Braid group symmetries on Poisson algebras arising from quantum symmetric pairs

Jinfeng Song; Weinan Zhang

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 46 references

Braid group symmetries on Poisson algebras arising from quantum symmetric pairs

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that for every finite-type quantum symmetric pair, the rescaled integral form $U^\imath_{A'}$ is preserved by relative braid group symmetries and has an explicit PBW basis; passing to $q=1$, these symmetries become…

desk verdict Genuinely new finite-type results for the DCKP integral form, but a key generation lemma rests on an invertibility claim that is false as stated; fixable but currently not proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.09456 v1 pith:O4TGFSHQ submitted 2025-07-13 math.QA math.RTmath.SG

Jinfeng Song , Weinan Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.QAmath.RTmath.SG MSC 17B3717B63

keywords quantumsymmetricpairsi-quantumgroupsDCKPintegralformbraidgroupsymmetriesPBWbasesPoissonalgebrasdualPoisson-LieDubrovin-Ugagliabracket

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

For any finite-type quantum symmetric pair $(\mathbf U,\mathbf U^\imath)$, this paper seeks to prove that the De Concini\,–\,Kac\,–\,Procesi-type integral form $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$ is stable under the relative braid group symmetries $T_i$ and carries an explicit rescaled PBW basis. The reason to care is that the semiclassical limit of this integral form is the coordinate algebra of a Poisson homogeneous space $K^\perp\backslash G^*$, so these quantum-level structures become, at $q=1$, polynomial generators and Poisson automorphisms for that space. The paper carries out the necessary rank-by-rank checks and gives closed formulas for the induced Poisson brackets, recovering the Dubrovin\,–\,Ugaglia bracket in the type AI example. If the claims are right, they give a uniform, intrinsic route to braid symmetries and polynomial descriptions of Poisson structures associated with arbitrary symmetric pairs.

What carries the argument

The engine of the proof is the rescaled $q$-commutator $\{A,B\}_{q^a}=(AB-q^aBA)/(q-1)$, a $q$-deformed version of the Poisson bracket. Proposition 3.2 asserts that the integral form $\mathbf U^-_{A'}$ is generated from the simple root vectors by these operations alone, and Lemma 3.3 transfers this closure to $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$. Because the relative braid symmetries commute with rescaled $q$-commutators, Theorem 3.7 reduces to checking $T_i$ on the finite set of generators $B_i,k_i,F_j,E_j,K_j$; the rank-two cases are then verified by explicit formulas from Lemma 3.6 and the rank-one root vectors in Appendix A. The same rescaled commutator calculus, together with the Letzter projection, turns the PBW construction of $[\mathrm{LYZ24}]$ into an $A'$-basis and ultimately into polynomial generators of the Poisson algebra.

