text:
# Untitled Document

Langlands parameters for Heisenberg modules.

A. Beilinson

Introduction

Below we define a “spectral decomposition” of the category of representations of the Heisenberg Lie algebra; the spectral parameters are moduli of de Rham local systems. This is a very particular case (the group $`G`$ is a torus) of the following general conjecture on Langlands parameters in the de Rham-Kac-Moody (split) setting. The key device here is chiral Hecke algebra (we assume its definition is known to the reader; otherwise he should either consider it as a black box or simply skip the introduction). When $`G`$ is a torus the chiral Hecke algebra is the same as a usual lattice Heisenberg vertex algebra.

General idea: Representations of a p-adic group have a canonical “spectral decomposition” over the spectrum of Bernstein’s center. According to the local Langlands conjecture these parameters can be identified roughly with the moduli of Galois representations with values in the Langlands dual group. A possible imitation of this picture in the de Rham setting: replace the p-adic group by a Kac-Moody Lie algebra111In truth representations of the p-adic group correspond not to individual Kac-Moody modules but rather to categories of those invariant with respect to the $`G(F)`$-action, see Remark (i) below. and the Galois representation by a de Rham local system. The fun is that the usual Bernstein center is trivial here, which corresponds to the fact that the moduli of de Rham local systems have no non-constant global functions. In the de Rham setting however, contrary to the $`p`$-adic situation, there is a direct way to relate the Galois side of the picture with “automorphic” one provided by the Hecke chiral algebras.

One proceeds as follows. Below $`Fk((t))`$ is a local $`k`$-field, $`OF,O\stackrel{}{}k[[t]]`$ the local ring (here $`k`$ is our base field of char 0). Let $`G`$ be a reductive group over $`k`$, $`c`$ an integral level for $`G`$ which is less than critical. Let $`^c`$ be the chiral Hecke algebra of level $`c`$. The Langlands dual group $`G^{}`$ acts on $`^c`$, so you can twist $`^c`$ by any $`G^{}`$-local system $`\varphi `$ (in the de Rham sense) on Spec$`F`$ getting a chiral algebra $`_\varphi ^c`$ on Spec$`F`$. When $`\varphi `$ varies we get a family of chiral algebras $`_𝒮^c`$ parametrized by the moduli stack $`𝒮=𝒮_G^{}`$ of $`G^{}`$-local systems on Spec$`F`$. Consider the category of $`_𝒮^c`$-modules.222supported at the puncture of Spec$`F`$. Every such animal $`V`$ is an $`𝒪`$-module on $`𝒮`$ equipped with an extra structure. In particular, it carries an action of the “constant” (with respect to $`\varphi `$) vertex algebra of $`G^{}`$-invariants in $`^c`$, which is the enveloping algebra of the Kac-Moody Lie algebra $`𝔤(F)^c`$ of level $`c`$. Thus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒮,V)`$ is a $`𝔤(F)^c`$-module.

Conjecture. The functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒮,):\{_𝒮^c`$-modules$`\}\{𝔤(F)^c`$-modules$`\}`$ is an equivalence of categories.333We consider $`𝔤(F)^c`$ as a topological Lie algebra, so $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules are assumed to have the property that every vector is killed by $`t^n𝔤(O)𝔤(F)^c`$ for sufficiently large $`n`$. The central element $`1k𝔤(F)^c`$ acts as identity.

Roughly speaking, this means that $`_\varphi ^c`$-modules equipped with an action of Aut$`\varphi `$ are the same as certain special $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules; $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules coming from $`_\varphi ^c`$’s with different $`\varphi `$’s are different; and every $`𝔤(F)^c`$-module can be presented as an “integral” of modules coming from $`_\varphi ^c`$-modules. Of course, a precise formulation of the above conjecture requires an explanation of what are $`𝒪`$-modules on $`𝒮`$ (which is an ind-algebraic stack in a broad sense), etc.

Remarks. (i) The chiral algebra $`^c`$ on Spec$`F`$ carries a natural $`G(F)`$ action commuting with the $`G^{}`$-action, so $`G(F)`$ acts on $`_𝒮^c`$ as well. Thus $`G(F)`$ acts on the category of $`_𝒮^c`$-modules; it acts also on the category of $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules (via the adjoint action of $`G(F)`$ on $`𝔤(F)^c`$). The functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒮,)`$ commutes with the $`G(F)`$-action.

(ii) Assuming the above conjecture, one defines the (Galois) support of a $`𝔤(F)^c`$-module as the support of the corresponding $`_𝒮^c`$-module. It would be very interesting to describe explicitly the categories of $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules with support in a given subspace of $`𝒮`$. For example, one can hope that the category of $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules supported on the substack of regular singular connections with nilpotent residue is equivalent to the product of several copies of the category of $`𝒟`$-modules on the affine flags space $`_G`$ of $`G(F)`$.444 $`_G`$ is a formally smooth ind-proper ind-scheme. The copies are labeled by the orbits of the $`c`$-affine action of the affine Weyl group on lattice of weights. As in the finite-dimensional situation, the functor that coorrresponds to an orbit assigns to a $`𝒟`$-module $`M`$ the vector space of global sections $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}(M):=\mathrm{\Gamma }(_G,M)`$ where $``$ is the (positive) line bundle on $`_G`$ that corresponds to the (only) negative weight from the orbit; this is a $`𝔤(F)^c`$-module in an obvious way. It is known that the functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}`$ is exact and fully faithful; a construction due to Gaitsgory provides a canonical lifting of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}`$ to a functor with values in $`_𝒮^c`$-modules. More generally, the category of $`𝔤(F)^c`$-modules supported on the substack of connections with regular singularities with fixed “semi-simple part of the monodromy” should be equivalent to the product of several copies of the category of appropriately twisted $`𝒟`$-modules on $`_G`$. It would be very interesting to guess what happens in the case of irregular singularities.

(iii) Denote by $`T`$ the Cartan group of $`G`$, so $`T^{}G^{}`$ is the Cartan torus of $`G^{}`$. Let $`V`$ be a $`𝔤(F)^c`$-module, $`\varphi `$ a $`G^{}`$-local system which comes from a $`T^{}`$-local system $`\varphi _T^{}`$. One can hope that $`\varphi `$ is in the support of $`V`$ if and only if $`\varphi _T^{}`$ belongs to the support of one of the Heisenberg modules $`H^{\mathrm{}/2+}(𝔫(F),V)`$ where $`𝔫`$ is the Lie algebra of a maximal nilpotent subgroup $`NG`$.

In this note we check the toy case of the above conjecture when $`G=T`$ is a torus, hence the Hecke chiral algebra is the lattice Heisenberg chiral algebra. The result is essentially straightforward (the key point is that $`𝒮_T^{}`$ is covered by $`\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(O))`$ = the spectrum of the algebra of “annihilation operators” in Heisenberg Lie algebra modules); the pages below are mostly a review of the known definitions and constructions. §1 considers a class of Heisenberg groups we play with. In §2 we transplant the picture to a curve. §3 deals with lattice vertex algebras. In case of a non-degenerate level we establish a natural bijection between symmetric Heisenberg groups and symmetric lattice vertex algebras (the construction is essentially the same as in \[K\] 5.4, 5.5 though the presentation may look different) and identify the corresponding categories of representations (the latter subject is essentially contained in \[D\], the proof below is similar to Dong’s555D. Gaitsgory found recently another, more natural, proof.). We also show that the twist by a local system of a lattice chiral algebra does not affect (locally) the chiral algebra structure but changes the Heisenberg Lie algebra embedding. In §4 the structure of the moduli space of local systems is spelled out and the promised fact on Langlands parameters is stated and proved.

I am grateful to V. Drinfeld, D. Gaitsgory and D. Kazhdan for their interest and stimulating discussions.

§1 Symmetric Heisenberg extensions

1.1 Suppose $`A`$, $`C`$ are abelian groups, $`H`$ a central $`C`$-extension of $`A`$. Denote by $`\{,\}`$ the corresponding commutator pairing $`A\times AC`$. For $`aA`$ we denote its preimage in $`H`$ by $`H_a`$; this is a $`C`$-torsor. We write elements of $`H_a`$ as $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$.

A symmetric structure on $`H`$ is an automorphism $`\sigma `$ of $`H`$ such that $`\sigma ^2=`$idH, $`\sigma |_C=`$idC, and $`\sigma `$mod$`C`$ is the involution $`aa^1`$ of $`A`$. We call $`(H,\sigma )`$ a symmetric (central) $`C`$-extension of $`A`$.

Example. Let $`s:AH`$ be a set-theoretic section such that the corresponding cocycle $`a_1,a_2\gamma _s(a_1,a_2):=s(a_1)s(a_2)s(a_1a_2)^1`$ has property $`\gamma _s(a_1^1,a_2^1)=\gamma _s(a_1,a_2)`$. Then $`s`$ defines a symmetric structure such that $`\sigma s(a)=s(a^1)`$. In other words, the extension defined by a two cocycle with the above property is symmetric.

All central $`C`$-extensions of $`A`$ form a groupoid. The Baer product defines on it the structure of a Picard groupoid. Same is true for the groupoid of symmetric extensions. The automorphism group of a cental extension equals Hom$`(A,C)`$;666We identify $`f:AC`$ with the automorphism $`\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}f(a)`$. the one of a symmetric extension is Hom$`(A,C_2)`$ Hom$`(A,C)`$.777 Here $`C_2C`$ is the subgroup of elements of order 2.

1.2 Denote by $`H^{(2)}`$ the Baer product of two copies of $`H`$. We have a canonical homomorphism $`HH^{(2)}`$, $`hh^{(2)}`$, which lifts idA and such that $`c^{(2)}=c^2`$ for $`cC`$. A symmetric structure $`\sigma `$ on $`H`$ yields a set-theoretic section $`s_\sigma :AH^{(2)}`$. Namely, for $`aA`$ our $`s_\sigma (a)`$ is the trivialization of the $`C`$-torsor $`H_a^{(2)}`$ defined by the identification $`H_a^{(2)}:=H_aH_a\stackrel{}{}C`$, $`hh^{}h\sigma (h^{})=\sigma (h)h^{}CH`$.

Lemma. The map $`\sigma s_\sigma `$ is a bijection between the set of symmetric structures on $`H`$ and the set of set-theoretic sections $`s:AH^{(2)}`$ which satisfy an equation $`s(a)s(b)=s(ab)\{a,b\}`$.

Proof. One has $`s_\sigma (a)=[\stackrel{~}{a}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{a})]^1\stackrel{~}{a}^{(2)}`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{a}H`$ is a lifting of $`a`$ and $`[\stackrel{~}{a}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{a})]C`$. Therefore $`s_\sigma (a)s_\sigma (b)=[\stackrel{~}{a}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{a})]^1\stackrel{~}{a}^{(2)}[\stackrel{~}{b}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{b})]^1\stackrel{~}{b}^{(2)}=[\stackrel{~}{a}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{a})\stackrel{~}{b}\sigma (\stackrel{~}{b})]^1(\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b})^{(2)}=\{a,b\}[(\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b})\sigma (\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b})]^1(\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b})^{(2)}=\{a,b\}s_\sigma (ab),`$ so $`s_\sigma `$ satisfies our equation. Conversely, for a given $`s`$ we define $`\sigma _s:HH`$ as $`\sigma _s(\stackrel{~}{a}):=[\stackrel{~}{a}^{(2)}s(a)^1]\stackrel{~}{a}^1`$ where $`[\stackrel{~}{a}^{(2)}s(a)^1]C`$. We leave it to the reader to check that $`\sigma `$ is a symmetric structure on $`H`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In other words, for a fixed skew-symmetric pairing $`\{,\}:C\times CA`$ a symmetric $`C`$-extension with the commutant pairing equal to $`\{,\}`$ is the same as a Baer square root of the $`C`$-extension of $`A`$ defined by the 2-cocycle $`\{,\}`$.

1.3 We see that the Picard groupoid of commutative symmetric $`C`$-extensions of $`A`$ is canonically equivalent to the Picard groupoid $`xt(A,C_2)`$ of commutative $`C_2`$-extensions of $`A`$. If $`A`$ is a free commutative group then this is the category of Hom$`(A,C_2)`$-torsors.

For a fixed pairing $`\{,\}:A\times AC`$ the groupoid of symmetric $`C`$-extensions of $`A`$ having $`\{,\}`$ as the commutator pairing carries the Baer sum action of the Picard groupoid of commutative symmetric extensions, i.e., that of $`xt(A,C_2)`$. If our groupoid is non-empty then it is an $`xt(A,C_2)`$-torsor.

