text:
# Chiral restoration from pionic atoms?

## 1 Introduction

The value of the quark condensate $`<\overline{q}q>`$ plays an important role in chiral dynamics . In the presence of a nuclear medium the value of the condensate drops as a function of the density and the linear terms in the nuclear density $`\rho `$ have been derived with different formalisms. In Refs.  the Hellmann–Feynman theorem is used, a mean field approach is used in Refs.  and the Nambu–Jona–Lasinio model is used in Refs. . The different formalisms lead to identical results in the terms linear in the baryon density, $`\rho `$, giving at zero temperature

$$\frac{<\overline{q}q>_\rho }{<\overline{q}q>_{\rho =0}}=1\frac{\sigma _N}{m_\pi ^2f_\pi ^2}\rho +\mathrm{}$$
(1)
where $`\sigma _N`$ is the pion-nucleon sigma term.

Assuming that the Gellmann–Oakes–Renner (GOR) relationship holds, at zero temperature, for finite baryon density ,,, one gets for the in-medium pion decay constant, $`f_\pi (\rho )`$, defined from the time component of the axial current111Note that there exists a breaking of covariance because of the nuclear medium which leads to different renormalization of the space and time components of the axial vector current.,

$$f_\pi ^2(\rho )=\frac{m_q}{m_{\pi }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}<\overline{q}q>_\rho +\mathrm{}$$
(2)
to leading order in the average quark mass $`m_q=\frac{1}{2}(m_u+m_d)`$, where $`<\overline{q}q>_\rho `$ now stands for the $`\rho `$dependent condensate $`<\overline{u}u+\overline{d}d>_\rho `$. Besides $`m_\pi ^{}`$ stands for the pion mass in the medium. Thus, the dropping of the condensate for finite densities is interpreted as a dropping of the pion decay constant $`f_\pi (\rho )`$, leading to the phenomenon of partial chiral restoration  in the nuclear medium.

This dropping of the pion decay constant was used in Ref.  to suggest that it could solve the long standing puzzle of the missing repulsion in the $`s`$wave pion selfenergy: it might account for the discrepancy between theoretical predictions for that part of the pion optical potential and the strength demanded by fits to pionic atoms data . The idea behind Ref.  is that the isovector $`\pi N`$ scattering length, $`b_1`$, involving the factor $`f_\pi ^2`$, will be enhanced in the nucleus222Similar effect will also occur for the isoscalar $`\pi N`$ scattering length, $`b_0`$, but in Ref.  such an effect is neglected because of the very small value of $`b_0`$ deduced from pionic hydrogen and deuterium ., renormalizing both the isovector part of the $`s`$wave pion selfenergy, proportional to $`b_1`$, as well as the isoscalar part from the Pauli blocking rescattering correction, , which is proportional to $`b_0^2+2b_1^2`$.

A more detailed study was done recently in Ref.  where conducting fits to the pionic atoms data and re-scaling the $`b_1`$ free parameter by the ratio $`(f_\pi /f_\pi (\rho ))^2`$, an improved agreement with the data was obtained. The agreement became excellent, without invoking any other extra repulsion, when the relativistic corrections of Ref.  were also included. However, the relativistic corrections of Ref.  were found to be ambiguous in Ref.  and another study  showed that they were a consequence of approximations which broke the exact cancellation of some large terms, and no correction was found when the exact calculation was done. Leaving apart these relativistic corrections, the fact still would remain that the renormalization of $`b_1`$ would generate a considerable part of the missing repulsion, leading the author of Ref.  to claim that the data of pionic atoms offered an evidence of partial chiral restoration in nuclei.

The problem is more subtle than just replacing the value of $`b_1`$. Actually, changing the $`s`$wave real part of the optical potential is justified if one might argue that the replacement of $`f_\pi `$ by $`f_\pi (\rho )`$ is done at the level of the in–medium Chiral Lagrangian. But, then the changes in the $`f_\pi `$ parameter should be implemented in a theoretical calculation wherever this parameter appears. This reminds us that this parameter actually appears not only in the $`b_0\rho ,b_1\delta \rho `$ and the Pauli blocking rescattering terms mentioned in Ref. , but in all terms of the optical potential, including the $`p`$wave part of the potential, and more importantly, all the absorption terms333 There is also another point worth mentioning since in the pion absorption terms  the $`\pi N`$ amplitude appears half off-shell, with the off-shell pion with an energy of $`m_\pi /2`$ and a momentum of $`\sqrt{m_\pi M_N}=360`$ MeV approximately. Although we do not expect drastic changes with this moderate off-shellness, the renormalization of $`b_1`$ in this amplitude could be different than that for on–shell pions . However, this problem also appears in the Pauli corrected rescattering term mentioned above, which provides the main source of $`s`$wave repulsion when the renormalization of $`b_1`$ is done. Indeed, the derivation of this term in a many body framework was done in , Fig. 22 and Eq. (A7), and it was shown to come from rescattering terms implicit in a Lippmann Schwinger equation when the Pauli blocking in the intermediate nucleon states was considered. In this rescattering term one can see (Eq. (A7) of ) that the term also involves the half off-shell $`\pi N`$ amplitude with the off-shell pion with a four-momentum $`(q^0,q)`$ such that $`m_\pi E_F<q^0<m_\pi +E_F`$ and $`0<q<2k_F`$, where $`E_F`$ and $`k_F`$ are the Fermi energy and momentum respectively. One can thus see that the level of off-shellness is similar in the rescattering term and in the absorption terms. , which go like $`f_\pi ^6`$. We will show that this scenario is strongly disfavoured by the pionic atom data. These findings are corroborated by the recent works of Ref. , where a new mode of chiral restoration is suggested in which the longitudinal $`\rho `$ would be the chiral partner of the pion and both would become massless in the limit of chiral symmetry restoration. These works show that the parameter $`f_\pi `$ appearing in Eq. (2) and the one that appears in the chiral Lagrangians when performing perturbation theory calculations with them, let us call it $`\widehat{f}_\pi `$, are not the same object. They would be the same at tree level, but, as soon as perturbation theory is performed, $`\widehat{f}_\pi `$ becomes explicitly dependent on the scale of renormalization and is not equal to zero even in the limit of chiral restoration where $`f_\pi `$ appearing in Eq. (2) would vanish. This line of thought about the inadequacy of using the constant $`f_\pi `$ that one induces from the GOR relation as the coupling constant in a perturbative approach, is in accordance with our ideas expressed below, where we give different arguments on why the identification of these two objects in a many body microscopic calculation would lead to doublecounting.

In the present work we shall explore the consequences of replacing $`f_\pi `$ by $`f_\pi (\rho )`$ in all the terms where it appears in a theoretical evaluation of the pion selfenergy 444 At this point, it is of interest to remind that the derivation of the renormalization of $`f_\pi `$ is linked to the renormalization of the axial vector current. The links to the renormalization of $`f_\pi `$ appearing in the $`s`$ and $`p`$waves of the $`\pi N`$ scattering amplitudes are not so clear from the way the derivation of $`f_\pi (\rho )`$ is done, and does not have to be the same for $`s`$ or $`p`$waves . . For the purpose of completeness we shall also investigate what happens in the case where the modifications are done in the $`s`$wave but not in the $`p`$wave parts. However, while the idea of changing $`f_\pi `$ by its medium value, everywhere that it appears, seems reasonable with the caveats pointed above, it is also true that one has to look in detail in the elements of the theoretical derivation of the potential to avoid double-counting in the case that the many body approach already contains the renormalization mechanisms that would lead to the quenching of the $`f_\pi `$ parameter555 It is worth mentioning that studies of the renormalization of the axial current in nuclei, using standard many body theory with effective Lagrangians, have been done both for the space component  as well as for the time component . .

The point we would like to make here is that while in the chiral studies the interpretation of the renormalization of the axial vector current as a change of the pion decay constant in the medium is a valid option, the standard many body approach in which the currents are renormalized using effective Lagrangians and the pions are renormalized in the medium using the same Lagrangians is also a valid option, but then one cannot reinterpret the renormalization of the axial vector current in terms of a change of the pion decay constant, recast the terms obtained for the pion selfenergy in terms of this decay constant and change it in all terms where it appears. A consistent many body approach using effective Lagrangians, as done for instance in  would be a valid approach by itself.

In this sense it is also interesting to mention that in the recent study of Ref.  the corrections to the space part of the pion decay constant were related to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ excitations induced from the axial current, thus connecting with the findings of Refs.  where a conventional many body expansion, including nucleon and isobar degrees of freedom, was done. These are also the degrees of freedom used in  to evaluate the pion selfenergy.

All this said, the purpose of the present paper is to investigate, in the line of Ref. , what would happen if we ignore the points discussed above and simply change $`f_\pi `$ by $`f_\pi (\rho )`$ in all the terms of the microscopic many body calculation of Ref. . The exercise is illustrative because although there might seem that pionic atoms are just governed mostly by the $`s`$wave optical potential, this is not actually the case and the $`p`$wave potential, as well as the absorption terms, responsible for the width of the pionic states, play also a very important role .

## 2 Results

We analyze in this section, the partial chiral restoration effect on the theoretical description of the pionic atom data. We base this study on our previous and detailed work of Ref.  and use the same set of experimental pionic shifts and widths as in this reference. There is a total of 61 piece of data. We present in Table 1 the values of $`\chi ^2/N`$, where $`N=61`$ is the number of data, obtained with two different optical potentials (II and III) modified to somehow account for the change of the pion decay constant in the medium, together with the value obtained with the theoretical potential (I) developed in Ref. .

More specifically, potential I in Table 1 corresponds to the potential TH of Ref. , defined in Eqs. (20-30) and (34-36) of that reference for the $`p`$ and $`s`$wave parts of the optical potential. For the $`s`$wave term the TH potential uses

$$b_0=0.013m_\pi ^1b_1=0.092m_\pi ^1\mathrm{Im}B_0=0.041m_\pi ^4$$
(3)
where $`b_0`$ and $`b_1`$ were taken from the experimental analysis of Ref.  and $`\mathrm{Im}B_0`$ computed in Ref. . The potential (TH) has been developed microscopically and it contains the ordinary lowest order optical potential pieces constructed from the $`s`$– and $`p`$–wave $`\pi N`$ amplitudes. In addition second order terms in both $`s`$– and $`p`$–waves, responsible for pion absorption, are also considered. Standard corrections, as second-order Pauli re-scattering term, ATT term, Lorentz–Lorenz effect and long and short range nuclear correlations, are also taken into account. This theoretical potential reproduces fairly well the data of pionic atoms (binding energies and strong absorption widths)  and low energy $`\pi `$-nucleus scattering .

In the potential II we take for the $`p`$wave part that of potential I, but the $`s`$wave part is modified following the prescription of Ref. . Thus, we replace $`b_0,b_1`$ and $`\mathrm{Im}B_0`$ by $`F_\chi \times b_0,F_\chi \times b_1`$ and $`F_\chi ^3\times \mathrm{Im}B_0`$ respectively, where $`F_\chi `$ can be deduced from Eqs. (1) and (2),

$$F_\chi =F_\chi (\rho )=\left(\frac{f_\pi }{f_\pi (\rho )}\right)^2\frac{1}{1\sigma _N\rho /(f_\pi ^2m_\pi ^2)}=\frac{1}{12.3\mathrm{fm}^3\rho }$$
(4)
for $`\sigma _N=50`$ MeV and neglecting the in-medium pion mass change because of its Goldstone boson nature. Note that $`F_\chi (\rho )`$ depends on the spatial coordinate $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ in the local density approach which we use for the optical potential. In potential III we modified both $`s`$ and $`p`$wave parts of the pion-nucleus optical potential. Thus, in addition to the changes mentioned above for the $`s`$wave, in the computation of the $`p`$wave part we have replaced the $`\pi NN`$ and $`\pi N\mathrm{\Delta }`$ coupling constants, $`f`$ and $`f^{}`$ in the notation of Ref. , by $`\sqrt{F_\chi }\times f`$ and $`\sqrt{F_\chi }\times f^{}`$ respectively666For the case of the in medium $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$selfenergy, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$, for which no explicit expression in terms of the $`f`$ and $`f^{}`$ coupling constants is given in Ref. , we have corrected only the leading $`\rho `$ behaviour, this is to say, we have multiplied $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ by $`F_\chi ^2`$. Thus, for the imaginary part, we have not modified the saturation coefficient appearing in the argument of the arc-tan parametrization of Eq. (11) of .. Note that, because of the non-local nature of the $`p`$wave part, first and second order derivatives of $`F_\chi (\rho )`$ are needed. Neglecting those derivatives lead to negative widths of the pionic atoms.