What would settle it

Check the missing coefficient check in a concrete rank-two case: take a Cartan datum from Table 1 with $-a_{ij}>\varepsilon_i$, write the corresponding root vector $F_\beta$ using the cited identity of $[\mathrm{Su}23]$, Theorem 3.5, as $cM$ with $M$ a rescaled $q$-commutator monomial, and test whether $c$ lies in $A'=\mathbb{Z}[q^{\pm1/2},(1+q)^{-1},[\varepsilon_i]!^{-1}]$. If any such $c$ has a denominator not inverted by $A'$, Proposition 3.2 and the proof of Theorem 3.7 collapse; if every rank-two coefficient in Lemma 3.6 and Appendix A lies in $A'$, the missing check is supplied and the argument stands.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the DCKP-type integral form is not merely a construction but a robust algebraic object: Theorem 3.7 shows that for every $i\in I^\circ$ the relative braid symmetries $T_i$ and their inverses send $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$ to itself, and Theorem 3.11 exhibits an $A'$-basis of $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$ consisting of monomials $B^a F^c_\bullet E^d_\bullet K^\mu$ built from the rescaled root vectors. In the semiclassical limit these results become: the Poisson algebra $P$ (an integral model of $C[K^\perp\backslash G^*]$) is a polynomial ring over its torus part $P^0$, generated by the images of the root vectors; and the braid symmetries descend to Poisson automorphisms $\sigma^\imath_i$ satisfying the braid relations of the relative Weyl group. In the quasi-split case, the paper identifies $\sigma^\imath_i$ geometrically as the unique Poisson automorphism lifting the known symmetry $\sigma_{r_i}$ of $G^*$ through an embedding of $K^\perp\backslash G^*$ into the fixed locus of a symmetric Poisson group involution $\Theta$. Finally, Section 5 writes the Poisson brackets explicitly in several low-rank examples.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Proposition 3.2's assertion that the root vectors of the integral form can be obtained from simple root vectors by rescaled $q$-commutators with coefficients in the localized ring $A'$; the proof cites an external identity and says the only denominators are quantum factorials that are 'easily checked' to be invertible in $A'$, without displaying that check. If any of those coefficients leaves $A'$, the finite-generation step fails, and with it the proof that the braid symmetries preserve the integral form.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For every finite-type quantum symmetric pair, the braid group $\mathrm{Br}(W_\bullet)\rtimes \mathrm{Br}(W^\circ)$ acts on $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$ by integral algebra automorphisms, upgrading a previously function-field-level action to an integral one.
The rescaled PBW monomials $B^a F^c_\bullet E^d_\bullet K^\mu$ form an $A'$-basis of $\mathbf U^\imath_{A'}$, so the integral form is finitely generated over $A'$ by the root vectors appearing in the basis.
The semiclassical limit $P$ is a polynomial algebra over $Z'[Y^\imath]$ with generators indexed by $R^+(w_0)\sqcup R^+_\bullet$, and its relative braid group action passes to Poisson automorphisms of $K^\perp\backslash G^*$.
In the quasi-split case the induced Poisson automorphism $\sigma^\imath_i$ is the unique lift of the geometric braid symmetry $\sigma_{r_i}$ on $G^*$ through the embedding $\psi$, giving explicit formulas on $H^{\theta 0}\times U^-$.
For type AI the explicit bracket on $P$ reproduces the Dubrovin\,–\,Ugaglia bracket, showing the construction unifies existing sporadic examples.

Reading between the lines

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

One immediate test the paper leaves open is whether the localization $A'$ can be removed in quasi-split cases: if the integrality proof can be run over $A=\mathbb{Z}[q^{\pm1/2}]$, the braid symmetries would survive without inverting $(1+q)$ or the quantum Cartan integers, and Remark 3.8 indicates this is expected.
The polynomial generators and braid automorphisms are natural ingredients for a cluster structure on $K^\perp\backslash G^*$; the paper lists cluster realization as future work, and a concrete next step would be to check whether the rescaled PBW generators are cluster variables in the type AI cluster structure of $U^\imath$.
The $\Theta$-fixed-locus description strongly suggests that for non-quasi-split types the algebraic Poisson automorphisms $\sigma^\imath_i$ should also admit a geometric description via a symmetric Poisson group embedding, with the quasi-split theorem serving as the first instance; the paper does not claim this.
Following the DCKP analogy, the braid symmetries and the integral form should allow the Poisson algebra $P$ to be identified with a central subalgebra of an $\imath$-quantum group at roots of unity; the authors announce this only as a sequel, so it is a conjecture rather than a consequence.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's my take on Song-Zhang. The paper does something genuinely new: it attacks the DCKP-type integral form for ıquantum groups uniformly for all finite types, establishes invariance under relative braid symmetries, a rescaled PBW basis, and then gets Poisson automorphisms and explicit brackets on K^⊥\G^*. The quasi-split geometric description (Theta-fixed locus) and the examples (Dubrovin-Ugaglia, AIV2, AIII3, CI2) are concrete and useful, and the authors are honest that they work over the localized ring A' rather than A. That part is good.

But there is a load-bearing gap. Proposition 3.2 claims that the constants c coming from [Su23, Thm 3.5] lie in A', on the stated grounds that the only denominators are [−a_{ij}]_i!, which are 'easily checked to be invertible in A''. That check is actually false. In type B_n, take i=n−1, j=n: a_{n−1,n}=−2, ε_{n−1}=1, so [−a_{ij}]_i! = [2]_1! = q+q^{−1}. The ring A' = Z[q^{±1/2}, (1+q)^{−1}, [ε_k]!^{−1}] does not invert q+q^{−1}: at q=i it vanishes while none of the localized factors do. So the stated reason fails. The same denominator appears in the paper's own Appendix A.6 for type BII, where B_{β_n} is defined by dividing a rescaled q-commutator by q+q^{−1} and then asserted to lie in U^ı_{A'}. No divisibility argument is given.

