scholarly journals Geometric and unipotent crystals. II. From unipotent bicrystals to crystal bases

Author(s):  
Arkady Berenstein ◽  
David Kazhdan
Keyword(s):  

2006 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong-Uy Shin
Keyword(s):  


Author(s):  
Georgia Benkart ◽  
Seok-Jin Kang






1994 ◽  
Vol 163 (3) ◽  
pp. 675-691 ◽  
Author(s):  
S.J. Kang ◽  
K.C. Misra
Keyword(s):  


Author(s):  
Ben Brubaker ◽  
Daniel Bump ◽  
Solomon Friedberg

This chapter translates Statements A and B into Statements A′ and B′ in the language of crystal bases, and explains in this language how Statement B′ implies Statement A′. It first introduces the relevant definition, which is provisional since it assumes that we can give an appropriate definition of boxing and circling for Ω‎. The crystal graph formulation in Statement A′ is somewhat simpler than its Gelfand-Tsetlin counterpart. In particular, in the formulation of Statement A, there were two different Gelfand-Tsetlin patterns that were related by the Schützenberger involution. In the crystal graph formulation, different decompositions of the long element simply result in different paths from the same vertex v to the lowest weight vector.



Author(s):  
Jens Jantzen
Keyword(s):  






Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document