The results of Table 1 clearly contradict the expectations of Ref. , corroborated in Ref. , of finding a signal of partial chiral restoration in nuclei from pionic atom data.

To better understand the results presented in Table 1, one should bear in mind that the real part of the $`s`$ and $`p`$wave contributions to the pion-nucleon optical potential are repulsive and attractive, respectively, and the fact that $`F_\chi `$ is a number greater than one for all densities, i.e., the effect of the partial chiral restoration is to increase, in absolute value, the size of each part ($`s`$ and $`p`$waves) of the potential. Thus, the potential II is more repulsive than the potential I. The main source of the enhancement of the repulsion in the $`s`$wave part of the potential is through the increase of the Pauli blocking rescattering term, which is of isoscalar nature and goes, as quoted above, as $`b_0^2+2b_1^2`$. Besides, the imaginary part of the potential II is substantially bigger in absolute value than that of the potential I, since it gets multiplied by a factor $`F_\chi ^3`$. Thus, we see in the table that the shifts of potential II are clearly worse than those obtained with the potential I. The same occurs for the widths, those of potential II are bigger than the experimental ones, but the effect is not as drastic as one might expect since the potential II is more repulsive than the potential I and thus the effective densities seen by the pion for the potential II case are smaller than those relevant when the interaction I is used. When the partial chiral restoration effects are also incorporated to the $`p`$wave, potential III, the shifts are improved respect to the potential II case. This is because there is a cancellation between the increase of repulsion and attraction generated by the inclusion of the chiral effects in each wave of the optical potential. However, the potential III has an imaginary part too big, a fact which is clearly appreciated in the table ($`\chi _\mathrm{\Gamma }^2/N_\mathrm{\Gamma }=112`$).

However, a word of caution must be said now. The recent determination of the isovector and isoscalar $`\pi N`$ scattering lengths, $`b_1`$ and $`b_0`$, in Ref.

$$b_0=0.0001_{0.0021}^{+0.0009}m_\pi ^1b_1=0.0885_{0.0021}^{+0.0010}m_\pi ^1$$
(5)
is incompatible, specially for $`b_0`$, with that of Ref.  quoted in Eq. (3). When one uses the central values of $`b_1`$ and $`b_0`$ given above, to re-compute $`\mathrm{Im}B_0`$, following the lines of Ref. , one gets

$$\mathrm{Im}B_0=0.0345m_\pi ^4$$
(6)
These new values ( Eqs. (5) and (6)) for the $`s`$wave part of the optical potential lead to the results presented in Tables 2 and 3. Neither potential I nor potentials II and III provide an acceptable description of the data. For the interaction I case, the main effect is the important reduction of the $`s`$wave repulsion which leads to a poorer description of binding energies and to greater effective densities felt by the pion than in the case presented in Table 1. This latter effect increases, in absolute value, the imaginary part of the optical potential. On the other hand the smaller value of the parameter $`\mathrm{Im}B_0`$ in Eq. (6) than in Eq. (3) reduces, in absolute value, the imaginary part. The total effect depends on the pionic level ($`nl`$ and nucleus) considered. Partial chiral restoration effects incorporated in potential II increase the repulsion and lead to an acceptable description of the shifts, but the increase in the imaginary part, in absolute value, produces an unacceptable description of the widths. The results presented in Ref.  correspond to a situation like that of the potential II in Table 2 but where the imaginary part of the $`s`$wave optical potential is not being affected by this partial chiral restoration. While this could be an acceptable procedure from the fitting point of view, is not satisfactory from a theoretical or microscopical point of view. In any case, we have simulated this scenery by the potential II, which only scale by the chiral factor $`F_\chi `$ the dispersive real part of the $`s`$–wave potential. This potential II is the one providing the best description without any fitted parameter, as can be seen in Table 2, with also a large value of $`\chi ^2/N`$=12. Finally, potential III provides really poor results: imaginary parts, in absolute values, are too big while the potential turns out to be too attractive, once the partial chiral restoration enhancement of the $`p`$wave potential is also considered. We consider adding a phenomenological fitted part to the previous potentials I and III as done in . The results obtained are shown in rows Ifit and IIIfit of Table 3. For potential Ifit, the fitted parameters are $`\delta b_0=0.0207(10)m_\pi ^1,\delta b_1=0.0163(60)m_\pi ^1,\delta ImB_0=0.0152(17)m_\pi ^4,\delta c_0=0.045(10)m_\pi ^3,\delta c_1=0.092(51)m_\pi ^3,\delta ImC_0=0.128(23)m_\pi ^6`$. For potential IIIfit, the fitted parameters are $`\delta b_0=0.0235(12)m_\pi ^1,\delta b_1=0.0201(64)m_\pi ^1,\delta ImB_0=0.0455(24)m_\pi ^4,\delta c_0=0.078(14)m_\pi ^3,\delta c_1=0.040(56)m_\pi ^3,\delta ImC_0=0.212(36)m_\pi ^6`$.

The results of the fits are instructive. In both cases we can see that there is a need for extra $`s`$wave repulsion in the demanded value of $`\delta b_0`$, similar in both cases, and around a value 50 percent bigger than the repulsion provided by the old value of $`b_0`$, Eq. (3). On the other hand, while from the fit Ifit the data demand a value for $`b_1`$ about 16 percent bigger in size that the free value, the results of IIIfit are telling us that that the renormalization of $`f_\pi `$ provides an effective value of $`b_1`$ about 20 percent larger than demanded by the data. The effects on $`ImB_0`$ are more striking. While the data would demand a value about 30 percent bigger than the one provided by the theoretical potential I, the effectively renormalized value of $`ImB_0`$ in potential III requires a reduction three times bigger. These results are thus telling us again that largely renormalized values of $`b_1`$ are not welcome by the data. Particularly, the values of $`ImB_0`$ that are obtained after multiplying by $`F_\chi ^3`$ the theoretical value of $`ImB_0`$ are far too large.

## 3 Conclusions

The idea expressed here is that, without questioning the dropping of the pion decay constant in a nuclear medium, a systematic many body expansion using effective Lagrangians, consistent with present knowledge of $`\chi PT`$ and incorporating explicitly the elements which go into the counter-terms of $`\chi PT`$, ( for instance $`\mathrm{\Delta }h`$ excitations), already incorporates the mechanisms responsible for the dropping of $`f_\pi `$ in the medium and, hence, this explicit renormalization should not be considered in addition to avoid double-counting.

It should also be stated that efforts were made to solve the puzzle of the missing repulsion and several small corrections were found to the $`s`$wave selfenergy, among them corrections of second order in the density from dispersion corrections linked to the $`s`$wave pion absorption , from the pion scattering with the virtual pion cloud in the nucleus  and from a Lorentz- Lorenz correction to the $`s`$wave rescattering terms , such that taking into account all the different effects and their errors there was only moderate room for extra $`s`$wave repulsion . Of course, the new data for the $`b_0`$ parameter have reduced a source of $`s`$wave repulsion provided by the old data of  and have worsened the problem, such that we can say that with the values of the scattering lengths provided by the recent data of pionic hydrogen  the problem of the missing repulsion in pionic atoms would be reopened.

The fits conducted, before and after the renormalization of $`f_\pi `$ is done, are also telling us that the strong renormalization of $`b_1`$ provided by this idea is not welcome by the data. Particularly the value for $`ImB_0`$ which is multiplied by $`F_\chi ^3`$.

All together the conclusions of this paper seem clear: First, that more theoretical work needs to be done to understand the meaning of the dropping of the pion decay constant and how it could have a repercussion in the renormalization of the $`\pi N`$, $`\pi NN`$, etc., amplitudes in the nuclear medium within a determined many body scheme. And second, that it is quite important to settle the question of the precise values of the $`\pi N`$ scattering lengths, so that the present discrepancy between the results from pionic hydrogen and from scattering data, reminiscent of the one that remained for long in the $`K^{}p`$ problem, and which was finally settled in , should be resolved. In this respect it is interesting to mention that efforts in this direction are presently underway. As an example the recent paper , which makes a combined analysis of pionic hydrogen and deuterium data, advocates for values of the $`b_0`$ parameter of the order of $``$0.004 $`m_\pi ^1`$, which are much bigger in strength than the value quoted here in Eq. (5). Should however results of the order of those used in Eq. (5) prevail, then it is clear that there is an important missing $`s`$wave repulsion which again will require renewed theoretical efforts to be understood.

### Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge some useful discussions with J.A. Oller and useful comments from W. Weise and E. Friedman. This work is partly supported by DGICYT contract number BFM2000-1326, by DGES contract number PB98-1367, by the Junta de Andalucia and by the EU TMR network Eurodaphne, contract no. ERBFMRX-CT98-0169.


format: text

text:
# Self-consistent Green function approach for calculations of electronic structure in transition metals

## I Figure captions

Fig 1 The diagram representation of: a) exchange energy, (b) ”bubble” set with vertex corrections for the polarization operator, (c) exchange diagram of second order (d) exchange T-matrix set. The integration contour and pole positions in the complex energy plane are shown in (e).

Fig 2. The energy dependence of the real and imaginary parts of the polarization operator with $`l=2`$ on the real axis (a). The same for the polarization operator and effective interaction $`V_{eff}=_lD_lZ_l/Z`$ on the imaginary axis (b).

Fig 3. The energy dependence of the partial components of self-energy in ferromagnetic Fe: (a) the real part and (b) absolute value of imaginary part.

Fig 4. The density of states in bcc Fe for the majority (solid) and minority (dashed) spin states.


text:
# Formes linéaires en polyzêtas et intégrales multiples

## 1 Introduction

Après la démonstration de l’irrationalité de $`\zeta (3)`$ par Apéry , plusieurs variantes ont été proposées, parmi lesquelles celles de Beukers  et Sorokin . Dans ces deux preuves, les formes linéaires en 1 et $`\zeta (3)`$ sont écrites comme des intégrales triples :

$$B(N)=_{[0,1]^3}\frac{x^N(1x)^Ny^N(1y)^Nz^N(1z)^N}{(1z(1y(1x)))^{N+1}}dxdydz$$

pour Beukers, et

$$S(N)=_{[0,1]^3}\frac{x^N(1x)^Ny^N(1y)^Nz^N(1z)^N}{(1xy)^{N+1}(1xyz)^{N+1}}dxdydz$$

pour Sorokin. Or ces formes linéaires coïncident. Si on croit à la philosophie des périodes , l’égalité de ces intégrales doit pouvoir se démontrer par une suite de changements de variables et d’applications des règles d’additivité (par rapport à l’intégrande ou au domaine) et du théorème de Stokes. En l’occurrence, un seul changement de variables suffit (voir le théorème 2.1).

Les intégrales $`B(N)`$ ont été généralisées par Vasilyev , qui pose $`\delta _k(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)=1x_k\delta _{k1}(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)`$ pour $`n2`$ et $`k\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ avec $`\delta _0=1`$, et considère

$$_{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^nx_k^N(1x_k)^N}{\delta _n(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)^{N+1}}dx_1\mathrm{}dx_n.$$
(1)
Il démontre que pour $`N=0`$ cette intégrale est un multiple rationnel de $`\zeta (n)`$, et  que pour $`n=5`$ (respectivement $`n=4`$) et $`N`$ quelconque c’est une forme linéaire en 1, $`\zeta (3)`$ et $`\zeta (5)`$ (respectivement 1, $`\zeta (2)`$ et $`\zeta (4)`$). Il conjecture que pour tous $`n`$ et $`N`$ on obtient une forme linéaire en 1 et les valeurs de $`\zeta `$ aux entiers compris entre 2 et $`n`$ ayant la même parité que $`n`$.

