text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Quantum algebras are often considered as deformations of symmetries described by Lie algebraic structures. Many of their physical applications are dealing with composite systems . In these cases the coproducts (i.e, the coalgebraic structure called the co-structure) are relevant . When composite systems (i.e. the sets composed of sub-systems) are studied physicists are well accustomed to work with Lie algebras and with nondeformed Hopf algebras (symmetric or cocommutative coalgebras) since the set of sub-systems is not ordered and for that all measurable results must be independent of the order chosen for the sub-systems (remember the case of the composition of angular momenta).

In general, in a quantum algebra both structures, algebraic and coalgebraic, are deformed. In other words, the coproduct in non cocommutative, thus, quantum algebras are ordered structures. We can interpret this lack of symmetry as an existence of a kind of correlation between the sub-systems. In this way, quantum groups supply us with an approximate symmetry .

Twisted quantum algebras have the nice property: one can always conserve the classical Lie algebraic compositions (use the nondeformed basis), only the co-structure is deformed. This is why twisted quantum algebras are interesting objects when physical applications are considered.

It was shown by Drinfeld  that a quasitriangular Hopf algebra $`𝒜`$ can be transformed into a twisted Hopf algebra when a certain adjoint operator of the “twisting” element of $`𝒜𝒜`$ is applied to the coproducts of $`𝒜`$. The algebraic structure of the twisted algebra $`𝒜_{}`$ is the same as in the original one but the co-structure in $`𝒜_{}`$ and the quantum $``$–matrix are different. Thus, using twists we can obtain quantum deformations of universal enveloping algebras of Lie algebras where the irreducible representations are classical but their compositions (tensor products) are deformed.

Since the seminal paper of Drinfeld mentioned above and especially during the last years important studies were performed in the area of twist deformations and complicated twisting elements defined on large “carrier” algebras were constructed . Notwithstanding their complicated form one can always decompose them into the product of basic twisting elements (factors) : Reshetikhin , Jordanian  or extended  factors. The twists are often constructed in a form of multiparametric families and the boundary twisting elements have the specific properties. In this concern we can mention the peripheric extended twists which are the limit versions of the extended jordanian twists .

In this work we study the possibility to construct chains of peripheric extended twists. We shall prove that these chains can be enlarged using the Reshetikhin-like or the Jordanian-like factors. The enlarged chains of twists provide the possibility to deform universal enveloping Lie algebras in a way different from the canonical twisting. The overall adjoint transformation cannot be reduced to the adjoint operators of the carrier algebra of the classical $`r`$-matrix. In other words, from a more physical point of view, we can quantize new classical $`r`$–matrices, or equivalently, new classical systems described by Poisson–Lie structures .

The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents a review of the main facts related to the theory of twists that we shall use along the paper. In the next section, using the particular case of the Lie algebra $`sl(3)`$, we demonstrate that the carrier algebra (i.e. the minimal subalgebra of the Lie algebra where the twisting element $``$ can be defined) associated to a peripheric twist enlarged by a Reshetikhin or Jordanian factor is different from the initial carrier algebra of the peripheric twist. In Section 4 we prove the existence of peripheric chains for $`sl(N)`$, and also find the maximal number of peripheric twisting compositions (or links) that we can add to construct a peripheric chain for $`sl(N)`$ in the case of even $`N=2n`$ or odd $`N=2n1`$ dimension. The properties of peripheric chains for $`U(sl(N))`$ are studied in the following section. We discuss separately two cases depending on the character of the additional twisting factors: Reshetikhin or Jordanian. In the first case the enlarged peripheric chains allows to quantize new classical $`r`$–matrices whose associated $`\omega `$–forms are cohomologically nontrivial. In the second one, it is proved that the carrier algebras of the peripheric chains enlarged by the Jordanian factors have the structure of semidirect sum of Borel and Abelian subalgebras that can be seen as motion algebras. Section 6 presents the enlarged peripheric twists for $`U(sl(3))`$, $`U(sl(4))`$ and $`U(sl(7))`$ in order to illustrate the theory developed in the preceding sections. The discussion of the obtained results and some comments conclude the paper.

## 2 Mathematical preliminaries

Quasitriangular Hopf algebras $`𝒜(m,\mathrm{\Delta },\eta ,ϵ,S,)`$ can be transformed  by an invertible twisting element $`𝒜𝒜`$ satisfying the equations

$$_{12}(\mathrm{\Delta }id)()=_{23}(id\mathrm{\Delta })(),(ϵid)()=(idϵ)()=1,$$
(2.1)
into twisted Hopf algebras $`𝒜_{}(m,\mathrm{\Delta }_{},ϵ,S_{},_{})`$, that has the same multiplication and counit but the twisted coproduct, antipode and $``$–matrix defined as follows

$$\begin{array}{cccccccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }_{}(X)& =& \mathrm{\Delta }(X)^1,\hfill & S_{}(X)=vS(X)v^1,& \hfill _{}& =\hfill & \left(\right)_{21}^1,\hfill & \\ \hfill & =& f_i^{(1)}f_i^{(2)},\hfill & X𝒜,& \hfill v& =\hfill & f_i^{(1)}S(f_i^{(2)}).\hfill & \end{array}$$
(2.2)
Twists are mostly used as tools to construct quantum deformations, $`:U(𝔤)U_{}(𝔤)`$, of universal enveloping algebras $`U(𝔤)`$ of simple Lie algebras $`𝔤`$, considered as Hopf algebras with primitive generators $`L𝔤`$ (i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }(L)=L1+1L`$). The minimal subalgebra $`𝔤_c𝔤`$ on which the twist $``$ can be defined is called the carrier of the twist $``$.

In general, the composition of twists is not a twist. But there are some important examples of the opposite behaviour. In particular, a composition of twists $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ (with carriers $`𝔤_{c_1}`$ and $`𝔤_{c_2}`$) can be performed when in the twisted algebra $`U__1(g)`$ one can find the primitive generators for the carrier $`𝔤_{c_2}`$.

There are three basic twisting factors (BTF’s) . Up to now all the twists that are known in the explicit form are composed of these BTF’s:

1.- The Reshetikhin basic twisting factor (RF) is defined for any pair of commuting primitive elements $`l_i,l_j`$ in $`𝒜`$  by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_R=e^{\psi _{i,j}l_il_j}.$$
(2.3)
The coefficient $`\psi _{i,j}`$ plays the role of the deformation parameter.

2.- The Jordanian BTF (JF)  has as a carrier the two-dimensional (2D) Borel algebra $`𝐁`$

$$[H,E]=E.$$
(2.4)
For $`U(𝐁)`$ the following element is the solution of (2.1):

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_J=e^{H\sigma }$$
(2.5)
with

$$\sigma =\mathrm{ln}(1+E).$$
(2.6)
The result of the deformation $`\mathrm{\Phi }_J:U(𝐁)U_J(𝐁)`$ is a Hopf algebra $`U_J(𝐁)`$ with the coproducts:

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }_J(H)=He^\sigma +1H,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_J(E)=Ee^\sigma +1E.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.7)
The deformation parameter is introduced by scaling the element $`E𝐁`$:

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}& E\hfill & \hfill & \xi E,\hfill & & \\ & \sigma \hfill & \hfill & \sigma (\xi )\hfill & =\hfill & \mathrm{ln}(1+\xi E),\hfill \\ & \mathrm{\Phi }_J\hfill & \hfill & \mathrm{\Phi }_J(\xi )\hfill & =\hfill & e^{H\sigma (\xi )}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.8)
3.- The third BTF , the extending factor (EF) or simply the extension, is defined for the deformed universal enveloping algebra $`U_J(𝐇)`$, where $`𝐇`$ is the 3D Heisenberg algebra

$$[A,B]=E,[A,E]=0,[B,E]=0,$$
(2.9)
with the coproducts

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }_J(A)=Ae^{\alpha \sigma }+1A,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_J(B)=Be^{\beta \sigma }+1B,\alpha +\beta =1,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_J(E)=Ee^\sigma +1E,\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.10)
and $`\sigma `$ as in (2.6). The extending factors

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_E=e^{ABe^{\beta \sigma }},\mathrm{\Phi }_E^{}=e^{BAe^{\alpha \sigma }}$$
(2.11)
are the solutions of the twist equations (2.1) and induce the deformations $`\mathrm{\Phi }_E:U_J(𝐇)U_E(𝐇)`$ or $`\mathrm{\Phi }_E^{}:U_J(𝐇)U_E^{}(𝐇)`$. For example, the co-structure of the algebra $`U_E(𝐇)`$ is defined by the coproducts:

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }_E(A)=Ae^{\beta \sigma }+1A,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_E(B)=Be^{\beta \sigma }+e^\sigma B,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_E(E)=Ee^\sigma +1E.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.12)
EF’s were first considered as parts of the so-called extended Jordanian twists (EJ’s) . Contrary to the other two BTF’s these are the discrete solutions of the twist equations, though they can borrow a continuous parameter from a smooth curve of equivalent algebras $`U_J(𝐁;\sigma (\xi ))`$, where $`\sigma (\xi )`$ is the same as in the parameterized Jordanian twist (see (2.8)).

Note that usually the EF is applied to the universal enveloping algebras $`U_J(𝐋(\alpha ,\beta ))`$ with the 4D carrier subalgebra $`𝐋(\alpha ,\beta )`$. The parameters $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ that appear in (2.10) are to coincide with the corresponding eigenvalues of the operator $`\mathrm{ad}(H)`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}& [H,E]=E,\hfill & [H,A]=\alpha A,\hfill & [H,B]=\beta B,\hfill & \\ & [A,B]=E,\hfill & [E,A]=0,\hfill & [E,B]=0,\hfill & \alpha +\beta =1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.13)
This Hopf algebra is already deformed by the Jordanian factor. The two factors are then considered together forming the extended Jordanian twist , $`_{EJ}=\mathrm{\Phi }_E\mathrm{\Phi }_J`$. This twist defines the deformed Hopf algebras $`U_{}(𝐋(\alpha ,\beta ))`$ with the co-structure

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}(H)\hfill & =& He^\sigma +1HABe^{(\beta +1)\sigma },\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}(A)\hfill & =& Ae^{\beta \sigma }+1A,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}(B)\hfill & =& Be^{\beta \sigma }+e^\sigma B,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}(E)\hfill & =& Ee^\sigma +1E.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.14)
Also we would like to remind that any BTF can be deformed by the previous factors of the sequence of twists. Nevertheless, it always has the form of an exponent whose argument is a tensor product of two elements of $`𝒜`$. Moreover, when in the sequence of twists all the parameters independent from the proper parameter of the BTF are equal to zero the BTF recovers its canonical form.