This is not a cosmetic issue. Proposition 3.2 drives the finite generation statement (Prop 3.5) used in the proof of the main integrality theorem (3.7) and the PBW basis (3.11). The theorems may still be true — the fix is probably to enlarge the localization to invert all [m]_i! for the relevant m, or to prove the numerators are divisible — but as written the proof does not establish the claimed result. The reader's conditional verdict is fair, but I'd call the gap sharper than 'clarification needed': it is a concrete false claim.

Worth sending to a referee? Yes. The results are important enough and the gap is likely patchable. But a referee should insist on seeing the constants c or a corrected localization before the paper is accepted.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the DCKP-type integral form U^ı_{A'} of an ıquantum group for arbitrary finite type. Its main theorems assert that the relative braid group symmetries T_i preserve U^ı_{A'} (Theorem 3.7) and that the rescaled monomials B^a F^c_• E^d_• K^μ form an A'-basis for U^ı_{A'} (Theorem 3.11). The authors then pass to the semiclassical limit q^{1/2} ↦ 1, obtaining a polynomial Poisson algebra P with a braid group action, a Poisson isomorphism with the coordinate algebra of K^⊥\G^*, and a geometric description of the symmetries in the quasi-split case. Explicit Poisson brackets are computed for several examples, including the Dubrovin–Ugaglia bracket.

Significance. These are natural and potentially important results: they extend the De Concini–Procesi integral-form framework to quantum symmetric pairs and connect it with Poisson geometry, cluster theory, and known Poisson structures such as the Dubrovin–Ugaglia brackets. The overall strategy is attractive: establish finite generation of U^ı_{A'} by rescaled q-commutators, reduce integrality of T_i to finitely many generator checks, and then specialize to Poisson automorphisms. The paper is also explicit about correcting a formula in [WZ23] for type CII4. However, the proof contains a genuine ring-theoretic gap in the local generation step, and the same obstruction reappears in the Appendix's rank-one verification; the main theorems are therefore not fully established as written.

major comments (2)

[§3.2, proof of Proposition 3.2] The assertion that the constants c obtained from [Su23, Theorem 3.5] lie in A′ because the denominators [−a_{ij}]_i! are invertible in A′ is false. In type B_n, take i = n−1 and j = n; then ε_{n−1} = 1 and a_{n−1,n} = −2, so [−a_{n−1,n}]_{n−1}! = [2]_1! = q + q^{−1}. At q = i this element vanishes, while each factor that is inverted in the definition of A′ in Section 2.3 — namely (1+q), [1]_1!, and [2]_2! = q^2 + q^{−2} — is nonzero at q = i. Hence q + q^{−1} is not a unit in A′, so the stated reason for c ∈ A′ is invalid. Since Proposition 3.2 is used in Propositions 3.4 and 3.5, and these provide the finite-generation input for Theorems 3.7 and 3.11, this is a load-bearing gap. The theorems may still be true, but the proof as written does not establish them.
[Appendix A.6–A.7] The rank-one verification that the root vectors B_β belong to U^ı_{A′} also divides by q + q^{−1}, which is not a unit of A′. For example, in type BII the formula for B_{β_n} is reduced to {F_n, B_{β_{n−1}}}_{q^2}/(q + q^{−1}), and the text concludes membership in U^ı_{A′} by Lemma 3.3 and Proposition 2.6. Lemma 3.3 only provides closure under rescaled q-commutators, i.e., division by q − 1; it does not justify division by q + q^{−1}. Since A′ does not contain (q + q^{−1})^{−1}, the asserted membership is not established. This is the base case used in Proposition 3.10 and hence feeds directly into Theorem 3.11.

minor comments (4)

