--- abstract: 'We study the moduli space of four dimensional ordinary Lie algebras, and their versal deformations. Their classification is well known; our focus in this paper is on the deformations, which yield a picture of how the moduli space is assembled. Surprisingly, we get a nice geometric description of this moduli space essentially as an orbifold, with just a few exceptional points.' address: - | Eötvös Loránd University\ Department of Applied Analysis\ Pázmány Péter sétány 1/C\ H-1117 Budapest, Hungary - | University of Wisconsin\ Department of Mathematics\ Eau Claire, WI 54702-4004 author: - Alice Fialowski - Michael Penkava title: Deformations of Four Dimensional Lie Algebras --- Introduction ============ Lie algebras of small dimension are still a central area of research, although their classification is basically known up to order 7 (for instance, see @ov [@Rh; @Tu; @KT; @pbnl]). The reason for this is that they play a crucial role in physical applications (especially in dimension 4). Despite the classification of these algebras, the moduli space of Lie algebras in a given dimension is not well understood. We should mention @KN, on the variety of $n$ dimensional Lie algebra structures. Moreover, in the existing classifications there are often overlaps of families determined by parameters and the manner in which unique objects are singled out is somewhat artificial. Our solution of this problem is to consider the cohomology of the Lie algebras as well as their versal deformations, and use this information as a guide to their division into families. This is the additional information which provides us with a natural division of the moduli space of Lie algebras into families, as well giving us a geometric picture of the structure of the moduli space. We did a similar study for 3 dimensional Lie algebras in @fp3. The goal of the present paper is to get an accurate picture of the moduli space of complex 4-dimensional Lie algebras. The key ingredient in our description will be the versal deformations of the elements in the moduli space; therefore cohomology will be a primary computational tool. In this paper we will show that the moduli space of Lie algebras on $\C^4$ is essentially an orbifold given by the natural action of the symmetric group $\Sigma_3$ on the complex projective space $\P^2(\C)$. In addition, there are two exceptional complex projective lines, one of which has an action of the symmetric group $\Sigma_2$. Finally, there are 6 exceptional points. The moduli space is glued together by the miniversal deformations, which determine the elements that one may deform to locally, so deformation theory determines the geometry of the space. The exceptional points play a role in refining the picture of how this space is glued together. By orbifold, we mean essentially a topological space quotiented out by the action of a group. In the case of $\P^n$, there is a natural action of $\Sigma_{n+1}$ induced by the natural action of $\Sigma_{n+1}$ on $\C^{n+1}$. An orbifold point is a point which is fixed by some element in the group. In the case of $\Sigma_{n+1}$ acting on $\P^n$, points which have two or more coordinates with the same value are orbifold points, but there are some other ones, such as the point $(1:-1)=(-1:1)$. In the classical theory of deformations, a deformation is called a jump deformation if there is a 1-parameter family of deformations of a Lie algebra structure such that every nonzero value of the parameter determines the same deformed Lie algebra, which is not the original one (see @gers). There are also deformations which move along a family, meaning that the Lie algebra structure is different for each value of the parameter. There can be multiple parameter families as well. In the picture we will assemble, both of these phenomena arise. Some of the structures belong to families and their deformations simply move along the family to which they belong. If there is a jump deformation from an element to a member of a family, then there will always be deformations from that element along the family as well, although they will typically not be jump deformations. In addition, there are sometimes jump deformations either to or from the exceptional points, so these exceptional points play an interesting role in the picture of the moduli space. The structure of this paper is as follows. After some preliminary definitions and explanation of notation, we will explain our classification of four dimensional Lie algebras, giving a comparison between our description of the isomorphism classes of Lie algebras and the ones in @bs and @Aga. Our division of the algebras into families is based primarily on cohomological considerations; elements with the same cohomological description are placed into the same family in our decomposition. The correlation between our decomposition and the one in @Aga is very close. The main differences arise out of our intention to divide up our families as projective spaces, a point of view which only partially occurs in @Aga. After giving a description of the elements of the moduli space, we then study in detail miniversal deformations of each element, and determine how the local deformations behave. The main tool used in this paper is a constructive approach to the computation of miniversal deformations, which was first given in @ff2 [@fp1]. We do not provide complete details about the method of construction, but try to provide enough information that the reader might be able to reconstruct miniversal deformations from the data we provide. Our goal here is to use the constructions to give a picture of the moduli space, rather than to demonstrate the constructions themselves. Finally, we will assemble all the information we have collected to give a pictorial representation of the moduli space. Preliminaries ============= In classical Lie algebra theory, the cohomology of a Lie algebra is studied by considering a differential on the dual space of the exterior algebra of the underlying vector space, considered as a cochain complex. If $V$ is the underlying vector space on which the Lie algebra is defined, then its exterior algebra $\EV$ has a natural -graded coalgebra structure as well. In this language, a Lie algebra is is simply a quadratic odd codifferential on the exterior coalgebra of a vector space. An odd codifferential is simply an odd coderivation whose square is zero. The space $L$ of coderivations has a natural -grading $L=\bigoplus L_n$, where $L_n$ is the subspace of coderivations determined by linear maps $\phi:\E^n V\ra V$. A Lie algebra is a codifferential in $L_2$, in other words, a quadratic codifferential. ( algebras are just arbitrary odd codifferentials.) The space of coderivations has a natural structure of a -graded Lie algebra. The condition that a coderivation $d$ is a codifferential can be expressed in the form $[d,d]=0$. The coboundary operator $D:L\ra L$ is given simply by the rule $D(\ph)=[d,\ph]$ for $\ph\in L$; the fact that $D^2=0$ is a direct consequence of the fact that $d$ is an odd codifferential. Moreover, $D(L_n)\subseteq L_{n+1}$, which means that the cohomology $H(d)=\ker D/\im D $ has a natural decomposition as a -graded space: $H(d)=\prod H^n(d)$, where $$H^n(d)=\ker (D:L_n\ra L_{n+1})/\im (D:L_{n-1}\ra L_n).$$ Recall that for an arbitrary vector space $V$ of dimension $n$, the dimension of $\E^k V$ is just $\binom nk$. If $\{e_1,\dots,e_n\}$ is a basis of $V$, and $I=(i_1,\dots,i_k)$ is a multi-index with $i_1<\cdots<i_k$, and we denote $e_I=e_{i_1}\cdots e_{i_k}$, then the $e_I$-s give a basis of $\E^k V$. Define $\ph^I_j\in L_k$ by $\phi^I_j(e_J)=\delta^I_J e_j$, where $\delta^I_J$ is the Kronecker delta. The elements of $L_k$ are all even if $k$ is odd, and odd if $k$ is even; to stress this difference, we will denote even elements as $\phi^I_j$, but odd ones as $\psi^I_j$. Because we will be working with a four dimensional space, only $L_0$, $L_1$, $L_2$, $L_3$ and $L_4$ are nonzero, so 1 and 3 cochains are even, while 1, 2 and 4 cochains are odd. In general, the dimension of $L_k$ is just $n\binom nk$, so for our case, $\dim L_0=4$, $\dim L_1=16$, $\dim L_2=24$, $\dim L_3=16$ and $\dim L_4=4$. The Lie algebra structures are codifferentials in $L_2$. In order to represent a codifferential $d$ as a matrix, we choose the following order for the increasing pairs $I=(i_1,i_2)$ of indices: $$\{(1,2),(1,3),(2,3),(1,4),(2,4),(3,4)\},$$ and denote the $i$th element of this ordered set by $S(i)$. Using this order and the Einstein summation convention, we can express $$d=a^i_{j}\ph^{S(j)}_i.