Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 30 references

Finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Every finite-dimensional irreducible representation of a twisted loop algebra of the second kind is classified by explicit highest-weight formulas.

desk verdict Known classification, useful explicit formulas, but the new elementary proof has a real gap at Lemma 5.4.4(2) and an unproved highest-weight reduction; still deserves referee time. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.02379 v1 pith:FOCEDNWH submitted 2025-06-03 math.RT

Hideya Watanabe This is my paper
classification math.RT MSC 17B1017B65
keywords twistedloopalgebraofthesecondkindrepresentationtheoryclassificationhighestweightmodulesOnsagerequivariantmapalgebraspowersumsymmetricpolynomials
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper classifies all finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind, the infinite-dimensional Lie algebras obtained as fixed points of a loop algebra under an involution. The classification is by highest weights: a universal highest weight module $V(\varphi)$ is finite-dimensional exactly when $\varphi$ takes explicit power-sum values on the Cartan subalgebra, with parameters $\nu_{j,\pm 1}$ and finitely many nonzero scalars $\alpha_{j,i} \in \mathbb{C}^\times$. This recovers the known equivariant-map-algebra classification for these algebras in a more elementary way, using only the four minimal twisted loop algebras (the loop algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the current algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the Onsager algebra, and the generalized Onsager algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_3$) as building blocks. The elementary proof is intended as a template for quantum settings, where equivariant-map-algebra machinery does not apply.

What carries the argument

The engine of the proof is a family of elements $d_a \in U^{\mathrm{tw},0}$, indexed by words $a=(a_1,\ldots,a_r)$ in an abelian monoid $A$ (which is $\mathbb{Z}$, $\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$, or $\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}^2$ in the four minimal cases). They are defined through derivations $\tilde{D}_a$ on an auxiliary $\mathfrak{sl}_2$-valued loop algebra, following the model of the arithmetic theory of loop algebras in [Gar78]. The $d_a$ satisfy identities mirroring the monomial symmetric polynomials: $d_\emptyset = 1$, $d_a d_a = d_{a*a} + \sum_{l} d_{(a_1,\ldots,a_l+a,\ldots,a_r)}$, and $d_a \equiv_{>0} x_{a_1,0}\cdots x_{a_r,0} f_{0,1}^{(r)}$. Theorem 4.4.9 shows that any assignment of complex numbers $c_a = \varphi(d_a)$ satisfying these identities is realized by evaluating monomial symmetric functions at points of $X^n$; this converts the purely algebraic identities into the transparent power-sum formulas for $\varphi$ on the Cartan subalgebra. The four minimal cases are distinguished by which monoid $A$ occurs, and they are exactly the loop algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the current algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the Onsager algebra, and the generalized Onsager algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_3$.