The above considerations make sense if $`H`$ is a central extension of an abelian group $`A`$ by any Picard category; in particular, we can play with superextensions of $`A`$.888See \[BBE\] §2 for the terminology. The above lemma remains true in this more general setting.

1.4 All schemes below are over the base field $`k`$ of char 0. We will consider symmetric $`𝔾_m`$-extensions or superextensions of certain group ind-schemes.

Remark. Let $`A`$ be a group ind-scheme equipped with a pairity homomorphism $`A/2`$ and a (super) skew-symmetric pairing $`\{,\}:A\times A𝔾_m`$. As follows from 1.2, symmetric superextensions of $`A`$ having $`\{,\}`$ as the commutator pairing are in bijective correspondence with those for the reduced ind-scheme $`A_{red}`$.

Let $`Fk((t))`$ be a local $`k`$-field, $`Ok[[t]]`$ its local ring, $`𝔪_xtk[[t]]`$ the maximal ideal, $`x`$ Spec$`(O)`$ is the closed point.

Let $`T=\mathrm{\Gamma }𝔾_m`$ be a torus, $`𝔱=\mathrm{\Gamma }k`$ its Lie algebra. We fix a level $`c`$ which is an integral symmetric bilinear form on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. We have the commutative group ind-scheme $`T(F)=\mathrm{\Gamma }F^\times `$. For $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`fF^\times `$ we set $`f^\gamma :=\gamma fT(F)`$. The Lie algebra of $`T(F)`$ equals $`𝔱(F)=\mathrm{\Gamma }F`$; for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\phi F`$ we set $`\phi \gamma :=\gamma \phi 𝔱(F)`$. The valuation $`v:F^\times `$ yields a projection $`T(F)\mathrm{\Gamma }`$; for $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the preimage of $`\gamma `$ is $`T(F)^\gamma T(F)`$. Notice that $`T(F)_{red}^0`$ is the group scheme $`T(O)`$.

Definition. A Heisenberg extension of level $`c`$ is a central $`𝔾_m`$-superextension $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`T(K)`$ equipped with a splitting $`i:T(O)T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ which satisfies the following two properties:

(i) The $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-pairity of $`aT(F)_\gamma `$ equals $`c(\gamma ,\gamma )`$mod$`2`$.

(ii) The $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-commutator pairing $`T(F)\times T(F)𝔾_m`$ for $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is

$$f_1^{\gamma _1},f_2^{\gamma _2}\{f_1^{\gamma _1},f_2^{\gamma _2}\}^c:=\{f_1,f_2\}^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}$$
$`\mathrm{1.4.1}`$
where $`\{f_1,f_2\}𝔾_m`$ is the Contou-Carrère symbol.999See \[CC\] or \[BBE\] §3.

We say that $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is symmetric it is equipped with a symmetric structure $`\sigma `$ which fixes the splitting $`i`$.

1.5 Remarks. (i) The Baer product of (symmetric) Heisenberg extensions of levels $`c,c^{}`$ is a (symmetric) Heisenberg extension of level $`c+c^{}`$.

(ii) The Lie algebra $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ of a Heisenberg extension of level $`c`$ is a central $`k`$-extension of the commutative Lie algebra $`𝔱(F)`$. The corresponding commutator pairing $`𝔱(F)\times 𝔱(F)k`$ is $`\phi _1\gamma _1,\phi _2\gamma _2c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)`$Res$`(\phi _2d\phi _1)`$. A symmetric structure defines a $`k`$-linear continuous splitting $`\stackrel{~}{i}:𝔱(F)𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ (the only splitting fixed by $`\sigma `$) which equals $`i`$ on $`𝔱(O)`$. Thus $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is uniquely defined: as a vector space it equals $`𝔱(F)k`$ with bracket defined by the above formula. We call $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ the symmetric Heisenberg Lie algebra of level $`c`$. The adjoint action of the group $`T(F)`$ on $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is Ad$`{}_{f^\gamma }{}^{}(\phi \gamma ^{})=\phi \gamma ^{}+c(\gamma ,\gamma ^{})`$Res$`(\phi d\mathrm{log}f)`$.

(iii) Let $`T^{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}𝔾_m`$ be the dual torus. The group ind-scheme $`T^{}(F)`$ acts on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ according to formula $`g^{\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }}(\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma )=\{f,g\}^{(\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma },\gamma )}\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma `$ where $`f,gF^\times `$, $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$, and $`\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is a lifting of $`f^\gamma `$. One can view $`c`$ as a homomorphism $`TT^{}`$. Then for any $`f^\gamma T(F)`$ the adjoint action of $`f^\gamma `$ on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ coincides with the action of $`c(f^\gamma )T^{}(F)`$.

(iv) As follows from 1.2 for a symmetric Heisenberg extension $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ the action of the group ind-scheme Aut$`(F)`$ on $`T(F)`$ lifts uniquely to an action on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ of the two-sheeted covering Aut$`{}_{}{}^{1/2}(F)`$ which preserves $`\sigma `$ and $`i`$. In particular, $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ carries a canonical action of the Lie algebra $`\mathrm{\Theta }(F):=`$ Der$`(F)`$ of vector fields on $`F`$. Here is an explicit formula:

1.6 Lemma. For $`fF^\times `$, $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\theta \mathrm{\Theta }(F)`$, and a lifting $`\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ one has

$$\theta (\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma )=[\stackrel{~}{i}(\frac{\theta (f)}{f}\gamma )+\frac{c(\gamma ,\gamma )}{2}\text{Res}(\theta (f)\frac{df}{f^2})]\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma =\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma [\stackrel{~}{i}(\frac{\theta (f)}{f}\gamma )\frac{c(\gamma ,\gamma )}{2}\text{Res}(\theta (f)\frac{df}{f^2})].$$

Proof. The action of Aut$`{}_{}{}^{1/2}(F)`$ is compatible with the projection $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}𝔾_m`$, $`\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma \stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma \sigma (\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma )`$, see 1.2. Therefore $`(1+ϵ\theta )\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma =(1+ϵ\stackrel{~}{i}(\frac{\theta (f)}{2f}\gamma ))\stackrel{~}{f}^\gamma (1+ϵ\stackrel{~}{i}(\frac{\theta (f)}{2f}\gamma ))`$. Now use (1.4.1). $`\mathrm{}`$

Denote by $`s^c`$ the groupoid of symmetric Heisenberg extensions of level $`c`$. By 1.2 and 1.5(i) $`s^0`$ is a Picard groupoid canonically equivalent to that of Hom$`(\mathrm{\Gamma },\mu _2)=\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mu _2`$-torsors.101010Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ is the dual lattice. Thus for any $`c`$ the groupoid $`s^c`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mu _2`$-gerbe (the fact that $`s^c`$ is non-empty follows from, say, Remark in 1.7 below).

1.7 Here is anoher description of $`s^c`$. Let $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ be a symmetric Heisenberg extension. For $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ let $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ be a superline defined as follows. Consider $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ as a superline $`\lambda `$ over $`T(F)`$ equivariant with respect to the left and right $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-translations. Restrict $`\lambda `$ to $`T(F)_{red}^\gamma `$ and consider the right translation action of $`T(O)\stackrel{i}{}T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. Our $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ is the superline of $`T(O)`$-equivariant sections.111111We use notation $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ instead of $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ since $`T(O)`$ acts on it by the character $`c(\gamma )`$, see 3.2, 3.3.

Denote by $`\omega _x`$ the cotangent $`k`$-line $`𝔪_x/𝔪_x^2`$.

Lemma. (i) For every $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ there is a canonical isomorphism $`\mu =\mu _{\gamma _1\gamma _2}:\lambda ^{\gamma _1}\lambda ^{\gamma _2}\stackrel{}{}\lambda ^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}\omega _x^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$, $`\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2\mu (\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)`$, and for every $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ a one $`\sigma =\sigma _\gamma :\lambda ^\gamma \stackrel{}{}\lambda ^\gamma `$ such that

(a) $`\mu `$ is associative: for every $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2,\gamma _3\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{}_i\lambda ^{\gamma _i}`$ one has $`\mu (\mu (\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2),\mathrm{}_3)=\mu (\mathrm{}_1,\mu (\mathrm{}_2,\mathrm{}_3))\lambda ^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2+\gamma _3}\omega _x^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)+c(\gamma _2,\gamma _3)+c(\gamma _1,\gamma _3)}`$.

(b) One has $`\mu _{\gamma _1\gamma _2}=(1)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\mu _{\gamma _2\gamma _1}𝔰`$ where $`𝔰:\lambda ^{\gamma _1}\lambda ^{\gamma _2}\stackrel{}{}\lambda ^{\gamma _2}\lambda ^{\gamma _1}`$ is the commutativity constraint.

(c) $`\sigma ^2=`$ id, i.e., $`\sigma _\gamma =\sigma _\gamma ^1`$, and $`\mu `$ commutes with $`\sigma `$.

(ii) The above construction identifies $`s^c`$ with the groupoid of triples $`(\{\lambda ^\gamma \},\mu ,\sigma )`$ where $`\lambda ^\gamma `$, $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$, is a collection of superlines such that each $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ has pairity $`c(\gamma ,\gamma )`$ mod2, and $`\mu `$, $`\sigma `$ are data of isomorphisms as in (i) above.

Remark (cf. \[K\] 5.5). Choose a square root $`\lambda _x`$ of $`\omega _x`$ and consider it as an odd superline. For a datum as in Lemma set $`\lambda ^{}_{}{}^{}\gamma :=\lambda ^\gamma \lambda _x^{c(\gamma ,\gamma )}`$. Then $`\mu `$ and $`\sigma `$ make $`\{\lambda ^{}_{}{}^{}\gamma \}`$ a symmetric $`𝔾_m`$-extension of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with the commutator pairing $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2(1)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)+c(\gamma _1,\gamma _1)c(\gamma _2,\gamma _2)}`$. Thus a choice of $`\lambda _x`$ identifies $`s^c`$ with the category of such symmetric $`𝔾_m`$-extensions of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Proof of Lemma. (i) The isomorphisms $`\sigma `$ come from the symmetric structure on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. In order to define $`\mu `$ let us choose a parameter $`t`$ in $`F`$ (so $`tF`$, $`v(t)=1`$). Then $`\lambda ^\gamma \stackrel{}{}\lambda _{t^\gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{}^\gamma \mathrm{}_t^\gamma :=\mathrm{}^\gamma (t^\gamma )`$, and we define $`\mu `$ by formula $`(\mu (\mathrm{}^{\gamma _1},\mathrm{}^{\gamma _2})(dt_0)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)})_t:=\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _1}\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _2}`$ where $``$ is the product map in $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. It remains to check that $`\mu `$ so defined does not depend on the choice of $`t`$. Take another parameter $`at`$, $`aO^\times `$. Then $`\mathrm{}_{at}^\gamma =\mathrm{}_t^\gamma i(a^\gamma )`$ hence $`\mathrm{}_{at}^{\gamma _1}\mathrm{}_{at}^{\gamma _2}=(\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _1}\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _2})i(a^{\gamma _1\gamma _2})\{a,t\}^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}=(\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _1}\mathrm{}_t^{\gamma _2})i(a^{\gamma _1\gamma _2})a_0^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}.`$ Since $`d(at)_0=a_0dt_0`$ this implies the independence.

Properties (a)–(c) are immediate.

