text:
# A universal symmetry structure in open string theory

## 1 Introduction

For the case of perturbative vacua in string theory, i.e. two dimensional superconformal field theory, there is a large body of results on certain symmetry structures which are linked to these. First of all, there are a number of reconstruction theorems (see \[CP\], \[FK\]) which allow to view the fusion structure of these superconformal theories as given by the representation category of a quasitriangular quasi-Hopf algebra. Beyond this, one can find a universal symmetry of all quasitriangular quasi-Hopf algebras in the form of the so called Grothendieck-Teichmüller group $`GT`$ (see \[Dri\]). The basic idea is the following: Ask for the possibility to transform the $`R`$-matrix and the Drinfeld associator $`\alpha `$ of a quasi-triangular quasi-Hopf algebra $`H`$ while keeping the rest of the structure of $`H`$ completely fixed. In order to define a nontrivial group from these transformations, one has to take a certain closure by including formal deformations of $`R`$ and $`\alpha `$ in the sense of a class of formal power series. Doing this, one arrives at $`GT`$ (for the full technical details of the definition of $`GT`$ we refer the reader to \[Dri\], for a convenient short description see also \[CP\]). As a consequence of these two levels of symmetry structure - the Hopf algebra structures of two dimensional superconformal field theory and the universal symmetry of $`GT`$ \- there exists an action of $`GT`$ on the so called extended moduli space of two dimensional superconformal field theories (see \[Kon 1994\], \[Wit 1991\] for the introduction and general structure of this space and \[Kon 1999\], \[KoSo\] for the $`GT`$-action on it). Mathematically, this space is expected to be describable as the moduli space of a triangulated version of $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$-categories (see \[Kon 1994\]). On the one hand, this extended moduli space has been related to $`D`$-branes, i.e. to boundary conditions for open strings (see e.g. \[GZ\], \[Laz\]). On the other hand, even this extended moduli space (it is extended in comparison to the usual moduli space of a two dimensional superconformal field theory which is locally generated by the truely marginal operators) is restricted to see non-metric degrees of freedom, only (see \[Kon 1994\], \[Wit 1991\]), i.e. it basically describes a topological string theory.

An understanding of the structure of the relevant moduli space of vacua for string theory is considered to be of outermost relevance for the long term goal of a full fledged nonperturbative and background independent formulation of the theory. Finding a symmetry like the $`GT`$ action on extended moduli space is of deep principal interest. The decisive question is, then, if this symmetry is of physical relevance. If it would be, one could hope that it tells an important lesson about the ultimate nature of a complete formulation of string theory. After all, we know from nearly all of the examples of theories in physics that these are to a high degree determined by knowing the fundamental symmetry principle. The examples range from the Galilei invariance of classical mechanics and the Lorentz invariance of the Maxwell equations up to the gauge symmetries in elementary particle physics and the diffeomorphism invariance of general relativity.

A first step toward the question of a physical relevance of the $`GT`$-symmetry is taken by asking the following more concrete question, instead: Does the $`GT`$-action extend to a physically relevant full moduli space of open string theory, i.e. to general boundary conditions in the non-topological setting (formulated more concisely: to a general moduli space of two dimensional boundary conformal field theories)? We will sometimes call this space simply the full moduli space, in the sequel.

We will in this paper show that the $`GT`$-symmetry can not extend to the full moduli space, i.e. in this sense the $`GT`$-symmetry can not be physically relevant (one can not take the $`GT`$-invariance as a candidate for a physical principle in full non-topological string theory). But we find that there is a self-dual, noncommutative, and noncocommutative Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$ which extends the $`GT`$-symmetry to the full moduli space. In more physical terms, we can view this as saying that the $`GT`$-symmetry does not survive the inclusion of general nonperturbative vacua but that in the full setting a quantum analog of this classical symmetry is seen.

We will first arrive at this result by starting from the question of what takes the role of the Hopf algebra symmetries behind two dimensional superconformal field theories if we pass to the setting of boundary conformal field theories. We then ask for the universal symmetry of these algebraic structures, replacing the $`GT`$-symmetry of quasi-triangular quasi-Hopf algebras. This will be the content of section 2.

In section 3, we approach the same problem from a more geometrical perspective: Boundary conditions in the two dimensional conformal field theories geometrically are linked to the appearance of a 2-form field $`B`$ with 3-form field strength $`H`$. Compared to closed 2-forms (which define connections on vector bundles), closed 3-forms - like $`H`$ \- are linked to connections on gerbes which, roughly speaking, can be seen as principal bundles with categories as their fibers. Paralleling the way in which vector bundles define by Serre duality finite-dimensional projective modules over the algebra $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ of smooth functions on the base manifold $`M`$, a class of gerbes induces $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$-linear ring categories. We will see in a simple but instructive example of such a category $`𝒞`$ that the analog of the Hochschild cohomology of a projective module for $`𝒞`$ is, again, related to an action of the Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$. So, we can argue that the more geometrical picture of gerbes leads to the same conclusion concerning a universal $`_{GT}`$-symmetry. Finally, we discuss the conjecture that the $`_{GT}`$-symmetry should not only be stable against quantization but that in this case the classical and the quantum description should even be equivalent.

Section 4 contains some concluding remarks.

## 2 Trialgebras and boundary conformal field theory

Two well known results are the starting point for the considerations in this section: First, starting from a three dimensional topological quantum field theory, one can get a two dimensional conformal field theory as living on the boundary of the 3-manifold (\[FFFS\], \[Wit 1989\]). By the fact that the boundary of a boundary is empty, one can get only conformal field theories without boundary in this way. Second, three dimensional topological field theories can be formulated in a purely algebraic way as vector space valued functors on the category of three dimensional cobordisms (\[Ati\]) and these functors can in turn be shown to be constructible from modular categories (see \[Tur\]). So, two dimensional conformal field theories can be constructed starting from certain modular categories (see \[Seg\] for a different approach leading to this result). In \[KL\] an algebraic framework is presented motivated by the wish to extend this approach to the case of two dimensional boundary conformal field theories. The algebraic notion of topological quantum field theory of \[Ati\] is extended (algebraically by using double functors, i.e. morphisms between double categories) to include 3-manifolds which do not only have boundaries but where also corners on the boundaries are allowed. This introduces the necessary freedom for two dimensional boundary conformal field theories to appear on the boundary of the 3-manifold (see \[KL\] for the details). The central result of \[KL\] is the following:

The extended topological quantum field theories in the above sense are in one to one correspondence with $``$-linear, bounded (i.e. equivalent to a category of finite dimensional modules over a finite dimensional algebra), balanced, abelian, rigid, braided, monoidal categories $`𝒞`$ together with a self-dual Hopf algebra object $`H`$ together with a special self-duality morphism in them (see, again, \[KL\] for the detailed definitions).

So, the algebraic framework introduced in \[KL\] leads to the conclusion that at least a class of two dimensional boundary conformal field theories can be defined starting from such categories $`𝒞`$ together with a Hopf algebra object $`H`$. It is shown in \[KL\] that the input data of \[Tur\] give a special case of the data $`(𝒞,H)`$. This means that the data, given by the introduction of a Hopf algebra object $`H`$, are directly linked to boundary conditions for the conformal field theory. We will, in the sequel, always assume that one can make use of the topological approach of \[KL\] in studying two dimensional boundary conformal field theory.

In order to proceed, we now introduce a new algebraic concept, called a trialgebra:

###### Definition 1

A trialgebra $`(A,,\mathrm{\Delta },)`$ with $``$ and $``$ associative products on a vector space $`A`$ (where $``$ may be partially defined, only) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ a coassociative coproduct on $`A`$ is given if both $`(A,,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ and $`(A,,\mathrm{\Delta })`$ are bialgebras and the following compatibility condition between the products is satisfied for arbitrary elements $`a,b,c,dA`$:

$$(ab)(cd)=(ac)(bd)$$

whenever both sides are defined.

Trialgebras were first suggested in \[CF\] as an algebraic means for the construction of four dimensional topological quantum field theories. It was observed there that the representation categories of trialgebras have the structure of so called Hopf algebra categories (see \[CF\]) and it was later shown explicitly in \[CKS\] that from the data of a Hopf category one can, indeed, construct a four dimensional topological quantum field theory. The first explicit examples of trialgebras were constructed in \[GS 2000a\] and \[GS 2000b\] by applying deformation theory, once again, to the function algebra on the Manin plane and some of the classical examples of quantum algebras and function algebras on quantum groups. In \[GS2001\] it was shown that one of the trialgebras constructed in this way appears as a symmetry of a two dimensional spin system. Besides this, the same trialgebra can also be found as a symmetry of a certain system of infinitely many coupled $`q`$-deformed harmonic oscillators.

We then have the following lemma:

###### Lemma 1

The data $`(𝒞,H)`$ of \[KL\] define for each choice of $`𝒞`$ and $`H`$ a trialgebra.

Proof. By definition of $`𝒞`$, $`𝒞`$ is equivalent to a category of representations of an algebra $`A`$ (see \[KL\]). So, on each object of $`𝒞`$ there is a representation $``$ of the product of $`A`$. Now, the Hopf algebra object $`H`$ is an object in $`𝒞`$ together with a product $``$ and a coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. So, we have two associative products and a coassociative coproduct given. It remains to check compatibilities. The compatibility of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $``$ is given by the definition of a Hopf algebra object. The compatibility of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with $``$ follows from the fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is a morphism in $`𝒞`$. Finally, the compatibility of $``$ and $``$ follows also from the fact that $``$ is a morphism in $`𝒞`$ together with the canonical extension of $``$ to the tensor product of a representation of $`A`$ with itself.

###### Remark 1

It was already observed in \[CF\] that trialgebras define certain monoidal bicategories. While two dimensional conformal field theories without boundary arise from modular categories, the above lemma shows that the two dimensional boundary conformal field theories which can be defined through the construction of \[KL\] correspond to a special class of monoidal bicategories.

As the next step, we can - in analogy to \[Dri\] \- ask for the universal symmetry of (quasi-) trialgebras (where we allow for the coproduct and one of the products to be quasi-associative, only) which are quasi-triangular (respectively, coquasi-triangular) with respect to $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and one of the products. This question was considered in \[Sch\] and it was found that instead of $`GT`$ we get a Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$ which was shown to be self-dual, noncommutative, and noncocommutative. In addition, $`_{GT}`$ can be shown to be a sub-Hopf algebra of the Drinfeld double of $`GT`$.

Together with the above lemma, this shows that the action of the classical group $`GT`$ is too restrictive to hold for general two dimensional boundary conformal field theories. Instead, we have a quantum symmetry in the form of an action of the Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$, here. In this sense, the $`GT`$-symmetry on extended moduli space can not be physical since it does not extend to general nonperturbative vacua. The $`GT`$-symmetry is extended in this case to a quantum symmetry $`_{GT}`$.

###### Remark 2

Since the associator can be seen to basically determine the structure of $`GT`$ already (see \[Dri\], \[Kon 1999\]), the assumption of quasi-triangularity and coquasi-triangularity for the trialgebra which we made above is not a decisive restriction.

We conclude this section by a remark on some additional structural properties of trialgebras: Though examples of trialgebras can be constructed by further deformation quantization of quantum groups and the concept carries some analogy to Hopf algebras (e.g dual pairings of trialgebras can be introduced and a system of coupled matrix equations can be given, replacing the $`RTT`$-relations in the trialgebraic case, see \[GS 2000b\]), trialgebras are in several respects quite different objects.

To give a simple example of this kind, we mention that nontrivial trialgebras are never unital. By a unital trialgebra one would mean one with a unit element $`1`$ which is compatible with both products where the algebraic notion of compatibility, usually used in the case of two products, is the requirement that one and the same element $`1`$ should act as the unit for both products. Such unital trialgebras are always trivial in the sense that they are commutative bialgebras, i.e. the two products necessarily agree and the product is commutative. The proof consists of a simple Eckmann-Hilton type argument, for if such an element $`1`$ would exist, we would have

$`ab`$ $`=`$ $`\left(a1\right)\left(1b\right)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(a1\right)\left(1b\right)`$
$`=`$ $`ab`$
$`=`$ $`\left(1a\right)\left(b1\right)`$
$`=`$ $`ba`$
A much more involved result, showing that trialgebras are objects with new and interesting algebraic properties, is given by the fact that - loosely speaking - trialgebras can not be further deformed to algebraic structures with e.g. two asscociative products and two coassociative coproducts, all linked in a compatible way (see \[Sch\]). In this sense, trialgebras are the end of the story in the deformation process leading from groups to Hopf algebras to trialgebras. We call this property of trialgebras ultrarigidity.