What would settle it

Apply the theorem to the Onsager algebra (type AI1) with the weight $\varphi(w_{a,0}) = a$ for all $a \ge 0$; the theorem predicts that $V(\varphi)$ is infinite-dimensional, because this $\varphi$ is not of the form $\nu_1 2^a + \nu_{-1}(-2)^a + \sum_i (\alpha_i + \alpha_i^{-1})^a$. A direct calculation of the weight spaces of $V(\varphi)$, or of whether $y_{0,1}^r v_\varphi$ vanishes for some $r$, would confirm or refute this prediction. The same check works for the current algebra of $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ with $\varphi(w_a) = a^2$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 5.5.1. For each twisted loop algebra $L^{\mathrm{tw}}(I,\mu,S)$ of the second kind, the simple highest weight module $V(\varphi)$ is finite-dimensional if and only if the weight $\varphi \in (L^{\mathrm{tw},0})^*$ is given as follows for each vertex $j$ of the associated affine Dynkin diagram. If $\mu(j) \neq j$ and $a_{j,\mu(j)}=0$, then $\varphi(w_{j,a}) = \sum_i (\alpha_{j,i} + \alpha_{j,i}^{-1})^a$ and $\varphi(w_{j,-,a}) = \sum_i (\alpha_{j,i} + \alpha_{j,i}^{-1})^a (\alpha_{j,i} - \alpha_{j,i}^{-1})$ for finitely many $\alpha_{j,i} \in \mathbb{C}^\times$. If $\mu(j)=j \notin S$, only the first power-sum formula holds. If $\mu(j)=j \in S$, then $\varphi(w_{j,a}) = \nu_{j,1} 2^a + \nu_{j,-1} (-2)^a + \sum_i (\alpha_{j,i} + \alpha_{j,i}^{-1})^a$ with $\alpha_{j,i} \neq \pm 1$, and $a_j^\vee \nu_{j,\pm 1} \in \mathbb{Z}$ when $0 \notin \tilde S$. If $a_{j,\mu(j)}=-1$, the same formula holds with all terms doubled and with $\nu_{j,\pm 1} \in \tfrac{1}{2}\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0}$. The four minimal cases (Theorems 5.1.3, 5.2.2, 5.3.5, and 5.4.5) are the building blocks; the general proof assembles them by reading the same product identities off the Dynkin diagram, and constructs the module as a quotient of a tensor product of evaluation modules at $\pm 1$ and at the $\alpha_{j,i}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the assertion in Section 2.3, stated without proof, that every finite-dimensional module of a twisted loop algebra of the second kind is a sum of highest weight modules; if any finite-dimensional module lacked a highest weight vector, the classification of irreducibles through the modules $V(\varphi)$ would be incomplete.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every finite-dimensional irreducible representation of a twisted loop algebra of the second kind is a highest weight module $V(\varphi)$, and the sets $\{\alpha_{j,i}\}$ together with the numbers $\nu_{j,\pm 1}$ (subject to the stated integrality conditions) form a complete parametrization of all isomorphism classes.
  • The reverse direction of the proof realizes each such module as a quotient of a tensor product of evaluation modules at the points $\pm 1$ and at the parameters $\alpha_{j,i}$, so finite-dimensional representation theory of these algebras is governed by evaluation at finitely many points of $\mathbb{C}^\times$.
  • The integrality condition $a_j^\vee \nu_{j,\pm 1} \in \mathbb{Z}$ in case (c) is forced by the relation $w_0 = -\sum_j a_j^\vee w_j$; it restricts exactly which weights of the fixed-point subalgebra can occur, a feature that only appears in the elementary proof.
  • The four minimal cases (loop $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, current $\mathfrak{sl}_2$, the Onsager algebra, and the generalized Onsager algebra) form a complete list of building blocks; every other twisted loop algebra of the second kind inherits its classification from these via the Dynkin diagram.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The explicit power-sum parametrization suggests a direct character formula: the formal character of $V(\varphi)$ should factor as a product of evaluation characters at the $\alpha_{j,i}$ together with the $\pm 1$ contributions, yielding closed $q$-character expressions if the pattern transfers to twisted Yangians. (Editorial inference.)
  • The same derivational machinery with a monoid $A = \mathbb{Z}^{m-1}$ should classify finite-dimensional representations of twisted loop algebras attached to automorphisms of order $m>2$ (the "first kind" variants), where no equivalent four-case reduction is yet worked out. (Editorial inference.)
  • The Section 2.3 assertion that every finite-dimensional module is a sum of highest weight modules is stated without proof; a direct proof of that assertion would turn the classification of irreducibles into a complete description of the category of finite-dimensional modules. (Editorial inference.)
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper gives an elementary highest-weight classification of the finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind Ltw(g, θ). After setting up a triangular decomposition and the corresponding highest weight modules V(φ), the author reduces the problem to four minimal algebras: the loop algebra of sl2, the current algebra of sl2, the Onsager algebra, and the generalized Onsager algebra of sl3. Theorems 5.1.3, 5.2.2, 5.3.5, and 5.4.5 classify finite-dimensional irreducible highest weight modules for these four cases in terms of explicit power-sum formulas for the action on the Cartan subalgebra. Theorem 5.5.1 assembles these into a classification for a general twisted loop algebra of the second kind. The paper also contains a general framework based on an auxiliary Lie algebra and invariant rings, and it uses the Neher–Savage–Senesi equivariant map algebra theorem only as an auxiliary tool.