$$ Let $A=(a^i_j)$ be the matrix of coefficients of $d$. The first column represents $d(e_1e_2)$, the second $d(e_1e_3)$, etc. The Jacobi identity of the Lie algebra is given by the equation $[d,d]=0$, which can be expressed in matrix form as $AB=0$, where $B$ is the matrix $$B := \left[ {\begin{array}{cccc} {a^1_{6}} & - {a^2_{6}} & - {a^2_{5}} - {a^1_{4}} & - {a^1_{2}} - {a^2_{3}} \\ - {a^1_{5}} & - {a^3_{6}} - {a^1_{4}} & - {a^3_{5} } & {a^1_{1}} - {a^3_{3}} \\ - {a^3_{6}} - {a^2_{5}} & - {a^2_{4}} & {a^3_{4}} & {a^3_{2}} + {a^2_{1}} \\ {a^1_{3}} & - {a^4_{6}} + {a^1_{2}} & - {a^4_{5}} + {a^1_{1}} & - {a^4_{3}} \\ - {a^4_{6}} + {a^2_{3}} & {a^2_{2}} & {a^4_{4}} + {a^2_{1}} & {a^4_{2}} \\ {a^4_{5}} + {a^3_{3}} & {a^4_{4}} + {a^3_{2}} & {a^3_{1}} & - {a^4_{1}} \end{array}} \right]$$ Since $AB$ is a $4\times 4$ matrix, we obtain 16 quadratic relations among the coefficients that must be satisfied. In principle, it should be possible to use a computer algebra system to determine the solutions, but in our experience, this method has some drawbacks, unless one reduces the problem to some special cases, which we will do below. In order to classify the solutions, we note that the dimension of the derived algebra is just the rank of $A$. We will show that the rank of $A$ is never larger than 3. From this it follows that there is an ideal $I$ of dimension 3 in the Lie algebra $L$, which gives an exact sequence of Lie algebras $$0\ra I\ra L\ra \k\ra 0,$$ where $\k$ is the abelian Lie algebra of dimension 1. But then, the structure of $L$ is completely determined by the structure of $I$ as a Lie algebra, and an outer derivation $\delta$ of $I$. In @fp3, the moduli space of three dimensional Lie algebras was studied, and we will use the classification given there, because we will use in our classification the structure of the cohomology of these Lie algebras, which is given in detail in that paper. Dimension of the Derived Algebra ================================ We separate the types of Lie algebras into two distinct cases. 1. Every independent pair of vectors spans a two dimensional subalgebra. 2. There are independent vectors $x$, $y$ and $z$ so that $d(xy)=z$. The first case is interesting, in that, up to isomorphism, over any field $\k$, there is exactly one nonabelian Lie algebra in each dimension greater than one satisfying this property, and it is given as an extension of a one dimensional Lie algebra by an abelian ideal. To see this, suppose that $L$ has dimension at least two, is nonabelian, and satisfies the property that every independent pair of vectors spans a two dimensional subalgebra. Let $x_1'$ and $y'$ be two independent elements whose bracket $[x_1',y']=ax_1'+by'$ does not vanish. We may assume that $a\ne 0$. If $x_1=x_1'+b/ay'$ and $y=1/ay'$, then $[x_1,y]=x_1$. Next, suppose that $x_2'$ is independent of $x_1$ and $y$. Let $[x_2',y]=ax_2'+by$. Then $x_1+ax_2'+by=[x_1+x_2',y]=p(x_1+x_2')+qy$, for some $p$ and $q$, so $a=1$. Let $x_2=x_2'+by$. Then $[x_2,y]=x_2$. Now, express $[x_1,x_2]= ax_1+bx_2$. Then $ax_1+bx_2-x_2=[x_1+y,x_2]=p(x_1+y)+qx_2$, which implies that $a=0$. Similarly, $x_1+bx_2=[x_1,y+x_2]=px_1+q(y+x_2)$, so $b=0$ and thus $[x_1,x_2]=0$. The process can be repeated indefinitely, so we finally obtain a basis $\{x_1,\dots ,x_n,y\}$ satisfying $[x_i,y]=x_i$, $[x_i,x_j]=0$. Finally, let us show that the bracket of any two elements is linearly dependent on them. Let $u=a^ix_i +by$ and $v=c^ix_i+dy$, then $[u,v]=a^idx_i-c^ibx_i=du-bv$. Clearly, the $x_i$-s span an abelian ideal in the algebra, so $L$ is an extension of the one dimensional Lie algebra spanned by $y$ by this ideal. It follows that there is an abelian ideal of dimension $n$; moreover, this ideal coincides with the derived algebra, so the rank of the matrix $A$ is precisely $n$, one less than the dimension of the vector space. In fact, the matrix $A$ has precisely the form $A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&I\\0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right]$, where $I$ is the $n\times n$ identity matrix. This completes the description of the first case. For the second case, suppose that there are linearly independent vectors such that $d(e_1e_2)=e_3$, so the matrix $A$ of $d$ satisfies $a^1_{1}=a^2_{1}=a^4_{1}=0$, $a^3_{1}=1$. One can easily check the possible solutions by considering subcases of this second case. For example, either $e_1$, $e_2$ and $e_3$ span a subalgebra, or we can assume that $d(e_1e_2)=e_4$. Since it is well known that the derived subalgebra of any 4 dimensional Lie algebra has dimension at most 3, we will not give a detailed analysis of this issue, and simply point out that the division into subcases can be carried out relatively easily. However, we note that even without breaking up the second case into subcases, we can solve the Jacobi identity using Maple, yielding around 40 solutions all of which have matrices of rank less than or equal to three. We note that the solutions are well defined over any field, so the fact that the derived algebra has dimension 3 is independent of the field $\k$ as well. Extensions of $\C$ by a three dimensional ideal =============================================== From now on, in this paper, we shall assume that we are working over the base field $\C$. It is not difficult to classify the moduli space over $\R$ as well. Over fields of finite characteristic, and over other fields, even the classification of 3 dimensional Lie algebras is quite complicated. Since the dimension of the derived algebra is never more than 3, every 4 dimensional Lie algebra is given as an extension of $\C$ by some three dimensional ideal. In @fp3, a complete classification of three dimensional algebras and their cohomology was given. We summarize the results about the cohomology in Table \[Table 3\]. <span>llrrrrr</span> Type&Codiff&$H^1$&$H^2$&$H^3$\ \ $d_1=\mathfrak{n}_3$&$\psi_1^{23}$&4&5&2\ $d_2=\mathfrak{r}_{3,1}(\C)$&$\psi_1^{13}+\psi_2^{23}$&3&3&0\ $d_2(1:1)=\mathfrak{r}_{3}(\C)$&$\psi_1^{13}+\psi_1^{23}+\psi_2^{23}$&1&1&0\ $d_2(\lambda:\mu)= \mathfrak{r}_{3,\mu/\lambda}(\C)$&$\psi_1^{13}\lambda+\psi_1^{23}+\psi_2^{23}\mu$&1&1&0\ $d_2(1:0)=\mathfrak{r}_2(\C)\oplus\C$&$\psi_1^{13}+\psi_1^{23}$&2&1&0\ $d_2(1:-1)=\mathfrak{r}_{3,-1}(\C)$&$\psi_1^{13}+\psi_1^{23}-\psi_2^{23}$&1&2&1\ $d_3=\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)$&$\psi_3^{12}+\psi_2^{13}+\psi_1^{23}$&0&0&0\ \ Here we have realigned the family of codifferentials as presented in @fp3 in order to identify elements which have the same cohomological type as belonging to the same family. The changes are actually modest: the family $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$ coincides with $d(\mu/\lambda)$ of that paper except that the new element $d_2$ was given as $d(1)$ in the paper, and the element $d(1:1)$ corresponds to the element $d_2$ in the previous paper. In addition, we have introduced projective notation for the family $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$. It should be noted that $d_2(\lambda:\mu)=d_2(\mu:\lambda)$, so the family can be identified with $\P^1(\C)/\Sigma_2$, which makes it an orbifold with orbifold points at $d_2(1:1)$ and $d_2(1:-1)$, where there is some atypical phenomena in the moduli space. At the point $d_2(1:1)$, there is a doppelganger $d_2$, whose neighborhoods coincide with those of the point $d_2(1:1)$, and which also deforms infinitesimally into $d_2(1:1)$. At the point $d_2(1:-1)$, there is a deformation in the $d_3$ direction as well as a deformation in the direction of the family. Otherwise, members of the family $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$ deform only in the direction of the family itself. The codifferential $d_1$ has deformations into every other type of codifferential except $d_2$, which accounts for why it has such a large dimension of $H^2$. In order to determine all the codifferentials of degree 4, it is only necessary to study the equivalence classes of codifferentials given by extending $\C$ by a 3 dimensional algebra, via an outer derivation. For this reason, in Table \[Table 3\], we have denoted by $H^1$ the dimension of the outer derivations, unlike our convention in @fp3. In most cases, an extension of $\C$ by a 3 dimensional algebra is equivalent to either an extension by the Heisenberg algebra $d_1$, or an extension by the zero algebra, that is, a three dimensional central extension of $\C$. For each of the types of 3 dimensional algebras in our classification in Table \[Table 3\], we will analyze the extensions of $\C$, by studying the outer derivations. Suppose that $A$ is a matrix representing a codifferential $d$ and $A'$ is the matrix representing a codifferential $d'$. The codifferentials $d$ and $d'$ determine isomorphic Lie algebras, and we call them equivalent codifferentials, if there is a linear automorphism $g:V\ra V$ such that $d'=g\inv d \tilde g$, where $\tilde g:\E^2 V\ra \E^2 V$ is the induced isomorphism. If we represent $g$ by the $4\times4$ matrix $G=(g^i_j)$, where $g(e_j)=g^i_je_i$, then $\tilde g$ is represented by the $6\times6$ matrix $Q$, in other words, $\tilde g(e_{S(j)})=Q^i_je_{S(i)}$, then the coefficients of $Q$ are given by the formula $$Q^i_j=g^m_kg^n_l-g^m_lg^n_k , \text{ where } S(i)=(k,l) \text{ and } S(j)=(m,n).