## 3 Cohomology of gerbes

Geometrically, the introduction of boundary conditions in two dimensional conformal field theory is related to the appearance of a 2-form field $`B`$ with a closed 3-form $`H`$ as its field strength. While closed 2-forms lead to connections on vector bundles, closed 3-forms are interpreted as a kind of connection on a gerbe (i.e. a kind of principal bundle with categories as fibers). In \[BM\] a detailed development of the necessary geometrical theory of gerbes is started.

We will in this section be rather brief. Our aim is not to introduce the heavy machinery of gerbes but mainly to show that the results, which have been given in a completely rigorous way from an algebraic approach in the foregoing section, can also be seen in this more geometric picture.

Following \[BM\], we consider a gerbe $`𝒫`$ over a base manifold $`M`$ with cover $`\left(U_i\right)_{iI}`$. Denote by $`𝒫_{U_i}`$ the fiber categories of $`𝒫`$ and let

$$U_{ij}=U_iU_j$$

Then sections of $`𝒫`$ can be written as pairs of data $`(x_i,\varphi _{ij})`$ with $`x_i`$ an object in $`𝒫_{U_i}`$ and

$$\varphi _{ij}:x_j|_{U_{ij}}x_i|_{U_{ij}}$$

a morphism in $`𝒫_{U_{ij}}`$.

Let us now assume that $`𝒫`$ is a gerbe with gauge group (see \[BM\] for this concept) $`GL(n,)`$ (or $`U\left(n\right)`$ for the unitary case). Then we have the following result:

###### Lemma 2

For $`𝒫`$ a gerbe with gauge group $`GL(n,)`$ (or $`U\left(n\right)`$) over a smooth base manifold $`M`$, the sections of $`𝒫`$ define the structure of a $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$-linear ring category.

Proof. $`𝒫`$ leads to a vector bundle analog $`\stackrel{~}{𝒫}`$ of a gerbe with sections $`(\stackrel{~}{x}_i,\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{ij})`$ where the pointwise restrictions of $`x_i`$ and $`\varphi _{ij}`$ lead to vector spaces and linear maps, respectively. For a ring category we need a tensor product $``$ and a direct sum $``$ with the obvious properties. But these are induced from $``$ and $``$ of the category of $``$-vector spaces. So, the category $`𝒮`$ of sections is a ring category. $``$-linearity of $`𝒮`$ follows from the fact that pointwise we have $``$-vector spaces and $``$-linear maps. The stronger result of $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$-linearity of $`𝒮`$ is a consequence of the fact that we have smooth data over $`M`$.

###### Remark 3

This result is the analog of the fact that - by Serre duality - vector bundles induce finite dimensional projective modules over $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$.

Since there is a highly developed theory of Hochschild cohomology of projective modules (see \[GeSch\]), we can now ask for the analog of Hochschild cohomology for such $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$-linear ring categories $`𝒮`$. We will restrict to a simple but instructive example, here (and make a remark about the more general case, below). Namely, consider the case of such a category, consisting only of one object. Since the morphism classes of $`𝒮`$ are $``$-linear, especially, it is immediately clear that $`𝒮`$ can be reinterpreted as a $``$-algebra $`A`$ where the product $``$ of $`A`$ is just the composition of $`𝒮`$. The tensor product gives a second product $``$ on $`A`$ and, using well known coherence theorems, we can assume without loss of generality that $``$ is associative, too. We will call such a structure $`(A,,)`$ a double algebra, in the sequel. Observe that the compatibility of $``$ and $``$ is, once again,

$$\left(ab\right)\left(cd\right)=\left(ac\right)\left(bd\right)$$
(1)
for $`a,b,c,dA`$.

###### Remark 4

Since our aim is to consider deformation theory, in the sequel, we forget about the additional sum $``$ for the moment because the additive structures remain fixed, anyway.

Let us now come to the question of the cohomology of such a double algebra. It is clear that $`(A,,)`$ defines two Hochschild complexes - one for each product - but these are not independent but linked by compatibility conditions for the cohomology groups induced from condition (1). E.g. for the second cohomology of $`(A,,)`$ we do not have arbitrary pairs $`(B_1,B_2)`$ where $`B_1`$ is a Hochschild 2-cocycle for $``$ and $`B_2`$ a Hochschild 2-cocycle for $``$ but only pairs where $`B_1`$and $`B_2`$ satisfy the constraint

$`\left(ab\right)B_1(c,d)+B_1(a,b)\left(cd\right)B_1(ac,bd)`$
$`=`$ $`\left(ac\right)B_2(b,d)+B_2(a,c)\left(bd\right)B_2(ab,cd)`$
calculated from the first order perturbation theory of condition (1).

###### Remark 5

Actually, the structure of $`𝒮`$ induces for $`A`$ even the structure of a double algebra over $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ (instead of simply a $``$-linear double algebra). One could therefore suppose at first sight that one can actually introduce, in addition, deformations of the product in $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ and that therefore three different Hochschild complexes are involved. But observe that in the undeformed case - by the composition of the linear maps $`\stackrel{~}{\varphi }_{ij}`$ \- the composition in $`𝒮`$ and the product on $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ are not independent but the product of $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ can be seen as induced from the composition which we would have for the case of $`1\times 1`$ matrices. In this sense, we do not consider the product on $`𝒞^{\mathrm{}}\left(M\right)`$ as another possibility for deformations and therefore restrict in the cohomology theory to cohomology of a $``$-linear double algebra.

Next, remember that on Hochschild cohomology of associative algebras there is - by the Deligne conjecture - a hidden action of the Grothendieck-Teichmüller group $`GT`$ (see \[Kon 1999\] where a proof of the Deligne conjecture is announced). Basically, the action of $`GT`$ can be imagined as deriving from the possibility to weaken the associative product to a quasi-associative one and from the transformation possibilities for such an associator. We can therefore give the following heuristic argument for the case of two associative products $``$ and $``$: Here, we have the possibility to introduce two different associators $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and the compatibility condition for $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ is

$$[\alpha ,\beta ]=0$$
(2)
(observe that $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ operate on the same space, i.e. we can introduce a commutator for the successive application of the two maps). The constraint resulting from condition (2) for transformations of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ was calculated in \[Sch\] and it was derived there that, again, instead of $`GT`$ the Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$ is the correct algebraic object to describe the common transformations of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ respecting condition (2).

Our heuristic argument therefore leads to the view that on the total cohomology of a $``$-linear double algebra $`(A,,)`$ we have to expect a hidden action of the Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$.

###### Remark 6

We expect that the $`_{GT}`$-action should also hold for the case of a general category with the structure of $`𝒮`$ because in the case of the $`GT`$-action this is also not affected by the passage from associative algebras to $`A_{\mathrm{}}`$-categories.

The main conclusion of this section is therefore that also in the more geometric picture of gerbes we find an argument that the $`GT`$-symmetry can not be physical in the sense that it does not hold for general nonperturbative backgrounds but that it has to be extended to the quantum symmetry $`_{GT}`$ in this case. The arguments of this section are of a more heuristic nature but one should keep in mind that we have given a completely rigorous approach in the algebraic framework in the previous section. The aim of this one was mainly to convey the general view which presents itself from the geometrical side, in this question.

Let us conclude this section by passing to the question if the $`_{GT}`$-symmetry is stable against quantization. In this part, we can only give a heuristic argument at this time. We will argue that for the $`_{GT}`$-symmetry we should not only have stability against quantization but that in this case the quantum and the classical description should even be equivalent.

The argument relies on the property of ultrarigidity introduced in \[Sch\]. By ultrarigidity we can not expect a $`_{GT}`$-invariant theory to have a nontrivial quantum deformation. Since any such deformation should be equivalent to the nondeformed theory, we expect that for a $`_{GT}`$-invariant theory the quantum theory should even be equivalent to the classical one.

## 4 Conclusion

We have in this paper given arguments from two different perspectives - the algebraic formulation of boundary conformal field theories of \[KL\] and the cohomology of gerbes - that the $`GT`$-symmetry on extended moduli space can not represent a physically relevant symmetry but that upon inclusion of general nonperturbative vacua it has to be extended to a quantum symmetry represented by a self-dual, noncommutative, and noncocommutative Hopf algebra $`_{GT}`$.

A more detailed investigation of the implications of a universal $`_{GT}`$-symmetry in open string theory will follow in subsequent work.

Acknowledgements:

I thank the Erwin Schrödinger Institute for Mathematical Physics, Vienna, for hospitality during the time where this work has been done. For discussions on the subjects involved, I thank Bojko Bakalov, Karen Elsner, Jürgen Fuchs, Harald Grosse, Christoph Schweigert, and Ivan Todorov.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

A remarkable theorem by Kac  states that the dimension vectors of indecomposable representations of a quiver $`Q`$ without vertex loops over an algebraically closed field are precisely the positive roots of an associated Kac-Moody Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. The Kac-Moody Lie algebras that appear in this way are the symmetric ones — i.e. those with a symmetric generalised Cartan matrix (GCM). However, there is also a well-developed theory for the symmetrisable Kac-Moody algebras, whose GCM can be symmetrised by left multiplication by an invertible diagonal matrix. It would clearly be of interest to generalise Kac’s Theorem in order to obtain the positive root systems of these symmetrisable Kac-Moody algebras.

We know that from any symmetrisable GCM, with valued graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we can construct a graph with an admissible automorphism $`(Q,𝐚)`$ . This pair is in no way unique, but there is a close connection between properties of $`Q`$ compatible with $`𝐚`$ and the corresponding properties of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. For example, there is an obvious bijection

$$f:()^𝐚𝐈$$

between the fixed points of the root lattice for $`Q`$ and the root lattice for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, which in turn gives rise to an isomorphism between the Weyl group $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and the subgroup of $`W(Q)`$ of elements commuting with $`𝐚`$. (Here, $``$ and $`𝐈`$ are indexing sets for the vertices of $`Q`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ respectively.)

The automorphism $`𝐚`$ naturally acts on the category of representations of $`Q`$ as an autoequivalence. It is therefore interesting to see how it acts on the isomorphism classes of indecomposable representations. This action is perhaps best understood by considering the following representations. We take one representative from each isomorphism class in the orbit and form their direct sum. This representation is then isomorphic to its twist by $`𝐚`$, and we refer to such representations as isomorphically invariant indecomposables (or ii-indecomposables). The dimension vector $`\alpha `$ of an ii-indecomposable is clearly fixed by $`𝐚`$ and so we can consider the element $`f(\alpha )`$ in the root lattice for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

We can now state the main result of this paper.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`(Q,𝐚)`$ be a quiver with admissible automorphism and let $`k`$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic not dividing the order of $`𝐚`$. Then

1. the images under $`f`$ of the dimension vectors of the ii-indecomposables give the positive root system for the symmetrisable Kac-Moody algebra $`𝔤(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$;
2. if $`f(\alpha )`$ is real, there is a unique such ii-indecomposable of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ up to isomorphism. The number of direct summands of this ii-indecomposable equals the length of the root $`f(\alpha )`$. (Equivalently, this is the size of the corresponding orbit of isomorphism classes of indecomposables.)

Here, the length of a root $`\beta `$ for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ indicates the value $`\frac{1}{2}(\beta ,\beta )_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with respect to the bilinear form (see §2).

In particular, the dimension vectors of the ii-indecomposables are independent of the (compatible) orientation of $`Q`$ and of the characteristic of the field $`k`$ (assuming it does not divide the order of $`𝐚`$).

This extends a result of Tanisaki  which states that the pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$ has only finitely many isomorphism classes of ii-indecomposables if and only if $`Q`$ is Dynkin.

In fact, we can consider the following more general situation. We know that the category of representations of a quiver $`Q`$ over a field $`k`$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional modules for the path algebra $`kQ`$ . This path algebra can be thought of as a tensor algebra $`T(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0=_ik\epsilon _i`$ is a basic semi-simple $`k`$-algebra and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1=_{\rho :ij}k\rho `$ is a finite dimensional $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$-bimodule. To say that $`Q`$ has no edge loops is then equivalent to specifying that $`\epsilon _i\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\epsilon _i=0`$ for all $`i`$.