(ii) Assume we have a datum $`(\{\lambda ^\gamma \},\mu ,\sigma )`$. By Remark in 1.4 a symmetric Heisenberg extension of $`T(F)`$ amounts to a similar extension of $`T(F)_{red}`$, so it suffices to define $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_{red}`$. To do this we track back the construction of (i). As a mere $`T(O)`$-equivariant superline $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_{red}`$ is constant over each $`T(F)_{red}^\gamma `$ with fiber $`\lambda ^\gamma `$. We also have its trivialization $`i`$ over $`T(O)`$ and the symmetry $`\sigma `$. To recover the product let us fix a parameter $`t`$ in $`F`$. Then $`\mu `$ recovers the multiplication law over the subgroup $`t^\mathrm{\Gamma }T(F)_{red}`$ according to formula $`\mathrm{}_{t^{\gamma _1}}^1\mathrm{}_{t^{\gamma _2}}^2:=(\mu (\mathrm{}^1,\mathrm{}^2)(dt_0)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)})_{t^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}}`$. It extends in a unique way to the product over the whole $`T(F)_{red}`$ if we demand that the $`T(O)`$-equivariant structure coincides with the right multiplication via $`i`$ and the commutator pairing equals (1.4.1). The independence of $`t`$ follows from a straightforward computation as in (i). $`\mathrm{}`$

1.8 Example (will not be used below). Assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=`$, so $`T(F)=F^\times `$, and $`c=1`$, i.e., $`c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)=\gamma _1\gamma _2`$. Choose a square root $``$ of the $`F`$-line $`\omega (F)`$. The group $`F^\times `$ acts on the Tate $`k`$-vector space $``$ by homotheties, so we have the Heisenberg group $`F_{()}^\times \mathrm{}`$ defined as the pull-back of the Tate superextension of the group GL$`()`$ of all continuous $`k`$-automorphisms of $``$ (see e.g. \[BBE\] 3.7). Now $`F_{()}^\times \mathrm{}`$ caries a canonical symmetric structure. Indeed, the pairing $`\times k`$, $`\mathrm{},\mathrm{}^{}\text{Res}(\mathrm{}\mathrm{}^{}),`$ makes $``$ a self-dual Tate $`k`$-vector space, and the symmetric structure $`\sigma `$ comes from the canonical isomorphism GL$`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}()\stackrel{}{}`$ GL$`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}()`$ which lifts the automorphism $`g{}_{}{}^{t}g_{}^{1}`$ (see \[BBE\] (2.16.1)). Notice that the functor $`F_{()}^\times \mathrm{}`$ is a morphism, hence an equivalence, of the $`\mu _2`$-gerbes.

1.9 We use notation of 1.5(iii). Set

$$Z^c:=\text{Ker}(c:TT^{})=\text{Hom}(\text{Coker}(c:\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}),𝔾_m).$$
$`\mathrm{1.9.1}`$
We consider $`Z^c`$ as a subgroup of $`TT(O)`$. The level $`c`$ is non-degenerate if and only if $`Z^c`$ is finite.

Denote by $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$mod the category of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules, i.e., $`k`$-vector (super)spaces equipped with an action of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ (the subgroup $`𝔾_mT(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is assumed to act by standard homotheties) and by $`Z^c`$mod the category of $`Z^c`$-modules.

Assume that $`c`$ is non-degenerate.

Lemma. Every set-theoretic section $`s:\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/c(\mathrm{\Gamma })\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ defines an equivalence of categories $`e_s:T(F)\stackrel{~}{}\text{mod}\stackrel{}{}Z^c`$mod. The equivalences $`e_s`$ for different $`s`$ are (non-canonically) isomorphic.

Proof. For any $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module $`M`$ the action of $`TT(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ defines a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$-grading $`M=M^{\stackrel{ˇ}{\gamma }}`$ such that $`T(F)^\gamma \stackrel{~}{}`$ acts by operators of degree $`c(\gamma )`$. The corresponding $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/c(\mathrm{\Gamma })`$-grading is compatible with the $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action; it is the decomposition of $`M`$ by $`Z^c`$-isotypical components (one has $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/c(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\text{Hom}(Z^c,𝔾_m)`$).

Set $`M^s:=\underset{\chi \mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/c(\mathrm{\Gamma })}{}M^{s(\chi )}`$ and $`e_s(M):=(M^s)^{T(𝔪)}`$ where $`T(𝔪):=\text{Ker}(T(O)T)`$ is the unipotent radical of $`T(O)`$. Then $`T=T(O)/T(𝔪)`$ acts on a $`\chi `$-isotypical component of $`e_s(M)`$ by the characters $`s(\chi )`$, and $`M`$ is equal to Ind$`{}_{T(O)}{}^{T(F)\stackrel{~}{}}e_{s}^{}(M)`$.121212It suffices to show that $`M^s=`$ Ind$`{}_{T(O)}{}^{T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}}e_{s}^{}(M)`$. One has $`T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}=T\times (T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}/T)`$, and $`T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}/T`$-modules are the same as the corresponding Lie algebra modules such that Lie$`T(𝔪)`$ acts by locally nilpotent operators. So our assertion follows, say, from the usual Kashiwara’s lemma.  This induction is the functor inverse to $`e_s`$.

Different $`s`$’ differ by a map $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}/c(\mathrm{\Gamma })\mathrm{\Gamma }\stackrel{c}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$. An isomorphism between the $`e_s`$’s is given by a lifting of this map to $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ (here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=T(F)\stackrel{~}{}/T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}`$). $`\mathrm{}`$

§2 Moving points

2.1 Let $`X`$ be a smooth curve. Then for every $`xX`$ we have a local field $`F_x`$ of Laurent series at $`x`$. The group ind-schemes $`T(F_x)`$ are fibers of a formally smooth commutative group ind-scheme $`T(F_X)`$ over $`X`$. For a $`k`$-algebra $`R`$ one has $`T(F_X)(R)`$ is the group of pairs $`(x,f^\gamma )`$ where $`x`$ is an $`R`$-point of $`X`$ and $`f^\gamma `$ is a $`T`$-point with values in the ring of functions on the punctured formal tubular neighbourhood of the graph of $`x`$. We have a group subscheme $`T(O_X)T(F_X)`$ affine over $`X`$ and the quotient ind-scheme $`Gr_X:=T(F_X)/T(O_X)`$ which is ind-finite, $`Gr_X=Gr_X^\gamma `$.

Infinitesimal automorphisms of $`X`$ act on $`T(F_X)`$ by transport of structure. Thus $`T(F_X)`$ carries a canonical action of the Lie algebroid of vector fields on $`X`$; for $`\theta \mathrm{\Theta }(X)`$ its action is denoted by Lieθ. Our $`T(F_X)`$ also carries a canonical connection $``$ along $`X`$. For $`\theta \mathrm{\Theta }(X)`$ the vertical vector field Lie$`{}_{\theta }{}^{}_\theta `$ on $`T(F_X)`$ acts on every fiber $`T(F_x)`$ as the restriction of $`\theta `$ to $`F_x`$, see 1.5(iv). These three actions preserve $`T(O_X)`$, so they also act on $`Gr_X`$.

It is clear what a symmetric Heisenberg extension of level $`c`$ in the present setting is. Such an extension yields a superline $`\lambda _{Gr_X}:=T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}/i(T(O_X)`$ on $`Gr_X`$. Notice that the restriction of $`\lambda _{Gr_X}`$ to $`Gr_{Xred}^\gamma =X`$ is the superline $`\lambda _X^\gamma `$ from Lemma 1.7. The latter Lemma remains true obviously modified, so symmetric Heisenberg extensions form a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}\mu _2`$-gerbe on $`X`$ which is always trivial (but has no canonical trivialization). As in 1.5(iv) we see that the above three actions of $`\mathrm{\Theta }(X)`$ on $`T(F_X)`$ lift canonically to any symmetric Heisenberg extension $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$.

2.2 As every ind-schemes of jets and meromorphic jets, $`T(O_X)`$ and $`T(F_X)`$ have canonical factorization structures (see \[BD\] 3.4). So for every $`n1`$ there is a canonical ind-affine group ind-scheme $`T(F_{X^n})`$ on $`X^n`$ equipped with a flat connection and its affine group subscheme $`T(O_{X^n})`$ whose fibers $`T(F_{x_1,..,x_n)})`$ over a $`k`$-point $`(x_1,..,x_n)X^n`$ are products of fibers $`T(F_x)`$, $`T(O_x)`$ for $`x\{x_1,..,x_n\}X`$. In particular, on $`X\times X`$ we have $`T(O_{X\times X})T(F_{X\times X})`$ whose pull-back to the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }:XX\times X`$ equals $`T(O_X)T(F_X)`$ and to the complement of the diagonal $`j:UX\times X`$ equals $`T(O_X)\times T(O_X)T(F_X)\times T(F_X)`$.

Recall the construction. First one has canonical factorization commutative ring scheme and ind-scheme $`O_X^{}F_X^{}`$ equipped with connections. Their $`R`$-points can be described as follows. For $`(x_1,..,x_n)X^n(R)`$ denote by $`O_{(x_1,..,x_n)}`$ the ring of functions of the formal completion of $`X\times \text{Spec}R`$ at the union of graphs $`Y_{x_i}`$ of $`x_i`$’s, and by $`F_{(x_1,..,x_n)}`$ the localization of $`O_{(x_1,..,x_n)}`$ with respect to the equations of the divisors $`Y_{x_i}`$. These $`O_{(x_1,..,x_n)}F_{(x_1,..,x_n)}`$ are fibers of $`O_{X^n}(R)F_{X^n}(R)`$ over $`(x_1,..,x_n)`$. The connections and the factorization identifications are obvious.

Now $`T(O_{X^n})(R):=T(O_{X^n}(R))`$ and $`T(F_{X^n})(R):=T(F_{X^n}(R))`$.

The schemes $`T(O_{X^n})`$ are flat over $`X^n`$, and ind-schemes $`T(F_{X^n})`$ ind-flat.

2.3 The Contou-Carrère symbol satisfies the factorization property, i.e., for every $`n1`$ we have a pairing $`\{,\}_n:F_{X^n}^\times \times F_{X^n}^\times 𝒪_{X^n}^\times `$ that satisfy the usual compatibilities. Indeed, the definition of $`\{,\}`$ from \[BBE\] §2 immediately extends to the above situation; the factorization compatibilities are clear.

A factorization structure on a symmetric Heisenberg extension $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_X`$ is formed by symmetric superextensions $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_{X^n}`$ of $`T(F)_{X^n}`$ connected by the usual factorization identifications (so the restriction of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_{X^n}`$ to the fiber $`\mathrm{\Pi }T(F_x)`$ as above is the Baer product of the symmetric Heisenberg extensions $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$). The corresponding commutator pairing is131313Since $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}_{X^n}`$ is formally smooth and connected it suffice to check this over the complement to the diagonal divisor; now use the factorization property. $`\{f_1^{\gamma _1},f_2^{\gamma _2}\}_n^c=\{f_1,f_2\}_n^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$. As follows from Remark in 1.4, every symmetric Heisenberg extension admits a unique factorization structure. The canonical flat connection and the actions of $`\mathrm{\Theta }(X)`$ on $`T(F_{X^n})`$ lift canonically to $`T(F_{X^n})\stackrel{~}{}`$ in the way compatible with the factorization structure.

The Lie algebra of $`T(F_{X^n})\stackrel{~}{}`$ is the symmetric Heisenberg extension $`𝔱(F_{X^n})\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`𝔱(F_{X^n})=\mathrm{\Gamma }F_{X^n}`$.

2.4 The above factorization structures yield a factorization structure on $`Gr_X`$ and the superline $`\lambda `$ on it. The action of the factorization group ind-scheme $`T(F_{X^n})`$ on $`Gr_{X^n}`$ lifts to a (left) action of $`T(F_{X^n})\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`\lambda _{Gr_{X^n}}`$.

Every $`Gr_{X^n}`$ is inductive limit of subschemes finite and flat over $`X^n`$.

The factorization ind-scheme $`Gr_X`$ can be also understood as the affine Grassmannian for the group $`T`$. Namely, $`R`$-points of $`Gr_{X^n}`$ are the same as triples $`((x_1,..,x_n),,\gamma )`$ where $`(x_1,..x_n)X^n(R)`$, $``$ is a $`T`$-torsor over $`X\times \text{Spec}R`$, $`\gamma `$ is a trivialization of $``$ over the complement to the graphs of $`x_i`$.

Remarks. (i) The distinguished horizontal section 1 of $`Gr_X`$ is a unit for the factorization structure, i.e., for any (local) section $`\varphi `$ of $`Gr_X`$ the section $`\varphi \times 1`$ of $`Gr_{X\times X}`$ defined a priori on $`U`$ extends to a section over $`X\times X`$ whose restriction to the diagonal equals $`\varphi `$. The superline $`\lambda _{Gr_X}`$ is canonically trivialized over 1, and this trivialization is compatible with the factorization structure on $`\lambda _{Gr_X}`$.

(ii) The section 1 of $`T(O_X)`$ is not a unit for the factorization structure on $`T(O_X)`$.

2.5 (the reader can skip it). The affine Grassmannian description makes it clear that for every $`n2`$ there is a natural morphism $`\pi ^n:Gr_X^nGr_{X^n}`$ which equals the factorization isomorphism over the complement to the diagonal divisor in $`X^n`$. Namely, $`\pi ^n`$ sends $`((x_1,_1,\gamma _1),..,(x_n,_n,\gamma _n))`$ to $`((x_1,..,x_n),_1.._n,\gamma _1..\gamma _n)`$ where $``$ is the Baer product.

