text:
# On cubic functors

## Introduction

Polynomial functors appeared in algebraic topology ((cf. )) and proved to be useful for lots of questions in homotopy theory. That is why their study seems to be of interest. Mostly, one deals with “continuous” polynomial functors, which are defined by their values on free groups, and in what follows we consider only such ones. In  the author gave a description of all (finitely generated) quadratic functors. This description was done using the technique of the so called *matrix problems*, namely, representations  *of bunches of chains*. The reduction to such a matrix problem depends on the presentation of quadratic functors as modules over a special ring, which happens to be an order in a semi-simple algebra. Then we used the procedure of . Now we are going to pass the same way for *cubic functors*. We check that the corresponding ring is again an order in a semi-simple algebra. Unfortunately, in this case, the classification of modules is a *wild problem*, i.e., it includes, in some sense, the classification of all representations of all finitely generated algebras over the residue field $`/2`$ (cf. Section 2). Thus, there can be no “good” description of all cubic functors.

On the contrary, such a description becomes possible (and rather analogous to that of quadratic functors) if we “make $`2`$ invertible,” i.e., consider cubic modules over the ring $`[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/2]`$. Such a description is given in Section 3. Just as for quadratic case, this classification problem is *tame*, i.e., indecomposable modules depend on some “discrete” combinatorial data and on at most one “continuous parametre,” which is an irreducible polynomial from $`/2[t]`$ (or, the same, a closed point of $`𝔸_{/2}^1=\mathrm{Spec}/2[t]`$). We also consider *weakly alternative* cubic functors $`F`$, i.e., those with $`F()=0`$. Their classification given in Section 4 is also tame, though this time the corresponding ring has both torsion and nilpotent ideals. At last, we give a classification of cubic functors with the image being *vector spaces* (Section 5) as well as of *torsion free* ones (Section 6). These problems also happens to be tame. We end up with one conjecture concerning polynomial functors of higher degrees that arises from the parallel between quadratic and *2*-divisible cubic functors and some corollaries from this conjecture.

## 1. Generalities

We suppose all categories to be *pre-additive*, i.e., such that their morphism sets are abelian groups and the composition is bi-additive. On the contrary, we do not suppose the *functors* to be additive, though we always suppose that $`F(0)=0`$ for a zero morphism. Remind that a *fully additive* category is an additive category such that every idempotent in it splits. If $`F:𝖠𝖡`$ is a functor from an additive category $`𝖠`$ to a fully additive category $`𝖡`$ and $`A=_{k=1}^nA_k`$ is an object from $`𝖠`$, consider the corresponding embeddings $`i_k:A_kA`$ and projections $`p_k:AA_k`$. Put $`e_k=i_kp_k`$ and $`f(k)=F(e_k)`$. Certainly, $`e_k`$, hence, $`f(k)`$, are pairwise orthogonal idempotents and $`\mathrm{Im}f(k)F(A_k)`$. Moreover, put $`f(kl)=F(e_k+e_l)f(k)f(l)`$ ($`k<l`$). Then $`f(kl)`$ are also idempotents, pairwise orthogonal and orthogonal to all $`f(k)`$. Hence, $`F(A)`$ has a direct summand $`(_kF(A_k))(_{k<l}F_2(A_k|A_l))`$, where one denotes $`F_2(A_k|A_l)=\mathrm{Im}f(kl)`$. Define recursively for any $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}k_1<k_2<\mathrm{}<k_rn`$

$$f(k_1k_2\mathrm{}k_m)=F(e_{k_1}+\mathrm{}e_{k_m})\underset{r<m}{}\underset{1l_1<\mathrm{}<l_rm}{}f(k_{l_1}k_{l_2}\mathrm{}k_{l_r})$$

and $`F_m(A_1|A_2|\mathrm{}|A_m)=\mathrm{Im}f(k_1k_2\mathrm{}k_m)`$. Then

$$F(A)=\underset{mn}{}\left(\underset{k_1k_2\mathrm{}k_m}{}F_m(A_{k_1}|A_{k_2}|\mathrm{}|A_{k_m})\right).$$

One easily sees that $`F_m`$ is indeed a functor $`𝖠^m𝖡`$. It is called the $`m`$-th *cross-effect* of $`F`$. Of course, $`F_1=F`$. If there is a positive integer $`n`$ such that $`F_m=0`$ for $`m>n`$, one calls $`F`$ a *polynomial functor*. The smallest possible $`n`$ with this property is called the *degree* of $`F`$. Certainly, the functors of degree $`1`$ are just additive ones. The functors of degree $`1`$ are called *linear*, of degree $`2`$ *quadratic*, of degree $`3`$ *cubic*, etc. For an arbitrary pre-additive category $`𝖠`$, one can always consider its *fully additive hull* $`\mathrm{add}𝖠`$ and we call polynomial functors $`𝖠𝖡`$ those from $`\mathrm{add}𝖠`$ to $`𝖡`$. Of course, for additive functors we get in this way nothing new as every additive functor $`𝖠𝖡`$ can be uniquely (up to isomorphism) prolonged to an additive functor $`\mathrm{add}𝖠𝖡`$.

In what follows, we consider the case when $`𝖠=`$, the ring of integers, and $`𝖡=𝐑\text{-}\mathrm{𝖬𝗈𝖽}`$, the category of modules over a ring $`𝐑`$, mainly even $`𝖡=𝐑\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$, the category of finitely generated $`𝐑`$-modules. Note that $`\mathrm{add}=\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}`$, the category of finitely generated free abelian groups. In this case polynomial functors are called *polynomial $`𝐑`$-modules* and the category of finitely generated polynomial $`𝐑`$-modules of degree at most $`n`$ is denoted by $`𝐑\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}^n`$. Of course, $`𝐑\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}^1`$ coincide with the category of finitely generated $`𝐑`$-modules. If $`𝐑=`$, we are just speaking of “polynomial modules” not precising the target category.

To define a polynomial functor $`F:\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}𝖡`$, one only has to define the following data:

* objects $`F_m=F_m(||\mathrm{}|)`$;
* morphisms $`h_k^m:F_mF_{m+1}`$ that are compositions of the morphisms

$`F_m(A_1|A_2|\mathrm{}|A_m)`$ $`F(A_1A_2\mathrm{}A_m)`$
$`F(A_1\mathrm{}A_kA_k\mathrm{}A_m)`$
$`F_{m+1}(A_1|\mathrm{}|A_k|A_k|\mathrm{}|A_m),`$
where all $`A_j=`$, the first morphism is the embedding of the direct summand, the last one is the projection onto the direct summand and the middle one is $`F(\gamma )`$, $`\gamma |_{A_j}`$ being identity if $`jk`$ and $`\gamma |_{A_k}`$ being the diagonal embedding $`A_kA_kA_k`$;
* morphisms $`p_k^m:F_{m+1}F_m`$ that are compositions of the morphisms

$`F_{m+1}(A_1|\mathrm{}|A_k|A_k|\mathrm{}|A_m)`$ $`F(A_1\mathrm{}A_kA_k\mathrm{}A_m)`$
$`F(A_1A_2\mathrm{}A_m)`$
$`F_m(A_1|A_2|\mathrm{}|A_m),`$
where again all $`A_j=`$, the first morphism is the embedding of the direct summand, the last one is the projection onto the direct summand and the middle one is $`F(\beta )`$, $`\beta |_{A_j}`$ being identity for $`jk`$, while $`\beta |_{A_k}`$ being the codiagonal (summation) mapping $`A_kA_kA_k`$.

In particular, a cubic $`𝐑`$-module $`F`$, where $`𝐑`$ is a ring, is defined by a diagram of $`𝐑`$-modules:

(1)
$$\begin{array}{c}F_1\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{h}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p}{}& \end{array}F_2\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{h_1}{}& \\ & \stackrel{h_2}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p_1}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p_2}{}& \end{array}F_3\end{array}$$

One can show that such a diagram corresponds to a cubic module if and only if the following relations hold:

(2)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& h_1p_2=h_2p_1=0,h_1h=h_2h,pp_1=pp_2,\hfill \\ & h_ip_ih_i=2h_i,p_ih_ip_i=2p_i(i=1,2),\hfill \\ & hph=2(h+(p_1+p_2)\overline{h}),php=2(p+\overline{p}(h_1+h_2)),\hfill \\ & \overline{h}p+h_1+h_2=h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1+h_2p_2h_1p_1h_2,\hfill \\ & h\overline{p}+p_1+p_2=p_1h_2p_2h_1p_1+p_2h_1p_1h_2p_2,\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`\overline{h}=h_1h=h_2h`$ and $`\overline{p}=pp_1=pp_2`$ .

Consider the pre-additive category $`𝐀`$ with three objects $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3`$ and generating morphisms

$$h:12,p:21,h_i:23,p_i:32(i=1,2)$$

subject to the relations (2). Then cubic $`𝐑`$-modules are just linear functors $`𝐀𝐑\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$. Sometimes we identify $`𝐀`$ with the endomorphism ring $`\mathrm{End}(123)`$. Obviously, the categories of modules over $`𝐀`$ and over this ring coincide.

## 2. Wildness

We are going to show that the description of *all* cubic functors is a *wild problem* in the sense of the representation theory (cf. ). Moreover, we show that it is even true for those cubic functors “freely generated by their 1-part,” or, the same, for $`𝐀(1,1)`$-modules.

###### Proposition 2.1.

The ring $`𝐀(1,1)`$ is isomorphic to the subring of $`^3`$ with the basis $`\{(1,1,1),(2,0,0),(0,6,0)\}`$.

###### Proof.

Put $`a=ph\overline{ph},b=ph`$. One easily verifies that these two elements generate $`𝐀(1,1)`$, $`ab=ba=0`$, $`a^2=2a`$ and $`b^2=6b`$. Hence, one gets an isomorphism by mapping $`a(2,0,0)`$, $`b(0,6,0)`$. ∎

The category of $`𝐀(1,1)`$-modules can be embedded into that of $`𝐀`$-modules. Namely, every $`𝐀(1,1)`$-module $`M`$ gives rise to the cubic module $`F`$, where

$$F_1=M,F_2=𝐀(1,2)_{𝐀(1,1)}M\text{and}F_3=𝐀(1,3)_{𝐀(1,1)}M$$

with the obvious action of morphisms. It is known (and easy to check) that this procedure really defines a functor, which is a full embedding.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ be the free (non-commutative) algebra $`/4x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n`$ with $`n`$ generators over the residue ring $`/4`$.

###### Proposition 2.2.

Denote by $`\phi :𝐀(1,1)\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$ the homomorphism mapping $`a`$ to $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}x_1`$ and $`b`$ to $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}x_2`$. For any $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$-module $`L`$, let $`{}_{}{}^{\phi }L`$ be the $`𝐀(1,1)`$-module obtained from $`L`$ via the “change of rings” $`\phi `$. Then, for any $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$-modules $`L,L^{}`$ which are free as $`/4`$-modules,

* $`{}_{}{}^{\phi }L{}_{}{}^{\phi }L_{}^{}`$ as $`𝐀(1,1)`$-modules if and only if $`L/2LL^{}/2L^{}`$ as $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$-modules;
* $`𝐀(1,1)`$-module $`{}_{}{}^{\phi }L`$ is indecomposable if and only if so is $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$-module $`L/2L`$.

###### The proof is evident..

###### Corollary 2.3.

For every $`n`$ there is a cubic module $`𝒞(\mathrm{\Sigma }_n)`$ such that, for any $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$-modules $`L,L^{}`$ which are free over $`/4`$,

* $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_n}L_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_n}L^{}`$ if and only if $`L/2L^{}/2`$;
* $`_{\mathrm{\Sigma }_n}L`$ is indecomposable if and only if $`L/2`$ is indecomposable.

###### Proof.

One only has to consider the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$-$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$-bimodule $`𝒩`$ which is free of rank $`n+1`$ over $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$, while the action of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_2`$ is given by the following rules:

* $`x_1`$ is acting as the (upper) Jordan cell;
* $`x_2`$ is acting as the matrix

$$\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ x_1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 0& x_2& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ 5\\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& x_n& 0\end{array}\right)$$

Afterwards, one puts $`={}_{}{}^{\phi }𝒩`$ with $`\phi `$ defined as in Proposition 2.2. All properties are verified immediately (cf., e.g., ). ∎

This Corollary shows that the classification of all cubic modules (even of $`𝐀(1,1)`$-modules) is at least so complicated as the classification of $`n`$-tuples of matrices over the filed $`/2`$ up to conjugations, for all $`n`$. It is just the situation when one calls such a problem “wild.”

## 3. *2*-divisible case

In this section, we consider the case of cubic *2-divisible* modules, i.e., cubic functors $`F:\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}^{}\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$, where $`^{}=[1/2]`$. It happens that here we are able to describe all (finitely generated) cubic modules. Moreover, this description is quite alike that of quadratic $``$-modules given in . Certainly, *2*-divisible cubic modules correspond to the modules over the category $`𝐀^{}=𝐀[1/2]`$.