Now suppose that $`𝐚`$ is any algebra automorphism of $`T(\mathrm{\Lambda }_0,\mathrm{\Lambda }_1)`$ given by an algebra automorphism of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ and a bimodule automorphism of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ (so $`𝐚`$ respects the natural grading of $`T`$). This induces an action of $`𝐚`$ on the vertex set $``$, and we say that this action is admissible if $`\epsilon _j\mathrm{\Lambda }_1\epsilon _i=0`$ whenever $`i`$ and $`j`$ lie in the same $`𝐚`$-orbit.

We can again associate to this pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$ a symmetrisable GCM, and hence a valued graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and all the results of this paper extend without alteration to this setting. (In fact, we are forced to consider such automorphisms when we consider the skew group algebra $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$.)

The heart of the proof of the main theorem lies in understanding the relationship between ii-indecomposables for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ and indecomposables for the skew group algebra $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$, the main reference being the paper by Reiten and Riedtmann .

In the penultimate section, we describe some particular examples of quivers with an automorphism. We note that if $`Q`$ has no oriented cycles, then the action of $`𝐚`$ on the category of representations commutes with that of the Auslander-Reiten translate $`\tau `$. In particular, if $`Q`$ is a tame quiver, then the actions of $`𝐚`$ and $`\tau `$ on the regular modules are determined by their actions on the regular simples, and hence the ii-indecomposables can be classified.

Finally we explain the correspondence between ii-representations and modules for the $`k`$-species associated to $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In particular, let $`k`$ be a finite field and $`t`$ the highest common factor of the so-called symmetrisers of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (c.f. ). Write $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ for the tensor algebra associated to the $`k`$-species of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then for $`K/k`$ an extension of degree $`t`$, the $`K`$-algebra $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is isomorphic to the path algebra of a quiver $`KQ`$ on which the Galois group $`\mathrm{Gal}(K,k)`$ acts as $`K`$-algebra automorphisms. It turns out that this is actually generated by an admissible quiver automorphism $`𝐚`$ of $`Q`$, and the valued graph associated to the pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$ is the underlying graph of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Moreover, we have the standard Galois group action (as $`k`$-algebra automorphisms) coming from the identification $`KQK_kkQ`$, and the induced modules $`KX`$ for $`X`$ a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module are precisely those for which these two actions coincide.

We know from  that the number of isomorphism classes of indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules of dimesion vector $`\alpha `$ is a polynomial in the size of the base field $`k`$. Here we show that these polynomials are non-zero precisely when $`\alpha `$ is a positive root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, thus answering a question of Hua .

This paper is based on work done during the author’s doctorate at the University of Leeds, supported by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council. The author would like to thank his supervisor Prof. W. Crawley-Boevey for his continuing support and guidance. Part of this paper was written whilst the author was visiting BUGH Wuppertal, supported by the ESF/PESC Programme on Non-Commutative Geometry, and he would like to thank Dr. M. Reineke, Prof. Dr. K. Bongartz and the other members of the algebra group for their hospitality.

## 2 Quivers With An Admissible Automorphism

In this paper we shall only consider finite quivers without vertex loops. Given such a quiver $`Q`$, we shall denote its vertex set by $``$. The corresponding symmetric GCM is the matrix $`A`$ indexed by $``$ with entries

$$a_{ij}:=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\hfill & \text{if }i=j;\hfill \\ \mathrm{\#}\{\text{edges between vertices }i\text{ and }j\}\hfill & \text{if }ij.\hfill \end{array}$$

We write $`𝔤(Q)`$ for the associated symmetric Kac-Moody algebra, with root system $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Q)`$ .

In  (see also ) Kac proved the following theorem.

###### Theorem 2 (Kac)

Let $`Q`$ be a quiver and $`k`$ an algebraically closed field. Then

1. the dimension vectors of the indecomposable representations of $`Q`$ over $`k`$ are precisely the positive roots of the Kac-Moody algebra $`𝔤(Q)`$;
2. there exists a unique isomorphism class of indecomposables of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ if and only if $`\alpha `$ is a positive real root of $`𝔤(Q)`$.

As a consequence, the dimension vectors of the indecomposable representations are independent of both the orientation of $`Q`$ and the characteristic of the field $`k`$.

An admissible automorphism $`𝐚`$ of a quiver $`Q`$ is a quiver automorphism such that no arrow connects two vertices in the same orbit. This notion was first introduced by Lusztig in , where given such a pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$, he describes how to construct a symmetric matrix $`B`$ indexed by the vertex orbits $`𝐈`$. Namely

$$b_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}:=\{\begin{array}{cc}2\mathrm{\#}\{\text{vertices in }\text{i}\text{-th orbit}\}\hfill & \text{if }𝐢=𝐣;\hfill \\ \mathrm{\#}\{\text{edges between }\text{i}\text{-th and }\text{j}\text{-th orbits}\}\hfill & \text{if }𝐢𝐣.\hfill \end{array}$$

Let

$$d_𝐢:=b_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐢}}/2=\mathrm{\#}\{\text{vertices in }\text{i}\text{-th orbit}\}$$

and set $`D=\mathrm{diag}(d_𝐢)`$. Then $`C=D^1B`$ is a symmetrisable GCM and we write $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for the corresponding valued graph. That is, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has vertex set $`𝐈`$ and we draw an edge $`𝐢𝐣`$ equipped with the ordered pair $`(|c_{\mathrm{𝐣𝐢}}|,|c_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}|)`$ whenever $`c_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}0`$.

N.B. Since $`𝐚`$ is admissible, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has no vertex loops.

For example, consider the quiver $`A_3`$ with automorphism   The corresponding symmetrisable GCM is then $`(\begin{array}{cc}2& 1\\ 2& 2\end{array})=(\begin{array}{cc}2& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array})^1(\begin{array}{cc}4& 2\\ 2& 2\end{array})`$ and the valued graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is

The roots of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be defined combinatorially as follows. For a vertex $`𝐢`$, we define the reflection $`r_𝐢`$ on the root lattice $`𝐈`$ by

$$r_𝐢:\alpha \alpha \frac{1}{d_𝐢}(\alpha ,e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }e_𝐢,$$

where $`(,)_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the symmetric bilinear form determined by the matrix $`B`$ and the $`e_𝐢`$ form the standard basis of $`𝐈`$. The group generated by these reflections is the Weyl group $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. The real roots are given by the images under $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of the simple roots $`e_𝐢`$ and the imaginary roots are given by $`\pm `$ the images under $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ of the fundamental roots

$$F_\mathrm{\Gamma }:=\{\alpha >0(\alpha ,e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }0\text{ for all }𝐢\text{ and supp}(\alpha )\text{ connected}\}.$$

Similarly, we have the Weyl group and the roots associated to the quiver $`Q`$, this time using the symmetric matrix $`A`$ to define $`(,)_Q`$. That is, the reflection $`r_i`$ on $``$ is given by $`\alpha \alpha (\alpha ,e_i)_Qe_i`$.

The automorphism $`𝐚`$ acts naturally on the root lattice $``$ for $`Q`$, and the bilinear form $`(,)_Q`$ is $`𝐚`$-invariant. We have a canonical bijection

$$f:()^𝐚𝐈$$

from the fixed points in the root lattice for $`Q`$ to the root lattice for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This is given by $`f(\alpha )_𝐢:=\alpha _i`$ for any vertex $`i`$ in the $`𝐢`$-th orbit.

The admissibility of $`𝐚`$ implies that the reflections $`r_i`$ and $`r_j`$ commute whenever $`i`$ and $`j`$ lie in the same $`𝐚`$-orbit. Therefore the element

$$s_𝐢:=\underset{i𝐢}{}r_iW(Q)$$

is well-defined. Also, since $`𝐚r_i=r_{𝐚(i)}𝐚`$, we see that $`s_𝐢C_𝐚(W(Q))`$, the set of elements in the Weyl group commuting with the action of $`𝐚`$.

###### Lemma 3

For $`\alpha ,\beta ()^𝐚`$ we have

1. $`(\alpha ,\beta )_Q=(f(\alpha ),f(\beta ))_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$;
2. $`f(s_𝐢(\alpha ))=r_𝐢(f(\alpha ))𝐈`$;
3. the map $`r_𝐢s_𝐢`$ induces an isomorphism $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })\stackrel{}{}C_𝐚(W(Q))`$.

Proof. Let $`i_v`$ enumerate the vertices in the orbit $`𝐢𝐈`$. Parts 1. and 2. now follow from the formula

$$b_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}=\underset{v,w}{}a_{i_vj_w}=d_𝐢\underset{w}{}a_{i_vj_w}\text{for any }v.$$

We denote the length of an element $`wW(Q)`$ by $`\mathrm{}(w)`$. Then

$$\mathrm{}(wr_i)<\mathrm{}(w)\text{if and only if}w(e_i)<0$$

and

$$\mathrm{}(w)=\mathrm{\#}\{\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(Q)_+w(\alpha )<0\}.$$

Since $`𝐚`$ is admissible and preserves the partial order $`<`$ on $``$, induction on length shows that $`C_𝐚(W(Q))`$ is generated by the $`s_𝐢`$. That $`r_𝐢`$ and $`s_𝐢`$ satisfy the same relations follows from 2. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 4

Let $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(Q)`$ and let $`r1`$ be minimal such that $`𝐚^r(\alpha )=\alpha `$. Set

$$\sigma (\alpha ):=\alpha +𝐚(\alpha )+\mathrm{}+𝐚^{r1}(\alpha )()^𝐚.$$

Then $`\alpha f(\sigma (\alpha ))`$ induces a surjection $`\mathrm{\Delta }(Q)\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Moreover, if $`f(\sigma (\alpha ))`$ is real, then $`\alpha `$ must also be real and unique up to $`𝐚`$-orbit.

Proof. Set $`\beta :=f(\sigma (\alpha ))`$ and consider $`w^{}(\beta )`$ for some $`w^{}W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Let $`wC_𝐚(Q)`$ correspond to $`w^{}`$. Then $`w(\sigma (\alpha ))=\sigma (w(\alpha ))`$ and $`w(\alpha )\mathrm{\Delta }(Q)`$.

Since $`𝐚`$ preserves the partial order $`<`$ on $``$, $`w^{}(\beta )`$ is either positive or negative. Also, $`f(\sigma (w(\alpha )))`$ always has connected support. Therefore, if $`w^{}`$ is chosen so that $`w^{}(\beta )`$ has minimal height, then either $`w^{}(\beta )`$ lies in the fundamental region or else is a multiple of a real root, say $`w^{}(\beta )=me_𝐢`$. In the latter case we must have that $`w(\alpha )=me_i`$ for some vertex $`i`$ in the $`𝐢`$-th orbit, so $`w(\alpha )=e_i`$ and $`m=1`$. This proves that every root of $`Q`$ gives rise to a root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Conversely, any simple root $`e_𝐢`$ clearly lies in the image of this map, so let $`\beta `$ lie in the fundamental region for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then $`\gamma =f^1(\beta )()^𝐚`$ satisfies

$$0(\beta ,e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\gamma ,\sigma (e_i))_Q=\underset{r}{}(\gamma ,𝐚^r(e_i))_Q=\frac{1}{d_𝐢}(\gamma ,e_i)_Q$$

for all $`i`$, where $`i𝐢`$. Thus any connected component $`\alpha `$ of $`\gamma `$ lies in the fundamental region for $`Q`$ and $`\sigma (\alpha )=\gamma `$.

The result now follows from the correspondence between the Weyl groups. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 Isomorphically Invariant Representations

Let $`X`$ be a representation of $`Q`$, given by vector spaces $`X_i`$ for $`i`$ and linear maps $`X_\rho :X_iX_j`$ for each arrow $`\rho :ij`$. The dimension vector $`\underset{¯}{dim}X`$ is defined to be $`_i(dimX_i)e_i`$.

We define a new representation $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}X`$ by $`({}_{}{}^{𝐚}X)_i:=X_{𝐚^1(i)}`$ and $`({}_{}{}^{𝐚}X)_\rho :=X_{𝐚^1(\rho )}`$. Similarly, given a homomorphism $`\varphi :XY`$, we have $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}\varphi :{}_{}{}^{𝐚}X{}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y`$ given by $`({}_{}{}^{𝐚}\varphi )_i:=\varphi _{𝐚^1(i)}:({}_{}{}^{𝐚}X)_i({}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y)_i`$. This determines a functor $`F(𝐚)`$ on the category of representations. Clearly $`F(𝐚^r)=F(𝐚)^r`$ and $`F(𝐚)`$ is additive. In fact, $`F(𝐚)`$ is an autoequivalence of the category, so in particular $`X`$ is indecomposable if and only if $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}X`$ is.