[Title and §1.5] There are spacing and capitalization typos: 'P airs' in the title and 'F uture work' in Section 1.5; in Section 2.3, 'surjecitve' should be 'surjective'.
[§3.2] The displayed rescaled generator formula contains an apparent typo: the denominator should involve q_{i_k} − q_{i_k}^{−1}, not q_{i_k} − q_{i_k}.
[§2.3] Since the invertibility of q-binomial denominators is central to Proposition 3.2, it would be helpful to state explicitly which factors [m]_i! are invertible in A′ and which are not.
[Table 2 and Appendix A] The shorthand notation s_{1⋯n⋯1} and similar expressions is used before being explained; a one-sentence definition would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main theorems are derived from explicit formulas and independent prior results, not from their own conclusions; the lone flagged issue is an unverified invertibility claim in Proposition 3.2, which is a correctness gap rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain for Theorem 3.7 and Theorem 3.11 is not circular. The integral form U^ı_{A'} = U^ı ∩ U_{A'} is defined independently, the relative braid symmetries T_i come from [WZ23] with explicit formulas, and the proof checks T_i on the finite generating set supplied by Proposition 3.5. Proposition 3.5 is proved through the Letzter map and Proposition 3.2, which invokes [Su23, Theorem 3.5] to express each PBW root vector as cM with M built from rescaled q-commutators. This is an external input, not a restatement of the target result. Self-citations such as [WZ23], [So24b], and [LYZ24] are load-bearing but they are prior independent constructions (published or separately argued) rather than conclusions assumed into existence by the present proof. The one serious defect is in Proposition 3.2: the proof claims that 'the only denominator shown in the equation is [−a_{ij}]_i! for i ≠ j ∈ I which is easily checked to be invertible invertible in A′.' That check is not merely omitted; it is false for type BII. For i=n−1, j=n one has a_{n−1,n}=−2 and ε_{n−1}=1, so [−a_{ij}]_i! = [2]_1! = q+q^{−1}, which vanishes at q=i and is not a unit in A′ = Z[q^{±1/2}, (1+q)^{−1}, [ε_k]!^{−1} | k∈I]; the inverted factors [ε_n]! = [2]_2! = q^2+q^{−2} do not repair this. Since Proposition 3.2 feeds into finite generation (Proposition 3.5) and from there into the integrality reduction in Theorem 3.7, the written proof has a load-bearing gap. This is a correctness risk, not a circularity: no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no definition is equivalent to the theorem, and no self-citation is used in place of proof. The central claims may still be true through other cancellations, but the paper as written does not establish the disputed unit claim.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new postulates or entities. It depends on the standard framework of quantum groups and quantum symmetric pairs, plus several technical theorems from the prior literature (especially [WZ23], [So24b], [LYZ24], [Su23]). The only hand-chosen parameters are the sign constants c_i, fixed by a convention, and the localization A' which enlarges the coefficient ring. These are inputs rather than fitted outputs.

free parameters (1)

c_i = c_i = -1 if τ i = i or w•(α_i) = α_i (see (2.13))
The sign parameters c_i ∈ {±1} define the ıquantum group U^ι. The paper fixes them by (2.12)-(2.13); the main results are stated for this normalization.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The relative braid group symmetries T_i exist as automorphisms of U^ι for arbitrary finite type and satisfy the formulas in Proposition 2.8.
Cited from [WZ23]; used throughout Section 3 to check integrality on generators.
domain assumption The semiclassical limit C ⊗_{A'} U^ι_{A'} is canonically isomorphic to the Poisson algebra C[K^⊥\G*].
Cited from [So24b, Theorem 1]; identifies the Poisson variety for Theorem 4.3 and the geometric statements in Section 4.
domain assumption There is a PBW basis for U^ι over C(q^{1/2}) with root vectors B_β as in [LYZ24, Section 3-4].
Used in Theorem 3.11 for linear independence and in Proposition 3.10 for integrality of root vectors.
domain assumption Sugawara's Theorem 3.5 expresses each rescaled root vector as cM with c ∈ A' and M a product of q-commutators in the F_i.
Used to prove Proposition 3.2, which underlies the finite generation statement Proposition 3.5.
domain assumption De Concini-Procesi integrality and Poisson structure results for U_A (Proposition 2.11, (2.26)).
Standard results from [DCP93]; used to define the semiclassical limit and bracket (2.24).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Braid group symmetries on Poisson algebras arising from quantum symmetric pairs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/O4TGFSHQ