D’autre part, les intégrales $`S(N)`$ sont à rapprocher de celles que Sorokin introduit  en relation avec $`\zeta (2,2,\mathrm{},2)`$, quand $`n=2r`$ est pair :

$$_{[0,1]^n}\frac{(y_1y_2)^{rN+(r1)}(y_3y_4)^{(r1)N+(r2)}\mathrm{}(y_{n1}y_n)^N_{k=1}^n(1y_k)^N}{_{k\{2,\mathrm{},n\}\mathrm{pair}}(1y_1y_2\mathrm{}y_k)^{N+1}}dy_1\mathrm{}dy_n.$$
(2)
Dans la section 2 ci-dessous, on définit deux familles d’intégrales, qui généralisent $`B(N)`$ et (1) d’une part, $`S(N)`$ et (2) d’autre part, et on montre que ces deux familles se correspondent par un changement de variables. On montre en outre qu’un groupe agit sur ces intégrales, de manière analogue à ce que Rhin et Viola considèrent (, ) pour obtenir les meilleures mesures d’irrationalité connues pour $`\zeta (2)`$ et $`\zeta (3)`$. À la section 3, on définit une autre famille d’intégrales $`n`$-uples, qui généralise (1) et sur laquelle agit aussi un groupe ; on retrouve alors dans les cas particuliers $`n=2`$ et $`n=3`$ les groupes obtenus par Rhin et Viola.

On adopte la définition suivante :

###### Définition 1.1

On dit qu’une famille de nombres $`I(\underset{¯}{p})_+^{}\{\mathrm{}\}`$, paramétrés par $`\underset{¯}{p}^s`$, admet pour groupe de Rhin-Viola un sous-groupe $`G`$ de $`\mathrm{GL}_s()`$ si $`I(g\underset{¯}{p})/I(\underset{¯}{p})`$ est un rationnel non nul pour tous $`gG`$ et $`\underset{¯}{p}^s`$ (avec $`\mathrm{}/\mathrm{}=1`$).

Dans ce texte, on considère des familles d’intégrales $`n`$-uples dont les valeurs (lorsqu’elles sont finies) sont conjecturalement des formes linéaires sur $``$ en les polyzêtas de poids au plus $`n`$. On peut espérer que, pour de bons choix des exposants $`\underset{¯}{p}`$, ces intégrales soient assez petites et qu’on ait un contrôle sur le dénominateur des coefficients de la forme linéaire. Alors l’étude de la valuation $`p`$-adique des nombres $`I(g\underset{¯}{p})/I(\underset{¯}{p})`$, quand $`g`$ parcourt $`G`$ et $`p`$ un certain ensemble de nombres premiers, peut permettre d’améliorer ce contrôle du dénominateur, donc de raffiner des mesures d’irrationalité ou d’indépendance linéaire de certains polyzêtas.

Davantage de détails, en particulier sur l’action des groupes de Rhin-Viola, seront donnés dans .

## 2 Une généralisation commune des intégrales de Vasilyev et de Sorokin

Dans tout ce texte, $`n`$ désigne un entier supérieur ou égal à 2.

Pour $`k\{0,\mathrm{},n\}`$ et $`\underset{¯}{x}=(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)[0,1]^n`$ on pose $`D_k(\underset{¯}{x})=_{j=0}^k(1)^jx_nx_{n1}\mathrm{}x_{nj+1}`$. On a alors $`D_0(\underset{¯}{x})=1`$, $`D_1(\underset{¯}{x})=1x_n`$, $`D_2(\underset{¯}{x})=1x_n(1x_{n1})`$ et $`D_n(\underset{¯}{x})=\delta _n(\underset{¯}{x})`$. À tout $`\underset{¯}{p}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n,b_1,\mathrm{},b_n,c_2,\mathrm{},c_n)^{3n1}`$ on associe l’intégrale (éventuellement infinie)

$$J(\underset{¯}{p})=_{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^nx_k^{a_k}(1x_k)^{b_k}}{_{k=2}^nD_k(\underset{¯}{x})^{c_k}}\frac{_{k\{2,\mathrm{},n2\}\text{pair }}D_k(\underset{¯}{x})}{_{k\{3,\mathrm{},n1\}\text{impair }}D_k(\underset{¯}{x})}\frac{\mathrm{d}x_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}x_n}{D_n(\underset{¯}{x})}.$$

Par ailleurs, à tout $`\underset{¯}{P}=(A_1,\mathrm{},A_n,B_1,\mathrm{},B_n,C_2,\mathrm{},C_n)^{3n1}`$ on associe

$$K(\underset{¯}{P})=_{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^ny_k^{A_k}(1y_k)^{B_k}}{_{k=2}^n(1y_1y_2\mathrm{}y_k)^{C_k+1}}dy_1\mathrm{}dy_n.$$

Cette intégrale est finie si, et seulement si, on a $`_{k=2}^n(C_kB_k)^+B_1`$ et $`A_k0`$, $`B_k0`$ pour tout $`k`$.

###### Théorème 2.1

Pour tout $`\underset{¯}{p}^{3n1}`$ on a $`J(\underset{¯}{p})=K(\underset{¯}{P})`$, où $`\underset{¯}{P}`$ est donné en fonction de $`\underset{¯}{p}`$ par :

$$\begin{array}{c}A_k=a_{n+1k}\text{ pour }1kn\text{ ,}\hfill \\ B_k=b_{n+1k}\text{ pour }2kn\text{ et }B_1=a_{n1}+b_nc_2c_3\mathrm{}c_n,\hfill \\ C_k=a_{n+1k}+b_{n+1k}c_kc_{k+1}\mathrm{}c_n\text{ pour tout }k\{2,\mathrm{},n\}\text{ pair,}\hfill \\ C_k=c_k+c_{k+1}+\mathrm{}+c_na_{nk}\text{ pour tout }k\{3,\mathrm{},n\}\text{ impair, avec la convention }a_0=0\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Ce résultat provient du changement de variables défini par $`x_k=y_{n+1k}`$ pour $`knmod2`$ et $`x_k=\frac{(1y_1\mathrm{}y_{nk})y_{n+1k}}{1y_1\mathrm{}y_{n+1k}}`$ pour $`knmod2`$. On peut bien sûr l’inverser, ce qui correspond à exprimer $`\underset{¯}{p}`$ en fonction de $`\underset{¯}{P}`$ dans le théorème 2.1.

###### Corollaire 2.2

Avec les notations de l’introduction, on a $`B(N)=S(N)`$ pour tout $`N0`$, et l’intégrale (1) est égale à $`\{\begin{array}{c}_{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^ny_k^N(1y_k)^N}{_{k\{2,\mathrm{},n\}\text{pair}}(1y_1\mathrm{}y_k)^{N+1}}dy_1\mathrm{}dy_n\text{ si }n\text{ est pair,}\hfill \\ _{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^ny_k^N(1y_k)^N}{(1y_1\mathrm{}y_n)^{N+1}_{k\{2,\mathrm{},n\}\text{pair}}(1y_1\mathrm{}y_k)^{N+1}}dy_1\mathrm{}dy_n\text{ si }n\text{ est impair.}\hfill \end{array}`$

L’intérêt des intégrales $`K(\underset{¯}{P})`$ (donc du théorème 2.1) est qu’elles se développent “naturellement” en séries multiples, dont on peut espérer démontrer que ce sont des formes linéaires sur $``$ en les polyzêtas de poids au plus $`n`$. Par exemple, pour $`N=0`$, (1) vaut

$$\underset{l_1l_2\mathrm{}l_{(n1)/2}l_{(n+1)/2}1}{}\frac{1}{l_1^2l_2^2\mathrm{}l_{(n1)/2}^2l_{(n+1)/2}}$$

si $`n`$ est impair, et

$$\underset{l_1l_2\mathrm{}l_{n/2}1}{}\frac{1}{l_1^2l_2^2\mathrm{}l_{n/2}^2}$$

si $`n`$ est pair. Le résultat de Vasilyev selon lequel cette intégrale égale $`(1)^{n1}\mathrm{Li}_n((1)^{n1})`$ se ramène ainsi à une identité linéaire entre polyzêtas. Or il existe des outils combinatoires pour démontrer de telles identités (voir ).

###### Proposition 2.3

Si $`n3`$, la famille $`(K(\underset{¯}{P}))`$ admet un groupe de Rhin-Viola d’ordre 32, isomorphe à $`(V\times V)/2`$, où $`V=/2\times /2`$ est le groupe de Klein et $`/2`$ agit en permutant les facteurs de $`V\times V`$. Cela provient d’analogues des transformations $`\sigma `$ et $`\chi `$ de , et du changement de variables défini par $`y_k^{}=\frac{1y_1\mathrm{}y_{nk+1}}{1y_1\mathrm{}y_{nk+2}}`$ pour tout $`k\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ (avec la convention $`y_{n+1}=0`$).

## 3 Une généralisation du groupe de Rhin-Viola

On reprend la notation $`\delta _k`$ utilisée dans l’introduction. À tout $`\underset{¯}{p}=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_n,b_1,\mathrm{},b_n,c_2,\mathrm{},c_n)^{3n1}`$ on associe

$$L(\underset{¯}{p})=_{[0,1]^n}\frac{_{k=1}^nx_k^{a_k}(1x_k)^{b_k}}{_{k=2}^n\delta _k(\underset{¯}{x})^{c_k}}\frac{\mathrm{d}x_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}x_n}{\delta _n(\underset{¯}{x})}.$$

On pose $`\varrho _n=c_nb_n`$ et $`\varrho _{n1}=c_{n1}1b_{n1}`$, puis $`\varrho _k=\varrho _{k+2}^++c_k1b_k`$ pour tout $`k\{1,\mathrm{},n2\}`$ en notant $`\alpha ^+=\mathrm{max}(\alpha ,0)`$ et avec la convention $`c_1=1`$. Alors l’intégrale $`L(\underset{¯}{p})`$ est finie si, et seulement si, on a $`a_k0`$, $`b_k0`$ et $`\varrho _ka_{k1}`$ pour tout $`k\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$, avec la convention $`a_0=0`$.

Notons $`\sigma `$ l’automorphisme de $`^{3n1}`$ qui échange $`a_1`$ et $`b_2`$, ainsi que $`a_2`$ et $`b_1`$, en fixant les autres coordonnées. Notons $`\psi `$ celui qui à $`\underset{¯}{p}`$ associe $`\underset{¯}{p}^{}=(a_1^{},\mathrm{},a_n^{},b_1^{},\mathrm{},b_n^{},c_2^{},\mathrm{},c_n^{})`$ défini par :

$$\begin{array}{c}a_k^{}=a_{n+1k}\text{ pour }1kn\text{ , }b_k^{}=b_{n+2k}\text{ pour }2kn\text{ et }b_1^{}=a_{n1}+b_nc_n,\hfill \\ c_k^{}=a_{n+2k}+b_{n+2k}+c_{n+1k}b_{n+1k}a_{nk}\text{ pour }2kn1,\hfill \\ c_n^{}=a_2+b_2b_1.\hfill \end{array}$$

Alors des changements de variables montrent qu’on a $`L(\underset{¯}{p})=L(\sigma (\underset{¯}{p}))=L((\psi (\underset{¯}{p}))`$ pour tout $`\underset{¯}{p}`$. En outre, notons $`\chi `$ l’automorphisme de $`^{3n1}`$ qui fixe toutes les composantes, sauf $`a_n`$ et $`c_n`$ qu’il échange et $`b_n`$ qu’il remplace par $`a_n+b_nc_n`$ ; il vérifie $`L(\underset{¯}{p})=\frac{a_n!b_n!}{c_n!(a_n+b_nc_n)!}L(\chi (\underset{¯}{p}))`$ pour tout $`\underset{¯}{p}`$.

###### Proposition 3.1

Si $`n3`$, la famille $`(L(\underset{¯}{p}))`$ admet un groupe de Rhin-Viola d’ordre 32, isomorphe à $`(V\times V)/2`$, qui est engendré par $`\sigma `$, $`\psi `$ et $`\chi `$.

###### Remarque 1

Peut-être y a-t-il un lien entre les intégrales $`L(\underset{¯}{p})`$ et $`K(\underset{¯}{P})`$ qui permette d’expliquer le parallélisme entre les propositions 2.3 et 3.1 ?