We say that $`X`$ is isomorphically invariant (an ii-representation) if $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}XX`$. Note that $`\underset{¯}{dim}{}_{}{}^{𝐚}X=𝐚(\underset{¯}{dim}X)`$, so any ii-representation has dimension vector fixed by $`𝐚`$. We say that $`X`$ is an ii-indecomposable if it is not isomorphic to the proper direct sum of two such ii-representations. By the Krull-Remak-Schmidt Theorem for $`Q`$-representations, the ii-indecomposables $`X`$ are precisely the representations of the form

$$XY{}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{𝐚^{r1}}Y,$$

where $`Y`$ is an indecomposable representation and $`r1`$ is minimal such that $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚^r}YY`$.

###### Lemma 5

The Krull-Remak-Schmidt Theorem holds for ii-representations.

Proof. Suppose that $`X`$ is an ii-representation. We can write $`X`$ as a direct sum of indecomposable representations and, since $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}XX`$, $`F(𝐚)`$ must act (up to isomorphism) as a permutation of these indecomposable summands. That is, we can write

$$XY_1\mathrm{}Y_m$$

with the $`Y_j`$ ii-indecomposables. The uniqueness properties now follow from the Krull-Remak-Schmidt Theorem for $`Q`$-representations. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 6

Let $`(Q,𝐚)`$ be a quiver with an admissible automorphism, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the associated valued graph and $`k`$ an arbitrary algebraically closed field. Then there is an ii-indecomposable of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ only if $`f(\alpha )`$ is a root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Moreover, every positive real root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ occurs, and the corresponding ii-indecomposable is unique up to isomorphism with $`\frac{1}{2}(\alpha ,\alpha )_Q`$ indecomposable summands.

Proof. Let $`Y`$ be an indecomposable representation of $`Q`$ and consider the ii-indecomposable

$$XY{}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y\mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{𝐚^{r1}}Y$$

Writing $`\beta =\underset{¯}{dim}Y\mathrm{\Delta }(Q)_+`$, then $`\underset{¯}{dim}X=\beta +𝐚(\beta )+\mathrm{}+𝐚^{r1}(\beta )=m\sigma (\beta )`$ for some $`m`$. If $`\beta `$ is real, then by Kac’s Theorem $`Y{}_{}{}^{𝐚^r}Y`$ if and only if $`𝐚^r(\beta )=\beta `$ and so $`m=1`$. Therefore $`f(\underset{¯}{dim}X)=f(\sigma (\beta ))\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$. On the other hand, if $`\beta `$ is imaginary, then so is $`f(\sigma (\beta ))`$, and hence $`f(\underset{¯}{dim}X)=mf(\sigma (\beta ))\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$.

This shows that the dimension vectors of ii-indecomposables give rise to positive roots of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Also, it follows from Proposition 4 that we must get every real root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and that the corresponding ii-indecomposable is unique up to isomorphism with the stated number of indecomposable summands. $`\mathrm{}`$

Of special interest in the representation theory of quivers are the reflection functors $`R_i^+`$ and $`R_i^{}`$, defined when $`i`$ is a sink or a source respectively. Clearly if $`i`$ is a sink (respectively a source) then the same is true for all vertices in the orbit of $`i`$. Also, since $`𝐚`$ is admissible, the functor

$$S_𝐢^\pm :=\underset{i𝐢}{}R_i^\pm $$

is well-defined.

Denote by $`k_i`$ the $`i`$-th simple representation of $`Q`$. If $`d=d_𝐢`$ is the size of the orbit of $`i`$, then we have an ii-indecomposable

$$k_𝐢:=k_ik_{𝐚(i)}\mathrm{}k_{𝐚^{d1}(i)}.$$

###### Proposition 7

Let $`i`$ be a sink (or a source, interchanging $`+`$ and $``$). Then for any ii-representation $`X`$ there is a canonical monomorphism

$$\varphi _X:S_𝐢^{}S_𝐢^+(X)X$$

whose image has a complement a direct sum of copies of the ii-indecomposable $`k_𝐢`$. In fact,

1. $`S_𝐢^+(k_𝐢)=0`$;
2. if $`Xk_𝐢`$ is an ii-indecomposable, then $`\varphi _X`$ is an isomorphism and hence

$$\mathrm{End}(S_𝐢^+(X))\mathrm{End}(X)\text{and}\underset{¯}{dim}S_𝐢^+(X)=s_𝐢(\underset{¯}{dim}X).$$

Proof. This follows immediately from the standard properties of reflection functors. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4 Skew Group Algebras

We recall  that the category of representations of a quiver $`Q`$ over a field $`k`$ is equivalent to the category of finite dimensional modules for the path algebra $`kQ`$. If $`𝐚`$ is a quiver automorphism of $`Q`$, then it naturally induces an algebra automorphism on $`kQ`$, also denoted $`𝐚`$. In such a situation, we can form the skew group algebra $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$. This has as basis the elements $`\lambda 𝐚^r`$, with $`\lambda `$ a path in $`kQ`$, and the multiplication is given by

$$\lambda 𝐚^r\mu 𝐚^s:=\lambda 𝐚^r(\mu )𝐚^{r+s}.$$

The action of $`𝐚`$ on $`modkQ`$ is given by $`𝒳{}_{}{}^{𝐚}𝒳`$, where $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}𝒳`$ has the same underlying vector space as $`𝒳`$, but with the new action

$$\lambda x:=𝐚^1(\lambda )x\text{for all }\lambda kQ.$$

Now suppose that $`k`$ is an algebraically closed field with characteristic not dividing the order $`n`$ of $`𝐚`$. Then, given any ii-representation $`X`$, there exists an isomorphism $`\theta :{}_{}{}^{𝐚}XX`$ and, as observed in , this implies the existence of an isomorphism $`\varphi :{}_{}{}^{𝐚}XX`$ such that

$$\varphi {}_{}{}^{𝐚}\varphi \mathrm{}{}_{}{}^{𝐚^{n1}}\varphi =1.$$

In terms of modules for the path algebra $`kQ`$, this says that we can find a vector space isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒳𝒳`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }^n=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\lambda x)=𝐚(\lambda )\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$. That is, the pair $`(𝒳,\mathrm{\Phi })`$ determines a module for the skew group algebra $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$. We note that there may exist $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{}`$ such that $`(𝒳,\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and $`(𝒳,\mathrm{\Phi }^{})`$ are non-isomorphic.

We now consider a slightly more general situation, following the paper by Reiten and Riedtmann . Let $`k`$ be an algebraically closed field and $`G`$ a finite cyclic group whose order is invertible in $`k`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be either an artin $`k`$-algebra or the path algebra of a quiver and suppose that $`G`$ acts as either algebra automorphisms or graded algebra automorphisms of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. We write $`\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$ for the skew group algebra. The following are proved in  when $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is artinian, but the proofs carry over to the path algebra case also.

Consider the following pair of functors. These are both left and right adjoints of each other (, Theorem 1.1).

$`F`$ $`:=\mathrm{\Lambda }G_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ $`:mod\mathrm{\Lambda }mod\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$
$`H`$ $`:=\text{restriction}`$ $`:mod\mathrm{\Lambda }Gmod\mathrm{\Lambda }.`$
We have (, Proposition 1.8)

###### Proposition 8

Let $`X,Y`$ be indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules. Then

1. $`HF(X)_{gG}{}_{}{}^{g}X`$;
2. $`F(X)F(Y)`$ if and only if $`Y{}_{}{}^{g}X`$ for some $`gG`$;
3. $`F(X)`$ has exactly $`m`$ indecomposable summands, where $`m`$ is the order of $`\{gG{}_{}{}^{g}XX\}`$.

It is also shown that the dual group $`\widehat{G}`$ acts on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$ via $`\chi (\lambda g)=\chi (g)\lambda g`$ and then (, Proposition 5.1)

###### Proposition 9

The map $`\varphi :(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}\mathrm{End}_\mathrm{\Lambda }(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)`$ given by

$$\varphi (\lambda g\chi )(\mu h):=\chi (h)\lambda g\mu h$$

is an algebra isomorphism.

In particular, since $`\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$ is a finitely generated projective generator for $`mod\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we have that $`(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}`$ is Morita equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

We can also consider the functors

$`F^{}`$ $`:=(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}_{\mathrm{\Lambda }G}`$ $`:mod\mathrm{\Lambda }Gmod(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}`$
$`H^{}`$ $`:=\text{restriction}`$ $`:mod(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}mod\mathrm{\Lambda }G,`$
and we note that the Morita equivalence $`mod(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}mod\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is given by

$$M:=H\mathrm{\Lambda }G_{(\mathrm{\Lambda }G)\widehat{G}}.$$

For, this comes from viewing $`\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$ as a finitely generated projective generator for $`mod\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

###### Corollary 10

There are natural isomorphisms

$$HMF^{}\text{and}H^{}FM.$$

Proof. It is clear that $`MF^{}`$ is naturally isomorphic to $`H`$. The second isomorphism follows by taking adjoints. $`\mathrm{}`$

It follows that Proposition 8 holds with $`F`$ and $`H`$ interchanged. Namely

###### Proposition 11

Let $`X,Y`$ be indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }G`$-modules. Then

1. $`FH(X)_{\chi \widehat{G}}{}_{}{}^{\chi }X`$;
2. $`H(X)H(Y)`$ if and only if $`Y{}_{}{}^{\chi }X`$ for some $`\chi \widehat{G}`$;
3. $`H(X)`$ has exactly $`m`$ indecomposable summands, where $`m`$ is the order of $`\{\chi \widehat{G}{}_{}{}^{\chi }XX\}`$.

###### Lemma 12

Let $`e`$ be an idempotent of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`e\mathrm{\Lambda }e`$ is Morita equivalent to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and suppose that $`e`$ is fixed by $`G`$. Then we have natural isomorphisms between

$`and`$
We can now relate this back to quivers with an admissible automorphism.

Let $`(Q,𝐚)`$ be a quiver with an admissible automorphism of order $`n`$ and let $`k`$ be an algebraically closed field of characteristic not dividing $`n`$. Then the skew group algebra $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$ is Morita equivalent to the path algebra of another quiver $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ and if $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$ is a generator for the dual group action on $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$, then we have an induced action on $`k\stackrel{~}{Q}`$. N.B. This may not come from a quiver automorphism, but is admissible in the sense that no edge joins two vertices in the same orbit (see the introduction).

Therefore we can consider the induction and restriction functors $`F`$ and $`H`$ as going between $`\mathrm{Rep}(Q)`$ and $`\mathrm{Rep}(\stackrel{~}{Q})`$.

On the other hand, we can do the same thing starting with $`(\stackrel{~}{Q},\stackrel{~}{𝐚})`$. In this way we recover our original pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$. Therefore we have induction and restriction functors $`\stackrel{~}{F}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{H}`$ going between $`\mathrm{Rep}(\stackrel{~}{Q})`$ and $`\mathrm{Rep}(Q)`$.

It now follows from Corollary 10 and Lemma 12 that there are natural isomorphisms $`F\stackrel{~}{H}`$ and $`H\stackrel{~}{F}`$.

###### Corollary 13

The ii-indecomposables for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ are given up to isomorphism by the images under $`H`$ of indecomposable $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-representations, and $`H(Y)H(Z)`$ if and only if $`Y{}_{}{}^{\stackrel{~}{𝐚}^r}Z`$ for some $`r`$.

