Paper detail

Restrictions of generalized Verma modules to symmetric pairs

We initiate a new line of investigation on branching problems for generalized Verma modules with respect to complex reductive symmetric pairs (g,k). Here we note that Verma modules of g may not contain any simple module when restricted to a reductive subalgebra k in general. In this article, using the geometry of K_C orbits on the generalized flag variety G_C/P_C, we give a necessary and sufficient condition on the triple (g,k, p) such that the restriction X|_k always contains simple k-modules for any g-module $X$ lying in the parabolic BGG category O^p attached to a parabolic subalgebra p of g. Formulas are derived for the Gelfand-Kirillov dimension of any simple k-module occurring in a simple generalized Verma module of g. We then prove that the restriction X|_k is multiplicity-free for any generic g-module X \in O if and only if (g,k) is isomorphic to a direct sum of (A_n,A_{n-1}), (B_n,D_n), or (D_{n+1},B_n). We also see that the restriction X|_k is multiplicity-free for any symmetric pair (g, k) and any parabolic subalgebra p with abelian nilradical and for any generic g-module X \in O^p. Explicit branching laws are also presented.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author4 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.