero. Literally following the description of semisimple Lie algebras over the fields of prime characteristic, V. Kac \[Ka4\] gave the following description of semisimple Lie superalgebras. Let $`𝔰_1`$, …, $`𝔰_k`$ be simple Lie superalgebras, let $`n_1`$, …, $`n_k`$ be pairs of non-negative integers $`n_j=(n_j^{\overline{0}},n_j^{\overline{1}})`$, let $`(n_j)`$ be the supercommutative superalgebra of polynomials in $`n_j^{\overline{0}}`$ even and $`n_j^{\overline{1}}`$ odd indeterminates, and $`𝔰=\underset{j}{}\left(𝔰_j(n_j)\right)`$. Then

$`(\mathrm{0.1.3})`$
$$𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰=\underset{j}{}\left((𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰_j)(n_j)\text{+}\text{ }\mathrm{id}_{𝔰_j}𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n_j)\right).$$

Let $`𝔤`$ be a subalgebra of $`𝔡𝔢𝔯𝔰`$ containing $`𝔰`$. If the projection of $`𝔤`$ on $`1𝔳𝔢𝔠𝔱(n_j)_1`$ is onto for each $`j`$, then $`𝔤`$ is semisimple and all semisimple Lie superalgebras arise in the manner indicated, i.e., as sums of almost simple superalgebras corresponding to the summands of $`(\mathrm{0.1.3})`$.

### 1.0.4. A. Sergeev’s central extension

In 70’s A. Sergeev proved that there is just one nontrivial central extension of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(n)`$. It exists only for $`n=4`$ and we denote it by $`𝔞𝔰`$. Let us represent an arbitrary element $`A𝔞𝔰`$ as a pair $`A=x+dz`$, where $`x𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$, $`d`$ and $`z`$ is the central element. The bracket in $`𝔞𝔰`$ is

$`(\mathrm{0.1.4.1})`$
$$[\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+dz,\left(\begin{array}{cc}a^{}& b^{}\\ c^{}& a^{}^t\end{array}\right)+d^{}z]=[\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}a^{}& b^{}\\ c^{}& a^{}^t\end{array}\right)]+\mathrm{tr}c\stackrel{~}{c}^{}z,$$

where $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ is extended via linearity from matrices $`c_{ij}=E_{ij}E_{ji}`$ on which $`\stackrel{~}{c}_{ij}=c_{kl}`$ for any even permutation $`(1234)(ijkl)`$..

The Lie superalgebra $`𝔞𝔰`$ can also be described with the help of the spinor representation. For this we need several vectorial superalgebras defined in sect. 0.3. Consider $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$, the Lie superalgebra whose superspace is the Grassmann superalgebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta )`$ generated by $`\xi _1,\xi _2,\xi _3,\eta _1,\eta _2,\eta _3`$ and the bracket is the Poisson bracket (0.3.6). Recall that $`𝔥(0|6)=Span(H_ff\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta ))`$.

Now, observe that $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$ can be embedded into $`𝔥(0|6)`$. Indeed, setting $`\mathrm{deg}\xi _i=\mathrm{deg}\eta _i=1`$ for all $`i`$ we introduce a $``$-grading on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ,\eta )`$ which, in turn, induces a $``$-grading on $`𝔥(0|6)`$ of the form $`𝔥(0|6)=\underset{i1}{}𝔥(0|6)_i`$. Since $`𝔰𝔩(4)𝔬(6)`$, we can identify $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)_0`$ with $`𝔥(0|6)_0`$.

It is not difficult to see that the elements of degree $`1`$ in the standard gradings of $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)`$ and $`𝔥(0|6)`$ constitute isomorphic $`𝔰𝔩(4)𝔬(6)`$-modules. It is subject to a direct verification that it is possible to embed $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)_1`$ into $`𝔥(0|6)_1`$.

Sergeev’s extension $`𝔞𝔰`$ is the result of the restriction to $`𝔰𝔭𝔢(4)𝔥(0|6)`$ of the cocycle that turns $`𝔥(0|6)`$ into $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$. The quantization deforms $`𝔭𝔬(0|6)`$ into $`𝔤𝔩(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ))`$; the through maps $`T_\lambda :𝔞𝔰𝔭𝔬(0|6)𝔤𝔩(\mathrm{\Lambda }(\xi ))`$ are representations of $`𝔞𝔰`$ in the $`4|4`$-dimensional modules $`\mathrm{spin}_\lambda `$ isomorphic to each other for all $`\lambda 0`$. The explicit form of $`T_\lambda `$ is as follows:

$`(\mathrm{0.1.4.2})`$
$$T_\lambda :\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+dz\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\lambda \stackrel{~}{c}\\ c& a^t\end{array}\right)+\lambda d1_{4|4},$$

where $`1_{4|4}`$ is the unit matrix and $`\stackrel{~}{c}`$ is defined in formula (0.1.4.1). Clearly, $`T_\lambda `$ is an irreducible representation for any $`\lambda `$.