SPRINGER’S WEYL GROUP REPRESENTATION VIA LOCALIZATION

arXiv:1505.06404v3 [math.AG] 12 Feb 2017

JIM CARRELL AND KIUMARS KAVEH

Abstract. Let G denote a reductive algebraic group over C and x a nilpotent element
of its Lie algebra g. The Springer variety Bx is the closed subvariety of the flag variety
B of G parameterizing the Borel subalgebras of g containing x. It has the remarkable
property that the Weyl group W of G admits a representation on the cohomology of
Bx even though W rarely acts on Bx itself. Well-known constructions of this action
due to Springer et al use technical machinery from algebraic geometry. The purpose of
this note is to describe an elementary approach that gives this action when x is what
we call parabolic-surjective. The idea is to use localization to construct an action of W
on the equivariant cohomology algebra HS∗ (Bx ), where S is a certain algebraic subtorus
of G. This action descends to H ∗ (Bx ) via the forgetful map and gives the desired
representation. The parabolic-surjective case includes all nilpotents of type A and, more
generally, all nilpotents for which it is known that W acts on HS∗ (Bx ) for some torus S
(see [K-P] and [G-McP]). Our result is deduced from a general theorem describing when
a group action on the cohomology of the fixed point set of a torus action on a space lifts
to the full cohomology algebra of the space.

1. Introduction
Let G be a reductive linear algebraic group over C with Lie algebra g, and fix a maximal
torus T and a Borel subgroup B of G such that T ⊂ B. The flag variety B = G/B of
G will be viewed as the variety of all Borel subgroups of G or, equivalently, as the variety
of all Borel subalgebras of g. Let W = NG (T )/T be the Weyl group of the pair (G, T ),
and recall that W acts topologically on B. Thus the cohomology algebra H ∗ (B) admits
a representation as a graded W -module, which is well-known to be isomorphic with the
+
graded W -algebra C[t]/IW
, the coinvariant algebra of W . Here t is the Lie algebra of T
+
and IW is the ideal in C[t] generated by the nonconstant homogeneous W -invariants. Note:
throughout this paper, H ∗ (Y ) will denote the standard cohomology algebra of a space Y
with complex coefficients.
A celebrated theorem of T. A. Springer [Spr1, Spr2] says that if x is a nilpotent element
of g and Bx is the Springer variety associated to x, namely the closed subvariety of B
consisting of all Borel subalgebras of g containing x, then there is a graded C-algebra
representation of W on H ∗ (Bx ) so that the cohomology restriction map i∗x : H ∗ (B) →
H ∗ (Bx ) associated to the inclusion ix : Bx ֒→ B is W -equivariant (see [H-S] for the proof of
W -equivariance). As remarked often, the existence of this representation is quite surprising
because W itself does not usually act on Bx , exceptions being when x = 0 or x is regular
in g, and the usual definitions require a lot of technical machinery. Subsequent definitions
involve either replacing H ∗ (Bx ) with an isomorphic algebra on which W is known to act (cf.
[Kraft, D-P, JC1]) or replacing Bx with a space having both a W -action and isomorphic
cohomology algebra (cf. [Ross, Slo, Treu]).
Date: February 14, 2017
AMS Subject Classification: 14N45, 14NF43, 55N91.
1

