text:
# Introduction

## Introduction

The concept of the moduli space is one of the most important tools in the study of solitons. Originally introduced by Manton to describe the classical scattering of monopoles , it is now appreciated that the topology and geometry of soliton moduli spaces also encodes many of the quantum properties of supersymmetric theories. Examples include the spectrum of solitonic bound states, and non-perturbative contributions to correlation functions. This has played a pivotal role in untangling the web of dualities in field and string theories.

While the moduli spaces of instantons, monopoles and vortices have all been studied in detail, less attention has been paid to the moduli space of domain walls. Indeed, in most theories there is a force between widely separated domain walls 111This remains true even when the domain walls are mutually BPS ., and any attempt to describe the dynamics using a moduli space approximation requires the introduction of a potential . Nevertheless, there do exist models where the force between domain walls vanishes, resulting in a moduli space of static multi-kink solutions with arbitrary separation. These include a class of generalized Wess Zumino models , $`𝒩=1^{}`$ theories , and massive sigma models .

In this paper we shall consider domain walls in $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric QED with a FI parameter and $`N`$ flavors of electrons222This is a slight generalization of the model considered in , reducing to it in the strong coupling limit .. If each electron has a different mass there are $`N`$ isolated vacua, implying the existence of BPS domain walls. As will be reviewed below, a generic domain wall decomposes into several “fundamental” domain walls, each of which carries an independent position and phase collective coordinate. The moduli space of solitons is thus a toric Kähler manifold .

In fact, this theory has a much richer spectrum of solitons than one might guess through a naive homotopy group argument. As well as domain walls, there also exist superconducting BPS strings, which carry a global current . Moreover, at least in the strong coupling limit, these strings can end on the domain wall where they are charged under a localized $`U(1)`$ gauge field . (The gauge field is dual to the phase collective coordinate). In other words, this field theory provides a simple model of D-brane physics.

The paper is organized as follows. In the next section we introduce the abelian-Higgs model of interest. We review the first order domain wall equations, as well as the connection to the sigma-model kinks of . We then proceed to consider the metric on the moduli space of solutions and derive the Kähler potential in integral form (equation (18)). In the case of two kinks with identical masses, this integral can be performed (the resulting explicit metric is given in equation (20)) and some of the properties and implications of this metric are analyzed. In the second part of this paper, we change tack and discuss semi-local vortices on $`𝐑\times 𝐒^1`$ with a Wilson line for the flavor symmetry group. Motivated by the analogy with instantons and monopoles , we demonstrate that the vortices decompose into multiple kink solutions. This provides a mechanism for calculating fractional instanton effects in strongly coupled two-dimensional sigma models.

A note on the quantum theory: in this paper we concentrate on domain walls in a $`d=3+1`$ dimensional abelian gauge theory. However, due to the existence of a Landau-pole, the theory is not well-defined at the quantum level. The same is true of the theory lifted to $`d=4+1`$ dimensions, which may be of interest in the context of brane-world scenarios333One cannot lift the theory with a mass gap to dimensions greater than $`4+1`$ while preserving supersymmetry.. Since we restrict ourselves to classical aspects of domain walls, no harm is done. However, to find the same domain walls as quantum objects, we must consider the dimensional reduction of the theory to $`d=2+1`$ or $`d=1+1`$. Alternatively they appear as instantons in gauge quantum mechanics. In each of these cases, the metric on the moduli space remains the same.

Finally, throughout the paper we stress the many similarities that exist between the domain walls and monopoles, as well as between semi-local vortices and Yang-Mills instantons. These similarities add to the growing evidence that there exists a quantitative correspondence relating these solitons .

## Gauge Theory Domain Walls

Our starting point is $`d=3+1`$, $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetric $`U(1)`$ gauge theory coupled to $`N`$ hypermultiplets. The bosonic part of the Lagrangian is given by,

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4e^2}}F^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2e^2}}|\varphi |^2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\left(|𝒟q_i|^2+|𝒟\stackrel{~}{q}_i|^2\right){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|\varphi m_i|^2(|q_i|^2+|\stackrel{~}{q}_i|^2)`$ (1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2}}({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|q_i|^2|\stackrel{~}{q}_i|^2\zeta )^2{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2}}|{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\stackrel{~}{q}_iq_i|^2`$
Each scalar field $`q_i`$ has charge $`+1`$ under the gauge group, while the $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i`$ have charge $`1`$. Each pair is assigned a complex mass $`m_i`$ which may always be chosen to satisfy $`_im_i=0`$. The complex scalar field $`\varphi `$ lives in the vector multiplet and is neutral under the gauge group. Finally, we require that $`\zeta `$, the real FI parameter appearing in the D-term, is non-zero. This ensures the theory lies in its Higgs phase. Without loss of generality444A possible complex FI parameter which would appear in the F-term in (1) has been set to zero using the $`SU(2)_R`$ R-symmetry of the action. we set $`\zeta >0`$.

For vanishing masses the theory enjoys a $`SU(N)`$ flavor symmetry and a moduli space of vacua given by $`T^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}`$. In this paper we will be interested in the case of non-zero, distinct masses: $`m_im_j`$ for $`ij`$. This breaks the flavor symmetry to the maximal torus $`U(1)^{N1}`$ and lifts all but $`N`$ isolated vacua, lying on the zero section of $`T^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}`$,

Vacuum $`i`$: $`\varphi =m_i,|q_j|^2=\zeta \delta _{ij},|\stackrel{~}{q}_j|^2=0`$

For generic masses $`m_i`$, there exist BPS domain wall solutions interpolating between any given pair of vacua. However, in order to find a moduli space of domain walls we need to restrict the mass parameters to be real555This is entirely analogous to the situation with monopoles in higher rank gauge groups, in which a moduli space only exists if the vacuum expectation value is real . : $`\mathrm{Im}(m_i)=0`$. This immediately leads to the important corollary that there is a natural ordering to the vacua. We choose the ordering $`m_{i+1}<m_i`$ for all $`i`$.

Since certain fields will not appear in the domain wall solutions discussed below, we set them to zero at this stage:

$`\mathrm{Im}(\varphi )=\stackrel{~}{q}_i=F=0`$ (2)
Their sole role was to complete the supersymmetry multiplets, and to cancel a potential gauge anomaly. (In fact the field strength will be resurrected below when we come to discuss dynamics). In particular, from now on the field $`\varphi `$ will always be assumed to be purely real. We choose the domain wall to lie in the $`(x^2x^3)`$ plane, so that the only non-zero space-time field variations are in the $`xx^1`$ direction. We write $`_1`$. The BPS equations, first derived in , can be determined by simply completing the square in the Hamiltonian,

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2e^2}}(\varphi )^2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|𝒟q_i|^2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\varphi m_i)^2|q_i|^2+{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2}}({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|q_i|^2\zeta )^2`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2e^2}}(\varphi e^2({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|q_i|^2\zeta ))^2+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|𝒟q_i(\varphi m_i)q_i|^2\pm T`$
For the kink interpolating between the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ vacuum at $`x\mathrm{}`$ and the $`j^{\mathrm{th}}`$ vacuum at $`x+\mathrm{}`$, the topological charge $`T`$ is given by,

$`T=\left[{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\varphi m_i)|q_i|^2\varphi \zeta \right]_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}=\zeta (m_im_j)`$ (3)
where we have chosen $`j>i`$ which requires use of the upper signs in the Hamiltonian. The Bogomoln’yi equations are therefore given by,

$`\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`e^2({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|q_i|^2\zeta )`$ (4)
$`𝒟q_i`$ $`=`$ $`(\varphi m_i)q_i`$ (5)
It is simple to show that for $`j<k<i`$, these Bogomoln’yi equations require $`q_k0`$. For this reason, we now restrict attention to the maximal domain wall interpolating between the $`1^{\mathrm{st}}`$ and $`N^{\mathrm{th}}`$ vacua, which has tension $`T=\zeta (m_1m_N)`$. Any other domain wall may be embedded maximally in a theory with fewer flavors.

The second Bogomoln’yi equation (5) is easily solved,

$`q_i=\sqrt{\zeta }\mathrm{exp}\left(\psi m_i(xx_0){\displaystyle \underset{a=1}{\overset{N2}{}}}\alpha _i^ar_a\right)`$ (6)
where $`\alpha `$ is a fixed, rank $`(N2)`$ real matrix satisfying $`_i\alpha _i^a=_im_i\alpha _i^a=0`$, and the complex function $`\psi `$ is determined by,

$`\psi =\varphi +iA`$
with $`AA_1`$ the gauge potential. By (2), the imaginary part of $`\psi `$ is pure gauge. It may be set to zero when considering static solutions, but will play an important role when we turn to the dynamics of domain walls. Most important in the solution (6) are the putative collective coordinates. These are the center of mass $`x_0`$ and the parameters $`r_a`$, $`a=1,\mathrm{},N2`$ which are related to the separation of neighbouring domain walls. Each is complex, with real and imaginary parts,

$`x_0=X_0+i\theta _0,r_a=R_a+i\theta _a`$ (7)
and will provide $`N1`$ complex coordinates on the domain wall moduli space. When $`m_i`$ and $`\alpha _i^a`$ are rational, the corresponding $`\theta `$ is periodic. In contrast, when $`m_i`$ and $`\alpha _i^a`$ are irrational, $`\theta 𝐑`$. Note that there exists some ambiguity in fixing the matrix $`\alpha _a^i`$ which is related to the possiblity of performing coordinate redefinitions on the moduli space. This ambiguity may be naturally removed by insisting that, asymptotically, the parameters $`R`$ coincide with the relative separations of far-separated domain walls. We shall do this explicitly for the two-kink metric but in general it remains an open problem.

However, we must not be too hasty in concluding that multi-domain wall solutions exist, since we have still to satisfy the first Bogomoln’yi equation (4) which now reads,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\zeta e^2}}^2\mathrm{Re}(\psi )={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{exp}\left(2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}(\psi )2m_i(xX)2\alpha _i^aR_a\right)1`$ (8)
Note that we have left the sum over $`a=1,\mathrm{},N2`$ implicit in this equation, and shall continue to do so for the remainder of the paper. This non-linear, somewhat unpleasant, differential equation, which defines $`\mathrm{Re}(\psi )`$ as a function of the real variables $`(xX)`$ and $`R_a`$, is further complicated by the boundary conditions,

$`\mathrm{Re}(\psi )\{\begin{array}{ccc}m_1(xX)+\alpha _1^aR_a& & x\mathrm{}\\ m_N(xX)+\alpha _N^aR_a& & x+\mathrm{}\end{array}`$ (11)
I do not know if solutions exist for all values of the dimensionful parameter $`\zeta e^2`$. However, it is possible to write down a formal solution as a perturbative series in the dimensionless parameter $`e^2`$. The strong coupling expansion takes the form,

$`\mathrm{Re}(\psi )={\displaystyle \underset{p=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{2p}}}\psi _p.`$ (12)
Then, in the strict strong coupling limit $`e^2\mathrm{}`$, the solution is

$`\mathrm{exp}(2\psi _0)=\left({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\mathrm{exp}(2m_i(xX)2\alpha _i^aR_a)\right)^1`$ (13)
which indeed has the correct boundary conditions. This may be understood as the long-wavelength approximation to the true solution to (8). The remaining $`\psi _p`$ for $`p>1`$ are determined in an iterative fashion by the equation,

$`^2{\displaystyle \underset{p=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^{2(p+1)}}}\psi _p=\zeta {\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n!}}\left({\displaystyle \underset{p=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{e^{2p}}}\psi _p\right)^n`$
which ensures that $`\psi _p0`$ as $`x\pm \mathrm{}`$, so the boundary conditions are preserved. Thus, there exist solutions to (8) enjoying the full compliment of $`N1`$ complex collective coordinates, at least in a neighborhood of $`e^2=0`$. The size of this neighborhood is determined by the radius of convergence of the sum (12), given by the limit $`|\psi _p/\psi _{p+1}|`$ as $`p\mathrm{}`$. It would be interesting to determine whether the solutions exhibit a phase transition as the coupling constant is varied, or whether the radius of convergence is infinity or (more disappointing) zero.

