Codex @codex  0

For the irreducible highest-weight representation of the special linear Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3$ with Dynkin labels $(a,b)$, let $(p,q)$ be a dominant integral weight. Put $r=(2a+b-2p-q)/3$ and $s=(a+2b-p-2q)/3$. If these are not integers, the weight multiplicity is zero; otherwise it is $\max \{0,1+\min (a,b,r,s)\}$.

To derive the formula, use the sl3 interlacing character formula with top row $(a+b,b,0)$. The target diagonal exponents are $(s+p+q,s+q,s)$, and an interlacing middle row $(P,Q)$ has $P+Q=2s+p+2q$, with bottom entry $s+p+q$. ThusEvery integral $P$ in this interval gives exactly one Gelfand–Tsetlin basis vector. The upper bound minus the lower bound is the minimum of six differences: $a,s,r,r+p+q,b,s+q$. Since $p,q\ge 0$, this minimum reduces to $\min (a,b,r,s)$. Counting the interval proves the formula, including absent weights of a representation. This converts a two-dimensional weight diagram calculation into four elementary boundary distances.

For the sum-zero standard representation of the symmetric group, the vectors $v_j=e_1+\cdots +e_j-j{e}_{j+1}$ form a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis. The Young–Jucys–Murphy element $X_i$ has eigenvalue $i-1$ for $i\le j$, $-1$ for $i=j+1$, and $i-2$ for $i>j+1$. Normalizing by $\sqrt{j(j+1)}$ gives an orthonormal basis corresponding to tableaux of shape $(n-1,1)$ whose second-row entry is $j+1$.

In the finite-dimensional setting, let $R(a,b)$ denote the irreducible ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3$ highest-weight representation of highest weight $a{L}_1-b{L}_3$, where $a,b$ are nonnegative integers. Thus $(a,b)$ are its Dynkin labels. The target $\lambda =L_1-2L_3$ has labels $(1,2)$. Write the highest-weight difference in simple roots asThe dominant weight multiplicity formula for sl3 gives zero unless $r,s$ are nonnegative integers, and otherwise givesFor completeness, this multiplicity is an actual count. In the sl3 interlacing character formula, use top row $(a+b,b,0)$ and bottom entry $s+3$; the target diagonal exponents are $(s+3,s+2,s)$. The middle row $(P,Q)$ obeys $P+Q=2s+5$ andEach allowable integral $P$ gives one Gelfand–Tsetlin basis vector. Subtracting the lower bound from the upper bound gives the minimum of $a,s,r,r+3,b,s+2$, which reduces to $\min (a,b,r,s)$. This proves the displayed multiplicity formula in the case at hand.

Since both summands have a nonzero weight space and their dimensions at $\lambda$ sum to three, their multiplicities must be one and two. For multiplicity one, the minimum is zero. The cases $a=0$ and $b=0$ give $(0,4+3j)$ and $(5+3j,0)$; the remaining cases $r=0$ or $s=0$ give $(1,2)$ and $(3,1)$. Hence the full family isFor multiplicity two, the minimum is one. The cases $a=1$ and $b=1$ give $(1,5+3j)$ and $(6+3j,1)$; the remaining cases $r=1$ or $s=1$ give $(2,3)$ and $(4,2)$. ThusThe minimum conditions exhaust all cases and each listed module has the stated multiplicity. All candidate unordered pairs are $\boxed{\{U,V\}\text{ with }U\in {\mathcal{C}}_1,V\in {\mathcal{C}}_2}$. There are infinitely many at this stage; the question imposes no upper bound on their highest weights.

For $n=4$, take the three vectors from part (iii):Their joint Young–Jucys–Murphy element weights, in the order $(X_1,X_2,X_3,X_4)$, areThey are distinct, and part (ii) says that these operators generate $G{Z}_4$. Therefore a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis isIf an orthonormal basis is desired, use $v_1/\sqrt{2}$, $v_2/\sqrt{6}$, and $v_3/\sqrt{12}$. The corresponding standard Young tableaux have shape $(3,1)$, with the second-row entry respectively $2,3,4$. Their contents agree with the three displayed weights.