Our plan is to give a simple new construction of Springer’s representation when x is a
nilpotent element of g which is what we call parabolic-surjective. We call a nilpotent x ∈ g
parabolic if it is regular in a Levi subalgebra l of g, and we say x is parabolic-surjective
if in addition the cohomology restriction map i∗x is surjective. The key idea is to exploit
the fact that in the parabolic-surjective case, there exists subtorus S of G acting on Bx so
that (Bx )S is stable under W so localization and the parabolic-surjective condition can be
used to obtain an C[s]-module action of W on the torus equivariant cohomology HS∗ (Bx )
descending to an action on H ∗ (Bx ) which turns out to coincide with Springer’s action.
Recently, the existence of this W -action on HS∗ (Bx ) was established by finding a geometric realization of Spec(HS∗ (Bn )): see [K-P] for the general parabolic-surjective setting and
[G-McP] for x of type A. We note that although [G-McP] only treats the type A case, their
argument is valid for all parabolic-surjective x ∈ g fo all g. The paper [A-H] establishes this
action by employing Tanisaki’s presentation of H ∗ (Bx ) in type A.
We now state the main result which will give Springer’s action for parabolic-surjective x
by first obtaining it for HS∗ (Bx ).
Theorem 1.1. Let Y be a projective variety with vanishing odd cohomology. Also suppose
that we have actions of an algebraic torus S and a finite group W on Y and these two actions
commute with each other. Let X be an S-stable subvariety of Y such that the cohomology
restriction map i∗ : H ∗ (Y ) → H ∗ (X) is surjective, where i : X ֒→ Y is the inclusion. Then
if W acts on H ∗ (X S ) so that the cohomology restriction map (iS )∗ : H ∗ (Y S ) → H ∗ (X S )
induced by the inclusion iS : X S ֒→ Y S is W-equivariant, then W also acts on HS∗ (X) by
graded W-algebra C[s]-module isomorphisms. Moreover, the natural map HS∗ (X) → H ∗ (X)
induces a representation of W on the graded algebra H ∗ (X) compatible with its action on
H ∗ (Y ) such that all the maps in the following commutative diagram are W-equivariant:
(1)

HS∗ (Y )

H ∗ (Y )

ι∗

i∗

/ H ∗ (X)
S

/ H ∗ (X).

In the above diagram, ι∗ is the map on equivariant cohomology induced by i : X ֒→ Y .
The proof, given in the next section, is an application of the localization theorem. The
reader can easily reformulate this result as a statement involving topological torus actions.
In the final section, we will verify the above assertions about parabolic-surjective Springer
varieties.
Acknowledgement We would like to thank Shrawan Kumar for useful comments and
Megumi Harada for pointing out the paper [A-H].
2. proof of the main theorem
We will begin by reviewing some facts about equivariant cohomology. Excellent references
for the facts below are [A-B, Brion]. Recall that all cohomology is over C. Let Y be a complex
projective variety with vanishing odd cohomology admitting a nontrivial action (S, Y ) by
an algebraic torus S ∼
= (C∗ )ℓ . In particular, the fixed point set Y S is nontrivial. Recall that
the S-equivariant cohomology algebra HS∗ (Y ) of Y is defined as the cohomology algebra
H ∗ (YS ) of the Borel space YS = (Y × E)/S, where E is a contractible space with a free
S-action and S acts diagonally on the product. The projection Y × E → E induces a map
YS = (Y × E)/S → E/S which in turn induces an H ∗ (E/S)-module structure on HS∗ (Y ).
2

On the other hand, the inclusion νY : Y ֒→ YS along a fibre gives a map from HS∗ (Y ) to the
ordinary cohomology H ∗ (Y ). Moreover, there is a natural identification H ∗ (E/S) ∼
= C[s],
where s = Lie(S). Note that by the Kunneth formula, HS∗ (Y S ) = C[s] ⊗ H ∗ (Y S ). When
HS∗ (Y ) is a free C[s]-module, the action (S, Y ) is said to be equivariantly formal. It is wellknown that equivariant formality is implied by the vanishing of odd cohomology of Y . The
proof of our main result is based on the following well-known result, the first assertion of
which is a special case of the localization theorem.
Theorem 2.1. If (S, Y ) is equivariantly formal, then the inclusion mapping jY : Y S ֒→ Y
induces an injection (jY )∗S : HS∗ (Y ) → HS∗ (Y S ). Moreover, the map (νY )∗ fits into an exact
sequence
(2)