Proof. If $`Y`$ is an indecomposable for $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, then $`H(Y)`$ is an ii-indecomposable for $`(Q,𝐚)`$. Conversely, suppose that $`X`$ is an indecomposable for $`Q`$ and let $`Y`$ be an indecomposable summand of $`F(X)`$. Then $`X`$ is a direct summand of $`H(Y)`$ and so every ii-indecomposable for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ is obtained up to isomorphism. $`\mathrm{}`$

We recall the construction of  for the semi-simple subalgebra of $`kQ`$. Let $`𝐢`$ be a vertex orbit of $`Q`$ of size $`d`$ and let $`i𝐢`$. Consider

$$A_𝐢=k\epsilon _i\times k\epsilon _{𝐚(i)}\times \mathrm{}\times k\epsilon _{𝐚^{d1}(i)}.$$

Using the notation of , we have an algebra isomorphism

$$\underset{\mu =1}{\overset{n/d}{}}𝕄(d,k)_{(𝐢,\mu )}A_𝐢\mathrm{\#}𝐚,E(𝐢,\mu )_{pq}\frac{d}{n}\underset{j=1}{\overset{n/d}{}}\zeta ^{dj\mu }𝐚^p\epsilon _i𝐚^{q+dj}$$

where $`\zeta `$ is a fixed primitive $`n`$-th root of unity and the $`E(𝐢,\mu )_{pq}`$ are the elementary matrices. Let $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$ be the generator for the dual group such that $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}(𝐚)=\zeta `$. Then

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐚}\left(E(𝐢,\mu )_{00}\right)=\stackrel{~}{𝐚}\left(\frac{d}{n}\underset{j}{}\zeta ^{dj\mu }\epsilon _i𝐚^{dj}\right)=\frac{d}{n}\underset{j}{}\zeta ^{dj(\mu +1)}\epsilon _i𝐚^{dj}=E(𝐢,\mu +1)_{00}.$$

Write $`E_𝐢:=_\mu E(𝐢,\mu )_{00}`$ and set $`B_𝐢=E_𝐢A_𝐢\mathrm{\#}𝐚E_𝐢`$. The algebras $`A_𝐢\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$ and $`B_𝐢`$ are then Morita equivalent, and since $`E_𝐢`$ is fixed by $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$ we have an induced action of the dual group on $`B_𝐢`$.

In general, we repeat this for all vertex orbits $`𝐢`$ and let $`E=_𝐢E_𝐢`$ be the corresponding idempotent of $`kQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚`$, fixed by $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$. Then $`EkQ\mathrm{\#}𝐚E`$ is isomorphic to the path algebra $`k\stackrel{~}{Q}`$. The vertices $`\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ are thus indexed by pairs $`(𝐢,\mu )`$, where $`𝐢𝐈`$ and $`\mu /(n/d_𝐢)`$.

We are now in a position to complete the proof of Theorem 1 — namely that given any root $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$, there exists an indecomposable $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$-representation $`Y`$ such that $`f(\underset{¯}{dim}H(Y))=\alpha `$. It is clearly enough to show that the map $`h:\stackrel{~}{}𝐈`$ induced by $`H`$ and $`f`$ maps $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{Q})_+`$ onto $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$. Alos, the above description of the Morita equivalence implies that $`h`$ is given by

$$h(\beta )_𝐢:=\underset{\mu }{}\beta _{(𝐢,\mu )}.$$

We first prove an analogous result to Lemma 3.

###### Lemma 14

Let $`\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢:=_\mu \stackrel{~}{r}_{(𝐢,\mu )}W(\stackrel{~}{Q})`$. We have the following relations.

1. $`(h(\beta ),e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }=d_𝐢_\mu (\beta ,e_{(𝐢,\mu )})_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}`$;
2. $`h(\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢(\beta ))=r_𝐢(h(\beta ))`$;
3. The map $`r_𝐢\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢`$ induces an isomorphism $`W(\mathrm{\Gamma })C_{\stackrel{~}{𝐚}}(W(\stackrel{~}{Q}))`$.

Proof. We note that if $`𝐚^m`$ fixes vertices $`i`$ and $`j`$, then we can find a basis of arrows $`ij`$ in $`kQ`$ with respect to which $`𝐚^m`$ acts diagonally (c.f. ). We now consider each of these basis elements separately. Let $`\rho :ij`$ be such a basis element and let $`t`$ be the lowest common multiple of $`d_𝐢`$ and $`d_𝐣`$. Then $`𝐚^t(\rho )=\zeta ^{rt}\rho `$ for some $`r`$ and the arrows

$$\rho ,𝐚(\rho ),\mathrm{},𝐚^{t1}(\rho )$$

are linearly independent in $`kQ`$. From  we know that we get an arrow $`(𝐢,\mu )(𝐣,\nu )`$ in $`k\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ from $`\rho `$ if and only if $`\mu \nu +rmodn/t`$, and so for fixed $`\nu `$ there are $`t/d_𝐢`$ solutions for $`\mu `$. In particular, if $`(\stackrel{~}{a}_{(𝐢,\mu )(𝐣,\nu )})`$ is the GCM for $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, then

$$d_𝐢\underset{\mu }{}\stackrel{~}{a}_{(𝐢,\mu )(𝐣,\nu )}=\underset{v,w}{}a_{i_vj_w}=b_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}\text{for any }\nu $$

and hence

$$(h(\beta ),e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }=\underset{𝐢,𝐣}{}b_{\mathrm{𝐢𝐣}}h(\beta )_𝐣=d_𝐢\underset{\mu }{}\underset{(𝐣,\nu )}{}\stackrel{~}{a}_{(𝐢,\mu )(𝐣,\nu )}\beta _{(𝐣,\nu )}=d_𝐢\underset{\mu }{}(\beta ,e_{(𝐢,\mu )})_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}.$$

The element $`\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢`$ is well defined since $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$ is again admissible, and as the bilinear form $`(,)_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}`$ is $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$-invariant, $`\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢`$ commutes with the action of $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$. Therefore

$$h(\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢(\beta ))=h(\beta )\underset{\mu }{}(\beta ,e_{(𝐢,\mu )})_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}e_𝐢=h(\beta )\frac{1}{d_𝐢}(h(\beta ),e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }e_𝐢=r_𝐢(h(\beta )).$$

As in the proof of Lemma 3, induction on length shows that $`C_{\stackrel{~}{𝐚}}(W(\stackrel{~}{Q}))`$ is generated by the $`\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢`$. Finally, suppose that $`r_{𝐢_1}\mathrm{}r_{𝐢_m}=1W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ and consider $`\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_m}C_{\stackrel{~}{𝐚}}(W(\stackrel{~}{Q}))`$. Then for any vertex $`(𝐣,\nu )`$, $`\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_m}(e_{(𝐣,\nu )})>0`$. By the characterisation of the length of an element in the Weyl group, we must have that $`\mathrm{}(\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{s}_{𝐢_m})=1`$. It follows immediately that the $`r_𝐢`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{s}_𝐢`$ must satisfy the same relations. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 15

The map $`\beta h(\beta )`$ sends $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{Q})_+`$ onto $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$. Moreover, if $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$ is real, then there is a unique $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$-orbit of roots mapping to $`\alpha `$, all of which are real.

Proof. Since the dimension vector of any ii-indecomposable must be a positive root for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we know that $`\beta h(\beta )`$ sends $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{Q})_+`$ into $`\mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$. (We could also prove this directly.) To show surjectivity, we first construct preimages for the fundamental roots by adapting the proof of Lemma 5.3 in .

Let $`\alpha F_\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and consider the set $`\{\beta \mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{~}{Q})_+h(\beta )\alpha \}`$. Since this set is finite and non-empty, we can take an element $`\beta `$ of maximal height. Suppose $`h(\beta )_𝐢<\alpha _𝐢`$. Then for any $`\mu `$, $`h(\beta +e_{(𝐢,\mu )})=h(\beta )+e_𝐢\alpha `$. By the maximality of $`\beta `$, $`\beta +e_{(𝐢,\mu )}`$ cannot be a root and so $`(\beta ,e_{(𝐢,\mu )})_{\stackrel{~}{Q}}0`$ (, Corollary 3.6). Thus $`(h(\beta ),e_𝐢)_\mathrm{\Gamma }0`$ as well. In particular, $`h(\beta )`$ and $`\alpha `$ must have the same support, for otherwise we can find such a vertex $`(𝐢,\mu )`$ adjacent to the support of $`\beta `$, and so $`(\beta ,e_{(𝐢,\mu )})<0`$. Contradiction.

We may assume that $`\mathrm{supp}(\alpha )=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Let $`S:=\{𝐢h(\beta )_𝐢=\alpha _𝐢\}`$. If $`S`$ is the empty set, then $`\beta +e_{(𝐢,\mu )}`$ is not a root for any vertex of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$, and so the connected component of $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ in which $`\beta `$ lies is Dynkin (, Proposition 4.9). Therefore $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ must be a disjoint union of copies of this Dynkin quiver, all in a single $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$ orbit, so in particular $`k\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ is representation finite. This implies that $`kQ`$ is representation finite (, Theorem 1.3) and that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a connected Dynkin diagram. Contradiction, since $`\alpha `$ was assumed tobe imaginary.

Thus $`S`$ is non-empty so take any connected component $`T`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }S`$ and write $`\gamma `$ for the restriction of $`h(\beta )`$ to $`T`$. Then for all vertices $`𝐣T`$,

$$(\gamma ,e_𝐣)_T(h(\beta ),e_𝐣)_\mathrm{\Gamma }0.$$

Moreover, there exists a vertex $`𝐣T`$ adjacent to $`S`$, and so $`(\gamma ,e_𝐣)_T>0`$. Therefore $`T`$ is Dynkin (, Corollary 4.3).

Conversely, let $`\gamma ^{}`$ be the restriction of $`\alpha h(\beta )`$ to $`T`$. Note that $`\gamma ^{}`$ has support the whole of $`T`$. Then, for any vertex $`𝐣T`$,

$$(\gamma ^{},e_𝐣)_T=(\alpha h(\beta ),e_𝐣)_\mathrm{\Gamma }=(\alpha ,e_𝐣)_\mathrm{\Gamma }(h(\beta ),e_𝐣)_\mathrm{\Gamma }0.$$

Hence $`T`$ is not Dynkin (, Theorem 4.3). Contradiction. Therefore $`S=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`h(\beta )=\alpha `$.

Clearly every simple root $`e_𝐢`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ lies in the image of $`h`$, and so the correspondence between the Weyl groups proves that $`h`$ is surjective.

Finally, let $`\alpha `$ be a real root for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and let $`\beta `$ be a root for $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ such that $`h(\beta )=\alpha `$. Then we can find an element $`w^{}W(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ such that $`w^{}(\alpha )`$ is simple, say equal to $`e_𝐢`$. If $`w`$ is the corresponding element in $`C_{\stackrel{~}{𝐚}}(W(\stackrel{~}{Q}))`$, then $`w(\beta )`$ must also be simple, equal to some $`e_{(𝐢,\mu )}`$. Therefore $`\beta `$ is real and uniquely determined up to an $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$-orbit. $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 1 now follows immediately from Proposition 15.

Using this proposition, we can exhibit a counter-example to the converse of Part 2 of Theorem 1 — that is, an imaginary dimension vector $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$ such that the corresponding ii-indecomposable is unique up to isomorphism. Namely, we consider

$$(Q,𝐚)\text{}\text{and}(\stackrel{~}{Q},\stackrel{~}{𝐚})\text{}$$

so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the valued graph . Then for $`\alpha =(1,1)`$ a fundamental root for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, there is a unique $`\stackrel{~}{𝐚}`$-orbit of roots for $`\stackrel{~}{Q}`$ mapping to $`\alpha `$, all of which are real, and hence there is a unique ii-indecomposable of dimension vector $`f^1(\alpha )`$.

## 5 Tame Quivers and their Automorphisms

We are interested in studying the tame quivers and their possible automorphisms. To this end, we first note that $`𝐚`$ commutes with the Auslander-Reiten translate $`\tau `$ (Lemma 4.1 in ). In particular, $`𝐚`$ acts on the preprojective and the preinjective components of the Auslander-Reiten quiver.

Now consider the special case when $`Q`$ is a tame quiver. Then the positive imaginary roots of $`Q`$ are generated by a single element $`\delta `$, and the defect of an indecomposable representation $`X`$ is defined to be

$$\mathrm{defect}(X):=\delta ,\underset{¯}{dim}X_Q,$$

where $`,_Q`$ is the Euler form for $`Q`$ given by

$$\alpha ,\beta _Q:=\underset{i}{}\alpha _i\beta _i\underset{\rho :ij}{}\alpha _i\beta _j.$$

The indecomposable regular representations are precisely those with defect 0, and $`\tau `$ acts with finite period on each connected regular component (tube) of the Auslander-Reiten quiver. Each regular indecomposable representation is regular serial, and is uniquely determined up to isomorphism by its regular top and regular length. Therefore the actions of both $`𝐚`$ and $`\tau `$ are determined by their actions on the regular simples.