@misc{pith2026250709456,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Braid group symmetries on Poisson algebras arising from quantum symmetric pairs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/O4TGFSHQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.09456}
}

abstract

Let $(\mathrm{U},\mathrm{U}^\imath)$ be the quantum symmetric pair of arbitrary finite type and $G^*$ be the associated dual Poisson-Lie group. Generalizing the work of De Concini and Procesi, the first author introduced an integral form for the $\imath$quantum group $\mathrm{U}^\imath$ and its semi-classical limit was shown to be the coordinate algebra for a Poisson homogeneous space of $G^*$. In this paper, we establish (relative) braid group symmetries and PBW bases on this integral form of $\mathrm{U}^\imath$. By taking the semi-classical limit, we obtain braid group symmetries and polynomial generators on the associated Poisson algebra. These symmetries further allow us to describe the Poisson brackets explicitly. Examples of such Poisson structures include Dubrovin-Ugaglia Poisson brackets.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages

[2]

Berenstein and J

A. Berenstein and J. Greenstein, Double canonical bases , Adv. Math. 316 (2017), 381–468

work page 2017
[1]

Appel and B

A. Appel and B. Vlaar, Universal k -matrices for quantum Kac-Moody algebras, Represent. Theory 26 (2022), 764--824

work page 2022
[3]

Bao and J

H. Bao and J. Song, Symmetric subgroup schemes, Frobenius splittings, and quantum symmetric pairs , arXiv:2212.13426 https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.13426

arXiv
[4]

P. P. Boalch, Stokes matrices, Poisson Lie groups and Frobenius manifolds , Invent. Math. 146 (2001), no. 3, 479–506

work page 2001
[5]

Boalch, G-bundles, isomonodromy and quantum Weyl groups, International Mathematics Research Notices, 2002(22): 1129–1166, 2002

Philip P. Boalch, G-bundles, isomonodromy and quantum Weyl groups, International Mathematics Research Notices, 2002(22): 1129–1166, 2002

work page 2002
[6]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, A new approach to Kazhdan-Lusztig theory of type B via quantum symmetric pairs , Ast\'erisque 402 , 2018, vii+134pp

work page 2018
[7]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, Canonical bases arising from quantum symmetric pairs , Invent. Math. 213 (3) (2018), 1099--1177

2018
[8]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, Canonical bases arising from quantum symmetric pairs of Kac-Moody type , Compositio Math. 157 (2021), 1507--1537

work page 2021

Show all 46 references

[9]

De Concini and V

C. De Concini and V. G. Kac, Representations of quantum groups at roots of 1 , in: Progress in Mathematics 92 , Birkhäuser Boston, 1990, 471–506

1990
[10]

De Concini, V

C. De Concini, V. G. Kac, and C. Procesi, Quantum coadjoint action , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 5 (1992), no. 1, 151–189

1992
[11]

De Concini, V

C. De Concini, V. G. Kac, and C. Procesi, Some quantum analogs of solvable Lie groups , arXiv:hep-th/9308138 https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9308138

arXiv
[12]

De Concini and C

C. De Concini and C. Procesi, Quantum groups , D-modules, Representation Theory, and Quantum Groups: Lectures given at the 2nd Session of the Centro Internazionale Matematico Estivo (C.I.M.E.) held in Venezia, Italy, June 12--20, 1992

1992
[13]

Dobson, Braid group actions for quantum symmetric pairs of type AIII/AIV , J

L. Dobson, Braid group actions for quantum symmetric pairs of type AIII/AIV , J. Algebra 564 (2020), 151--198

2020
[14]

Dobson and S

L. Dobson and S. Kolb, Factorisation of quasi K-matrices for quantum symmetric pairs , Selecta Math. (N.S.) 25 (2019), Paper No. 63, 53 pp

2019
[15]

Dubrovin, Geometry of 2d topological field theories , arXiv:hep-th/9407018 https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9407018, 1994