(νY )∗

0 → C[s]+ HS∗ (Y ) → HS∗ (Y ) −−−−→ H ∗ (Y ) → 0,

where C[s]+ is the augmentation ideal, generated by all the nonconstant homogeneous polynomials.
We now prove Theorem 1.1. Assume that W is a finite group acting on Y such that the
action (W, Y ) commutes with (S, Y ). Then W acts linearly on both H ∗ (Y ) and H ∗ (Y S ).
Furthermore, it acts on HS∗ (Y ) and HS∗ (Y S ) as C[s]-module isomorphisms so that the map
jY∗ : HS∗ (Y ) → HS∗ (Y S ) induced by the inclusion jY : Y S ֒→ Y is a W-equivariant C[s]module injection. Let X be an S-stable subvariety of Y such that the cohomology restriction
map i∗ : H ∗ (Y ) → H ∗ (X) is surjective.
Since W acts on H ∗ (X S ) and the restriction map H ∗ (Y S ) → H ∗ (X S ) is W-equivariant,
W also acts on HS∗ (X S ) as a group of C[s]-module isomorphisms so that the natural map
µ : HS∗ (Y S ) → HS∗ (X S ) is a W-equivariant C[s]-module homomorphism. Now consider the
commutative diagram
(3)

HS∗ (Y )

ι∗

∗
jY


HS∗ (Y S )

/ H ∗ (X)
S
∗
jX

µ


/ H ∗ (X S )
S

We will define the action of W on HS∗ (X) by imposing the requirement that ι∗ be a W-module
homomorphism. To show this action is well-defined, it suffices to show that the kernel of
ι∗ is a W-submodule. Suppose then that ι∗ (a) = 0. By assumption, H ∗ (Y ) → H ∗ (X)
is surjective and thus X also has vanishing odd cohomology. It follows that (S, X) is
∗
equivariantly formal and hence jX
is injective. Thus to show ι∗ (w · a) = 0 for any w ∈ W,
∗ ∗
it suffices to show that jX
ι (w · a) = 0. But
∗ ∗
∗ ∗
jX
ι (w · a) = µjY∗ (w · a) = w · µjY∗ (a) = wjX
ι (a) = 0,

since µjY∗ is a W-module homomorphism. Thus, W acts on HS∗ (X) as claimed. It follows
∗
from this argument that jX
is W-equivariant. To show that W acts on H ∗ (X), consider the
exact sequence (2) for X. As above, we may define the W-action by requiring that (νX )∗ be
equivariant. It suffices to show its kernel is W-stable. But if (νX )∗ (a) = 0, then a = f b for
some f ∈ C[s]+ and b ∈ HS∗ (X). Thus,
w · a = w · f b = f (w · b) ∈ C[s]+ HS∗ (X) = ker(νX )∗ .
Finally, we remark that the above definitions make the diagram (1) commutative.
3



If one omits the assumption that cohomology restriction map i∗ : H ∗ (Y ) → H ∗ (X) is
surjective, the best one can hope for is that W acts on the image i∗ (H ∗ (Y )). The following
result gives a sufficient condition for W to act in this case.
Theorem 2.2. Assume that the setup in Theorem 1.1 holds except for the assumption
that i∗ : H ∗ (Y ) → H ∗ (X) is surjective, and, in addition, assume also that H ∗ (X) has
vanishing odd cohomology. Then there exists an action of W on ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) by C[s]-module
isomorphisms. Moreover, if ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) is free of rank dim i∗ (H ∗ (Y )), then the action of W
on ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) descends to i∗ (H ∗ (Y )) so that the cohomology restriction map i∗ : H ∗ (Y ) →
i∗ (H ∗ (Y )) is W-equivariant.
Proof. For the first assertion, we have to show that the kernel of ι∗ is W-invariant. Since
∗
H ∗ (X) has vanishing odd cohomology, jX
is injective, so this follows from the argument
above. Next, note that if N denotes a free C[s]-module of finite rank, then the C-vector
space dimension of N /C[s]+ N is equal to the rank of N . Thus it follows by assumption
that the sequence
ν

0 → C[s]+ ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) → ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) −
→ i∗ (H ∗ (Y )) → 0
is exact, where ν is the restriction of (νX )∗ . Hence, as above, the kernel of ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) →
i∗ (H ∗ (Y )) is W-stable, so W acts on i∗ (H ∗ (Y )). Moreover, the map H ∗ (Y ) → i∗ (H ∗ (Y ))
is W-equivariant.