The strong coupling limit $`e^2\mathrm{}`$, which played an important role in determining the existence of the solution, is familiar from linear sigma-models . From the expression for the scalar potential (1), it is clear that this limit restricts us to the Higgs branch $`𝒱=T^{}\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}`$. The presence of mass terms for the hypermultiplets induces a potential on the Higgs branch which, by supersymmetry requirements, is proportional to the length of a tri-holomorphic Killing vector on $`𝒱`$ . This Killing vector is determined by the global flavor symmetry preserved by the masses $`m_i`$. Domain walls in such massive sigma-models have been extensively studied in the literature and, in particular, the existence of multi-kink solutions was demonstrated in  using both Morse theory as well as more direct techniques. It was further shown in  that the coordinates $`R_a`$ do indeed parameterize the separations between “fundamental kinks”, each of which interpolates from the $`i^{\mathrm{th}}`$ vacuum to the $`(i+1)^{\mathrm{th}}`$ vacuum. The maximal kink considered here is comprised of $`(N1)`$ fundamental kinks. A similar decomposition of kinks has also been found in $`SU(N)\times 𝐙_2`$ gauge models .

Moreover, the massive sigma-models also admit a wide range of BPS solutions including intersecting domain walls , string-lumps , strings ending on domain walls  and dyonic domain walls . It seems likely that each of these has a generalization to the finite coupling gauge theory considered here. This is certainly true of strings, as shown in , and it a simple exercise to generalize the BPS equations of all these solitons to the gauge theory context.

## The Moduli Space of Domain Walls

We turn now to the dynamics of domain walls. We work in the moduli space approximation; in other words, we consider solutions to the static BPS equations. The complex collective coordinates are then promoted to fields on on the domain wall world-volume, $`x_0(\xi )`$ and $`r_a(\xi )`$. For small fluctuations, the low-energy dynamics of the soliton is described by a $`d=2+1`$ dimensional sigma model with target space toplogically of the form

$`_{N1}=𝐑\times {\displaystyle \frac{𝐑\times \stackrel{~}{}_{N1}}{𝒢}}`$
where the first two $`𝐑`$ factors parameterize the center-of-mass and overall phase of the soliton respectively. Newton’s third law ensures each is endowed with a flat metric. As with monopoles, motion along the second $`𝐑`$ factor recovers the dyonic domain walls discussed in . All interesting dynamics is encoded in the metric on $`\stackrel{~}{}_{N1}`$, the relative kink moduli space, which has complex dimension $`(N2)`$. This inherits both a complex structure from (7) as well as $`(N2)`$ holomorphic $`U(1)`$ isometries from the abelian flavor symmetries, and is thus a toric Kähler manifold. The quotient by the discrete group $`𝒢`$ acts only on the toric fibers. For generic domain wall masses, $`𝒢=𝐙`$. For certain, rational, choices of masses the second $`𝐑`$ factor collapses to $`𝐒^1`$, and $`𝒢`$ is a finite group. This is identical to monopoles in higher rank gauge groups. Unlike monoples however, the symmetries of the problem allow the metric to contain constant cross terms between the center-of-mass and relative motion factors — more on these later.

To find the metric, we firstly study fluctuations around the domain wall background. We concentrate on variations with respect to time, but the final answer may be trivially extended to have $`d=2+1`$ Lorentz symmetry on the domain wall world volume. The linearized Bogomoln’yi equations are,

$`\dot{\varphi }`$ $`=`$ $`e^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(\dot{q}_iq_i^{}+q_i\dot{q}_i^{})`$ (14)
$`𝒟\dot{q}_ii\dot{A}q_i`$ $`=`$ $`(\varphi m_i)\dot{q}_i+\dot{\varphi }q_i`$ (15)
which are augmented by Gauss’ law, determining the electric field $`E=F_{01}`$,

$`E=ie^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}(q_i𝒟_0q_i^{}q_i^{}𝒟_0q_i)`$ (16)
This equation requires $`E0`$. However, it may be shown that neither $`\mathrm{Im}(\varphi )`$ nor $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i`$ have zero modes, and so we continue to ignore them as per ansatz (2)666This is not true of the corresponding fermions and the superpartners of $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i`$ do yield fermionic zero modes.. We choose to work in $`A_0=0`$ gauge, in which case the three equations above combine to give,

$`^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{q}_i}{q_i}}\right)=(\dot{\varphi }+i\dot{A})=2e^2{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\dot{q}_jq_j^{}`$
which is valid for all $`i`$ such that $`q_i0`$. The metric on the moduli space is, as usual, inherited from the kinetic terms in the action. After employing the above time-evolution equations, this can be brought into the form,

$``$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\frac{1}{2e^2}|\dot{\varphi }+i\dot{A}|^2}+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\dot{q}_i\dot{q}_i^{}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\dot{q}_j\dot{q}_j^{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{q}_i}{q_i}}\dot{q}_j^{}q_ji(q_i0)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑x\underset{j}{}|q_j|^2(\dot{\psi }+m_j\dot{x}_o\alpha _j^a\dot{r}^a)(m_j\dot{x}_0^{}\alpha _i^a\dot{r}_a^{})}`$
where, in the last equality, we have used the explicit expression for $`q_j`$ given in equation (6). To make further progress, we must find an expression for $`\dot{\psi }`$ in terms of the collective coordinates $`x_0`$ and $`r_a`$. This involves solving equation (8) which is currently beyond our reach apart from in the strong coupling $`e^2\mathrm{}`$ limit. From now on, we therefore restrict ourselves to this regime of parameter space so that, using (13), Gauss’ law becomes

$`\dot{\psi }_0={\displaystyle \frac{_{i=1}^N(m_i\dot{x}_0+\alpha _i^a\dot{r}_a)\mathrm{exp}(2m_i(xX)2\alpha _i^aR_a)}{_{j=1}^N\mathrm{exp}(2m_j(xX)2\alpha _j^aR_a)}}`$
Inserting this into the Lagrangian, and performing some of the more simple integrals, we find the metric on the $`𝒢`$-fold cover of $`_{N1}`$ is given by,

$`=\frac{1}{2}T|\dot{x}_0|^2+\zeta (\alpha _N^a\alpha _1^a)\dot{x}_o\dot{r}_a^{}+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.+{\displaystyle \frac{^2𝒦}{R_aR_b}}\dot{r}_a\dot{r}_b^{}`$ (17)
The cross-term between the center-of-mass $`x_0`$ and the relative separations $`r_a`$ reflects the fact that the generic domain wall solution breaks parity, so that the metric is not invariant under $`x_0x_0`$.777Such terms are absent for higher co-dimension solitons (vortices, monopoles, instantons) by rotational symmetry. I thank Adam Ritz for a discussion on this issue.. In relativistic terminology, the metric is “stationary”, as opposed to “static”, in the $`x_0`$ coordinate. The interesting dynamics is contained within the Kähler potential $`𝒦(R_a)`$ which is given by the integral,

$`𝒦={\displaystyle \frac{\zeta }{4}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\mathrm{log}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{exp}(2m_ix2\alpha _i^aR_a)\right)}`$ (18)
Note that although this integral is divergent, all such terms are at most linear in $`R_a`$, and so do not contribute to the metric. The toric Kähler structure of the metric, which is required by the global and super- symmetries of the theory, is manifest in these coordinates. In particular, the Kähler structure ensures that the bosonic Lagrangian (17) enjoys a supersymmetric extension. Since the domain walls are half BPS, their three-dimensional worldvolume dynamics preserves $`𝒩=2`$ supersymmetry (or four-supercharges). The relevant sigma-model was found long ago  and includes a four-fermi term coupling Grassmannian zero modes to the Riemann tensor associated with the metric (18).

As mentioned in the introduction, the function $`𝒦`$ contains information about the classical scattering of domain walls, as well as quantum effects in lower dimensional theories. For example, we may dimensionally reduce the theory (1) to $`d=1+1`$, with $`𝒩=(4,4)`$ supersymmetry. The spectrum of solitons is then determined by normalisable, harmonic forms on $`_k`$. The holomorphic subset of these forms survive as states in the $`𝒩=(2,2)`$ theory (in which the $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i`$ and their superpartners are removed). Alternatively, if we reduce further to $`d=0+1`$ quantum mechanics, the integral of the Euler form over $`_k`$ yields the $`k`$-instanton contribution to the four-fermi correlation function.

### The Two-Kink Metric

Let us now restrict attention to the simplest case: two kinks with equal tension $`T=\frac{1}{2}M\zeta `$. This occurs for the $`N=3`$ model with the parameters,

$`m_i=(\frac{1}{2}M,0,\frac{1}{2}M),\alpha _i=\frac{1}{6}(\frac{1}{2}M,M,\frac{1}{2}M)`$ (19)
With this choice, the system is symmetric under $`x_0x_0`$, ensuring that the $`dx_0dr^{}`$ cross-terms in the metric vanish. The moduli space takes the form,

$`_2=𝐑\times {\displaystyle \frac{𝐒^1\times \stackrel{~}{}_2}{𝐙_2}}`$
The periodicities of the two angular variables can be found by careful examination of the solutions (6). The $`𝐒^1`$ factor is parameterized by $`\theta _0[0,4\pi /M)`$. The relative moduli space is parameterized by the collective coordinates $`R𝐑`$ and $`\theta [0,8\pi /M)`$. The $`𝐙_2`$ symmetry acts only on these periodic variables,

$`𝐙_2:\theta _0\theta _0+2\pi /M,\theta \theta +4\pi /M`$
Most importantly, with the choice of parameters (19) the Kähler potential given in equation (18) simplifies tremendously; in fact, to the point where Mathematica is happy to perform the integral with minimal complaint. We find the relative moduli space metric to be,

$`ds^2=\frac{1}{16}M\zeta F(R)(dR^2+d\theta ^2)`$ (20)
where all interactions are encoded in the function $`F`$;

$`F(R)`$ $`=`$ $`e^{MR/2}{\displaystyle 𝑑y\frac{e^y+e^y}{(e^y+e^y+e^{MR/2})^2}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2e^{MR/2}}{(e^{MR}4)^{3/2}}}\left[e^{MR/2}(e^{MR}4)^{1/2}+4\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2+e^{MR/2}(e^{MR}4)^{1/2}}{2+e^{MR/2}+(e^{MR}4)^{1/2}}}\right)\right]`$
Note that, despite appearances to the contrary, the function $`F`$ is real and positive definite. The apparent singularity at $`e^{MR}=4`$ is quite illusory: $`F`$ is smooth at that point with value $`4/3`$. As mentioned in the introduction, this function contains information about the spectrum of domain walls in $`d=1+1`$ dimensional gauge theories, as well as instanton effects in gauge quantum mechanics. Here we merely extract some simple physics concerning the classical dynamics. Firstly, let us consider the limit of far-separated domain walls. As $`R\mathrm{}`$, the metric becomes

$`ds^2\frac{1}{8}M\zeta \left(1(2MR4)e^{MR}+𝒪(e^{2MR})\right)(dR^2+d\theta ^2)`$
The constant term, with the factor of $`M/8`$ shows that we have correctly identified $`R`$ as the large-distance separation between the kinks (this can be traced back to the choice of normalization of $`\alpha `$ in (19)). The leading order correction to free motion is exponentially suppressed as expected for any soliton in a theory with a mass gap. The long-range velocity dependent force is,

$`\ddot{R}=e^{MR}(M^2R3M)(\dot{R}^2\dot{\theta }^2)`$
For suitably large $`\dot{\theta }`$, the two kinks repel. If, instead, the kinks have constant relative phase, the overall minus sign implies that the velocity dependent force is attractive at large separation. In fact, numerical studies show that this attractive force persists for all values of $`R`$. Thus kinks moving initially apart will continue on such a trajectory, slowing but not halting. In contrast, kinks moving towards each other will increase their speed. Assuming the velocities remain small so that the moduli space approximation is valid, we can determine their fate by examining the metric as they approach. In the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$, the function $`F\frac{1}{2}\pi \mathrm{exp}(MR/2)`$. After changing to coordinates

$`L=\left({\displaystyle \frac{\pi \zeta }{2M}}\right)^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}(MR/4)𝐑^+`$
then, as $`L0`$, the metric becomes

$`ds^2dL^2+\frac{1}{16}M^2L^2d\theta ^2`$
which, for the specific range $`\theta [0,8\pi /M)`$, is non-singular. Thus the two-kink moduli space is smooth, the collision is elastic and the domain walls rebound with their phases exchanged, $`\theta \theta +4\pi /M`$.

