Yetter-Drinfeld modules under cocycle twists. (Q626699): Difference between revisions

For simplicity, all Hopf algebras will be over the complex numbers \(\mathbb C\). Let \(H\) be a graded (by the non-negative integers) Hopf algebra with \(H_0=\mathbb CG\) for a finite Abelian group \(G\), and \(0=H_n=H_{n+1}=\cdots\) for some positive integer \(n\). \textit{D. E. Radford} exhibited a bijective correspondence between the Cartesian product \(\widehat G\times G\) (\(\widehat G\) the character group of \(G\)) and the set of isomorphism classes of simple (left-right) Yetter-Drinfeld \(H\)-modules [J. Algebra 270, No. 2, 670-695 (2003; Zbl 1042.16028)]. The paper under review considers twists \(H^s\) of \(H\), where \(s\) is a convolution invertible 2-cocycle from \(H\otimes H\) to \(\mathbb C\). If \(M\) is a Yetter-Drinfeld \(H\)-module, there is a corresponding Yetter-Drinfeld module denoted by \(M^s\). It was shown by \textit{S. Majid} and \textit{R. Oeckl} that the categories of Yetter-Drinfeld \(H\)-modules and Yetter-Drinfeld \(H^s\)-modules are monoidally equivalent [Commun. Math. Phys. 205, No. 3, 617-655 (1999; Zbl 0939.58007)] and formulated for Yetter-Drinfeld modules by \textit{H. Chen} and \textit{Y. Zhang} [Commun. Algebra 35, No. 2, 399-433 (2007; Zbl 1125.16023)]. The main theorem of the paper under review considers \(s\) to be extended to \(H\) from a normalized 2-cocycle on \(G\). Applying Radford's result, it gives a precise correspondence between simple Yetter-Drinfeld \(H\)-modules and simple Yetter-Drinfeld \(H^s\)-modules. In the final two sections, the authors specialize to the restricted 2-parameter quantum group \(\mathfrak u_{r,s}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\). Some conditions are known for which \(\mathfrak u_{r,s}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\) is the Drinfeld double of a Borel subalgebra. In these cases, (left) \(\mathfrak u_{r,s}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\)-modules correspond to Yetter-Drinfeld modules for the Borel subalgebra, and these are given by Radford's construction. For \(n\) at least 3, (under mild assumptions) there is no Hopf algebra isomorphism between \(\mathfrak u_{r,s}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\) and \(\mathfrak u_{q,q^{-1}}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\) unless \(r=q\), \(s=q^{-1}\) or vice-versa. However, their representations can be quite similar when the parameters are related in certain ways. The authors give a precise explanation of this using their results on cocycle twists. They exploit an explicit cocycle twist that yields an equivalence of categories of Yetter-Drinfeld modules for the Borel subslgebras, and hence an equivalence of categories of modules for \(\mathfrak u_{r,s}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\) and \(\mathfrak u_{q,q^{-1}}(\mathfrak{sl}_n)\). The computer algebra system \textsc{Singular::Plural} was used in obtaining the results for these examples.