We illustrate this with a couple of examples. Let $`Q`$ be the quiver $`\stackrel{~}{D}_4`$

Then there are three tubes of period 2 with regular simples

$`E_0`$ $`=\text{}`$ $`E_0^{}`$ $`=\text{}`$ $`E_0^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=\text{}`$
$`E_1`$ $`=\text{}`$ $`E_1^{}`$ $`=\text{}`$ $`E_1^{\prime \prime }`$ $`=\text{}`$
as well as the tubes of period 1, indexed by $`k\{0,1\}`$, with regular simples

$$T(\lambda )=\text{}$$

If we let $`𝐚`$ act as the automorphism

so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the valued graph $`\stackrel{~}{A}_{11}`$ , then $`𝐚`$ acts on the regular simples (up to isomorphism) as

$$E_0E_0^{}E_1E_1^{},E_0^{\prime \prime }E_1^{\prime \prime },T(\lambda )T(\frac{\lambda }{\lambda 1}).$$

Therefore we have ii-indecomposables

$$E_0E_0^{}E_1E_1^{},E_0^{\prime \prime }E_1^{\prime \prime },T(2),T(\lambda )T(\frac{\lambda }{\lambda 1})\text{ for }\lambda 0,1,2.$$

Alternatively, if $`𝐚`$ acts as the automorphism

then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the valued graph $`\stackrel{~}{G}_{21}`$ and we have ii-indecomposables

$$E_0E_0^{}E_0^{\prime \prime },E_1E_1^{}E_1^{\prime \prime },T(\omega ),T(\omega ^2)$$

$$T(\lambda )T(\frac{1}{1\lambda })T(\frac{\lambda 1}{\lambda })\text{ for }\lambda 0,1,\omega ,\omega ^2,$$

where $`\omega `$ is a primitive cube root of unity.

## 6 Representations of Species over Finite Fields

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a valued quiver with symmetrisable GCM $`C=D^1B`$. We fix a finite field $`k=𝔽_q`$, an algebraic closure $`\overline{k}`$ and denote by $`𝔽_{q^r}`$ the unique extension of $`k`$ of degree $`r`$ inside $`\overline{k}`$. The $`k`$-species $`S`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is given by the field $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ at vertex $`i`$ and the $`𝔽_{q^{d_j}}`$-$`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$-bimodule $`𝔽_{q^{b_{ij}}}`$ for each arrow $`ij`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

A representation $`X`$ of $`S`$ is given by an $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$-vector space $`X_i`$ for each vertex $`i`$ and an $`𝔽_{q^{d_j}}`$-linear map

$$\theta _{ij}:𝔽_{q^{b_{ij}}}_{𝔽_{q^{d_i}}}X_iX_j$$

for each arrow $`ij`$. Therefore, the category of $`S`$-representations is equivalent to the category of finite demensional modules for the tensor algebra $`\mathrm{\Lambda }:=T(A_0,A_1)`$, where $`A_0=_i𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ is a semisimple algebra and $`A_1=_{ij}𝔽_{q^{b_{ij}}}`$ is an $`A_0`$-bimodule.

In , Dlab and Ringel studied the representations of a $`k`$-species associated to a valued Dynkin or tame quiver $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. For $`k`$ a finite field, the number of isomorphism classes of representations was studied for general $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (without oriented cycles) by Hua  and a partial analogue of Kac’s Theorem was proved. This was later completed by Deng and Xiao  using the Ringel-Hall algebra.

###### Theorem 16 (Hua, Deng-Xiao)

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a valued quiver, $`k`$ a finite field and $`S`$ the $`k`$-species of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then

1. the dimension vectors of the indecomposable $`S`$-representatons are precisely the positive roots of the symmetrisable Kac-Moody Lie algebra $`𝔤(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$;
2. if $`\alpha `$ is real, there is a unique indecomposable of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ up to isomorphism.

Suppose now that $`K/k`$ is a finite field extension. Then the Galois group $`G:=\mathrm{Gal}(K,k)`$ acts as $`k`$-algebra automorphisms on $`K_k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, say generated by $`g:a\lambda a^q\lambda `$. Thus for any $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module $`Y`$ we can form a new module $`{}_{}{}^{g}Y`$ by taking the same underlying $`k`$-vector space with the new action $`py:=g^1(p)y`$.

###### Proposition 17

There is a bijection between the isomorphism classes of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules and the isomorphism classes of $`K_k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules $`Y`$ satisfying $`{}_{}{}^{g}YY`$.

The proof is based upon the following series of lemmas (c.f. ).

###### Lemma 18

Let $`X`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module and $`K/k`$ a field extension of degree $`r`$. Then $`K_kX|_kX^r`$ over $`k`$. In particular, two $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules $`X`$ and $`Y`$ are isomorphic if and only if $`K_kXK_kY`$.

###### Lemma 19

Let $`X`$ be an indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module, $`K:=\mathrm{End}(X)/\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{End}(X)`$ and $`r=[K:k]`$. Then $`K_kX`$ is a direct sum of $`r`$ pairwise non-isomorphic indecomposables $`Y_i`$ with $`\mathrm{End}(Y_i)/\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{End}(Y_i)=K`$.

Proof. Since $`k`$ is perfect, $`\mathrm{End}(K_kX)/\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{End}(K_kX)`$ is isomorphic to $`K_k\mathrm{End}(X)/\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{End}(X)K_kKK^r`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 20

Let $`K/k`$ be a finite field extension with Galois group $`G`$. Let $`Y`$ be a $`K_k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module such that $`{}_{}{}^{g}YY`$ for all $`gG`$ and suppose that $`G`$ acts transitively on the indecomposable summands of $`Y`$ (up to isomorphism). Then any indecomposable summand $`X`$ of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-module $`Y|_k`$ satisfies $`K_kXY`$.

Proof. We have $`K_kY_{gG}{}_{}{}^{g}YY^r`$, using that $`K_kK_{gG}{}_{}{}^{g}K`$ as $`K`$-bimodules. Now let $`X`$ be an indecomposable summand of $`Y|_k`$. Since $`{}_{}{}^{g}(K_kX)K_kX`$, the assumption on $`Y`$ implies that $`K_kXY^s`$ for some $`s`$. If $`L`$ is common extension of $`K`$ and $`\mathrm{End}(X)/\mathrm{rad}\mathrm{End}(X)`$, then on the one hand, $`M_kX`$ is isomorphic to the direct sum of pairwise non-isomorphic indecomposables, whereas on the other it is isomorphic to $`M_KY^s`$. Thus $`s=1`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In fact, we now see that if $`X`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-indecomposable as in Lemma 19, then $`G`$ must act transitively on the $`Y_i`$. Proposition 17 now follows immediately.

In particular, we can take $`K/k`$ to be a splitting field for each $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ — for example, $`K=𝔽_{q^t}`$ where $`t`$ is the lowest common multiple of the $`d_i`$. Then the algebra $`K_k\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is isomorphic to the path algebra of a quiver $`Q`$. We show that the action of the Galois group can now be thought of as an admissible quiver automorphism combined with the $`G`$-action on $`KQ`$ coming from the identification $`KQK_kkQ`$.

We describe this construction in the case when $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ has only two vertices; the general case following immediately. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be the valued quiver

with $`d_ic_{ij}=b_{ij}=d_jc_{ji}`$. Let $`t`$ be the lowest common multiple of $`d_i`$ and $`d_j`$ and set $`b_{ij}=bt`$. The tensor algebra is therefore given by

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝔽_{q^{d_i}}& 0\\ 𝔽_{q^{bt}}& 𝔽_{q^{d_j}}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}𝔽_{q^{d_i}}& 0\\ K^b& 𝔽_{q^{d_j}}\end{array}\right).$$

Now $`K_k\mathrm{\Lambda }KQ`$ for some quiver $`Q`$, and we can assume that $`b=1`$ since for general $`b`$ we just take $`b`$ copies of each arrow in $`Q`$.

By the Normal Basis Theorem , there exists $`x𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ such that the elements $`x^{q^r}`$ for $`0r<d_i`$ form a $`k`$-basis for $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$. We also have the isomorphism

$$𝔽_{q^{d_i}}_k𝔽_{q^{d_i}}\stackrel{}{}\underset{\mu =0}{\overset{d_i1}{}}𝔽_{q^{d_i}},ab(ab^{q^\mu })_\mu .$$
(\*)
Let $`\epsilon _{(i,\mu )}`$ denote the unit for the $`\mu `$-th copy of $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ and fix $`a_r𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$ such that $`_ra_rx^{q^r}`$ corresponds to $`\epsilon _{(i,0)}`$. Then $`_ra_rx^{q^{r\mu }}`$ corresponds to $`\epsilon _{(i,\mu )}`$ and so

$$\underset{r,s}{}a_ra_sx^{q^{r\lambda }}x^{q^{s\mu }}=\delta _{\lambda ,\mu }\underset{r}{}a_rx^{q^{r\lambda }}.$$

Similarly we can find $`y,b_sK`$ such that the $`y^{q^{sd_i}}`$ give an $`𝔽_{q^{d_i}}`$-basis for $`K`$ and $`_sb_sy^{q^{(s\mu )d_i}}=\delta _{\mu ,0}`$. Then, for the isomorphism

$$K_kK\stackrel{}{}\underset{\lambda =0}{\overset{t1}{}}K,ab(ab^{q^\lambda })_\lambda ,$$

the $`\lambda `$-th unit, which we denote by $`\rho _{(\lambda )}`$, corresponds to $`_{r,s}a_rb_sx^{q^{r\lambda }}y^{q^{sd_i\lambda }}`$. It follows that

$$\rho _{(\lambda )}\epsilon _{(i,\mu )}=\{\begin{array}{cc}\rho _{(\lambda )}\hfill & \text{if }\lambda \mu modd_i;\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

We have analogous identities for the isomorphism $`K_k𝔽_{q^{d_j}}\stackrel{}{}_{\nu =0}^{d_j1}K`$ and the product $`\epsilon _{(j,\nu )}\rho _{(\lambda )}`$. In conclusion, we have

###### Lemma 21

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a valued quiver with symmetrisable GCM $`C=D^1B`$, $`k`$ a finite field and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ the corresponding $`k`$-algebra. Let $`t`$ be the lowest common multiple of the $`d_i`$. Then for $`K/k`$ an extension of degree $`t`$, the algebra $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is isomorphic to the path algebra of a quiver $`KQ`$. The vertices of $`Q`$ are labelled by pairs $`(i,\mu )`$ for $`i`$ a vertex of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`0\mu <d_i`$ and there are $`a_{ij}`$ arrows $`(i,\mu )(j,\nu )`$ if and only if $`ij`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mu \nu mod\mathrm{hcf}(d_i,d_j)`$, where $`a_{ij}:=b_{ij}/\mathrm{lcm}(d_i,d_j)`$.

Let $`G`$ denote the Galois group $`\text{Gal}(K,k)`$. This acts naturally on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ as $`k`$-algebra automorphisms, and so we can extend this to get $`K`$-algebra automorphisms of $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Let $`𝐚`$ be a generator for $`G`$, acting as $`𝐚(ab):=ab^q`$. In terms of the path algebra $`KQ`$, we get

$$𝐚(\epsilon _{(i,\mu )})=𝐚\left(\underset{r}{}a_rx^{q^{r\mu }}\right)=\underset{r}{}a_rx^{q^{r+1\mu }}=\epsilon _{(i,\mu 1)}.$$

Similarly, $`𝐚(\epsilon _{(j,\nu )})=\epsilon _{(j,\nu 1)}`$ and $`𝐚(\rho _{(\lambda )})=\rho _{(\lambda 1)}`$, and hence $`𝐚`$ acts on $`KQ`$ as an admissible quiver automorphism. We note that the valued graph associated to the pair $`(Q,𝐚)`$ is precisely the underlying graph of the valued quiver $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

On the other hand, we have the standard $`G`$-action on $`KQ`$ coming from the isomorphism $`KQK_kkQ`$. Let $`\tau `$ be a generator for this action, where for example $`\tau (a\epsilon _{(i,\mu )})=a^q\epsilon _{(i,\mu )}`$. Then $`\tau `$ acts on $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ as $`aba^qb^q`$. In particular, the $`k`$-algebra automorphism $`𝐚^1\tau `$ of $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ sends $`ab`$ to $`a^qb`$ and so we recover our original $`G`$ action. Thus we deduce the following proposition.