Pour obtenir une structure de groupe plus riche que celle de la proposition 3.1, on peut se restreindre aux intégrales $`L(\underset{¯}{p})`$ telles que $`c_2=\mathrm{}=c_{n1}=0`$. Pour conserver l’action de $`\sigma `$ et $`\psi `$, on doit imposer en outre $`a_1+b_2=a_3+b_3`$ si $`n=3`$, et les relations suivantes si $`n4`$ :

$$a_2=b_1\text{ et }b_n=c_n\text{ et }a_k+b_{k+1}=a_{k+2}+b_{k+2}\text{ pour tout }k\{1,\mathrm{},n2\}.$$

On note $``$ l’ensemble des $`\underset{¯}{p}`$ vérifiant ces relations ; il est stable par $`\sigma `$ et $`\psi `$. Notons $`\varphi `$ l’automorphisme de $``$ qui stabilise toutes les coordonnées, sauf $`a_{n1}`$ et $`c_n`$ qu’il échange, $`b_{n1}`$ qu’il remplace par $`a_{n1}+b_{n1}c_n`$ et $`b_n`$ qu’il remplace par $`a_{n1}+b_nc_n`$. On a alors $`L(\underset{¯}{p})=\frac{a_{n1}!b_{n1}!}{c_n!(a_{n1}+b_{n1}c_n)!}L(\varphi (\underset{¯}{p}))`$.

###### Théorème 3.2

La famille des $`L(\underset{¯}{p})`$, pour $`\underset{¯}{p}`$, admet un groupe de Rhin-Viola $`G`$ engendré par $`\sigma `$, $`\psi `$ et $`\varphi `$. Plus précisément :

* Pour $`n4`$, ce groupe est isomorphe à $`(𝔖_3\times 𝔖_3)/2`$, donc d’ordre 72 ; il laisse stable $`\frac{L(\underset{¯}{p})}{a_{n1}!b_{n1}!a_2!b_3!}`$ si $`n5`$, et $`\frac{L(\underset{¯}{p})}{a_3!b_3!a_2!}`$ si $`n=4`$.
* Pour $`n=3`$, le groupe $`G`$ est isomorphe à $`H𝔖_5`$, où $`H`$ est l’hyperplan $`\epsilon _1+\mathrm{}+\epsilon _5=0`$ de $`(/2)^5`$ ; il laisse stable $`\frac{L(\underset{¯}{p})}{a_1!a_2!a_3!b_1!b_2!b_3!(a_2+b_3c_3)!(b_1+b_3c_3)!}`$.
* Pour $`n=2`$, le groupe $`G`$ est isomorphe à $`𝔖_5`$, et laisse stable $`\frac{L(\underset{¯}{p})}{a_1!a_2!b_1!b_2!(a_1+b_2c_2)!}`$.

Pour $`n\{2,3\}`$, on retrouve exactement les situations considérées par Rhin et Viola. Pour $`n=2`$, le groupe diédral $`𝒟_5`$ de  est exactement celui engendré par $`\psi `$ et $`\sigma `$. Pour $`n=3`$, la transformation notée $`\vartheta ^2`$ dans  est ici $`\psi \sigma `$. On obtient $`\vartheta `$ en observant qu’il agit sur $``$ comme $`\varphi (\sigma \varphi \psi \varphi )^2`$.

Pour $`n=3`$, un phénomène mystérieux se produit dans  : lorsqu’on impose la relation $`a_1+b_2=a_3+b_3`$, ce qui permet d’avoir une action de groupe, les intégrales obtenues sont des formes linéaires en 1 et $`\zeta (3)`$ seulement : $`\zeta (2)`$ n’apparaît plus. On peut se demander si un phénomène analogue survient pour $`n4`$.

###### Remarque 2

Dans tout ce texte, les propriétés de $`\chi `$ et $`\varphi `$ proviennent, comme dans  et , de la formule $`_0^1\frac{x^a(1x)^b}{(1+\beta x)^{c+1}}dx=\frac{a!b!}{c!(a+bc)!}_0^1\frac{x^c(1x)^{a+bc}}{(1+\beta x)^{a+1}}dx`$. Un analogue de cette formule, dans lequel le dénominateur serait de la forme $`(1+\beta x)^{c+1}(1+\beta ^{}x)^{c^{}+1}`$, permettrait d’enrichir les structures de groupe obtenues ici.

Remerciements : Je remercie Pierre Cartier et Tanguy Rivoal, dont les questions sont à l’origine de ce travail, ainsi que Jacky Cresson et Michel Waldschmidt.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

It is well known the role played by the unitary representations of the (kinematical) symmetry groups of quantum physical systems. One can classify the elementary systems  according to them or to obtain their corresponding Schrödinger equations using local representations . In the last years we are involved in a program for constructing a theory of induced representations for quantum algebras . Our aim is to obtain a quantum counterpart of the program that Wigner started in 1939 for Lie groups  that has been so fruitful in quantum physics.

Kinematical groups like Poincaré and Galilei, whose physical interest is out of any doubt, have a structure of semidirect product. The quantum version of this kind of structure for quantum groups is that of bicrossproduct . In this case a quantum Lie algebras inherits the ‘semidirect’ structure in the algebra sector and the algebra of functions also has a semidirect product structure in the coalgebra sector. The interest of the quantum versions of the kinematical groups and algebras from a physical point of view is as $`q`$–generalizations of the symmetries of the physical space-time in a noncommutative framework. The study of these quantum symmetries and their representations generalizes the Wigner program inside the perspective of the noncommutative geometry , whose importance in physics is increasing.

For these groups having structure of semidirect product Mackey’s method  provides their unitary representations by induction from the representations of one of their subgroups. In this paper we study the induced representations for some quantum kinematical algebras from a unified point of view. We consider the framework of the Cayley–Klein (CK) pseudo-ortoghonal algebras  acting in spaces of $`(1+1)`$–dimensions, which includes the inhomogeneous algebras like Galilei, Poincaré and Euclidean algebras. The quantum deformation of these CK algebras was performed in  (Ref.  present quantum CK algebras in higher dimensions). The above mentioned quantum CK inhomogeneous algebras have a bicrossproduct structure  that we profit to obtain their induced representations, given a unified model for all of them.

The induction procedure formulated by us presents a strong algebraic character because we made use of objects like modules, comodules, etc., which, from our point of view, are the appropriate tools to work with the algebraic structures characteristic of the quantum algebras and groups.

In the literature we can find some attempts to develop techniques that generalize the Mackey method  of induced representations for semidirect product groups to the quantum case. For instance, Dobrev presented in  a method for constructing representations of quantum groups near to ours, since both methods emphasize the dual case, closer to the classical one, and the representations are constructed in the algebra sector. Other authors  have also extended the induction technique to quantum groups but constructing corepresentations, i.e. representations of the coalgebra sector.

The organization of the paper is the following one. In Section 2 we present a mathematical outline of the concepts that we will use along the paper in order to unify notation. Section 3 is devoted to summarize the theory of induced representations of quantum bicrossproduct algebras. We begin to study the induction problem taking into account the deep relation between modules and representations obtaining, in some sense, more deep results from a geometric point of view using the concept of regular co-space. Since our aim is to construct the induced representations of certain quantum inhomogeneous CK algebras Section 4 is devoted to describe briefly these $`q`$–algebras. In Section 5 we construct with some detail the induced representations following the method developed in Section 3. We start with the computation of the flow associated to the accion of the generator of one of the factors of the bicrossproduct over the other one. After, we are able to determine the regular co-spaces determining the induced representations, that we obtain below in an explicit way. Moreover, $`q`$–Casimir equations are also obtained.

## 2 Preliminaries

Let $`H=(V;m\eta ;\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ;S)`$ be a Hopf algebra with underlying vector space $`V`$ over the field 𝕂 ( or ), multiplication $`m:HHH`$, coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }:HHH`$, unit $`\eta :\text{𝕂}H`$, counit $`ϵ:H\text{𝕂}`$ and antipode $`S:HH`$.

The algebras involved in this work are infinite dimensional algebras but finitely generated, for this reason we will use a multi-index notation . Let $`A`$ be an algebra generated by the elements $`(a_1,a_2,\mathrm{},a_r)`$ such that the ordered monomials $`a^n=a_1^{n_1}a_2^{n_2}\mathrm{}a_r^{n_r}`$ $`(n=(n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_r)^r)`$ form a basis of the linear space underlying to $`A`$. An arbitrary product of generators of $`A`$ is written in a normal ordering if it is expressed in terms of the (ordered) basis $`(a^n)_{n^r}`$. The unit of $`A`$, $`1_A`$, is denoted by $`a^0`$ ($`0\text{}^n`$). Multi-factorials and multi-deltas are defined by

$$l!=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}l_i!,\delta _l^m=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\delta _{l_i}^{m_i}.$$
(2.1)
A pairing between two Hopf algebras, $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$, is a bilinear mapping $`,:H\times H^{}\text{𝕂}`$ verifying some defining relations . The pairing is said to be left (right) nondegenerate if $`[h,\phi =0,\phi H^{}]h=0`$ ($`[h,\phi =0,hH]\phi =0`$). The pairing is said nondegenerate if it is simultaneously left and right nondegenerate. Two Hopf algebras and a nondegenerate pairing, $`(H,H^{},,)`$, determine a ‘nondegenerate triplet’. The bases $`(h^m)`$ of $`H`$ and $`(\phi _n)`$ of $`H^{}`$ are dual with respect to the nondegenerate pairing if

$$h^m,\phi _n=c_n\delta _n^m,c_n\text{𝕂}\{0\}.$$
(2.2)
Given a nondegenerate triplet and the map $`f:HH`$. We shall say that the map $`f^{}:H^{}H^{}`$, defined by

$$h,f^{}(\phi )=f(h),\phi ,$$
(2.3)
is the adjoint map to $`f`$ with respect to $`,`$.

We will use the endomorphisms of ‘multiplication’ (denoted again by $`h`$ and $`\phi `$) and ‘formal derivation’ ($`\frac{}{h}_h`$ and $`\frac{}{\phi }_\phi `$). They verify that $`h^{}=_\phi `$ and $`\phi ^{}=_h`$. The situation is similar when $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$ are finitely generated. The definition of the formal derivative is

$$\frac{}{h_i}(h_1^{l_1}\mathrm{}h_i^{l_i}\mathrm{}h_n^{l_n})=l_ih_1^{l_1}\mathrm{}h_i^{l_i1}\mathrm{}h_n^{l_n}.$$
(2.4)
The generalization of the ‘multiplication’ operators is not straightforward if the algebras are non commutative. To avoid any confusion the formal operators associated to the generators $`h_i`$ will be denoted using a bar over the corresponding symbol. The action of these operators is

$$\overline{h}_i(h_1^{l_1}\mathrm{}h_i^{l_i}\mathrm{}h_n^{l_n})=h_1^{l_1}\mathrm{}h_i^{l_i+1}\mathrm{}h_n^{l_n}.$$
(2.5)
For the elements $`\phi ^iH^{}`$ the ‘multiplication’ and derivative operators are defined in a similar way. Note that if $`H`$ (resp. $`H^{}`$) is commutative then $`\overline{h}_i`$ (resp. $`\overline{\phi }^i`$) acts as a multiplication operator, but this is not longer true when the algebra is noncommutative. The adjoint operators are $`\overline{h}_i^{}=_{\phi ^i},\overline{\phi }^i=_{h_i}`$. The commutation relations for $`\overline{h}_i`$ and $`_{h_i}`$ (similar for $`\overline{\phi }^i`$ and $`_{\phi ^i}`$) are

$$[_{h_i},\overline{h}_j]=\delta _{ij},[\overline{h}_i,\overline{h}_j]=0,[_{h_i},_{h_j}]=0.$$
(2.6)
Let $`(V,\alpha ,A)`$ be a triad composed by a unital and associative $`𝕂`$–algebra $`A`$, a $`𝕂`$–vector space $`V`$ and a linear map (called action) $`\alpha :A_𝕂VV`$ ($`\alpha (av)=av`$). It is said that $`(V,\alpha ,A)`$ (or $`(V,,A)`$) is a left $`A`$–module if:

$$a(bv)=(ab)v,1v=v,a,bA,vV.$$
(2.7)
Dualizing an $`A`$–module a comodule is obtained. The triad $`(V,,C)`$, where $`C`$ is an associative $`𝕂`$–coalgebra with counit, $`V`$ a $`𝕂`$–vector space and $`:VC_𝕂V`$ ($`v=v^{(1)}v^{(2)}`$) a (linear map) coaction, is said to be a left $`C`$–comodule if

$$v_{}^{(1)}{}_{(1)}{}^{}v_{}^{(1)}{}_{(2)}{}^{}v^{(2)}=v^{(1)}v_{}^{(2)}{}_{(1)}{}^{}v_{}^{(2)}{}_{(2)}{}^{},ϵ(v^{(1)})v^{(2)}=v,vV,$$
(2.8)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }(c)=c_{(1)}c_{(2)}`$ denoting the coproduct of the elements of $`C`$.