B. Dubrovin, Geometry of 2d topological field theories , arXiv:hep-th/9407018 https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9407018, 1994

1994 arXiv
[16]

Jantzen, Lectures on quantum groups , Grad

J.C. Jantzen, Lectures on quantum groups , Grad. Studies in Math. 6 , Amer. Math. Soc., Providence (1996)

1996
[17]

Kolb, Quantum symmetric Kac-Moody pairs , Adv

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

2014
[18]

Kolb and J

S. Kolb and J. Pellegrini, Braid group actions on coideal subalgebras of quantized enveloping algebras , J. Algebra 336 (2011), 395--416

2011
[19]

S. Kolb, M. Yakimov, Defining relations of quantum symmetric pair coideal subalgebras , Forum of Mathematics, Sigma, 2021

2021
[20]

Letzter, Coideal subalgebras and quantum symmetric pairs , New directions in Hopf algebras (Cambridge), MSRI publications, 43 (2002), Cambridge Univ

G. Letzter, Coideal subalgebras and quantum symmetric pairs , New directions in Hopf algebras (Cambridge), MSRI publications, 43 (2002), Cambridge Univ. Press, 117--166

2002
[21]

Letzter, Cartan subalgebras for quantum symmetric pair coideals , Represent

G. Letzter, Cartan subalgebras for quantum symmetric pair coideals , Represent. Theory 23 (2019), 99--153

2019
[22]

Lu and X

M. Lu and X. Pan Dual canonical bases of quantum groups and quantum groups , arXiv:2504.19073 https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.19073
[23]

Lu and W

M. Lu and W. Wang, Hall algebras and quantum symmetric pairs II: reflection functors , Commun. Math. Phys. 381 (2021), 799--855

2021
[24]

Lu and W

M. Lu and W. Wang, Hall algebras and quantum symmetric pairs I: foundations , Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 124 (2022), 1--82

2022
[25]

Lu and W

M. Lu and W. Wang, Braid group symmetries on quasi-split quantum groups via Hall algebras , Selecta Math. 28 (2022), Article number 84

2022
[26]

Lusztig, Finite-dimensional Hopf algebras arising from quantized universal enveloping algebra, J

G. Lusztig, Finite-dimensional Hopf algebras arising from quantized universal enveloping algebra, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), 257--296

1990
[27]

Lusztig, Canonical bases arising from quantized enveloping algebras, J

G. Lusztig, Canonical bases arising from quantized enveloping algebras, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 3 (1990), 447--498

1990
[28]

Lusztig, Quivers, perverse sheaves, and quantized enveloping algebras , J

G. Lusztig, Quivers, perverse sheaves, and quantized enveloping algebras , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 4 (1991), 365--421

1991
[29]

auser Classics, Reprint of the 1993 Edition, Birkh\

G. Lusztig, Introduction to quantum groups , Modern Birkh\"auser Classics, Reprint of the 1993 Edition, Birkh\"auser, Boston, 2010

1993
[30]

Lusztig, Hecke algebras with unequal parameters , CRM Monograph Series 18 , Amer

G. Lusztig, Hecke algebras with unequal parameters , CRM Monograph Series 18 , Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2003, arXiv:0208154v2 https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0208154

2003 arXiv
[31]

M. Lu, R. Yang, and W. Zhang PBW basis for quantum groups , arXiv:2407.13127 https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.13127

arXiv
[32]

Molev, E

A. Molev, E. Ragoucy, Symmetries and invariants of Twisted Quantum Algebra and Associated Poisson Algebra , Rev. Math. Phys. 20 (2008), 173-198

2008
[33]

Qin, Dual canonical bases and quantum cluster algebras , arXiv:2003.13674 https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.13674

F. Qin, Dual canonical bases and quantum cluster algebras , arXiv:2003.13674 https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.13674

2003 arXiv
[34]

Shen, Cluster Nature of Quantum Groups , arXiv:2209.06258 https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.06258

L. Shen, Cluster Nature of Quantum Groups , arXiv:2209.06258 https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.06258

arXiv
[35]

Shen, Duals of semisimple Poisson--Lie groups and cluster theory of moduli spaces of G -local systems , Int