Lemma. The factorization isomorphism yields an isomorphism of superlines

$$\mu _n:\lambda _{Gr_X^{\gamma _1}}..\lambda _{Gr_X^{\gamma _n}}\stackrel{}{}(\pi ^n\lambda _{Gr_{X^n}})(\underset{i<j}{}c(\gamma _i,\gamma _j)\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij})$$

on $`Gr_X^{\gamma _1}\times ..\times Gr_X^{\gamma _n}`$ (here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ij}`$ are the diagonal divisors $`x_i=x_j`$). The restriction of $`\mu _2`$ to $`Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _1}\underset{X}{\times }Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _2}=X`$ is the isomorphism $`\mu _{\gamma _1,\gamma _2}`$ from Lemma 1.7.

Proof. It suffices to consider the case of $`n=2`$ and restrict our picture to the reduced schemes. One has $`Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _i}\stackrel{}{}X`$, so we have superlines $`\lambda _X^i:=\lambda _{Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _i}}`$ on $`X`$ and $`\lambda _{X\times X}`$ on $`X\times X`$ defined as the restriction of $`\pi ^2\lambda _{Gr_{X\times X}}`$ to $`Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _1}\times Gr_{Xred}^{\gamma _2}`$. The factorization yields an isomorphism $`\varphi :\lambda _X^1\lambda _X^2\stackrel{}{}\lambda _{X\times X}(\mathrm{?}\mathrm{\Delta })`$; we want to show that $`\mathrm{?}=c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)`$ and compute the restriction of $`\varphi `$ to the diagonal.

Let $`t`$ be a local coordinate on $`X`$, $`x`$ the corresponding coordinate on another copy of $`X`$, $`x_1,x_2`$ the local coordinates on $`X\times X`$. Recall that $`\lambda _{Gr_X^\gamma }`$ is formed by sections of $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ over $`T(F_X)_{red}^\gamma `$ which are right invariant with respect to the $`i(T(O_X))`$-action. Therefore $`\lambda _X^i`$ identifies with the pull-back of $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ by the section $`x(tx)^{\gamma _i}`$ of $`T(F_X)^{\gamma _i}`$. Similarly, the superlines $`p_i^{}\lambda _X^i`$ on $`X\times X`$ identify with the pull-back of $`T(F_{X\times X})\stackrel{~}{}`$ by the sections $`(x_1,x_2)(tx_i)^{\gamma _i}`$ of $`T(F_{X\times X})`$, and $`\lambda _{X\times X}`$ is the pull-back by the product of these sections. These identifications together with the product in $`T(F_{X\times X})\stackrel{~}{}`$ provide an isomorphism $`\psi =\psi _t:\lambda _X^1\lambda _X^2\stackrel{}{}\lambda _{X\times X}`$.

It remains to compute the function $`\varphi /\psi `$. Let $`\mathrm{}^i`$ be invertible (local) sections of $`\lambda _X^i`$ considered as sections of the pull-back of $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ by $`x(tx)^{\gamma _i}`$. Our $`\mathrm{}^i`$ yields an invertible section $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}^i`$ of $`p_i^{}\lambda _X^i`$ identified with the pull-back of $`T(F_{X\times X})\stackrel{~}{}`$ by $`x(tx_i)^{\gamma _i}`$. The product $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}^1\widehat{\mathrm{}}^2`$ is a section of the pull-back of $`T(F_{X\times X})\stackrel{~}{}`$ by $`x(tx_1)^{\gamma _1}(tx_2)^{\gamma _2}`$. From the point of view of the factorization isomorphism outside of the diagonal our sections are $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_{(x_1,x_2)}^1=\mathrm{}_{x_1}^1i(tx_1)_{x_2}^{\gamma _1}`$, $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}_{(x_1,x_2)}^2=i(tx_2)_{x_1}^{\gamma _2}\mathrm{}_{x_2}^2`$, and $`(\widehat{\mathrm{}}^1\widehat{\mathrm{}}^2)_{(x_1,x_2)}=(\mathrm{}^1i(tx_2)^{\gamma _2})_{x_1}(i(tx_1)^{\gamma _1}\mathrm{}^2)_{x_2}`$. To compute $`\varphi /\psi `$ we have to extend $`\mathrm{}^1\mathrm{}^2`$ and $`\widehat{\mathrm{}}^1\widehat{\mathrm{}}^2`$ to sections of $`T(F_{X\times X})\stackrel{~}{}`$ invariant with respect to the right $`iT(O_{X\times X})`$-translations and take the ratio. Thus $`\varphi /\psi =\mathrm{}_{x_2}^2/\text{Ad}_{i(tx_1)^{\gamma _1}}\mathrm{}_{x_2}^2=(x_2x_1)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$. This implies Lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

§3 The vertex counterpart

3.1 We use the framework of \[BD\], so for us a vertex algebra $`A`$ is the same as a universal chiral (super)algebra. We consider it as a chiral algebra $`A_O`$ over Spec$`(O)`$ equipped with an action of Aut$`{}_{}{}^{1/2}(O)`$ (so $`A=A_O/𝔪_xA_O`$). Sometimes we prefer to consider the corresponding chiral algebra $`A_X`$ on a curve $`X`$. Similarly, “vertex Lie algebras” from \[FBZ\] or “conformal algebras” from \[K\] are the same as universal Lie algebras. For such a fellow $`L`$ we have the corresponding Lie algebras $`h_F(L)h_O(L)`$ of $`_t`$-coinvariants on $`L_FL_O`$. We always have a distinguished central element $`1_LL`$; the enveloping chiral algebra is denoted by $`U(L)`$.141414Our $`U(L)`$ is the plain chiral envelope modulo the relation $`1_L=1`$.

We denote by $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$ the symmetric Heisenberg Lie algebra of level $`c`$. Then $`h_F(𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟})`$ is the symmetric Heisenberg Lie algebra $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ from 1.5(ii).

3.2 Definition. A symmetric lattice vertex algebra of level $`c`$ is a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-graded vertex algebra $`A=A^\gamma `$ equipped with a morphism of Lie algebras $`\alpha :𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}A^0`$ and an automorphism $`\sigma `$ such that:

(a) $`\alpha `$ is compatible with $`\sigma `$, sends $`1𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$ to $`1A`$, and yields $`U(𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟})\stackrel{}{}A^0`$.

(b) Each $`A^\gamma `$ has pairity $`c(\gamma ,\gamma )`$ mod2. As a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module $`A^\gamma `$ is isomorphic to the representation Ind$`c(\gamma )`$ induced by the character $`c(\gamma )\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}=\text{Hom}(T(O),𝔾_m)`$ of the Lie subalgebra $`𝔱(O)\stackrel{i}{}𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$.

(c) The chiral product on every pair of components $`A^{\gamma _1}`$, $`A^{\gamma _2}`$ does not vanish.

(d) One has $`\sigma ^2=`$ idA and $`\sigma (A^\gamma )=A^\gamma `$.

Example. The algebra $`A`$ of functions on the scheme of $`T^{}`$-valued jets is a symmetric Heisenberg vertex algebra of level 0. Here the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading comes from the translation action of $`T^{}`$, $`\sigma `$ comes from the involution $`\tau \tau ^1`$ of $`T^{}`$, and $`\alpha `$ from the embedding $`𝔱\omega _x^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }\theta _x^1A`$, $`\gamma _xe^\gamma _xe^\gamma `$ where $`e^\gamma `$ denotes the character of $`T^{}`$ corresponding to $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Remark. If $`c`$ is non-degenerate then representations Ind$`c(\gamma )`$ are irreducible and pairwise non-isomorphic, so the datum of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading is redundant.

3.3 Let $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ be a symmetric Heisenberg extension of level $`c`$. Denote by $`A`$ the representation of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ induced from the trivial representation of $`T(O)\stackrel{i}{}T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$.

Proposition. $`A`$ is a symmetric lattice vertex algebra in a natural way.

Proof. A comment on the definition of $`A`$. As in 2.1 set $`Gr:=T(F)/T(O)`$; this is an ind-finite ind-scheme whose connected components are labeled by $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Denote by $`\lambda _{Gr}`$ the superline $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}/i(T(O))`$ over $`Gr`$; it is a $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-equivariant superline in the obvious way. Let $`\delta _{Gr}`$ be the dualizing $`𝒪`$-module on $`Gr`$. Equivalently, $`\delta _{Gr}`$ is the cofree $`T(F)`$-equivariant $`𝒪`$-module on $`Gr`$ such that $`i_1^!\delta _{Gr}=k`$. Set $`A^\gamma :=\mathrm{\Gamma }(Gr^\gamma ,\lambda _{Gr}\delta _{Gr})`$ and $`A:=A^\gamma `$.

We see that $`A`$ is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-graded and is equipped with an action of $`\sigma `$ and Aut$`{}_{}{}^{1/2}(O)`$ (they act on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ preserving $`T(O)`$). In particular, the Lie algebra of vector fields $`\mathrm{\Theta }(O)`$ acts on $`A`$. Each $`A^\gamma `$ contains the superline $`\lambda ^\gamma :=\mathrm{\Gamma }(Gr_{red}^\gamma ,\lambda _{Gr})`$ which equals $`\lambda ^\gamma `$ from 1.7.

For a curve $`X`$ and a symmetric Heisenberg extension $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`X`$ we get a $`𝒟_X`$-module $`A_X`$. A vertex algebra structure on $`A`$ amounts to a natural chiral algebra structure on $`A_X`$. Now the factorization structure on $`Gr`$ and $`\lambda _{Gr}`$ as defined in 2.4 define a factorization structure on $`A_X`$ which amounts to a chiral algebra structure (see \[BD\] 3.4). Thus $`A`$ is a vertex algebra with unit $`1_A=\lambda ^0`$.

The group ind-schemes $`T(F_{X^n})\stackrel{~}{}`$ act on $`𝒪_{X^n}`$-modules $`A_{X^n}`$ (see 2.4) in a way compatible with the $`𝒟`$-module and factorization structures.

Notice that $`A^0`$ equals the chiral envelope of $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$,151515 See \[BD\] 3.7.5–3.7.11, 3.7.20. so 3.2(a) is valid. Properties 3.2(c),(d) are clear. To see 3.2(b) note that $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on $`A`$ in two ways: first as the Lie algebra of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ and second as $`h_F(𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟})h_F(A)`$ by the adjoint chiral algebra action. The two actions coincide. For the first action it is clear that $`𝔱(O)𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on the superline $`\lambda ^\gamma A^\gamma `$ by the character $`c(\gamma )`$, and $`A^\gamma `$ is the corresponding induced $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module. $`\mathrm{}`$

3.4  Here is another description of the chiral product on $`A_X`$. The action of $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`A_X`$ yields, via the factorization structure on $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$, an action of $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}A_X`$ compatible with the connections.161616Notice that for a $`𝒟_X`$-module $`M`$ a $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action on $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}M`$ compatible with the connections amounts to a $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action on $`M`$ compatible with the connections. Now the embedding $`1_A:𝒪_XA_X`$ identifies $`A_X`$ with the $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module induced from the trivial $`T(O_X)`$-module $`𝒪_X`$. So $`1_A^2:j_{}j^{}𝒪_{X\times X}j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)`$ identifies $`j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)`$ with the $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-module induced from the trivial $`T(O_{X^2})`$-module $`j_{}j^{}𝒪_{X\times X}`$. Therefore the canonical morphism $`j_{}j^{}𝒪_{X\times X}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}𝒪_X`$ extends canonically to a morphism of $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules

$$\mu _A:j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)\mathrm{\Delta }_{}A_X.$$
$`\mathrm{3.4.1}`$
Lemma. The chiral product on $`A_X`$ equals $`\mu _A`$.

Proof. Recall (see 3.3) that $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts naturally on $`A_{X^2}`$, hence on $`j_{}j^{}A_{X^2}`$ and $`j_{}j^{}A_{X^2}/A_{X^2}`$. The factorization isomorphisms $`j_{}j^{}A_{X^2}\stackrel{}{}j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)`$, $`j_{}j^{}A_{X^2}/A_{X^2}\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}A_X`$ are compatible with the $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-actions. Thus the chiral product on $`A_X`$ is compatible with the $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-action. On $`1_A`$ it equals the canonical morphism $`j_{}j^{}𝒪_{X\times X}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}𝒪_X`$. We are done since these two properties characterize $`\mu _A`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

3.5 Let us deduce the usual explicit formula for vertex operators. For a point $`xX`$ consider the operator product $`:A_{O_x}A_xF_x\widehat{}A_x`$, $`\varphi a\varphi a`$, with fixed second variable equal to $`x`$. An invertible section $`\mathrm{}\lambda _{O_x}^\gamma `$ defines then the vertex operator $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma :A_xF_x\widehat{}A_x`$, $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (a):=\mathrm{}a`$, which we want to compute.