## Fractional Vortices

In this section, we discuss the relationship between the gauge theory domain walls considered above, and BPS semi-local vortices  (for a review, see ). The latter solitons are vortices in an abelian gauge theory with a multi-component Higgs field. This is precisely the model of equation (1) if we set the mass terms $`m_i`$ to zero. The vortices have $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i=\varphi =0`$, but a non-zero magnetic field, say $`B=F_{13}`$ for a vortex string extended in the $`x_2`$ direction. The BPS equations are,

$`B`$ $`=`$ $`e^2({\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}|q_i|^2\zeta )`$
$`𝒟_1q_i`$ $`=`$ $`𝒟_3q_i`$
Suppose we dimensionally reduce on the $`x_3`$ direction, so that $`_30`$ on all dynamical fields, and we further rename $`A_3\mathrm{Re}(\varphi )`$. Then the vortex equations are precisely the domain wall equations (4) and (5) if, upon dimension reduction, we impose a Wilson line for the $`SU(N)`$ flavor symmetry, introducing the masses $`m_i`$.

This situation is reminiscent of the relationship between monopoles and instantons. In this case, dimensional reduction of the self-dual Yang-Mills equations, with a Wilson line for the $`SU(N)`$ gauge symmetry, results in the BPS monopole equation. In fact, in the monopole case, there is a deeper relationship between instantons and monopoles, discovered by Lee and Yi . These authors consider $`SU(N)`$ instantons compactified on $`𝐑^3\times 𝐒^1`$ with a Wilson line around the $`𝐒^1`$, breaking the gauge group to the maximal torus. Such configurations are known as calorons. The dimension of the moduli space of calorons is the same as that of instantons in flat space; for Pontyagrin number $`k`$, there are $`4kN`$ moduli. Lee and Yi show that these collective coordinates may be understood as the position and internal phase of $`kN`$ magnetic monopoles of $`N`$ different types. Recall that on flat $`𝐑^3`$, an $`SU(N)`$ gauge theory plays host to only $`(N1)`$ different types of monopoles, one for each simple root of the Lie algebra. For the caloron, the extra monopole is associated to the affine root of the Lie algebra, and arises because of the periodic nature of the Higgs field. The simplest way to see this result is using the string set-up of D0-D4-branes compactified on a circle.

In the remainder of this paper, we would like to show that a similar phenomenon happens for semi-local vortices. Related observations were also made in . As in the case of instantons and monopoles, the simplest way to see this result is through a brane construction. In fact, we choose to model the $`d=2+1`$ theory which is simply the dimensional reduction of the model considered up to now888The $`d=3+1`$ dimensional theory has a Landau pole. This doesn’t affect the classical discussion of this paper but, due to the omniscience of string theory, makes a brane discussion more subtle., which we subsequently compactify on $`𝐑^{1,1}\times 𝐒^1`$. There are (at least) two ways to construct semi-local vortices in string theory, and each has its advantages. The first method uses IIA string theory with a background of D2- and D6-branes, together with a NS-NS $`B_2`$-field,

$`D2:`$ $`012`$
$`N\times D6:`$ $`0123456`$
with anti-self dual $`B_{\mu \nu }`$ for $`\mu ,\nu =3,4,5,6`$. The theory on the D2-brane is the $`U(1)`$ gauge theory of interest, with $`\zeta |B|`$. In this set-up, the Chern-Simons terms on the D2-brane world-volume imply that the semi-local vortex may be thought of as a D0-brane absorbed within the D2-brane. Unfortunately, moduli counting is difficult to see from this perspective, as the D0-brane does not preserve supersymmetry when it is removed from the D2-D6-bound state. Nevertheless, we shall have use for this construction later.

The second construction of semi-local vortices uses the IIB Hanany-Witten set-up,

$`2\times NS5:`$ $`012345`$
$`N\times D5:`$ $`012789`$
$`D3:`$ $`0126`$
$`k\times D1:`$ $`07`$
The full configuration is drawn in Figure 1. The low-energy theory on the D3-brane is the $`d=2+1`$, $`𝒩=4`$ $`U(1)`$ gauge theory with $`N`$ flavors described in (1) Although this set-up employs more branes, it has the advantage that all parameters have geometric origins. For example, the real FI parameter is given by the relative positions of the NS5-branes,

$`x^8|_{NS5}=x^9|_{NS5}=0,\mathrm{\Delta }x^7|_{NS5}=\zeta `$
while the complex masses are related to the relative positions of the D5-branes in the $`x^4`$ and $`x^5`$ directions. For the purposes of discussing vortices, we set the masses to zero. The vevs of $`q_i`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i`$ are determined by the positions of the D3-brane segments suspended between the D5-branes. We denote the $`(N+1)`$ segments as $`D3_\alpha `$. For BPS vortices to exist, we require $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i=0`$. In the brane picture, this translates to

$`x^8|_{D3_\alpha }=x^9|_{D3_\alpha }=0,x^7|_{D3_{\alpha +1}}>x^7|_{D3_\alpha }`$
In this case, $`k`$ parallel D-strings, lying in the $`x^7`$ direction, may connect the first D3-brane segment with the last, while preserving supersymmetry — see Figure 1a. This is the semi-local vortex with magnetic charge $`k`$. Each of these D-strings splits into $`N`$ separate segments as illustrated in the picture. Since each of these segments is free to roam the $`(x^1x^2)`$ plane, the moduli space of semi-local vortices has real dimension $`2kN`$. This is counting is indeed correct, as shown in . Moreover, this provides the first piece of numerological evidence that, as for instantons and monopoles, the charge $`k`$ semi-local vortex may decompose into $`kN`$ parallel domain walls when placed on a circle.

One may wonder why a single segment of D-string does not qualify as a BPS state of the theory. To see this, note that the flux from such a D-string is deposited on the D3-brane segment, where it spreads out. Since the D3-brane is non-compact only in two spatial dimensions, this state has a logarithmically divergent mass. Only when the D-strings form a closed, oriented path from the first D3-brane to the last can this flux escape onto the NS5-branes, leading to a state of finite energy. Note also that the brane picture suggests that finite mass states also exist when $`\stackrel{~}{q}_i0`$ — see Figure 1b. However, since the D-strings are not parallel in this case, the state breaks supersymmetry.

We turn now to the question of vortices on $`𝐑\times 𝐒^1`$, where the circle is taken to have radius $`R`$. To realize this in string theory, we may work with either of the brane constructions above, and make $`x^2`$ periodic. Since the IIA set-up is the less complicated (and easier to draw) we choose to work in the D2-D6-system. If a Wilson line for the $`SU(N)`$ flavor symmetry is introduced, upon T-duality the D6-branes become D5-branes separated in the $`x^2`$ direction. The flat D2-brane becomes a D-string oriented in the $`x^1`$ direction. The result is the familiar D1-D5 system. The presence of the $`B_2`$-field, which is not affected by T-duality, induces a force between the D-string and the D5-branes. This reproduces the $`N`$ vacuum states, in which the D-string lies within a given D5-brane. What becomes of the vortex? At the position of the vortex, the D2-brane is wrapping an internal cycle and thus, locally, is not extended in the $`x^2`$ direction. Upon T-duality, we therefore expect a D-string wrapping the dual $`S^1`$. The final configuration for $`N=2`$ is shown in Figure 2. The D-string interpolates to one of the vacuum states at $`x_1\pm \mathrm{}`$, lying within one of the D5-branes. However, at the location of the vortex, it leaves its asymptotic location to wind $`k`$ times around the circle ($`k=1`$ is drawn in the picture). On the way around, it may make a temporary home in any one of the other $`(N1)`$ D5-branes it encounters. The existence of such BPS kinky D-string configurations was predicted in , and further examined in  where it was shown that they indeed correspond to the gauge theory domain walls discussed in this paper.

Let us discuss the $`N=2`$ field theory in more detail. This theory only two vacua, located at $`\varphi =\pm m`$. (Since the mass $`m`$ arose from a flavor Wilson line, it is periodic so we must have $`m<\pi /R`$). In flat space, this would imply the existence of a single kink, in which $`\varphi `$ monotonically increases from $`\varphi =m`$ to $`\varphi =+m`$. There is also a corresponding anti-kink in which $`\varphi `$ decreases, in the other direction. However, as the brane picture clearly demonstrates, when placed on $`𝐑\times 𝐒^1`$, there exists a further kink (as opposed to anti-kink) solution which interpolates from $`\varphi =+m`$ to $`\varphi =m`$. This preserves the same supersymmetry as the original kink and is possible because $`\varphi `$ arises from a Wilson line, $`\varphi =_{𝐒^1}A`$. Invariance under large gauge transformations means that $`\varphi `$ has period $`2\pi /R`$. This allows $`\varphi `$ to interpolate from $`+m>0`$ to $`m<0`$ with $`\varphi ^{}>0`$ at all times. For the theory on the circle, the mass of the original kink is $`2\stackrel{~}{\zeta }m`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }=2\pi R\zeta `$. In the limit $`R0`$, we keep $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ fixed, to ensure that this kink remains in the spectrum. In contrast, the new kink which interpolates from $`+m`$ to $`m`$, has mass $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }(2\pi /R2m)`$. As $`R0`$, with $`\stackrel{~}{\zeta }`$ fixed this kink decouples, and we recover the situation described at the beginning of this paper.

A periodic $`\varphi `$ allows for the possibility of multiple domain wall solutions for theories with only two, or indeed one, vacuum states. It would be interesting to examine the metric on these moduli spaces in more detail, especially in light of the fact that they give a Kähler deformation of the (semi-local) vortex moduli space.

As stressed above, the preceding discussion is entirely analogous to that of instantons and monopoles given in . In that case, the calorons have found an interesting application in supersymmetric quantum field theories. It has long been known that certain strongly coupled four-dimensional field theories receive non-perturbative contributions that have the characteristics of fractional instantons. The decomposition of instantons into monopoles when compactified on a circle gives a physical manifestation of this phenomenon and, when coupled with holomorphy, may be used to compute fractional instanton effects in four-dimensional gauge theories in the weakly coupled regime . Fractional instantons also appear in certain two-dimensional gauge theories and sigma-models, the most familiar example being the $`𝒩=(2,2)`$, $`\mathrm{𝐂𝐏}^{N1}`$ sigma-model. As for the four-dimensional case, compactification on a circle gives a new method to compute these effects using controlled, semi-classical techniques.