###### Proposition 3.1.

The category $`𝐀^{}`$ is Morita equivalent to the direct product $`^{}\times ^{}\times 𝐁`$ where $`𝐁`$ is the subring in $`^{}\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,^{})\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,^{})\times ^{}`$ consisting of all quadruples of the form:

$`(a,\left(\begin{array}{cc}b_1& 3b_2\\ b_3& b_4\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}c_1& 3c_2\\ c_3& c_4\end{array}\right),d)`$
with
$`ab_1,b_4c_1,c_4d(mod3)`$
###### Remark.

One can see that a module over the ring $`𝐁`$ is given by a diagram of abelian (*2*-divisible) groups of the following shape:

(3)
$$\begin{array}{c}M_1\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{\alpha _1}{}& \\ & \stackrel{\beta _1}{}& \end{array}M_2\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{\alpha _2}{}& \\ & \stackrel{\beta _2}{}& \end{array}M_3\end{array},$$

satisfying the relations:

$$\begin{array}{cc}& \alpha _1\beta _1\alpha _1=3\alpha _1,\beta _1\alpha _1\beta _1=3\beta _1,\hfill \\ & \alpha _2\beta _2\alpha _2=3\alpha _2,\beta _2\alpha _2\beta _2=3\beta _2,\hfill \\ & \beta _1\beta _2=0,\alpha _2\alpha _1=0,\hfill \\ & \alpha _1\beta _1+\beta _2\alpha _2=3\mathrm{id}_2.\hfill \end{array}$$

We always identify $`𝐁`$-modules with such diagrams.

###### Proof.

Put $`𝐀_i=𝐀^{}(i,i)`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) and consider the following elements:

in $`𝐀_1`$:
$`f_1={\displaystyle \frac{ph\overline{p}\overline{h}}{2}},e_1=\mathrm{id}_1f_1,a_1={\displaystyle \frac{\overline{p}\overline{h}}{2}};`$
in $`𝐀_2`$:
$`e_2={\displaystyle \frac{p_1h_1}{2}},f_2={\displaystyle \frac{p_2h_2}{2}},g=\mathrm{id}_2e_2f_2,`$
$`u=hp,g_1={\displaystyle \frac{gu}{2}},g_2=gg_1,`$
$`v_i=p_ih_j(i,j=1,2,ij),v_1^{}={\displaystyle \frac{5v_1v_1v_2v_1}{2}},`$
$`a_2=v_1v_2,b_2=v_2v_1;`$
in $`𝐀_3`$:
$`u_i=h_ip_i(i=1,2),e_3={\displaystyle \frac{u_1}{2}},f_3=\mathrm{id}_3e_3,`$
$`\overline{u}=\overline{h}\overline{p}+e_3,a_3=2u_2e_3\overline{u},b_3=2e_3u_2\overline{u};`$
in $`𝐀^{}(2,1)`$:
$`p^{}=p{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{p}(h_1+h_2)}{2}}.`$
On can verify that:

* elements $`e_i,f_i,g_i`$ are orthogonal idempotents;
* elements $`e_1,f_1,a_1`$ form a $`^{}`$-basis of $`𝐀_1`$;
* $`a_1=e_1a_1e_1`$ and $`a_1^2=3a_1`$ ;
* elements $`e_2,f_2,g_1,g_2,a_2,b_2,v_1,v_2,v_1b_2,a_2v_1`$ form a $`^{}`$-basis of $`𝐀_2`$;
* $`g𝐀_2=𝐀_2g=g_1,g_2`$;
* $`a_2=e_2a_2e_2`$, $`b_2=f_2b_2f_2`$, $`a_2^2=3a_2`$, $`b_2^2=3b_2`$;
* $`v_1^{}(v_2/2)=e_2`$, $`(v_2/2)v_1^{}=f_2`$;
* $`p^{}(h/2)=f_1`$, $`(h/2)p^{}=g_1`$;
* elements $`e_3,f_3,a_3,b_3,a_3b_3,b_3a_3`$ form a $`^{}`$-basis of $`𝐀_3`$;
* $`a_3=f_3a_3e_3`$, $`b_3=e_3b_3f_3`$, $`a_3b_3a_3=3a_3`$, $`b_3a_3b_3=3b_3`$;
* $`p^{}(h/2)=f_1`$ and $`(h/2)p^{}=g_1`$;
* $`(p_1/2)h_1=e_2`$ and $`h_1(p_1/2)=e_3`$;
* $`gp_i=h_ig=0`$ ($`i=1,2`$) and $`g_2h=pg_2=0`$;
* $`f_2h_i=p_if_2=0`$ ($`i=1,2`$).

Consider the projective $`𝐀^{}`$-modules:

$`E_1=𝐀^{}(1,\mathrm{\_})e_1,F_1=𝐀^{}(1,\mathrm{\_})f_1,`$
$`E_2=𝐀^{}(2,\mathrm{\_})e_2,F_2=𝐀^{}(2,\mathrm{\_})f_2,G_i=𝐀^{}(2,\mathrm{\_})g_i,`$
$`E_3=𝐀^{}(3,\mathrm{\_})e_3,F_3=𝐀^{}(3,\mathrm{\_})f_3,`$
They are projective generators of the category of $`𝐀^{}`$-modules. The above equalities imply that:

$`F_1G_1,E_2F_2,E_2E_3;`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(G_i,G_j)=0\text{ if }ij;`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(G_i,E_j)=\mathrm{Hom}(E_j,G_i)=\mathrm{Hom}(G_i,F_3)=\mathrm{Hom}(F_3,G_i)=0;`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(E_1,F_3)=\mathrm{Hom}(F_3,E_1)=0;`$
$`\mathrm{End}E_1e_1𝐀_1e_1=e_1,a_1𝐃;`$
$`\mathrm{End}E_2e_2𝐀_2e_2=e_2,a_2𝐃;`$
$`\mathrm{End}F_3f_3𝐀_3f_3=f_3,a_3b_3𝐃;`$
$`\mathrm{End}G_i=^{};`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(E_3,F_3)=b_3^{};`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(F_3,E_3)=a_3^{};`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(E_1,E_3)=\overline{p}^{};`$
$`\mathrm{Hom}(E_3,E_1)=\overline{h}^{}.`$
Here $`𝐃`$ denotes the ring $`^{}[t]/(t^23)`$, which is isomorphic to the subring in $`^{}\times ^{}`$ consisting of the pairs $`\left\{(a,b)\right|ab(mod3)\}`$. Therefore, the category of $`𝐀^{}`$-modules is equivalent to that of $`𝐄`$-modules, where $`𝐄=\mathrm{End}(G_1G_2E_1F_3E_3)^{}\times ^{}\times 𝐁`$. ∎

One can verify that the $`𝐀^{}`$-modules $`G_i`$ correspond to the functors $`\mathrm{S}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$, where $`\mathrm{S}^r`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^r`$ denote, as usually, the $`r`$-th symmetric and exterior powers. Actually, these functor are quadratic, and it is the main reason that they “stand apart” really cubic ones.

Now the theory of *2*-divisible cubic modules becomes quite parallel to that of quadratic modules  and one gets the main results just following the same way. As the proofs are also almost the same, we replace them by the exact references to the corresponding items from . We denote by $`e_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) the natural idempotents in $`𝐁`$:

$`e_1`$ $`=(1,\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),0),`$
$`e_2`$ $`=(0,\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),0),`$
$`e_1`$ $`=(0,\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right),\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right),1).`$
Put $`𝖡_i=𝐁e_i`$; they are just indecomposable projective $`𝐁`$-modules. Denote by $`𝖫_1`$ the projection of $`𝖡_1`$ onto the first component, by $`𝖫_2`$ its projection onto the second component; by $`𝖫_3`$ the projection of $`𝖡_2`$ onto the second component, by $`𝖫_4`$ its projection onto the third component; by $`𝖫_5`$ the projection of $`𝖡_3`$ onto the third and by $`𝖫_6`$ its projection onto the forth component. Then $`𝖫_i`$ are just irreducible torsion free $`𝖡`$-modules. Put $`_{(p)}=\left\{a/b\right|a,b,pb\}`$, $`M_{(p)}=_{(p)}M`$.

###### Theorem 3.2.

1. 2-divisible cubic modules $`M,N`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`M_{(p)}N_{(p)}`$ for every odd prime $`p`$.
2. Given a set $`\left\{N_p\right\}`$ ($`p>2`$) where $`N_p`$ is a cubic $`_{(p)}`$-module, there is a 2-divisible cubic module $`M`$ such that $`M_{(p)}N_p`$ for all $`p`$ if and only if almost all (i.e., all but a finite set) of them are torsion free (maybe, zero) and $`N_pN_q`$ for all $`p,q`$. In this case, $`M=N_p`$ and $`\mathrm{t}M=_p\mathrm{t}N_p`$.

###### Cf.

\[7, Theorem 2.1\]. ∎

Now we define our main personages: string and band modules. We rearrange a bit the description given in \[7, Section 4\] to make it more comprehensible. We start with some notations and definitions.

###### Definition 3.3.

1. Define an equivalence relation $``$ on the set $`\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3,4,5,6\}`$ with the only non-trivial equivalences $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}3`$ and $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}5`$ and a symmetric relation $``$ (not equivalence!) putting $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}2,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}4,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}6`$.
2. Define the following mappings acting on every diagram of the form (3):

(4)
$$\begin{array}{ccc}\theta (11)=3\mathrm{id}_1\beta _1\alpha _1,\hfill & & \theta (22)=\beta _1\alpha _1,\hfill \\ \theta (23)=\alpha _1,\hfill & & \theta (32)=\beta _1,\hfill \\ \theta (33)=\beta _2\alpha _2,\hfill & & \theta (44)=\alpha _2\beta _2\hfill \\ \theta (45)=\alpha _2,\hfill & & \theta (54)=\beta _2,\hfill \\ \theta (55)=\alpha _2\beta _2\hfill & & \theta (66)=3\mathrm{id}_3\alpha _2\beta _2.\hfill \end{array}$$
3. Define the function $`\nu :\{\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2\},\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},4\},\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5},6\}\}`$ putting $`\nu \{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2\}=1,\nu \{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},4\}=2,\nu \{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5},6\}=3`$.
4. A *primary polynomial* over a field $`𝐤`$ is, by definition, a power of an irreducible polynomial with the leading coefficient $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$.

Now the string and band modules can be defined as follows.

###### Definition 3.4.

1. A *string diagram* $`\mathrm{D}`$ is a diagram of one of the following types:

(i) $`\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}j_1& & & & j_2j_3& & & & j_{2n2}j_{2n1}& & \\ & k_1& & k_2& & k_3& & \mathrm{}& & k_{2n1}& \\ & & i_1i_2& & & & i_3i_4& & & & i_{2n1}\end{array},`$
or
(ii) $`\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}& & j_2j_3& & & & j_{2n2}j_{2n1}& & & & \\ & k_2& & k_3& & \mathrm{}& & k_{2n1}& & & \\ i_2& & & & i_3i_4& & & & i_{2n1}& & \end{array},`$
or
(iii) $`\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}j_1& & & & j_2j_3& & & & j_{2n}& & \\ & k_1& & k_2& & \mathrm{}& & k_{2n}& & & \\ & & i_1i_2& & & & i_{2n1}i_{2n}& & & & \end{array},`$
where $`k`$, $`i_m,j_m\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3,4,5,6\}`$, satisfying the following conditions:

* $`i_{2m1}i_{2m}`$ for every $`m=1,\mathrm{},n`$.
    (This condition is empty for diagrams (i) and (ii) if $`m=n`$ and for diagrams (ii) if $`m=1`$; nevertheless, in these cases we *define* $`i_1`$ or $`i_{2n}`$ so that this condition holds.)
    * $`j_{2m+1}j_{2m}`$ for every $`m=1,\mathrm{},n1`$.
    * $`i_kj_k`$ for every $`m=1,\mathrm{},2n`$.
    (This condition is empty for diagrams (i) and (ii) if $`m=2n`$ and for diagrams (ii) if $`m=1`$.)
2. The *string $`𝐁`$-module* corresponding to a string diagram $`\mathrm{D}`$ is the $`𝐁`$-module $`M=M^\mathrm{D}`$ with the generators

$$𝐠_1,𝐠_2,\mathrm{},𝐠_n,𝐠_mM_{\nu \{i_{2m1},i_{2m}\}},$$

and the defining relations

$$3^{k_{2m}}\theta (i_{2m}j_{2m})g_m=3^{k_{2m+1}}\theta (i_{2m+1}j_{2m+1})g_{m+1}$$

for $`i=0,\mathrm{},n`$; we put here $`g_0=g_{n+1}=0`$ and omit the relation with $`m=n`$ for diagrams (i), (ii) and with $`m=1`$ for diagrams (ii).
3. A *string cubic module* is one corresponding to a string $`𝐁`$-module via the Morita equivalence of Proposition 3.1.