Denote by $`F_{O_x}`$ the localization of $`O_x\widehat{}O_x`$ with respect to an equation of the diagonal. One has obvious morphisms $`F_{O_x}F_x\widehat{}O_x:=\text{lim}F_x(O_x/𝔪_x^n)`$ and $`F_{O_x}O_x\widehat{}F_x:=\text{lim}(O_x/𝔪_x^n)F_x`$ which we denote by $`ff_+,f_{}`$.

Let $`gT(F_{O_x})`$ be any element such that its order of pole along the diagonal divisor equals $`\gamma `$; such $`g`$ is defined up to multiplication by an element of $`T(O_x\widehat{}O_x)`$. So $`g`$ is a section of $`T(F_X)^\gamma `$ over Spec$`O_x`$. Thus $`\lambda _{O_x}^\gamma `$ equals the pull-back of $`T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ by $`g`$, so our $`\mathrm{}`$ defines a lifting $`\stackrel{~}{g}:=\mathrm{}(g)T(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`g`$.

Two points of view on $`g`$:

(i) We have $`g_+T(F_x)(O\widehat{_x}):=\text{lim}T(F_x)(O_x/𝔪_x^n)`$. In other words, $`g_+`$ is the restriction of $`g`$ to the formal neighbourhood of $`x`$ identified with an $`O\widehat{_x}`$-point of $`T(F_x)`$ by means of the connection on $`T(F_X)`$. Similarly, we have $`\stackrel{~}{g}_+T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}(O\widehat{_x})`$.

(ii) We have $`g_{}T(O_x)(F_x)`$ hence $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{}:=\stackrel{~}{i}(g_{})T(O_x)\stackrel{~}{}(F_x)`$.

Consider $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ as a section of the restriction of $`T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$ to $`\text{Spec}O_x\times \{x\}X\times X`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ acts on $`A_{F_x}A_x`$ (which is the restriction of $`j_{}j^{}(A_XA_X)`$) as $`\stackrel{~}{g}\stackrel{~}{g}_{}`$, and on $`(F_x/O_x)A_x`$ (which is the restriction of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}A_X`$) as $`\stackrel{~}{g}_+`$. Since the chiral product $`\mu _A`$, so the ope product, commutes with the action of $`\stackrel{~}{g}T(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$ (see 3.4) we get, applying them to $`1_A\stackrel{~}{g}_{}^1aF_x1_AA_xA_{F_x}A_x`$, the formula

$$V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma =\stackrel{~}{g}_+\stackrel{~}{g}_{}^1.$$
$`\mathrm{3.5.1}`$
This is, indeed, the usual formula. To see this choose a coordinate $`t`$ at $`x`$; let $`z`$ be the same coordinate on another copy of $`X`$. Pick any non-zero $`\mathrm{}_x\lambda _x^\gamma `$; let $`\mathrm{}\lambda _{O_x}^\gamma `$ be the corresponding translation invariant171717i.e., Lie$`__z`$-invariant. section. Take $`g:=(tz)^\gamma T(F_{O_x})`$; as above, $`\mathrm{}`$ yields its translation invariant lifting $`\stackrel{~}{g}:=\mathrm{}(g)`$ which at $`z=0`$ takes value $`\stackrel{~}{t}^\gamma :=\mathrm{}_x(t^\gamma )T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$. Set $`h_a^\gamma :=\stackrel{~}{i}(t^a\gamma )𝔱(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$ (see 1.5, 1.6). Then $`\stackrel{~}{g}_+(z)=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})\stackrel{~}{t}^\gamma `$, $`\stackrel{~}{g}_{}(z)=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})(z)^{h_0^\gamma }`$, and

$$V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma =\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})\stackrel{~}{t}^\gamma \mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})(z)^{h_0^\gamma }.$$
$`\mathrm{3.5.2}`$
3.6 Remarks. (a) For a coordinate $`t`$ as above set $`L_a:=t^{a+1}_t\mathrm{\Theta }(F)`$. Now, by 1.6, for $`\mathrm{}\lambda ^\gamma A^\gamma `$ one has

$$L_1\mathrm{}=h_1^\gamma \mathrm{},L_0\mathrm{}=\frac{1}{2}c(\gamma ,\gamma )\mathrm{},L_1\mathrm{}=0.$$
$`\mathrm{3.6.1}`$
These formulas, together with the compatibility of the $`\mathrm{\Theta }(F)`$-action with the $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action recover the $`\mathrm{\Theta }(F)`$-action on $`A`$ via the $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action.

The first of the above equations implies that the operator $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma `$ from (3.5.2) satifies the following differential equation:181818Which is clear also from the formula (3.5.2) itself.

$$z_zV_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma =\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma z^n+\underset{n0}{}V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma h_n^\gamma z^n.$$
$`\mathrm{3.6.2}`$
(b) Let $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$ be the coordinates on $`X\times X`$ that correspond to $`t`$. As follows from (3.5.2), for every $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`\mathrm{}_i\lambda ^{\gamma _i}`$ the operator product $`\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2`$ belongs to $`(x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}A_{x_2}^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$. The top coefficient lies, in fact, in $`(x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\lambda _{x_2}^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$ and it equals $`\mu (\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)`$ where $`\mu `$ was defined in 1.7.191919Precisely, the top coefficient is $`(x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\mu (\mathrm{}_1,\mathrm{}_2)dt^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$.

(c)202020Need not for the rest of the text. The chiral algebra structure on $`A`$ can be described in terms of the $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action as follows. It suffices to recover $`A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}:=A_{X^2}j_{}j^{}A_X^{\gamma _1}A_X^{\gamma _2}j_{}j^{}A_X^{\gamma _1}A_X^{\gamma _2}`$ together with identifications $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}\stackrel{}{}A_X^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$. Consider the sheaves of Lie $`𝒪_{X^2}`$-algebras $`𝔱(O_{X^2})𝔱(F_{X^2})j_{}j^{}𝔱(F_X)\times 𝔱(F_X)`$ equipped with a connection $``$ and the symmetric Heisenberg extension $`𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$ (see 2.2).

Lemma. $`A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ is the $`𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-submodule of $`j_{}j^{}A_X^{\gamma _1}A_X^{\gamma _2}`$ generated by the superline $`\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}:=\lambda _X^{\gamma _1}\lambda _X^{\gamma _2}(c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)\mathrm{\Delta })`$. The isomorphism $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}\stackrel{}{}A_X^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$ is the morphism of $`𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules induced by the morphism $`\mu _{\gamma _1\gamma _2}:\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}=\lambda _X^{\gamma _1}\lambda _X^{\gamma _2}\omega _X^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\stackrel{}{}\lambda _X^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$ between the generators (see 1.7).

Proof. By 2.5 $`A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ contains the superline $`\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ hence the $`𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-submodule $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$ generated by it. $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$ equals the $`𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$-module induced from the $`𝔱(O_{X^2})`$-module $`\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ on which $`𝔱(O_{X^2})`$ acts by the character $`\varphi (t)_{x_1,x_2}\gamma _1\varphi (x_1)_{x_1,x_2}+\gamma _2\varphi (x_2)_{x_1,x_2}`$. So $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$ is the $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}=𝔱(F_X)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module induced from the $`𝔱(O_X)`$-module $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{}\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}=\lambda _X^{\gamma _1}\lambda _X^{\gamma _2}\omega _X^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$ on which $`𝔱(O_X)`$ acts by $`\gamma _1+\gamma _2`$.

To show that $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}=A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ it suffices to check that $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$ is a $`𝒟_{X^2}`$-submodule (since both $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$, $`A_{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ have the same pull-back to the diagonal) which in turn amounts to the fact that the action of vector fields sends $`\lambda _{X^2}^{\gamma _1\gamma _2}`$ to $`A_{X^2}^{{}_{}{}^{}\gamma _{1}^{}\gamma _2}`$. Let $`t`$ be a local coordinate on $`X`$, $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$ the corresponding coordinates on $`X^2`$. For translation invariant212121Here “translation” is the action of Lie$`_t`$. sections $`\mathrm{}_i\lambda _X^{\gamma _i}`$ one has $`_{x_1}((x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2)=c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)(x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)1}\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2+(x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}(h_1^\gamma \mathrm{}_1)\mathrm{}_2.`$ Consider $`\varphi :=\stackrel{~}{i}((tx_1)^1\gamma )𝔱(F_{X^2})\stackrel{~}{}`$; one has $`\varphi (\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2)=(h_1^\gamma \mathrm{}_1)\mathrm{}_2c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)(x_2x_1)^1\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2`$. Therefore $`_{x_1}((x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2)=\varphi (((x_1x_2)^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2)`$.

The last statement of Lemma follows from 2.5. $`\mathrm{}`$

3.7 Symmetric lattice vertex algebras of level $`c`$ form a groupoid $`𝒱s^c`$. In 3.3 we have defined a functor $`s^c𝒱s^c`$, $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}A=A(T(F)\stackrel{~}{})`$.

Lemma. If $`c`$ is non-degenerate then our functor $`s^c𝒱s^c`$ is an equivalence.

Proof. Let $`A`$ be a symmetric lattice vertex algebra of level $`c`$. Set $`\lambda ^\gamma :=(A^\gamma )^{T(𝔪)}`$; this is a superline on which $`T(O)`$ acts by the character $`c(\gamma )`$, and $`A^\gamma `$ is the corresponding induced $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module.

(i) Let us check that formulas (3.6.1) remain valid. Set $`𝔱_a:=\stackrel{~}{i}(𝔱t^a)𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$; for $`a0`$ this is the $`a`$-eigenspace for the $`L_0`$-action on $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. Take a non-zero $`\mathrm{}\lambda ^\gamma `$. It is clear that $`L_1\mathrm{}=0`$ and $`L_0\mathrm{}=w\mathrm{}`$ for some $`wk`$. Since $`[L_1,L_0]=L_1`$ we see that $`L_1\mathrm{}`$ is an eigenvector of $`L_0`$ of eigenvalue $`w1`$, hence $`L_1\mathrm{}=\varphi \mathrm{}`$ for some $`\varphi 𝔱_1`$. For every $`\psi 𝔱_1`$ one has $`\psi L_1\mathrm{}=(L_1(\psi ))\mathrm{}=[\psi ,\varphi ]\mathrm{}`$. Since $`c`$ is non-degenerate this implies that $`L_1\mathrm{}=h_1^\gamma \mathrm{}`$. Now, since $`L_0=\frac{1}{2}[L_1,L_2]`$ and $`L_2(h_1^\gamma )=h_0^\gamma `$, one has $`L_0\mathrm{}=\frac{1}{2}L_2h_1^\gamma \mathrm{}=\frac{1}{2}h_0^\gamma \mathrm{}=\frac{1}{2}c(\gamma ,\gamma )\mathrm{}`$, and we are done.

(ii) Let us check that 3.6(b) remains valid. Since $``$ is compatible with the Heisenberg action we see that that the top non-zero coefficient of $`\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2`$ belongs to $`\lambda ^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}`$. By (i) we know how $`L_0`$ acts on $`\lambda ^\gamma `$, therefore the compatibility of $``$ with the $`L_0`$-action implies that this coefficient has degree $`\frac{1}{2}c(\gamma _1,\gamma _1)\frac{1}{2}c(\gamma _2,\gamma _2)+\frac{1}{2}c(\gamma _1+\gamma _2,\gamma _1+\gamma _2)=c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)`$.

(iii) The above top non-zero coefficients form a system of isomorphisms $`\mu :\lambda ^{\gamma _1}\lambda ^{\gamma _2}\stackrel{}{}\lambda ^{\gamma _1+\gamma _2}\omega _x^{c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)}`$. Together with identifications $`\sigma :\lambda ^\gamma \stackrel{}{}\lambda ^\gamma `$ they form the datum of 1.7, so we get the symmetric Heisenberg extension $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$.