L. Shen, Duals of semisimple Poisson--Lie groups and cluster theory of moduli spaces of G -local systems , Int. Math. Res. Not., Vol. 2022, No. 18, pp. 14295--14318

2022
[36]

Song, Cluster realisation of quantum groups of type AI , Proc

J. Song, Cluster realisation of quantum groups of type AI , Proc. London Math. Soc. 129 (2024), no. 4, Paper No. e12636, 48 pp

2024
[37]

Song, Quantum duality principle and quantum symmetric pairs , arXiv:2403.05167 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05167

J. Song, Quantum duality principle and quantum symmetric pairs , arXiv:2403.05167 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05167

arXiv
[38]

a user Classics, Birkh \

T. A. Springer, Linear Algebraic Groups , 2nd ed., Modern Birkh \"a user Classics, Birkh \"a user Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2009

2009
[39]

Sugawara, Quantum dilogarithm identities arising from the product formula for the universal R-matrix of quantum affine algebras , Publ

M. Sugawara, Quantum dilogarithm identities arising from the product formula for the universal R-matrix of quantum affine algebras , Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ 59 (2023), no. 4, 769--819

2023
[40]

Ugaglia, On a Poisson structure on the space of Stokes matrices , International Mathematics Research Notices 9 (1999), 473–-493

M. Ugaglia, On a Poisson structure on the space of Stokes matrices , International Mathematics Research Notices 9 (1999), 473–-493

1999
[41]

Wang, Quantum symmetric pairs , In Proceedings of ICM, Vol

W. Wang, Quantum symmetric pairs , In Proceedings of ICM, Vol. 4 (2023), 3080--3102. EMS Press, Berlin

2023
[42]

Wang and W

W. Wang and W. Zhang, An intrinsic approach to relative braid group symmetries on quantum groups , Proc. London Math. Soc. 127 (2023), 1338--1423

2023
[43]

Wang and W

W. Wang and W. Zhang, Relative braid group symmetries on modified quantum groups and their modules , in preparation
[44]

Xu, Dirac submanifolds and Poisson involutions , Ann

P. Xu, Dirac submanifolds and Poisson involutions , Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Supér. 36 (2003), 403--430

2003
[45]

Watanabe, Classical weight modules over quantum groups , J

H. Watanabe, Classical weight modules over quantum groups , J. Algebra 578 (2021), 241--302

2021
[46]

Zhang, H

Y. Zhang, H. Lin, and H. Zhang, RTT presentation of coideal subalgebra of quantized enveloping algebra of type\,CI , arXiv:2501.13305 https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.13305v1

arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [2]

Berenstein and J

A. Berenstein and J. Greenstein, Double canonical bases , Adv. Math. 316 (2017), 381–468

work page 2017

[2] [1]

Appel and B

A. Appel and B. Vlaar, Universal k -matrices for quantum Kac-Moody algebras, Represent. Theory 26 (2022), 764--824

work page 2022

[3] [3]

Bao and J

H. Bao and J. Song, Symmetric subgroup schemes, Frobenius splittings, and quantum symmetric pairs , arXiv:2212.13426 https://arxiv.org/abs/2212.13426

arXiv

[4] [4]

P. P. Boalch, Stokes matrices, Poisson Lie groups and Frobenius manifolds , Invent. Math. 146 (2001), no. 3, 479–506

work page 2001

[5] [5]

Boalch, G-bundles, isomonodromy and quantum Weyl groups, International Mathematics Research Notices, 2002(22): 1129–1166, 2002

Philip P. Boalch, G-bundles, isomonodromy and quantum Weyl groups, International Mathematics Research Notices, 2002(22): 1129–1166, 2002

work page 2002

[6] [6]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, A new approach to Kazhdan-Lusztig theory of type B via quantum symmetric pairs , Ast\'erisque 402 , 2018, vii+134pp

work page 2018

[7] [7]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, Canonical bases arising from quantum symmetric pairs , Invent. Math. 213 (3) (2018), 1099--1177

2018

[8] [8]

Bao and W

H. Bao and W. Wang, Canonical bases arising from quantum symmetric pairs of Kac-Moody type , Compositio Math. 157 (2021), 1507--1537

work page 2021