## Acknowledgements

My thanks to John Brodie, Jerome Gauntlett, Neil Lambert, Adam Ritz and Paul Townsend for discussions on various issues, and to Luis Bettencourt for comments on the draft. I am supported by a Pappalardo fellowship, and thank Neil Pappalardo for his generosity. This work is supported in part by funds provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (D.O.E.) under cooperative research agreement #DF-FC02-94ER40818.


format: text

text:
# §0. Introduction

## §0. Introduction

A quantum Kac-Moody algebra $`U_q(𝔤)`$ introduced in \[D1\] and \[Ji\] is a $`q`$-deformation of the universal enveloping algebra $`U(𝔤)`$ of a Kac-Moody Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. Lusztig \[L\] (see also \[R\]) has shown that the character formula for dominant highest weight representations is preserved when $`U_q(𝔤)`$ is deformed to $`U(𝔤)`$.

This paper deals with the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$, the quantum toroidal algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$, and vertex operators. Our purpose is to give an irreducible vertex representation for the newly developed quantum toroidal algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$. This leads an interesting phenomena: the irreducible basic $`\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N`$-module allows an irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ action. Moreover, each weight space as both $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$-module and $`\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N`$-module coincides. Therefore, this fact enhances the above mentioned Lusztig theorem in the special case $`𝔤=\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N`$.

Quantum toroidal algebras were introduced by Ginzburg-Kapranov-Vasserot \[GKV\] in the study of the Langlands reciprocity for algebraic surfaces. These algebras are quantized analogues for toroidal Lie algebras of Moody-Rao-Yokonuma \[MRY\]. A Schur type duality between representations of the quantum toroidal algebra (of type $`A`$) and the double affine Hecke algebra was established by Varagnolo-Vasserot in \[VV1\]. They further obtained in \[VV2\](see also \[STU\]) a nice representation for the quantum toroidal algebra by gluing the standard module of the quantum affine algebra together with a level-$`0`$ module arising from solvable lattice models. Some other interesting representations were constructed in \[FJW\], \[S\] and \[TU\] from various point of view.

Vertex representations for quantum affine algebras were developed by Frenkel-Jing \[FJ\] and Jing \[J\], which are q-analogues of Frenkel-Kac \[FK\] and Segal \[Se\] construction for affine Lie algebras. Vertex representations of the affine Lie algebra $`\widehat{𝔤l}_N`$ was given in Frenkel \[F\]. Representations for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ or $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ have been studied by many people (for example, \[H\], \[JKKMP\] and \[KMS\]).

We shall use $`N`$ copies of orthogonal (or independent) Fock spaces to construct a family of vertex operators as was done in \[G\]. More precisely, given a non-zero complex number $`p`$, we define vertex operators $`X_{ij}(r,z)`$ depending on the parameter $`p`$, for $`i,j,r`$. In the non-quantum case (i.e. $`q=1`$), there are only finite such operators for a fixed $`r`$ as $`X_{ij}(r,z)`$ is doubly periodic with respect to indices $`i`$ and $`j`$. However, in the quantum case, due to the $`q`$-twisting, $`X_{ij}(r,z)`$ is no longer doubly periodic so there are infinite such operators for a fixed $`r`$. The algebra generated by some of those operators will give an irreducible representation of the quantum toroidal algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$. As one by-product, we obtain another realization of the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ and recover the vertex representation of \[FJ\] for the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$. The other by-product is the fact of level-0 $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ action on level-1 $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$-module which appeared in \[JJKMP\].

Our results are based on a new realization of the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$. In \[DF\] the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ was defined in the context of the quantum Yang-Baxter equation, which contains the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ in a canonical way. We construct a new set of generators within the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ with the advantage that they are orthogonal (mutually commutative) in the usual sense, and this immediately establishes the isomorphism between the classical enveloping algebra of $`\widehat{𝔤l}_N`$ and its quantum counterpart over the field of functions in $`q^{c/2}`$. Drinfeld \[D2\] showed that in an appropriate completion the quantum enveloping algebra of the simple Lie algebra is isomorphic to the enveloping algebra of the simple Lie algebra up to a twisting of the Hopf algebra structure. Our result adds another example to this general statement and also facilitates the construction of Weyl bases in the algebra.

The main results in sections 1 to 3 were announced in \[GJ\]. The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 1 we recall the notion of the quantum toroidal algebra. Sect. 2 lays the foundation for the Fock space representation of $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ where we emphasize the role of the affine general linear algebra. Sect. 3 is devoted to the proof of our construction. In the last section we construct a new set of generators for the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ and through the new basis we show that the module provides both actions for $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ and $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$.

## §1. Quantum toroidal algebra of type $`A_{_{N1}}`$

We always assume that the complex number $`q`$ is generic and $`N`$ is a positive integer with $`N3`$. Let $`d`$ be a nonzero complex number. The quantum toroidal algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ is the unital associative algebra over $``$ generated by $`e_{i,k},f_{i,k},h_{i,l},k_i^{\pm 1}`$, where $`i=0,1,\mathrm{},N1,k,l\{0\}`$, and the central elements $`c^{\pm 1}`$. The relations are expressed in terms of the formal series:

$$e_i(z)=\underset{k}{}e_{i,k}z^k,f_i(z)=\underset{k}{}f_{i,k}z^k,$$
$`1.1`$
and

$$k_i^\pm (z)=k_i^{\pm 1}\mathrm{exp}(\pm (qq^1)\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}h_{i,\pm k}z^k),$$
$`1.2`$
as follows

$`k_ik_i^1=k_i^1k_i=cc^1=1,`$ $`1.3`$$`1.4`$$`1.5`$$`1.6`$$`1.7`$$`1.8`$$`1.9`$
$`[k_i^\pm (z),k_j^\pm (w)]=0,`$
$`\theta _{a_{ij}}(c^2d^{m_{ij}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})k_i^+(z)k_j^{}(w)=\theta _{a_{ij}}(c^2d^{m_{ij}}{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})k_j^{}(w)k_i^+(z),`$
$`k_i^\pm (z)e_j(w)=\theta _{a_{ij}}(c^1d^{m_{ij}}({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\pm 1})e_j(w)k_i^\pm (z),`$
$`k_i^\pm (z)f_j(w)=\theta _{\pm a_{ij}}(cd^{m_{ij}}({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\pm 1})f_j(w)k_i^\pm (z),`$
$`[e_i(z),f_j(w)]={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{ij}}{qq^1}}(\delta (c^2{\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})k_i^+(cw)\delta (c^2{\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})k_i^{}(cz)),`$
$`(d^{m_{ij}}zq^{a_{ij}}w)e_i(z)e_j(w)=(q^{a_{ij}}d^{m_{ij}}zw)e_j(w)e_i(z),`$
$`(q^{a_{ij}}d^{m_{ij}}zw)f_i(z)f_j(w)=(d^{m_{ij}}zq^{a_{ij}}w)f_j(w)f_i(z),`$ $`1.10`$$`1.11`$
$`\{e_i(z_1)e_i(z_2)e_j(w)(q+q^1)e_i(z_1)e_j(w)e_i(z_2)+e_j(w)e_i(z_1)e_i(z_2)\}`$
$`+\{z_1z_2\}=0,\text{ if }a_{ij}=1,`$
$`\{f_i(z_1)f_i(z_2)f_j(w)(q+q^1)f_i(z_1)f_j(w)f_i(z_2)+f_j(w)f_i(z_1)f_i(z_2)\}`$ $`1.12`$$`1.13`$
$`+\{z_1z_2\}=0,\text{ if }a_{ij}=1,`$
$`[e_i(z),e_j(w)]=[f_i(z),f_j(w)]=0,\text{ if }a_{ij}=0,`$
where

$$\theta _m(z)=\frac{q^mz1}{zq^m}[[z]]$$
$`1.14`$
is understood as the Taylor series expansion,

$$A=(a_{ij})=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}2& 1& & 0& 1\\ 1& 2& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 2& 1\\ 1& 0& & 1& 2\end{array}\right)$$
$`1.15`$
is the Cartan matrix of affine type $`A_{_{N1}}^{(1)}`$ and

$$M=(m_{ij})=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 1& & 0& 1\\ 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 0\\ & \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \\ 0& 0& \mathrm{}& 0& 1\\ 1& 0& & 1& 0\end{array}\right)$$
$`1.16`$
is a skew symmetric matrix (i.e., $`m_{ij}=\delta _{i,j+1}\delta _{j,i+1}`$ for $`0i,jN1`$, where $`\delta _{0N}=\delta _{N0}=1`$).

The reason to call $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ the quantum toroidal algebra is that it is a two-parameter deformation of the enveloping algebra of the toroidal Lie algebra $`\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N([x^{\pm 1},y^{\pm 1}])`$ (the universal central extension of the double loop algebra $`𝔰𝔩__N([x^{\pm 1},y^{\pm 1}])`$, see \[MRY\]). Actually, $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ has been proven to be a one-parameter deformation of the enveloping algebra of a Lie algebra over a quantum torus, see Section 13 in \[VV2\].

As pointed out in \[GKV\], the quantum toroidal algebra $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ contains two remarkable subalgebras, the horizontal subalgebra $`\dot{U}_h`$ and the vertical subalgebra $`\dot{U}_v`$, where $`\dot{U}_h`$ is generated by

$$e_{i,0},f_{i,0},k_i^{\pm 1},i=0,1,2,\mathrm{},N1,$$
$`1.17`$
while $`\dot{U}_v`$ is generated by

$$e_{i,n},f_{i,n},h_{i,l},k_i^{\pm 1},i=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,n\text{ and }l^\times .$$
$`1.18`$
The central elements of $`\dot{U}_h`$ and $`\dot{U}_v`$ are $`k^{\pm 1}=_{i=0}^{N1}k_i^{\pm 1}`$ and $`c^{\pm 1}`$ respectively. Both $`\dot{U}_h`$ and $`\dot{U}_v`$ are isomorphic to the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$.

## §2. Fock space and vertex operators

In this section, we shall set up our Fock space and construct a family of vertex operators indexed by $`\times `$.

Let

$$P=ϵ_1\mathrm{}ϵ__N$$
$`2.1`$
be a rank $`N`$ free abelian group provided with a $``$-bilinear form $`(,)`$ defined by $`(ϵ_i,ϵ_j)=\delta _{ij}`$, $`1i,jN`$. Let

$$Q=(ϵ_1ϵ_2)\mathrm{}(ϵ_{_{N1}}ϵ__N)$$
$`2.2`$
be the rank $`(N1)`$ free subgroup of $`P`$. Then

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\{\alpha Q:(\alpha ,\alpha )=2\}=\{ϵ_iϵ_j:1ijN\}$$
$`2.3`$
is the root system of type $`A_{_{N1}}`$.

Let $`\epsilon :Q\times Q\{\pm 1\}`$ be a bimultiplicative function such that

$`\epsilon (\alpha +\beta ,\gamma )`$ $`=\epsilon (\alpha ,\gamma )\epsilon (\beta ,\gamma ),\epsilon (\alpha ,\beta +\gamma )=\epsilon (\alpha ,\beta )\epsilon (\alpha ,\gamma )`$ $`2.4`$$`2.5`$
$`\epsilon (\alpha ,\alpha )`$ $`=(1)^{\frac{1}{2}(\alpha ,\alpha )},`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma Q`$. The formula (2.5) immediately implies

$$\epsilon (\alpha ,\beta )\epsilon (\beta ,\alpha )=(1)^{(\alpha ,\beta )},\alpha ,\beta Q.$$
$`2.6`$
Let $`[Q]=e^\alpha `$ be the group algebra of $`Q`$. For $`\beta Q`$, define $`e_\beta \text{End}[Q]`$ by

$$e_\beta e^\alpha =\epsilon (\beta ,\alpha )e^{\alpha +\beta },\text{ for }\alpha Q.$$
$`2.7`$
It follows that

$$e_\alpha e_\beta =(1)^{(\alpha ,\beta )}e_\beta e_\alpha $$
$`2.8`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta Q`$. Also, for $`\beta H=Q_{}`$, define $`\beta (0)\text{End}[Q]`$ by

$$\beta (0)e^\alpha =(\beta ,\alpha )e^\alpha ,\text{ for }\alpha Q.$$
$`2.9`$
Next let $`ϵ_i(n)`$ and $`C`$ be the generators of the Heisenberg algebra $``$, $`1iN,n\{0\}`$, subject to relations that $`C`$ is central and

$$[ϵ_i(m),ϵ_j(n)]=m\delta _{ij}\delta _{m+n,0}C.$$
$`2.10`$
Define

$$ϵ_{ij}(n)=q^{(ji)|n|/2}ϵ_i(n)q^{(ij)|n|/2}ϵ_j(n).$$
$`2.11`$
Here we observe the relation

$$ϵ_{ik}(n)=q^{(kj)|n|/2}ϵ_{ij}(n)+q^{(ij)|n|/2}ϵ_{jk}(n).$$
$`2.12`$
We have

$$[ϵ_{ij}(m),ϵ_{ij}(n)]=m\delta _{m+n,0}(q^{(ji)m}+q^{(ij)m})C,j>i,$$
$`2.13`$
and it is zero if $`i=j`$.