(iv) It follows directly from the construction of 3.3 that the functor $`AT(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ is left inverse to the functor from 3.3. Let us show that it is right inverse as well. Let $`A`$ be as above, $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ the Heisenberg extension just defined, and let $`A^{}`$ be the lattice vertex algebra defined by $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ as in 3.3. Then there is a canonical isomorphism $`A\stackrel{}{}A^{}`$ of $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules which is identity map on the generators $`\lambda ^\gamma `$. We have to show that this isomorphism is compatible with the vertex algebra structures (the compatibility with the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-gradings and $`\sigma `$ is clear).

We already know that $`A\stackrel{}{}A^{}`$ is compatible with the $`\mathrm{\Theta }(O)`$-action. Denote by $`^{}`$ the ope product on $`A`$ that comes from the one of $`A^{}`$. To show that $`=^{}`$ it suffices to prove that $`\mathrm{}_1\mathrm{}_2=\mathrm{}_1^{}\mathrm{}_2A((z))`$ for $`\mathrm{}_i\lambda ^{\gamma _i}`$. We know that these formal power series have the same order of pole, the same leading coefficient, and satisfy the same differential equation $`z_zp(z)=\underset{n>0}{}h_n^{\gamma _1}p(z)z^n+c(\gamma _1,\gamma _2)p(z)`$ which arises from the first equality in (3.6.1). Hence they are equal, q.e.d. $`\mathrm{}`$

3.8 Representations. For $`xX`$ we have the category of $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-mod (see 1.9) and the category $`_x(A)`$ of $`A_X`$-modules supported at $`x`$.

Lemma. There is a canonical fully faithful embedding $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}\text{-mod}_x(A).`$

Proof. The construction, parallel to 3.4, goes as follows. Notation: $`j_x:U_x:=X\{x\}X`$, $`i_x:\{x\}X`$.

Let $`O_{X,x}F_{X,x}^{}F_{X,x}`$ be the commutative ring (ind)-schemes over $`X`$ with fibers over $`yX(R)`$ equal, respectively, to $`O_{(y,x)}`$, $`F_y^{}`$:= the localization of $`O_{(y,x)}`$ with respect to the equation of $`x`$, and $`F_{(y,x)}`$ (see 2.2). They carry an obvious canonical connection. There is an obvious projection $`F_{X,x}^{}(F_x)_X`$ and the factorization identifications $`i_x^{}F_{X,x}^{}=i_x^{}F_{X,x}=F_x`$, $`j_x^{}F_{X,x}^{}=j_x^{}O_X\times F_x`$, $`j_x^{}F_{X,x}=j_x^{}F_X\times F_x`$.

We have the corresponding group ind-schemes $`T(O_{X,x})T(F_{X,x}^{})T(F_{X,x})`$. The latter one is the restriction of $`T(F_{X^2})`$ to $`X\times \{x\}X\times X`$, so we have the corresponding superextension $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$. The restriction of $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$ to $`xX`$ equals $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$. The pull-back $`T(F_{X,x}^{})\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$ by the projection $`T(F_{X,x}^{})T(F_x)`$ coincides with the restriction of $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$ to $`T(F_{X,x}^{})`$.222222To see this use e.g. Remark in 1.4.

Let $`M_x`$ be a $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module. We will construct a canonical chiral action of $`A`$ on $`i_xM_x`$ which defines (3.6.1). $`T(F_{X,x}^{})\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on $`j_xj_x^{}𝒪_XM_x`$ via $`T(F_{X,x}^{})\stackrel{~}{}T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$. The corresponding induced $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$-module equals $`j_xj_x^{}A_XM`$. Notice that $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on the $`𝒟_X`$-module $`i_xM_x`$ in a way compatible with connections,232323 Such action amounts to an $`i_x^{}T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$-action which we have since $`i_x^{}T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}=T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$. so the obvious morphism $`j_xj_x^{}𝒪_XM_xi_xM_x`$ extends to a morphism of $`T(F_{X,x})\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules $`\mu _M:j_xj_x^{}A_XM_xi_xM_x`$. This is the promised chiral $`A_X`$-action on $`i_xM_x`$.

It is clear that the chiral action of the Lie Heisenberg $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$ on $`i_xM_x`$ coincides with the $`𝔱(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action. Repeating the argument of 3.5 we see that $`\lambda _X^\gamma A_X^\gamma `$ acts on $`i_xM_x`$ according to formula (3.5.1). These operators determine completely the action of $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`M_x`$, so our functor is fully faithful. $`\mathrm{}`$

3.9 Proposition. If $`c`$ is non-degenerate then the functor of 3.8 is an equivalence.

Proof. Let $`M`$ be a vector space. Suppose we have an $`A_X`$-module structure on $`i_xM`$. We want to show that it comes from a $`T(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module structure.

(a) The $`A_X^0`$-action is the same as a chiral $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$-action = a $`𝔱(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module structure on $`M`$. Let us show that our $`𝔱(F_x)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action is integrable, i.e., it comes from a $`T(F_x)^0\stackrel{~}{}`$-action. Pick some $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$; we want to check that all operators $`h_n^\gamma `$, $`n>0`$, act on $`M`$ in a locally nilpotent way, and $`h_0^\gamma `$ is semi-simple with integral eigenvalues.

(b) We follow the notation from the end of 3.5. For $`\mathrm{}`$ as in loc.cit. we have the vertex operator $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z):=\mathrm{}:MM((z))`$ acting on $`M`$.242424In 3.5 itself we consider the case $`M=A_x`$. Then $`[h_n^\gamma ^{},V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)]=c(\gamma ,\gamma ^{})z^nV_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)`$ and, by the first equation from (3.6.1), our $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)`$ satisfies differential equation (3.6.2).

Consider the modified operator $`\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z):=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z):MM((z))`$. One has:

(i) $`\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma `$ commutes with every $`h_n^\gamma ^{}`$, $`\gamma ^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`n>0`$.

(ii) $`[h_n^\gamma ^{},\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)]=c(\gamma ,\gamma ^{})z^n\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)`$ for $`n0`$.

(iii) $`z_z\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)=\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)(\underset{n0}{}h_n^\gamma z^n)=(\underset{n0}{}h_n^\gamma z^nc(\gamma ,\gamma ))\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z).`$

(c) Local nilpotency of $`h_{>0}^\gamma `$: Consider $`M`$ as a $`k[h_1^\gamma ,h_2^\gamma ,..]]`$-module. We want to check that it is supported at $`0\text{Spec}k[h_1^\gamma ,h_2^\gamma ,..]]:=\text{Spec}k[h_1^\gamma ,..,h_n^\gamma ]`$. Take any $`mM`$. Set $`v(z)=v_iz^i:=\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)m`$. Then the support of $`v(z)`$ (:= the union of supports of $`v_i`$’s) is equal to that of $`m`$. Indeed, Supp $`v(z)`$ Supp $`m`$ by (i) above. To see the opposite inclusion notice that for appropriate $`\mathrm{}^{}\lambda ^\gamma `$ one has $`(zz^{})^{c(\gamma ,\gamma )}V_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\gamma (z^{})V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)m=m+(zz^{})\varphi (z,z^{})`$ where $`\varphi M[[z^{},z]][z^{}_{}{}^{}1,z^1]`$. Since $`V_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\gamma (z^{})V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)m=\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^{}_{}{}^{}n}{n})\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}^{}}^\gamma \mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})v(z)M((z^{}))((z))`$ we see that $`m=\alpha _iv_i`$ where $`\alpha _i`$ are differential operators<sup>25</sup><sup>25</sup>25with respect to the $`k[h_1^\gamma ,h_2^\gamma ,..]]`$-module structure on $`M`$. acting on $`M`$ almost all equal to 0. Thus Supp $`m`$ Supp $`v(z)`$.

Assume that $`m`$ is killed by $`h_{>N}^\gamma `$; let $`\eta \text{Spec}k[h_1^\gamma ,..,h_N^\gamma ]`$ be a generic point of the support of $`m`$. We want to show that $`\eta 0`$. Changing $`m`$ if necessary we can assume that the maximal ideal of $`\eta `$ kills $`m`$. Let us localize $`M`$ (as a $`k[h_1^\gamma ,..,h_N^\gamma ]`$-module) at $`\eta `$. By above, $`v_\eta (z)`$ is a non-zero element of $`M_\eta ((z))`$ killed by the maximal ideal of the local ring. Differential equation (iii) shows that $`z_zv_\eta (z)=(\underset{n0}{}h_{n\eta }^\gamma z^nc(\gamma ,\gamma ))v_\eta (z)`$ where $`h_{n\eta }^\gamma k_\eta `$ are images of $`h_n^\gamma `$ in the residue field. An immediate induction by $`n`$ shows that $`h_{n\eta }^\gamma =..=h_{1\eta }^\gamma =0`$.

(d) $`h_0^\gamma `$ is semi-simple with integral eigenvalues: By (c) the operator $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z):=\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)\mathrm{exp}(\underset{n>0}{}h_n^\gamma \frac{z^n}{n})`$ is well-defined. Since $`z_z\stackrel{~}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)=(h_0^\gamma c(\gamma ,\gamma ))\stackrel{~}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)`$ we see that each component $`\overline{V}_n^\gamma `$262626Here $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)=\overline{V}_n^\gamma z^n`$. sends $`M`$ to the $`c(\gamma ,\gamma )n`$-eigenspace of $`h_0^\gamma `$. It is easy to see272727Look at the composition $`V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma V_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma `$ and note that $`\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma `$ commutes with $`h_0^\gamma `$, cf. (c).that the image of $`\overline{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)`$ generates $`M`$, and we are done.

(e) Now we can define the action of $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ on $`M`$. We aready know how the connected component $`T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts. We define the action of elements $`\stackrel{~}{t}^\gamma `$ as $`\stackrel{~}{V}_{\mathrm{}}^\gamma (z)^{h_0^\gamma }`$ (cf. (3.5.2)); these operators do not depend on $`z`$. One check immediately that this provides a $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action on $`M`$; the corresponding vertex module structure coincides with the initial one by (3.5.2). $`\mathrm{}`$

3.10 Twists and rigidity. Recall that the category of chiral algebras on $`X`$ is a tensor category. So we know what is a coalgebra in our tensor category, its (co)action on some chiral algebra $`A_X`$, and the chiral subalgebra of $`A_X`$ of invariants of this action. We need the case when our coalgebra is actually (the algebra of functions on) an affine group $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒢_X`$. Here we say that $`𝒢_X`$ acts on $`A_X`$ and denote the invariants by $`A_X^{𝒢_X}`$. Suppose now that we have a $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒢_X`$-torsor $`=\text{Spec}R_X`$ (i.e., a $`𝒢_X`$-torsor with connection). The $``$-twist of $`A_X`$ is, by definition, $`A_X^{}:=(R_XA_X)^{𝒢_X}`$.

Our situation: Let $`A`$ be a lattice Heisenberg vertex algebra of a non-degenerate level $`c`$, $`A_X`$ the corresponding chiral algebra on $`X`$.

(a) Consider the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading of $`A`$ as a $`T^{}`$-action. It yields an action of the constant group $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`T_X^{}`$ on $`A_X`$. So for every de Rham $`T^{}`$-local system $`(𝔉,)`$ (:= a $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`T_X^{}`$-torsor) we have the twisted chiral algebra $`A_X^{(𝔉,)}`$ on $`X`$. The $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading on $`A`$ yields the one on $`A_X^{(𝔉,)}`$.

(b) On the other hand, $`T(O)`$ acts on $`A`$ via $`i:T(O)T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. The subgroup $`Z^cT(O)`$ (see 1.9) acts trivially, so, since $`c:T(O)/Z\stackrel{}{}T^{}(O)`$,282828Here we use non-degeneracy of $`c`$. we have a $`T^{}(O)`$-action on $`A`$. This provides an action of the group $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒥_XT^{}`$ of $`T^{}`$-valued jets on the chiral algebra $`A_X`$. So every $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒥_XT^{}`$-torsor $`𝔉_𝒥`$ yields the twisted chiral algebra $`A_X^{𝔉_𝒥}`$ on $`X`$. The $`T^{}(O)`$-acton on $`A`$ preserves the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading, so $`A_X^{𝔉_𝒥}`$ carries a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading.

(c) The canonical morphism $`𝒥_XT^{}T_X^{}`$ of group $`X`$-schemes identifies the sheaf of horizontal sections of $`𝒥_XT^{}`$ with $`T^{}(𝒪_X)`$. So, by (b), $`T^{}(𝒪_X)`$ acts on $`A_X`$ as a plain sheaf of groups. Thus any $`T^{}`$-torsor $`𝔉`$ on $`X`$ yields a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-graded chiral algebra $`A_X^𝔉`$ := the twist of $`A_X`$ by the $`T^{}(𝒪_X)`$-torsor of sections of $`𝔉`$.