$$ It follows that $d$ is equivalent to $d'$ precisely when there is an invertible matrix $G$ and a corresponding matrix $Q$ such that $A'=G\inv AQ$. It is usually easier to check by computer whether there is a matrix $G$ and corresponding $Q$ so that $GA'=AQ$, but then one must be careful to check that $\det(G)\ne0$. The simple Lie algebra $d_3=\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C$) ------------------------------------------------ Since $\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)$ is simple, all derivations are inner. As a consequence, any extension of $\C$ by $\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)$ is just a direct sum $\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)\oplus\C$. This 4 dimensional algebra is given by the codifferential $$d_3=\psi^{12}_3+\psi^{13}_2+\psi^{23}_1,$$ which represents the simple algebra $\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)\oplus\C$ in the BS list @bs. The solvable Lie algebra $d_2=r_3(\C)$ -------------------------------------- This algebra is given by the codifferential $$d_2=\psi^{13}_1+\psi^{23}_2.$$ $H^1(d_2)=\langle\ph^2_2,\ph^1_2,\ph^2_1\rangle$. Thus a generic outer derivation of $d_2$ is given by $\delta=\ph^2_2x+\ph^1_2y+\ph^2_1z$. An extension of $\C$ by $\delta$ is given by the rule $d(e_ie_4)=\delta(e_i)$. We compute $$d(e_1e_4)=e_2y\quad d(e_2e_4)=e_1z+e_2x\quad d(e_3e_4)=0,$$ so that the general formula for an extension $d$ of $\C$ by $d_2$ is $$d=\psi^{13}_1+\psi^{23}_2+\psi^{14}_2y+\psi^{24}_1z+\psi^{24}_2x.$$ When $x^2+4yz\ne0$, $d$ is equivalent to the codifferential $$d_2^\sharp=\psi^{12}_1+\psi^{34}_3,$$ which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{r}_2\oplus\mathfrak{r}_2$ in the BS list. When $x^2+4yz=0$ and the three parameters are not all 0, then the matrix can be transformed into the matrix of the codifferential $$d_1(1:0)=\psa{12}3+\psa{13}3+\psa{23}4,+\psa{14}4,$$ which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak g_8(0)$ in the BS list. The solvable algebra $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$ --------------------------------------- This algebra is given by the codifferential $$d_2(\lambda:\mu)=\psa{13}1\lambda+\psa{23}1+\psa{23}2.$$ If we consider the trivial extension of $\C$ by $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$, then $\{e_1,e_2,e_4\}$ span an abelian ideal, so this case reduces to an extension of $\C$ by an abelian ideal. To analyze nontrivial extensions, first note that $$\begin{aligned} H^1(d_2(1:0))&=\langle\ph^1_1+\ph^2_2,\ph^3_2\rangle\\ H^1(d_2(\lambda:\mu))&=\langle\ph^1_1+\ph^2_2\rangle\quad \text{ otherwise }\end{aligned}$$ If we extend our codifferential by the derivation $\delta=(\ph^1_1+\ph^2_2)x+\ph^3_2y$, the extended codifferential is $$d=d_2(\lambda:\mu)+(\ph^{14}_1+\ph^{24}_2)x+\ph^{34}_2y.$$ When $x\ne 0$ then if $\lambda=\mu$, the extended codifferential is equivalent to the codifferential $d_1(1:0)$, otherwise it is equivalent to the codifferential $d_2^\sharp$. When $x=0$ and $\mu\ne0$, the codifferential is equivalent to the unextended codifferential which we will identify with the codifferential $$d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)=\psa{14}1\lambda+\psa{24}1+\psa{24}2\mu+\psa{34}2,$$ which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak r_{3,\mu/\lambda}(\C)\oplus\C$ (unless $\lambda=\mu$, in which case it represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak r_3(\C)\oplus\C$). When $\mu=0$ and $x=0$, then if $y\ne 0$, the extended codifferential is equivalent to $d_3(1:0:0)$, which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak g_2(0,0)$, but when $y=0$, the unextended codifferential is equivalent to the codifferential $$d_3(0:1)=\psa{34}2+\psa{34}3,$$ which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak r_2(\C)\oplus \C^2$. The Heisenberg Algebra $d_1=n_3(\C)$ ------------------------------------ Let $d_1=\psi_1^{23}$ be the three dimensional Heisenberg algebra. Then $$\begin{aligned} H^1(d_1)=\langle \ph^2_3,\ph^3_2,\ph^1_1+\ph^2_2,\ph^1_1+\ph^3_3\rangle\end{aligned}$$ so $H^1(d_1)$ is four dimensional. If we consider a generic outer derivation $$\delta=\ph^2_3a+\ph^3_2b+(\ph^1_1+\ph^2_2)c+(\ph^1_1+\ph^3_3)d,$$ the term $\psi_3^{24}a+\psi_2^{24}c+\psi_2^{34}b+\psi_3^{34}d+\psi_1^{14}(c+d)$ would be added to $d_1$ obtain the extended codifferential. If we set $a=a^3_5$, $b=a^2_6$, $c=a^2_5$ and $d=a^3_6$, then we get the extended codifferential $$d=\psi_1^{23}+\psi_1^{14}(a^2_5+a^3_6)+\psi_2^{24}a^2_5+\psi_2^{34}a^2_6+\psi_3^{24}a^3_5+\psi_3^{34}a^3_6,$$ with matrix $A$ given by $A= \Bigg[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&1&a^2_5+a^3_6&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&a^2_5&a^2_6\\ 0&0&0&0&a^3_5&a^3_6\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\Bigg]$. Let $g$ be the linear transformation whose matrix is $G=\Bigg[\begin{smallmatrix} 1&0&0&0\\ 0&p&r&0\\ 0&q&s&0\\ 0&0&0&1 \end{smallmatrix}\Bigg]$. Let $R=\big[\begin{smallmatrix}p&r\\q&s\end{smallmatrix}\big]$, and assume $\det(R)=1$. Now the matrix $Q$ is given in block form by $Q=\bigg[\begin{smallmatrix}R&0&0\\0&I&0\\0&0&R\end{smallmatrix}\bigg]$. The matrix of $d'=g\inv d\tilde g$ is $A'= \Bigg[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&1&a^2_5+a^3_6&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&a'^2_5&a'^2_6\\ 0&0&0&0&a'^3_5&a'^3_6\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\Bigg]$, where $$\bigg[\begin{smallmatrix}a'^2_5&a'^2_6\\a'^3_5&a'^3_6\end{smallmatrix}\bigg]= R\inv \bigg[\begin{smallmatrix}a^2_5&a^2_6\\a^3_5&a^3_6\end{smallmatrix}\bigg]R,$$ which means that if $V=\bigg[\begin{smallmatrix}a^2_5&a^2_6\\a^3_5&a^3_6\end{smallmatrix}\bigg]$, then similar submatrices give equivalent codifferentials. Note that the $a^1_4$ coefficient $a^2_5+a^3_6$ is just the trace of the matrix $V$, which is invariant under similarity transformations. Therefore, looking at the submatrix $V$ alone, we have the following cases <span>$\bullet$</span> $V=\big[\begin{smallmatrix}\lambda&1\\0&\mu\end{smallmatrix}\big]$, corresponding to the codifferential $$d_1(\lambda:\mu)=\psi_1^{23}+\psi_1^{14}(\lambda+\mu)+\psi_2^{24}\lambda+ \psi_2^{34}+\psi_3^{34}\mu.