Let

$$S(^{})=[ϵ_i(n):1iN,n_+]$$
$`2.14`$
denote the symmetric algebra of $`^{}`$, which is the algebra of polynomials in infinitely many variables $`ϵ_i(n),1iN,n_+`$, where $`_+=\{n:n>0\}`$. $`S(^{})`$ is an $``$-module in which $`C=1`$, $`ϵ_i(n)`$ acts as the multiplication operator for $`n_+`$, and $`ϵ_i(n)`$ acts as the partial differential operator for $`n_+`$.

For $`\alpha \{\pm ϵ_1,\mathrm{},\pm ϵ_N\}`$ we introduce the operators $`E_\pm (r,z)`$ as follows

$$E_\pm (\alpha ,z)=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\alpha (\pm n)}{n}z^n).$$
$`2.15`$
It follows that for $`\alpha ,\beta \{\pm ϵ_1,\mathrm{},\pm ϵ_N\}`$

$$E_+(\alpha ,z)E_{}(\beta ,w)=E_{}(\beta ,w)E_+(\alpha ,z)(1\frac{w}{z})^{(\alpha ,\beta )}.$$
$`2.16`$
Set

$$V_Q=S(^{})[Q].$$
$`2.17`$
The operator $`z^\alpha (\text{End}[Q])[z,z^1]`$ is defined as $`z^{\alpha (0)}=\mathrm{exp}(\alpha (0)\mathrm{ln}z)`$.

$$z^\alpha e^\beta =z^{(\alpha ,\beta )}e^\beta $$
$`2.18`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta Q`$. Thus, in $`(\text{End}[Q])\{z\}`$, we have

$$[\alpha (0),z^\beta ]=0,\text{ and }z^\alpha e_\beta =e_\beta z^{\alpha +(\alpha ,\beta )}$$
$`2.19`$
for $`\alpha ,\beta Q`$. It is clear that the formula (2.18) expresses $`z^\alpha `$ as an operator from $`[Q]`$ to $`[Q][z,z^1]`$.

Let $`\mu `$ be any non-zero complex number. Consider the valuation $`\mu ^\alpha `$ of the operator $`z^\alpha `$. Namely, $`\mu ^\alpha `$ is the operator $`[Q][Q]`$ given by

$$\mu ^\alpha e^\beta =\mu ^{(\alpha ,\beta )}e^\beta ,\text{ for }\alpha ,\beta Q.$$
$`2.20`$
Most notations related to formal series and the Fock space used in this section can be found in \[FLM\] and \[J\].

Set

$$ϵ_{i+N}=ϵ_i,\text{ for }i.$$

Accordingly,

$$(ϵ_i,ϵ_j)=\delta _{ij}=\delta _{\overline{i},\overline{j}},\text{ for }\overline{i},\overline{j}/N.$$

This implies that $`a_{ij}=(ϵ_iϵ_{i+1},ϵ_jϵ_{j+1})`$ and $`m_{ij}=(ϵ_i,ϵ_{j+1})(ϵ_j,ϵ_{i+1})`$ which are used in Section 1.

Let $`p`$ ba a non-zero complex number. For $`r,i,j`$, we define the vertex operator $`X_{ij}(r,z)`$ as follows.

$`X_{ij}(r,z)=`$ $`:\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(ϵ_i(n)p^{rn}q^{(ij)|n|}ϵ_j(n))}{n}}z^n):`$ $`2.21`$
$`e_{ϵ_iϵ_j}z^{ϵ_iϵ_j+\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j)}{2}}p^{rϵ_j\frac{(ϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j)}{2}r}`$
$`=`$ $`E_{}(ϵ_i,z)E_{}(ϵ_j,zq^{ij}p^r)E_+(ϵ_i,z)E_+(ϵ_j,zq^{ji}p^r)`$
$`e_{ϵ_iϵ_j}z^{ϵ_iϵ_j+\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j)}{2}}p^{rϵ_j\frac{(ϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j)}{2}r}`$
Remark 2.22. In the non-quantum case (i.e. $`q=1`$), we get $`X_{ij}(r,z)=X_{i+N,j}(r,z)=X_{i,j+N}(r,z).`$ For general $`q`$, we only have $`X_{ij}(r,z)=X_{i+N,j+N}(r,z).`$ We may think of $`X_{10}(r,z)`$ (or $`X_{01}(r,z)`$) as $`X_{1N}(r,z)`$ (or $`X_{N1}(r,z)`$) by modulo $`N`$ in the powers of $`q`$.

Let

$$\stackrel{~}{𝔤𝔩}__N=𝔤𝔩__N([t,t^1])CD$$

be the affine algebra, where $`C`$ is the central element and $`D`$ is the degree operator. $`𝔥=HCD`$ is its Cartan subalgebra.

The following result is known (see \[F\] and \[G\]).

###### Proposition 2.23

$`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $`\stackrel{~}{𝔤𝔩}__N`$ module given by

$`E_{ij}(t^n)X_{ij}(0,n),1ijN,n,`$
$`E_{ii}(t^n)ϵ_i(n),1iN,n`$
$`C1,D{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}ϵ_i(0)^2{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{n_+}{}}ϵ_i(n)ϵ_i(n).`$
and $`V_Q=_{\mu P}V_\mu `$, where $`P=\{\omega _0+\alpha +n\tau :\alpha Q,n_0\}`$ is the set of weights, $`V_\mu =\{vV:h.v=\mu (h)v\text{ for }h𝔥\}`$. More precisely, we have $`V_{\omega _0+\alpha +n\tau _0}=We^\alpha ,`$ where $`W`$ is the homogeneous subspace of $`S(^{})`$ of degree $`n+\frac{1}{2}(\alpha ,\alpha )`$, for $`\alpha Q,n_0`$, and

$$\text{ch }V_Q=(\underset{\alpha Q}{}e^{\omega _0+\alpha \frac{1}{2}(\alpha ,\alpha )\tau })\phi (e^\tau )^N,$$
$`2.24`$
where $`\omega _0|_{HD}=0,\omega _0(C)=1,`$ $`\tau |_{HC}=0,\tau (D)=1.`$

Next, for $`r,i,j`$, and $`ij`$, we define

$`u_{ij}(r,z)=q^{(ji)(ϵ_iϵ_j)}`$ $`2.25`$$`2.26`$
$`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{(ji)n}q^{(ij)n}}{n}}(q^{\frac{ji}{2}n}ϵ_i(n)p^{nr}q^{\frac{ij}{2}n}ϵ_j(n)z^n)`$
$`v_{ij}(r,z)=q^{(ij)(ϵ_iϵ_j)}`$
$`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^{(ij)n}q^{(ji)n}}{n}}(q^{\frac{ji}{2}n}ϵ_i(n)p^{nr}q^{\frac{ij}{2}n}ϵ_j(n))z^n).`$
The normal ordering can be defined as usual. For instance we have

$`:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2):`$ $`2.27`$
$`=`$ $`E_{}(ϵ_i,z_1)E_{}(ϵ_j,z_1q^{ij}p^{r_1})E_{}(ϵ_k,z_2)E_{}(ϵ_l,z_2q^{kl}p^{r_2})`$
$`E_+(ϵ_i,z_1)E_+(ϵ_j,z_1q^{ji}p^{r_1})E_+(ϵ_k,z_2)E_+(ϵ_l,z_2q^{lk}p^{r_2})`$
$`e_{ϵ_iϵ_j}e_{ϵ_kϵ_l}z_1^{ϵ_iϵ_j+\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j+ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}z_2^{ϵ_kϵ_l+\frac{(ϵ_kϵ_l,ϵ_iϵ_j+ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}`$
$`p^{r_1ϵ_jr_2ϵ_l\frac{(ϵ_j,ϵ_iϵ_j)}{2}r_1\frac{(ϵ_l,ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}r_2}`$
Moreover, we have

$$:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2):=(1)^{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}:X_{kl}(r_2,z_2)X_{ij}(r_1,z_1):.$$
$`2.28`$
where $`r_1,r_2,i,j,k,l`$ .

The following fact is straightforward.

###### Lemma 2.29

For $`r_1,r_2,i,j,k,l`$,

$`X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2)=:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2):`$ $`2.30`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{z_2}})^{\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{z_1}})^{\delta _{ik}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{kl}z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{\delta _{jl}}`$
$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{kl}z_2}{z_1}})^{\delta _{il}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{\delta _{jk}}p^{\delta _{jk}r_1+\delta _{jl}r_1}`$
Remark 2.31. Note that $`\delta _{ij}`$ used above is doubly periodic with respect to $`i`$ and $`j`$ as $`\delta _{i,j}=(ϵ_i,ϵ_j)=\delta _{\overline{i},\overline{j}}`$, where $`\overline{i},\overline{j}/N`$.

To calculate the commutators of vertex operators, we need some more notations and identities. Set

$`F_{kl}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)=:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2):`$ $`2.32`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{z_2}})^{\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}p^{\delta _{jk}r_1+\delta _{jl}r_1}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{z_1}})^{\delta _{ik}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{kl}z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{\delta _{jl}}`$
$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{kl}z_2}{z_1}})^{1\delta _{il}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{1\delta _{jk}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}z_1}{z_2}}.`$
In particular we have $`F_{ji}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)=F_{ij}^{ji}(r_2,r_1,z_2,z_1)=:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ji}(r_2,z_2):`$. Then we can rewrite Lemma 2.29 as follows.

$`X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_2,z_2)`$ $`2.33`$
$`=`$ $`F_{kl}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{kl}z_2}{z_1}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}z_1}}.`$
The next lemma can be checked directly.

###### Lemma 2.34

For $`r_1,r_2,i,j`$ with $`r_1+r_2=0`$ and $`ij`$,

$`\underset{z_1p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}{lim}F_{ji}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)=:X_{ij}(r_1,p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2)X_{ji}(r_2,z_2):`$
$`=u_{ij}(r_1,p^{r_2}q^{\frac{ji}{2}}z_2)`$
$`\underset{z_2p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}{lim}F_{ji}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)=:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ji}(r_2,p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1):`$
$`=v_{ij}(r_1,q^{\frac{ji}{2}}z_1)`$
The following basic result is similar to (4.16) in \[J\] whose proof is straightforward.