###### Definition 3.5.

1. A diagram $`\mathrm{D}`$ of type (iii) is said to be *non-periodic* if it cannot be obtained by a repetition of a smaller diagram $`\mathrm{D}_1`$ of the same type: $`\mathrm{D}\mathrm{D}_1\mathrm{D}_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{D}_1`$.
2. A *band data* is a pair $`\mathrm{B}=(\mathrm{D},f(t))`$ consisting of a non-periodic diagram of type (iii) with the additional condition:

* $`j_{2n}j_1`$,

and of a primary polynomial $`f(t)=\lambda _1+\lambda _2t+\mathrm{}+\lambda _dt^{d1}+t^d`$ over the residue field $`/3`$ with $`\lambda _10`$.
3. The *band $`𝐁`$-module* corresponding to a band data $`\mathrm{B}`$ is the $`𝐁`$-module $`M=M^\mathrm{B}`$ with the generators

$$𝐠_{ml}(m=1,\mathrm{},n,l=1,\mathrm{},d),𝐠_{ml}M_{\nu \{i_{2m1},i_{2m}\}},$$

and the defining relations:

$`3^{k_{2m}}\theta (i_{2m}j_{2m})g_{ml}`$ $`=3^{k_{2m+1}}\theta (i_{2m+1}j_{2m+1})g_{m+1,l}\mathrm{if}1m<n;`$
$`3^{k_{2n}}\theta (i_{2n}j_{2n})g_{nl}`$ $`=3^{k_1}\theta (i_1j_1)g_{1,l+1}\mathrm{if}1l<d;`$
$`3^{k_{2n}}\theta (i_{2n}j_{2n})g_{nd}`$ $`=3^{k_1}\theta (i_1j_1){\displaystyle \underset{\nu =1}{\overset{d}{}}}\lambda _\nu g_{1\nu }.`$
4. A *band cubic module* is one corresponding to a band $`𝐁`$-module via the Morita equivalence of Proposition 3.1.

Put also $`L(i,p,k)=𝖫_i/p^k𝖫_i`$, where $`k`$ is a positive integer, $`p>3`$ is a prime number, $`i\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,4,6\}`$; $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(p,k)=\mathrm{\Lambda }^2/p^k\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ and $`\mathrm{S}^2(p,k)=\mathrm{S}^2/p^k\mathrm{S}^2`$, where $`p3`$ is again a prime number.

###### Theorem 3.6.

1. The string and band cubic modules defined above, the modules $`L(i,p,k)`$ and the modules $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2(p,k),\mathrm{S}^2(p,k)`$ are just all finitely generated indecomposable 2-divisible cubic modules.
2. The only isomorphisms between these modules are the following:

* $`M^\mathrm{D}M^\mathrm{D}^{}`$, where $`\mathrm{D}^{}`$ denotes the diagram symmetric to $`\mathrm{D}`$, the latter being of type *(ii)* or *(iii)*;
    * $`M^\mathrm{B}M^{\mathrm{B}^{(s)}}`$, where $`\mathrm{B}^{(s)}=(\mathrm{D}^{(s)},f(t))`$ and $`\mathrm{D}^{(s)}`$ is the *$`s`$-th shift* of the diagram $`\mathrm{D}`$, i.e., the diagram

    $$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}j_{2s+1}& & & & j_{2s+2}j_{2s+3}& & & & j_{2s}& & \\ & k_{2s+1}& & k_{2s+2}& & \mathrm{}& & k_{2s}& & & \\ & & i_{2s+1}i_{2s+2}& & & & i_{2s1}i_{2s}& & & & \end{array}$$
    * $`M^\mathrm{B}M^{\mathrm{B}_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{(s)}}`$, where $`(\mathrm{D},f(t))^{}=(\mathrm{D}^{},f^{}(t))`$ and $`f^{}(t)=\lambda _1^1t^df(1/t)`$;

###### Cf..

\[7, Theorem 5.1\]

###### Corollary 3.7.

1. A 2-divisible cubic module $`M`$ is of finite projective dimension if and only if it contains no string summands of types (i) and (iii). In this case either $`M`$ is projective (hence, a direct sum of modules isomorphic to $`𝖡_i`$) or $`\mathrm{pr}.\mathrm{dim}M=1`$. Otherwise, $`\mathrm{pr}.\mathrm{dim}M=\mathrm{}`$.
2. Every 2-divisible cubic module $`M`$ has a periodic projective resolution

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{}P_{n+1}\stackrel{\gamma _n}{}P_n& \stackrel{\gamma _{n1}}{}& \mathrm{}\stackrel{\gamma _1}{}P_1\stackrel{\gamma _0}{}P_0M0\end{array}$$

of period 6, namely, such that $`\gamma _{n+6}=\gamma _n`$ for every $`n2`$.
3. If $`M`$ is an indecomposable non-projective 2-divisible cubic module, $`\mathrm{t}M`$ is its torsion part, then

$$M/\mathrm{t}M\{\begin{array}{cc}𝖫_{i_{2n}}\hfill & \text{if }M\text{ }\text{is a string module of type (i)}\hfill \\ 𝖫_{i_1}𝖫_{i_{2n}}\hfill & \text{if }M\text{ }\text{is a string module of type (ii)}\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}\hfill \end{array}$$

(Remind that here $`i_{2n}`$ denotes the unique index such that $`i_{2n1}i_{2n}`$ and $`i_1`$ denotes the unique index such that $`i_2i_1`$.)

###### Cf.

\[7, Corollaries 5.3, 5.5\]. ∎

## 4. Weakly alternative functors

Consider now the case of cubic $``$-modules $`F`$ such that $`F()=0`$. We call them *weakly alternative*. They are actually modules over the category $`𝐀^a=𝐀/(\mathrm{id}_1)`$. The functors $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{Id}`$ are of this sort. Here again, we are able to obtain a complete description.

Denote by $`𝐂_0`$ the subring in $`\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,)`$ consisting of the pairs $`(a,B)`$ with $`b_{12}0,ab_{11}(mod3)`$.

###### Proposition 4.1.

The category $`𝐀^a`$ is Morita equivalent to the semi-direct product $`𝐂=(\times 𝐂_0)T`$ where $`T`$ is the elementary $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$-group with three generators $`\xi ,\eta ,\theta `$ such that the following relations hold:

$`\theta =\xi \eta ,\eta \xi =0,`$
$`\eta e=\eta ,e\xi =\xi ,\text{ }\text{where }e=(1,0,0),`$
$`\xi (0,a,B)=a\xi \text{and}(0,a,B)\eta =a\eta `$
for any pair $`(a,B)𝐂_0`$.

###### Proof.

The category $`𝐀^a`$ has two objects: $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2},3`$, and is generated by the morphisms $`h_i:23,p_i:32`$ (i=1,2) subject to the following relations, cf. diagram (1):

$`h_ip_ih_i=2h_i,p_ih_ip_i=2p_i,h_ip_j=0\text{ if }ij,`$
$`h_1+h_2=h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1+h_2p_2h_1p_1h_2,`$
$`p_1+p_2=p_1h_2p_2h_1p_1+p_2h_1p_1h_2p_2,`$
that imply:

$`h_ip_i`$ $`=h_ip_ih_jp_jh_ip_i,`$
$`2p_i`$ $`=2p_ih_jp_jh_ip_i,`$
$`2h_i`$ $`=2h_ip_ih_jp_jh_i`$
(always $`i,j\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2\},ij`$). Then $`e_i=p_ih_jp_jh_i`$ are orthogonal idempotents in $`𝐀^a(2,2)`$ which are conjugate as $`e_1p_1h_2=p_1h_2e_2`$ and $`e_2p_2h_1=p_2h_1e_1`$. Moreover, one can check that $`e_3p_1h_2=p_1h_2e_3=e_3p_2h_1=p_2h_1e_3`$ where $`e_3=1e_1e_2`$. Denote this product by $`\theta `$. Then $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\theta =0`$ and $`p_ih_i=\theta +2e_i`$, so $`𝐀^a(2,2)`$ is Morita equivalent to $`\times [\theta ]`$.

Just in the same way, one can verify that $`𝐀^a(3,3)=f_1,f_2,\alpha _1,\alpha _2,\beta `$ where $`f_1=h_1p_1h_2p_2,f_2=1f_1,\alpha _i=h_ip_i,\beta =\alpha _2\alpha _1`$. Moreover, $`f_i\alpha _i=\alpha _if_j=\alpha _i`$, $`\alpha _1\alpha _2=3f_1`$ and $`\beta ^2=3\beta `$. Therefore, $`𝐀^a(3,3)`$ is isomorphic to the subring $`𝐂_0`$.

Let $`u=p_1h_2p_2,v=h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1`$. Then $`e_1u=uf_1,f_1v=ve_1,uv=e_1,vu=f_1`$, so $`e_1`$ and $`f_1`$ are conjugate in $`𝐀^a`$. Put $`\xi =p_1p_1h_2p_2h_1p_1,\eta =h_1h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1`$. One can also check that

$`2\xi =0,2\eta =0,\eta \xi =0,\xi \eta =\theta ,\xi f_3=\xi ,f_3\eta =\eta ,`$
$`e_3𝐀^a(3,2)=\xi ,𝐀^a(2,3)e_3=\eta .`$
Hence, putting $`E_3^a=𝐀^a(2,\mathrm{\_})e_3`$ we get that $`𝐀^a`$ is Morita equivalent to the endomorphism ring $`\mathrm{End}(E_3^a𝐀^a(3,\mathrm{\_}))`$ which is isomorphic to $`𝐂`$. ∎

Describe now (finitely generated) $`𝐂`$-modules or, the same, weakly alternative cubic functors. If $`M`$ is such a module, put $`\overline{M}=M/TM`$. It is a module over $`\times 𝐂`$, so $`\overline{M}=M_1M_2`$, where $`M_1`$ is an abelian group with $`𝐂_0M_1=0`$ and $`M_2`$ is a $`𝐂_0`$-module. Again, the same observations as in \[7, Theorem 2.1\] yield the following result.

###### Proposition 4.2.

1. Weakly alternative cubic modules $`M,N`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`M_{(p)}N_{(p)}`$ for every prime $`p`$.
2. Given a set $`\left\{N_p\right\}`$ where $`N_p`$ is a weakly alternative cubic $`_{(p)}`$-module, there is a weakly alternative cubic module $`M`$ such that $`M_{(p)}N_p`$ for all $`p`$ if and only if almost all of them are torsion free (maybe, zero) and $`N_pN_q`$ for all $`p,q`$. In this case $`M=N_p`$ and $`\mathrm{t}M=_p\mathrm{t}N_p`$.

Let $`\overline{𝐂}=𝐂/T=\times 𝐂_0`$, $`𝖢_1=𝖫_1=\overline{𝐂}e`$, $`𝖢_2=\overline{𝐂}(0,1,e_{11})`$ and $`𝖢_3=𝖫_4=\overline{𝐂}(0,0,e_{22})`$. They are all indecomposable projective $`\overline{𝐂}`$-modules. Put also $`𝖫_2=\overline{𝐂}(0,1,0)`$ and $`𝖫_3=\overline{𝐂}(0,0,e_{11})`$. They are all non-projective indecomposable torsion free $`\overline{𝐂}`$-modules. If $`p>2`$, the localization $`𝐂_{(p)}`$ is torsion free. If, moreover, $`p>3`$, this localization is hereditary, hence, any $`𝐂_{(p)}`$-module splits into a direct sum of a torsion free and a torsion one, the latter being a direct sum of modules isomorphic to $`L(i,k,p)=𝖫_i/p^k`$ for $`i\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3\},k`$.

The description of $`𝐂_{(3)}`$-modules is similar to that of $`𝐁`$-modules in the preceding section. One only has to consider the set $`\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3,4\}`$ instead of $`\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3,4,5,6\}`$ with the relations $``$ and $``$ defined as follows: $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}4`$ and $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}3`$.