A morphism of left $`A`$–modules, $`(V,,A)`$ and $`(V^{},^{},A)`$, is a linear map, $`f:VV^{}`$, equivariant with respect the action, i.e.,

$$f(av)=a^{}f(v),aA,vV.$$
(2.9)
A linear map $`f:VV^{}`$ between two $`C`$–comodules, $`(V,,C)`$ and $`(V^{},^{},C)`$ is a morphism if

$$v^{(1)}f(v^{(2)})=f(v)^{(1)^{}}f(v)^{(2)^{}},vV.$$
(2.10)
If a bialgebra acts or coacts on a vector space equipped with an additional structure (algebra, coalgebra or bialgebra) some compatibility relations for the action may be demanded .

Let $`A,B,C`$ be an algebra, a bialgebra and a coalgebra, respectively. The left module $`(A,,B)`$ is a $`B`$–module algebra if $`m_A`$ and $`\eta _A`$ are morphisms of $`B`$–modules. That is, if

$$b(aa^{})=(b_{(1)}a)(b_{(2)}a^{}),b1=ϵ(b)1,bB,a,a^{}A.$$
(2.11)
A left $`B`$–module $`(C,,B)`$ is a $`B`$–module coalgebra if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$ and $`ϵ_C`$ are morphisms of $`B`$–modules, i.e., if

$$(bc)_{(1)}(bc)_{(2)}=(b_{(1)}c_{(1)})(b_{(2)}c_{(2)}),ϵ_C(bc)=ϵ_B(b)ϵ_C(c),b,cB.$$

A left $`B`$–comodule $`(C,,B)`$ is said to be a $`B`$–comodule coalgebra if $`\mathrm{\Delta }_C`$ and $`ϵ_C`$ are morphisms of $`B`$–comodules, i.e.,

$$c^{(1)}c_{}^{(2)}{}_{(1)}{}^{}c_{}^{(2)}{}_{(2)}{}^{}=c_{(1)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}c_{(2)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(1)}c_{(1)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)}c_{(2)}^{}{}_{}{}^{(2)},c^{(1)}ϵ_C(c^{(2)})=(\eta _Bϵ_C)(c).$$

A left $`B`$–comodule $`(A,,B)`$ is a $`B`$–comodule algebra if $`m_A`$ and $`\eta _A`$ are morphisms of $`B`$–comodules. Explicitly

$$(aa^{})_{(1)}(aa^{})_{(2)}=a_{(1)}a_{(1)}^{}a_{(2)}a_{(2)}^{},1_A=1_B1_A.$$
(2.12)
The triad $`(B^{},,B)`$ is a left $`B`$–module bialgebra if simultaneously is a $`B`$–module algebra and a $`B`$–module coalgebra; $`(B^{},,B)`$ is a left $`B`$–comodule bialgebra if is a $`B`$–comodule algebra and a $`B`$–comodule coalgebra.

A regular module (comodule) is an $`A`$–module ($`C`$–comodule) whose vector space is the underlying vector space of the algebra $`A`$ (coalgebra $`C`$). The action (coaction) is defined in terms of the algebra product (coalgebra coproduct). If $`B`$ is a bialgebra, the regular $`B`$–module $`(B,,B)`$, whose regular action is $`bb^{}=bb^{}`$, is a module coalgebra. The regular module $`(B^{},,B)`$, obtained by dualization, is a module algebra with regular action $`\phi b=\phi _{(1)},b\phi _{(2)}`$ with $`bB,\phi B^{}`$.

Let $`K`$ and $`L`$ be two Hopf algebras, with $`(L,,K)`$ a right $`K`$–module algebra and $`(K,,L)`$ a left $`L`$–comodule coalgebra. The tensor product $`KL`$ is equipped simultaneously with the semidirect structures of algebra $`K<L`$ and coalgebra $`K>L`$. If some compatibility conditions are verified $`K<L`$ and $`K>L`$ determine a Hopf algebra called (right–left) bicrossproduct and denoted by $`KL`$ .

Let $`𝒦`$ and $``$ be two Hopf algebras and $`(,,𝒦)`$ and $`(𝒦,,)`$ a left $`K`$–module algebra and a right $`L`$–comodule coalgebra, respectively, verifying the corresponding compatibility conditions. Then $`>𝒦`$ and $`<𝒦`$ determine a Hopf algebra, $`𝒦`$, called (left–right) bicrossproduct.

These two bicrossproduct structures are related by duality: if $`K`$ and $`L`$ are finite dimensional bialgebras and the $`K`$–module algebra $`(L,,K)`$ and the $`L`$–comodule coalgebra $`(K,,L)`$ verify the compatibility conditions determining the bicrossproduct $`KL`$ , then $`(KL)^{}=K^{}L^{}`$.

It has been proved in Ref.  that dual bases and $``$–structures over bicrossproduct Hopf algebras may be constructed when the corresponding bases and $``$–structures of the bicrossproduct the factors are known. Thus, let $`H=KL`$ be a bicrossproduct Hopf algebra and $`(K,K^{},,_1)`$ and $`(L,L^{},,_2)`$ nondegenerate triplets, then the expression

$$kl,\kappa \lambda =k,\kappa _1l,\lambda _2.$$
(2.13)
defines a nondegenerate pairing between $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$. If $`(k_m)`$ and $`(\kappa _m)`$ are dual bases for $`K`$ and $`K^{}`$, and $`(l_n)`$ and $`(\lambda _n)`$ for $`L`$ and $`L^{}`$, then $`(k_ml_n)`$ and $`(\kappa ^m\lambda ^n)`$ are dual bases for $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$.

It can be proved that given a bicrossproduct Hopf algebra, $`H=KL`$, such that $`K`$ and $`L`$ are equipped with $``$–structures verifying the compatibility relation $`(lk)^{}=l^{}S(k)^{}`$, there is a $``$–structure on the algebra sector of $`H`$ is determined by

$$(kl)^{}=l^{}k^{},kK,lL.$$
(2.14)
## 3 Induced representations of bicrossproduct algebras

The main results about the theory of induced representations for quantum bicrossproduct algebras will be summarized in this Section (see Refs.  for a complete description of induced representations of quantum algebras).

As we have seen in the previous Section different actions are involved, henceforth we will denote them by the following symbols (or their symmetric for the corresponding right actions and coactions): $``$ ($``$) (bicrossproduct actions (coactions)), $``$ (induced and inducting representations) and $``$, $``$ (regular actions).

Let $`(H,,,)`$ be a nondegenerate triplet and $`L`$ a commutative subalgebra of $`H`$. Suppose that $`\{l_1,\mathrm{},l_s\}`$ is a system of generators of $`L`$ which is completed with $`\{k_1,\mathrm{},k_r\}`$ to get a system of generators of $`H`$, such that $`(l_n)_{n^s}`$ is a basis of $`L`$ and $`(k_ml_n)_{(m,n)^r\times ^s}`$ a basis of $`H`$. Moreover, there is a generator system of $``$, $`\{\kappa _1,\mathrm{},\kappa _r,\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _s\}`$, such that $`(\kappa ^m\lambda ^n)_{(m,n)^r\times ^s}`$ is a basis of $``$ dual of that of $`H`$ with pairing

$$k_ml_n,\kappa ^m^{}\lambda ^n^{}=m!n!\delta _m^m^{}\delta _n^n^{}.$$
(3.1)
In order to construct the representation of $`H`$ induced by the character of $`L`$, determined by $`a=(a_1,\mathrm{},a_s)𝕂^s`$ (explicitly, $`1l_n=a_n=a_1^{n_1}\mathrm{}a_s^{n_s},n^s`$) we need to know its carrier space $`𝕂^{}`$ and the action of $`H`$ on it. The elements of $`𝕂^{}`$ are those of $`\text{Hom}_𝕂(H,𝕂)`$ verifying the invariance condition

$$f(hl)=f(h)l,lL,hH.$$
(3.2)
They can be written as

$$f=\underset{(m,n)^r\times ^s}{}f_{mn}\kappa ^m\lambda ^n$$
(3.3)
by identifying $`𝕂^{}=\text{Hom}_𝕂(H,𝕂)`$ with $``$ via the pairing. The equivariance condition (3.2)

$$hl,f=h,fl,lL,hH,$$
(3.4)
together with duality give the relation

$$m!n!f_{mn}=k_ml_n,f=k_m,fa_n=m!f_{m0}a_n.$$
(3.5)
Hence, the elements of $`𝕂^{}`$ are

$$f=\kappa \psi ,\kappa 𝒦,\psi =e^{a_1\lambda _1}\mathrm{}e^{a_s\lambda _s},$$
(3.6)
where $`𝒦`$ is the subspace of $``$ generated by the linear combinations of the ordered monomials $`(\kappa ^m)_{m^r}`$. Because $`\psi `$ is product of exponentials, $`𝒦`$ and $`𝕂^{}`$ are isomorphic ($`\kappa \kappa \psi `$).

The action of $`H`$ on $`𝕂^{}`$ is determined knowing the action over the basis elements $`(\kappa ^p\psi )_{p^r}`$. Putting

$$(\kappa ^p\psi )h=\underset{(m,n)^r\times ^s}{}[h]_{mn}^p\kappa ^m\lambda ^n,p^r,$$
(3.7)
the coefficients $`[h]_{mn}^p`$ are evaluated by means of duality

$$m!n![h]_{mn}^p=(\kappa ^p\psi )h,k_ml_n=\kappa ^p\psi ,hk_ml_n=\kappa ^p\psi ,hk_ma_n.$$
(3.8)
The properties of the action allow to compute it only for the generators of $`H`$ instead of considering an arbitrary element of $`H`$. The problem reduces to write $`hk_m`$ in normal ordering to get the value of the paring in (3.8). Since in many cases this task is very cumbersome, our objective will be to take advantage of the bicrossproduct structure to simplify the computations.

In the following we will restrict ourselves to Hopf algebras having a bicrossproduct structure like $`H=𝒦`$, such that $`𝒦`$ is cocommutative and $``$ commutative. Let us suppose that the algebras $`𝒦`$ and $``$ are finite generated by the sets $`\{k_i\}_{i=1}^r`$ and $`\{l_i\}_{i=1}^s`$, respectively, the $`k_i`$’s are primitive and $`(k_n)_{n^r}`$ and $`(l_m)_{m^s}`$ are bases of the vector spaces underlying to $`𝒦`$ and $``$, respectively. Let $`𝒦^{}`$ and $`^{}`$ be the dual algebras of $`𝒦`$ and $``$ having dual systems to those of $`𝒦`$ and $``$ with analogue properties to them. So, duality between $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$ is given by (3.1).

We are interested in the construction of the representations induced by ‘real’ characters of the commutative sector $``$. We will show that the solution of this problem can be reduced to the study of certain dynamical systems which present, in general, a nonlinear action. The above results can be summarized in the following theorem.