$$ This family of codifferentials should be thought of as a projective family, parameterizing $\P^1(\C)$. There is an action of $\Sigma_2$ on this space which identifies $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ with $\d_1(\mu:\lambda)$. There are two orbifold points under this action: $d_1(1:1)$ and $d_1(1,-1)$. We can reasonably expect something unusual to happen at these orbifold points. In fact, $d_1(1:-1)$ represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}_7$ on the BS list while for all other values, , when $\lambda+\mu\ne 0$, $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}_8\left(\tfrac{\lambda\mu}{(\lambda+\mu)^2}\right)$. The diagonal matrix $V=\diag(1,1)$. This is the only nonzero diagonalizable matrix which does not show up in the case above. Its associated codifferential is given by the formula $$d_1^\sharp=\psi_1^{23}+2\psi_1^{14}+\psi_2^{24}+\psi_3^{34},$$ representing the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}_6$. $V=\left[\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\0&0\end{smallmatrix}\right]$. Then the extended codifferential is equivalent to $$d_2^\star=\psa{24}1+\psa{34}2,$$ representing the Lie algebra $\mathfrak n_4(\C)$. $V=0$. This is the original, unextended codifferential, which is equivalent to the codifferential $$d_1=\psa{24}1,$$ representing the Lie algebra $\mathfrak n_3(\C)\oplus\C$. Extensions of $\C$ by an abelian ideal -------------------------------------- Since $H^1(0)=L_1(\C^3)$, the whole 9 dimensional cochain space, an extension of $\C$ by $\C^3$ is given by a matrix of the form $ A= \left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&0&a^1_4&a^1_5&a^1_6\\ 0&0&0&a^2_4&a^2_5&a^2_6\\ 0&0&0&a^3_4&a^3_5&a^3_6\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right]$. If we let $V=\Bigg[\begin{smallmatrix} a^1_4&a^1_5&a^1_6\\ a^2_4&a^2_5&a^2_6\\ a^3_4&a^3_5&a^3_6\\ \end{smallmatrix}\Bigg]$, then any matrix $V'$ which is similar to $V$ up to multiplication by a nonzero constant determines an equivalent codifferential. Since matrices which are constant multiples of each other determine the same codifferential, we can think of the nonequivalent codifferentials as being parameterized projectively. The decomposition of these matrices into distinct equivalence classes is as follows. <span>$\bullet$</span> The codifferential $$d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)=\psi_1^{14}\lambda+\psi_1^{24}+\psi_2^{24}\mu+\psi_2^{34}+\psi_3^{34}\nu$$ for $(\lambda:\mu:\nu)\in\P^2(\C)/\Sigma_3$, where the action of $\Sigma_3$ is given by permutation of the coordinates. These points determine an orbifold with orbifold points occurring along certain lines ($\P^1(\C)$) where some of the parameters coincide. It might seem more natural to use diagonal matrices to represent this two parameter family; the choice here is based on cohomological considerations. The codifferential $$d_3(\lambda:\mu)=\psi_1^{14}\lambda+\psi_2^{24}\lambda +\psi_2^{34}+ \psi_3^{34}\mu$$ for $(\lambda:\mu)\in\P^1(\C)$. Here there is no action of the symmetric group. The Heisenberg algebra $d_1=\psi_1^{24}$. The only eigenvalue of the matrix is zero, and it has two Jordan blocks. We will see that every point in $d_3(\lambda,\mu)$ is infinitesimally close to this point. The solvable algebra $d_2^*$. The matrix has one Jordan block, with eigenvalue zero. The identity matrix determines the codifferential $$d_3^*=\psi_1^{14}+\psi_2^{25}+\psi_2^{34},$$ which represents the Lie algebra $\mathfrak g_1(1)$. The zero algebra $d=0$. Every point is infinitesimally close to this zero point. We summarize these results and give the Lie bracket operations in standard terminology in the table below. Type Brackets ------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------- $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ $[e_2,e_3]=e_3,[e_1,e_4]=(\lambda+\mu)e_1,$ $[e_2,e_4]=\lambda e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_2+\mu e_3$ $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ $[e_1,e_4]=\lambda e_1,[e_2,e_4]=e_1+\mu e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_2+\nu e_3$ $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ $[e_1,e_4]=\lambda e_1,[e_2,e_4]=\lambda e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_2+\mu e_3$ $d_1$ $[e_2,e_4]=e_1$ $d_1^\sharp$ $[e_2,e_3]=e_1,[e_1,e_4]=2e_1,[e_2,e_4]=e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_3$ $d_2^*$ $[e_1,e_2]=e_1,[e_3,e_4]=e_2$ $d_2^\sharp$ $[e_1,e_2]=e_1,[e_3,e_4]=e_3$ $d_3$ $[e_1,e_2]=e_3,[e_1,e_3]=e_2,[e_2,e_3]=e_1$ $d_3^*$ $[e_1,e_4]=e_1,[e_2,e_4]=e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_3$ : Table of Lie Bracket Operations<span data-label="Table 5"></span> Comparison with the Burde-Steinhoff and Agaoka Lists ==================================================== The comparison between the Burde-Steinhoff (BS) list and ours is slightly complicated. On the other hand, our decomposition is essentially the same as Agaoka's list, so we will just note the corresponding element, which is of the form ${\mathbf L}_i(\alpha)$ (see @Aga). $d_1(\lambda:\mu)={\mathbf L}_8(\mu/\lambda)= \psi_1^{23}+\psi_1^{14}(\lambda+\mu)+\psi_2^{24}\lambda+\psi_2^{34}+\psi_3^{34}\mu$ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. When $\lambda+\mu\ne0$, then $$d_1(\lambda:\mu)=\mathfrak g_8\left(\tfrac{\lambda\mu}{(\lambda+\mu)^2}\right).$$ 2. When $\lambda+\mu=0$, then we have the codifferential $d_1(1:-1)$ and $$d_1(1:-1)=\mathfrak g_7.$$ $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)={\mathbf L}_7(\lambda/\nu,\mu/\nu) =\psi_1^{14}\lambda+\psi_1^{24}+\psi_2^{24}\mu+\psi_2^{34}+\psi_3^{34}\nu$ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. When the trace $\lambda+\mu+\nu$ of the matrix $V$ is nonzero and none of the parameters are equal to zero, then $$d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)= \mathfrak{g}_2\left(\tfrac{\lambda\mu\nu}{(\lambda+\mu+\nu)^3}, \tfrac{\lambda\mu+\lambda\nu+\mu\nu}{(\lambda+\mu+\nu)^2}\right).$$ 2. When exactly one of the parameters vanishes and the other two are not equal, then $$d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)=\mathfrak{r}_{3,\mu/\lambda}(\C)\oplus\C.$$ 3. When one of the parameters vanishes and the other two are equal we have the special point $$d_3(1:1:0)=\mathfrak{r}_3(\C)\oplus\C.$$ 4. When two of the parameters vanish, then we have the special point $$d_3(1:0:0)=\mathfrak{g}_2(0,0).$$ 5. When the trace of $V$ is zero, none of the parameters is equal to zero, and the parameters are not the three distinct roots of unity, then we have $$d_3(\lambda:\mu:-\lambda-\mu)= \mathfrak{g}_3\left(\tfrac{(\lambda^2+\lambda\mu+\mu^2)^3}{(\lambda\mu(\lambda+\mu))^2}\right).$$ 6. When $\lambda$, $\mu$ and $\nu$ are the three distinct cube roots of unity, then $$d_3(1:-1/2+1/2i\sqrt{3}:-1/2-1/2i\sqrt{3})=\mathfrak{g}_4.$$ $d_3(\lambda:\mu)= {\mathbf L}_4(\mu/\lambda)= \psi_1^{14}\lambda+\psi_2^{24}\lambda+\psi_2^{34}+\psi_3^{34}\mu$ ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. When neither of the parameters vanish or are equal, then we have $$d_3(\lambda:\mu)=\mathfrak{g}_1(\mu/\lambda).$$ 2. When $\mu=0$, then we have the special point $$d_3(1:0)=\mathfrak{r}_{3,1}(\C)\oplus\C.$$ 3. When $\lambda=0$ then we have the special point $$d_3(0:1)={\mathbf L}_4(\infty)=\mathfrak{r}_2(\C)\oplus\C^2.$$ 4. When $\lambda=\mu$ then we have the special point $$d(0)=d_3(1:1)=\mathfrak{g}_5.$$ The special cases ----------------- $$\begin{aligned} d_1&={\mathbf L}_1=\mathfrak{n}_3(\C)\oplus\C=\psi_1^{24}\\ d_1^\sharp&={\mathbf L}_5=\mathfrak g_6=\psi_1^{23}+2\psi_1^{14}+\psi_2^{24}+\psi_3^{34}\\ d_2^*&={\mathbf L}_2=\mathfrak{n}_4(\C)=\psi_1^{24}+\psi_2^{34}\\ d_2^\sharp&={\mathbf L}_9=\mathfrak r_2(\C)\oplus\mathfrak r_2(\C)=\psi_1^{12}+\psi_3^{34}\\ d_3&={\mathbf L}_6=\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)\oplus\C=\psi_3^{12}+\psi_2^{13}+\psi_1^{23}\\ d_3^*&={\mathbf L}_3=\mathfrak{g}_1(1)=\psi_1^{14}+\psi_2^{24}+\psi_3^{34}.\end{aligned}$$ Deformations of the Lie Algebras ================================ For the basic notion of deformations, we refer to @gers [@nr; @fi1; @fi2; @ff2]. In some previous papers, we considered deformations of algebras @fp1 [@fp3]. In this paper, we will only consider Lie algebra deformations of our Lie algebras, which are determined by cocycles coming from $H^2$. We will not explore deformations of the Lie algebras we study in this paper, but it would not be difficult to construct them from the cohomology computations we provide here. In Table \[Table 2\], we give a classification of the codifferentials according to their cohomology. Note that for the most part, elements from the same family have the same cohomology. In fact, the decomposition of the codifferentials into families was strongly influenced by the desire to associate elements with the same pattern of cohomology in the same family. This is why our family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ was not chosen to be the diagonal matrices. Similar considerations influenced our selection of the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$. Type $H^1$ $H^2$ $H^3$ $H^4$ --------------------------------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -- $d_3$ 1 0 1 1 $d_2^\sharp$ 0 0 0 0 $d_1(1:-1)$ 2 2 2 1 $d_1(1:0)$ 1 2 1 0 $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ 1 1 0 0 $d_1^\sharp$ 3 3 0 0 $d_3(1:-1:0)$ 3 5 5 2 $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\lambda+\mu)$ 2 3 1 0 $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$ 3 3 1 0 $d_3(\lambda:\mu:-\lambda-\mu)$ 2 2 1 1 $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ 2 2 0 0 $d_3(1:0)$ 5 7 3 0 $d_3(0:1)$ 6 6 2 0 $d_3(1:2)$ 4 5 1 0 $d_3(1:-2)$ 4 4 1 1 $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ 4 4 0 0 $d_1$ 8 13 10 3 $d_2^*$ 4 6 5 2 $d_3^*$ 8 8 0 0 : Table of the Cohomology<span data-label="Table 2"></span> The codifferential $d_3=\mathfrak{sl}_2(\C)\oplus\C$ ---------------------------------------------------- It is an easy calculation to show that $$\begin{aligned} H^1&=\langle\ph^4_4\rangle\\ H^2&=0\\ H^3&=\langle\ph^{123}_4\rangle\\ H^4&=\langle\ph^{1234}_4\rangle\end{aligned}$$ Since $H^2$ vanishes, this algebra is rigid in terms of deformations in the Lie algebra sense. The codifferential $d_2^\sharp=\mathfrak{r}_2(\C)\oplus\mathfrak{r}_2(\C)$ -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Since the cohomology vanishes entirely, this algebra has no interesting deformations or extensions. This algebra is the only four dimensional Lie algebra which is truly rigid in the $\linf$ algebra sense, although $d_3$ is also rigid in the Lie algebra sense. The codifferential $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ ------------------------------------- In the generic case we have $$\begin{aligned} H^1&=\langle 2\pha11+\pha22+\pha33\rangle\\ H^2&=\langle\psa{14}1+\psa{24}2\rangle\end{aligned}$$ and all higher cohomology vanishes. Thus, generically, the infinitesimal deformation is given by $$d^\inf=d_1(\lambda+t,\mu).$$ Since $d^\inf$ is actually a member of the family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$, it is immediate that $[d^\inf,d^\inf]=0$, so the infinitesimal deformation is the miniversal deformation $\d^\infty$ and the base of the miniversal deformation is $\C[[t]]$. Moreover, it is transparent in this case that the deformations run in the direction of the family. The codifferential $d_1(1:-1)$ ------------------------------ For this special case there are more cohomology classes than in the generic case. We have $$\begin{aligned} H^1&=\langle 2\pha11+\pha22+\pha33,\pha41\rangle\\ H^2&=\langle\psi_1=\psa{14}1+\psa{24}2,\psi_2=\psa{23}4\rangle\\ H^3&=\langle\pha{123}4,\pha{123}1+\pha{234}4\rangle\\ H^4&=\langle\psa{1234}4\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ Consider the universal infinitesimal deformation $$d^\inf=d_1(1:-1)+\psi_1t^1 +\psi_2 t^2.$$ Then we have $\tfrac12[d^\inf,d^\inf]=-(\pha{123}1+\pha{234}4)t^1t^2$, which is a nontrivial cocycle. It follows that the infinitesimal deformation is miniversal, and the base of the miniversal deformation is $\A=\C[[t^1,t^2,t^3]]/(t^1t^2)$. When $t^1t^2\ne0$, the miniversal deformation $d^\infty=d^\inf$ does not correspond to an actual deformation. The cohomology class of the cocycle $(\pha{123}1+\pha{234}4)$ is called an obstruction to the extension of the infinitesimal deformation to higher order. In order to obtain an actual deformation out of the miniversal deformation, we need to restrict ourselves to the lines $t^1=0$ or $t^2=0$, along which the obstruction term vanishes. The cohomology $H^2$, which gives the tangent space to the moduli space, has dimension 2, but the deformations actually lie on two curves. Thus the dimension of the tangent space does not reveal the complete situation in terms of the deformations; one needs to construct the versal deformation to get the true picture. A deformation along the line $t^2=0$ gives $d_1(1+t_1,:-1+t_1)$, the same pattern as we observed generically. On the other hand, a deformation along the line $t^1=0$ yields a coderivation which is equivalent to the codifferential $d_3$ . This is an example of a jump deformation, because $d_1(1:-1)+\psi_2t^2\sim d_3$ for all values of $t^2$. In the classical language of Lie brackets, we get the following bracket table: $$[e_1,e_3]=e_1+t^2e_4,\quad[e_2,e_4]=e_2,\quad[e_3,e_4]=e_2-e_3$$ Both orbifold points in the family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ have some unusual features. The point $d_1(1:-1)$, because it has a jump deformation out of the family to $d_3$, and the point $d_1(1:1)$ because, as we will see shortly, there is a jump deformation to it from the element $d_1^\sharp$, which lies outside of the family. What is surprising is that the point $d_1(1:0)$, which is not an orbifold point, is also special. The codifferential $d_1(1:0)$ ----------------------------- The cohomology $H^1$ is the same as the generic case, while $H^2$ and $H^3$ are given by $$\begin{aligned} H^2&=\langle\psi_1=\psa{14}1+\psa{34}3,\psi_2=\psa{13}2\rangle\\ H^3&=\langle\phi=\pha{134}2\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ The universal infinitesimal deformation $d^\inf=d_1(1:0)+\psi_i t^i$ satisfies $\tfrac12[d^\inf,d^\inf]=-2\phi t^1t^2$, so it is miniversal and the base of the versal deformation is $\C[[t^1,t^2]]/(t^1t^2)$. Along the line $t^2=0$, $d^\infty=d_1(1,t^1)$, so we deform along the family as in the generic case. Along the line $t^1=0$, the deformation $d^\inf$ is equivalent to $d_2^\sharp$ for all values of $t^2$. Thus $d_1(1:0)$ has a jump deformation to the element $d_2^\sharp$. The classical form of the Lie brackets for the case $t^1=0$ is $$[e_1,e_3]=t^2e_2, [e_2,e_3]=e_1,[e_1,e_4]=e_1,[e_2,e_4]=e_2,[e_3,e_4]=e_2$$ The codifferential $d_1^\sharp$ ------------------------------- The cohomology is given by $$\begin{aligned} H^1&=\langle\pha11+\pha22,\pha23,\pha32\rangle\\ H^2&=\langle\psi_1=\psa{24}3,\psi_2=\psa{34}2,\psi_3=\psa{14}1+\psa{34}3\rangle\end{aligned}$$ The universal infinitesimal deformation $d^\inf=d_1^\sharp+\psi_it^i$ is miniversal since $[d^\inf,d^\inf]=0$, so the base of the miniversal deformation is just $\A=\C[[t^1,t^2,t^3]]$. Now let us consider which codifferential $d^\infty=d^\inf$ is equivalent to. Even though the deformation is defined for all values of the parameters, which element we deform to depends in a complicated manner on the parameters. Except on the plane $t^1=0$, we have $d^\infty\sim d_1(\alpha:\beta)$ where $$(\alpha,\beta)=2+t^3\pm\sqrt{(t^3)^2+4t^1t^2}.$$ On the plane $t^1=0$, we have $d^\infty\sim d_1(1+t^3:1)$. In particular, if $t^3=0$, we have $d^\infty\sim d(1:1)$. In fact, along the entire surface given by $(t^3)^2+4t^1t^2=0$, we have $d^\infty\sim d(1:1)$, so there is a two parameter family of jump deformations to $d_1(1:1)$. Thus $d_1^\sharp$ has a jump deformation to $d_1(1:1)$ and deforms along the family $d_1(\alpha:\beta)$ as if it were the element $d_1(1:1)$ in this family. This is a pattern which will always emerge: *If a codifferential has a jump deformation to another codifferential, then it will deform also to every codifferential to which the element it jumps to deforms.* We give the classical form of the Lie brackets for $d^\infty$: $$[e_2,e_3]\!=\!e_1,[e_1,e_4]\!=\!(2+t^3)e_1,[e_2,e_4]\!=\!e_2+t^1e_3,[e_3,e_4]\!=\!t^2e_2+ (1+t^3)e_3.$$ Let us consider the picture including only the codifferentials $d_3$, $d_1^\sharp$ and $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$. The picture is very similar to that of the moduli space of three dimensional Lie algebras. The family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ consists of a $\P^1$ with an action of the symmetric group $\Sigma_2$, with orbifold points at $(1:1)$ and $(1:-1)$. The point $d_1(1:-1)$ has a jump deformation to $d_3$, the four dimensional simple Lie algebra, while there is a jump deformation from the point $d_1^\sharp$ to $d_1(1:1)$. The point $d_1(1:0)$ is not an orbifold point, but is still special, with a jump deformation to the point $d_2^\sharp$. We did not see this phenomenon in the 3 dimensional picture, but there was something special about the point $d_2(1:0)$ in the family of codifferentials $d_2(\lambda:\mu)$ (see Table \[Table 3\]), because $\dim(H^1(d_2(1:0)))=2$, instead of the generic value. Since $H^1$ influences the extensions of $\C$ by a Lie algebra, it is perhaps natural to expect that the 4 dimensional counterpart to $d_2(1:0)$ should not behave generically. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ ----------------------------------------- Before examining the cohomology in the generic case, we want to make some general remarks about the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$, which we will call *the big family*, relating to the fact that the points correspond to $\P^2/\Sigma_3$, in contrast to $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$, which we will refer to as *the small family*. Let us refer to elements in the orbit of a point under the action of the symmetric group as conjugates. Most points in $\P^2$ have precisely 6 conjugates, and the stabilizer of the point is the trivial subgroup. The few exceptional cases are as follows. 1. The points $(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$, where $\lambda\ne\mu$ and their conjugates are stabilized by a subgroup of order 2, so they each have only 3 conjugates. 2. The point $(1:-1:0)$ and its 3 conjugates are also stabilized by a subgroup of order 2. 3. The point $(1:r:r^2)$, where $r$ is a primitive cube root of unity, and its 2 conjugates, are stabilized by the alternating group $A_3$. 4. The point $(1:1:1)$ is stabilized by the entire group $\Sigma_3$. Next, consider the lines ($\P^1$) in $\P^2$ and the induced action of $\Sigma_3$ on the set of lines. For most lines, the stabilizer of the line is just the trivial subgroup, but again, there are a few exceptions. 1. The line $(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$ and its 3 conjugates are stabilized by subgroups of order 2. 2. The lines $(\lambda:\mu:c(\lambda+\mu))$ and their conjugates are also stabilized by subgroups of order 2. It turns out that when $c=0$ or $c=\pm1$, the cohomology of the codifferentials corresponding to points on the line $(\lambda:\mu:c(\lambda+\mu))$ does not follow the generic pattern. The cohomology of the codifferentials corresponding to points on the line $(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$ is the same as the generic case with the exception of the points $(1:1:0)$, $(1:1:2)$ and $(1:1:-2)$, which are the points of intersection of this line with the three other special lines. Note also that the lines $(\lambda:\mu:c(\lambda+\mu))$ all intersect in precisely the point $(1:-1:0)$, which makes this point very special. To determine the cohomology of a codifferential of type $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$, read Table \[Table 2\] in descending order, and whichever is the first pattern it matches, that gives its cohomology. However, we will present the description of the cohomology in ascending order, because it is more natural to begin with the generic pattern, and then proceed to the more exotic cases. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$: the generic case ----------------------------------------------------------- Generically, we have $$\begin{aligned} H^1=&\langle\pha11(\lambda-\mu)+\pha21+\pha22(\mu-\nu)+\pha32, \\&\pha11(-\lambda\mu+\lambda^2-\lambda\nu+\mu\nu)+\pha21(\lambda-\nu)+\pha31\rangle. $$ For most generic values of $(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ a natural basis to choose for $H^2$ would be $H^2=\langle\psa{24}2,\psa{34}3\rangle$. Then $d^\inf=d_3(\lambda,\mu+t^1,\nu+t^2)$, so there is no difficulty in seeing what the deformations are equivalent to. However, for certain generic values of the parameters, the two cocycles above are not a basis of $H^2$, so we need to work with a more complex solution, which yields a basis of $H^2$ for all generic values. Let us take $$H^2=\langle\psi_1=\psa{24}3,\psi_2=\psa{14}3\rangle.$$ The universal infinitesimal deformation $d^\inf=d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)+\psi_i t^i$ is miniversal, with base $\A=\C[[t^1,t^2]]$. It is a bit more difficult to identify what the miniversal deformation $d^\infty=d^\inf$ is equivalent to when we take this more complicated basis of $H^2$. In fact, if we let $x$ be a root of the polynomial $$z^3+(-\nu+2\lambda-\mu)z^2+(\mu\nu-\lambda\nu-\lambda\mu+\lambda^2-t^1)z-t^2,$$ and $y$ be a root of the polynomial $$z^2+(-x-\nu+\mu)z+x^2+x(\lambda-\mu)-t^1,$$ then if $g$ is given by the matrix $G=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 1&0&0&0\\ x&1&0&0\\ x(\lambda-\mu)+x^2&y&1&0\\ 0&0&0&1 \end{smallmatrix}\right]$, we have $$g^*(d^\infty)=d_3(\lambda+x:\mu+y-x:\nu-y).$$ Thus for generic values of $(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$, all deformations of $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$ simply move along this same big family. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu:-\lambda-\mu)$ -------------------------------------------------- In this case $H^1$ is the same as the generic case, and for most values of $\mu$, one can use the cocycles $\psa{14}1$ and $\psa{24}2$ as the basis of $H^2$. Since the brackets of these two cocycles vanish, the resulting infinitesimal deformation $$d^\inf=d_3(\lambda:\mu:-\lambda-\mu)+\psa{14}1t^1+\psa{24}2t^2$$ is miniversal, and in fact coincides with $d_3(\lambda+t^1,\mu+t^2,-\mu-\lambda)$. In this case, it is obvious that the deformations of our codifferential just lie along the big family. The values for which these two elements do not form a basis of $H^2$ are $(1:-1:0)$, which we will cover separately, and $(1:1:-2)$, for which $\psi_1=\psa{14}3$ and $\psi_2=\psa{24}2$ give a basis of $H^2$. It is still true that the brackets of these cocycles vanish, and the deformations lie along the big family, although the expression of the member of the family corresponding to the element $d^\infty$ is more complicated in this case, and will be omitted. Thus the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:-\lambda-\mu)$ is not special in deformation theory. This is a bit surprising, since $H^3$ does not vanish for elements of this subfamily, so it would not have been unreasonable to expect that there would be some obstructions to the extension of an infinitesimal deformation. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)=\mathfrak{r}_{3,\mu/\lambda}(\C)\oplus\C$ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- . The dimensions of $H^1$ and $H^2$ increase to 3, and $H^3$ is 1-dimensional as well. The two cocycles $\psi_1$ and $\psi_2$ chosen as basis elements for $H^2$ in the generic case remain nontrivial and one can find an independent nontrivial cocycle $\psa{13}1+\psa{23}2$. However, this choice of a basis turns out to be inconvenient, and a slight modification of the basis will make the presentation simpler. We have $$\begin{aligned} H^1=&\langle\pha11\lambda(\lambda-\mu)+\pha21\lambda+\pha31, \pha11+\pha22+\pha33,\pha43\rangle\\ H^2=&\langle\psi_1=\psa{24}3+\psa{14}3\lambda,\psi_2=\psa{14}3,\psi_3=\psa{13}1+\psa{23}2\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ Let $d^\inf=d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)+\psi_it^i$. We compute $$\begin{aligned} [\psi_1,\psi_3]&=-\pha{124}1+\pha{234}3+\pha{134}3\lambda+\pha{124}2\lambda=-D(\psa{12}2+\psa{13}3)\\ [\psi_2,\psi_3]&=\pha{134}3+\pha{124}2,\end{aligned}$$ so that $$\tfrac12[d^\inf,d^\inf]=-D(\zeta_1)t^1t^3+(\pha{134}3+\pha{124}2) t^2t^3,$$ where $\zeta_1=\psa{12}2+\psa{13}3$. Note that in the case $t^3=0$, since $\psi_1$ and $\psi_2$ span the same subspace as the ones we used in the generic case, a deformation with $t^3=0$ is equivalent to one in the family. Thus there is a two parameter family of deformations of $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$ along the big family $d_3(\alpha:\beta:\eta)$. On the other hand, when $t^3$ does not vanish, we will have to consider how $d^\inf$ extends to a higher order deformation. It turns out that when $\lambda=\mu$, the codifferential $\pha{134}3+\pha{124}2$ is a coboundary, but otherwise, it can be taken as a basis of $H^3$, and so is an obstruction to the extension of $d^\inf$ to a higher order deformation. We will first consider this obstructed case. ### $\mu\ne\lambda$ In this case we have $$H^3=\langle\phi=\pha{134}3+\pha{124}2\rangle.$$ We extend $d^\inf$ to the second order deformation $$d^2=d^\inf+\zeta_1t^1t^3.