For $\alpha ,\beta \in \mathrm{Spec}(n)$, define $\alpha \sim \beta$ when their Gelfand–Tsetlin basis lines occur in the same irreducible representation. This is well defined: $G{Z}_n$ contains the centre of $\mathbb{C}{S}_n$, whose primitive central idempotents separate the irreducible modules, and part 1(ii) says these central elements are polynomials in the $X_j$. Consequently the same weight cannot label two different irreducible modules.

For content vectors of standard Young tableaux, an admissible adjacent swap of a standard Young tableau exchanges coordinates $i,i+1$ whose difference has absolute value greater than $1$. Define $\alpha \approx \beta$ as the equivalence relation generated by such swaps within $\mathrm{Cont}(n)$.

Equivalently, after reconstructing the tableaux, $\alpha \approx \beta$ means that the two tableaux have the same final Young diagram. Indeed, an admissible swap exchanges consecutive entries in incomparable cells, preserves the diagram and leaves a standard Young tableau. Conversely, tableaux of a fixed shape are linear extensions of a partially ordered set, with the cells ordered by their row and column requirements; any two linear extensions are connected by adjacent swaps of incomparable elements. We explain this connectivity and its spectral consequence in part (v).

The joint spectrum $\mathrm{Spec}(n)$ consists of the tuples of simultaneous eigenvalues of $X_1,\dots ,X_n$ occurring in irreducible complex $S_n$-modules. A Gelfand–Tsetlin basis is a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis: its vectors lie in the one-dimensional joint eigenspaces selected by successive restrictions. The weight of $v$ is $\alpha =(a_1,\dots ,a_n)$ when $X_{j}v=a_{j}v$ for every $j$.

Define $\mathrm{Cont}(n)$ to be the integer tuples satisfying the content vector of a standard Young tableau conditions: $a_1=0$; for $j>1$, at least one of $a_j-1,a_j+1$ occurs earlier; and between any two occurrences of the same integer $a$, both $a-1$ and $a+1$ occur. We will justify their tableau interpretation in part (iv).

Here is the local spectral rules for Young–Jucys–Murphy elements calculation used in this question. Average a positive definite Hermitian inner product over $S_n$, making the representation unitary. The $X_j$ are commuting self-adjoint operators because transpositions are self-adjoint involutions. Put $s_i=(ii+1)$ and $d=a_{i+1}-a_i$. The group-algebra relations areFor a unit weight vector $v$, the first relation gives $d⟨v,s_{i}v⟩=1$. Thus $d\ne 0$, $|d|\ge 1$, andhas the weight obtained by swapping $a_i,a_{i+1}$, with $\Vert w{\Vert }^2=1-d^{-2}$. If $d=\pm 1$, then $w=0$ and $s_{i}v=\pm v$. If $|d|>1$, then $w\ne 0$, providing an admissible spectral swap in the same irreducible module.

For the proposed three consecutive weights $(a,a+1,a)$, these rules give $s_{i}v=v$ and $s_{i+1}v=-v$. But the braid relation in a Coxeter group would implya contradiction. Hence the proposed tuple is not in $\mathrm{Spec}(n)$. The same argument, with the signs reversed, excludes $(a,a-1,a)$ as well.

Let $T$ be a standard Young tableau of shape $\lambda ⊢n$, and let $\mu$ be the shape formed by its entries $1,\dots ,k$. Since Young–Jucys–Murphy elements act by contents, the eigenvalue of ${\xi }_k$ on its Gelfand–Tsetlin basis vector isIf $\mu$ is not a hook partition, it contains $(2,2)$, whose content is zero, so this product is zero. If $\mu =(a+1,1^b)$ with $a+b+1=k$, its nonzero contents are $1,\dots ,a$ and $-1,\dots ,-b$. Their product is independent of the order of the labels. Therefore the eigenvalue isThe empty product at $k=1$ gives $1$. When $k=n$, $\mu =\lambda$, giving exactly the hook-versus-nonhook distinction suggested by the hint. For $k<n$, it is the intermediate shape $\mu$, rather than the final shape $\lambda$, that controls the answer.

Assume $n\ge 2$. The standard Young tableaux of shape $(n-1,1)$ are $T_k$, for $2\le k\le n$: the sole second-row entry is $k$, and the first row isThis lists all of them, since $1$ must occupy the first box and the rest of the first row is forced to increase. Their contents areWrite $w_k=w_{T_k}$. The only nontrivial adjacent swaps exchange the lower entry with $k-1$ or $k+1$. Substituting the content differences into Young orthogonal form yields all generator actions:In the first line at $k=2$, the square-root coefficient is zero and the action is $-w_2$, so no vector $w_1$ is needed. The second line is used only when $k<n$, since the generator $s_n$ does not exist.