In  the extended Jordanian twists were studied in the limit points $`\alpha =0`$ (or $`\beta =0`$). The corresponding twists were called peripheric extended twists (PET’s). It is easy to see from (2.12) that in these limiting points some generators of $`𝐋^𝒫=𝐋(1,0)`$ remain primitive in the deformed $`U_𝒫(𝐇)`$. For example, in $`U_𝒫(𝐋^𝒫)`$ we have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^𝒫(H)\hfill & =& He^\sigma +1HABe^\sigma ,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}^𝒫(A)\hfill & =& A1+1A,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}^𝒫(B)\hfill & =& B1+e^\sigma B,\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{}^𝒫(E)\hfill & =& Ee^\sigma +1E.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2.15)
The second cohomology group $`H^2\left(𝐋^𝒫\right)`$ of the carrier algebra for the PET is nontrivial. We have $`dimH^2\left(𝐋^𝒫\right)=1`$ (in contrast to the case $`\alpha ,\beta 0,1`$). The nontrivial cocycle can be chosen to be proportional to $`H^{}A^{}`$. This means that $`𝐋^𝒫`$ has not only the nondegenerate coboundary $`\omega =E^{}\left([,]\right)`$ but also the nondegenerate cocycle

$$\omega _{}=E^{}\left([,]\right)+\xi H^{}A^{}.$$
(2.16)
The latter defines the classical $`r`$–matrix $`r_{}=HE+AB+\psi AE`$. It is easy to verify that the corresponding twisting element is a composition of the PET $`_{}^𝒫`$ and the RF

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{R}=\mathrm{e}^{\psi \mathrm{A}\sigma };$$
(2.17)
i.e.

$$_{}^𝒫=\mathrm{\Phi }_\mathrm{R}_{}^𝒫=\mathrm{e}^{\psi \mathrm{A}\sigma }\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{A}\mathrm{B}}\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{H}\sigma }.$$
(2.18)
Other specific possibilities of PET’s arise when $`𝐇(\beta =0)`$ is considered as a subalgebra of a simple Lie algebra $`𝔤`$. The most interesting are the non-Abelian primitive subalgebras in $`𝔤`$ that contain the generators like $`A`$ (see Section 4 where these possibilities are studied in detail). In the simplest case when the initial twist is a peripheric twist with several extension factors $`_{}^𝒫`$ these additional possibilities lead to the deformations equivalent to the multi-Jordanian twistings (see Section 6).

More fruitful and much more complicated is the situation where the initial twist is a nontrivial composition of extended twists. For Hopf algebras $`U(𝔤)`$ with classical simple Lie algebras $`𝔤`$ there exists the possibility to construct systematically the compositions of twists called chains :

$$_{_{p0}}__p_{_{p1}}\mathrm{}__0.$$
(2.19)
The factors $`__k=\mathrm{\Phi }__k\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}`$ of the canonical chain are the canonical extended Jordanian twists for the initial Hopf algebra $`𝒜`$. Their carriers are the multidimensional analogs to $`𝐋(1/2,1/2)`$, the extensions $`\{\mathrm{\Phi }__k,k=0,\mathrm{},p1\}`$ contain the fixed set of normalized factors like $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\mathrm{exp}\{ABe^{\frac{1}{2}\sigma }\}`$. The sequence of twists in a chain for the Lie algebra $`𝒜=U(sl(N))`$ corresponds to the sequence of injections $`U(sl(N))U(sl(N2))\mathrm{}U(sl(N2k))\mathrm{}`$. For each $`𝒜_k`$ the initial root $`\lambda _0^k`$ is fixed. The extensions $`\mathrm{\Phi }__k`$ are defined by the set $`\pi _k`$ of constituent roots $`\pi _k=\{\lambda ^{},\lambda ^{\prime \prime }|\lambda ^{}+\lambda ^{\prime \prime }=\lambda _0^k;\lambda ^{}+\lambda _0^k,\lambda ^{\prime \prime }+\lambda _0^k\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝒜\}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_𝒜`$ is the root system of $`𝒜_0`$. The set of constituent roots can be naturally decomposed as $`\pi _k=\pi _k^{}\pi _k^{\prime \prime },\pi _k^{}=\{\lambda ^{}\},\pi _k^{\prime \prime }=\{\lambda ^{\prime \prime }\}`$. In these terms the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }__k`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}`$ have the form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}=\mathrm{exp}\{H_{\lambda _0^k}\sigma _0^k\},\sigma _0^k=\mathrm{ln}(1+L_{\lambda _0^k});$$
(2.20)
$$\mathrm{\Phi }__k=\underset{\lambda ^{}\pi _k^{}}{}\mathrm{\Phi }__\lambda ^{}=\underset{\lambda ^{}\pi _k^{}}{}\mathrm{exp}\{L_\lambda ^{}L_{\lambda _0^k\lambda ^{}}e^{\frac{1}{2}\sigma _0^k}\},$$
(2.21)
where the generator $`L_\lambda `$ is associated to the root $`\lambda `$.

The role of additional twistings provided by the chains of twists with the peripheric properties and the new class of Lie-Poisson structures that can be thus quantized are studied in Section 5.

## 3 Deformations of carriers: the $`sl(3)`$ case

Most interesting are the cases where the additional factors change the carrier subalgebra. This may happen if the initial carrier $`𝐋^𝒫`$ is a proper subalgebra $`𝐋^𝒫𝔤`$ and the Drinfeld equations are considered over $`𝔤`$. In this Section the simplest variant of such situation is studied. Suppose that $`𝔤`$ contains the Lie subalgebra $`𝐌=H^{}𝐋^𝒫`$, which is the extension of $`𝐋^𝒫`$ by the 1D subalgebra generated by $`H^{}`$ with the following action on $`𝐋^𝒫`$:

$$[H^{},E]=0,[H^{},A]=A,[H^{},B]=B,[H^{},H^𝒫]=0.$$

When $`𝔤=sl(3)`$ the generators of $`𝐌sl(3)`$ can be identified as follows

$$\begin{array}{cccc}& H^𝒫=\frac{1}{3}\left(2E_{11}E_{22}E_{33}\right),\hfill & A=E_{12},\hfill & E=E_{13},\hfill \\ & H^{}=\frac{1}{3}\left(E_{11}2E_{22}+E_{33}\right),\hfill & B=E_{23}.\hfill & \end{array}$$
(3.1)
In $`U_𝒫(𝐌)`$ twisted by $`_{}^𝒫`$ the co-structure is defined by (2.15) while the coproduct of the additional generator $`H^{}`$ remains primitive, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒫(H^{})=H^{}1+1H^{}`$. If we want to change the carrier $`𝐋^𝒫`$ of the twist by introducing an extra factor (to enlarge the $`_{}^𝒫`$) we have to consider the primitive Borel subalgebra $`𝐁𝐌`$ generated by $`\{A,H^{}\}`$ or the primitive Abelian subalgebra $`𝐀`$ generated by $`\{\sigma ,H^{}\}`$. This means that $`U_𝒫(𝐌)`$ admits additional Jordanian or Reshetikhin twists

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒥^{}=\mathrm{exp}\{H^{}\sigma _A(\xi )\}\mathrm{or}\mathrm{\Phi }_{}=\mathrm{exp}\{\zeta H^{}\sigma \}.$$

Composing $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒥^{}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ with $`_{}^𝒫`$ we obtain new solutions of the Drinfeld equations for the algebra $`U(sl(3))`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _𝒥^𝒫& =& \mathrm{\Phi }_𝒥^{}_{}^𝒫=e^{H^{}\sigma _A(\xi )}e^{AB}e^{H^𝒫\sigma },\hfill \\ \hfill _𝒥^𝒫& :& U\left(𝐌\right)U_𝒫\left(𝐌\right)U_{𝒥𝒫}\left(𝐌\right);\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.2)
and

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _{}& =& \mathrm{\Phi }_{}_{}^𝒫=e^{\zeta H^{}\sigma }e^{AB}e^{H^𝒫\sigma },\hfill \\ \hfill _{}& :& U\left(𝐌\right)U_{}\left(𝐌\right)U_{}\left(𝐌\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

The universal elements

$$_𝒥=\left(_𝒥^𝒫\right)_{21}\left(_𝒥^𝒫\right)^1,_{}=\left(_{}\right)_{21}\left(_{}\right)^1$$

are the quantizations of the classical $`r`$–matrices

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill r_𝒥& =& H^𝒫E+AB+\xi H^{}A,\hfill \\ \hfill r_{}& =& H^𝒫E+AB+\zeta H^{}E.\hfill \end{array}$$
(3.3)
They define the dual Lie algebras $`𝐌_𝒥^{}^{}`$, $`𝐌_{}^{}`$ and the Lie algebra morphisms $`𝐌^{}𝐌.`$ Applying them to $`𝐌_𝒥^{}^{}`$ and $`𝐌_{}^{}`$ we get (as an image of this map and after the appropriate redefinition of the generators) the 4D subalgebras $`𝐋_𝒥^{},𝐋_{}`$ $`𝐌`$ with commutators

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & 𝐋_𝒥^{}\{\begin{array}{c}[H,E]=E,[H,A]=A,[H,B]=0,\hfill \\ [A,B]=E,[E,A]=0,[E,B]=\xi E;\hfill \end{array}\hfill \\ & & \\ & & 𝐋_{}\{\begin{array}{c}[H,E]=E,[H,A]=\left(1\zeta \right)A,[H,B]=\zeta B,\hfill \\ [A,B]=E,[E,A]=0,[E,B]=0.\hfill \end{array}\hfill \end{array}$$

The algebras $`𝐋_𝒥^{},𝐋_{}`$ and $`𝐋^𝒫`$ are inequivalent. The deforming functions $`\mu _𝒥^{}(E,B)=E`$ and $`\left\{\mu _{}(H,B)=B,\mu _{}(H,A)=A\right\}`$ are cohomologically nontrivial: $`\mu _𝒥^{},\mu _{}H^2(𝐋^𝒫,𝐋^𝒫)`$. Here it is worthy to mention that both deforming functions describe not only the “tangent vector” to the deformation curve but the complete (first order) deformation of $`𝐌`$. Notice that $`𝐋_𝒥^{}`$ and $`𝐋_{}`$ are Frobenius Lie algebras. The corresponding nondegenerate forms are coboundaries.