Remarks. (i) Assume we are in situation (a). Since $`T^{}`$ acts on $`A^0`$ trivially we have a canonical identification of chiral algebras

$$A_X^0\stackrel{}{}A_X^{(𝔉,)0}.$$
$`\mathrm{3.10.1}`$
(ii) The constructions of (b) and (c) are essentially equivalent. Indeed, there is a canonical equivalence of groupoids

$$\{T^{}\text{-torsors on }X\}\stackrel{}{}\{𝒟_X\text{-scheme }𝒥_XT^{}\text{-torsors on }X\}$$
$`\mathrm{3.10.2}`$
which assigns to a $`T^{}`$-torsor $`𝔉`$ on $`X`$ the $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒥_XT^{}`$-torsor of jets $`𝒥𝔉`$; the inverse functor is the push-out for the canonical homomorphism of the group $`X`$-schemes $`𝒥_XT^{}T_X^{}`$. It identifies the $`T^{}(𝒪_X)`$-torsor of sections of $`𝔉`$ with that of horizontal sections of $`𝒥𝔉`$, so one has a canonical identification

$$A_X^𝔉\stackrel{}{}A_X^{𝒥𝔉}.$$
$`\mathrm{3.10.3}`$
3.11 Lemma. (i) For every de Rham $`T^{}`$-local system $`(𝔉,)`$ there is a canonical isomorphism of chiral algebras

$$\varphi :A_X^{(𝔉,)}\stackrel{}{}A_X^𝔉.$$
$`\mathrm{3.11.1}`$
(ii) A section $`s𝔉`$ yields $`\nu :=\mathrm{log}s𝔱^{}\omega (X)`$ and an identification of chiral algebras $`\beta _s:A_X\stackrel{}{}A_X^𝔉`$. Now (3.10.1) equals the composition of $`\varphi ^1\beta _s`$ with the automorphism of $`A_X^0=U(𝔱_𝒟)`$ coming from an automorphism $`\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}+(\nu ,a)`$ of $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$.

Proof. Key remark: the action of $`T^{}`$ from 3.10 (a) coincides, via $`T^{}T^{}(O)`$, with the action from 3.10 (b). Therefore $`A_X^{(𝔉,)}`$ coincides with the twist of $`A_X`$ by the $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒥_XT^{}`$-torsor induced from $`(𝔉,)`$ by the embedding of group $`𝒟_X`$-schemes $`T_X^{}𝒥_XT^{}`$. By (3.10.2) the latter torsor equals $`𝒥𝔉`$, so (i) comes from (3.10.3).

In more details, consider the canonical morphism of group $`X`$-schemes $`𝒥_XT^{}T_X^{}`$ and the one of torsors $`𝒥𝔉𝔉`$. The “constant” connection on $`T_X^{}`$ yields a section $`T_X^{}𝒥_XT^{}`$ which is an embedding of group $`𝒟_X`$-schemes, and $``$ yields a section $`e_{}:𝔉𝒥𝔉`$ which is an embedding of $`𝒟_X`$-schemes compatible with the actions of $`T_X^{}𝒥_XT^{}`$. This $`e_{}`$ identifies $`𝒥𝔉`$ with the $`𝒟_X`$-scheme $`𝒥_XT^{}`$-torsor induced from $`(𝔉,)`$ via the embedding of the group $`𝒟_X`$-schemes $`T_X^{}𝒥_XT^{}`$. Our $`\varphi `$ is the composition $`A_X^{(𝔉,)}\stackrel{e_{}}{}A_X^{𝒥𝔉}\stackrel{\left(\mathrm{3.10.3}\right)}{}A_X^𝔉.`$

Let us write down $`\varphi `$ in terms of $`s`$ as in (ii). Let $`𝒥s`$ be the horizontal section of $`𝒥𝔉`$ defined by $`s`$. The projection $`𝒥𝔉𝔉`$ maps $`𝒥s`$ to $`s`$, hence

$$e_{}(s)=\kappa _\nu 𝒥s$$
$`\mathrm{3.11.2}`$
where $`\kappa _\nu `$ is a section of $`𝒥_XT^{}`$ killed by $`𝒥_XT^{}T_X^{}`$ uniquely determined by the condition $`d\mathrm{log}\kappa _\nu =\nu 𝔱^{}\omega _X𝒥_X𝔱^{}\omega _X`$.

As a mere $`𝒪_X`$-module $`A_X^{(𝔉,)}`$ is the $`𝔉`$-twist of $`A_X`$ with respect to the action of $`T^{}`$ given by the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading (see 3.10 (a)), so $`s`$ yields an identification $`\alpha _s:A_X\stackrel{}{}A_X^{(𝔉,)}`$ of $`𝒪_X`$-modules. Similarly, $`𝒥s`$ yields an identification of chiral algebras $`\alpha _{𝒥s}:A_X\stackrel{}{}A_X^{𝒥𝔉}`$ which equals the composition of $`\beta _s`$ (see 3.11(ii)) and (3.10.3). By (3.11.2) one has

$$\varphi \alpha _s=\beta _s\kappa _\nu :A_X\stackrel{}{}A_X^𝔉.$$
$`\mathrm{3.11.3}`$
On $`A_X^0=U(𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟})`$ our $`\alpha _s`$ equals (3.10.1) and $`\kappa _\nu `$ acts according to the automorphism $`\stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{a}+(\nu ,a)`$ of $`𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟}`$ (see 1.5(ii)). This implies (ii). $`\mathrm{}`$

§4 Moving $`T^{}`$-local system

4.1 Let $`𝒮=𝒮_T^{}`$ be the moduli stack of de Rham $`T^{}`$-local systems on Spec$`F`$. By definition, an $`R`$-point of $`𝒮`$ is a pair $`(𝔉_R,)`$ where $`𝔉_R`$ is a $`T^{}`$-torsor on $`\text{Spec}F_R`$, $`F_R:=F\widehat{}R=\text{lim}F/𝔪^nRR((t))`$, and $``$ is an $`R`$-relative continuous connection on $`𝔉_R`$. We always assume that $`𝔉_R`$ comes from a $`T^{}`$-torsor on $`\text{Spec}O_R`$, $`O_R:=O\widehat{}RR[[t]]`$, étale locally on $`\text{Spec}R`$.

According to Drinfeld, the latter unpleasant asssumption becomes redundant if we consider instead of étale topology a finer one (a version of cdh topology), but this seems to be irrelevant for what follows.

4.2 Here are some convenient descriptions of $`𝒮`$:

Set $`\omega (F):=\{`$1-forms on Spec$`F\}`$; this is an ind-scheme. The ind-scheme $`𝒞`$ of connections on the trivialized $`T^{}`$-bundle identifies canonically with $`𝔱^{}\omega (F)`$,$`\nu _\nu :=_t+\nu `$. Notice that

$$𝒞=\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(F)):=\begin{array}{c}\text{lim}\end{array}\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(F)/𝔱(𝔪^n))$$
$`\mathrm{4.2.1}`$
where $`a𝔱(F)`$ is identified with a linear function $`\varphi (a):\nu \text{Res}(a,\nu )`$ on $`𝒞`$.

The group ind-scheme $`T^{}(F)`$ of automorphisms of a $`T^{}`$-bundle acts on $`𝒞`$; the corresponding gauge action on $`𝔱^{}\omega (F)`$ is $`g(\nu )=\nu +d\mathrm{log}(g)`$. Thus

$$𝒮=𝒞/T^{}(F)=𝔱^{}\omega (F)/T^{}(F).$$
$`\mathrm{4.2.2}`$
Set $`\mathrm{\Phi }:=T^{}(F)/T^{}(𝔪)`$. Thus $`T^{}=T^{}(O)/T^{}(𝔪)`$ is a subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }/T^{}=Q\times \mathrm{\Gamma }^{}`$ where $`Q`$ is the formal group whose Lie algebra equals $`𝔱^{}(F/O)`$. Set $`\omega (F)^{}:=\omega (F)/\omega (O)`$, $`\overline{𝒞}:=𝔱^{}\omega (F)^{}`$; one has $`\overline{𝒞}=\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(O)):=\begin{array}{c}\text{lim}\end{array}\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(O/𝔪^n))`$ (see (4.2.1)). Since $`d\mathrm{log}`$ yields an isomorphism $`T^{}(𝔪)\stackrel{}{}𝔱^{}\omega (O)`$ one has $`\overline{𝒞}=𝒞/T^{}(𝔪)`$ and

$$𝒮=\overline{𝒞}/\mathrm{\Phi }.$$
$`\mathrm{4.2.3}`$
There is a canonical decomposition $`\omega (F)^{}=\omega (F)^{irr}\times k`$ where the projection $`\omega (F)^{}k`$ is the residue map, and $`k\omega (F)^{}`$ is the subspace of forms with pole of order one. Hence $`\overline{𝒞}=\overline{𝒞}^{irr}\times 𝔱^{}`$. The morphism $`d\mathrm{log}:\mathrm{\Phi }𝔱^{}\omega (F)^{}`$ kills $`T^{}`$, so it yields a morphism $`Q\times \mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔱^{}\omega (F)^{irr})\times 𝔱^{}`$. This is an embedding compatible with the product decomposition; it identifies $`Q`$ with the formal completion of $`𝔱^{}\omega (F)^{irr}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{}𝔱^{}`$ is the usual embedding. Therefore, by (4.2.3), we have a canonical projection

$$𝒮(\overline{𝒞}^{irr}/Q)\times (𝔱^{}/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})$$
$`\mathrm{4.2.4}`$
which makes $`𝒮`$ a $`T^{}`$-gerbe over $`(\overline{𝒞}^{irr}/Q)\times (t^{}/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})`$. Any splitting of the extension $`0T^{}\mathrm{\Phi }Q\times \mathrm{\Gamma }0`$ yields a trivialization of this gerbe, i.e., an identification

$$𝒮\stackrel{}{}(\overline{𝒞}^{irr}/Q)\times (t^{}/\mathrm{\Gamma }^{})\times BT^{}.$$
$`\mathrm{4.2.5}`$
4.3 The definition of 3.10(a) works for families of de Rham $`T^{}`$-local systems, so we have an $`𝒮`$-family $`A_F^𝒮`$ of twisted chiral algebras over $`\text{Spec}F`$ equipped with a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$-grading.

Namely, recall that a $`\text{Spec}R`$-family of chiral algebras on $`\text{Spec}F`$ is a flat $`F_R`$-module $`A_{F_R}`$ equipped with an $`R`$-relative connection and a chiral product operation which amounts to an $`R`$-bilinear ope product $`A_{F_R}A_{F_R}A_{F_R\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}}((t_1t_2))`$ which satisfies the usual properties.

For $`(𝔉_R,)𝒮(R)`$ one defines the $`(𝔉_R,)`$-twisted chiral lattice algebra $`A_{F_R}^{(𝔉_R,)}`$ as in 3.10(a). This construction is compatible with the $`R`$-base change. The datum of $`A_{F_R}^{(𝔉_R,)}`$ together with the base change isomorphisms forms $`A_F^𝒮`$.

The pull-back of $`A_F^𝒮`$ to $`𝒞=𝔱^{}\omega (F)`$ is a $`𝒞`$-family of chiral algebras $`A_F^𝒞`$ on $`\text{Spec}F`$ equivariant with respect to the action of the group ind-scheme $`T^{}(F)`$.

4.4 Denote by $`(A_F^𝒮)`$ the abelian $`k`$-category of $`A_F^𝒮`$-modules, i.e., of $`𝒪^!`$-modules on $`𝒮`$ equipped with an action of $`A_F^𝒮`$. Explicitly, an $`A_F^𝒮`$-module $`M`$ amounts to a disctrete module $`M_𝒞`$ over the topological algebra $`𝒪(𝒞)=𝒪(𝔱^{}\omega (F))=\text{lim}\text{Sym}_k(𝔱F/𝔪^n)`$ equipped with compatible actions of the group ind-scheme $`T^{}(F)`$ and the chiral algebra $`A_F^𝒞`$.

The vector space of sections $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M):=\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒮,M)`$ is defined as a BRST-type combination of invariants and coinvariants:

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(M):=(M_𝒞^{T^{}(O_F)})_{T^{}(F)/T^{}(O_F)}.$$
$`\mathrm{4.4.1}`$
Since $`A_F^{𝒮0}A_F^𝒮`$ is a $`𝒞`$-constant family of chiral algebras equal $`U(𝔱\stackrel{~}{_𝒟})_𝒞`$ (see (3.10.1)) the Heisenberg Lie algebra $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on $`M_𝒞`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M)`$.