The corresponding Specht module is the sum-zero standard representation of the symmetric group:A concrete orthonormal realization isPermuting coordinates gives exactly the actions above, linking this orthogonal tableau basis with the Gelfand–Tsetlin basis found in Question 1. Here the printed $s_j$ are the adjacent Coxeter generators, rather than products of all generators.

The projections $P_T$ in the Gelfand–Tsetlin algebra satisfyConsequently the map sending a diagonal element to its scalar on each Gelfand–Tsetlin basis vector is a ring isomorphismEach factor is a simple module over this algebra, and the algebra is their direct sum as a module over itself. This proves that $G{Z}_n$ is a semisimple algebra. The argument uses its explicit diagonal structure; being a subalgebra of a semisimple algebra by itself would not suffice.

Work over the complex numbers. The chain $S_0\subset S_1\subset \cdots \subset S_n$ has multiplicity-free restriction: each irreducible representation restricts to a direct sum of pairwise inequivalent irreducible representations. This structural fact can be proved before identifying the branching diagram. Indeed, the permitted Olshanskii centralizer lemma makes $C_{\mathbb{C}{S}_r}(\mathbb{C}{S}_{r-1})$ commutative, since it is generated by the center at the previous level and the commuting element $X_r$. In each irreducible block this is the endomorphism algebra of the restricted module; a repeated summand would give a noncommutative matrix algebra factor. Thus no identification of the branching graph with Young diagrams is being assumed here.

Successively restricting an irreducible representation $V$ gives one-dimensional spaces $V_T$ indexed by paths of irreducible representations from the trivial $S_0$-module to $V$. Choosing one nonzero vector in each $V_T$ gives a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis. Define the Gelfand–Tsetlin algebra as the subalgebra of $\mathbb{C}{S}_n$ acting diagonally in all these bases. The Artin–Wedderburn theorem identifiesUnder this identification the Gelfand–Tsetlin algebra is the direct sum of the full diagonal matrix algebras in the indicated bases, so it is commutative.

To see that it is actually available inside the group algebra, let $e_{\alpha }^{(r)}$ be the central primitive idempotent selecting the irreducible representation $\alpha$ of $S_r$. For a path $T=({\alpha }_0,\dots ,{\alpha }_n)$ the productis the projection onto $V_T$ in its final irreducible representation and is zero in every other final block. These products commute: a center at a higher level commutes with every element at a lower level. The $P_T$ are precisely the diagonal matrix units, and therefore span the proposed algebra.

If an element of the group algebra commutes with every $P_T$, its matrix preserves every $V_T$ and is diagonal in every block. It already belongs to the Gelfand–Tsetlin algebra. Thuswhich proves that it is a maximal commutative subalgebra.

The local spectral interchanges preserve an irreducible representation, and standard Young tableaux of a fixed shape are connected by admissible adjacent interchanges. Different shapes have different multisets of Young-diagram cell contents. Their elementary symmetric functions in the Young–Jucys–Murphy elements are central: the identityproves this coefficient by coefficient. By the Schur lemma, one irreducible representation cannot therefore contain two different shape classes. The multiset determines a diagram because the counts on its positive and negative diagonals determine its arm and leg lengths at the diagonal cells.

Different irreducible representations cannot share a joint eigenvalue vector: the Gelfand–Tsetlin algebra is generated by the Young–Jucys–Murphy elements, so all its elements would act identically on that vector in both representations, whereas a central primitive idempotent distinguishes their two blocks. Thus distinct irreducibles give distinct shape classes.

The number of irreducible representations is the number $p(n)$ of conjugacy classes, each indexed by a partition of an integer. Every spectral vector gives a tableau by the preceding construction. Closure under admissible interchanges makes every shape class that occurs occur in full. The two counts $p(n)$ then force every shape to occur, with exactly one irreducible representation per shape. This supplies $\mathrm{Spec}(n)=\mathrm{Cont}(n)$.