Significance. The main classification is already known from the general theory of equivariant map algebras, so the paper's contribution is a more elementary, representation-theoretic proof with explicit highest-weight parameters. The reduction to four minimal cases and the explicit formulas in Theorem 5.5.1 are useful and potentially valuable for quantum-analogue applications. The four minimal classifications are proved with detailed computations and the auxiliary Lie algebra construction is a genuine technical device. The paper is not fully self-contained as written: the structural reduction in Section 2.3 is asserted without proof, and the proof of Lemma 5.4.4(2) contains a gap. If these are repaired, the paper would be a solid contribution; as it stands, the main theorem is not completely proved by the elementary route claimed.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.4, Lemma 5.4.4(2)] The proof of the vanishing statement φ(d_a)=0 for all r>n and a∈B^r is not justified. The text says that Theorem 5.3.5 states that V(φ) is a quotient of a module on which every product Y_{a1,b1}...Y_{ar,br} acts as zero, and then invokes Lemma 5.4.2. But Theorem 5.3.5 classifies the simple finite-dimensional highest weight module of the Onsager algebra. The restriction of V(φ) to the relevant Onsager subalgebra is a finite-dimensional highest weight module, but it need not be the simple module controlled by Theorem 5.3.5; only its simple quotient is. Vanishing on that quotient does not imply vanishing on V(φ). A direct argument showing Y_{a1,b1}...Y_{ar,br}vφ=0 for r>n, using the definition of n as the Y_{0,1}-nilpotency degree and the Onsager algebra relations, is needed. This is load-bearing because the vanishing is used in Theorem 5.4.5 to obtain equation (5.4.9), which enters the proof of Theorem 5.5.1(d).
  2. [Section 2.3] The reduction from arbitrary finite-dimensional modules to highest weight modules is asserted without proof in the paragraph after Definition 2.3.3: 'Also, each finite-dimensional module is a sum of highest weight modules.' This claim is load-bearing because all theorems in Section 5 concern the modules V(φ); if a finite-dimensional irreducible module without a highest weight vector existed, it would be missed by the classification. The text says this is a straightforward analogue of the finite-dimensional theory, but for these infinite-dimensional Lie algebras the argument requires a suitable element of Ltw,0 that acts with positive weights on Ltw,+ and is semisimple in finite-dimensional modules. Neither the element nor the argument is supplied. Please provide a proof or a precise reference for this structural statement.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] There are several typographical errors, including 'ing redients' in the abstract, 'main ingriedients' in Section 1.1, and 'classification theor em' in the final paragraph of Section 1.3; these should be corrected.
  2. [Affiliation] The author affiliation line reads 'Colledge of Scien ce' and should read 'College of Science'.
  3. [References] The reference [MRS03] appears in the bibliography but is not cited in the text; either cite it where relevant or remove it.
  4. [Figures 1–3] The Dynkin diagrams in Figures 1–3 are very dense and the vertex labels are hard to read. Since these figures encode the case list for Theorem 5.5.1, a clearer presentation or an accompanying table would improve usability.