At last, $`𝐂_{(2)}=𝐂^{}\times 𝐂^{\prime \prime }`$ where $`𝐂^{}=(_{(2)}\times _{(2)})T`$ and $`𝐂^{\prime \prime }\mathrm{Mat}(2,_{(2)})`$. A $`𝐂^{\prime \prime }`$-module is a direct sum of several copies of $`(𝖫_3)_{(2)}`$ and of modules isomorphic to $`L(3,k,2)=𝖫_3/2^k`$. A $`𝐂^{}`$-module $`W`$ is given by a diagram of $`_{(2)}`$-modules of the form:

$$\begin{array}{c}W_1\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{\xi }{}& \\ & \underset{\eta }{}& \end{array}W_2\end{array}$$

such that $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\xi =0,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\eta =0,\eta \xi =0`$. Split both $`W_1`$ and $`W_2`$ into a direct sum of cyclic modules $`C_i=/2^i`$ and $`C_{\mathrm{}}=_{(2)}`$. Then one can check that such a diagram is a direct sum of diagrams $`W(\omega )`$ and $`W(\omega ,\pi )`$. Here $`\omega `$ is a (finite) word of the form

$$\mathrm{}\xi ^{i_m}\eta _{j_m}\xi ^{i_{m+1}}\eta _{m+1}\xi \mathrm{}(i_l,j_l\left\{\mathrm{}\right\})$$

containing no subwords of the form $`{}_{\mathrm{}}{}^{}\xi ,^{\mathrm{}}\eta ,\eta _1\xi `$. In $`W(\omega ,\pi )`$, $`\omega `$ must be of the form

$${}_{j}{}^{}\xi _{}^{i_1}\eta _{j_1}\xi ^{i_2}\eta _{j_2}\xi \mathrm{}^{i_m}\eta _j$$

with the same restrictions as above and $`\pi (t)t^n`$ is a primary polynomial over $`/2`$. Namely, if $`W=W(\omega )`$, then $`W_1=_mC_{i_m}`$, $`W_2=_mC_{j_m}`$, while $`\xi (C_{i_m})C_{j_{m1}}`$, $`\eta (C_{j_m})C_{i_m}`$ and the induced mappings are the unique non-zero ones of period 2 (we denote them by $`\gamma `$). If $`W=W(\omega ,\pi )`$ and $`\mathrm{deg}\pi =n`$, then $`W_1=_mnC_{i_m}`$, $`W_2=nC_j(_mnC_{j_m})`$; $`\xi (nC_{i_m})nC_{j_{m1}}`$, $`\eta (nC_{j_m})nC_{i_m}`$, $`\xi (nC_{i_1})nC_j`$, $`\eta (nC_j)nC_{i_m}`$ and the induced mappings are given by the matrices $`\gamma I`$, except the last one, given by $`\gamma \mathrm{\Phi }`$ where $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the Frobenius cell corresponding to the polynomial $`\pi `$.

Note that the torsion free part of $`W(\omega ,\pi )`$ is zero, that of $`W(\omega )`$ consists of at most one cyclic summand, and that of an indecomposable $`𝐂_{(3)}`$-module either is trivial, or consists of one or of two cyclic summand (for string modules $`M^\mathrm{D}`$ of type, respectively, (i) or (ii), cf. page 3.4). So, in accordance with Proposition 4.2, the indecomposable $`𝐂`$-modules $`M`$ that are not torsion have the following local components $`M_{(p)}`$ (we only describe $`M_{(2)}`$ and $`M_{(3)}`$ as all other ones are torsion free, hence, uniquely defined):

1. $`M_{(2)}=W(\omega )`$ where $`\omega `$ contains $`\xi ^{\mathrm{}}`$, $`M_{(3)}=M^\mathrm{D}`$ where $`\mathrm{D}`$ is a string of type (i) or (ii) with $`i_{2n1}=2`$ or $`i_2=2`$ (if both $`i_2=i_{2n1}=2`$ in a string of type (ii), there are two possibilities for such $`M`$).
2. $`M_{(2)}=W(\omega )W(\omega ^{})`$ where both $`\omega `$ and $`\omega ^{}`$ contain $`\xi ^{\mathrm{}}`$, $`M_{(3)}=M^\mathrm{D}`$ where $`\mathrm{D}`$ is a string of type (ii) with $`i_2=i_{2n1}=2`$.
3. $`M_{(3)}`$ is a string module of type (i) or (ii), $`M_{(2)}`$ is torsion free (thus, uniquely defined).

(Note that the case when $`M_{(3)}`$ is torsion free is a part of case (1) above.)

## 5. Cubic vector spaces

Now we consider the *cubic vector spaces*, i.e., cubic functors $`F:\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}𝐤\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$ where $`𝐤`$ is a field. If $`\mathrm{char}𝐤2`$ they are a partial case of the functors considered in Section 3; hence, we always suppose that $`\mathrm{char}𝐤=2`$. In this case a cubic functor $`F`$ is given by a diagram of $`𝐤`$-vector spaces of the same shape (1) with the relations:

(5)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& h_1p_2=h_2p_1=0,h_1h=h_2h,pp_1=pp_2,\hfill \\ & h_ip_ih_i=0,p_ih_ip_i=0(i=1,2),\hfill \\ & hph=0,php=0,\hfill \\ & \overline{h}p+h_1+h_2=h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1+h_2p_2h_1p_1h_2,\hfill \\ & h\overline{p}+p_1+p_2=p_1h_2p_2h_1p_1+p_2h_1p_1h_2p_2\hfill \end{array}$$

(just as before, $`\overline{h}=h_1h=h_2h`$ and $`\overline{p}=pp_1=pp_2`$). Denote by $`𝖢`$ the $`𝐤`$-linear category with objects $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2,3`$ and generating morphisms $`h:12,p:21,h_i:23,p_i:31`$ ($`i=1,2`$) satisfying the relations (5). So, a cubic vector space is the same as a $`𝖢`$-module (i.e., a linear functor $`𝖢𝐤\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$).

The last two equations imply that

$$\overline{h}\overline{p}+h_ip_i=h_ip_ih_jp_jh_ip_j(i,j=1,2;ij),$$

whence $`p_i\overline{h}\overline{p}=\overline{h}\overline{p}h_i=0`$ for $`i=1,2`$. Hence, the elements $`e_i=h_ip_ih_jp_j`$ as well as the elements $`f_i=p_ih_jp_jh_i`$ ($`i,j=1,2;ij`$) are orthogonal idempotents, respectively, in $`𝖢(3,3)`$ and in $`𝖢(2,2)`$. Thus, in $`\mathrm{add}𝖢`$, $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}3_03_13_2`$ and $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}2_02_12_2`$, so that the identity morphisms of $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}_i`$ are identified with $`e_i`$ (with $`e_0=1e_1e_2`$) and those of $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}_i`$ are identified with $`f_i`$ (with $`f_0=1f_1f_2`$). In what follows, we write $`𝖢(x,y)`$ for the set of morphisms $`xy`$ in $`\mathrm{add}𝖢`$. An easy calculation shows that the four objects $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}_i,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}_i`$ ($`i=1,2`$) are isomorphic in $`\mathrm{add}𝖢`$. For instance, as $`p_1h_2p_2=p_1h_2p_2h_1p_1h_2p_2`$, this element lies in $`𝖢(3_1,2_1)`$; the element $`h_1p_1h_2p_2h_1`$ lies in $`𝖢(2_1,3_1)`$ and their products are just $`f_1`$ and $`e_1`$, whence $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}_13_1`$, etc. So, we only have to take into account one of these objects, say $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}_1`$. One can also easily check that $`𝖢(3_1,3_1)=𝐤e_1`$, while $`𝖢(x,3_1)=𝖢(3_1,x)=0`$ if $`x\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2_0,3_0\}`$. Thus, the category $`𝖢`$ is Morita equivalent to the direct product of the *trivial category* with one object $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3}_1`$ and the full subcategory $`𝖢^{}`$ of $`\mathrm{add}𝖢`$ with the objects $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1},2_0,3_0`$. One easily check that the cubic module $`T`$ corresponding to the (unique) indecomposable representation of the trivial part is the following one:

(6)
$$\begin{array}{cc}& T_1=0,T_2=u_1,u_2,T_3=v_1,v_2;\hfill \\ & h_1(u_1)=v_1,h_1(u_2)=0;h_2(u_1)=0,h_2(u_2)=v_2;\hfill \\ & p_1(v_1)=0,p_1(v_2)=u_1;p_2(v_1)=u_2,p_2(v_2)=0.\hfill \end{array}$$

(This cubic module corresponds to the functor $`𝐤\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{Id}`$.) So, from now on, we only consider the representations of $`𝖢^{}`$ and for every morphism $`\alpha `$ from $`𝖢`$ we denote by the same letter $`\alpha `$ its restriction onto $`𝖢^{}`$. As such restrictions of $`e_i`$ and $`f_i`$ are zero for $`i=1,2`$, one obtains the relations:

$$h\overline{p}+p_1+p_2=0,\overline{h}p+h_1+h_2=0,$$

so we may exclude $`p_2,h_2`$ from the generating set. Therefore, $`𝖢^{}`$-modules are just diagrams of vector spaces

(7)
$$\begin{array}{c}F_1\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{h}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p}{}& \end{array}F_2\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{h_1}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p_1}{}& \end{array}F_3\end{array}$$

with the relations

(8)
$$hph=php=h_1p_1h_1=p_1h_1p_1=0,h_1p_1=h_1hpp_1.$$

(One easily checks that they imply all relations (5) if we put $`h_2=h_1+h_1hp`$ and $`p_2=p_1+hpp_1`$.)

Consider the subdiagram

$$\begin{array}{c}F_1\begin{array}{ccc}& \stackrel{h}{}& \\ & \stackrel{p}{}& \end{array}F_2.\end{array}$$

As $`hph=php=0`$, it decomposes into a direct sum of the following shape:

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}& & U_1& & U_2& & U_3& & U_4& & U_5& & U_6\\ & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ V_6& & V_1& & V_2& & V_3& & V_4& & V_5& & \end{array}$$

($`U_i`$ are the direct summands of $`F_1`$, $`V_i`$ those of $`F_2`$, the arrows show the action of $`h`$ and $`p`$ when it is non-zero, the corresponding maps being isomorphisms.) It means that $`h`$ and $`p`$ are given by the following matrices:

(9)
$$h=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& \\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right),p=\left(\begin{array}{cccccc}0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right).$$

($`I`$ denotes the identity matrices.)

With respect to the decomposition of $`F_2`$, $`h_1`$ and $`p_1`$ are given by the matrices $`H=(H_1,H_2,H_3,H_4,H_5,H_6)`$ and $`P=(P_1,P_2,P_3,P_4,P_5,P_6)^{}`$ where $`H_i:V_iF_3,P_i:F_3V_i`$. For these matrices the following conditions hold:

* the number of rows of $`H`$ equals the number of columns of $`P`$;
* the number of columns of $`H_i`$ is the same as the number of rows of $`P_i`$ for every $`i`$;
* the number of columns of $`H_1`$ is the same as the number of rows of $`H_6`$.

When one applies the isomorphisms of the spaces $`F_i`$ which do not destroy the form (9) of $`h`$ and $`p`$, they result in elementary transformations of the columns of the matrices $`H`$ and $`P`$ such that:

* the transformations of $`P`$ are *contragredient* to those of $`H`$ (e.g., when we add the $`k`$-th column of $`H`$ to the $`l`$-th one, we have to subtract the $`l`$-th column of $`P`$ from the $`k`$-th one, etc.);
* the transformations inside $`H_1`$ are the same as those inside $`H_6`$;
* one can only add columns of $`H_i`$ to those of $`H_j`$ if $`ij`$ and $`(i,j)(3,4)`$.

Using such transformations, one can reduce the matrix $`H`$ to the following form:

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccccccccccccccccc}0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& I\\ 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}\right)$$

(the vertical lines denote the borders of the matrices $`H_i`$). Certainly, we have to subdivide in the same manner the rows and columns of the matrix $`P`$. Denote the corresponding blocks by $`P_{ij}`$ ($`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}i17,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}j10`$); the horizontal (vertical) stripes of $`P`$ will be denoted by $`R_i`$ (respectively, $`S_j`$). Then the relations (8) for $`h_1`$ and $`p_1`$ are equivalent to the following conditions for these blocks:

$$\begin{array}{cc}& P_{ij}=0\text{ if }i\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4},6,9,12,14,16,18\},\hfill \\ & P_{ij}=0\text{ if }i\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3},17\}\text{ and }j\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10},\hfill \\ & P_{8j}=P_{11,j}\text{ for all }j,\hfill \\ & P_{3,10}=P_{17,10}\text{ and }P_{i1}P_{3,10}=0\text{ for all }i.\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus, we only have to consider the matrix $`\overline{P}`$ obtained from $`P`$ by crossing out all zero horizontal stripes as well as the stripes $`R_3`$ and $`R_8`$. A straightforward calculation shows that the automorphisms of the spaces $`F_3`$ and $`V_i`$ which do not destroy the shape of $`H`$ give rise to the elementary transformations of the matrix $`\overline{P}`$ satisfying the following conditions:

* the transformations inside $`R_1`$ are the same as those inside $`R_{15}`$;
* the transformations inside $`S_2`$ are the same as those inside $`S_9`$;
* the transformations inside $`R_2`$ are contragredient to those inside $`S_8`$;
* the transformations inside $`R_{11}`$ are contragredient to those inside $`S_4`$;
* the transformations inside $`R_{17}`$ are contragredient to those inside $`S_1`$;
* one can add the columns of $`S_i`$ to those of $`S_j`$ if and only if $`ij`$ and $`(i,j)(5,6)`$;
* one can add the rows of $`R_i`$ to those of $`R_j`$ if and only if $`ij`$ and $`(i,j)(10,7)`$.