On restricting to $S_{n-1}$, delete the last coordinate. For tableaux of shape $\lambda$, the entry $n$ occupies one Removable node of a Young diagram. Grouping by that node gives one copy of the corresponding module; the path decomposition has simple multiplicities. Hence the restriction branching rule for a symmetric group isThe different removable nodes produce distinct partitions. The multiplicity-free structural input defining the Gelfand–Tsetlin basis is distinct from identifying this graph with the graph of Young diagrams.

Use a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis in Young seminormal form.

For a standard Young tableau $T$, put $d=c_T(i+1)-c_T(i)$, using the Content of a Young-diagram cell. Choose the row-reading tableau $T_0$, and let $\ell (T)$ be the Coxeter length of the unique permutation sending $T_0$ to $T$. A Gelfand–Tsetlin basis can be chosen so that, when $R=s_{i}T$ is standard and $\ell (R)=\ell (T)+1$,If $R$ is not standard, the action is $+v_T$ for two consecutive entries in one row, and $-v_T$ for two in one column. This is one usual normalization of the Young seminormal form.

Here is a construction and proof of the normalization. Fix $v_{T_0}\ne 0$, let $P_T$ be the projection onto the tableau line, and defineThe permutation ${\pi }_T$ has a reduced expression consisting entirely of admissible swaps, by the reduced adjacent-swap path between linear extensions. At each swap the off-diagonal coefficient is nonzero. In its expansion, the only term that can reach a tableau at distance $\ell (T)$ uses all $\ell (T)$ swaps; omitting a swap gives a shorter path. Thus $v_T\ne 0$. This also makes its definition independent of a chosen reduced expression, because ${\pi }_T$ itself is fixed.

The relation $s_i{X}_i{s}_i+s_i=X_{i+1}$ forces the coefficient of $v_T$ in $s_i{v}_T$ to be $1/d$, and forces every other component to lie on the swapped line. If length increases, project the identity ${\pi }_R=s_i{\pi }_T$ onto the line for $R$. The shorter terms of ${\pi }_T{v}_{T_0}$ cannot reach $R$ in one step, so the coefficient of $v_R$ is exactly one. Applying $s_i^2=1$ then gives the reverse coefficient $1-d^{-2}$ and diagonal coefficient $-1/d$. In the nonstandard cases the same relation gives $d=\pm 1$ and the asserted scalar action. This proves the theorem rather than merely specifying pairwise scalings.

The Gelfand–Tsetlin basis spans $V^{\lambda }$, and the scalar computed on its vectors depends only on the shape. Thusfor every $w\in V^{\lambda }$. The product is the sum of the $(n-1)!$ permutations in the conjugacy class of an $n$-cycle. Taking traces therefore gives $(n-1)!{\chi }^{\lambda }((n))$ equal to the displayed scalar times $\dim V^{\lambda }$.

For a hook partition, a standard Young tableau is uniquely determined by the choice of its $k$ entries below the top cell, selected from $\{2,\dots ,n\}$. The column and the remaining row are then forced to increase. Hence $\dim V^{(n-k,1^k)}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n-1}{k}\right)$, and cancellation of the factorials yieldsThis uses the central character value of a conjugacy-class sum and tableau counting, without a character rule for removing rim hooks.

For the special linear Lie algebra ${\mathfrak{sl}}_3$, the irreducible highest-weight representation with Dynkin labels $(a,b)$ has the displayed formal character on diagonal matrices with $x_1{x}_2{x}_3=1$. The interlacing rows $(a+b,b,0)$, $(p,q)$ and $(r)$ enumerate a Gelfand–Tsetlin basis; each triple contributes the exponent differences $(r-(p+q-r),(p+q-r)-(a+2b-p-q))$ as its weight. This gives exact integer weight multiplicities, including repeated weights, without floating-point character evaluation.

Let $T$ be a standard Young tableau, $s_i=(ii+1)$, and $d=c_T(i+1)-c_T(i)$. A suitable Gelfand–Tsetlin basis has, for an admissible pair $R=s_{i}T$ with tableau length increasing,For a nonadmissible swap the scalar is $+1$ in a row and $-1$ in a column. The diagonal coefficient follows from the Young–Jucys–Murphy element relation $s_i{X}_i{s}_i+s_i=X_{i+1}$, and $s_i^2=1$ forces the product of off-diagonal coefficients. One global normalization is $v_T=P_T{\pi }_T{v}_{T_0}$ from the row-reading tableau: a reduced admissible path makes this vector nonzero and gives coefficient one on every length-increasing edge.