###### Proposition 22

There is a bijection between the isomorphism classes of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ and representations $`Y`$ of $`KQ`$ of dimension vector $`f^1(\alpha )`$ such that $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y{}_{}{}^{\tau }Y`$, where $`f`$ is again the canonical map from the $`𝐚`$-fixed points of the root lattice for $`Q`$ to the root lattice for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

We can now offer a more representation-theoretic poof of the generalisation of Kac’s Theorem to representations of species over finite fields (c.f. ). We denote by $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)`$ the number of isomorphism classes of indecomposable representations of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ for the $`𝔽_q`$-species of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Theorem 23 (Hua )

The numbers $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)`$ are polynomial in $`q`$ with rational coefficients, independent of the orientation of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Theorem 24

The polynomials $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)`$ are non-zero if and only if $`\alpha `$ is a positive root of $`𝔤(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$. Moreover, if $`\alpha `$ is a real root of $`𝔤(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ then $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)=1`$.

Proof. Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ have symmetrisable GCM $`C=D^1B`$, let $`S`$ be the $`k`$-species of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and write $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ for the corresponding tensor algebra. Set $`t`$ to be the lowest common multiple of the $`d_i`$ and let $`K/k`$ be a field extension of degree $`t`$. Then $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is isomorphic to a path algebra $`KQ`$ and as before, we can consider the two different actions of $`G=\text{Gal}(K,k)`$ on $`KQ`$ generated by $`𝐚`$ and $`\tau `$.

We know that the isomorphism classes of indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules are in bijection with the isomorphism classes of representations $`Y`$ for $`KQ`$ such that $`{}_{}{}^{𝐚}Y{}_{}{}^{\tau }Y`$ and $`Y`$ is not the proper direct sum of two such representations. In particular, every ii-indecomposable $`Y`$ for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ of dimension vector $`f^1(\alpha )`$ defined over $`k`$ gives rise to a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-indecomposable of dimension vector $`\alpha `$.

Let $`X`$ be a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-indecomposable of dimension vector $`\alpha `$ and let $`Y`$ be an indecomposable summand of $`KX`$. Setting $`\underset{¯}{dim}Y=\beta `$, we see that $`\underset{¯}{dim}KX=f^1(\alpha )=r\sigma (\beta )`$ for some $`r`$. Thus if $`\beta `$ is imaginary root of $`Q`$, then $`\alpha =rf(\sigma (\beta ))`$ is an imaginary root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Conversely, if $`\beta `$ is real, then $`Y`$ is defined over $`k`$ and so fixed by $`\tau `$. Therefore $`KX`$ is an ii-indecomposable for $`(Q,𝐚)`$. Hence $`r=1`$ and $`\alpha `$ is a root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. This shows that all indecomposable $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-modules have dimension vector a root of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and hence the polynomial $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)`$ is non-zero unless $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(𝔤)_+`$ (C.f. the argument in ).

Moreover, if $`\alpha `$ is real, then the highest common factor of the $`\alpha _i`$ is 1 and so $`r=1`$. Therefore $`\beta `$ is real and unique up to $`𝐚`$-orbit. Since there is a unique isomorphism class of ii-indecomposables for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ of dimension vector $`f^1(\alpha )`$, we deduce that $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)=1`$.

Finally, suppose that $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }(\mathrm{\Gamma })_+`$. Then there exists an ii-indecomposable $`X`$ for $`(Q,𝐚)`$ of dimension vector $`f^1(\alpha )`$ over $`\overline{𝔽}_p`$, where $`p`$ is coprime to $`t`$. This $`X`$ must be defined over some finite field $`k=𝔽_q`$ and so corresponds to an indecomposable for the $`k`$-species of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of dimension vector $`\alpha `$. Therefore the polynomial $`I_\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha ,q)`$ cannot be zero. $`\mathrm{}`$


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The study of $`W`$ bosons at different colliders serves as an important test of the Standard Model and possible extensions. $`W`$ bosons can be produced at the $`ep`$ collider HERA with a center of mass (c.m.) energy $`\sqrt{s}318`$ GeV which is achieved by colliding electrons/positrons with energy $`E_e=27.5`$ GeV and protons with energy $`E_p=920`$ GeV. Since the production cross sections for the processes $`e^\pm pe^\pm W+X`$ reach values of about 1 $`pb`$ at HERA, the production mechanisms of $`W`$ bosons can be studied and the existence of anomalous $`WW\gamma `$ trilinear couplings can be probed \[??\]. Moreover, $`W`$ boson production represents an important SM background to several new physics searches. In particular it is the dominant SM process leading to isolated high energy lepton events with missing transverse momentum . In order to determine potential discrepancies between measurements and Standard Model (SM) predictions, the latter have to be sufficiently accurate and reliable. This is not guaranteed for the available LO calculations of $`W`$ boson production . For an unambiguous test of anomalous contributions, it is necessary to extend the previous analyses to NLO accuracy. The first step in this direction has been made in Ref. , where the QCD corrections to the total resolved photoproduction cross section have been determined. However, the result cannot be used for $`W`$ boson production with large transverse momentum which is dominated by direct photoproduction, the QCD corrections to which are discussed in this letter.

## 2 Leading Order

$`W`$ boson production at $`ep`$ colliders is mediated by photon, $`Z`$ and $`W`$ exchange between the electron/positron and the hadronic currents of the process. In general two phase-space regions are distinguished: the deep inelastic (DIS) regime at large $`Q^2`$ and the photoproduction regime at small $`Q^2`$, $`Q^2`$ being the negative square of the transferred momentum from the electron/positron. The photoproduction cross section can be calculated by convoluting the Weizsäcker-Williams photon spectrum,

$$f_{\gamma /e}(x_\gamma )=\frac{\alpha }{2\pi }\left\{\frac{1+(1x_\gamma )^2}{x_\gamma }\mathrm{log}\frac{Q_{max}^2}{Q_{min}^2}2m_e^2x_\gamma \left(\frac{1}{Q_{min}^2}\frac{1}{Q_{max}^2}\right)\right\},$$
(1)
with the differential hadronic cross section with respect to the transverse momentum $`p_{TW}`$ and the rapidity $`y_W`$ of the $`W`$ boson for $`\gamma qq^{}W`$:

$$\frac{d^2\sigma _{LO}^{dir}}{dp_{TW}dy_W}=2p_{TW}\underset{q,\overline{q}}{}_{x_\gamma ^{}}^1\frac{dx_\gamma }{x_\gamma }f_{\gamma /e}(x_\gamma )q_p(x_p,\mu _F^2)\frac{x_p}{s+u_1}\frac{s^2}{S}\frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{dir}(\gamma qWq^{})}{dt_1},$$
(2)
where $`q_p(x_p,\mu _F^2)`$ is the corresponding quark density of the proton with momentum fraction $`x_p`$ and at the factorization scale $`\mu _F`$. $`\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{dir}(\gamma qWq^{})`$ denotes the corresponding LO partonic cross section and $`x_\gamma `$ the photon momentum fraction of the electron/positron. (For the resolved part the Weizsäcker–Williams spectrum $`f_{\gamma /e}`$ has to be replaced by the convolution of $`f_{\gamma /e}`$ with the corresponding parton densities in the photon and the partonic cross section by the resolved expressions.) The QED coupling at vanishing momentum transfer is denoted by $`\alpha `$, the electron mass by $`m_e`$, and the minimal and maximal values of the photon virtuality $`Q^2`$ by $`Q_{min}^2,Q_{max}^2`$. In order to separate photoproduction from the DIS region we impose a cut of $`Q_{max}^2=4\mathrm{Ge}\mathrm{V}^2`$ in the momentum transfer $`Q^2`$ from the electron/positron line. The minimal value of $`Q^2`$ is kinematically fixed,

$$Q_{min}^2=m_e^2\frac{x_\gamma ^2}{1x_\gamma },$$
(3)
where negligible higher order terms in the electron mass $`m_e`$ have been omitted. The partonic Mandelstam variables are defined as

$`s`$ $`=`$ $`(k_1+k_2)^2,`$
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`(k_1p_1)^2,t_1=tM_W^2,`$
$`u`$ $`=`$ $`(k_2p_1)^2,u_1=uM_W^2,`$ (4)
where $`k_1`$ is the 4-momentum of the photon, $`k_2`$ the incoming quark 4-momentum and $`p_1`$ the 4-momentum of the outgoing $`W`$ boson. The momentum fraction $`x_p`$ of the proton is given by $`x_p=x_p^{}`$, where

$$x_p^{}=\frac{x_\gamma T_1+M_W^2}{x_\gamma S+U_1},$$
(5)
and the lower bound of the $`x_\gamma `$ integration by

$$x_\gamma ^{}=\frac{U_1+M_W^2}{S+T_1}.$$
(6)
$`S,T_1,U_1`$ denote the hadronic Mandelstam variables. They are related to the partonic variables as

$$s=x_\gamma x_pS,t_1=x_\gamma T_1,u_1=x_pU_1.$$
(7)
The hadronic Mandelstam variables can be expressed in terms of the transverse momentum $`p_{TW}`$ and the rapidity $`y_W`$ (defined to be positive in the electron/positron direction) of the $`W`$ boson,

$$T_1=\sqrt{S(p_{TW}^2+M_W^2)}e^{y_Wy_0},U_1=\sqrt{S(p_{TW}^2+M_W^2)}e^{y_W+y_0},$$
(8)
where $`y_0=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}E_p/E_e`$ denotes the shift in rapidity between the laboratory system and the hadronic c.m. system.

The leading direct photon process $`\gamma qq^{}W`$ (a typical contribution is depicted by the first diagram of Fig. 1) develops a singularity at LO when the final state quark $`q^{}`$ becomes collinear with the initial state photon. However, the finite transverse momentum $`p_{TW}`$ of the $`W`$ boson has to be balanced by the final state quark, so that this singularity does not occur at LO for non-vanishing $`p_{TW}`$. The small $`Q^2`$ region includes the contribution of the hadronic component of the photon giving rise to $`W+jet`$ production via $`q\overline{q}^{}Wg`$ (second diagram of Fig. 1 as a typical example) and the crossed processes $`gq(\overline{q})Wq^{}(\overline{q}^{})`$. The treatment of the DIS region is straightforward (a typical contribution is shown in the third diagram of Fig. 1).

The result for the direct contribution can be cast into the form

$$\frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{dir}}{dt_1}[\gamma qWq^{}]=\frac{G_FM_W^2\alpha }{\sqrt{2}}\frac{(e_q^{}t_1e_Wu)^2}{s^2ut_1^2}\left(s^2+u^2+2M_W^2t\right),$$
(9)
where $`G_F`$ denotes the Fermi constant, $`M_W`$ the $`W`$ mass and $`e_q^{},e_W`$ the electric charges of the scattered quark $`q^{}`$ and $`W`$ boson, i.e. $`e_W=e_qe_q^{}=\pm 1`$. The LO cross sections of the resolved processes $`q\overline{q}^{}Wg`$ and $`gq(\overline{q})Wq(\overline{q})`$ are given by ($`C_F=4/3`$ and $`T_R=1/2`$)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{res}}{dt_1}}[q\overline{q}^{}Wg]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_FM_W^2\alpha _s}{3\sqrt{2}}}C_F{\displaystyle \frac{t^2+u^2+2M_W^2s}{s^2tu}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{res}}{dt_1}}[gq(\overline{q})Wq^{}(\overline{q}^{})]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{G_FM_W^2\alpha _s}{3\sqrt{2}}}T_R{\displaystyle \frac{s^2+u^2+2M_W^2t}{s^3u}},`$ (10)
where $`\alpha _s`$ denotes the strong coupling constant.

The direct, resolved and DIS contributions add up to the total $`W`$ $`p_{TW}`$ distribution. Direct photoproduction develops the dominant contribution, while the DIS part is smaller but competitive. The resolved component is negligible for pTW

>
[-0.07cm]
15subscript𝑝𝑇𝑊

>
[-0.07cm]
15p_{TW}\raisebox{-3.69899pt}{~{}\shortstack{$>$ \\
[-0.07cm] $\sim$}}~{}15 GeV . The consistency of the calculation requires that the dependence on the specific value of the cut $`Q_{max}^2`$ which separates the DIS and photoproduction regimes, should be small. This dependence is presented in Fig. 2 for the LO $`W^+`$ and $`W^{}`$ cross sections at $`p_{TW}=40`$ GeV. The residual dependence is below the per-cent level and thus indeed sufficiently small.