Obviously, one may suppose that the matrix $`P_{17,10}`$ is of the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& I\\ 0& 0\end{array}\right)`$. Then the whole stripe $`S_1`$ has the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}0& S_1^{}\end{array}\right)`$, the number of columns in $`S_1^{}`$ being the same as that of zero rows in $`P_{17,10}`$. Moreover, using the elementary transformations described above, one may suppose that the remaining part of the stripe $`S_{10}`$ is of the form $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}S_{10}^{}& 0\end{array}\right)`$, the number of columns in $`S_{10}^{}`$ being the same as in the zero part of $`P_{17,10}`$. In what follows, we omit the dash and write $`S_1`$, $`S_{10}`$, $`P_{i1}`$ and $`P_{i,10}`$ for the remaining (non-zero) parts of the corresponding matrices. Of course, we should no more consider the stripe $`R_{17}`$.

Now one immediately sees that we are again in the situation considered in . Namely, we have got the following semi-chains:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 𝔈& =\left\{R_i\right|R_1>R_2>R_5>R_7>R_{11}>R_{13}>R_{15},R_5>R_{10}>R_{11}\},\hfill \\ \hfill 𝔉& =\left\{S_j\right|S_1<S_2<S_3<S_4<S_5<S_7<S_8<S_9<S_{10},S_4<S_6<S_7\}\hfill \end{array}$$

with the involution $`\sigma `$ such that

$$\sigma (R_1)=R_{15},\sigma (R_2)=S_8,\sigma (R_{11})=S_4,\sigma (S_2)=S_9$$

and $`\sigma (x)=x`$ if $`x\{R_1,R_2,R_{11},R_{15},S_2,S_4,S_8,S_9\}`$. Hence, one can deduce from  a list of canonical forms of the matrix $`P`$ and, therefore, of cubic functors $`\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}𝐤\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}`$. It can again be arranged in the form of “strings and bands,” though a trifle more sophisticated than in the preceding sections.

###### Definition 5.1.

Put $`𝔛=(𝔈𝔉)\{R_{10},S_6\}`$. Write $`xy`$ if $`x𝔈,y𝔉`$ or vice versa; $`xy`$ if $`\sigma (x)=yx`$ or $`x=y\{R_7,S_5\}`$. Call $`R_7,S_5`$ *special elements*. An $`𝔛`$-*word* (or simply *word*) is a sequence $`w=x_1r_2x_2r_3\mathrm{}r_nx_n`$, where $`x_k𝔛`$, $`r_k\{,\}`$, satisfying the following conditions:

* $`x_{k1}r_kx_k`$ (in the above defined sense) for all $`k=2,\mathrm{},n`$;
* $`r_kr_{k1}`$ for all $`k=3,\mathrm{},n`$;

Such a word is called *full* if the following conditions hold:

* either $`r_2=`$ or $`x_1\sim ̸y`$ for every $`yx_1`$;
* either $`r_n=`$ or $`x_n\sim ̸y`$ for every $`yx_n`$.

A full word is called *special* if $`x_1`$ or $`x_n`$, but not both of them, is a special element, *bispecial* if both $`x_1`$ and $`x_n`$ are special, and *ordinary* if neither $`x_1`$ nor $`x_n`$ is special. A word $`w`$ is called *non-symmetric* if $`ww^{}`$, where $`w^{}`$ is the *inverse word*: $`w^{}=x_nr_nx_{n1}\mathrm{}x_2r_2x_1`$.

An $`𝔛`$-word is called *cyclic* if $`r_2=r_n=`$ and $`x_nx_1`$. A cyclic word is called *aperiodic* if it is not of the form $`vv\mathrm{}v`$ for a shorter word $`v`$. The $`s`$-th *shift* of a cyclic word $`w`$ is the word $`w^{(s)}=x_{2s+1}r_{2s+2}x_{2s+2}\mathrm{}x_nx_1r_2\mathrm{}r_{2s}x_{2s}`$. A cyclic word $`w`$ is said to be *shift-symmetric* if $`w^{(s)}`$ is symmetric for some $`s`$. Note that the length $`n`$ of a cyclic word is always even.

###### Definition 5.2.

A *string datum* $`\mathrm{D}`$ is:

* either an ordinary non-symmetric $`𝔛`$-word $`w`$ (*ordinary string datum*);
* or a pair $`(w,\delta )`$ consisting of a special word $`w`$ and $`\delta \{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},1\}`$ (*special string datum*);
* or a quadruple $`(w,\delta _1,\delta _2,m)`$ consisting of a bispecial non-symmetric word $`w`$, $`\delta _1,\delta _2\{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0},1\}`$ and $`m`$ (*bispecial string datum*).

Put $`\mathrm{D}^{}=w^{}`$ in the first case, $`\mathrm{D}^{}=(w^{},\delta )`$ in the second and $`\mathrm{D}^{}=(w^{},\delta _2,\delta _1,m)`$ in the third one.

A *band datum $`\mathrm{B}`$* is a pair $`(w,\pi (t))`$ consisting of an aperiodic cyclic word $`w`$ and of a *primary polynomial* $`\pi (t)𝐤[t]`$ (i.e., a power of an irreducible one) such that $`\pi (t)t^d`$ if $`w`$ is not shift-symmetric and $`\pi (t)(t1)^d`$ if $`w`$ is shift-symmetric. Put $`\mathrm{B}^{(s)}=(w^{(s)},f(t))`$ and $`\mathrm{B}^{}=(w^{},\lambda ^1t^d\pi (1/t))`$, where $`w`$ is not shift-symmetric, $`d=\mathrm{deg}\pi `$ and $`\lambda =\pi (0)`$.

Now the results of  immediately imply the following

###### Theorem 5.3.

1. Every string data $`\mathrm{D}`$ defines an indecomposable cubic vector space $`V^\mathrm{D}`$ called *string cubic space*.
2. Every band data $`\mathrm{B}`$ defines an indecomposable cubic vector space $`V^\mathrm{B}`$ called *band cubic space*.
3. Every indecomposable cubic vector space, except $`𝐤\mathrm{\Lambda }^2\mathrm{Id}`$, is isomorphic either to a string or to a band one.
4. The only isomorphisms between string and band spaces are the following:

* $`V^\mathrm{D}V^\mathrm{D}^{}`$ where $`\mathrm{D}`$ is a string data;
    * $`V^\mathrm{B}V^{\mathrm{B}^{(s)}}`$ and $`V^\mathrm{B}V^{\mathrm{B}_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{(s)}}`$ where $`\mathrm{B}`$ is a band data and $`s`$.

Moreover, one can deduce from  and the preceding considerations an explicit construction of string and band spaces, though it is rather cumbersome and we will not include it here.

## 6. Torsion free cubic modules

In this section, we consider *torsion free* cubic modules, i.e., cubic functors $`\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}`$. Again, we first study them *locally*, i.e., describe cubic functors $`\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}\mathrm{𝖿𝖺𝖻}_{(p)}`$, the latter being the category of torsion free finitely generated $`_{(p)}`$-modules. Denote also by $`_p`$ the ring of $`p`$-adic integers. The latter has the advantage of being complete, that guarantees lifting idempotent endomorphisms modulo $`p`$. Note that the calculations of Section 3 easily imply that $`𝐀^3\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,)\times \mathrm{Mat}(4,)^2`$. In particular, it is a semi-simple *split* $``$-algebra, i.e., $`\mathrm{End}V`$ for every simple module $`V`$. Thus, it follows from the standard results of the theory of lattices over orders (cf. \[9, Chapter 4, § 1\]) that every torsion free $`𝐀_p`$-module is actually a completion of a torsion free $`𝐀_{(p)}`$-module. Hence, lifting idempotents is possible for $`𝐀_{(p)}`$-modules too. Together with the calculations of Section 5 it implies the following result.

###### Proposition 6.1.

The ring $`𝐀_{(2)}`$ is isomorphic to the subring of $`_{(2)}^3\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,_{(2)})\times \mathrm{Mat}(4,_{(2)})^2`$ consisting of all sextuples $`(a_1,a_2,a_3,B,C,D)`$ satisfying the following congruences modulo $`2`$:

$`a_1b_{11}c_{11},a_2b_{22}c_{22}c_{33},a_3c_{44},`$
(\*) $`b_{12}0\text{ and }c_{ij}0\text{ if }i<j.`$
One can easily check that this ring is an example of the so called *Backström order* , i.e., its Jacobson radical coincides with that of an hereditary order $`𝐇`$. Thus, torsion free $`𝐀_{(2)}`$-modules are in a natural one-to-one correspondancewith the representations of a quiver $`𝖰`$ over the field $`/2`$. Namely, the vertices of $`𝖰`$ are just simple $`𝐀_{(2)}`$-modules $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_r`$ and simple $`𝐇`$-modules $`H_1,\mathrm{},H_s`$, all arrows are from some $`A_i`$ to some $`H_j`$ and the number of such arrows equals the multiplicity of $`A_i`$ in $`H_j`$. In our example $`𝐇`$ consists of the sextuples satisfying the congruences (\*) only, $`r=4,s=10`$ and the quiver $`𝖰`$ consists of $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}`$ connected components:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\begin{array}{ccccc}H_1& & A_1& & H_4\\ & & & & & \\ & & H_6& \end{array}& & \begin{array}{cccc}& & H_5& \\ & & & & & \\ H_2& & A_2& & H_7\\ & & & & & \\ & & H_8& \end{array}\\ & & \\ \begin{array}{ccccc}H_3& & A_3& & H_9\end{array}& & \begin{array}{ccc}A_4& & H_{10}\end{array}\end{array}$$

(The numeration is the natural one with respect to the description of $`𝐀_{(2)}`$ and $`𝐇`$ above.) This quiver is tame and the list of its representations is well known (cf., e.g., ). Hence, we can derive the description of torsion free $`𝐀_{(2)}`$-modules.

The description of indecomposable torsion free $`𝐀_{(3)}`$-modules is given in Section 3. For any other prime $`p`$, the localization $`𝐀_{(p)}`$ is just $`_{(p)}^3\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,_{(p)})\times \mathrm{Mat}(4,_{(p)})^2`$, hence, there are exactly $`6`$ indecomposable (and irreducible) torsion free modules. Therefore, the standard “local–global” procedure  implies the following result on torsion free cubic modules.

###### Proposition 6.2.

Torsion free cubic modules are in one-to-one correspondancewith the pairs $`(M_2,M_3)`$, where $`M_p`$ is a torsion free $`𝐀_{(p)}`$-module ($`p=2,3`$) and $`M_2M_3`$.

###### Proof.

It follows from \[9, Chapter 4\] that such a pair $`(M_2,M_3)`$ always defines a cubic module $`M`$ *up to genus*. (Remind that two modules $`M,N`$ *belong to the same genus* if $`M_pN_p`$ for all prime $`p`$.) Note that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=^3\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,)\times \mathrm{Mat}(4,)^2`$ is a maximal order containing $`𝐀`$ and two torsion free $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-modules belonging to the same genus are isomorphic. Applying the results of , we see that the isomorphism classes of modules belonging to the same genus as $`M`$ are in one-to-one correspondancewith the double cosets

$$\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M)\backslash \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M_2)\times \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M_3)/\mathrm{Aut}(M_2)\times \mathrm{Aut}(M_3),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }M`$ denotes the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-submodule in $`M`$ generated by $`M`$. As $`𝐀^6\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we can replace these cosets by

$$\overline{\mathrm{Aut}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M)\backslash \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M/6\mathrm{\Gamma }M)/\mathrm{Aut}(M/6\mathrm{\Gamma }M),$$

where $`\overline{\mathrm{Aut}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M)`$ denotes the image of $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M)`$ in $`\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M/6\mathrm{\Gamma }M)`$. But $`\mathrm{End}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M)`$ is just a direct product of matrix algebras $`\mathrm{Mat}(n_i,)`$, and any matrix invertible modulo $`6`$ is the image of an invertible integer matrix. Hence, $`\overline{\mathrm{Aut}}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M))=\mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{\Gamma }M/6\mathrm{\Gamma }M)`$, so every genus only contains one module up to isomorphism. ∎

Using the arguments analogous to those of \[7, Theorem 2.1\], one gets the following corollary extending Theorem 3.2 to *all* cubic functors.

###### Corollary 6.3.

1. Cubic modules $`M,N`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`M_{(p)}N_{(p)}`$ for every prime $`p`$.
2. Given a set $`\left\{N_p\right\}`$ where $`N_p`$ is a cubic $`_{(p)}`$-module, there is a cubic module $`M`$ such that $`M_{(p)}N_p`$ for all $`p`$ if and only if almost all of them are torsion free (maybe, zero) and $`N_pN_q`$ for all $`p,q`$. In this case $`M=N_p`$ and $`\mathrm{t}M=_p\mathrm{t}N_p`$.

It seems plausible that the analogous result is no more true for the polynomial functors of degree $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}`$, but at the moment we do not have a corresponding counterexample.

## 7. One conjecture

The descriptions of quadratic modules and of cubic *2*-divisible modules as well as some other evidence give rise to the following conjecture concerning polynomial modules of higher degrees.