4.5 Theorem. The functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }:(A_F^𝒮)𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-mod is an equivalence of categories.

Proof. (a) Recall that $`T^{}(F)`$ acts on $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ (see 1.5(iii)); denote by $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ the corresponding semi-direct product. This is a symmetric Heisenberg extension for the torus $`T^{}\times T`$ whose level is of determinant 1. According to 1.9 the functor $`PP^{T^{}(O)\times T(O)}`$ from the category of $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules to (super) vector spaces is an equivalence of categories.292929The inverse functor is induction from $`T^{}(O)\times T(O)`$ to $`(T^{}(F)\times T(F))\stackrel{~}{}`$.

(b) The group $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on $`𝒞`$ via the projection to $`T^{}(F)`$, so we have the category $`𝒫`$ of $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-equivariant discrete $`𝒪(𝒞)`$-modules.303030As always, the center $`𝔾_m`$ of $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts on our modules by standard homotheties.

Lemma. (i) For every $`M(A_F^𝒮)`$ there is a natural $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action on $`M_𝒞`$ which, together with the structure $`𝒪(𝒞)`$\- and $`T^{}(F)`$-actions, makes $`M_𝒞`$ an object of $`𝒫`$. The functor $`(A_F^𝒮)𝒫`$ is an equivalence of categories.

(ii) The $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action on $`M_𝒞`$ from 4.4 is $`\stackrel{~}{a}m=\alpha (\stackrel{~}{a})m`$ where $``$ is the $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action coming from the $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module structure from (i) and $`\alpha `$ is a $`𝒞`$-family of automorphisms of $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$, $`\alpha (\stackrel{~}{a}):=\stackrel{~}{a}+\varphi (a)`$ (see (4.2.1)).

Proof of Lemma. Notice that Lemma 3.11, as well as its proof, remains valid for families of de Rham $`T^{}`$-local systems; one can also replace the curve $`X`$ by $`\text{Spec}F`$. By 3.11(i) our $`𝒞`$-family of chiral algebras $`A_F^𝒞`$ on $`\text{Spec}F`$ can be canonically identified with the constant $`𝒞`$-family $`A_{F𝒞}`$. This isomorphism is compatible with the $`T^{}(F)`$-actions (here the $`T^{}(F)`$-action on $`A_{F𝒞}`$ is the product of the action on $`A_F`$ from 3.10(c) and the gauge action on $`𝒞`$).

Therefore an $`A_F^𝒮`$-module $`M`$ amounts to a $`T^{}(F)`$-equivariant discrete $`𝒪(𝒞)`$-module $`M_𝒞`$ equipped with an $`A_F`$-action which commutes with the $`𝒪(𝒞)`$-action and is compatible with the $`T^{}(F)`$ one. According to 3.8, 3.9 an $`A_F`$-action is the same as a $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action. As follows from the construction of 3.8, the compatibility with the $`T^{}(F)`$-action just means that the $`T^{}(F)`$\- and $`T(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-actions form an action of $`(T^{}\times T)(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. This proves (i), and (ii) follows from 3.11(ii). $`\mathrm{}`$

(c) Set $`H:=T(F)^0/T`$, $`H^{}:=T^{}(F)^0/T^{}`$. Since $`T`$ is a central subgroup of $`T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}`$ and $`T^{}T^{}(F)^0`$ acts trivially on $`T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}`$ we have a central $`𝔾_m`$-extension $`H\stackrel{~}{}:=T(F)^0\stackrel{~}{}/T`$ of $`H`$ and the corresponding semi-direct product $`(H^{}\times H)\stackrel{~}{}`$ of $`H^{}`$ and $`H\stackrel{~}{}`$. Since $`T^{}(F)^0`$ acts on $`𝒞`$ through its quotient $`H^{}`$ we have the category $`𝒫^0`$ of $`(H^{}\times H)\stackrel{~}{}`$-equivariant discrete $`𝒪(𝒞)`$-modules. As follows from (a) the obvious functor $`𝒫𝒫^0`$, $`M_𝒞M_𝒞^0:=(M_𝒞)^{T^{}\times T}`$, is an equivalence of categories.

(d) As we have seen in 4.2, $`𝒞`$ is a $`T^{}(𝔪)`$-torsor over $`\overline{𝒞}`$ (see 4.2). The $`T^{}(𝔪)`$-action on $`H\stackrel{~}{}`$ defines the corresponding twisted group ind-scheme on $`\overline{𝒞}`$ which we denote by $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$; this is a central $`𝔾_m`$-extension of the constant group ind-scheme $`H_{\overline{𝒞}}`$. The action of $`H^{}`$ on $`𝒞`$ and $`H\stackrel{~}{}`$ defines an action of the formal group ind-scheme $`Q:=T^{}(F)^0/T^{}(O)=H^{}/T^{}(𝔪)`$ on $`\overline{𝒞}`$ and $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$.

Let $`\overline{𝒫}`$ be the category of discrete $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$-modules $`M_{\overline{𝒞}}`$ equipped with an $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$-action and equivariant with respect to the $`Q`$-action. There is an obvious descent equivalence $`𝒫^0\stackrel{}{}\overline{𝒫}`$, $`N_𝒞N_{\overline{𝒞}}:=N_𝒞^{T^{}(𝔪)}`$.

(e) The $`𝒞`$-family $`\alpha `$ of automorphisms of $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$ from (b)(ii) has property $`g(\alpha (\stackrel{~}{a})_\nu )=\alpha (\stackrel{~}{a}_{g\nu })`$ for every $`gT^{}(F)`$, $`\nu 𝒞`$, $`\stackrel{~}{a}𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$. Therefore it yields a canonical morphism of Lie algebras $`\overline{\alpha }:𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}𝔥\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ on $`\overline{𝒞}`$ equivariant with respect to the $`Q`$-action. Here $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ is the constant $`\overline{𝒞}`$-family and $`𝔥\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ is the Lie algebra of $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$. Thus every $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}\overline{𝒫}`$ is a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module in a natural way. The $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action commutes with the $`Q`$-action, so the space of $`Q`$-coinvariants $`(N_{\overline{𝒞}})_Q`$ is also a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module.

We have an equivalence $`(A_F^𝒮)\stackrel{}{}\overline{𝒫}`$, $`MM_{\overline{𝒞}}^0`$, defined as the composition of the equivalences from (b)(i), (c), and (d). By (4.4.1), (b)(ii) there is a canonical identification of $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(M)=(M_{\overline{𝒞}}^0)_Q`$. Therefore our theorem amounts to the fact that the functor $`\overline{𝒫}𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-mod, $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}(N_{\overline{𝒞}})_Q`$, is an equivalence of categories.

(f) The morphism $`\overline{\alpha }:𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}𝔥\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ is surjective and $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ is connected, so for $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}\overline{𝒫}`$ the $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$-action on it is uniquely determined by the $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action. Therefore $`\overline{𝒫}`$ is a full subcategory of the category of $`Q`$-equivariant discrete $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$-modules equipped with a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action.

Notice that $`H`$ is an extension of a formal group by a unipotent one $`T(𝔪)`$. Thus $`H\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules are the same as $`𝔥\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules such that the Lie algebra of $`T(𝔪)H\stackrel{~}{}`$ acts in a locally nilpotent way. Same is true for $`H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$-modules.

Let $`\beta :𝔱(O)_{\overline{𝒞}}𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$ be the morphism $`\beta (a):=a\varphi (a)`$.313131Here $`\varphi (a)𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$ is the linear function on $`\overline{𝒞}`$ that corresponds to $`a`$, see 4.2. Then $`\text{Ker}\overline{\alpha }=\beta (𝔱_{\overline{𝒞}})`$ and $`\overline{\alpha }`$ identifies $`\beta (𝔱(𝔪)_{\overline{𝒞}})`$ with the Lie algebra of $`T(𝔪)H\stackrel{~}{_{\overline{𝒞}}}`$.

We see that objects of $`\overline{𝒫}`$ are exactly those $`Q`$-equivariant discrete $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$-modules $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}`$ equipped with a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action which satisfy the following conditions:

(i) $`\beta (𝔱)`$ kills $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}`$,

(ii) $`\beta (𝔱(𝔪)_{\overline{𝒞}})`$ acts on $`N_{\overline{𝒞}}`$ in a locally nilpotent way.

(g) It is convenient to view $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules in the following “geometric” way.

According to 4.2 the embedding $`\varphi :𝔱(O)𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$ identifies $`\overline{𝒞}`$ with $`\text{Spec}(\text{Sym}𝔱(O))`$. Let $`\pi :𝒞𝔱^{}`$ be the projection that corresponds to the embedding $`𝔱𝔱(O)`$.323232 $`\pi `$ can be also described as the residue map $`𝒞=𝔱^{}(\omega (F)/\omega (O))𝔱^{}`$, see 4.2. The Lie algebra $`𝔱(F)`$ acts along the fibers of $`\pi `$: namely, for $`a𝔱(F)`$, $`b𝔱(O)𝒪(𝒞)`$ one has $`a(b):=\text{Res}c(b,da)`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ be a Lie algebroid on $`\overline{𝒞}`$ equipped with a Lie algebra homomorphism $`\rho :𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ such that:

(i) $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ is an extension of the relative tangent algebroid $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi =\mathrm{\Theta }_{\overline{𝒞}/𝔱^{}}`$ by $`𝒪_{\overline{𝒞}}`$,

(ii) $`\rho `$ lifts the above action of $`𝔱(F)`$ on $`\overline{𝒞}`$, and $`\rho |_{𝔱(O)}`$ equals $`\varphi :𝔱(O)𝒪(\overline{𝒞})\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$.

Such $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ exists and is unique.

By definition, a $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$-module any discrete $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$-module $`L_{\overline{𝒞}}`$ equipped with a (right)333333Since $`\overline{𝒞}`$ is an ind-scheme only right actions make sense. action of $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ such that $`1𝒪_{\overline{𝒞}}\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ acts as identity. Then $`L_{\overline{𝒞}}`$ is a $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-module via $`\rho `$. The functor $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$-mod $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-mod is an equivalence of categories.

So $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules are the same as (twisted) $`𝒟`$-modules along the fibers of $`\pi `$.

(h) Now we are ready to prove the theorem. Returning to (f) notice that $`Q`$ is a formal group which acts formally simply transitively along the fibers of $`\pi `$. Therefore a $`Q`$-equivariant structure on an $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞})`$-module is the same as a (right) $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi `$-action. Such object equipped with an $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-action amounts, by (g), to a $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi \times \mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$-module, i.e., a discrete $`𝒪(\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞})`$-module $`N_{\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}}`$ equipped with a (right) action of $`\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi \times \mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ such that $`1𝒪_{\overline{𝒞}}\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$ acts as identity. Condition (f)(i) means that $`N_{\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}}`$ is supported (scheme-theoretically) on $`\overline{𝒞}\underset{𝔱^{}}{\times }\overline{𝒞}\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}`$. Condition (f)(ii) means that $`N_{\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}}`$ is supported set-theoretically on the diagonal $`\overline{𝒞}\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}`$.

According to the Kashiwara lemma such animals are the same as $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$-modules on the diagonal $`\overline{𝒞}\overline{𝒞}\times \overline{𝒞}`$. The identification can be given by the integration functor along the first copy of $`\overline{𝒞}`$ which is the same as taking $`Q`$-coinvariants. Returning from $`\mathrm{\Theta }\stackrel{~}{_\pi }`$-modules to $`𝔱(F)\stackrel{~}{}`$-modules we get the theorem. $`\mathrm{}`$

References.

\[BBE\] A. Beilinson, S. Bloch, H. Esnault. $``$-factors for Gauß-Manin determinants. alg-geom 2001.

\[BD\] A. Beilinson, V. Drinfeld. Chiral Algebras.

\[CC\] C. E. Contou-Carrère. Jacobienne locale, groupe de bivecteurs de Witt universel et symbole local modéré. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, t. 318, Série I (1994), 743-746.

\[D\] C. Dong. Vertex algebras associated with even lattices. J. Algebra 161 (1993) 245–265.

\[FBZ\] E. Frenkel, D. Ben-Zvi. Vertex algebras and algebraic curves. AMS 2001.

\[K\] V. Kac. Vertex algebras for beginners. University Lecture Series vol. 10, AMS, 1998.