  5. [Section 5.4, Lemma 5.4.2] The proof of Lemma 5.4.2 is summarized as 'straightforwardly deduced' from Lemma 5.4.1; a few more details of the induction would help the reader verify the claimed relation between the d_a and the products of Y-factors.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the classification is derived from direct highest-weight computations and an external classification, with no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's Section 5 derivation is self-contained: Theorems 5.1.3, 5.2.2, 5.3.5, and 5.4.5 are each proved from the universal highest weight module M(phi), the auxiliary algebra calculations of Section 4.3, and the invariant-ring parametrization of Theorems 4.4.8 and 4.4.9, none of which assumes the target classification. The parameters alpha_{j,i}, nu_{j,pm 1} are not fitted inputs: they are shown to be forced by the eigenvalues of Cartan elements on the highest weight vector. The citation of Neher-Savage-Senesi in Section 3 is external and is used only for the auxiliary statement that every finite-dimensional simple module arises as V(phi); the main theorem 5.5.1 does not use NSS12 in its proof. I note two non-circular proof-quality issues: Section 2.3 asserts without proof that every finite-dimensional module is a sum of highest weight modules, and Lemma 5.4.4(2) justifies the vanishing phi(d_a)=0 via a quotient argument that is not fully written out; these are gaps or possible errors, not circular reductions. The result is benchmarked against the independent NSS12 classification, so no self-citation is load-bearing.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper's central claim rests on standard background (Kac's automorphism classification, PBW, sl2 representation theory, Macdonald basis) and on one asserted structural fact (finite-dimensional modules are highest weight). No free parameters are fitted; the numbers in the classification are outputs, not inputs. The auxiliary Lie algebra is a new but non-empirical tool.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Kac's classification of finite-order automorphisms of simple Lie algebras and their conjugacy classes (Kac83, Section 8.6), used to parametrize involutions by (I, mu, S).
    Section 2.2, Proposition 2.2.1: every involution on g is conjugate to some sigma_s, giving the Dynkin diagram parametrization that underlies the four minimal types and Theorem 5.5.1.
  • standard math The triangular decomposition U = U^- tensor U^0 tensor U^+ and its twisted analogue U^{tw} = U^{tw,-} tensor U^{tw,0} tensor U^{tw,+} (equation (2.3.5)), requiring PBW.
    Section 2.3: used to define highest weight modules and universal highest weight modules; without it, the reduction to V(phi) breaks.
  • domain assumption Finite-dimensional modules of Ltw are sums of highest weight modules.
    Section 2.3, stated without proof: 'each finite-dimensional module is a sum of highest weight modules.' This reduces the classification to checking finite-dimensionality of V(phi).
  • standard math Representation theory of sl2, including the classification of finite-dimensional simple modules and the nilpotency of f on finite-dimensional modules.
    Section 5: used in Theorems 5.1.3, 5.2.2, 5.3.5, 5.4.5 to define r0 = max{r | y_0^{(r)} v_phi != 0} and to construct tensor product modules.
  • standard math Macdonald's theorem that monomial symmetric polynomials form a basis of the ring of symmetric polynomials, generalized to the monoid setting in Proposition 4.4.6.
    Section 4.4: underlies Theorems 4.4.8 and 4.4.9, which convert algebraic relations among phi(d_a) into existence of evaluation points alpha_i.
  • domain assumption The classification of finite-dimensional simple modules of equivariant map algebras (NSS12, Theorem 5.5).
    Section 3: used to prove Proposition 3.2.1. The main theorems in Section 5 do not rely on this, but the paper includes it as a preliminary characterization.
invented entities (1)
  • The auxiliary Lie algebra \tilde{L} = C[A x Z_{>=0}] tensor sl2 with derivation operators D_a
    purpose: A formal device in Section 4.3 to compute products e_{a1,0}...e_{ar,0} f_{0,1}^{(s)} in the enveloping algebra of the twisted loop algebra, via an evaluation homomorphism ev.
    This is a technical construction introduced for the proofs; it has no independent empirical status.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FOCEDNWH