$$ Since $\tfrac12[d^2,d^2]=\phi t^2t^3$, the second order deformation is miniversal and the base of the miniversal deformation is $\A=\C[[t^1,t^2,t^3]]/(t^2t^3)$. Thus any true deformation is given by taking $d^\infty=d^2$ with either $t^2=0$ or $t^3=0$. Since the case $t^3=0$ has already been examined, we consider the case $t^2=0$. In this case, the matrix $A$ of the deformation $d^\infty$ is given by $A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&t^2&0&\lambda&1&0\\ t^1t^3&0&t^3&0&\mu&1\\ 0&t^1t^3&0&\lambda t^1&t^1&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right]$. When $t^1=-\tfrac{(\lambda-\mu)^2}4$, then $d^\infty\sim d_1(1:0)$. Since $\lambda\ne\mu$, note that this deformation is not a jump deformation of $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$ but occurs some "distance" away from the original codifferential. When $t^1\ne-\tfrac{(\lambda-\mu)^2}4$, then $d^\infty=d_2^\sharp$. This is a jump deformation, since it is independent of the value of $t^1$, as long as it is small. Thus we obtain that the deformations of $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$, for $\lambda\ne\mu$, live along two planes in the $(t^1,t^2,t^3)$ space. One is the plane $t^3=0$ determining deformations along the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$, while those which lie in the plane $t^2=0$ are equivalent to $d_2^\sharp$, except along the line $t^1=-\frac{(\lambda-\mu)^2}4$, which is not important to us, because this line does not include the origin. We say that a family of deformations is *not local* if the origin in the $t$-parameter space is not part of the family. Thus the deformations along the line $t^1=-\frac{(\lambda-\mu)^2}4$ are not local, in this sense. Only local deformations play a role in determining how the moduli space is glued together. ### $\mu=\lambda$ This is the codifferential $d_3(1:1:0)=\mathfrak{r}_3(\C)\oplus\C$. We have $$[\psi_2,\psi_3]=\pha{134}3+\pha{124}2=-D(\zeta_2),$$ where $\zeta_2=-\psa{23}3+\psa{13}3+\psa{24}4+\psa{12}2$. So the second order deformation is given by $$d^2=d^\inf+\zeta_1t^1t^3+\zeta_2t^2t^3.$$ Since $\ph=\pha{124}3$ is a nontrivial 3-cocycle, we can take $$H^3=\langle\phi=\pha{124}3\rangle.$$ Now $$\tfrac12[d^2,d^2]=-2\phi t^2t^3(t^1+t^3)-D(\zeta_3)t^2(t^3)^2+ (\pha{124}4-\pha{123}3)t^2(t^3)^2(t^1+t^2),$$ where $\zeta_3=\psa{23}4$. We did not obtain any second order relations, but because of the term involving $\ph$ in the bracket above, there is a third order relation $t^2t^3(t^1+t^2)$. The last term in the bracket is of higher order, so can be ignored in computing the third order deformation. We can take $$d^3=d(1:1:0)+\psi_it^i +\zeta_1t^1t^3+\zeta_2t^2t^3+\zeta_3t^2(t^3)^2.$$ One computes that $$\begin{aligned} \tfrac12[d^3,d^3]= &-2\phi t^2t^3(t^1+t^3)+2(\pha{124}4-\pha{123}3)t^2(t^3)^2(t^1+t^2)\\ &+2\pha{123}4t^2(t^3)^3(t^1+t^2).\end{aligned}$$ But this term is equal to zero, using the third order relation. Thus the base of a versal deformation is $\A=\C[[t^1,t^2,t^3]]/(t^2t^3(t^1+t^2))$, $d^\infty=d^3$, and the formal deformation corresponds to an actual deformation along the three planes $t^3=0$, $t^2=0$ and $t^2=-t^1$. The plane $t^3=0$ corresponds to the generic case, which gives a 2 parameter space of deformations along the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$. Now consider the plane spanned by $t^2=0$. If neither $t^1$ nor $t^3$ vanish, we then have $d^\infty\sim d_2^\sharp$, so there is a jump deformation from $d_3(1:1:0)$ to $d_2^\sharp$, just as for the other points on the line $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$. When $t^2=t^3=0$, we are on the plane $t^3=0$, which we discussed already. When $t^2=t^1=0$, then we get a jump deformation to the point $d_1(1:0)$. This is not like the generic case. Finally, let us consider the case when $t^2=-t^1$ and $t^3\ne0$. Let us express $t^1=\tfrac{\alpha\beta}{(\alpha+\beta)^2}$, and let $x=\tfrac{\alpha+\beta}{t^3}$. Then $g^*(d^3)=d_1(\alpha,\beta)$ if $g$ is given by the matrix $G=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} -x&0&0&0\\ 0&-x&0&0\\ 0&\frac{\beta}{t^3}&-\frac1{t^3}&x\\ 0&-\beta&1&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right].$ Note that $(\alpha:\beta)$ is independent of $t^3$ as long as $t^3$ is nonzero. On the plane $t^2=-t^1$, we see that for $t^1=0$, the deformation jumps to $d_1(1:0)$, but when $t^1\ne0$, we deform along the family $d_1(\alpha:\beta)$. It is as if $d_3(1:1:0)$ sits just above the point $d_1(1:0)$ and deforms as if it were that element. This is the usual pattern we have already discussed when there is a jump deformation to a point. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\lambda+\mu)$ ------------------------------------------------- We exclude the codifferential $d_3(1:0:1)$ from our consideration here, because it coincides with the codifferential $d_3(1:1:0)$, which we treated previously. $H^1$ is the same as the generic case, and we have $$\begin{aligned} H^2=\langle\psi_1=&2\psa{12}1\lambda\mu(\lambda+\mu)^2+ \psa{12}2\lambda\mu^2(\lambda+\mu)(\lambda+2\mu)\\ &+\psa{12}3\lambda^2\mu^2(\lambda+\mu)^2- \psa{13}1\mu(\mu^2+2\lambda\mu+2\lambda^2)\\ &-\psa{13}2\mu^2(\lambda+\mu)+\psa{23}1(\mu^2+\lambda\mu+\mu^2)\\ &+(\psa{14}1+\psa{23}2)\lambda^2\mu^2(\lambda+\mu)\\ \psi_2=&\psa{14}1\\ \psi_3=&\psa{14}2\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ The brackets of $\psi_1$ with itself and $\psi_3$ are coboundaries, its bracket with $\psi_2$ is a nontrivial cocycle, and the rest of the brackets vanish. From this, one sees immediately that the second order relation is $t^1t^2=0$, but it is not so obvious what higher order terms might be necessary to add in order to obtain the relation on the base of the miniversal deformation. Since the space of 3-cocycles is 12 dimensional, we know that a miniversal deformation can be expressed in the form $$d^\infty=d_3(\lambda,\mu,\lambda+\mu)+\psi_i t^i +\zeta_i x^i,$$ where $\zeta_1,\dots,\zeta_{11}$ is a pre-basis of the space of 3-coboundaries. In fact, we can give this pre-basis as $$\{\zeta_i,i=1,\dots11\}= \{\psa{12}1,\psa{12}2,\psa{12}3,\psa{12}4,\psa{13}1,\psa{13}2, \psa{13}3,\psa{13}4,\psa{23}1,\psa{23}2,\psa{23}4 \}.$$ Note that the first 10 of these vectors are just the first 10 elementary 2-cochains. Also $$H^3=\langle\phi=\pha{124}3\rangle,$$ and we can complete the linearly independent set given by the $D(\zeta_i)$ and $\phi$ to a basis $\{D(\zeta_1),\dots,D(\zeta_11),\phi,\tau_1,\dots\tau_4\}$ of $L_3$. Then we must have $$[d^\infty,d^\infty]=D(\zeta_1)s^1+\cdots+\D(\zeta_{11})s^{11}+\phi s^{12} +\tau_1 s^{13}+\cdots \tau_4 s^{16},$$ for some coefficients $s^1,\dots s^{16}$, where these coefficients are expressed as polynomials in the variables $t^i$ and $x^i$. Now all of these coefficients must be equal to zero, once you take into account the relation on the base of the miniversal deformation, which is the coefficient $s^{12}$. The expression one obtains for $s^{12}$ by direct computation from the form of $d^\infty$ will have the variables $x^i$ in it, but it should depend only on the variables $t^i$. The trick is to solve the first 11 equations for $x^i$ as functions of the variables $t^i$, and then substitute these into the formula for $s^{12}$ to obtain the relation on the base. The relation on the base of the miniversal deformation is simply $t^1t^2=0$, which is exactly the second order relation. If you solve for the coefficients of $s^{13},\dots,s^{16}$, then they turn out to be multiples of $s^{12}$, so they are equal to zero using the relation on the base. Let us study the deformations of $d(\lambda:\mu:\lambda+\mu)$. Since the relation on the base of the miniversal deformation is $t^1t^2=0$, in any true deformation, we must have either $t^1=0$ or $t^2=0$. When $t^1=0$, then $d^\infty=d_3(\lambda:\mu:\lambda+\mu)+\psi_2 t^2+\psi_3 t^3$, so that for any values of $t^2$ and $t^3$ we have a deformation along the big family. In fact, $d^\infty\sim d_3(\alpha:\beta:\eta)$ where $$\begin{aligned} \alpha=&\tfrac12(\lambda+\mu+t^2+\sqrt{(t^2+\lambda-\mu)^2+4t^3})\\ \beta=&\tfrac12(\lambda+\mu+t^2-\sqrt{(t^2+\lambda-\mu)^2+4t^3})\\ \eta=&\lambda+\mu.