###### Theorem 3.1.

The carrier space of the representation of $`H`$ induced by the character $`a`$ of $``$

$$1l_n=a_n,a^s,n^s,$$
(3.9)
is isomorphic to $`𝒦^{}`$ and is constituted by the elements of the form

$$\kappa \psi ,\kappa 𝒦^{},\psi =e^{a_1\lambda _1}e^{a_2\lambda _2}\mathrm{}e^{a_s\lambda _s},\lambda _i^{}.$$
(3.10)
The induced action of the elements of $`H`$ over the elements of the carrier space $`^{}`$ is given by

$$fh=\underset{m^r}{}\kappa ^mh\frac{k_m}{m!},f\psi ,f^{}.$$
(3.11)
To obtain the explicit action of the generators of $`𝒦`$ and $``$ in the induced representation, let us start identifying $``$, because is commutative, with the algebra of functions $`F(^s)`$ by the morphism $`F(^s),(l\stackrel{~}{l})`$, mapping the generators of $``$ into the canonical projections

$$\stackrel{~}{l}_j(x)=x_j,x=(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_s)^s,j=1,2,\mathrm{},s.$$
(3.12)
This identification allows to chose a $``$–structure keeping invariant the generators of $``$ by

$$l_j^{}=l_j,j=1,2,\mathrm{},s.$$
(3.13)
Hence, the characters of $``$ (3.9) compatible with (3.13) are real. They can be written now as

$$1l=\stackrel{~}{l}(a),a^s.$$
(3.14)
Also, the right action of $`𝒦`$ on $``$ can be carried to $`F(^s)`$. Since the generators of $`𝒦`$ are primitive, they act by derivations on the $`𝒦`$–module algebra of $`𝒦`$ inducing vector fields, $`X_i`$, on $`^s`$ by

$$X_i\stackrel{~}{l}=\stackrel{~}{lk_i},i=1,2,\mathrm{},r.$$
(3.15)
The associated flow to $`X_i`$, $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i:\times ^s^s`$, is given by

$$(X_if)(x)=(Df_{x,\mathrm{\Phi }_i})(0),$$
(3.16)
where $`f_{x,\mathrm{\Phi }_i}(t)=f\mathrm{\Phi }_i^t(x)`$ and $`D`$ is the derivative operator. Thus, we can state the following theorem that allows us to have explicit formulae for the action.

###### Theorem 3.2.

The explicit action of the generators of $`𝒦`$ and $``$ in the induced representation determined in Theorem 3.1 and realized in the space $`𝒦^{}`$ is given by the following expressions:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \kappa k_i& =& \kappa k_i,\hfill \\ \hfill \kappa l_j& =& \kappa \widehat{l}_j\mathrm{\Phi }_{(\kappa _1,\kappa _2,\mathrm{},\kappa _r)}(a),\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.17)
where $`i\{1,\mathrm{},r\}`$, $`j\{1,\mathrm{},s\}`$, the symbol $``$ denotes the regular action of $`𝒦`$ on $`𝒦^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{(\kappa _1,\kappa _2,\mathrm{},\kappa _r)}=\mathrm{\Phi }_r^{\kappa _r}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }_2^{\kappa _2}\mathrm{\Phi }_1^{\kappa _1}`$.

We can reformulate the induction procedure in terms of modules because their deep relation with representations . The regular $`H`$–modules associated to a Hopf algebra $`H`$ and its dual $`H^{}`$, $`(H,,H)`$, $`(H^{},,H)`$, $`(H,,H)`$ and $`(H^{},,H)`$, will help us to describe the actions as well as the carrier spaces involved in the induced representations. The modules $`(H^{},,H)`$ and $`(H^{},,H)`$ are called co-spaces since they can be considered as an algebraic generalization of the concept of $`G`$–space.

The commutative or cocommutative Hopf algebras are, in fact, of the form $`F(G)`$ or $`[G]`$, the group algebra of $`G`$, (or $`U(𝔤)`$) for any group $`G`$ . Hence, the bicrossproduct Hopf algebras, that we consider in this paper, can be factorized as

$$H=U(𝔨)F(L),H^{}=F(K)U(𝔩).$$
(3.18)
where $`K`$ and $`L`$ are Lie groups with associated Lie algebras $`𝔨`$ and $`𝔩`$, respectively.

The use of elements of $`H`$ and $`H^{}`$, like

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& k\lambda H,\hfill & & kK,\hfill & \lambda F(L),\hfill \\ & \kappa lH^{},\hfill & & \kappa F(K),\hfill & lL,\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.19)
instead of the standard bases of ordered monomials, allows an effective description of the $`H`$–regular modules.

###### Theorem 3.3.

The action on each of the four regular $`H`$–modules is:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}(H,,H)\hfill & :\hfill & (k\lambda )k^{}=kk^{}(\lambda k^{}),\hfill & (k\lambda )\lambda ^{}=k\lambda \lambda ^{};\hfill & \\ (H^{},,H)\hfill & :\hfill & k^{}(\kappa l)=(k^{}\kappa )(k^{}l),\hfill & \lambda ^{}(\kappa l)=\lambda ^{}(l)\kappa l;\hfill & \\ (H,,H)\hfill & :\hfill & k^{}(k\lambda )=k^{}k\lambda ,\hfill & \lambda ^{}(k\lambda )=k(\lambda ^{}k)\lambda ;\hfill & \\ (H^{},,H)\hfill & :\hfill & (\kappa l)k^{}=(\kappa k^{})l,\hfill & (\kappa l)\lambda ^{}=\kappa (\lambda ^{}\widehat{l})l;\hfill & \end{array}$$
(3.20)
where $`\widehat{l}`$ is the map, $`KL(kkl)`$, projecting the group $`K`$ on the orbit passing through $`lL`$ such that $`l^{(1)},\lambda l^{(2)}=\lambda \widehat{l}`$, for all $`k,k^{}K`$, $`\lambda ,\lambda ^{}F(L)`$, $`\kappa F(K)`$ and $`lL`$.

Notice that in this theorem we have taken into account that in $`(U(𝔩),,F(L))`$ holds

$$\lambda l=\lambda (l)l,\lambda F(L),lL.$$
(3.21)
Now we can carry a complete analysis of the representations of $`H=U(𝔨)F(L)`$ induced by the one-dimensional modules of its commutative sector. Note that the set of characters of the algebra $`F(L)`$ is its spectrum and, hence, the spectrum of $`F(L)`$ is isomorphic to $`L`$. Fixed an element $`l`$ of $`L`$, the character is given by

$$1\lambda =\lambda (l),\lambda F(L).$$
(3.22)
The carrier space $`^{}`$ of the representation of $`H=U(𝔨)F(L)`$ induced by (3.22) is the set of elements $`fH^{}`$ satisfying the condition

$$\lambda f=\lambda (l)f,\lambda F(L).$$
(3.23)
Expanding $`f`$ in terms of the bases of $`𝔨`$ and $`𝔩`$, imposing the equivariance condition and considering the definition of second kind coordinates $`\lambda _j`$ over the group $`L`$ we obtain that

$$f=\kappa l,\kappa F(K).$$
(3.24)
The right regular action determines the action on the induced module that can be carried to $`F(K)`$ using the isomorphism $`F(K)^{}(\kappa \kappa l)`$. So,

$$\kappa k=\kappa k,\kappa \lambda =\kappa (\lambda \widehat{l}).$$
(3.25)
Comparing these expressions with those of Theorem 3.2 we see that the action of $`U(𝔨)`$ is determined by the regular action. The action of $`F(L)`$ is multiplicative and its evaluation is essentially reduced to obtain the flows associated to the action of $`K`$ on $`L`$ derived from the bicrossproduct structure of $`H`$.

Finally, next theorem summarizes the induction procedure for bicrossproduct algebras.

###### Theorem 3.4.

Let us consider an element $`lL`$ supporting a global action of the group $`K`$. The carrier space, $`^{}`$, of the representation of $`H`$ induced by the character determined by $`l`$ is the set of elements of $`H^{}`$ of the form

$$\kappa l,\kappa F(K).$$
(3.26)
There is an isomorphism between $`^{}`$ and $`F(K)`$ given by the map $`\kappa \kappa l`$. The action induced by the elements of the form $`kK`$ and $`\lambda F(L)`$ in the space $`F(K)`$ is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\kappa k\hfill & =\hfill & \kappa k\hfill \\ \kappa \lambda \hfill & =\hfill & \kappa (\lambda \widehat{l}).\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.27)
The modules induced by $`l`$ and $`kl`$ are isomorphic. So, the induction algorithm establishes a correspondence between the space of orbits $`L/K`$ and the set of equivalence classes of representations.

### 3.1 Local representations

The quantum counterpart of the local representations  of Lie groups can be obtained inducing from representations of the subalgebra $`U(𝔨)`$. Given a character $`\kappa `$ of $`U(𝔨)`$,

$$\kappa \text{Spectrum}U(𝔨)F(K),k1=\kappa (k),$$
(3.28)
the carrier space, $`^{}`$, of the representation induced by $`\kappa `$ is determined by the equivariance condition

$$fk=\kappa (k)f,kU(𝔨)$$
(3.29)
obtaining that the elements of $`^{}`$ are of the form

$$f=\kappa l,lU(𝔩).$$
(3.30)
The isomorphism $`U(𝔩)^{}`$ ($`l\kappa l`$), allows to realize the induced representation over $`U(𝔩)`$

$$kl=\kappa (k)kl,\lambda l=\lambda (l)l.$$
(3.31)
## 4 Quantum $`𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)`$ algebras

The called CK pseudo-orthogonal algebras $`𝔰𝔬_{\omega _1,\omega _2,\mathrm{},\omega _N}(N+1)`$ is a family of $`(N+1)N/2`$ dimensional real Lie algebras characterized by $`N`$ real parameters $`(\omega _1,\omega _2,\mathrm{},\omega _N)`$ . In the ‘geometric’ basis $`(J_{ij})_{0i<jN}`$ the nonvanishing commutators are

$$[J_{ij},J_{ik}]=\omega _{ij}J_{jk}[J_{ij},J_{jk}]=J_{ik}[J_{ik},J_{jk}]=\omega _{jk}J_{ij},$$
(4.1)
with $`0<i<j<k<N`$ and $`\omega _{ij}={\displaystyle \underset{s=i+1}{\overset{j}{}}}\omega _s`$.

The parameters $`\omega _i`$, in fact, only take the values $`1,0`$ and $`1`$ since the generators $`J_{ij}`$ can be rescaled. When $`\omega _i0i`$, the Lie algebra $`𝔰𝔬_{\omega _1,\omega _2,\mathrm{},\omega _N}(N+1)`$ is isomorphic to some of the pseudo-orthogonal algebras $`𝔰𝔬(p,q)`$ with $`p+q=N+1`$ and $`pq0`$. If some of the $`\omega _i`$ vanish the corresponding algebra is inhomogeneous.

In this paper we are interested in the particular case of $`N=2`$ and $`\omega _1=0`$. These inhomogeneous algebras $`𝔰𝔬_{0,\omega _2}(3)`$ can be realized as algebras of groups of affine transformations on $`^2`$  (i.e, the Euclidean group when $`\omega _2=1`$, the Galilei group when $`\omega _2=0`$ and the Poincaré group when $`\omega _2=1`$). In this case the generators $`J_{0i}`$ are denoted by $`P_i`$ stressing their role as generators of translations. The remaining generator $`J_{12}J`$ is associated to compact ($`\omega _2=1`$) and noncompact rotations (galilean and lorentzian boosts).

The algebra $`𝔰𝔬_{0,\omega _2}(3)`$, that we shall denote by $`𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)`$, is characterized by the commutators

$$[J,P_1]=P_2,[J,P_2]=\omega P_1,[P_1,P_2]=0.$$
(4.2)
We shall use the following ‘generalized trigonometric functions’

$$\mathrm{C}_\omega (x)=\frac{e^{\sqrt{\omega }x}+e^{\sqrt{\omega }x}}{2},\mathrm{S}_\omega (x)=\frac{e^{\sqrt{\omega }x}e^{\sqrt{\omega }x}}{2\sqrt{\omega }}.$$
(4.3)
When $`\omega <0`$ ($`\omega >0`$) these expressions become the trigonometric (hyperbolic) functions. For $`\omega =0`$ the parabolic functions $`\mathrm{C}_0(x)=1`$ and $`\mathrm{S}_0(x)=x`$ are obtained. The functions (4.3) satisfy identities similar to those of the usual trigonometric functions. Some useful properties that will be used in next computations are:

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{C}_\omega ^2(x)+\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega ^2(x)=1,\\ \mathrm{C}_\omega (x+y)=\mathrm{C}_\omega (x)\mathrm{C}_\omega (y)\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (x)\mathrm{S}_\omega (y),\mathrm{S}_\omega (x+y)=\mathrm{S}_\omega (x)\mathrm{C}_\omega (y)+\mathrm{C}_\omega (x)\mathrm{S}_\omega (y),\\ C_\omega ^{}(x)=\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (x),S_\omega ^{}(x)=\mathrm{C}_\omega (x).\end{array}$$
(4.4)
A simultaneous standard deformation for all the enveloping algebras $`U(𝔰𝔬_{\omega _1,\omega _2}(3))`$ was introduced in , The particular case of the deformed Hopf algebras $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ is obtained taking $`\omega _1=0`$ and, obviously, $`\omega _2=\omega `$.