@misc{pith2026250602379,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FOCEDNWH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.02379}
}
abstract

Twisted loop algebras of the second kind are infinite-dimensional Lie algebras that are constructed from a semisimple Lie algebra and an automorphism on it of order at most $2$. They are examples of equivariant map algebras. The finite-dimensional irreducible representations of an arbitrary equivariant map algebra have been classified by Neher--Savage--Senesi. In this paper, we classify the finite-dimensional irreducible representations of twisted loop algebras of the second kind in a more elementary way.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.02379 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. r = 1, classical type Diagram Constraints k • • 0 1 2 C ◦ · · · ◦ • ◦ · · · ◦ • 1 k − 1 k k + 1 l 0 l ≥ 2, 1 ≤ k ≤ l s(glk ⊕ gll−k+1) • • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 2 l − 1 l 2 l ≥ 3 C ⊕ so2l−1 ◦ ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 2 k − 1 k k + 1 l − 1 l 2 l ≥ 3, 2 ≤ k ≤ l so2k ⊕ so2(l−k)+1 • ◦ · · · ◦ • 0 1 l − 1 l 2 2 l ≥ 2 gll ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 k − 1 k k + 1 l − 1 l 2 2 l ≥ 2, 1 ≤ k < l sp2k ⊕ sp2(l−k) • ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. r = 1, exceptional type Diagram k • • ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ 0 1 4 2 3 5 6 C ⊕ so10 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ • 0 1 4 2 3 5 6 sl2 ⊕ sl6 ◦ • ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ 0 1 7 2 3 4 5 6 sl2 ⊕ so12 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ • 0 1 7 2 3 4 5 6 sl8 ◦◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ • ◦ 07 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 sl2 ⊕ e7 ◦• ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ 07 8 6 5 4 3 2 1 so16 ◦ • ◦ ◦ ◦ 0 1 2 3 4 2 sl2 ⊕ sp6 ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ • 0 1 2 3 4 2 so9 ◦ • ◦ 0 1 2 3 sl2 ⊕ sl2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. r = 2 Diagrams Constraints k • ◦ 0 1 4 ◦ ◦ 1 2 so3 • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 l − 1 l 2 2 ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ 1 l l + 1 2l l ≥ 2 so2l+1 • ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 2 l − 1 l 2 ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ 1 l − 1 l l + 1 2l − 1 l ≥ 3 sp2l ◦ ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ • 0 1 2 l − 1 l 2 ◦ · · · ◦ • ◦ · · · ◦ 1 l − 1 l l + 1 2l − 1 l ≥ 3 so2l • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 l − 1 l 2 2 ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ ◦ 1 l − 1 l l + 1 l ≥ 2 so2l+1 ◦ ◦ · · · ◦ • ◦ · · · ◦ ◦ 0 1 k − 1 k k + 1… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Appel and B

    A. Appel and B. Vlaar, Trigonometric K -matrices for finite-dimensional representations of quantum affine algebras, arXiv:2203.16503, 36 pp

    work page arXiv

  2. [2]

    Chari, Integrable representations of affine Lie-algebras, Invent

    V. Chari, Integrable representations of affine Lie-algebras, Invent. Math. 85 (1986), no. 2, 317--335

    work page 1986

  3. [3]

    Chari and A

    V. Chari and A. Pressley, A Guide to Quantum Groups, Corrected reprint of the 1994 original, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. xvi+651 pp

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Chari and A

    V. Chari and A. Pressley, Twisted quantum affine algebras, Comm. Math. Phys. 196 (1998), no. 2, 461--476

    work page 1998

  5. [5]

    Conner and N

    P. Conner and N. Guay, From twisted quantum loop algebras to twisted Yangians, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 11 (2015), Paper 040, 14 pp

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    V. G. Drinfeld, Hopf algebras and the quantum Yang-Baxter equation, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 283 (1985), no. 5, 1060--1064

    work page 1985

  7. [7]

    V. G. Drinfeld, Quantum groups, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians, Vol. 1, 2 (Berkeley, Calif., 1986), 798--820, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1987

    work page 1986

  8. [8]

    Eisenbud and J

    D. Eisenbud and J. D. Harris, The Geometry of Schemes, Grad. Texts in Math., 197, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000. x+294 pp

    work page 2000

Show all 30 references
  1. [9]

    Garland, The arithmetic theory of loop algebras, J

    H. Garland, The arithmetic theory of loop algebras, J. Algebra 53 (1978), no. 2, 480--551

    1978

  2. [10]

    Gautam and V

    S. Gautam and V. Toledano Laredo, Yangians and quantum loop algebras, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 19 (2013), no. 2, 271--336

    2013

  3. [11]

    Gow and A

    L. Gow and A. I. Molev, Representations of twisted q -Yangians, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 16 (2010), no. 3, 439--499

    2010

  4. [12]