In this simple example we have demonstrated that the carrier subalgebra associated to the peripheric twist $`_{}^𝒫`$ enlarged by $`\mathrm{\Phi }_𝒥^{}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}`$ differs nontrivially from the initial $`𝐋^𝒫`$.

## 4 Construction of peripheric chains

The constructions used in the previous Section can be generalized for the case where the initial carrier algebra contains the maximal nilpotent subalgebra of a simple Lie algebra. The only known twists with such properties are the (full) chains of extended Jordanian twists (2.19). In order to use chains of twists for our purposes we must find their analogs with the peripheric properties. In  it was proved that the peripheric chains exist.

In this section we shall compose and study the full peripheric chains for $`𝔤=sl(N)`$. We normalize the Cartan elements as $`H_{i,k}=(E_{ii}E_{kk})/2`$ and use the standard $`gl(N)`$–basis $`\{E_{i,j}\}_{i,j=1,\mathrm{}N}`$. Consider the canonical chain (2.19) of extended twists $`_{_{p0}}__p_{_{p1}}\mathrm{}__0`$ with

$$__k=\mathrm{\Phi }__k\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}=\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}e^{\frac{1}{2}\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}\sigma _{k+1,Nk}},$$
(4.1)
where $`k=0,\mathrm{},p`$ and $`\sigma _{ij}=\mathrm{ln}(1+E_{i,j})`$. This chain produces the deformation $`_{_{p0}}:U(sl(N))U_𝒫(sl(N))`$. The deformed Hopf algebra $`U_{}(sl(N))`$ admits additional twists. One of them $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{}`$, a multidimensional analog of $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{})^1`$, must transform $`U_{}(sl(N))`$ into the quantized algebra of peripheric type $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{}:U_{}(sl(N))U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$. To start the construction of the Hopf algebra $`U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$ we separate the peripheric factors in the Jordanian twists:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}=e^{H_{k+1,Nk}\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}=e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^{}\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^𝒫.$$

Here

$`H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\left(NE_{k+1,k+1}{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{N}{}}}E_{s,s}\right),`$ (4.2)
$`H_{k+1,Nk}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`H_{k+1,Nk}H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫.`$ (4.3)
The factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}`$ can be dragged to the end of the extended twist $`__k`$, the extension factors will be changed:

$$__k=\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}__k^𝒫.$$
(4.4)
One can check that $`__k^𝒫`$’s are the multidimensional peripheric extended twists. In particular, the Cartan element $`H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫`$ commutes with all the second constituent generators $`\{E_{s,Nk};`$ $`s=k+2,\mathrm{},Nk1\}`$ (in the formula (2.21) these are the elements $`L_{\lambda _0^k\lambda ^{}}`$). Applying $`__k`$ to the primitive subalgebra $`U(sl(N2k))`$ (this is just the situation that happens after the action of the $`k`$ first factors $`_{_{k1}}\mathrm{}__0`$) it preserves the primitivity of all the first constituent generators $`\{E_{k+1,s};s=k+2,\mathrm{},Nk1\}`$.

The factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}`$ can be further pushed to the very end of the chain because it commutes with all the subsequent links $`\{__s;s>k\}`$. The factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}`$ with different indices $`k`$ commute with each other. Performing the factorizations (4.4) in all the links and collecting the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_k}^{}`$ at the end of the chain we get the following expression

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _{_{p0}}__p_{_{p1}}\mathrm{}__0& =& \mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_p}^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p1}}^{}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_0}^{}__p^𝒫_{_{p1}}^𝒫\mathrm{}__0^𝒫\hfill \\ & =& \mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{}_{_{p0}}^𝒫.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4.5)
We know  that $`_{_{p0}}`$ is the twist for $`U(sl(N))`$. In the deformed algebra $`U_{_{p0}}(sl(N))`$ we have $`(p+1)`$ primitive elements of the type $`\sigma _{k+1,Nk}`$. It can be easily checked that all the elements $`H_{k+1,Nk}^{}`$ are also primitive in $`U_{_{p0}}(sl(N))`$. So, the integral factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{}`$ consists of Reshetikhin twists for commuting elements $`\{H_{k+1,Nk}^{},E_{k+1,Nk};`$ $`k=0,\mathrm{},p\}`$. This means that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{}`$ is a twist for $`U_{_{p0}}(sl(N))`$, the same is true for $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{})^1`$. Consequently, the composition $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{p0}}^{})^1_{_{p0}}`$ is a twist for $`U(sl(N))`$ and it immediately follows from (4.5) that $`_{_{p0}}^𝒫`$ is also a twist, $`_{_{p0}}^𝒫:U(sl(N))U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$,

$$_{_{p0}}^𝒫=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{p}{}}{}}__k^𝒫=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{p}{}}{}}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}}.$$
(4.6)
This composition of basic twisting factors is the necessary peripheric analogue of the chain of extended twists for $`sl(N)`$, it is called the peripheric chain of twists. The chain is full when the number of links (for $`𝐁^+(sl(N))`$) is maximal: $`N/2`$ for even and $`(N+1)/2`$ for odd $`N`$.

## 5 Peripheric chains as quantization tools

Let us consider $`N=2n`$ for the even case and $`N=2n1`$ for the odd one. The twisted algebra $`U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$ has $`z=(p+1)`$ primitive elements $`\sigma _{k+1,Nk}`$ and $`(N1z)`$ primitive Cartan generators. Each link $`__k^𝒫`$ of the chain $`_{_{p0}}^𝒫`$ is a peripheric extended twist. After applying it to $`U_{𝒫_{(k1)0}}(sl(N))`$ we get $`(N2k3)`$ primitive generators $`L_{\lambda ^k}`$ corresponding to the constituent roots $`\lambda ^k`$ (such that $`\lambda ^k+\lambda ^{k\prime \prime }=\lambda _0^k`$). In our case these are the elements $`\{E_{k+1,s}|s=k+2,\mathrm{},Nk1\}`$. The next link $`_{_{k+1}}^𝒫`$ preserves the primitivity only of one of them, $`E_{k+1,Nk1}`$. Thus in $`U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$ (after having applied $`z`$ links) we get $`(Np2)`$ additional primitive generators (with respect to the effect of the canonical chain). The following statement will be useful for applications.

###### Lemma 5.1

The ‘matreshka’ effect  is valid for peripheric chains.

Proof. The peripheric link $`__k^𝒫`$ is the function of the tensor invariant for the subalgebra $`𝔤_{\lambda _0^k}^{}`$ and being applied to $`U_{𝒫_{(k1)0}}(𝔤_{\lambda _0^k}^{})`$ such twist cannot change its coproducts. On the first step of the inductive process (with $`__0^𝒫`$) all the vectors in $`𝔤`$ have primitive coproducts. $`\mathrm{}`$

In particular, the Hopf algebra $`U_{𝒫_{p0}}(sl(N))`$ contains the subalgebra $`U(sl(N2z))`$ whose generators are primitive.

In the following we shall consider the most important case: the full peripheric chains $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$ for the enveloping algebra $`U(sl(N))`$. They have $`z=(Nn)`$ links and the twisted algebras $`U_{𝒫_{(Nn1)0}}(sl(N))`$ contain $`(Nn)`$ primitive elements $`\sigma _k\sigma _{k+1,Nk}`$, $`(n1)`$ primitive Cartan generators and $`(n1)`$ additional primitive generators $`E_k^𝒫E_{k+1,Nk1}`$. This provides possibilities to enlarge the sequence of twists in the peripheric chain by the new twisting factors. As it was demonstrated in Section 3 these possibilities are of two kinds: additional Reshetikhin and additional Jordanian basic twisting factors.

### 5.1 Additional Reshetikhin BTF’s

Notice that the primitive elements $`I_m\{\sigma _k,E_l^𝒫|k,l=0,\mathrm{},z1\}`$ commute. Consequently, the following factor

$$_{}=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta ^{mn}I_mI_n\right\}$$

is the solution of the Drinfeld equations (2.1) for the algebra $`U_{𝒫_{(Nn1)0}}(sl(N))`$. The coefficients $`\beta ^{mn}`$ are arbitrary. Thus, the composition

$$_{}^𝒫=_{}_{_{\left(Nn1\right)0}}^𝒫$$

is the twisting element for $`U(sl(N))`$,

$$_{}^𝒫:U(sl(N))U_{𝒫_{\left(Nn1\right)0}}(sl(N)).$$

Each link $`__k^𝒫`$ in $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$ can have an independent parameter $`\psi _{k+1}`$ ,

$$__k^𝒫\left(\psi _{k+1}\right)=\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{\psi _{k+1}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}\left(\psi _{k+1}\right)}.$$
(5.1)
Let all the variables of $`_{}^𝒫`$ be proportional to the overall deformation parameter $`\xi `$, i.e. $`\beta ^{mn}\xi \beta ^{mn}`$ and $`\psi _{k+1}\xi \psi _{k+1}`$. The universal element (2.2)

$$_{}^𝒫\left(\xi \right)=\left(_{}^𝒫\left(\xi \right)\right)_{21}\left(_{}^𝒫\left(\xi \right)\right)^1$$

corresponds to the classical $`r`$–matrix

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill r_{}^𝒫& =& _{k=0}^p\psi _{k+1}\left(H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫E_{k+1,Nk}+_{s=k+2}^{Nk1}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}\right)\hfill \\ & & +_{n,m=1}^{2z}\beta ^{mn}J_mJ_n.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.2)
Here $`J_m\{E_{k+1,Nk},E_l^𝒫|k,l=0,\mathrm{},z1\}`$. The difference between $`r_{}^𝒫`$ and the $`r`$–matrix for the canonical chain

$$r_{}=\underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\psi _{k+1}\left(H_{k+1,Nk}E_{k+1,Nk}+\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}\right)$$

is essential. This is clearly seen when the corresponding Frobenius forms are compared

$$\omega _{}^𝒫=\underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\chi _{k+1}E_{k+1,Nk}^{}([,])+\underset{n,m=1}{\overset{2z}{}}\varphi ^{mn}K_m^{}K_n^{},$$

and

$$\omega _{}=\underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\chi _{k+1}E_{k+1,Nk}^{}([,]),$$

where $`K_m\{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫,E_l^𝒫|k,l=0,\mathrm{},z1\}`$. The coefficients $`\chi _{k+1}`$ and $`\varphi ^{mn}`$ are proportional to $`\psi _{k+1}`$ and $`\beta ^{mn}`$ respectively. Notice that $`\omega _{}^𝒫=\omega _{}+_{n,m=1}^{2z}\varphi ^{mn}K_m^{}K_n^{}`$ and when all $`\varphi ^{mn}`$ are equal to zero the forms coincide despite the fact that the corresponding terms in the $`r`$–matrix contain different Cartan generators. Moreover, as we had already mentioned in Section 4, the carrier algebras for $`r_{}`$ and $`r_{}^𝒫(\varphi ^{mn}=0)`$ are different. In the general case (with nonzero $`\varphi ^{mn}`$) the $`\omega `$–forms are also different: $`\omega _{}`$ is a coboundary while $`\omega _{}^𝒫`$ is cohomologically nontrivial.