Remark 2.3. In the case when S = C∗ , since (S, X) is assumed to be equivariantly formal,
the module ι∗ (HS∗ (Y )) is always free. This is because C[s] is a principal ideal domain and
HS∗ (X) is free.
3. The Weyl group action on HS∗ (Bx )
We now return to the parabolic-surjective setting. First, recall that W acts as a group of
homeomorphisms of B which commute with T . Let K be a maximal compact subgroup in
G such that H = K ∩ T is a maximal torus in K. Then the natural mapping K/H → B is
a homeomorphism; but W = NK (H)/H acts on K/H (from the left) by w · kH = k ẇ−1 H,
where ẇ ∈ NK (H) is a representative of w. Thus W acts on B as asserted. Since this action
∗
commutes with the action of H on K/H, the group W acts on both HT∗ (B) = HH
(K/H)
∗
∗
∗
and H (B) and the natural mapping HT (B) → H (B) is W -equivariant.
In order to apply Theorem 1.1, we need the following lemma from [JC1].
Lemma 3.1. Let x ∈ g be nilpotent, and suppose x is a regular element in the Lie algebra of
the Levi L = CG (S) for a subtorus S of T . Then S acts on Bx with exactly [W : WL ] fixed
points. Moreover, every component of B S contains exactly one point of (Bx )S , so W acts on
H ∗ ((Bx )S ) so that the cohomology restriction map H ∗ (B S ) → H ∗ ((Bx )S ) is W -equivariant
and surjective.
Proof. By assumption, Bx is the variety of Borel subalgebras of g containing x, so Bx is
stable under the action of S on g. Each irreducible component of B S is isomorphic to the
flag variety of L, so each component contains a unique fixed point of the one parameter
group exp(tx), t ∈ C, since x is regular in l. It follows that the cohomology restriction map
H ∗ (B S ) → H ∗ ((Bx )S ) is surjective. Moreover, since W permutes the components of B S ,
and each component contains a unique point of Bx , we can uniquely define an action of W on
H ∗ ((Bx )S ) = H 0 ((Bx )S ) by requiring that the cohomology restriction map be equivariant.
Finally, it is well-known that the number of components of B S is the index [W : WL ] of the
Weyl group of L in W .

