Modular orthogonal Yangians

Hao Chang and Hongmei Hu School of Mathematics and Statistics, Hubei Key Laboratory of Mathematical Sciences, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China [email protected] Department of Mathematics, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai 201306, China [email protected]
(Date: May 31, 2025)
Abstract.

We study the (extended) orthogonal Yangians associated to the Lie algebras types B𝐵Bitalic_B and D𝐷Ditalic_D over a field of positive characteristic. We define the p𝑝pitalic_p-center for the Yangians and obtain an explicit description of the center in terms of Drinfeld generators, showing that the center is generated by its Harish-Chandra center together with a large p𝑝pitalic_p-center.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 17B37, Secondary 17B50
* Corresponding author.

1. Introduction

For each simple Lie algebra 𝔤𝔤\mathfrak{g}fraktur_g over the field of complex numbers, the corresponding Yangian Y(𝔤)Y𝔤\operatorname{Y}(\mathfrak{g})roman_Y ( fraktur_g ) was defined by Drinfeld in [D1] as a cannonical deformation of the universal enveloping algerba U(𝔤[x])U𝔤delimited-[]𝑥\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{g}[x])roman_U ( fraktur_g [ italic_x ] ) for the current Lie algebra 𝔤[x]𝔤delimited-[]𝑥\mathfrak{g}[x]fraktur_g [ italic_x ]. In [D2], Drinfeld gave a new presentation which is now often referred to as the Drinfeld presentation. The Yangian YnsubscriptY𝑛\operatorname{Y}_{n}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT associated to the general Lie algebra 𝔤𝔩n𝔤subscript𝔩𝑛\mathfrak{gl}_{n}fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT was earlier considered in the work of mathematical physicists from St. Petersburg [TF]. It is an associative algebra whose defining relations can be written in a specific matrix form, which is called the RTT relation; see e.g. [MNO]. In [AACFR](see also [AMR]), the RTT-presentation of the Yangian associated with B,C𝐵𝐶B,Citalic_B , italic_C or D𝐷Ditalic_D Lie algebras was studied. Regarding for related topics and further applications of Yangians, the reader is referred to [Mol1] and the references cited therein.

An explicit isomorphism between the RTT and Drinfeld presentations of the Yangian YnsubscriptY𝑛\operatorname{Y}_{n}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is constructed with the use of the Gauss decomposition (or quasideterminants) of the generator matrix. Complete proofs were given by Brundan and Kleshchev [BK], see also [Mol1, Chapter 3]. The same approach for Yangians of type BCD is more challenging and was accomplished by Jing, Liu and Molev [JLM] , while a different method to establish isomorphisms was developed in [GRW].

In [BT], Brundan and Topley developed the theory of the Yangian YnsubscriptY𝑛\operatorname{Y}_{n}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over a field of positive characteristic. One of the key features which differs from characteristic zero is the existence of a large central subalgebra Zp(Yn)subscript𝑍𝑝subscriptY𝑛Z_{p}(\operatorname{Y}_{n})italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), called the p𝑝pitalic_p-center. Very recently, the first author jointly with Hu and Topley [CHL] studied the modular representations of the Yangian Y2subscriptY2\operatorname{Y}_{2}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Using the p𝑝pitalic_p-center, they classified the finite-dimensional irreducible modules for the restricted Yangian Y2[p]superscriptsubscriptY2delimited-[]𝑝\operatorname{Y}_{2}^{[p]}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. This leads to a description of the certain non-restricted representations of the higher rank general linear Lie algebras. From this one needs precise information about the structure of the center of the Yangian in positive characteristic.

Our goal in this paper is to give a description of the center Z(Y(𝔬N))𝑍Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) of the modular orthogonal Yangian Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Let us shortly explain our approach. Actually, we will mainly work with the extended orthogonal Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). We first define it over an algebraically closed field 𝕜𝕜\mathbbm{k}blackboard_k of positive characteristic to be the associative algebra by the usual RTT-relation ((3.2)). Our main methods are similar strategy to [BT], see also [CH] for the type A𝐴Aitalic_A super Yangians. To describe the center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ), it was easier to work with the Drinfeld presentation rather than the RTT-presentation of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Under the assumption the characteristic char𝕜=:p>2\operatorname{char}\mathbbm{k}=:p>2roman_char blackboard_k = : italic_p > 2, it was observed by Brundan-Topley ([BT, Theorem 4.3]) that the Drinfeld presentation of the modular Yangian YnsubscriptY𝑛\operatorname{Y}_{n}roman_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is exactly the same as the one obtained by Brundan-Kleshchev over the complex field (see [BK, Theorem 5.2]). It remains to be true in our setting, we obtain the Drinfeld presentation of the modular orthogonal Yangians by using the results obtained by Jing-Liu-Molev [JLM] (see Theorem 3.1). However, the usual Serre relations ((3.31)-(3.32)) are inadequate for our purposes, particularly when p=3𝑝3p=3italic_p = 3, we need to derive the cubic Serre relations (Lemma 3.5). Moreover, as the Drinfeld presentation involves more relations, the calculations become more complicated than that in [BT, CH]. We need to put extra effort to obtain more formulae (Lemma 3.8) for getting the central elements.