\end{aligned}$$ The interesting case is when $t^2=0$. The matrix of $d^\infty$ is quite complicated, so we won't reproduce it here, but it should be noted that some terms have $t^3-\lambda\mu$ in the denominator, so that $t^3=\lambda\mu$ may not correspond to an actual deformation. When $t^1\ne0$, then $d^\infty\sim\mathfrak g_8\left(\tfrac{\lambda\mu-t^3}{(\lambda+\mu)^2}\right)$. In particular, if we set $t^3=0$, we see that there is a jump deformation to $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$, and that we also deform along the family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$ when $t^3\ne 0$. The codifferential $d_3(1:-1:0)$ -------------------------------- For this codifferential, from the fact that $H^2$ and $H^3$ both have dimension 5, we expect to see some interesting phenomena, both because the tangent space to the space of deformations has dimension 5, and since $H^3$ has high dimension, the dimension of the variety of deformations would likely be lower than 5. We can give bases for the cohomology as follows: $$\begin{aligned} H^1=\langle&2\pha11+\pha22+\pha31,\pha11+\pha22+\pha33,\pha43\rangle\\ H^2=\langle&\psi_1=\psa{24},\psi_2=\psa{14}3,\psi_3=\psa{12}3- \psa{13}3-\psa{23}3+\psa{14}4+\psa{24}4\\ &\psi_4=\psa{23}1-2\psa{23}2,\psi_5=\psa{12}4-\psa{13}4-\psa{23}4\rangle\\ H^3=\langle&\phi_1=\pha{124}1,\phi_2=\pha{124}3,\phi_3=\pha{123}2+ \pha{123}3-\pha{234}4\\ &\phi_4=\pha{123}4,\phi_5=\pha{123}2+\pha{124}4-\pha{234}4\rangle.\end{aligned}$$ A pre-basis of the 3-coboundaries is $$\{\zeta_1,\dots,\zeta_9\}= \{\psa{12}1,\psa{12}2,\psa{12}3,\psa{12}4,\psa{13}1,\psa{13}2,\psa{13}3, \psa{13}4,\psa{14}4\}.$$ A miniversal deformation is given by $$\d^\infty=d_3(1:-1:0)+\psi_i t^i+\zeta_i x^i,$$ where the $x^i$ are expressible as power series in the variables $t^i$. Since not all of the brackets of the $\psi_i$ vanish, we do not expect that the coefficients $x^i$ are all equal to zero, in general. We can express $$[d^\infty,\d^\infty]=D(\zeta_i)s^i +\phi_i s^{9+i} +\tau_i s^{14+i},$$ where $D(\zeta_i)$, $\phi_i$ and $\tau_i$ form a basis of $L_3$. Solving $s^1=\cdots=s^9=0$ for $x^1,\dots,x^9$ in terms of $t^1,\dots, t^9$, and substituting these values of the $x^i$ into the formulas for $s^{10},\dots,s^{14}$, we obtain 5 relations on the base of the versal deformation, the simplest of which is $$\tfrac{(t^3(t^1)^2+4t^1t^2t^4+4t^2t^4)}{t^1-2}=0.$$ Some of these relations have $t^1-1$ or $t^1-2$ as a factor of the denominator, which means that there may not be a solution when $t^1$ takes on these values. There should be an actual, rather than just a formal power series solution for all values of $t^i$ which make all 5 of the relations vanish. When we solved for the zeros of the relations, we obtained the following 5 solutions: $$\begin{aligned} 1)\quad t^1=&t^2=t^4=0\\\ 2)\quad t^3=&t^4=t^5=0\\ 3)\quad t^2=&t^3=t^5=0\\ 4)\quad t^3=&t^5=0,\qquad t^1=-1\\ 5)\quad t^2=&\tfrac{-t^1(t^1-2)^2}8,t^3=\tfrac{t^4(t^1-2)^2(t^1+1)}{2t^1}, t^5=\tfrac{(t^4)^2(t^1-2)^2(t^1+1)}{(t^1)^2}.\\\end{aligned}$$ Note that each of these solutions is only a 2-dimensional subvariety of the 5-dimensional tangent space. For the first solution, the matrix of the corresponding $d^\infty$ is $$A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&0&1&1&0\\ 0&0&0&0&-1&1\\ t^3&-t^3&-t^3&0&0&0\\ t^5&-t^5&-t^5&t^3&t^3&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right].$$ Along the curve $t^5=(t^3)^2$, $d^\infty\sim d_1(1:-1)$. For all other points on the $(t^3,t^5)$-plane, $d^\infty\sim d_3$. This fits with our prior observation that there is a jump deformation from $d_1(1:-1)$ to $d_3$. Thus we have jump deformations from $d_3(1:-1:0)$ to both $d_1(1:-1)$ and $d_3$. For the second solution, the matrix of $d^\infty$ is $$A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&0&1&1&0\\ 0&0&0&0&-1+t^1&1\\ 0&0&0&t^2&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right].$$ Deformations corresponding to this solution give a two parameter family of deformations along the big family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\nu)$. For the third solution, the matrix of $d^\infty$ is $$A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&-t^4t^1&t^4&1&1&0\\ 0&0&-2t^4&0&-1+t^1&1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right].$$ When $t^4=0$, this is just a special case of the previous solution, and in fact, in this case $d^\infty=d_3(1:-1+t^1:0)$. Supposing that $t^4\ne0$, then when $t^1\ne-1$, then $d^\infty\sim\d_2^\sharp$ which is a jump deformation. The fourth solution has $t^1=-1$, which means it is not local, so does not contribute to our picture of the moduli space. Although the solution is interesting, we will omit it here. For the last solution, which is the most complicated of them all, the first three columns of the matrix of $d^\infty$ are $$\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&t^1t^4&t^4\\\frac{t^4(t^1-2)^2(t^1+1)}4&0&-2t^4\\\frac{t^4(t^1-2)^4(t^1+1)}{8t^1}&\frac{-t^4(t^1-2)^2(-4+3(t^1)^2)}{8t^1}& \frac{-t^4(t^1-2)^2(t^1+1)}{2t^1}\\\frac{(t^4)^2(t^1+2)(t^1-2)^4(t^1+1)}{8(t^1)^2}&\frac{-(t^4)^2((t^1)^3-2(t^1)^2+4t^1+8)(t^1-2)^2}{8(t^1)^2}& \frac{-(t^4)^2(t^1+1)(t^1-2)^2}{(t^1)^2}\\\end{smallmatrix}\right].$$ Note that $t^1$ appears in the denominator, so cannot vanish for this solution. If $t^4=0$, $t^1=-1$ or $t^1=2$, then the fifth solution coincides with one of the previous four, so we will not consider these cases here. The matrix of $A$ is so complicated that in order to determine which standard form the codifferential is equivalent to three, we first had to transform $A$ into a matrix of an equivalent codifferential which had a simpler matrix. We found that $d^\infty\sim d_1(\alpha:\beta)$ where $$\alpha=\tfrac{t^1+\sqrt{5(t^1)^2-16t^1+16}}2,\quad \beta=\tfrac{t^1-\sqrt{5(t^1)^2-16t^1+16}}2.$$ Note that if we were to set $t^1=0$ in the above, we would obtain the codifferential $d_1(1:-1)$, to which we already obtained a jump deformation in the first solution above. The picture of the local deformations of $d_3(1:-1:0)$ is as follows. First, we can deform along the big family. Secondly, we can deform to $d_2^\sharp$, like any other member of the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:0)$. Thirdly, like any other member of the family $d_3(\lambda:\mu:\lambda+\mu)$, we have a jump deformation to an element in the family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$. Because the element we deform to is $d_1(1:-1)$, which has an extra deformation to the element $d_3$, we can also deform to this element, as well as deforming along the family $d_1(\lambda:\mu)$. The codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ ------------------------------------- This family does not have an action of the symmetric group, which is important to keep in mind. Generically, $H^1$ and $H^2$ are 4 dimensional. The generic basis of $H^2$ below consists of elements which are linearly independent nontrivial cocycles for generic values of $\lambda$ and $\mu$ except in the special case $\lambda=\mu$, which we will treat separately. Of course, for those values of $\lambda$ and $\mu$ for which $\dim H^2>4$, they do not span $H^2$. Generically, we have $$\begin{aligned} H^1=\langle&\psa12,\psa22(\lambda-\mu)+\psa32,\psa22+\psa33,\psa21(\lambda-\mu)+\psa31\rangle\\ H^2=\langle&\psi_1=\psa{34}3, \psi_2=\psa{14}2, \psi_3=\psa{24}1, \psi_4=\psa{24}2 \rangle.\end{aligned}$$ All of the brackets of these nontrivial cocycles vanish, so the miniversal deformation is just the first order deformation $d^\infty=d_3(\lambda:\mu)+\psi_i t^i$, and there are no relations on the base. The matrix of $d^\infty$ is given by $A=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} 0&0&0&\lambda&t^3&0\\ 0&0&0&t^2&\lambda+t^4&1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&\mu+t^1\\ 0&0&0&0&0&0 \end{smallmatrix}\right]$. If $t^3\ne 0$, then $d^\infty\sim d_3(\alpha,\beta,\eta)$, where $$\alpha=\lambda+\tfrac{t^4+\sqrt{(t^4)^2+4t^2t^3}}2, \beta=\lambda+\tfrac{t^4-\sqrt{(t^4)^2+4t^2t^3}}2,\eta=\mu+t^1.$$ If $t^1=t^2=t^4=0$, then $d^\infty\sim d_3(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$, so there is a jump deformation from $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ to $d_3(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$. Thus we see that the codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ sits over the codifferential $d_3(\lambda:\lambda:\mu)$ and deforms along the big family as if it were that codifferential. All of the deformations of $d_3(\lambda:\mu)$ which do not lie along the hyperplane $t^3=0$ lie along the big family. Now, consider the hyperplane $t^3=0$. The eigenvalues of the submatrix $B=\left[\begin{smallmatrix} \lambda&0&0\\ t^2&\lambda+t^4&1\\ 0&\mu+t^1 \end{smallmatrix}\right]$ are $\lambda$, $\lambda+t^4$ and $\mu+t^1$. If these eigenvalues are all distinct, then $d^\infty\sim d_3(\lambda:\lambda+t^4:\mu+t^1)$. Otherwise,
{'source': 'arXiv_out/math0512354_extract_lie4d'}