Put $`_{<p}=[\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/(p1)!]`$ and denote by $`𝐀^{(p)}`$ the subring of the direct product $`_{<p}\times _{<p}\times \mathrm{Mat}(2,_{<p})^{p1}`$ consisting of all $`(p+1)`$-tuples

$$(a,b,C^1,\mathrm{},C^{p1})$$

such that $`ac_{11}^1(modp),bc_{22}^{p1}(modp)`$ and $`c_{22}^ic_{11}^{i+1}(modp)`$ for every $`i=1,\mathrm{},p2`$.

###### Conjecture 7.1.

The category $`(p)=_{<p}\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}^p`$ is equivalent to the category of modules over $`𝐀^{(p)}\times _{<p}^r`$ for appropriate $`r`$ (depending on $`p`$).

As the ring $`𝐀^{(p)}`$ fits the conditions of , it would give a complete description of such polynomial functors in strings and bands terms quite similar to that of Section 3. Moreover, easy calculations show that this conjecture would imply the following properties of such polynomial functors analogous to those of quadratic and *2*-divisible cubic functors:

* Two modules from $`(p)`$ are isomorphic if and only if all their localizations are isomorphic.
* Given a set $`\left\{N_q\right\}`$ of polynomial functors ($`N_q_{(q)}\text{-}\mathrm{𝗆𝗈𝖽}^p`$, $`q`$ runs through all primes $`p`$), there is a functor $`M(p)`$ such that $`M_{(q)}N_q`$ for all $`q`$ if and only if almost all $`N_q`$ are torsion free and $`N_qN_q^{}`$ for all $`q,q^{}`$. In this case $`\mathrm{t}M=_q\mathrm{t}N_q`$ and $`MN_q`$.
* Any functor from $`(p)`$ is either projective, or of projective dimension 1, or of infinite projective dimension.
* Any functor from $`(p)`$ has a periodic projective resolution of period $`\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}p`$.
* If a functor $`F(p)`$ is indecomposable and non-projective, its torsion free part is a direct sum of at most two irreducible torsion free modules.

## Acknowledgments

This research was mainly performed when the author was at the Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik. I am extremely grateful to the Institute for the excellent opportunity and working conditions. I am also grateful to H.-J. Baues who enthusiastically supported this research and to W. Dreckman for useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Module categories over the Drinfeld double of a finite group

## 1. Introduction

Let $`𝒞`$ be a (semisimple abelian) monoidal category. A module category over $`𝒞`$ is a (semisimple abelian) category $``$ together with a functor $`𝒞\times `$ and an associativity constraint (= natural isomorphism of two composition functors $`𝒞\times 𝒞\times `$) satifying natural axioms, see . In physics, one is interested in the case when $`𝒞`$ is a category of representations of some vertex algebra $`V`$ and irreducible objects of $``$ are interpreted as a boundary conditions for the Conformal Field Theory associated to $`V`$, see . Thus it is interesting from a physical point of view for a given monoidal category $`𝒞`$ to classify all possible module categories over $`𝒞`$ (it is known that in many interesting cases the list of answers is finite, see ). This problem is also of mathematical interest, for example the module categories with just one isomorphism class of irreducible objects are exactly the same as the fiber functors $`𝒞\text{Vec}`$, see . It is known that for a fusion categories of $`\widehat{sl}(2)`$ at positive integer levels the module categories are classified by ADE Dynkin diagrams, see . In this note we consider another class of examples, known in physics as holomorphic orbifold models, see e.g. .

Let $`G`$ be a finite group. It is well known that the monoidal structures (= associativity constraints) on the category $`\text{Vec}^G`$ of $`G`$graded vector spaces with the usual functor of tensor product are classified by the group $`H^3(G,^{})`$, see . For $`\omega H^3(G,^{})`$ let $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$ denote the corresponding monoidal category. Let $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ be the Drinfeld center of the category $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$, see e.g. . The main result of this paper is a classification of module categories over the category $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$. The closely related problem of classification of modular invariants for this category was considered in . On the other hand the problem of classification of twists (= fiber functors) in the Hopf algebra $`𝒟(G)`$ corresponding to $`𝒟(G,1)`$ is interesting from the Hopf-algebraic point of view (here 1 is a trivial 3-cocycle).

The paper is organized as follows: in the Section 2 we recall necessary definitions and basic facts, in Section 3 we state and prove the Main Theorem, and in Section 4 we consider the simplest nonabelian example — the case of the symmetric group in three letters.

I was interested in the problem solved in this note from the beginning of my work on module categories . But I got an idea that this problem can be solved (and actually is trivial) only after reading papers . So I am grateful to Michael Mueger for this influence. My sincere gratitude is due to Pavel Etingof for very interesting discussions. I am greatly indebted to Terry Gannon for providing me with a list of modular invariants for the group $`S_3`$.

## 2. Preliminaries

In this paper we will consider only abelian semisimple categories over the field of complex numbers; we assume that all $`\text{Hom}`$spaces are finite dimensional. The rank of such a category is just the number of isomorphism classes of simple objects (= the rank of the Grothendieck group). We will consider only categories of finite rank. All functors are assumed to be additive. We will consider on many occasions the cohomology of finite groups with coefficients in $`^{}`$ (with trivial action). We will denote by 1 the trivial cohomology class. Sometimes we will identify cohomology class with a representing cocycle; we will always consider only normalized cocycles (i.e. the value of cocycle is 1 when one of arguments equals to 1).

### 2.1. Module categories

Let $`𝒞=(𝒞,,a,\mathrm{𝟏},l,r)`$ be a monoidal category. Here $`𝒞`$ is a category, $`:𝒞\times 𝒞𝒞`$ is a bifunctor, $`a:(\text{id}\times )(\times \text{id})`$ is a functorial isomorphism of two possible composition functors $`𝒞\times 𝒞\times 𝒞𝒞`$, $`\mathrm{𝟏}𝒞`$ is the unit object, $`l:(\mathrm{𝟏}\times \text{id})\text{id}`$ and $`r:(\text{id}\times \mathrm{𝟏})\text{id}`$ are functorial isomorphisms subject to usual axioms, see e.g. . We will consider only fusion categories, that is rigid categories with irreducible unit object, see . A (left) module category $``$ over $`𝒞`$ is a quadruple $`(,,m,l)`$ where $``$ is a category, $`:𝒞\times `$ is a bifunctor, $`m:(\times \text{id})(\text{id}\times )`$ is a functorial isomorphism of two possible composition functors $`𝒞\times 𝒞\times `$ and $`l:(\mathrm{𝟏}\times \text{id})\text{id}`$ is a functorial isomorphism of two functors $``$; these data are subject to the pentagon and triangle axioms, see . There are obvious notions of a direct sum of module categories, of module functors between module categories, see . A module category is called indecomposable if it is not module equivalent to a direct sum of nonzero categories. One way to construct module categories over $`𝒞`$ is the following: let $`A`$ be an associative algebra in the category $`𝒞`$, see e.g. . Then the category $`\text{Mod}_𝒞(A)`$ of right $`A`$modules has an obvious structure of a module category over $`𝒞`$, see loc. cit. Theorem 3.1 in loc. cit. states that any module category over $`𝒞`$ can be obtained in this way.

Example 2.1. The indecomposable module categories over $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$ are classified by the conjugacy classes of pairs $`(H,\psi )`$ where $`HG`$ is a subgroup such that $`\omega |_H=1`$ and $`\psi H^2(H,^{})`$, see e.g. . To be more precise let $`\underset{¯}{\omega }Z^3(G,^{})`$ be a 3-cocycle representing $`\omega `$. For any $`HG`$ let $`\psi C^2(H,^{})`$ be a 2-cochain such that $`d\psi =\underset{¯}{\omega }|_H`$. Then the twisted group algebra $`A(H,\psi )=_\psi [H]`$ is an associative algebra in the category $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$; for any 1-cochain $`\chi C^1(H,^{})`$ the algebras $`A(H,\psi )`$ and $`A(H,\psi +d\chi )`$ are isomorphic. Any semisimple indecomposable algebra $`A`$ in $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$ with $`dim\text{Hom}(\mathrm{𝟏},A)=1`$ is of the form $`A(H,\psi )`$ and thus the set of isomorphism classes of such algebras is a fibration over $`\{HG|\omega |_H=1\}`$ with fiber being a torsor over $`H^2(H,^{})`$. In what follows we will often assume that this torsor is trivialized.

### 2.2. The dual category

Let $`𝒞`$ be a monoidal category and $``$ be an indecomposable module category over $`𝒞`$. Then one defines the dual category $`𝒞^{}=\text{Fun}_𝒞(,)`$ as a category of module functors from $``$ to itself. Note that despite of our notation the category $`𝒞^{}`$ depends on both $`𝒞`$ and $``$. In general, semisimplicity of $`𝒞`$ and $``$ does not imply that $`𝒞^{}`$ is semisimple. But this is always true over a field of characteristic 0 (this follows from the main result of  in conjunction with Theorem 4.2 in  and Corollary 6.7 in ). Moreover over a field of characteristic 0 for two module categories $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ the category $`\text{Fun}_𝒞(_1,_2)`$ of module functors from $`_1`$ to $`_2`$ is semisimple, see . If the category $``$ is of the form $`\text{Mod}_𝒞(A)`$ for some algebra $`A𝒞`$ then one identifies the category $`𝒞^{}`$ with the category of $`A`$bimodules. The operation $`𝒞𝒞^{}`$ is really a duality, by definition $``$ is a module category over $`𝒞^{}`$ and $`𝒞^{}=𝒞`$ (this is an immediate consequence of Theorem 4.2 in ).

Example 2.2. Let $`𝒞=\text{Vec}_1^G`$ and $`=\text{Vec}`$ be the module category corresponding to the usual forgetful functor $`\text{Vec}_1^G\text{Vec}`$ (this functor is defined for any $`\omega `$ but it has a structure of tensor functor if and only if $`\omega =1`$). Then it is easy to see using Theorem 4.2 of  that $`𝒞^{}=\text{Rep}(G)`$ — the category of representations of the finite group $`G`$. A little bit more generally, let $``$ be the module category attached to a pair $`(H,1)`$ in Example 2.1. Then it is easy to see that the category $`𝒞^{}`$ is equivalent to the category of $`H`$equivariant sheaves on $`G/H`$ with tensor product given by the convolution of sheaves.

The following observation is due to M. Mueger, see :

Proposition 2.1. The module categories over $`𝒞`$ and over $`𝒞^{}`$ are in the canonical bijection.

Proof. Let $``$ be the module category which connects $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ (that is $`𝒞^{}=\text{Fun}_𝒞(,)`$). Let $`_1`$ be a module category over $`𝒞`$. Then the category $`\text{Fun}_𝒞(,_1)`$ of module functors from $``$ to $`_1`$ is a module category over $`𝒞^{}=\text{Fun}(,)`$ via the composition of functors. Conversely if $`_2`$ is a module category over $`𝒞^{}`$ then $`\text{Fun}_𝒞^{}(,_2)`$ is a module category over $`\text{Fun}_𝒞^{}(,)=𝒞`$. It is obvious that these constructions are inverse to each other. $`\mathrm{}`$

Note that the category $`\text{Fun}(,_1)`$ has the following “elementary” description: if $`=\text{Mod}_𝒞(A)`$ and $`_1=\text{Mod}_𝒞(B)`$ for some algebras $`A,B𝒞`$ then the category $`\text{Fun}(,_1)`$ is equivalent to the category of $`(A,B)`$bimodules.

Example 2.3. One instance of this bijection is contained in . In loc. cit. the authors define non-commutative “lowering of indices”. This can be described as follows: let $`𝒞`$ be a monoidal category (semisimple, of finite rank) and let $``$ be a module category over $`𝒞`$ of rank 1 (= a fiber functor); thus $`𝒞`$ is the category of representations of a Hopf algebra and $``$ is related with forgetful functor $`𝒞\text{Vec}`$; let $`𝒞^{}`$ be the dual category of $`𝒞`$ with respect to $``$ (thus $`𝒞^{}`$ is the category of representations of the Hopf algebra dual to the previous one). One says that a module category $`_1`$ over $`𝒞`$ of rank 1 (= a fiber functor = a twist up to gauge transformation) is non-degenerate if the category $`\text{Fun}_𝒞(,_1)`$ is semisimple of rank 1. Theorem 5.10 of  says that there is a bijection between non-degenerate module categories over $`𝒞`$ and over $`𝒞^{}`$. From our point of view this is almost tautological, the bijection being given by an assignment $`_1\text{Fun}_𝒞(,_1)`$. The conditions that $`_1`$ is of rank 1 and that $`_1`$ is non-degenerate are permuted by this bijection. Note that the assumption of semisimplicity of $`𝒞`$ is not essential for these considerations.