The result is that the peripheric chains provide the possibility to quantize explicitly the new class of classical $`r`$–matrices (5.2), defined on carrier subalgebras of the $`𝐋^𝒫`$–type, whose $`\omega `$–forms are cohomologically nontrivial.

### 5.2 Additional Jordanian BTF’s

Let us consider the peripheric chain $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$ and its possible extensions related to the primitive Cartan generators $`\{H_i^{}\}`$ and the additional primitive elements $`\{E_i^𝒫\}`$ ($`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$) belonging to the twisted Hopf algebra $`U_{𝒫_{(Nn1)0}}(sl(N))`$. Here, we consider only the generators $`E_i^𝒫`$ because the alternative pairs $`\{H_i^{},\sigma _k\}`$ appear also in the canonical case and were treated earlier (see for example ). The dual elements $`\{H_i^{}\}`$ generate in the root space the hyperplane orthogonal to the initial roots $`\{\lambda _0^k|k=0,\mathrm{},z1\}`$ of the chain $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$. On this hyperplane we fix the set of basic elements $`\{H_i^{}\}`$ and consider it together with the set $`\{E_i^𝒫\}`$:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H_i^{}& =& \frac{N2i}{N}_{l=1}^NE_{l,l}\frac{2i}{N}_{m=i+1}^{Ni}E_{m,m},\hfill \\ \hfill E_j^𝒫& =& E_{j,Nj},\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.3)
with $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},n1`$. On the joint space generated by $`\{H_i^{},E_j^𝒫\}`$ we have a Lie algebra with the nonzero commutators

$$[H_i^{},E_j^𝒫]=\delta _{ij}E_j^𝒫.$$

In other words, this is the direct sum of $`(n1)`$ 2D Borel subalgebras $`𝐁_i`$. This guarantees the possibility to enlarge the twisting element $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$ with the additional (independent) Jordanian basic factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_i}=e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}`$.

Let $`_𝒥^𝒫`$ be the maximal enlargement of the full peripheric chain with $`(n1)`$ additional JBF’s,

$$_𝒥^𝒫=\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}\right)_{_{\left(Nn1\right)0}}^𝒫.$$

Formally, the carrier subalgebra of this chain coincides with the Borel subalgebra $`𝐁^+(sl(N))`$. It contains all the raising operators $`\{E_{lm}|l,m=1,\mathrm{},N;l<m\}`$, $`(Nn)`$ generators $`H_{k,Nk}^𝒫`$ and $`(n1)`$ generators $`H_i^{}`$. However, as we shall demonstrate below, the dimension of the carrier for the classical $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$ remains the same as in the full chain $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫`$.

To study the properties of the enlarged chain in detail we must introduce in $`_𝒥^𝒫`$ the full set of parameters. This can be done by means of an involutive automorphism of the carrier subalgebra and the discrete transformations of subalgebras inside the carrier. It is sufficient to consider the maximal nilpotent subalgebra $`𝐍^+(sl(N))𝐁^+(sl(N))`$. We perform the smooth scaling of the generators in $`𝐍^+(sl(N))`$:

$$\left\{E_{lm}\alpha _{lm}E_{lm}\right|\alpha _{lm}\text{};l,m=1,\mathrm{},N;l<m\}.$$

The scaling factors $`\alpha _{lm}`$ are as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\text{for}\hfill & \left\{E_{lm}\right|\begin{array}{c}l=1,\mathrm{},z1,\\ m=2,\mathrm{},z,\\ l<m\end{array}\}\hfill & \alpha _{lm}=\frac{\psi _l}{\psi _m},\hfill \\ & & \\ \text{for}\hfill & \left\{E_{lm}\right|\begin{array}{c}l=1,\mathrm{},z,\\ m=z+1,\mathrm{},N,\end{array}\}\hfill & \alpha _{lm}=\psi _l\zeta _{\left(Nm\right)},\hfill \\ & & \\ \text{for}\hfill & \left\{E_{lm}\right|\begin{array}{c}l=z+1,\mathrm{},N1,\\ m=z+2,\mathrm{},N,\\ l<m\end{array}\}\hfill & \alpha _{lm}=\frac{\zeta _{\left(Nm\right)}}{\zeta _{\left(Nl\right)}},\hfill \end{array}\zeta _0=1.$$
(5.4)
All the parameters $`\{\psi _l,\zeta _i|l=1,\mathrm{},z;i=1,\mathrm{},Nz1\}`$ are independent. The first subset $`\{\psi _l\}`$ consists of the parameters of links, they were already introduced in $`__k^𝒫(\psi _{k+1})`$ (see (5.1)), the entries of the second subset $`\{\zeta _i\}`$ refer to the Jordanian factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_i}=e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}`$. Notice that each argument $`E_i^𝒫`$ of $`\sigma _i`$ is scaled by a product of parameters, $`E_i^𝒫(\psi _i\zeta _j)E_i^𝒫`$, because it is already scaled in the corresponding link $`_{_{i1}}^𝒫(\psi _i)`$ of the chain. The discrete parameters describe the property: in any link of the chain the extension factor can be switched off. Only the full extension

$$\mathrm{\Phi }__k\left(\psi _{k+1}\kappa _{k+1}\right)=\underset{\lambda ^{}\pi _k^{}}{}\mathrm{\Phi }__\lambda ^{}\left(\psi _{k+1}\kappa _{k+1}\right)=\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{\psi _{k+1}\kappa _{k+1}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}$$

has the character of the basic extending factor (2.11) with the continuous parameter $`\psi _{k+1}`$ and the discrete parameter $`\kappa _{k+1}=0,1`$. The separate EF’s inside $`\mathrm{\Phi }__k`$ conserve their independence and can be switched off. But, in the general case, such cancellation ruins the matreshka effect and the structure of the chain is, hence, lost. The parameterized enlarged chain has the form

$$\begin{array}{c}_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\kappa _l,\zeta _i\}\right)\hfill \\ =\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i\left(\psi _i\kappa _i\zeta _i\right)}\right)_{_{\left(Nn1\right)0}}^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\kappa _l,\zeta _i\}\right)\hfill \\ =\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i\left(\psi _i\kappa _i\zeta _i\right)}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{z}{}}{}}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{\psi _{k+1}\zeta _k\kappa _{k+1}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}\left(\psi _{k+1}\zeta _k\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.5)
Any number of links $`_{_{i1}}^𝒫(\{\psi _l,\kappa _l,\zeta _i\})`$ and JBF’s $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_i}(\psi _i\kappa _i\zeta _i)=e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i(\psi _i\kappa _i\zeta _i)}`$ can be switched off in the enlarged chain. This is ensured by the following rearrangement of parameters:

$$\psi _l=\nu _l\underset{r=1}{\overset{l1}{}}\frac{\nu _r}{\rho _r},\zeta _i=\underset{r=1}{\overset{i}{}}\frac{\rho _r}{\nu _r}.$$

$$\begin{array}{c}_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\kappa _l,\rho _i\}\right)\hfill \\ =\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i\left(\kappa _i\rho _i\right)}\right)_{_{\left(Nn1\right)0}}^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\kappa _l\}\right)\hfill \\ =\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i\left(\kappa _i\rho _i\right)}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{z}{}}{}}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}e^{\nu _{k+1}\kappa _{k+1}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}\left(\nu _{k+1}\right)}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.6)
From the structural point of view the independence of the additional factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_i}(\kappa _i\rho _i)`$ is obvious. Due to the matreshka effect switching off a link $`_{_{(Nn1)0}}^𝒫(\{\nu _l,\kappa _l\})`$ in $`_𝒥^𝒫(\{\nu _l,\rho _i,\kappa _l\})`$ can not prevent any of $`E_i^𝒫`$’s to be primitive in $`U_{(Nn1)0}^𝒫(sl(N))`$. When an extension $`\mathrm{\Phi }__l(\nu _l\kappa _l)`$ is switched off by putting $`\kappa _l=0`$ the corresponding factor $`e^{H_l^{}\sigma _l(\kappa _l\rho _l)}`$ also vanishes. This correlates with the fact that when the extension $`\mathrm{\Phi }__l(\nu _l\kappa _l)`$ is absent (the corresponding link contains only a JF) the coproduct $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥(E_l^𝒫)`$ is not primitive and the additional JF $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_l}`$ has to be canceled. Strictly speaking, even in such a situation the number of additional factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_i}`$ can be preserved. Instead of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥(E_l^𝒫)`$ we have the primitive $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥(E_{Nl,Nl+1})`$ and the factor $`e^{H_l^{}\sigma _l(\kappa _l\rho _l)}`$ can be substituted by $`e^{H_l^{}\sigma _{Nl,Nl+1}(\rho _l)}`$.