Next, we take advantage of the transposition and permutation automorphisms of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), These automorphisms reduces the verification of all the relations to checking the simple generating elements, so that we may derive various relations by direct computations. Notice that the root system contains roots of two distinct lengths for type B𝐵Bitalic_B Lie algebras, we must deal with them separately (see Section 3.5). Finally we show that we have found enough generating elements for the center X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).

In characteristic zero, the center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) was determined in [AACFR, AMR]. It still makes sense when char𝕜=p>0char𝕜𝑝0\operatorname{char}\mathbbm{k}=p>0roman_char blackboard_k = italic_p > 0. We call it the Harish-Chandra center of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and denote it by ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). In positive characteristic, the orthogonal current Lie algebra 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] admits a natural structure of restricted Lie algebra with the p𝑝pitalic_p-map 𝔬N[t]𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]\rightarrow\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] → fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] sending xx[p]maps-to𝑥superscript𝑥delimited-[]𝑝x\mapsto x^{[p]}italic_x ↦ italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. More precisely, it is a restricted subalgebra of 𝔤𝔩N[t]𝔤subscript𝔩𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{gl}_{N}[t]fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ]. Then the p𝑝pitalic_p-map is defined on a basis of 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] by the role (Fi,jtr)[p]=δi,jFi,jtrpsuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟delimited-[]𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{[p]}=\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp}( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (see Section 2). By general theory (cf. [Jan, Section 2.3]), the enveloping algebra U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) has a large p𝑝pitalic_p-center Zp(U(𝔬N[t]))subscript𝑍𝑝Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z_{p}(\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ) generated by the elements

{(Fi,jtr)pδi,jFi,jtrp;1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0}.formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝1𝑖formulae-sequence𝑗𝑁formulae-sequence𝑖𝑗𝑁1𝑟0\{(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}-\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp};~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,i+j<N+1,r% \geq 0\}.{ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 } .

In Section 2, we determine the center of the enveloping algebra U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). It is natural to look for lifts of the p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements in Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). Using the relations established in Section 3, we investigate the p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements. We will give a description of the p𝑝pitalic_p-center Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) and obtain the precise formulas for the generators. It is shown in Section 4 that the generators of Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) provide the lifts of generators for Zp(U(𝔬N[t]))subscript𝑍𝑝Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z_{p}(\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ). With this information in hand, we show in particular that the center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is generated by ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) and Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). We also determine the center for the Yangian Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). It would also be interesting to generalize the results in this article to the modular Yangians of type C𝐶Citalic_C, but it requires more laborious calculations and some new techniques.


Throughout this paper, 𝕜𝕜\mathbbm{k}blackboard_k denotes an algebraically closed field of characteristic char(𝕜)=:p>2\operatorname{char}(\mathbbm{k})=:p>2roman_char ( blackboard_k ) = : italic_p > 2.

2. The orthogonal current Lie algebra and p𝑝pitalic_p-center

Define the orthogonal Lie algebras 𝔬Nsubscript𝔬𝑁\mathfrak{o}_{N}fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 and N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n (corresponding to types B𝐵Bitalic_B and D𝐷Ditalic_D, respectively) as subalgebras of 𝔤𝔩N𝔤subscript𝔩𝑁\mathfrak{gl}_{N}fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT spanned by all elements Fi,jsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗F_{i,j}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Fi,j:=Ei,jEj,i,assignsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗subscript𝐸𝑖𝑗subscript𝐸superscript𝑗superscript𝑖\displaystyle F_{i,j}:=E_{i,j}-E_{j^{\prime},i^{\prime}},italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , (2.1)

where the elements {Ei,j;i,j=1,,N}formulae-sequencesubscript𝐸𝑖𝑗𝑖𝑗1𝑁\{E_{i,j};~{}i,j=1,\dots,N\}{ italic_E start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ; italic_i , italic_j = 1 , … , italic_N } denote the standard basis of 𝔤𝔩N𝔤subscript𝔩𝑁\mathfrak{gl}_{N}fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Here we use the notation i=N+1isuperscript𝑖𝑁1𝑖i^{\prime}=N+1-iitalic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_N + 1 - italic_i. It is easy to verify that the elements Fi,jsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗F_{i,j}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT satisfy the relations