### 2.3. The Drinfeld center

Let $`𝒞`$ be a monoidal category, $``$ be a module category over $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$ be the corresponding dual category. Then one can consider external product of monoidal categories $`𝒞𝒞^{}`$ and $``$ has an obvious structure of a module category over $`𝒞𝒞^{}`$. The following result is inspired by :

Proposition 2.2. The dual category to $`𝒞𝒞^{}`$ with respect to the module category $``$ is equivalent to the Drinfeld center $`𝒵(𝒞)`$ of the category $`𝒞`$.

Proof. Each functor from $`(𝒞𝒞^{})^{}`$ should commute with $`𝒞^{}`$ so is equivalent to the functor $`X\mathrm{?}`$ for some $`X𝒞`$ (since $`𝒞^{}=𝒞`$). The functor $`X\mathrm{?}`$ should commute with all functors of the form $`Y\mathrm{?}`$ for all $`Y𝒞`$, so for each $`Y𝒞`$ we have an isomorphism of functors $`X(Y\mathrm{?})Y(X\mathrm{?})`$. Clearly this isomorphism comes from the isomorphism of objects $`XYYX`$ (by the Yoneda Lemma). We leave for the reader to check that under this identification the axioms (= commutative diagrams) from the definition of a module functors reduce to the axioms of the objects of Drinfeld center. $`\mathrm{}`$

We have the following immediate consequence :

Corollary 2.1. The categories $`𝒵(𝒞)`$ and $`𝒵(𝒞^{})`$ are canonically equivalent.

Proof. The construction of Proposition 2.2 is completely symmetric with respect to the roles of $`𝒞`$ and $`𝒞^{}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. A counterpart of this statement in the theory of Hopf algebras is well known: the Drinfeld doubles of a Hopf algebra and of its dual are isomorphic.

For a monoidal category $`𝒞`$ let $`𝒞^{op}`$ denote the same category with opposite tensor product. The following consequence of Proposition 2.2 is essentially contained in :

Corollary 2.2. For any monoidal category $`𝒞`$ the module categories over $`𝒵(𝒞)`$ are in canonical bijection with module categories over $`𝒞𝒞^{op}`$.

Proof. One should use Proposition 2.2 with $`=𝒞`$ considered as a module category over $`𝒞`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3. Main results

### 3.1. General setting

Let $`G`$ be a finite group and let $`\omega H^3(G,^{})`$ be a cohomology class. Consider the category $`𝒞=\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$. For each subgroup $`HG`$ such that $`\omega |_H=1`$ and a cohomology class $`\psi H^2(H,^{})`$ let $`A(H,\psi )`$ denote the corresponding algebra in the category $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$, see Example 2.1 (as a $`G`$graded space $`A(H,\psi )`$ is supported on $`HG`$ and each graded component is one dimensional, the multiplication is given by the 2-cocycle $`\psi `$; in other words $`A(H,\psi )`$ is the group algebra of $`H`$ twisted by $`\psi `$). Consider the monoidal category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$ of $`A(H,\psi )`$bimodules in the category $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$. Equivalently, the category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$ can be defined as the category $`𝒞^{}`$ with respect to the module category $``$ consisting of $`A(H,\psi )`$modules.

Theorem 3.1. The indecomposable module categories over monoidal category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$ are parametrized by the conjugacy classes of pairs $`(H_1,\psi _1)`$ where $`H_1G`$ is a subgroup such that $`\omega |_{H_1}=1`$ and $`\psi _1H^2(H_1,^{})`$ is a cohomology class. Moreover, the module category corresponding to a pair $`(H_1,\psi _1)`$ is just the category $``$ of $`(A(H,\psi ),A(H_1,\psi _1))`$bimodules with tensor product over $`A(H,\psi )`$ as a bifunctor $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )\times `$.

Proof. This is immediate from the definitions and Proposition 2.1 and Example 2.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now let $`(H_1,\psi _1)`$ and $`(H_2,\psi _2)`$ be two pairs consisting of a subgroup $`H_iG`$ such that $`\omega |_{H_i}=1`$ and a cohomology class $`\psi _iH^2(H_i,^{})`$. We are going to calculate the number of simple objects in the category of $`(A(H_1,\psi _1),A(H_2,\psi _2))`$bimodules (so as a special case we will get the rank of the category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$). Let $`gG`$ be an element of $`G`$. The group $`H^g:=H_1gH_2g^1`$ has a well defined 2-cocycle

$$\psi ^g(h,h^{}):=\psi _1(h,h^{})\psi _2(g^1h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}g,g^1h^1g)\omega (hh^{}g,g^1h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}g,g^1h^1g)^1\times $$

$$\times \omega (h,h^{},g)\omega (h,h^{}g,g^1h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}g)$$

(we will see that this is indeed well defined in the proof of Proposition 3.1).

Proposition 3.1. Let $`(H_1,\psi _1)`$ and $`(H_2,\psi _2)`$ be two pairs as above. Let $`\{g_i\}_{iH_1G/H_2}`$ be a set of reprsentatives of two-sided $`(H_1,H_2)`$cosets in $`G`$. The rank of the category of $`(A(H_1,\psi _1),A(H_2,\psi _2))`$bimodules equals to

$$\underset{iH_1G/H_2}{}m(g_i)$$

where $`m(g_i)`$ is the number of irreducible projective representations of the group $`H^{g_i}`$ with the center acting via 2-cocycle $`\psi ^{g_i}`$.

Proof. Let $`M=_{gG}M_g`$ be a $`(A(H_1,\psi _1),A(H_2,\psi _2))`$bimodule. The structure of a bimodule gives us for each $`h_1H_1,h_2H_2`$ the isomorphisms $`i_{h_1,g}^1:M_{h_1g}M_g`$ and $`i_{g,h_2}^2:M_{gh_2}M_g`$. These isomorphisms should satisfy the following identities:

1) $`i_{h_1h_1^{},g}^1=\omega (h_1,h_1^{},g)\psi _1(h_1,h_1^{})i_{h_1^{},g}^1i_{h_1,h_1^{}g}^1`$ (this relation says that $`M`$ is left $`A(H_1,\psi _1)`$module).

2) $`i_{g,h_2^{}h_2}^2=\omega (g,h_2^{},h_2)^1\psi _2(h_2^{},h_2)i_{g,h_2^{}}^2i_{gh_2^{},h_2}^2`$ (this relation says that $`M`$ is right $`A(H_2,\psi _2)`$module).

3) $`i_{h_1,g}^1i_{h_1g,h_2}^2=\omega (h_1,g,h_2)i_{g,h_2}^2i_{h_1,gh_2}^1`$ (that is the structure of left module commutes with the structure of right module).

There are also some other identities (which we omit) related to the action of the identity.

It is clear that the module $`M`$ is a direct sum of submodules supported on individual double cosets. If we assume that $`M`$ is supported on one such coset and $`g`$ is a representative of this coset, then it is enough to study the vector space $`M_g`$; for each pair $`(h_1,h_2)H_1\times H_2`$ such that $`h_1gh_2=g`$ we have an operator $`j_{h_1}^g:=i_{h_1,g}^1i_{h_1g,h_2}^2:M_gM_g`$ (note that $`h_1=gh_2^1g^1`$ so $`h_1H^g`$, also $`h_2`$ is completely determined by $`h_1`$); it is not difficult to see from the above that

$$j_h^gj_h^{}^g=\psi ^g(h,h^{})j_{hh^{}}^g.$$

This relation is exactly the definition of the $`\psi ^g`$twisted group algebra of $`H^g`$ and the Proposition is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark. (i) Actually we will prove that there is a natural bijection between simple $`(A(H_1,\psi _1),A(H_2,\psi _2))`$bimodules and irreducible projective representations of groups $`H^{g_i}`$ with the center acting via 2-cocycle $`\psi ^{g_i}`$.

(ii) The formula for 2-cocycle $`\psi ^g`$ is a generalization of formula 5.15 from .

(iii) The paper of S. Yamagami  contains results closely related to Proposition 3.1, see  section 5. Also the result closely related with Proposition 3.1 is contained in .

It is easy to deduce from Proposition 3.1 the classification of fiber functors (= module categories of rank 1) for the category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$.

Corollary 3.1. The fiber functors of the category $`𝒞(G,\omega ,H,\psi )`$ are classified by pairs $`(H_1,\psi _1)`$ where $`H_1G`$ is a subgroup and $`\psi _1H^2(H_1,^{})`$ such that

1) The class $`\omega |_{H_1}`$ is trivial.

2) The number of double cosets $`HG/H_1`$ is 1.

3) The class $`\psi |_{HH_1}\psi _1|_{HH_1}`$ is nondegenerate, that is the twisted group algebra of $`HH_1`$ with respect to the cocycle representing $`\psi |HH_1\psi _1|_{HH_1}`$ is isomorphic to a matrix algebra.

Example 3.1. Assume that $`G=HH_1`$ is an exact factorization, i.e. any element of $`G`$ can be uniquely represented as a product $`hh_1`$ where $`hH,h_1H_1`$. Then the category $`𝒞(G,1,H,1)`$ has a fiber functor corresponding to a pair $`(H_1,1)`$. The corresponding Hopf algebra is called a Kac algebra and is well known in the theory of Hopf algebras.

### 3.2. Main Theorem

Recall that $`𝒞(G,\omega )`$ denotes the Drinfeld center of the category $`\text{Vec}_\omega ^G`$. Consider the cohomology class $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }=p_1^{}\omega p_2^{}\omega H^3(G\times G,^{})`$ where $`p_i:G\times GG,(g_1,g_2)g_i`$ are projections. Here is the main result of this note:

Theorem 3.2. The indecomposable module categories over the category $`𝒞(G,\omega )`$ are parametrized by the conjugacy classes of pairs $`(H,\psi )`$ where $`HG\times G`$ is a subgroup such that $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }|_H=1`$ and $`\psi H^2(H,^{})`$.

Proof. Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)G\times G`$ denote the diagonal subgroup. By Corollary 2.2 the category $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ is equivalent to the category $`𝒞(G\times G,\stackrel{~}{\omega },\mathrm{\Delta }(G),1)`$. So this Theorem is a special case of Theorem 3.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

We will denote the module category corresponding to a pair $`(H,\psi )`$ by $`(H,\psi )`$. Let us consider an action of the group $`H`$ on the set of elements of $`G`$ given by the formula $`(h_1,h_2)g=h_1gh_2^1`$. Let $`\{g_i\}_{iI}`$ be a set of representatives of all orbits under this action. For each $`g_i`$ consider a subgroup $`H^{g_i}=\{(h_1,h_2)H|h_1g_ih_2^1=g_i\}`$ of $`H`$; note that since $`h_2`$ is completely determined by the value of $`h_1`$ the group $`H^{g_i}`$ can be considered as a subgroup of $`G`$ via the first projection $`HG\times GG`$. The group $`H^{g_i}`$ has a well defined 2-cocycle

$$\psi ^{g_i}(h,h^{})=\psi ^1((h,g_ihg_i^1),(h^{},g_ih^{}g_i^1))\times $$

$$\times \frac{\omega (g_i^1,h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1},h^1)\omega (h,h^{},h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1})\omega (g_i^1h^{}g_i,g_i^1h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1},h^1)}{\omega (hh^{},h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1},h^1)\omega (g_i^1hg_i,g_i^1h^{}g_i,g_i^1h_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}h^1)}.$$

Let $`m(g_i)`$ denote the number of irreducible projective representations of the group $`H^{g_i}`$ with center acting via 2-cocycle $`\psi ^{g_i}`$.

Theorem 3.3. The rank of the category $`(H,\psi )`$ is $`_{iI}m(g_i)`$.

Proof. This is an immediate consequence of Proposition 3.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

Example 3.2. Assume that the cohomology classes $`\omega `$ and $`\psi `$ are both trivial. Then the category $`(H,1)`$ is equivalent to the category of $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$equivariant sheaves on $`G\times G/H`$.

Corollary 3.2. The fiber functors of the category $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ are classified by pairs $`(H,\psi )`$ where $`HG\times G`$ is a subgroup and $`\psi H^2(H,^{})`$ such that

1) The class $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }|_H`$ is trivial.

2) The number of double cosets $`\mathrm{\Delta }(G)G\times G/H`$ is 1.

3) The class $`\psi |_{H\mathrm{\Delta }(G)}`$ is nondegenerate, that is the twisted group algebra of $`H\mathrm{\Delta }(G)`$ with respect to the cocycle representing $`\psi |_{H\mathrm{\Delta }(G)}`$ is isomorphic to a matrix algebra.

### 3.3. Two unsolved problems

Recall that $`𝒞=𝒟(G,\omega )`$ is a modular tensor category, see e.g. . On the other hand, for a modular tensor category $`𝒞`$ one attaches a modular invariant to each module category over $`𝒞`$, see .

Problem 1. Calculate explicitly modular invariants attached to module categories over $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$.