When the extensions are switched off in all the links the initial chain degenerates into the twist

$$_{}^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,0,\rho _i\}\right)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{z}{}}e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}\left(\nu _{k+1}\right)}$$

(with the special “peripheric” choice of the Cartan generators $`H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫`$). This multi-Jordanian twist can be enlarged by $`(n1)`$ JF’s,

$$_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,0,\rho _i\}\right)=\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _{Nl,Nl+1}\left(\rho _i\right)}\right)\underset{k=0}{\overset{z}{}}e^{H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,Nk}\left(\nu _{k+1}\right)}.$$

Now we shall consider the quasi-classical limit for the enlarged chain $`_𝒥^𝒫(\{\nu _l,\kappa _l,\rho _i\})`$. To simplify the formulas we put $`\{\kappa _l=1|l=1,\mathrm{},n1\}`$. The quasi-classical limit for $`_𝒥^𝒫(\{\nu _l,1,\rho _i\})_𝒥^𝒫(\{\nu _l,\rho _i\})`$ is obtained through the substitution $`\psi _k\xi \psi _k`$ in (5.5) or $`\nu _l\xi \nu _l,\rho _i\xi \rho _i`$ in (5.6) with the overall deformation parameter $`\xi `$. In the neighborhood of the origin the $``$–matrix $`_𝒥^𝒫`$ has the expansion

$`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\zeta _i;\xi \}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`11+\xi r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\zeta _i\}\right)+𝒪\left(\xi \right)`$
$`=`$ $`11+\xi r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\rho _i\}\right)+𝒪\left(\xi \right).`$
This means that the deformation $`U(sl(N))U_{𝒥\left(Nn1\right)0}^𝒫(sl(N))`$ performed by the twist $`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\zeta _i;\xi \}\right)`$ can be treated as a quantization of the classical mechanical system described by the $`r`$–matrix

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\hfill & =\hfill & \underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\psi _{k+1}\zeta _k\left(H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫E_{k+1,Nk}+\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}\right)\hfill \\ & & +\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\psi _i\zeta _iH_i^{}E_{i,Ni}\hfill \\ & =\hfill & \underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\nu _{k+1}\left(H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫E_{k+1,Nk}+\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk1}{}}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}\right)\hfill \\ & & +\underset{i=1}{\overset{n1}{}}\rho _iH_i^{}E_{i,Ni}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.7)
It can be easily checked that on the space of $`𝐁^+(sl(N))`$ this $`r`$–matrix is degenerate.

Now we shall show that the carrier subalgebra of $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$ has the dimension $`(N^2+N2n)/2`$ (the same as in the case of $`r_{}^𝒫`$).

###### Lemma 5.2

The carrier algebra of the classical $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫(\{\psi _l,\zeta _i\})`$ (5.7) is equivalent to the $`((N^2+N2n)/2)`$–dimensional subalgebra of $`𝐁^+(sl(N))`$ generated by the following sets of elements:

$$\begin{array}{cc}H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫\hfill & i=1,\mathrm{},z\hfill \\ H_j^{}\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},n1\hfill \\ E_{lm}\hfill & \left\{\begin{array}{c}l=1,\mathrm{},z1;m=2,\mathrm{},z;l<m\hfill \\ l=1,\mathrm{},z;m=z+1,\mathrm{},N\hfill \\ l=z+1,\mathrm{},N2;m=z+3,\mathrm{},N;l<m\hfill \end{array}\right\}\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.8)
Proof. It is obvious that the set (5.8) generates a subalgebra, that we denote $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$. It contains the Cartan subalgebra of $`sl(N)`$ and all the positive roots operators except those corresponding to the following subset of basic roots

$$\left\{\lambda _{z+i}=e_{z+i}e_{z+i+1}\right|i=1,\mathrm{},Nz1\}.$$

Let us construct the smooth set of injections $`\phi `$ of $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ into $`𝐁^+(sl(N))`$ depending on the parameters $`\{\zeta _i\}`$:

$$\phi \left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right):\{\begin{array}{cc}H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫\hfill & i=1,\mathrm{},z;\hfill \\ H_j^{}B_j\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & j=1,\mathrm{},n1;\hfill \\ E_{lm}E_{lm}\hfill & l=1,\mathrm{},z1;m=2,\mathrm{},z;l<m;\hfill \\ E_{lm}A_{lm}\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & l=1,\mathrm{},z;m=z+1,\mathrm{},N;\hfill \\ E_{lm}C_{lm}\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & l=z+1,\mathrm{},N2;m=z+3,\mathrm{},N;l<m\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.9)
where

$$\begin{array}{ccc}B_j\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \underset{s=1}{\overset{j}{}}\frac{\zeta _{js}}{\zeta _j}E_{Nj,Nj+s}H_j^{},\hfill \\ A_{lm}\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\zeta _{Nm}}\underset{s=0}{\overset{Nm}{}}\zeta _{Nms}E_{l,m+s},\hfill \\ C_{lm}\left(\left\{\zeta _i\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{lm}\frac{\zeta _{Nl}}{\zeta _{Nm}}\left(\underset{s=m}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\zeta _{Ns}}{\zeta _{Nl+1}}E_{l1,s}+\underset{s=1}{\overset{Nm}{}}\frac{\zeta _{Nms}}{\zeta _{Nl}}E_{l,m+s}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.10)
Direct computations show that the map $`\phi (\{\zeta _i\})`$ is an automorphism of $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$. Let us denote by $`\left\{D_s\right\}`$ the basis of $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ obtained as the image of the natural basis (5.8),

$$\phi \left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right):\{H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫,H_j^{},E_{pt}\}\left\{D_s\right\}\{H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫,B_j\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right),E_{lm},A_{lm}\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right),C_{lm}\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right)\}.$$

The $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\}\right)`$ can be expressed in terms of the generators $`\left\{D_s\right\}`$. First let us rewrite it as follows:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\psi _{k+1}\varsigma _kE_{k+1,Nk1}\left(E_{Nk1,Nk}\frac{\varsigma _{k+1}}{\varsigma _k}H_{j+1}^{}\right)\hfill \\ & & +\underset{k=0}{\overset{p}{}}\psi _{k+1}\varsigma _k\left(H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫E_{k+1,Nk}+\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{Nk2}{}}E_{k+1,s}E_{s,Nk}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(5.11)
Consider the restriction of the map $`\phi _E`$ (5.9) to the subspace generated by

$$\begin{array}{ccc}E_{lm}\hfill & \text{for}\hfill & l=1,\mathrm{},z1;m=2,\mathrm{},z;l<m;\hfill \\ E_{lm}\hfill & \text{for}\hfill & l=1,\mathrm{},z;m=z+1,\mathrm{},N;\hfill \\ E_{lm}\hfill & \text{for}\hfill & l=z+1,\mathrm{},N2;m=z+3,\mathrm{},N;l<m.\hfill \end{array}$$

The formulas (5.10) describe the decompositions $`\phi _E\left(E_{ij}\right)=D_{s\left(ij\right)}=\left(\phi _E\right)_s^{pt}E_{pt}`$. It is easy to see that the matrix $`\left\{\left(\phi _E\right)_s^{pt}\right\}`$ is invertible and $`E_{pt}=`$ $`\left(\phi _E^1\right)_{pt}^sD_s`$ are the linear combinations of the elements $`E_{ij}`$ and $`A_{ij}`$ whose indices are $`\left\{il,jm\right\}`$. The remaining entries of $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$ (5.11) are the combinations $`(C_{Nk1,Nk}\frac{\varsigma _{k+1}}{\varsigma _k}H_{j+1}^{})`$. According to the definition (5.10) these terms depend only on $`B_j`$’s and the generators $`\left\{C_{pt}\right|p=z+1,\mathrm{},N2;t=z+3,\mathrm{},N;p<t\}`$. As a result all the arguments of the $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\}\right)`$ are proved to belong to the space generated by $`H_{i,Ni+1}^𝒫,B_j,E_{lm},A_{lm}`$ and $`C_{lm}`$, that is the algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ described above:

$$r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\}\right)\phi \left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)\phi \left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)𝔤_𝒥^𝒫𝔤_𝒥^𝒫.$$

In this presentation the $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$–matrix is nondegenerate. This proves the Lemma. $`\mathrm{}`$

We can calculate the symplectic form $`\omega _𝒥^𝒫`$ corresponding to $`r_𝒥^𝒫(\{\psi _l,\zeta _i\})`$. It is a special kind of coboundary generated by the basic forms $`A_{l,m}^{}([,])`$ with $`\{l=1,\mathrm{},z;m=z+1,\mathrm{},Nl+1\}`$. As far as the map $`\phi `$ is an isomorphism we can use the canonical basis (5.8). In this case the corresponding coboundaries are $`E_{l,m}^{}\left([,]\right)`$. The symplectic form $`\omega _𝒥^𝒫`$ has a very simple structure:

$$\omega _𝒥^𝒫\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right)=\underset{l=1}{\overset{z}{}}\underset{m=z+1}{\overset{Nl+1}{}}\frac{1}{\alpha _{lm}}E_{l,m}^{}\left([,]\right),$$
(5.12)
here $`\alpha _{lm}=\alpha _{lm}\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right)`$ are the scaling factors defined in (5.4).

## 6 Examples

We shall demonstrate the properties of the enlarged peripheric chains presenting explicitly the expressions corresponding to three special cases: $`U(sl(4))`$, $`U(sl(7))`$ and $`U(sl(3))`$.