[Fi,j,Fk,l]=δk,jFi,lδi,lFk,jδk,iFj,l+δl,jFk,i.subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑘𝑙subscript𝛿𝑘𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑙subscript𝛿𝑖𝑙subscript𝐹𝑘𝑗subscript𝛿𝑘superscript𝑖subscript𝐹superscript𝑗𝑙subscript𝛿𝑙superscript𝑗subscript𝐹𝑘superscript𝑖[F_{i,j},F_{k,l}]=\delta_{k,j}F_{i,l}-\delta_{i,l}F_{k,j}-\delta_{k,i^{\prime}% }F_{j^{\prime},l}+\delta_{l,j^{\prime}}F_{k,i^{\prime}}.[ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l , italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

The current algebra is the Lie algebra 𝔬N[t]:=𝔬N𝕜[t]assignsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡tensor-productsubscript𝔬𝑁𝕜delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]:=\mathfrak{o}_{N}\otimes\mathbbm{k}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] := fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_t ]. When x𝔬N𝑥subscript𝔬𝑁x\in\mathfrak{o}_{N}italic_x ∈ fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and f𝕜[t]𝑓𝕜delimited-[]𝑡f\in\mathbbm{k}[t]italic_f ∈ blackboard_k [ italic_t ] we usually abbreviate xf=xf𝔬N[t]tensor-product𝑥𝑓𝑥𝑓subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡x\otimes f=xf\in\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]italic_x ⊗ italic_f = italic_x italic_f ∈ fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ]. As a vector space, 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] is spanned by elements {Fi,jtr;1i,jN,r0}formulae-sequencesubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑖formulae-sequence𝑗𝑁𝑟0\{F_{i,j}t^{r};~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,r\geq 0\}{ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_r ≥ 0 }, and the Lie bracket is given by

[Fi,jtr,Fk,lts]=(δk,jFi,lδi,lFk,jδk,iFj,l+δl,jFk,i)tr+s.subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝐹𝑘𝑙superscript𝑡𝑠subscript𝛿𝑘𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑙subscript𝛿𝑖𝑙subscript𝐹𝑘𝑗subscript𝛿𝑘superscript𝑖subscript𝐹superscript𝑗𝑙subscript𝛿𝑙superscript𝑗subscript𝐹𝑘superscript𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑠\displaystyle[F_{i,j}t^{r},F_{k,l}t^{s}]=(\delta_{k,j}F_{i,l}-\delta_{i,l}F_{k% ,j}-\delta_{k,i^{\prime}}F_{j^{\prime},l}+\delta_{l,j^{\prime}}F_{k,i^{\prime}% })t^{r+s}.[ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l , italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r + italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (2.2)

We observe that Fi,j+Fj,i=0subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹superscript𝑗superscript𝑖0F_{i,j}+F_{j^{\prime},i^{\prime}}=0italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, so that the elements Fi,jtrsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟F_{i,j}t^{r}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT with r=0,1,2,𝑟012r=0,1,2,\dotsitalic_r = 0 , 1 , 2 , … and i+j<N+1𝑖𝑗𝑁1i+j<N+1italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 make a basis of 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ].