###### Lemma 2.35

For any $`a,b`$ and $`ab`$, we have in $`[[z,z^1]]`$

$$(1az)^1(1bz)^1=\frac{z^1}{ab}((1az)^1(1bz)^1)$$

###### Proposition 2.36

If $`r_1+r_2=0`$, then as a formal series we have

$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}{z_1}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}z_1}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^{ij}z_1}{z_2}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{p^{r_2}q^{ij}z_2}})^1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{p^{r_2}z_2}}`$
$`=`$ $`(q^{ji}q^{ij})^1(\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}{z_1}})\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}{z_2}}))`$
###### Demonstration Proof

By Lemma 2.35, we see that the left hand side of the identity is equal to

$`(q^{ji}q^{ij})^1((1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}{z_1}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^1)`$
$`(q^{ij}q^{ji})^1((1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^{ij}z_1}{z_2}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{p^{r_2}q^{ij}z_2}})^1)`$
$`=`$ $`(q^{ji}q^{ij})^1(\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{q^{ji}p^{r_2}z_2}{z_1}})\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{q^{ji}p^{r_1}z_1}{z_2}}))`$
as needed. ∎

Now we are in the position to show our commutation relation:

###### Proposition 2.37

If $`r_1+r_2=0`$, then

$`[X_{ij}(r_1,z_1),X_{ji}(r_2,z_2)]`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{q^{ji}q^{ij}}}(u_{ij}(r_1,q^{\frac{ji}{2}}p^{r_2}z_2)\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{q^{ji}p^{r_2}z_2}{z_1}})v_{ij}(r_1,q^{\frac{ji}{2}}z_1)\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{q^{ji}p^{r_1}z_1}{z_2}}))`$
###### Demonstration Proof

By (2.33), we have

$`[X_{ij}(r_1,z_1),X_{ji}(r_2,z_2)]`$
$`=`$ $`X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ji}(r_2,z_2)X_{ji}(r_2,z_2)X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)`$
$`=`$ $`F_{ji}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}{z_1}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^1{\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{p^{r_1}z_1}}`$
$`F_{ij}^{ji}(r_2,r_1,z_2,z_1)(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^{ij}z_1}{z_2}})^1(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{p^{r_2}q^{ij}z_2}})^1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{p^{r_2}z_2}}.`$
From Proposition 2.36 and the normal ordering relations of the F’s, the above becomes

$$F_{ji}^{ij}(r_1,r_2,z_1,z_2)(q^{ji}q^{ij})^1(\delta (\frac{q^{ji}p^{r_2}z_2}{z_1})\delta (\frac{q^{ji}p^{r_1}z_1}{z_2})).$$

Now (2.37) follows from (2.34). ∎

## §3. Representations for the quantum toroidal algebra

In this section, we shall use some of vertex operators constructed in the previous section to generate a unital associative algebra which turns out to be a homomorphic image of $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$. From now on we assume that

$$p=d^N.$$
$`3.1`$
For simplicity, we let

$`E_i(z)=X_{i,i+1}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz),F_i(z)=X_{i+1,i}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz),i=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,`$
$`E_0(z)=X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z),F_0(z)=X_{10}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z),`$
$`K_i^+(z)=u_{i,i+1}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz),K_i^{}(z)=v_{i,i+1}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz),i=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,`$
$`K_0^+(z)=u_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z),K_0^{}(z)=v_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z),K_i^\pm =q^{\pm (ϵ_iϵ_{i+1})}.`$
Let $`𝒜`$ be the associative algebra generated by the coefficients of $`E_i(z),F_i(z),K_i^\pm (z)`$, for $`0iN1`$.

We now state our main result of this paper.

###### Theorem 3.2

The linear map $`\pi `$ given by

$`\pi (e_i(z))=E_i(z),\pi (f_i(z))=F_i(z),i=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,`$
$`\pi (e_0(z))=E_0(z),\pi (f_0(z))=F_0(z),`$
$`\pi (k_i^+(z))=K_i^+(z),\pi (k_i^{}(z))=K_i^{}(z),i=1,2,\mathrm{},N1,`$
$`\pi (k_0^+(z))=K_0^+(z),\pi (k_0^{}(z))=K_0^{}(z),`$
$`\pi (c)=q^{\frac{1}{2}},\pi (k_i^\pm )=K_i^\pm ,i=0,1,\mathrm{},N1`$
yields an algebra homomorphism from $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ to $`𝒜`$.

###### Demonstration Proof

The proof will be carried out in several steps.

Step 1. First we have

$$u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)v_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)=v_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)\mathrm{exp}((qq^1)^2J)$$

where

$$J=\underset{n1}{}[\frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}n}ϵ_i(n)p^{nr_1}q^{\frac{1}{2}n}ϵ_{i+1}(n)}{n},\frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}n}ϵ_j(n)p^{nr_2}q^{\frac{1}{2}n}ϵ_{j+1}(n)}{n}](\frac{w}{z})^n$$

Hence the above becomes

$`=`$ $`v_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{q^3w}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}(1\frac{q^1w}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}}{(1\frac{qw}{z})^{2\delta _{ij}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{p^{r_2r_1}qw}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}(1\frac{p^{r_2r_1}q^3w}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}}{(1\frac{p^{r_2r_1}q^1w}{z})^{2\delta _{ij}}}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{p^{r_2}w}{z})^{2\delta _{i,j+1}}}{(1\frac{q^2p^{r_2}w}{z})^{\delta _{i,j+1}}(1\frac{q^2p^{r_2}w}{z})^{\delta _{i,j+1}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{p^{r_1}w}{z})^{2\delta _{j,i+1}}}{(1\frac{q^2p^{r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{j,i+1}}(1\frac{q^2p^{r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{j,i+1}}}}`$
By restricting $`0i,jN1`$ and $`r_1,r_2=0,1`$, noting that $`p=d^N`$ which is only involved when $`K_0^\pm (z)`$ presents, we thus obtain

$$\theta _{a_{ij}}(qd^{m_{ij}}\frac{w}{z})K_i^+(z)K_j^{}(w)=\theta _{a_{ij}}(q^1d^{m_{ij}}\frac{w}{z})K_j^{}(w)K_i^+(z),$$
$`3.3`$
for $`0i,jN1`$.

Step 2. The relations (1.6-1.7) are proved similarly. We only show one case in the following.

$`u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)X_{jk}(r_2,w)=X_{jk}(r_2,w)u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)q^{(ϵ_iϵ_{i+1},ϵ_jϵ_k)}`$
$`\mathrm{exp}((qq^1){\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}[q^{\frac{n}{2}}ϵ_i(n)p^{nr_1}q^{\frac{n}{2}}ϵ_{i+1}(n),{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_j(n)p^{nr_2}q^{(jk)n}ϵ_k(n)}{[n]}}]({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^n)`$
$`=`$ $`X_{jk}(r_2,w)u_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)q^{(ϵ_iϵ_{i+1},ϵ_jϵ_k)}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}}w}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}}{(1\frac{q^{\frac{3}{2}}w}{z})^{\delta _{ij}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{q^{jk\frac{3}{2}}p^{r_2r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{i+1,k}}}{(1\frac{q^{jk+\frac{1}{2}}p^{r_2r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{i+1,k}}}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{q^{jk+\frac{3}{2}}p^{r_2}w}{z})^{\delta _{ik}}}{(1\frac{q^{jk\frac{1}{2}}p^{r_2}w}{z})^{\delta _{ik}}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1\frac{q^{\frac{1}{2}}p^{r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}}{(1\frac{q^{\frac{3}{2}}p^{r_1}w}{z})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}}}`$
By restricting $`0i,j,kN`$, $`k=j\pm 1`$ and $`r_1,r_2=0,1`$, noting that $`p=d^N`$ which is only involved when $`K_0^+(z)`$, $`E_0(z)`$ or $`F_0(z)`$ presents, we get for $`0i,jN1`$

$`K_i^+(z)E_j(w)=\theta _{a_{ij}}(q^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{m_{ij}}({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}}))E_j(w)K_i^+(z),`$ $`3.4`$$`3.5`$
$`K_i^+(z)F_j(w)=\theta _{a_{ij}}(q^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{m_{ij}}({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}}))F_j(w)K_i^+(z).`$
Step 3. Assume that $`0ijN1`$. One has

$`X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)X_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)=:X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)X_{j,j+1}(r_2,w):`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})^{\delta _{ij}\frac{\delta _{i+1,j}}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\delta _{ij}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}q^1w}{p^{r_1}qz}})^{\delta _{ij}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{p^{r_1}qz}})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}p^{\delta _{i+1,j}r_1+\delta _{ij}r_1}`$
$`X_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)=:X_{j,j+1}(r_2,w)X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z):`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\delta _{ij}\frac{\delta _{i+1,j}}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})^{\delta _{ij}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^1z}{p^{r_2}qw}})^{\delta _{ij}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}q^1z}{w}})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}p^{\delta _{ij}r_2}.`$
It follows that

$`(d^{m_{ij}}zq^{a_{ij}}w)E_i(z)E_j(w)=(q^{a_{ij}}d^{m_{ij}}zw)E_j(w)E_i(z),`$ $`3.6`$$`3.7`$
$`[E_i(z),E_j(w)]=0,\text{ if }a_{ij}=0.`$
Note that $`a_{ij}=0`$ if and only if $`|ij|0,1`$ and $`p=d^N`$ which is only involved when $`E_0(z)`$ presents. We can prove relation (1.10) similarly.

Assume that $`0ijN1`$.

$`X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)X_{j+1,j}(r_2,w)=:X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)X_{j+1,j}(r_2,w):`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})^{\frac{\delta _{i,j+1}+\delta _{i+1,j}}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\delta _{i,j+1}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}w}{p^{r_1}z}})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}p^{\delta _{i+1,j}r_1}`$
$`X_{j+1,j}(r_2,w)X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z)=:X_{j+1,j}(r_2,w)X_{i,i+1}(r_1,z):`$
$`({\displaystyle \frac{w}{z}})^{\frac{\delta _{i,j+1}+\delta _{i+1,j}}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z}{w}})^{\delta _{i,j+1}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_1}z}{p^{r_2}w}})^{\delta _{i+1,j}}p^{\delta _{j,i+1}r_2}`$
It immediately gives us

$$[E_i(z),F_j(w)]=0,$$
$`3.8`$
for $`0ijN1`$.

Step 4. To prove the Serre relation, we set

$`I(z_1,z_2,w)={\displaystyle \frac{w}{(z_1z_2)^{1/2}}}({\displaystyle \frac{(z_1z_2)(z_1q^2z_2)}{(z_1q^1w)(z_2q^1w)}}`$
$`+(q+q^1){\displaystyle \frac{(z_1z_2)(z_1q^2z_2)}{(z_1q^1w)(wq^1z_2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(z_1z_2)(z_1q^2z_2)}{(wq^1z_1)(wq^1z_2)}}).`$
###### Lemma 3.9

\[J\] Let $`S(z_1,z_2,w)=I(z_1,z_2,w)+I(z_2,z_1,w)`$, then

$$S(z_1,z_2,w)=0.$$

It follows from the usual vertex operator computation that

$`X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2)X_{kl}(r_3,w)`$ $`3.10`$
$`=:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2)X_{kl}(r_3,w):`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{z_2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{z_2}})(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_2}z_2}{p^{r_1}z_1}})p^{r_1}({\displaystyle \frac{z_1}{w}})^{\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z_1}})^{\delta _{ik}}`$
$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_3}q^{kl}w}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{\delta _{jl}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_3}q^{kl}w}{z_1}})^{\delta _{il}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{p^{r_1}q^{ji}z_1}})^{\delta _{jk}}`$
$`p^{\delta _{jk}r_1+\delta _{jl}r_1}({\displaystyle \frac{z_2}{w}})^{\frac{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}{2}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{z_2}})^{\delta _{ik}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_3}q^{kl}w}{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}})^{\delta _{jl}}`$
$`(1{\displaystyle \frac{p^{r_3}q^{kl}w}{z_2}})^{\delta _{il}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{w}{p^{r_2}q^{ji}z_2}})^{\delta _{jk}}p^{\delta _{jk}r_2+\delta _{jl}r_2}.`$
Its associated products $`X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_3,w)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2)`$, $`X_{kl}(r_3,w)X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2)`$ are expressed in terms of their product expansions similarly by using Lemma 2.29. Note that for all $`i,j,k,l`$