For a braided tensor category $`𝒞`$ it makes sense to speak about commutative algebras $`A`$ in this category, see e.g. . We will say that a module category $``$ over $`𝒞`$ is of type I if $``$ is module equivalent to $`\text{Mod}_𝒞(A)`$ for a commutative algebra $`A`$ (in this case the algebra $`A`$ is uniquely determined by the module category $``$) and $``$ is of type II otherwise (this is just a translation to the language of module categories of the corresponding notions due to G. Moore and N. Seiberg for modular invariants).

Problem 2. Which module categories over $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ are of type I?

One can attach a module category of type I to any subgroup $`HG`$. Indeed the category $`\text{Rep}(G)`$ is a braided subcategory of $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ and the algebra $`A`$ of functions on $`G/H`$ is a commutative algebra in $`\text{Rep}(G)`$. But even in a simplest case $`G=S_3`$ there are some other module categories of type I, see below. It seems plausible that at least for $`\omega =1`$ the type I module categories correspond to pairs $`(H,1)`$ (so cocycle $`\psi `$ is trivial) such that $`H`$ is conjugate to a subgroup of $`G\times G`$ invariant under the permutation of factors automorphism of $`G\times G`$.

## 4. The simplest example

In this section we consider the simplest non-abelian example, the case of the group $`G=S_3`$ — the symmetric group in three letters. It is well known that in this case $`H^3(G,^{})=/6`$ (see e.g. ). For each value of $`\omega H^3(G,^{})`$ the category $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ has 8 simple objects and the same fusion rules (but the structures of monoidal categories differ). Let $`\omega _0`$ be a generator of $`H^3(G,^{})`$. It is easy to see that $`\omega _0`$ has a nonzero restriction to either of the subgroups $`/2`$, $`/3`$ of $`G=S_3`$. In this section we will use the additive notations for cohomology groups instead of the multiplicative notations used above.

### 4.1. Enumeration of subgroups of $`G\times G`$

In the table below we enumerate conjugacy classes of all subgroups of $`G\times G`$ and their 2-cocycles. The following table is self-explaining; $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ denotes the diagonal imbedding $`GG\times G`$, the subgroup $`K`$ consists of all pairs of permutations with the same parity. The subgroups $`L_1,L_2`$ are $`L_1=(/3\times e)\mathrm{\Delta }(/2)`$ and $`L_2=(e\times /3)\mathrm{\Delta }(/2)`$ (these subgroups were erroneously omitted in the published version of this note; the mistake was pointed out in ).

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ \text{notation}& H_1& H_2& H_3& H_4& H_5& H_6\\ & & & & & & \\ |H|& 1& \multicolumn{3}{c}{2}& \multicolumn{2}{c}{3}\\ & & & & & & \\ H& e\times e& /2\times e& e\times /2& \mathrm{\Delta }(/2)& /3\times e& e\times /3\\ & & & & & & \\ H^2(H,^{})& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ \text{notation}& H_7& H_8& H_9& H_{10}& H_{11}& H_{12}\\ & & & & & & \\ |H|& 3& 4& \multicolumn{4}{c}{6}\\ & & & & & & \\ H& \mathrm{\Delta }(/3)& /2\times /2& S_3\times e& e\times S_3& \mathrm{\Delta }(S_3)& /2\times /3\\ & & & & & & \\ H^2(H,^{})& 0& /2& 0& 0& 0& 0\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}& & & & & \\ \text{notation}& H_{13}& H_{14}& H_{15}& H_{16}& \\ & & & & & \\ |H|& 6& 9& \multicolumn{2}{c}{12}& \\ & & & & & \\ H& /3\times /2& /3\times /3& S_3\times /2& /2\times S_3& \\ & & & & & \\ H^2(H,^{})& 0& /3& /2& /2& \end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ \text{notation}& H_{17}& H_{18}& H_{19}& H_{20}& H_{21}& H_{22}\\ & & & & & & \\ |H|& \multicolumn{3}{c}{18}& 36& 6& 6\\ & & & & & & \\ H& S_3\times /3& /3\times S_3& K& S_3\times S_3& L_1& L_2\\ & & & & & & \\ H^2(H,^{})& 0& 0& /3& /2& 0& 0\end{array}$$

### 4.2. Module categories

We say that the subgroup $`H`$ is admissible for a 3-cocycle $`\omega `$ if $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }|_H`$ (see Theorem 3.2) is trivial. It is clear that any subgroup is admissible for $`\omega =0`$ and in this case the category $`𝒟(G,\omega )`$ has 28 indecomposable module categories (in both cases when $`H^2(H,^{})=/3`$ two nontrivial 2-cocycles are permuted by the action of the normalizer of $`H`$); if $`\omega =\pm \omega _0`$ then the admissible subgroups are $`H_1`$, $`H_4`$, $`H_7`$, $`H_{11}`$ and we have 4 indecomposable module categories; if $`\omega =\pm 2\omega _0`$ then the admissible subgroups are $`H_1`$, $`H_2`$, $`H_3`$, $`H_4`$, $`H_7`$, $`H_8`$, $`H_{11}`$ and we have 8 indecomposable module categories; finally if $`\omega =3\omega _0`$ then the admissible subgroups are $`H_1`$, $`H_4`$, $`H_5`$, $`H_6`$, $`H_7`$, $`H_{11}`$, $`H_{14}`$, $`H_{19},H_{21},H_{22}`$ and we have 12 indecomposable module categories. The following table gives the number of simple objects in module categories in all cases (note that the rank of module categories does not depend on 2 and 3-cocycles involved since the possible groups $`H^g=e,/2,/3,S_3`$ have trivial second cohomology, so we present results only for $`\omega =0`$; in the other cases one just needs to erase some columns).

$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{subgroup}& H_1& H_2& H_3& H_4& H_5& H_6& H_7& H_8& H_9& H_{10}& H_{11}\\ & & & & & & & & & & & \\ |\mathrm{\Delta }(G)G\times G/H|& 6& 3& 3& 4& 2& 2& 4& 2& 1& 1& 3\\ & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{rank of}& 6& 3& 3& 6& 2& 2& 10& 3& 1& 1& 8\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{cccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{subgroup}& H_{12}& H_{13}& H_{14}& H_{15}& H_{16}& H_{17}& H_{18}& H_{19}& H_{20}& H_{21}& H_{22}\\ & & & & & & & & & & & \\ |\mathrm{\Delta }(G)G\times G/H|& 1& 1& 2& 1& 1& 1& 1& 2& 1& 2& 2\\ & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{rank of}& 1& 1& 6& 2& 2& 3& 3& 6& 3& 4& 4\end{array}$$

So in particular we see that the untwisted double of $`S_3`$ has 4 fiber functors and all the twisted doubles have no fiber functors.

### 4.3. Modular invariants

In this section we assume that $`\omega =0`$ and give a list of modular invariants attached to the module categories above. The list of modular invariants for this case was worked out in  3.3 (unfortunately the list in a published vesrion of  is incomplete and I am grateful to the authors of  for providing me with a complete list consisting of 48 invariants). Below we are using the notations for the simple objects of $`𝒟(S_3,1)`$ from : if we identify $`𝒟(S_3,1)`$ with the category of $`S_3`$equivariant sheaves on $`S_3`$ with respect to the action by conjugations then indices 0,1,2 mark objects living on the unit, 0 corresponds to the trivial representation, 1 to the sign representation, 2 to the 2-dimensional irreducible representation of $`S_3`$; indices 3,4,5 mark objects living on the conjugacy class of 3-cycles, 3 corresponds to the trivial representation and 4,5 to two nontrivial one dimensional representations of $`/3`$; indices 6,7 mark objects living in the conjugacy class of 2-cycles, 6 corresponds to the trivial and 7 to the nontrivial irreducible representations of $`/2`$. One can compute the modular invariants attached to the module categories above in the following way: first compute the ranks of the module categories $``$ (this was done above) and of the dual categories $`𝒞^{}`$ (= the rank of the category of $`(A(H,\psi ),A(H,\psi ))`$bimodules; see the tables below, where $`H`$ denotes the module category corresponding to a pair $`(H,1)`$ and $`H^{tw}`$ denotes the module category corresponding to a pair $`(H,\psi )`$ where $`\psi `$ is a nontrivial 2-cocycle):

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{subgroup}& H_1& H_2& H_3& H_4& H_5& H_6& H_7& H_8& H_8^{tw}& H_9& H_{10}& H_{11}\\ & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{rank of}𝒞^{}& 36& 18& 18& 12& 36& 36& 20& 9& 9& 18& 18& 8\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccccccccccc}& & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{subgroup}& H_{12}& H_{13}& H_{14}& H_{14}^{tw}& H_{15}& H_{15}^{tw}& H_{16}& H_{16}^{tw}& H_{17}& H_{18}\\ & & & & & & & & & & \\ \text{rank of}𝒞^{}& 18& 18& 36& 20& 9& 9& 9& 9& 18& 18\end{array}$$

$$\begin{array}{ccccccc}& & & & & & \\ \text{subgroup}& H_{19}& H_{19}^{tw}& H_{20}& H_{20}^{tw}& H_{21}& H_{22}\\ & & & & & & \\ \text{rank of}𝒞^{}& 12& 8& 9& 9& 12& 12\end{array}$$

On the other hand the ranks of $``$ and of $`𝒞^{}`$ can (at least conjecturaly) be computed from the modular invariants, see e.g.  Claims 5.3 and 5.4. Now comparing the lists of the module categories and of the modular invariants one gets some information (unfortunately incomplete, we can not distinguish for example $`H_2`$ and $`H_{17}`$ from this information) on the correpondence between them. We conjecture that the table below (obtained using the above information plus some heuristics) gives correct correspondence between module categories and modular invariants.

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& & & \\ H_1& |\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2|^2& H_{15}& (\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)^{}\\ & & & \\ H_2& (\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)^{}& H_{15}^{tw}& (\chi _0+\chi _3)(\chi _0+\chi _2)^{}+\chi _1\chi _6^{}+\\ & & & \\ H_3& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)(\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)^{}& & +\chi _3\chi _6^{}+\chi _6\chi _1^{}+\chi _6\chi _2^{}+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_4& |\chi _0+\chi _2|^2+|\chi _1+\chi _2|^2+& H_{16}& (\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)^{}\\ & & & \\ & +|\chi _6|^2+|\chi _7|^2& H_{16}^{tw}& (\chi _0+\chi _2)(\chi _0+\chi _3)^{}+\chi _1\chi _6^{}+\\ & & & \\ H_5& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)^{}& & +\chi _2\chi _6^{}+\chi _6\chi _1^{}+\chi _6\chi _3^{}+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_6& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)^{}& H_{17}& (\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)^{}\\ & & & \\ H_7& |\chi _0+\chi _1|^2+2|\chi _2|^2+2|\chi _3|^2+& H_{18}& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)(\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)^{}\\ & & & \\ & +2|\chi _4|^2+2|\chi _5|^2& H_{19}& |\chi _0+\chi _3|^2+|\chi _1+\chi _3|^2+\\ & & & \\ H_8& |\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6|^2& & +|\chi _6|^2+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_8^{tw}& |\chi _0+\chi _2|^2+\chi _1\chi _6^{}+\chi _2\chi _6^{}+& H_{19}^{tw}& |\chi _0|^2+|\chi _1|^2+\chi _2\chi _3^{}+\chi _3\chi _2^{}\\ & +\chi _6\chi _1^{}+\chi _6\chi _2^{}+|\chi _7|^2& & +|\chi _4|^2+|\chi _5|^2+|\chi _6|^2+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_9& (\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)^{}& H_{20}& |\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6|^2\\ & & & \\ H_{10}& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _2)(\chi _0+\chi _3+\chi _6)^{}& H_{20}^{tw}& |\chi _0+\chi _3|^2+\chi _1\chi _6^{}+\chi _3\chi _6^{}+\\ & & & \\ H_{11}& |\chi _0|^2+|\chi _1|^2+|\chi _2|^2+|\chi _3|^2+& & +\chi _6\chi _1^{}+\chi _6\chi _3^{}+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ & +|\chi _4|^2+|\chi _5|^2+|\chi _6|^2+|\chi _7|^2& H_{21}& (\chi _0+\chi _3)(\chi _0+\chi _2)^{}+|\chi _6|^2+\\ & & & \\ H_{12}& (\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)(\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)^{}& & (\chi _1+\chi _3)(\chi _1+\chi _2)^{}+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_{13}& (\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3)(\chi _0+\chi _2+\chi _6)^{}& H_{22}& (\chi _0+\chi _2)(\chi _0+\chi _3)^{}+|\chi _6|^2+\\ & & & \\ H_{14}& |\chi _0+\chi _1+2\chi _3|^2& & (\chi _1+\chi _2)(\chi _1+\chi _3)^{}+|\chi _7|^2\\ & & & \\ H_{14}^{tw}& |\chi _0+\chi _1|^2+2\chi _2\chi _3^{}+2\chi _3\chi _2^{}+& & \\ & +2|\chi _4|^2+2|\chi _5|^2& & \end{array}$$