### 6.1 $`U(sl(4))`$

This is the simplest case where the peripheric properties can be visualized because four is the lowest dimension of the space whose algebra of linear transformations has the nontrivial chain of extended twists  characterized by the indices $`j=1,i=1,2;n=2;z=Nn=2`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_{_{10}}^𝒫\hfill & =\hfill & \underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{1}{}}{}}__k^𝒫=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{1}{}}{}}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{3k}{}}e^{E_{k+1,s}E_{s,4k}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,4k}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,4k}}\hfill \\ & =\hfill & e^{H_{2,3}^𝒫\sigma _{2,3}}e^{E_{1,2}E_{2,4}}e^{E_{1,3}E_{3,4}}e^{H_{1,4}^𝒫\sigma _{1,4}}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.1)
Notice that the extension factor in the second link is trivial. This chain differs from the canonical one by the Cartan generators in the Jordanian factors:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}H_{1,4}^𝒫\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{4}\left(3E_{1,1}\underset{s=2}{\overset{4}{}}E_{s,s}\right),\hfill \\ H_{2,3}^𝒫\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{4}\left(E_{1,1}+3E_{2,2}E_{3,3}E_{4,4}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

The basic vector $`(H_1^{})^{}`$ of the hyperplane orthogonal to $`\lambda _{1,4}=e_1e_4`$ and $`\lambda _{2,3}=e_2e_3`$ corresponds to the generator

$$H_1^{}=\frac{1}{2}\left(E_{1,1}E_{2,2}E_{3,3}+E_{4,4}\right).$$

The coproducts of the generators of $`𝐁^+(sl(4))`$ can be considered as a modification of the coproducts $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{_{_{10}}}`$ (twisted by a canonical chain) due to the Reshetikhin “rotation” of the type $`(\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝒥_{10}}^{})^1`$ (see the expression (4.5)):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{1,2}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,2}e^{\sigma _{1,4}}+1E_{1,2}H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{13}e^{\sigma _{2,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{1,3}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,3}1+1E_{1,3};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{1,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}}+1E_{1,4};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{2,3}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{2,3}e^{\sigma _{2,3}}+1E_{2,3};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{2,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{2,4}e^{\sigma _{2,3}}+e^{\sigma _{1,4}}E_{2,4};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(E_{3,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{3,4}1+e^{\sigma _{1,4}}E_{3,4}+H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{24}e^{\sigma _{2,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(H_{1,4}^𝒫\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_{1,4}^𝒫e^{\sigma _{1,4}}+1H_{1,4}^𝒫E_{1,3}E_{3,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}}\hfill \\ & & \left(E_{1,2}+H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{1,3}\right)E_{2,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}\sigma _{2,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(H_{2,3}^𝒫\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_{2,3}^𝒫e^{\sigma _{2,3}}+1H_{2,3}^𝒫;\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{10}}^𝒫\left(H_1^{}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_1^{}1+1H_1^{}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.2)
We have here two additional primitive elements

$$E_1^𝒫=E_{1,3},H_1^{},$$

that determine the Borel algebra

$$[H_1^{},E_1^𝒫]=E_1^𝒫.$$

The twist $`_{_{10}}^𝒫`$ (6.1) can be enlarged by the factor $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{J_1}=e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}`$, with $`\sigma _1=\mathrm{ln}(1+E_1^𝒫)`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _𝒥^𝒫& =& e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}_{_{10}}^𝒫\hfill \\ & =& e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}e^{H_{2,3}^𝒫\sigma _{2,3}}e^{E_{1,2}E_{2,4}}e^{E_{1,3}E_{3,4}}e^{H_{1,4}^𝒫\sigma _{1,4}}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.3)
The enlarged twist corresponds to the $``$–matrix

$$_𝒥^𝒫=e^{\sigma _1H_1^{}}\left(_{_{10}}^𝒫\right)_{21}\left(_{_{10}}^𝒫\right)^1e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}.$$

This universal element (supplied with the full set of deformation parameters $`\{\psi _l\xi \psi _l,\varsigma _1|l=1,2\}`$ with the overall parameter $`\xi `$) can be considered as a quantization of the classical $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\})`$

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _1\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \psi _1E_{1,3}\left(E_{3,4}\varsigma _1H_1^{}\right)+\psi _2\varsigma _1H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{2,3}\hfill \\ & & +\psi _1\left(H_{1,4}^𝒫E_{1,4}+E_{1,2}E_{2,4}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.4)
The Lie-Poisson structure fixed by $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _i\}\right)`$ can be redefined in terms of the algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ that in our case is 8D generated by $`\left\{H_{1,4}^𝒫,H_{2,3}^𝒫,H_1^{},E_{p,t}\right|p=1,2;t=2,3,4;p<t\}`$. This is an algebra of motion over the 4D space with the translations $`𝔤_𝒫=\left\{E_{p,t}\right|p=1,2;t=3,4\}`$ and the subalgebra $`𝔤_{}`$ containing the operator $`E_{1,2}`$ and the Cartan generators $`\{H_{1,4}^𝒫,H_{2,3}^𝒫,H_1^{}\}`$,

$$𝔤_𝒥^𝒫=𝔤_{}𝔤_𝒫.$$

In terms of the image $`\phi \left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)`$ generated by

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}B_1\left(\left\{\varsigma _1\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{3,4}H_1^{},\hfill & E_{12},\hfill & \\ A_{13}\left(\varsigma _1\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,3}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{1,4},\hfill & A_{14}=E_{14},\hfill & H_{1,4}^𝒫,\hfill \\ A_{23}\left(\varsigma _1\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{2,3}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{2,4},\hfill & A_{24}=E_{24},\hfill & H_{2,3}^𝒫,\hfill \end{array}$$

this $`r`$–matrix looks like

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _1\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \psi _1\varsigma _1\left(A_{13}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{14}\right)B_1+\psi _2\varsigma _1H_{2,3}^𝒫\left(A_{23}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{24}\right)\hfill \\ & & +\psi _1\left(H_{1,4}^𝒫A_{1,4}+E_{1,2}A_{2,4}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.5)
The corresponding sumplectic form (in terms of the algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$)

$`\omega _𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _i,\varsigma _1\}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=3}{\overset{5l}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\alpha _{lm}}}E_{l,m}^{}\left([,]\right)`$
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\psi _1\varsigma _1}}E_{1,3}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\psi _1}}E_{1,4}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\psi _2\varsigma _1}}E_{2,3}^{})\left([,]\right),`$
defines $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ as a Frobenius algebra.

The expression (6.3) for the enlarged peripheric twist shows that the Hopf algebra $`U_{}^𝒫(sl(4))`$ can be twisted further by the JF $`e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}`$:

$$U(sl(4))\stackrel{_{_{10}}^𝒫}{}U_{}^𝒫(sl(4))\stackrel{e^{H_1^{}\sigma _1}}{}U_𝒥^𝒫(sl(4)).$$

The final co-structure $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫`$ can be obtained as $`\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫=e^{\mathrm{ad}\left(H_1^{}\sigma _1\right)}\mathrm{\Delta }_{}^𝒫`$ and is defined by the set of coproducts:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{1,2}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,2}e^{\sigma _{1,3}\sigma _{1,4}}+1E_{1,2}H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{13}e^{\sigma _{2,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{1,3}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,3}e^{\sigma _{1,3}}+1E_{1,3};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{1,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{1,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}}+1E_{1,4};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{2,3}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{2,3}e^{\sigma _{2,3}}+1E_{2,3};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{2,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{2,4}e^{\sigma _{2,3}\sigma _{1,3}}+e^{\sigma _{1,4}}E_{2,4};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(E_{3,4}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_{3,4}e^{\sigma _{1,3}}+e^{\sigma _{1,4}}E_{3,4}\hfill \\ & & +H_1^{}e^{\sigma _{1,4}}\left(e^{\sigma _{1,4}}1\right)e^{\sigma _{1,3}}+H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{24}e^{\sigma _{2,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(H_{1,4}^𝒫\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_{1,4}^𝒫e^{\sigma _{1,4}}+1H_{1,4}^𝒫H_1^{}\left(e^{\sigma _{1,3}}1\right)\hfill \\ & & \left(e^{\sigma _{1,3}}1\right)E_{3,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}+\sigma _{1,3}}H_1^{}\left(e^{\sigma _{1,3}}1\right)\left(1e^{\sigma _{1,4}}\right)\hfill \\ & & \left(E_{1,2}+H_{2,3}^𝒫E_{1,3}\right)E_{2,4}e^{\sigma _{1,4}\sigma _{2,3}+\sigma _{1,3}};\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(H_{2,3}^𝒫\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_{2,3}^𝒫e^{\sigma _{2,3}}+1H_{2,3}^𝒫;\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_𝒥^𝒫\left(H_1^{}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_1^{}e^{\sigma _{1,3}}+1H_1^{};\hfill \end{array}$$

All the Cartan generators of $`sl(4)`$ participate in the deformation that leads to this Hopf algebra $`U_𝒥^𝒫(sl(4))`$.

In the ordinary injection of the Poincaré algebra in $`sl(4)`$ (in the corresponding real form) the Cartan generators are identified with the diagonalizable rotation (usually $`l_{12}`$), boost ($`n_{03}`$) and the dilatation operator. Notice that here the commutative subalgebra of generators $`\{A_{ij}=E_{ij}|i=1,2;j=3,4\}`$ is just the subalgebra of Poincaré translations. All of them have the especially simple quasi-primitive coproducts. The reason is that in the twist $`_𝒥^𝒫`$ the number of Jordanian factors $`_𝒥`$ is maximal and each of them is attached to one of the “momenta”.

### 6.2 $`U\left(sl(7)\right)`$

Now we shall briefly expose the case of dimension seven to show some peculiarities of odd dimension $`N=2n1`$. We also want the algebra $`U(sl(N))`$ to be sufficiently large to contain nontrivially the generators of the type $`C_{lm}\left(\left\{\varsigma _i\right\}\right)`$.