$`:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2)X_{kl}(r_3,w):=:X_{kl}(r_3,w)X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2):`$
$`=(1)^{(ϵ_iϵ_j,ϵ_kϵ_l)}:X_{ij}(r_1,z_1)X_{kl}(r_3,w)X_{ij}(r_2,z_2):.`$
Case 1. For $`0iN2`$, using (3.10) and its associates as well as Lemma 3.9 we have

$`\{E_i(z_1)E_i(z_2)E_{i+1}(w)(q+q^1)E_i(z_1)E_{i+1}(w)E_i(z_2)`$
$`+E_{i+1}(w)E_i(z_1)E_i(z_2)\}+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{i,i+1}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz_1)X_{i,i+1}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^iz_2)X_{i+1,i+2}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{i+1}w):S(z_1,z_2,dw)`$
$`=`$ $`0`$
Case 2. It follows from (3.10) that

$`X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_1)X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_2)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}w)`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_1)X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_2)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}w):`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p^1w}{(z_1z_2)^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(z_1z_2)(z_1q^2z_2)}{(z_1q^1d^1w)(z_2q^1d^1w)}}`$
Then we have

$`\{E_1(z_1)E_1(z_2)E_0(w)(q+q^1)E_1(z_1)E_0(w)E_1(z_2)+E_0(w)E_1(z_1)E_1(z_2)\}`$
$`+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_1)X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dz_2)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}w):S(z_1,z_2,d^1w)p^1`$
$`=`$ $`0`$
Case 3. In the case of $`(i,i,j)=(0,0,1)`$ we have as above

$`\{E_0(z_1)E_0(z_2)E_1(w)(q+q^1)E_0(z_1)E_1(w)E_0(z_2)+E_1(w)E_0(z_1)E_0(z_2)\}`$
$`+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z_1)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z_2)X_{12}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}dw):S(z_1,z_2,dw)`$
$`=`$ $`0`$
Case 4. As above we have

$`\{E_{N1}(z_1)E_{N1}(z_2)E_0(w)(q+q^1)E_{N1}(z_1)E_0(w)E_{N1}(z_2)`$
$`+E_0(w)E_{N1}(z_1)E_{N1}(z_2)\}+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{N1,N}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{N1}z_1)X_{N1,N}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{N1}z_2)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}w):`$
$`S(z_1,z_2,dw)`$
$`=`$ $`0,`$
where we have used $`p^1d^{1N}=d`$.

Case 5. Finally we have

$`\{E_0(z_1)E_0(z_2)E_{N1}(w)(q+q^1)E_0(z_1)E_{N1}(w)E_0(z_2)`$
$`+E_{N1}(w)E_0(z_1)E_0(z_2)\}+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z_1)X_{01}(1,p^{\frac{1}{2}}z_2)X_{N1,N}(0,p^{\frac{1}{2}}d^{N1}w):`$
$`S(z_1,z_2,pd^{N1}w)p`$
$`=`$ $`0`$
The quantum Serre relations involving $`F_i`$’s are shown in a similar way. Let $`\alpha _i`$ and $`\alpha _j`$ be adjacent simple roots in the affine Dynkin diagram of type $`A_{_{N1}}^{(1)}`$. Corresponding to the five cases we have considered above, we have

$`\{F_i(z_1)F_i(z_2)F_j(w)(q+q^1)F_i(z_1)F_j(w)F_i(z_2)+F_j(w)F_i(z_1)F_i(z_2)\}`$
$`+\{z_1z_2\}`$
$`=`$ $`:F_i(z_1)F_i(z_2)F_j(w):\{\begin{array}{cc}S(z_1,z_2,dw)\hfill & j=i+1N1\hfill \\ S(z_1,z_2,d^1w)\hfill & i=1,j=0\hfill \\ S(z_1,z_2,dw)p^1\hfill & i=0,j=1\hfill \\ S(z_1,z_2,d^2w)p\hfill & i=N1,j=0\hfill \\ S(z_1,z_2,d^1w)p\hfill & i=0,j=N1\hfill \end{array}`$
$`=`$ $`0`$
Therefore the proof is completed.∎

###### Theorem 3.11

If $`pq^{\pm N}`$ is not a root of unity, then $`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $`𝒜`$ module. Therefore $`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $`U_q(𝔰𝔩_{{}_{N}{}^{},tor})`$ module.

###### Demonstration Proof

Let $`U`$ be a nonzero submodule of

$$V_Q=S(^{})_{}[Q].$$
$`3.12`$
Consider the subalgebra $``$ generated by the coefficient operators of $`k_i^\pm (z)`$. Since

$$\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}x_nz^n)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}y_nz^n$$
$`3.13`$
where

$`y_0=1,y_1=x_1,y_2=x_2+{\displaystyle \frac{x_1^2}{2}},y_3=x_3+x_2x_1+{\displaystyle \frac{x_1^3}{6}},`$
$`y_4=x_4+x_3x_1+{\displaystyle \frac{x_2x_1^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x_2^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{x_1^4}{24}},\mathrm{},`$
one can easily see that the algebra $``$ is the same as the algebra generated by $`K_i^\pm =q^{\pm (ϵ_iϵ_{i+1})}`$ and

$`H_{i,n}=q^{\frac{1}{2}|n|}ϵ_i(n)q^{\frac{1}{2}|n|}ϵ_j(n),1iN1,n\{0\},`$ $`3.14`$$`3.15`$
$`H_{0,n}=q^{\frac{1}{2}|n|}ϵ_N(n)p^nq^{\frac{1}{2}|n|}ϵ_1(n),n\{0\}.`$
from (2.11)-(2.12) we get

$$ϵ_{1N}(n)=q^{\frac{N1}{2}|n|}ϵ_1(n)q^{\frac{1N}{2}|n|}ϵ_N(n)$$
$`3.16`$
It follows from (3.15), (3.16) and our assumption on $`p`$ that

$$ϵ_1(n),ϵ_N(n),\text{ for }n\{0\}.$$

Therefore $``$ contains the Heisenberg algebra $``$. Lemma 9.13 in \[K\] (or Theorem 1.7.3 in \[FLM\]) implies that $`U`$ is completely reducible as $``$-module and so

$$U=S(\widehat{}^{})\mathrm{\Omega }$$

for some subspaces $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of $`[Q]`$. Suppose that $`f=_{i=1}^ms_ie^{\gamma _i}\mathrm{\Omega }`$, where $`s_i,s_i0`$, $`\gamma _iQ`$, for $`1im`$, and $`\gamma _i\gamma _j`$ if $`ij`$.

We claim that $`e^{\gamma _k}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ for some $`k`$.

Since $`K_i^\pm =q^{\pm (ϵ_iϵ_{i+1})}`$ lie in $``$, clearly, $``$ contains $`q^Q`$. Pick $`\alpha Q`$ such that $`(\alpha ,\gamma _{m1}\gamma _m)0`$. Then

$$q^\alpha fq^{(\alpha ,\gamma _m)}f=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m1}{}}s_i(q^{(\alpha ,\gamma _i)}q^{(\alpha ,\gamma _m)})e^{\gamma _i}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{m1}{}}s_i^{}e^{\gamma _i}\mathrm{\Omega },$$

where $`s_i^{}=s_i(q^{(\alpha ,\gamma _i)}q^{(\alpha ,\gamma _m)})`$, $`1im1`$, and $`q^\alpha e^\gamma =q^{(\alpha ,\gamma )}e^\gamma `$. Since $`s_{m1}^{}0`$ (thanks to the generic $`q`$), we may continue this process and get some $`e^{\gamma _k}\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Also, from (2.21), we have

$`e_{ϵ_iϵ_{i+1}}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{n_+}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_i(n)q^nϵ_{i+1}(n)}{n}}z^n)X_{i,i+1}(0,z)`$
$`\mathrm{exp}({\displaystyle \underset{n_+}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_i(n)q^nϵ_{i+1}(n)}{n}}z^n)z^{ϵ_{i+1}ϵ_i1}`$
for $`1iN1`$. Similarly, for $`e_{ϵ_{i+1}ϵ_i}`$. It then follows that $`e^{\gamma _k+Q}\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and so $`\mathrm{\Omega }=[Q]`$. ∎

###### Corollary 3.17

$`V_Q`$ is a level-1 $`\dot{U}_v=U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ module and also a level-0 $`\dot{U}_h=U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ module.

Let $``$ be the unital associative algebra generated by the coefficients of $`E_i(z),F_i(z)`$ for $`1iN1`$ (we may assume that $`d=p=1`$) and $`ϵ_i(n),q^{\pm ϵ_i},1iN,n\{0\}`$. Note that $``$ is a subalgebra of $``$. Then it follows from the proof of Theorem 3.16, we have

###### Proposition 3.18

$`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $``$ module.

Our next business is to show that $``$ is a homomorphic image of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$. Thus $`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$-module.

## §4. The quantum affine algebras $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ and $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$

In this section we will give a new realization for the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$.

We define the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ to be the unital associative algebra generated by $`ϵ_{im},q^{c/2},k_{i0}^{\pm 1}`$, $`x_{jn}^\pm `$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},N;j=1,\mathrm{},N1;n,m^\times )`$ subject to the following relations that $`q^{c/2}`$ is central and

$`[ϵ_{im},ϵ_{jn}]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}[mc]\delta _{ij}\delta _{m,n},`$ $`4.1`$$`4.2`$$`4.3`$$`4.4`$$`4.5`$$`4.6`$$`4.7`$$`4.8`$
$`[ϵ_{im},x_{jn}^\pm ]`$ $`=0,ji,i1,`$
$`[ϵ_{im},x_{in}^\pm ]`$ $`=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{|m|c/2+|m|/2}x_{i,m+n}^\pm ,`$
$`[ϵ_{im},x_{i1,n}^\pm ]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{|m|c/2|m|/2}x_{i1,m+n}^\pm ,`$
$`x_{i,m+1}^\pm x_{jn}^\pm `$ $`q^{\pm a_{ij}}x_{jn}^\pm x_{i,m+1}^\pm =q^{\pm a_{ij}}x_{im}^\pm x_{j,n+1}^\pm x_{j,n+1}^\pm x_{im}^\pm ,`$
$`[x_{im}^\pm ,x_{jn}^\pm ]`$ $`=0,|ji|>1,`$
$`[x_{im}^+,x_{jn}^{}]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{ij}}{qq^1}}(k_{i,m+n}^+q^{(mn)c/2}k_{i,m+n}^{}q^{(nm)c/2}),`$
$`x_{im_1}^\pm x_{im_2}^\pm x_{i\pm 1,n}^\pm `$ $`(q+q^1)x_{im_1}^\pm x_{i\pm 1,n}^\pm x_{im_2}^\pm `$
$`+x_{i\pm 1,n}^\pm x_{im_1}^\pm x_{im_2}^\pm +\{m_1m_2\}=0,`$
where $`(a_{ij})`$ is the Cartan matrix of type $`A`$ of rank $`N1`$, $`[m]=\frac{q^mq^m}{qq^1}`$, $`[mc]=\frac{q^{mc}q^{mc}}{qq^1}`$, and

$$k_i^\pm (z)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}k_{in}^\pm z^n=k_{i0}^{\pm 1}exp(\pm (qq^1)\underset{n>0}{}(q^{n/2}ϵ_{in}q^{n/2}ϵ_{i+1,n})z^{\pm n}).$$
$`4.9`$
Let $`ϵ_i(m)=\frac{m}{[m]}ϵ_{im}`$ and $`c=1`$, then we have

$$[ϵ_i(m),ϵ_j(n)]=m\delta _{ij}\delta _{m,n}I,$$

Thus the Fock module $`V_Q`$ constructed in Sect. 3 is a vertex representation of the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ at level one.