4

Remark 3.2. In fact, W actually acts on (Bx )S itself (see [JC1] or [JC2, Lemma 6.3 and
p. 137]).
Let us now return to the problem considered in the introduction. As above, G is reductive
linear algebraic group over C and B is its flag variety. By the main result (Theorem 1.1),
we have
Corollary 3.3. Let x be a parabolic-surjective nilpotent in g, say x is regular in the Lie
algebra of the Levi subgroup CG (S). Then W acts on HS∗ (Bx ) and this action descends to
to H ∗ (Bx ) so that the diagram (1) is commutative for Y = B and X = Bx . Consequently,
this W -action is Springer’s representation.
Proof. The only thing to show is that this action of W on H ∗ (Bx ) coincides with Springer’s
representation. But this follows since i∗ : H ∗ (B) → H ∗ (Bx ) is W -equivariant by [H-S]. 
This seems to give the most elementary construction of Springer’s action in type A. It was
originally conjectured in [Kraft] that for any x ∈ sl(n, C), the action of W = Sn on H ∗ (Bx )
is equivalent to the action of W on the coordinate ring A(t∩Cy ) of the schematic intersection
of the diagonal matrices in sl(n, C) and the closure Cy in sl(n, C) of the conjugacy class of
of the nilpotent y dual to x. This was immediately verified in [D-P] where it was shown
that H ∗ (Bx ) ∼
= A(t ∩ Cy ) as graded W -algebras. This isomorphism was extended in [JC1]
to the case of parabolic-surjective nilpotents in an arbitrary g which satisfy some additional
conditions. Here the nilpotent y dual to x turns out to be a Richardson element in the
nilradical of the parabolic subalgebra of g associated to the Levi l in which x is a regular
nilpotent. We refer to [JC1] for more details.
Finally, let us mention that by a well-known of result DeConcini, Lusztig and Procesi
[D-L-P], Bx has vanishing odd cohomology for any nilpotent x ∈ g. Moreover, the JacobsonMorosov lemma guarantees that every Springer variety Bx has a torus action (S, Bx ). This
suggests that HS∗ (Bx ) should be studied in the general case. For example, when does W act
on any of H ∗ ((Bx )S ), HS∗ (Bx ) or even ι∗ (HS∗ (B))?
References
[A-H] Abe, H.; Horiguchi, T. The torus equivariant cohomology rings of Springer varieties. Topology Appl.
208 (2016), 143–159.
[A-B] Atiyah, M.; Bott, R. The moment map and equivariant cohomology. Topology 23 (1984), 1–28.
[Brion] Brion, M. Equivariant cohomology and equivariant intersection theory. Notes by Alvaro Rittatore.
NATO Adv. Sci. Inst. Ser. C Math. Phys. Sci., 514, Representation theories and algebraic geometry
(Montreal, PX, 1997), 1–37, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1998.
[JC1] Carrell, J. B. Orbits of the Weyl group and a theorem of DeConcini and Procesi. Compositio Math.
60 (1986), 45–52.
[JC2] Carrell, J. B. Torus actions and cohomology. The adjoint representation and the adjoint action,
83–158, Encyclopaedia Math. Sci., 131, Springer, Berlin, 2002.
[D-L-P] De Concini, C.; Lusztig, G.; Procesi, C. Homology of the zero-set of a nilpotent vector field on a
flag manifold. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 1 (1988), 15–34.
[D-P] De Concini, C.; Procesi, C. Symmetric functions, conjugacy classes, and the flag variety. Invent.
Math., 64 (1981), 203–219.
[G-McP] Goresky, M.; MacPherson, R. On the spectrum of the equivariant cohomology ring. Canad. J.
Math. 62 (2010), 262–283.
[H-S] Hotta, R.; Springer, T.A. A specialization theorem for certain Weyl group representations and an
application to the Green polynomials of unitary groups, Invent. Math. 41 (1977) 113–127.
[Kraft] Kraft, H. P. Conjugacy classes and Weyl group representations, Young tableaux and Schur functors
in algebra and geometry (Torun,1980), 191205, Astrisque, 8788, Soc. Math. France, Paris, 1981.
[K-P] Kumar, S.; Procesi, C. An algebro-geometric realization of equivariant cohomology of some Springer
fibers. Journal of Algebra 368 (2012), 70–74.
5

[Ross] Rossmann, W. Picard-Lefschetz theory for the coadjoint quotient of a semisimple Lie algebra. (English summary) Invent. Math. 121 (1995), 531–578.
[Slo] Slodowy, P. Four lectures on simple groups and singularities. Communications of the Math. Inst.,
Rijksuniversiteit Utrecht, v. 11, ( 1 ) 1980.
[Spa] Spaltenstein, N. The fixed point set of a unipotent transformation on the flag manifold. Indag. Math.
38 (1976), 452–456.
[Spr1] Springer, T. A. Trigonometric sums, Green functions of finite groups and representations of Weyl
groups. Invent. Math. 36 (1976), 173–207.
[Spr2] Springer, T. A. A construction of representations of Weyl groups. Invent. Math. 44 (1978), 279–293.
[Treu] Treumann, D. A topological approach to induction theorems in Springer theory. Represent. Theory
13 (2009), 8–18.
Department of Mathematics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
E-mail address: carrell@math.ubc.ca
Department of Mathematics, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
E-mail address: kaveh@pitt.edu

6