    Guay and X

    N. Guay and X. Ma, From quantum loop algebras to Yangians, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 86 (2012), no. 3, 683--700

    2012

  5. [13]

    Guay and V

    N. Guay and V. Regelskis, Twisted Yangians for symmetric pairs of types B , C , D , Math. Z. 284 (2016), no. 1-2, 131--166

    2016

  6. [14]

    Ito and P

    T. Ito and P. Terwilliger, The augmented tridiagonal algebra, Kyushu J. Math. 64 (2010), no. 1, 81--144

    2010

  7. [15]

    V. G. Kac, Infinite-Dimensional Lie Algebras, Third edition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1990. xxii+400 pp

    1990

  8. [16]

    Kolb, Quantum symmetric Kac-Moody pairs, Adv

    S. Kolb, Quantum symmetric Kac-Moody pairs, Adv. Math. 267 (2014), 395--469

    2014

  9. [17]

    Kuniba, M

    A. Kuniba, M. Okado, and A. Yoneyama, Reflection K matrices associated with an Onsager coideal of U_p(A_ n-1 ^ (1) ) , U_p(B_n^ (1) ) , U_p(D_n^ (1) ) and U_p(D_ n+1 ^ (2) ) , J. Phys. A 52 (2019), no. 37, 375202, 27 pp

    2019

  10. [18]

    Kusano and M

    H. Kusano and M. Okado, Solution to the reflection equation related to the quantum group of type AII, Comm. Algebra 50 (2022), no. 8, 3608--3617

    2022

  11. [19]

    Kusano, M

    H. Kusano, M. Okado, and H. Watanabe, Kirillov-Reshetikhin modules and quantum K -matrices, Comm. Math. Phys. 405 (2024), no. 4, Paper No. 88, 27 pp

    2024

  12. [20]

    J. R. Li and T. Prze\' z dziecki, Boundary q -characters of evaluation modules for split quantum affine symmetric pairs, arXiv:2504.14042, 47 pp

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    K. Lu, W. Wang, and W. Zhang, Affine quantum groups and twisted Yangians in Drinfeld presentations, arXiv:2406.05067v2, 33 pp

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    I. G. Macdonald, Symmetric Functions and Hall Polynomials, Second edition, with contributions by A. Zelevinsky, Oxford Math. Monogr., Oxford Sci. Publ., The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1995. x+475 pp

    1995

  15. [23]

    A. I. Molev, É. Ragoucy, and P. Sorba, Coideal subalgebras in quantum affine algebras, Rev. Math. Phys. 15 (2003), no. 8, 789--822

    2003

  16. [24]

    Neher and A

    E. Neher and A. Savage, A survey of equivariant map algebras with open problems, Recent developments in algebraic and combinatorial aspects of representation theory, 165--182, Contemp. Math., 602, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2013

    2013

  17. [25]

    Neher, A

    E. Neher, A. Savage, and P. Senesi, Irreducible finite-dimensional representations of equivariant map algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 364 (2012), no. 5, 2619--2646

    2012

  18. [26]

    G. I. Ol'shanski , Twisted Yangians and infinite-dimensional classical Lie algebras, Quantum groups (Leningrad, 1990), 104--119, Lecture Notes in Math., 1510, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992

    1990

  19. [27]

    Onsager, Crystal statistics

    L. Onsager, Crystal statistics. I. A two-dimensional model with an order-disorder transition, Phys. Rev. (2) 65 (1944), 117--149

    1944

  20. [28]

    Roan, Onsager's algebra, loop algebra and chiral Potts model, MPIM Preprint Series 1991 (70), 30 pp

    S. Roan, Onsager's algebra, loop algebra and chiral Potts model, MPIM Preprint Series 1991 (70), 30 pp

    1991

  21. [29]

    J. V. Stokman, Generalized Onsager algebras, Algebr. Represent. Theory 23 (2020), no. 4, 1523--1541

    2020

  22. [30]

    D. B. Uglov and I. T. Ivanov, sl (N) Onsager's algebra and integrability, J. Statist. Phys. 82 (1996), no. 1-2, 87--113

    1996

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.