It was proved in  that the standard quantum Hopf algebras $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_{\omega _2,\omega _3,\mathrm{},\omega _N}(N))`$ have a structure of bicrossproduct. So, $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ is characterized in a basis adapted to its bicrossproduct structure by

$$\begin{array}{c}[J,P_1]=\frac{1e^{2\lambda P_2}}{2\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \omega P_1^2,[J,P_2]=\omega P_1;\\ \mathrm{\Delta }(P_1)=P_11+e^{\lambda P_2}P_1,\mathrm{\Delta }(P_2)=P_21+1P_2,\mathrm{\Delta }(J)=J1+e^{\lambda P_2}J;\\ ϵ(P_1)=ϵ(P_2)=ϵ(J)=0;\\ S(P_1)=e^{\lambda P_2}P_1,S(P_2)=P_2,S(J)=e^{\lambda P_2}J.\end{array}$$

The bicrossproduct structure $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))=𝒦`$, where $``$ is the Hopf subalgebra spanned by ($`P_1`$, $`P_2`$) and $`𝒦`$ is the commutative and cocommutative Hopf algebra generated by $`J`$, is determined by the action of $`𝒦`$ on $``$ given by

$$P_1J=[P_1,J]=\left[\frac{1e^{2\lambda P_2}}{2\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \omega P_1^2\right],P_2J=[P_2,J]=\omega P_1,$$
(4.5)
and the left coaction of $``$ on $`𝒦`$, which over the generator of $`𝒦`$ takes the value

$$J=e^{\lambda P_2}J.$$
(4.6)
The dual algebra $`F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))`$ is generated by the local coordinates $`\phi ,a_1,a_2`$. Its commutators, coproduct, counit and antipode are given by

$$\begin{array}{c}[a_1,\phi ]=\lambda (1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )),[a_2,\phi ]=\lambda \mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi ),[a_1,a_2]=\lambda a_1;\\ \mathrm{\Delta }(a_1)=a_1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+a_2\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )+1a_1,\\ \mathrm{\Delta }(a_2)=a_1\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )+a_2\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+1a_2,\\ \mathrm{\Delta }(\phi )=\phi 1+1\phi ;\\ ϵ(a_1)=ϵ(a_2)=ϵ(\phi )=0;\\ S(a_1)=\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )a_1\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )a_2,S(a_2)=\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )a_1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )a_2,S(\phi )=\phi .\end{array}$$
(4.7)
This Hopf algebra exhibits the bicrossproduct structure $`F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))=𝒦^{}^{}`$, dual of the above one, with $`𝒦^{}`$ generated by $`\phi `$ and $`^{}`$ by $`a_1,a_2`$. The left action of $`^{}`$ over $`𝒦^{}`$ is given by

$$a_1\phi =\lambda (1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )),a_2\phi =\lambda \mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi ).$$
(4.8)
The right coaction of $`𝒦^{}`$ over $`^{}`$ takes the following values over the generators of $`^{}`$

$$a_1=a_1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+a_2\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi ),a_2=a_1\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )+a_2\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi ).$$
(4.9)
The results mentioned in the last paragraph of Section 2 about dual bases and $``$–structures over bicrossproduct Hopf algebras allow to construct a pair of dual bases in such a way that the duality form between $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ and $`F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))`$ is

$$J^mP_1^nP_2^p,\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s=m!n!p!\delta _m^q\delta _n^r\delta _p^s.$$
(4.10)
## 5 Representations of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$

Firstly, according to the theory of representations of bicrossproduct algebras displayed in Section 3 and, in particular, Theorem 3.2, we need to know the flow associated to the action of $`𝒦`$ on $``$.

### 5.1 One-parameter flow for $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$

In Ref.  the factor $`𝒦`$ is interpreted as the enveloping algebra $`U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))`$, while $``$ is seen as a deformation of the algebra of the group of the translations in the plane $`T_2`$, $`U_\lambda (𝔱_2)`$. Hence,

$$U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))=U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))U_\lambda (𝔱_2),F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))=F(SO_\omega (2))F_\lambda (T_2).$$
(5.1)
However, the interpretation given here by us is different since

$$U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))=U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))F(T_{\lambda ,2}),$$
(5.2)
being $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$ the Lie group with composition law

$$(\alpha _1^{},\alpha _2^{})(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=(\alpha _1^{}+e^{\lambda \alpha _2^{}}\alpha _1,\alpha _2^{}+\alpha _2).$$
(5.3)
Now the generators $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ are considered as a global coordinate system over $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$, i.e.,

$$P_1(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\alpha _1,P_2(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\alpha _2.$$
(5.4)
The module algebra structure included in $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))=U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (\mathfrak{2}))F(T_{\lambda ,2})`$ determines the action of $`SO_\omega (2)`$ over $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$ by means of the vector field

$$\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }=\left[\frac{1e^{2\lambda P_2}}{2\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \omega P_1^2\right]\frac{}{P_1}+\omega P_1\frac{}{P_2}.$$
(5.5)
Prior to determine the flow associated to $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }`$ we can obtain a first qualitative information by identifying the fixed points of $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }`$. When $`\omega 0`$ only the origin $`(0,0)`$ is an equilibrium point, but if $`\omega =0`$ the set of fixed points is the straight line of equation $`\alpha _2=0`$. The deformation due to $`\lambda `$ does not change the character of these points. Thus, the point is elliptic if $`\omega >0`$ and hyperbolic if $`\omega <0`$.

The one-form

$$\eta _\rho =\rho \left[\omega P_1dP_1+(\frac{1e^{2\lambda P_2}}{2\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \omega P_1^2)dP_2\right],\rho F(T_{\lambda ,2}),$$
(5.6)
verifies $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }\eta _\rho =0`$. Taking $`\rho _0=\lambda ^2e^{\lambda P_2}`$ one obtains that $`\eta _{\rho _0}`$ is exact and invariant under $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }`$. Adding a constant and rescaling the invariant function under the action of $`J`$

$$h=\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2P_1^2e^{\lambda P_2}+\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda P_2),$$
(5.7)
we obtain a central element of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$

$$\mathrm{C}_{\omega ,\lambda }=\omega P_1^2e^{\lambda P_2}+2\frac{\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda P_2)1}{\lambda ^2}=\omega P_1^2e^{\lambda P_2}+\frac{4}{\lambda ^2}\mathrm{sinh}^2(\frac{\lambda }{2}P_2)$$
(5.8)
such that in the limit $`\lambda 0`$ we recover the nondeformed Casimir $`\mathrm{C}_{\omega ,0}=\omega P_1^2+P_2^2`$ of $`𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)`$.

The computation of the trajectories of $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,\lambda }`$ requires to solve the equation system

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \dot{\alpha _1}=& \left[\frac{1e^{2\lambda \alpha _2}}{2\lambda }+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \omega \alpha _1^2\right],\hfill \\ \hfill \dot{\alpha _2}=& \omega \alpha _1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.9)
The integral curve $`\gamma `$ can be expressed as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \alpha _1(t)=& \frac{1}{\lambda }\frac{\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \beta )\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)}{\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \beta )+\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \beta )\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)},\hfill \\ \hfill \alpha _2(t)=& \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \beta )+\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \beta )\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)].\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.10)
Using the fact that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\omega ,\lambda }^t(\gamma (\tau ))=\gamma (\tau +t)`$ the flow can be evaluated

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Phi }_{\omega ,\lambda }^t& (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\hfill \\ & (\frac{2\alpha _1\lambda e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+(\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2))\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+2\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)},\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+\omega \lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)]).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.11)
In the limit $`\lambda 0`$ we recover the linear flow

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\omega ,0}^t(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=(\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)\alpha _1\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)\alpha _2,\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (t)\alpha _1+\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)\alpha _2),$$
(5.12)
which corresponds to the nondeformed action given by the vector field $`\widehat{J}_{\omega ,0}=P_2_{P_1}+\omega P_1_{P_2}`$.

Note that although expression (5.11) has been obtained for $`\omega >0`$ and $`\lambda >0`$ it can be proved that it is also valid for the remaining values. In some sense, the flow has an “analytic” dependence on the parameters $`\omega `$ and $`\lambda `$ which allows to extend the results obtained in a region of the parameters space to whole it.

The flow (5.11) is globally defined when $`\omega 0`$ but is only local for $`\omega <0`$ as it is easy to prove considering the integral curve passing through a point like $`(0,\alpha _2)`$: since the logarithm argument has to be positive one gets the inequality

$$\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)>0,$$
(5.13)
if the product $`\lambda \alpha `$ is negative the definition interval of $`t`$ is bounded

$$t(\mathrm{C}_\omega ^1(\mathrm{coth}(\lambda \alpha _2)),\mathrm{C}_\omega ^1(\mathrm{coth}(\lambda \alpha _2))).$$
(5.14)
The flow (5.11) describes the action of $`SO_\omega (2)`$ over $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$

$$e^{tJ}(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\mathrm{\Phi }_{\lambda ,\omega }^t(\alpha _1,\alpha _2),$$
(5.15)
which decomposes the space $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$ on strata of orbits depending on the values of $`\omega `$:

$``$ Case $`\omega <0`$

\- A stratum with only one orbit with only one point: (0,0). The isotropy group is $`SO_\omega (2)`$.

\- Four orbits determined by the points

$$(\frac{1e^\lambda }{\lambda \sqrt{\omega }},1),(\frac{1e^\lambda }{\lambda \sqrt{\omega }},1),(\frac{1e^\lambda }{\lambda \sqrt{\omega }},1),(\frac{1e^\lambda }{\lambda \sqrt{\omega }},1).$$
(5.16)
These orbits are isomorphic to $``$ and have the point $`(0,0)`$ as accumulation point.

\- The remaining points of $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$ constitute another stratum fibrered by orbits diffeomorphic to $``$ since they are branches of deformed hyperbolae.

$``$ Case $`\omega =0`$

\- A stratum is constituted by the points $`(\alpha _1,0)`$, each of them is an orbit.

\- The orbits $`\{(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)|\alpha _1,\alpha _20\mathrm{but}\mathrm{fixed}\}`$ determine a stratum.

$``$ Case $`\omega >0`$

\- The point $`(0,0)`$ constitutes the only orbit of this stratum.

\- The orbits diffeomorphic to the circle determine another stratum.

Note that the deformation associated to $`\lambda `$ does not give qualitative changes with respect to the nondeformed case. Summarizing, we can say that the quotient spaces are isomorphic

$$T_{\lambda ,2}/SO_\omega (2)T_{0,2}/SO_\omega (2).$$
(5.17)
### 5.2 Regular co-spaces

Once the flow associated to the bicrossproduct structure of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ is known, we can study the regular co-spaces $`(F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2)),,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ and $`(F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2)),,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$, which are basic elements to characterize the induced representations of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$.

The structures of both co-spaces are easily deduced combining Theorem 3.3 with expression (5.11) of the flow of $`\widehat{J}`$. Firstly, remember that $`(F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))`$ can be described by elements of the form

$$\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2),\varphi F(SO_\omega (2)),(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)T_{\lambda ,2},$$
(5.18)
instead of monomials $`\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s`$.