In this case the full peripheric chain has three links $`\left(n=4;i,j=1,2,3;z=Nn=3\right)`$,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill _{_{20}}^𝒫& =& \underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{2}{}}{}}__k^𝒫=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\stackrel{2}{}}{}}\left(\underset{s=k+2}{\overset{6k}{}}e^{E_{k+1,s}E_{s,7k}}\right)e^{H_{k+1,7k}^𝒫\sigma _{k+1,7k}}\hfill \\ & =& e^{E_{3,4}E_{4,5}}e^{H_{3,5}^𝒫\sigma _{3,5}}\hfill \\ & & \times e^{E_{2,3}E_{3,6}}e^{E_{2,4}E_{4,6}}e^{E_{2,5}E_{5,6}}e^{H_{2,6}^𝒫\sigma _{2,6}}\hfill \\ & & \times e^{E_{1,2}E_{2,7}}e^{E_{1,3}E_{3,7}}e^{E_{1,4}E_{4,7}}e^{E_{1,5}E_{5,7}}e^{E_{1,6}E_{6,7}}e^{H_{1,7}^𝒫\sigma _{1,7}}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.6)
The Cartan generators are fixed according to the prescription (4.2):

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H_{k+1,Nk}^𝒫& =& \frac{1}{N}\left(NE_{k+1,k+1}\underset{s=1}{\overset{N}{}}E_{s,s}\right),k=0,1,2.\hfill \end{array}$$

The dimension of the subalgebra $`𝐇^{}`$ in $`𝐇(sl(7))`$ that remains primitive after the twisting performed by the peripheric chain $`_{_{20}}^𝒫`$

$$_{_{20}}^𝒫:U(sl(7))U__{}^𝒫(sl(7))$$

coincides with the dimension of $`𝐇^𝒫`$. We choose the following three basic elements (see (5.3)):

$$H_i^{}=\frac{N2i}{N}\underset{l=1}{\overset{N}{}}E_{l,l}\underset{m=i+1}{\overset{Ni}{}}E_{m,m},i=1,2,3.$$
(6.7)
It is easy to check that the subalgebras $`𝐇^𝒫`$ and $`𝐇^{}`$ are primitive in the twisted algebra $`U_{}^𝒫(sl(N))`$ :

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\mathrm{\Delta }_{_{20}}^𝒫\left(H_i^{}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & H_i^{}1+1H_i^{},\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{_{20}}^𝒫\left(E_j^𝒫\right)\hfill & =\hfill & E_j^𝒫1+1E_j^𝒫,\hfill \end{array}i,j=1,2,3,$$

where $`E_j^𝒫=E_{j,Nj}`$. The generators $`\{H_i^{},E_j^𝒫\}`$ form three (mutually commuting) Borel subalgebras:

$$[H_i^{},E_j^𝒫]=\delta _{ij}E_j^𝒫.$$

This indicates that the peripheric chain $`_{_{20}}^𝒫`$ (6.6) can be enlarged by the factors $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\mathrm{J}_\mathrm{i}}=\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{H}_\mathrm{i}^{}\sigma _\mathrm{i}}`$, with $`\sigma _i=\mathrm{ln}\left(1+E_i^𝒫\right)`$:

$$_𝒥^𝒫=\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}\right)_{_{10}}^𝒫.$$

The corresponding universal $``$–matrix has the form:

$$_𝒥^𝒫=\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}e^{\sigma _iH_i^{}}\right)\left(_{_{20}}^𝒫\right)_{21}\left(_{_{20}}^𝒫\right)^1\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}\right).$$

Notice that the additional JF’s commute.

We have six deformation parameters: $`\left\{\psi _l\xi \psi _l,\varsigma _l\right|l=1,2,3\}`$. The expansion of
$`_𝒥^𝒫(\psi _l,\varsigma _l;\xi )`$ with respect to $`\xi `$ exhibits the following classical $`r`$–matrix

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \psi _1\left[H_1^𝒫E_{1,7}+_{k=2}^5E_{1,k}E_{k,7}+E_{1,6}\left(E_{6,7}\varsigma _1H_1^{}\right)\right]\hfill \\ & & +\psi _2\varsigma _1\left[H_2^𝒫E_{2,6}+_{k=3}^4E_{2,k}E_{k,6}+E_{2,5}\left(E_{5,6}\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _1}H_2^{}\right)\right]\hfill \\ & & +\psi _3\varsigma _2\left[H_3^𝒫E_{3,5}+E_{3,4}\left(E_{4,5}\frac{\varsigma _3}{\varsigma _2}H_3^{}\right)\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.8)
The carrier algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ of the $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)`$ is 24D with the generators $`\{H_i^𝒫,`$ $`H_i^{},`$ $`\{E_{p,t}|p=1,2,3;t=2,\mathrm{},7;p<t\},\{E_{4,6},E_{4,7},E_{5,7}\}\}`$. This is an algebra of motion over the 12D space with translations $`𝔤_𝒫=\left\{E_{p,t}\right|p=1,2,3;t=4,5,6,7\}`$ and the subalgebra $`𝔤_{}`$ that is a direct sum of two 6D algebras $`𝔤_{}=𝔤_{}^{}𝔤_{}^{\prime \prime }`$. Each direct summand contain three Cartan and three positive root generators: $`𝔤_{}^{}=\{H_i^𝒫,E_{p,t}|p,t=1,2,3;`$ $`p<t\}`$ and $`𝔤_{}^{\prime \prime }=\{H_i^{},E_{4,6};E_{4,7},E_{5,7}\}`$. In these terms $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ is a semi-direct sum,

$$𝔤_𝒥^𝒫=\left(𝔤_{}^{}𝔤_{}^{\prime \prime }\right)𝔤_𝒫.$$
(6.9)
The image $`\phi \left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)`$ of the map $`\phi `$ contains the generators

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}B_1\left(\left\{\varsigma _1\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{6,7}H_1^{},\hfill & & E_{i,j},i,j=1,2,3,\hfill \\ B_2\left(\left\{\varsigma _{1,2}\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\varsigma _2}E_{5,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1\varsigma _2}E_{5,7}H_2^{},\hfill & & H_i^𝒫,\hfill \\ B_2\left(\left\{\varsigma _{1,2}\right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\varsigma _3}E_{4,5}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _2\varsigma _3}E_{4,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1\varsigma _2\varsigma _3}E_{4,7}H_3^{},\hfill & & E_{i,7}.\hfill \\ A_{i,4}\hfill & =\hfill & E_{i,4}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _3}E_{i,5}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _2\varsigma _3}E_{i,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1\varsigma _2\varsigma _3}E_{i,7},\hfill & & C_{4,6}=E_{4,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{4,7},\hfill \\ A_{i,5}\hfill & =\hfill & E_{i,5}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _2}E_{i,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1\varsigma _2}E_{i,7},\hfill & & C_{4,7}=E_{4,6},\hfill \\ A_{i,6}\hfill & =\hfill & E_{i,6}+\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}E_{i,7},\hfill & & C_{5,7}=E_{5,7}\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}E_{4,7},\hfill \end{array}$$

In these terms the $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)`$ has the form

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)=\hfill \\ & & \psi _1[H_1^𝒫A_{1,7}+E_{1,2}A_{2,7}+E_{1,3}A_{3,7}+(A_{14}\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}A_{15})A_{47}\hfill \\ & & +(A_{15}\frac{\varsigma _1}{\varsigma _2}A_{16})(A_{57}+\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}A_{47})+(A_{16}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{17})\varsigma _1B_1]\hfill \\ & & +\varsigma _1\psi _2[H_2^𝒫(A_{2,6}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{27})+E_{2,3}(A_{36}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{37})\hfill \\ & & +\left(A_{24}\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}A_{25}\right)\left(A_{46}\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}A_{47}\right)\hfill \\ & & +(A_{25}\frac{\varsigma _1}{\varsigma _2}A_{26})(\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _1}B_2\frac{1}{\varsigma _1}(A_{57}+\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}A_{47}))]\hfill \\ & & +\varsigma _2\psi _3\left[H_3^𝒫\left(A_{3,5}\frac{\varsigma _1}{\varsigma _2}A_{36}\right)+\left(A_{3,4}\frac{\varsigma _2}{\varsigma _3}A_{35}\right)\left(\frac{\varsigma _3}{\varsigma _2}B_3\frac{\varsigma _1}{\varsigma _2}A_{46}\right)\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.10)
This expression enables us to calculate the corresponding form $`\omega `$ that has a simple structure in terms of the algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$:

$$\omega _𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)=\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\underset{m=4}{\overset{8l}{}}\frac{1}{\alpha _{lm}}E_{l,m}^{}\left([,]\right);\alpha _{lm}=\psi _l\varsigma _{\left(Nm\right)}.$$

Thus, when the Hopf algebra $`U_{_{_{20}}^𝒫}(sl(7))`$ is twisted by the additional JF’s $`\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}`$, the result

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}e^{H_i^{}\sigma _i}:U_{_{_{20}}^𝒫}(sl(7))U_{_𝒥^𝒫}(sl(7))$$

is a quantization of the initial Hopf algebra $`U(sl(7))`$ in the direction defined by the $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\psi _l,\varsigma _l\}\right)`$ ((6.8) or (6.10)) with carrier algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ (see (6.9)).

### 6.3 $`U\left(sl(3)\right)`$

To conclude the examples it is worth mentioning the degenerate case of the enlarged peripheric chain, the PET $`_{}^𝒫=e^{E_{1,2}E_{2,3}}e^{H^𝒫\sigma _{1,3}}`$ in $`U(sl(3))`$ equipped with the additional Jordanian factor:

$$_𝒥^𝒫=e^{H_{13}^{}\sigma _{12}\left(\varsigma \right)}e^{\psi E_{1,2}E_{2,3}}e^{H^𝒫\sigma _{1,3}\left(\psi \right)},$$
(6.11)
(see (3.2)). Here the generators $`H^𝒫`$ and $`H_{13}^{}=H^{}`$ were defined in section 3, formula (3.1). The corresponding classical $`r`$–matrix (3.3) is evidently one-parametric:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}r_𝒥^𝒫\left(\varsigma \right)\hfill & =\hfill & H^𝒫E_{13}+E_{12}\left(E_{23}\varsigma H_{13}^{}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6.12)
Its carrier algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ is 4D with two Cartan and two “translation” generators: $`\{H^𝒫,H_{13}^{},E_{12},`$ $`E_{13}\}`$. The natural basis in the image $`\phi \left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)`$ of the map $`\phi `$ is formed by the elements:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}B\left(\left\{\varsigma \right\}\right)\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{\varsigma }E_{23}H_{13}^{},\hfill & & H^𝒫,\hfill \\ A_{12}\hfill & =\hfill & E_{12}+\frac{1}{\varsigma }E_{13},\hfill & & E_{13}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The $`\omega `$–form corresponding to the $`r`$–matrix (6.12) is

$$\omega _𝒥^𝒫\left(\varsigma \right)=\frac{1}{\varsigma }E_{12}^{}\left([,]\right)E_{13}^{}\left([,]\right).$$

The important fact here is that for the 4D carrier algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ we can easily compose the other twisting element that contains no external generators. Consider the basic generators $`\{H_{12}^{},H_{13}^{},E_{12},E_{13}\}`$ correlated with the direct sum structure $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫=𝐁_2(H_{12}^{},E_{13})𝐁_2(H_{13}^{},E_{12})`$. This is obviously the two-Jordanian situation and the corresponding twist is

$$_{𝒥𝒥}=e^{H_{13}^{}\sigma _{12}\left(\varsigma \right)}e^{H_{12}^{}\sigma _{13}\left(\psi \right)}.$$

Notice that the $`r`$–matrix

$$r_{𝒥𝒥}\left(\varsigma \right)=H_{12}^{}E_{13}+\eta H_{13}^{}E_{12}$$

is equivalent to (6.12). In this particular case we can construct two different twists, $`_{𝒥𝒥}`$ and $`_𝒥^𝒫`$, that quantize the $`r`$–matrix $`r_{𝒥𝒥}r_𝒥^𝒫`$. One of them has the carrier algebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$, the other depends on the full set of generators of $`^+(sl(3))`$. In other words, the twist $`_𝒥^𝒫`$ uses not only the adjoint operators of the elements of $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ but also the morphisms external with respect to $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$.