## 3 QCD Corrections

For the dominant direct part we have evaluated the NLO QCD corrections. They consist of two parts, the virtual and real corrections. The virtual corrections are built up by all one-loop diagrams which are generated by virtual gluon exchange. Typical examples are displayed in Fig. 3. The real corrections originate from gluon radiation off the quark lines, see Fig. 4, and the corresponding crossed contributions with the gluon in the initial state.

The QCD-corrected result including virtual and real corrections can be cast into the form

$$\frac{d^2\sigma _{NLO}^{dir}}{dp_{TW}dy_W}=2p_{TW}\underset{h=q,\overline{q},g}{}_{x_\gamma ^{}}^1\frac{dx_\gamma }{x_\gamma }_{x_p^{}}^1\frac{dx_p}{x_p}h_p(x_p,\mu _F^2)f_{\gamma /e}(x_\gamma )\frac{s^2}{S}\frac{d^2\widehat{\sigma }_{\gamma h}^{dir}}{dt_1du_1}$$
(11)
with all parameters as defined in Eqs. (48) and $`h_p`$ denoting the corresponding parton density of the proton. The partonic virtual corrections are given by

$$\frac{d^2\widehat{\sigma }_{virt}}{dt_1du_1}=\frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{virt}}{dt_1}\delta (s+t_1+u_1+M_W^2)$$
(12)
which leads to Eq. (2) with $`\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}^{dir}`$ replaced by $`\widehat{\sigma }_{virt}`$ for LO kinematics.

### 3.1 Virtual Corrections

The virtual corrections have been computed via dimensional regularization in $`n=42ϵ`$ dimensions. The quarks have been treated as massless particles. Due to the Ward-Takahashi identities no renormalization is required after adding all diagrams, since there is no input parameter at LO which is affected by QCD corrections. The required scalar loop integrals are taken from Ref. . The final double and single singularities of the virtual corrections arise from infrared gluon exchange and collinear singularities due to the gluon and massless quarks,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{virt}}{dt_1}}`$ $`=`$ $`C_{virt}C_F{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _s}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}}{dt_1}}`$
$`C_{virt}`$ $`=`$ $`C_ϵ\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{M_W^2}{t}}\right)+C_V\right\}`$ (13)
with

$$C_ϵ=\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+ϵ)\left(\frac{4\pi \mu ^2}{M_W^2}\right)^ϵ$$
(14)
and a lengthy finite term $`C_V`$. These singularities are cancelled by adding the real corrections and the counter terms due to the renormalization of the parton densities.

As a cross check, the virtual corrections have also been evaluated by introducing small gluon and quark masses $`\lambda ,m`$. This computation has been worked out with the programs FeynArts , FormCalc  and LoopTools . The renormalization of the small quark mass has been performed in the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme to obtain an ultraviolet-finite result. The renormalization, however, does not affect the result in the limit of the massless gluons and massless quarks, but has to be introduced to take the massless limit in a consistent way. The infrared and collinear singularities now appear as logarithms of the gluon and quark masses in the limit of small masses,

$$C_{virt}^{}=C_ϵ\left\{\mathrm{log}\frac{\lambda ^2}{t}\mathrm{log}\frac{m^2}{t}+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}^2\frac{m^2}{t}\mathrm{log}\frac{\lambda ^2}{t}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{m^2}{t}+C_V^{}\right\}$$
(15)
with a different finite term $`C_V^{}`$. This result has to be translated into the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme for zero masses. The corresponding piece to be added to the virtual corrections can be calculated from the results of Refs.  and it is given by

$`\mathrm{\Delta }C_{virt}`$ $`=`$ $`C_ϵ\{\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2}{t}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{log}^2{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{t}}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda ^2}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{t}}`$ (16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{M_W^2}{t}})2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{log}^2{\displaystyle \frac{M_W^2}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{M_W^2}{t}}\}.`$
After adding this transformation term to the virtual corrections $`C_{virt}^{}`$ of the second approach, both results are in agreement.

### 3.2 Real Corrections

The real corrections have been calculated by means of the massless dipole subtraction method introduced in Ref. . The basic idea is to construct appropriate dipole terms $`d\sigma ^{sub}`$ that include all infrared and collinear singularities of the real matrix elements, but can be integrated out analytically up to the LO phase space. The final expression for the differential cross section is given by

$$d\widehat{\sigma }_{NLO}=d\widehat{\sigma }_{LO}+[d\widehat{\sigma }^{real}d\widehat{\sigma }^{sub}]+[d\widehat{\sigma }^{virt}+d\overline{\widehat{\sigma }}_1^{sub}]+[d\widehat{\sigma }^{part}+d\overline{\widehat{\sigma }}_2^{sub}],$$
(17)
where $`d\overline{\widehat{\sigma }}_{1,2}^{sub}`$ are the two parts of the dipole terms which were integrated out analytically. They cancel the infrared and collinear divergences of the virtual corrections $`d\widehat{\sigma }^{virt}`$ and the collinear singularity of the counter term $`d\widehat{\sigma }^{part}`$ due to the renormalization of the parton densities at NLO, respectively. The NLO parton densities have been defined in the $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme. Each of the square brackets in eq. (17) is individually finite. This procedure allows to calculate the real matrix elements in 4 dimensions.

The dipole terms are constructed for each collinear and infrared configuration arising in the processes. They include the collinear singularities between final state partons themselves and those between the final state partons and the initial parton or photon. The collinear singularity related to the photon is absorbed by the renormalization of the direct part of the resolved photon densities. There is a subtlety in the numerical implementation of the dipole term corresponding to collinear $`\gamma q\overline{q}`$ splitting, see Fig. 5.

Although this dipole term does not generate a new spurious singularity, the numerical integration turns out to be unstable, if the gluon in the final state is soft. In this case the quark emitted from the photon develops a large transverse momentum balancing the transverse momentum of the $`W`$ boson. Since the dipole term has not been constructed to cover this case numerically, we introduced an upper cut on the product of photon and quark momenta,

$$2k_1p_2<p_{cut}^2.$$
(18)
After introducing this cut into the dipole terms which are subtracted from the real matrix element, and the analytically integrated one the numerical integration is stable and independent of this cut.

## 4 Results

We analyze our final results for direct photoproduction of $`W`$ bosons plus one jet $`W+jet`$ as well as the inclusive process $`W+X`$, i.e. without defining jets. We use the inclusive $`k_T`$ algorithm for the jet definition with a cone size $`R<1`$ . Moreover, we require each detected parton in the final state to have transverse energy $`E_T>5`$ GeV. One-jet configurations arise in this framework from 3 different phase space configurations: (i) LO kinematics include only one parton in the final state and are thus one-jet contributions automatically; (ii) if both partons of the real corrections are inside the same cone of size $`R<1`$, they are combined to one jet; (iii) if one parton has $`E_T<5`$ GeV, it is undetected so that only the other parton is counted as a single jet. The contributions of these three configurations have to be added to obtain the cross section for $`W+1`$ jet production. The residual part of the real corrections is attributed to $`W+2`$ jet production which has been added to the 1-jet part for the full $`W+X`$ production rate.

We have chosen CTEQ4M  and ACFGP  parton densities for the proton and the resolved photon, respectively. The strong coupling constant is taken at NLO with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_5^{\overline{\mathrm{MS}}}=202`$ MeV. At LO we used CTEQ4L parton densities  with LO strong coupling and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_5=181`$ MeV. In our numerical analysis we have chosen the following values for the input parameters: $`M_W=80.43`$ GeV, $`M_Z=91.1876`$ GeV, $`\alpha =1/137.03599976`$, $`G_F=1.16639\times 10^5`$ GeV-2, $`m_e=0.510998902`$ MeV. In the fermionic $`Z`$ couplings we have introduced the Weinberg angle $`\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W=1M_W^2/M_Z^2`$, and the Cabibbo angle between the first two generations has been chosen as $`\mathrm{sin}\theta _c=0.222`$ 111In our numerical analysis we neglected the contribution of initial $`b`$ quarks..

Setting $`\mu _R=\mu _F=M_W`$ for the renormalization and factorization scales, we present the final results for the $`p_{TW}`$ distributions of $`W+1`$ jet and $`W+X`$ production in Fig. 6. The QCD corrections modify the direct contribution by about $`\pm (1015)\%`$ and they are thus of moderate size. To estimate the theoretical uncertainties, the renormalization/factorization scale dependence of the direct contributions to the processes $`e^+pW^\pm +X`$ is presented in Fig. 7 for HERA conditions. The scale dependence is significantly smaller, once the NLO corrections are included. The residual scale dependence is reduced from about 20% down to about 5%. Fig. 7 clearly indicates that the NLO QCD corrections are accidentially small at the central scale determined by the $`W`$ boson mass. Since the uncertainties of the parton densities are of similar size, the total theoretical uncertainty can be estimated to be less than about 10%.

In Fig. 8 we present our final results for the total transverse momentum distributions of $`W^+`$ and $`W^{}`$ production at HERA including the NLO QCD corrections to the direct photoproduction part. The individual contributions are also shown. The Figure clearly demonstrates the dominance of the direct photoproduction part, while the DIS part is smaller but still relevant. The resolved photoproduction part can safely be neglected for $`p_{TW}`$ values larger than about $`1015`$ GeV. The rising total sum at $`p_{TW}`$ values below about 15 GeV signals the breakdown of the pure perturbative results and underlines the necessity of a soft gluon resummation to describe $`W`$ boson production for smaller transverse momenta which however is beyond the scope of this work.

The rapidity distribution of $`W`$ boson production at HERA for $`p_{TW}=40`$ GeV is presented in Fig. 9 for all individual parts. The direct photoproduction part is shown at LO and NLO. As in the case of the transverse momentum distribution the QCD corrections to the direct contribution amount to less than about $`1015\%`$ and are of moderate size. They hardly change the shape of the rapidity distribution. It can clearly be inferred from this figure that there is a preference to produce $`W`$ bosons at larger values of the rapidity $`y_W`$.

In order to allow a comparison of our results with existing analyses at HERA, we have determined the cross sections for transverse momenta below and above 25 GeV. In the first case we have used the NLO results of Refs.  for the cross section with $`p_{TW}<25`$ GeV, while for $`p_{TW}>25`$ GeV we have integrated our results including the NLO corrections to direct photoproduction. We obtain the following values for the cross section in the case of a positron beam (the numbers in brackets are the LO values):

$`p_{TW}<25\mathrm{GeV}`$ $`:`$ $`\sigma (W^+)=0.478\mathrm{pb}(0.363\mathrm{pb})`$
$`\sigma (W^{})=0.484\mathrm{pb}(0.348\mathrm{pb})`$
$`p_{TW}>25\mathrm{GeV}`$ $`:`$ $`\sigma (W^+)=0.150\mathrm{pb}(0.143\mathrm{pb})`$ (19)
$`\sigma (W^{})=0.084\mathrm{pb}(0.079\mathrm{pb}).`$
No other cuts have been imposed.

## 5 Conclusions

We have presented predictions for $`W`$ boson production at HERA including the QCD corrections to the dominant direct photon mechanism at finite transverse momentum of the $`W`$ bosons. Working in the conventional $`\overline{\mathrm{MS}}`$ scheme we find that the QCD corrections modify the direct contribution by about $`\pm (1015)\%`$ at the nominal renormalization/factorization scale $`\mu _R=\mu _F=M_W`$ and are thus of moderate size. In addition, the NLO corrections reduce the residual scale dependence of direct photoproduction to a level of about 5%. Taking into account also the uncertainties in the parton densities of the proton and the photon, the total theoretical uncertainty is estimated to be about 10%. However, the QCD corrections to the DIS part are still unknown. They are not expected to be significantly larger, because they have to cancel the $`Q_{max}^2`$ dependence of the NLO direct contribution and thus have to be of similar size. Since the QCD corrections are dominated by soft gluon effects, the shapes of the differential distributions are hardly affected. Therefore the results obtained in this work cannot explain the excess of isolated high-energy lepton events observed at the H1 experiment .

Acknowledgements.
We would like to thank S. Catani, C. Diaconu, R. Eichler, E. Elsen, M. Kuze, A. Mehta, P. Schleper and P.M. Zerwas for useful discussions. We are grateful to C. Diaconu, P. Schleper and P.M. Zerwas for carefully reading the manuscript.