1).- For the right coregular module $`(F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2)),,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ we have that

$$\begin{array}{c}[\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]e^{tJ}=\varphi (e^{tJ})(\alpha _1,\alpha _2),\hfill \\ [\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]P_1=\hfill \\ \varphi \frac{2\alpha _1\lambda e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+(\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}2\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2))\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+2\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )}(\alpha _1,\alpha _2),\hfill \\ [\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]P_2=\varphi \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )\hfill \\ +\omega \lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )](\alpha _1,\alpha _2).\hfill \end{array}$$

The dot stands for the argument of the function $`\varphi =\varphi ()`$. Developing in power series of $`t`$ and considering the first order in the first expression and the multiplication and derivation operators associated to the basis $`\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s`$ we can write the action of the generators of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ over an arbitrary ‘function’ $`fF_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))`$ only making the changes

$$\phi \overline{\phi },a_i\frac{}{a_i}_{a_i}.$$
(5.19)
In this way we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}fJ=_\phi f,\hfill & \\ fP_1=\frac{2\lambda _{a_1}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}\mathrm{C}_\omega (\overline{\phi })+(\omega \lambda ^2\frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}2\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda _{a_2}))\mathrm{S}_\omega (\overline{\phi })}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda _{a_2})+\omega \lambda ^3\frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda _{a_2})\omega \lambda ^3\frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda _{a_2}})\mathrm{C}_\omega (\overline{\phi })+2\omega \lambda ^2_{a_1}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\overline{\phi })}f,\hfill & \\ fP_2=\frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda _{a_2})+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}+(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda _{a_2})\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}\mathrm{C}_\omega (\overline{\phi })+\omega \lambda _{a_1}e^{\lambda _{a_2}}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\overline{\phi })]f.\hfill & \end{array}$$

From the above result the action of the generator $`J`$ over the ordering monomials $`\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s`$ is easily evaluated

$$(\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)J=q\phi ^{q1}a_1^ra_2^s,$$
(5.20)
but it does not happen the same with $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$, excepting in the nondeformed case where the action reduces to

$$fP_1=\left(\mathrm{C}_\omega (\overline{\phi })\frac{}{a_1}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\overline{\phi })\frac{}{a_2}\right)f,fP_2=\left(\omega \mathrm{S}_\omega (\overline{\phi })\frac{}{a_1}+\mathrm{C}_\omega (\overline{\phi })\frac{}{a_2}\right)f.$$
(5.21)
So, when $`\lambda =0`$ one gets:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill (\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)P_1=& r\phi ^q\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )a_1^{r1}a_2^ss\phi ^q\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )a_1^ra_2^{s1},\hfill \\ \hfill (\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)P_1=& \omega r\phi ^q\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )a_1^{r1}a_2^s+s\phi ^q\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )a_1^ra_2^{s1}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.22)
2).- The description of the left coregular module $`(F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2)),,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ is made in an analogous way. Firstly, considering Theorem 3.3 one obtains

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill e^{tJ}& [\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]=\varphi (e^{tJ})\hfill \\ & (\frac{2\lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+(\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}2\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2))\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+2\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)},\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+\omega \lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)]),\hfill \\ \hfill P_1& [\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]=\alpha _1\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2),\hfill \\ \hfill P_2& [\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)]=\alpha _2\varphi (\alpha _1,\alpha _2).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.23)
With the same arguments that in the case of the right regular co-space the action of the generators can be written in terms of the multiplication and derivation operators

$$\begin{array}{cc}& Jf=[\frac{}{\phi }\overline{a}_1\frac{1e^{2\lambda \frac{}{a_2}}}{2\lambda }+\omega \overline{a}_2\frac{}{a_1}\frac{\lambda }{2}\omega \overline{a}_1\frac{^2}{a_1^2}]f,\hfill \\ & P_if=\frac{}{a_i}f,i=1,2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.24)
which allows to obtain the action of the generators over the basis $`\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s`$

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill J(\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)=q\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^{s1}& \frac{\lambda }{2}\omega r(r1)\phi ^qa_1^{r1}a_2^s+\omega r\phi ^qa_1^{r1}a_2^{s+1}\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{2\lambda }\phi ^qa_1^{r+1}a_2^s+\frac{1}{2\lambda }\phi ^qa_1^{r+1}(a_2+2\lambda )^s.s\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^{s1},\hfill \\ \hfill P_1(\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)=& r\phi ^qa_1^{r1}a_2^s,\hfill \\ \hfill P_2(\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^s)=& s\phi ^qa_1^ra_2^{s1}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.25)
The subalgebra $`𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda }=a_1,a_2`$ of $`F_\lambda (ISO_\omega (2))`$, which is not a Hopf subalgebra, is stable under the previous action. The explicit action of the generators of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ over a generic element $`\psi (a_1,a_2)`$ of $`𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda }`$ in terms of operators adapted to the basis $`a_1^ra_2^s`$ is

$$\begin{array}{cc}& J\psi (a_1,a_2)=\left(\overline{a}_1\frac{1e^{2\lambda \frac{}{a_2}}}{2\lambda }+\omega \overline{a}_2\frac{}{a_1}\frac{\lambda }{2}\omega \overline{a}_1\frac{^2}{a_1^2}\right)\psi (a_1,a_2),\hfill \\ & P_i\psi (a_1,a_2)=\frac{}{a_i}\psi (a_1,a_2),i=1,2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.26)
The generators $`a_1`$ and $`a_2`$ of the co-space $`(𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda },,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ verify the commutation relation

$$[a_1,a_2]=\lambda a_1$$
(5.27)
defining a noncommutative geometry except in the nondeformed limit where the corresponding classical geometries are recovered.

The action of the Casimir (5.8) of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ on $`(𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda },,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{C}_{\omega ,\lambda }f(a_1,a_2)=\left[\omega \frac{^2}{a_1^2}e^{\lambda \frac{}{a_2}}+\frac{4}{\lambda ^2}\mathrm{sinh}^2(\frac{\lambda }{2}\frac{}{a_2})\right]f(a_1,a_2),$$
(5.28)
or explicitly

$$\mathrm{C}_{\omega ,\lambda }f(a_1,a_2)=\omega \frac{^2}{a_1^2}f(a_1,a_2+\lambda )+\frac{1}{\lambda ^2}[f(a_1,a_2+\lambda )+f(a_1,a_2\lambda )2f(a_1,a_2)].$$
(5.29)
This last expression shows the effect of the deformation transforming one of the derivatives on a finite difference operator.

An interesting problem is the solution of the wave equations associated to this two–parameter family of Casimir operators (in this context see, for instance Ref.  and references therein). Considering the group $`T_{\lambda ,2}`$ included inside of $`𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda }`$ by means of the exponential map, the action of the Casimir over the elements $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)T_{\lambda ,2}`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{C}_{\omega ,\lambda }(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\left[\omega \alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+\frac{4}{\lambda ^2}\mathrm{sinh}^2(\frac{\lambda }{2}\alpha _2)\right](\alpha _1,\alpha _2),$$
(5.30)
that suggests to interpret to $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)`$ as a “plane wave”.

### 5.3 Representations of $`U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$

The representation induced by the character of $``$

$$1(P_1^{n_1}P_2^{n_2})=\alpha _1^{n_1}\alpha _2^{n_2}$$
(5.31)
(or, in other words, the representation induced by $`(\alpha _1,\alpha _2)T_{\lambda ,2}`$) is obtained as follows. Theorem 3.4 gives the following result for the action of the generators in the induced representation

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \varphi J=& \varphi ^{},\hfill \\ \hfill \varphi P_1=& \varphi \frac{2\lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+(\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}2\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2))\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2+2\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+2\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )},\hfill \\ \hfill \varphi P_2=& \varphi \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\hfill \\ & +(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )+\omega \lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )].\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.32)
In the limit $`\lambda 0`$ we recover the more familiar expressions

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \varphi J=& \varphi ^{},\hfill \\ \hfill \varphi P_1=& \varphi (\alpha _1\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )\alpha _2\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )),\hfill \\ \hfill \varphi P_2=& \varphi (\omega \alpha _1\mathrm{S}_\omega (\phi )+\alpha _2\mathrm{C}_\omega (\phi )).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.33)
The local representations obtained inducing with the character of $`U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$ given by

$$J^m1=c^m,$$
(5.34)
are

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill e^{tJ}& (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=e^{tc}\hfill \\ & \times (\frac{2\lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+(\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}2\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2))\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)}{2\lambda \mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(2\lambda \mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\omega \lambda ^3\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+2\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)},\hfill \\ & \frac{1}{\lambda }\mathrm{ln}[\mathrm{cosh}(\lambda \alpha _2)+\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2}+(\mathrm{sinh}(\lambda \alpha _2)\frac{1}{2}\omega \lambda ^2\alpha _1^2e^{\lambda \alpha _2})\mathrm{C}_\omega (t)+\omega \lambda \alpha _1e^{\lambda \alpha _2}\mathrm{S}_\omega (t)]),\hfill \\ & \\ \hfill P_i& (\alpha _1,\alpha _2)=\alpha _i(\alpha _1,\alpha _2),i=1,2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.35)
which can be written in an equivalent way using an arbitrary element, $`\psi (a_1,a_2)`$, of $`U(𝔱_{\lambda ,2})`$, as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill J\psi (a_1,a_2)=& \left[c\overline{a}_1\frac{1e^{2\lambda \frac{}{a_2}}}{2\lambda }+\omega \overline{a}_2\frac{}{a_1}\frac{\lambda }{2}\omega \overline{a}_1\frac{^2}{a_1^2}\right]\psi (a_1,a_2),\hfill \\ \hfill P_i\psi (a_1,a_2)=& \frac{}{a_i}\psi (a_1,a_2),i=1,2.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.36)
Notice that if we take $`c=0`$, which is equivalent to consider the character determined by the counit of $`U(𝔰𝔬_\omega (2))`$, the action (5.26) of the co-space $`(𝒜_{\omega ,\lambda },,U_\lambda (𝔦𝔰𝔬_\omega (2)))`$ is recovered.

The Casimir action for the local representation coincides with those given by (5.28) since only the generators $`P_i`$ are presented.

It is worthy to note that also in this case in the limit $`\lambda 0`$ we obtain

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill J\psi (a_1,a_2)=& \left[ca_1\frac{}{a_2}+\omega a_2\frac{}{a_1}\right]\psi (a_1,a_2),\hfill \\ \hfill P_i\psi (a_1,a_2)=& \frac{}{a_i}\psi (a_1,a_2),i=1,2\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.37)
that it is in agreement with the results for local representations .

## 6 Concluding remarks

The induction procedure that we have used here is not, strictly speaking, a generalization of Mackey’s induction method for Lie groups. The concept of co-space generalizes in an algebraical way the concept of $`G`$–space (being $`G`$ a transformation group), and is connected with the induced representations in some sense similar to the nondeformed case. In Ref.  we presented a more general method that, obviously, can also be used for bicrossproduct algebras. However, it is necessary the knowledge of pairs of dual basis of the corresponding Hopf algebra and its dual, but here this requirement is not necessary in the method used in this work.

We have made use of the vector fields to compute commutators. For bicrossproduct Hopf algebras, like used in this work $`H=𝒦`$, there is a connection between the representations of $`H`$ induced by characters of $`L`$ and one-parameter flows. This relation allows to associate to quantum bicrossproduct groups dynamical systems. Here we have only sketched this situation that will be analyzed with more detail in a forthcoming paper.

The equations associated to the Casimir operators, as in the nondeformed case, will give the behaviour of the ‘deformed’ quantum systems. A procedure for this solution can be found in . Note that $`q`$–special polynomials and $`q`$–functions may appear as solutions of these $`q`$–Casimir equations.

As we mention in Section 2 the bicrossproduct structure gives a $``$–structure for which the representations are, essentially, unitary. The equivalence of the induced representations is given by Theorem 3.4, which establishes a correspondence among classes of induced representations and orbits of $`L`$ under the action of $`K`$. This result is analogous to the Kirillov orbits method . The problem of the irreducibility of the representations is still open. Partial results for particular cases have been obtained (see Ref.  for the $`(1+1)`$ $`\kappa `$–Galilei algebra and  for the quantum extended $`(1+1)`$ Galilei algebra).

## Acknowledgments

This work has been partially supported by DGES of the Ministerio de Educación y Cultura de España under Project PB98-0360, and the Junta de Castilla y León (Spain).