This is the explicit demonstration of the fact that there exist different quantizations of one and the same Lie-Poisson structure.

## 7 Conclusions

We have explicitly quantized the sets of Lie-Poisson structures defined on the groups of motion. When they are of the $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$–type the carrier algebras of the $`r`$-matrix and the twist $`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\varkappa _l,\rho _i\}\right)`$ are different ($`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ and $`𝐁^+\left(sl(N)\right)`$, respectively). It is necessary to stress that the defining space of the twisting element $`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\varkappa _l,\rho _i\}\right)`$ cannot be restricted to the subspace $`U\left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)U\left(𝔤_𝒥^𝒫\right)`$. The quantization of the $`r`$–matrix $`r_𝒥^𝒫`$ with carrier subalgebra $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ was performed by the twist $`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\varkappa _l,\rho _i\}\right)`$ with carrier $`𝐁^+\left(sl(N)\right)`$. On the other hand, it is well known  that to find the twisting element it is sufficient to know the classical $`r`$–matrix, there exists the solution of the Drinfeld equations corresponding to $`r`$ and defined over $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$. It was demonstrated above that this is not the only way to perform the explicit twisting. The alternative possibility is to inject the carrier into the larger algebra and to search for the solutions there. Thus, to perform the quantization corresponding to the carrier $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ we have used the enlarged peripheric twist $`_𝒥^𝒫\left(\{\nu _l,\varkappa _l,\rho _i\}\right)`$ that includes the adjoint operators external with respect to $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$. This method can be used to facilitate the solution of the Drinfeld equations: in the nonordinary cases it might be reasonable to enlarge the algebra and thus include the external morphisms.

In the general situation the explicit form of the twisting element with the carrier $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ (that depends only on the generators of $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ ) is unknown to us. The only exception is the degenerate case of $`U\left(sl(3)\right)`$ considered in the end of the previous Section. The same properties can be found when $`N`$ is arbitrary but the chain is degenerate and consists of only one link. In this single link the extension can contain $`N2`$ basic extending factors and (when the whole link is peripheric) can lead to $`N2`$ additional primitive generators. The enlarged peripheric twist will have $`N2`$ additional Jordanian factors. At the same time here the carrier $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ is obviously equivalent to the direct sum of $`N1`$ commuting Borel subalgebras and the corresponding multi-Jordanian twist can be composed.

The algebras $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫=𝔤_{}𝔤_𝒫`$ are algebras of motion of special type. They have the $`(z\left(Nz\right))`$-dimensional subspace corresponding to the translations $`A_{lm}𝔤_𝒫`$ . The subalgebra $`𝔤_{}`$ contains the Borel subalgebra $`𝐁^+\left(gl\left(z\right)\right)`$, which is the multidimensional analogue of the dilatation operator in the conformal algebra, and the subalgebra $`𝐂^+\left(gl\left(n1\right)\right)`$ that can be treated as a contraction of $`𝐁^+\left(gl\left(n1\right)\right)`$. The Cartan subalgebra in $`𝔤_{}`$ contains the ordinary set of simultaneously diagonalizable operators in the algebra of motion $`𝔤_𝒥^𝒫`$ including the subset of dilatation-like operators $`B_i`$. The applications of the enlarged peripheric chains of twists studied in this paper to quantize Lie-Poisson structures defined on groups of motion could be of considerable interest.

To study the peripheric chains for simple Lie algebras of series $`A_n`$ we have used the auxiliary Reshetikhin “rotation” in the root space. This method is quite general and can be applied to an arbitrary simple algebra.

## Acknowledgments

One of the authors (V. L.) would like to thank the Vicerrectorado de Investigación de la Universidad de Valladolid for supporting his stay. This work has also been partially supported by DGES of the Ministerio de Educación y Cultura de España under Project PB98–0360, the Junta de Castilla y León (Spain) and by the Russian Foundation for Fundamental Research under the grant 00–01–00500.


format: text

text:
# Kawasaki-type Dynamics: Diffusion in the kinetic Gaussian model

## A Equation derivation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}q_k\left(t\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}{\displaystyle \underset{\left\{\sigma \right\}}{}}\sigma _kP(\left\{\sigma \right\};t)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\left\{\sigma \right\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{j,l}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\widehat{\sigma }_j,\widehat{\sigma }_l}{}}[\sigma _kW_{jl}(\sigma _j\sigma _l\widehat{\sigma }_j\widehat{\sigma }_l)P(\left\{\sigma \right\};t)`$
$`+\sigma _kW_{jl}(\widehat{\sigma }_j\widehat{\sigma }_l\sigma _j\sigma _l)P(\left\{\sigma _{ij,l}\right\},\widehat{\sigma }_j,\widehat{\sigma }_l;t)]`$
Taking summation over all $`\left\{\sigma \right\}`$, one will find the terms of those pairs unrelated to $`\sigma _k`$ cancel with each other. So one will only have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}q_k\left(t\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\left\{\sigma \right\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{w}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}}{}}[\sigma _k\left(W_{k,k+w}(\sigma _k\sigma _{k+w}\widehat{\sigma }_k\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w})\right)P(\left\{\sigma \right\};t)`$
$`+\sigma _kW_{k,k+w}(\widehat{\sigma }_k\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}\sigma _k\sigma _{k+w})P(\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w},\mathrm{},\sigma _N;t)]`$
$`=`$ $`2dq_k\left(t\right)+{\displaystyle \underset{\left\{\sigma \right\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{w}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}}{}}\sigma _kW_{k,k+w}\left(\widehat{\sigma }_k\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}\sigma _k\sigma _{k+w}\right)P(\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w},\mathrm{},\sigma _N;t)\right]`$
$`=`$ $`2dq_k\left(t\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{w}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _k,\sigma _{k+w},\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w},\mathrm{},\sigma _N}{}}\sigma _kW_{k,k+w}\left(\widehat{\sigma }_k\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}\sigma _k\sigma _{k+w}\right)P(\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w},\mathrm{},\sigma _N;t)`$
$`=`$ $`2dq_k\left(t\right)+{\displaystyle \underset{\left\{\sigma \right\}}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{w}{}}\left[{\displaystyle \underset{\widehat{\sigma }_k,\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}}{}}\widehat{\sigma }_kW_{k,k+w}\left(\sigma _k\sigma _{k+w}\widehat{\sigma }_k\widehat{\sigma }_{k+w}\right)\right]P(\left\{\sigma \right\};t).`$
## B Calculational details

We give the details for one of them, and the remaining terms follow the same way. The spin pair redistribution probability can be expressed as

$`W_{i,j,k;i+1,j,k}\left(\sigma _{ijk}\sigma _{i+1,j,k}\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q_{i,j,k;i+1,j,k}}}\delta _{\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k},\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\{K[\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}(\sigma _{i1,j,k}+\sigma _{i,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i,j1,k}+\sigma _{i,j,k1}+\sigma _{i,j,k+1})+\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}`$
$`+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}(\sigma _{i+2,j,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k1})]\},`$
and there are similar expressions for $`W_{i,j,k;i1,j,k}`$, $`W_{i,j,k;i,j\pm 1,k}`$, and $`W_{i,j,k;i,j,k\pm 1}`$. Because the spins take continuous value, the summation for spin value turns into the integration

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\sigma }{}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}f\left(\sigma \right)𝑑\sigma ;`$

and then the normalization factor

$`Q_{i,j,k;i+1,j,k}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}𝑑\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}\delta _{\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k},\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k}}`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\{K[\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}(\sigma _{i,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i1,j,k}+\sigma _{i,j1,k}+\sigma _{i,j,k1}+\sigma _{i,j,k+1})+\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}`$
$`+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}(\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i+2,j,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k1})]{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}^2{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}^2\}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{b+K}}}\mathrm{exp}[K(\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k})`$
$`\times (\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i+2,j,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k1}){\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}(\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k})^2]`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\left(b+K\right)}}[K(\sigma _{i,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i1,j,k}+\sigma _{i,j1,k}+\sigma _{i,j,k1}+\sigma _{i,j,k+1}+\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k}`$
$`\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}\sigma _{i+2,j,k}\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}\sigma _{i+1,j,k1})+b(\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k})^2]\}.`$
Thus this combined term in Eqs.(5) becomes

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk},\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}}{}}\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}W_{i,j,k;i+1,j,k}\left(\sigma _{ijk}\sigma _{i+1,j,k}\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q_{i,j,k;i+1,j,k}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}𝑑\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}\delta _{\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k},\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k}}`$
$`\times \widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\mathrm{exp}\{K[\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}(\sigma _{i,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i1,j,k}+\sigma _{i,j1,k}+\sigma _{i,j,k1}+\sigma _{i,j,k+1})+\widehat{\sigma }_{ijk}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}`$
$`+\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j,k}(\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i+2,j,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k1})]{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}\widehat{\sigma }_{ij}^2{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}\widehat{\sigma }_{i+1,j}^2\}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\left(b+K\right)}}[K(\sigma _{i,j+1,k}+\sigma _{i1,j,k}+\sigma _{i,j1,k}+\sigma _{i,j,k1}+\sigma _{i,j,k+1}+\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k}`$
$`\sigma _{i+1,j+1,k}\sigma _{i+2,j,k}\sigma _{i+1,j1,k}\sigma _{i+1,j,k+1}\sigma _{i+1,j,k1})+b(\sigma _{ijk}+\sigma _{i+1,j,k})].`$