The following easily checked result shows that $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ contains the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ canonically.

###### Lemma 4.10

Let $`h_{im}=q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{im}q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{i+1,m}`$, then the associative subalgebra generated by $`h_{im},q^{c/2},k_{i0}^{\pm 1}`$, $`x_{jn}^\pm `$ $`(i,j=1,\mathrm{},N1;n,m^\times )`$ is isomorphic to the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$. The commutation relations are as follows: Eqs. (4.5)-(4.9) and

$`[h_{im},h_{jn}]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[a_{ij}m]}{m}}[mc]\delta _{m,n},`$ $`4.11`$$`4.12`$
$`[h_{im},x_{jn}^\pm ]`$ $`=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{[a_{ij}m]}{m}}q^{|m|c/2}x_{j,m+n}^\pm ,`$
###### Remark 4.13

In terms of generating functions $`x_i^\pm (z)=_nx_{in}^\pm z^n`$, $`k_i^\pm (z)`$, the commutation relations of the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ are given in Eqs. (1.2)-(1.13) with $`e_i(z)=x_i^+(z),f_i(z)=x^{}(z)`$ and $`d=1`$.

We now introduce another set of basis in the Heisenberg subalgebra to establish isomorphism between the quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ defined above and the Ding-Frenkel algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ \[DF\].

For $`m0`$ we define

$`a_{Nm}`$ $`4.14`$
$`=q^{Nm+|m|/2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|m|}{m}}{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{1m}+q^{|m|}ϵ_{2m}+\mathrm{}+q^{(N1)|m|}ϵ_{Nm}}{(1+q^{2|m|}+\mathrm{}+q^{2(N1)|m|})^{1/2}}}+ϵ_{Nm}\right).`$
For each $`i=1,\mathrm{},N1`$ let

$$a_{im}=\underset{j=i}{\overset{N1}{}}q^{im}(q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{im}q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{i+1,m})+a_{Nm}.$$
$`4.15`$
###### Theorem 4.16

The quantum affine algebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ is isomorphic to the associative algebra generated by the generators $`x_{in}^\pm `$, $`a_{im},q^{c/2},k_{i0}^{\pm 1}`$, $`x_{jn}^\pm `$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},N;j=1,\mathrm{},N1;n,m^\times )`$ with the commutation relations (4.5-4.8) and:

$`[a_{im},a_{in}]`$ $`=0,`$ $`4.17`$$`4.18`$$`4.19`$$`4.20`$$`4.21`$
$`[a_{im},a_{jn}]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}[mc]q^m\delta _{m,n},i>j`$
$`[a_{im},x_{jn}^\pm ]`$ $`=0,ji,i+1,`$
$`[a_{im},x_{in}^\pm ]`$ $`=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{(i1)m|m|c/2}x_{i,m+n}^\pm ,`$
$`[a_{i+1,m},x_{in}^\pm ]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{(i+1)m|m|c/2}x_{i,m+n}^\pm ,`$
###### Demonstration Proof

Let $`\overline{h}_{im}=q^{im}h_{im}=q^{im}(q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{im}q^{|m|/2}ϵ_{i+1,m})`$. First we compute that

$`[`$ $`a_{Nm},a_{Nn}]={\displaystyle \frac{[m][mc]}{m}}\delta _{m,n}`$ $`4.22`$
$`(q^{|m|}+({\displaystyle \frac{|m|}{m}}+{\displaystyle \frac{|n|}{n}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{1+q^{2|m|}+\mathrm{}+q^{2(N1)|m|}}}+q^{|m|})=0,`$
and we can also easily check that

$$[\overline{h}_{im},a_{Nn}]=\delta _{i,N1}\frac{q^m}{m}[m][mc]\delta _{m,n}.$$
$`4.23`$
It follows from Lemma 4.10 and Eq.(4.23) that

$`[a_{im},\overline{h}_{jn}]`$ $`=[\overline{h}_{im}+\mathrm{}+\overline{h}_{N1,m}+a_{Nm},\overline{h}_{jn}]`$ $`4.24`$
$`=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & ij,j+1\hfill \\ \frac{q^m}{m}[m][mc]\delta _{m.n},\hfill & i=j+1\hfill \\ \frac{q^m}{m}[m][mc]\delta _{m.n},\hfill & i=j\hfill \end{array}.`$
We claim that the new set of generators of the Heisenberg subalgebra satisfy the following relations:

$$[a_{im},a_{jn}]=\{\begin{array}{cc}0,\hfill & i=j\hfill \\ \frac{q^m}{m}[m][mc]\delta _{m,n},\hfill & \text{for }i>j.\hfill \end{array}$$
$`4.25`$
In fact for $`i>j`$ it follows from Eqs. (4.22-23) that

$`[a_{im},a_{jn}]`$ $`=[\overline{h}_{im}+a_{i+1,m},a_{jn}]`$
$`=[a_{i+1,m},a_{jn}]=\mathrm{}=[a_{Nm},a_{jn}]`$
$`=[a_{Nm},\overline{h}_{jn}+\overline{h}_{j+1,n}+\mathrm{}+\overline{h}_{N1,n}+a_{Nn}]`$
$`=[a_{Nm},\overline{h}_{N1,n}]={\displaystyle \frac{q^m}{m}}[m][mc]\delta _{m,n}.`$
Similarly using Eq. (4.23) we obtain that

$$[a_{im},a_{in}]=[a_{i+1,m},a_{i+1,n}]=\mathrm{}=[a_{Nm},a_{Nn}]=0.$$

Now let’s look at the commutation relations $`[a_{im},x_{jn}^\pm ]`$. For simplicity we write

$$a_{Nm}=c_{1m}ϵ_{1m}+c_{2m}ϵ_{2m}+\mathrm{}+c_{Nm}ϵ_{Nm}.$$

Then it follows that $`c_{i+1,m}=q^{|m|}c_{im}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},N2`$ and $`c_{Nm}`$=$`q^{|m|/2}(c_{N1,m}q^{|m|/2}+q^{Nm})`$. Using the latter equation and (4.2-4.3) we have that

$`[a_{Nm},x_{N1,n}^\pm ]`$ $`=\pm {\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{|m|c/2}x_{N1,n}^\pm (c_{N1,m}q^{|m|/2}c_{Nm}q^{|m|/2})`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{[m]}{m}}q^{|m|c/2+Nm}x_{N1,n}^\pm .`$
Similarly one proves that $`[a_{Nm},x_{in}^\pm ]=0`$ for $`1iN2`$ by using $`c_{i+1,m}=q^{|m|}c_{im}`$. The relations (4.18-19) are then immediate consequences of $`a_{im}=a_{i+1,m}+q^{im}h_{im}`$ and Lemma 4.10.

The other relations hold automatically, and the theorem is proved. ∎

The following theorem is obtained by the standard argument of generating functions.

###### Theorem 4.26

The new set of generators $`a_{im},q^{c/2},k_{i0}^{\pm 1}`$, $`x_{jn}^\pm `$ of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},N;`$ $`j=1,\mathrm{},N1;n,m^\times )`$ satisfy the following commutation relations in terms of generating functions $`v_i^\pm (z)`$, $`x_i^\pm (z)`$ where

$$v_i^\pm (z)=v_{i0}^1exp((qq^1)\underset{n>0}{}a_{i,n}z^{\pm n}),$$

and the relations are

$`v_i^\pm (z)v_j^\pm (w)`$ $`=v_j^\pm (w)v_i^\pm (z),v_{j0}^\pm v_{j0}^{}=1,`$ $`4.27`$$`4.28`$$`4.29`$$`4.30`$$`4.31`$$`4.32`$$`4.33`$$`4.34`$
$`v_i^+(z)v_i^{}(w)`$ $`=v_i^{}(w)v_i^+(z),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{zwq^{\pm c}}{zwq^{\pm c2}}}v_i^{}(z)v_j^\pm (w)`$ $`=v_j^\pm (w)v_i^{}(z){\displaystyle \frac{zwq^c}{zwq^{c2}}},j>i,`$
$`v_i^\pm (z)^1x_j^\pm (w)v_i^\pm (z)`$ $`=x_j^\pm (w),ij1,`$
$`v_i^\pm (z)^1x_j^{}(w)v_i^\pm (z)`$ $`=x_j^{}(w),ij2,`$
$`v_i^\pm (z)^1x_i^\epsilon (w)v_i^\pm (z)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{zq^{\epsilon c/2+1}wq^{i1}}{zq^{\epsilon c/2}wq^i}}x_i^\epsilon (w),\epsilon =+\text{or}`$
$`v_{i+1}^\pm (z)^1x_i^\epsilon (w)v_{i+1}^\pm (z)`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{zq^{\epsilon c/21}wq^{i+1}}{zq^{\epsilon c/2}wq^i}}x_i^\epsilon (w),\epsilon =+\text{or}`$
$`(zwq^{a_{ij}})x_i^\pm (z)x_j^\pm (w)`$ $`=x_j^\pm (w)x_i^\pm (z)(zq^{a_{ij}}w),`$
$`[x_i^\pm (z),x_j^\pm (w)]`$ $`=0,|ij|>1,`$ $`4.35`$$`4.36`$$`4.37`$
$`[x_i^+(z),x_j^{}(w)]`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{\delta _{ij}}{qq^1}}\{\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{z}{wq^c}})v_{i+1}^{}(wq^{c/2})v_i^{}(wq^{c/2})^1`$
$`\delta ({\displaystyle \frac{zq^c}{w}})v_{i+1}^+(zq^{c/2})v_i^+(zq^{c/2})^1\},`$
$`\{x_i^\pm (z_1)x_i^\pm (z_2)x_j^\pm `$ $`(w)(q+q^1)x_i^\pm (z_1)x_j^\pm (w)x_i^\pm (z_2)`$
$`+x_j^\pm (w)`$ $`x_i^\pm (z_1)x_i^\pm (z_2)\}+\{z_1z_2\}=0,ij=\pm 1,`$
where the rational functions represent the corresponding Taylor expansions as usual.

###### Remark 4.38

One can also express the generator $`ϵ_{im}`$ in terms of $`a_{im}`$ easily from Eqs. (4.14-4.15) to give another proof of the theorem. If we let

$$X_i^\pm (z)=x_i^\pm (q^iz),$$

then the generators defined by $`X_i^\pm (z),v_j^\pm (z),q^{c/2}`$ are exactly the generators in Ding-Frenkel’s definition of $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ (with correction of some typos in \[DF\]). Our Heisenberg algebra is orthogonal and a direct deformation of the classical affine general linear algebra.

Under the presentation of Theorem 4.26 the subalgebra $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$ is generated by $`q^c`$ and

$$x_i^\pm (z),k_i^+(z)=v_{i+1}^{}(zq^i)v_i^{}(zq^i)^1,k_i^{}(z)=v_{i+1}^+(zq^i)v_i^+(zq^i)^1.$$

In order to let $`V_Q`$ have a weight space decomposition, we need to add the operator $`q^D`$ to $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ and $``$. As $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$-module, we have $`V_Q=V^\mu `$, where

$$V^\mu =\{vV_Q:q^h.v=q^{\mu (h)}v,\text{ for }h𝔥\}.$$

It is easy to see that $`V^\mu =V_\mu `$, where $`V_\mu =\{vV_Q:h.v=\mu (h)v,\text{ for }h𝔥\}`$.

###### Proposition 4.39

$`V_Q`$ is an irreducible $`U_q(\widehat{𝔤𝔩}__N)`$ module with the weight space decomposition $`V_Q=_{\mu P}V_\mu `$. Moreover, $`V_Q`$ is complete reducible as $`U_q(\widehat{𝔰𝔩}__N)`$-module.