It is well-known that 𝔬Nsubscript𝔬𝑁\mathfrak{o}_{N}fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a restricted simple Lie subalgebra of 𝔤𝔩N𝔤subscript𝔩𝑁\mathfrak{gl}_{N}fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (cf. [Hum, Section 0.13]). Moreover, the current algebra 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] is a restricted Lie algebra with p𝑝pitalic_p-map defined on the basis by the rule (xtr)[p]:=x[p]trpassignsuperscript𝑥superscript𝑡𝑟delimited-[]𝑝superscript𝑥delimited-[]𝑝superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝(xt^{r})^{[p]}:=x^{[p]}t^{rp}( italic_x italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT where x[p]superscript𝑥delimited-[]𝑝x^{[p]}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT denotes the p𝑝pitalic_pth matrix power of x𝔬N𝑥subscript𝔬𝑁x\in\mathfrak{o}_{N}italic_x ∈ fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (see [BT, Lemma 3.3]). In particular, one can show by direct computation that (Fi,jtr)[p]=δi,jFi,jtrpsuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟delimited-[]𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{[p]}=\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp}( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Let Z(𝔬N[t]):=Z(U(𝔬N[t]))assign𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝑍Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]):=Z(\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]))italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) := italic_Z ( roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ) be the center of the universal enveloping algebra U(𝔬N[t]))\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]))roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ). Using the restricted structure, we can define the p𝑝pitalic_p-center Zp(𝔬N[t])subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) of U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) to be the subalgebra of Z(𝔬N[t])𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) generated by xpx[p]superscript𝑥𝑝superscript𝑥delimited-[]𝑝x^{p}-x^{[p]}italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for all x𝔬N[t]𝑥subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡x\in\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]italic_x ∈ fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ]. Since the map xxpx[p]maps-to𝑥superscript𝑥𝑝superscript𝑥delimited-[]𝑝x\mapsto x^{p}-x^{[p]}italic_x ↦ italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_x start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_p ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is p𝑝pitalic_p-semilinear, we have that

Zp(𝔬N[t])=𝕜[(Fi,jtr)pδi,jFi,jtrp;1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0]\displaystyle Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=\mathbbm{k}\big{[}(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}-% \delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp};~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,i+j<N+1,r\geq 0\big{]}italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = blackboard_k [ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 ] (2.3)

as a free polynomial algebra.

The following result is adapted from [BT, Lemma 3.2 and Theorem 3.4]. We provide a proof here which is slightly different in the type B𝐵Bitalic_B case.

Theorem 2.1.

We have that the center Z(𝔬N[t])𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) of U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) is equal to the p𝑝pitalic_p-center Zp(𝔬N[t])subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). In particular, Z(𝔬N[t])𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) is freely generated by

{(Fi,jtr)pδi,jFi,jtrp;1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0}.formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝1𝑖formulae-sequence𝑗𝑁formulae-sequence𝑖𝑗𝑁1𝑟0\displaystyle\{(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}-\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp};~{}1\leq i,j\leq N% ,i+j<N+1,r\geq 0\}.{ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 } . (2.4)
Proof.

Define a filtration on U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) by placing Fi,jtrsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟F_{i,j}t^{r}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in degree r+1𝑟1r+1italic_r + 1. Then the associated graded algebra grU(𝔬N[t])grUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_gr roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) is isomorphic (both as a graded algebra and as a graded 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ]-module) to the symmetric algebra S(𝔬N[t])𝑆subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). The adjoint action of 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] on itself extends to actions of 𝔬N[t]subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] on U(𝔬N[t])Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) and S(𝔬N[t])𝑆subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) by derivations. The invariant subalgebras are denoted by U(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, respectively. It is clear that

grZ(𝔬N[t])S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]gr𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\subseteq S(\mathfrak{o}_{% N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}roman_gr italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊆ italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (2.5)

We first prove the claim

()S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]is freely generated by{(Fi,jtr)p;1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0}.(\ast)\ \ \ S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}~{}\text{is freely % generated by}~{}\{(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p};~{}~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,i+j<N+1,r\geq 0\}.( ∗ ) italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is freely generated by { ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 } .

Note that all the elements in the set {(Fi,jtr)p;1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0}formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝1𝑖formulae-sequence𝑗𝑁formulae-sequence𝑖𝑗𝑁1𝑟0\{(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p};~{}~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,i+j<N+1,r\geq 0\}{ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 } belong to S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and let I(𝔬N[t])𝐼subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡I(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_I ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) be the subalgebra of S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT generated by them. Let

B:={(i,j,r);1i,jN,i+j<N+1,r0}B:=\{(i,j,r);~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,i+j<N+1,r\geq 0\}italic_B := { ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i + italic_j < italic_N + 1 , italic_r ≥ 0 }

for short. It follows that

S(𝔬N[t])=𝕜[Fi,jtr;(i,j,r)B]andI(𝔬N[t])=𝕜[(Fi,jtr)p;(i,j,r)B].𝑆subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜delimited-[]subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑗𝑟𝐵and𝐼subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝐵S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=\mathbbm{k}[F_{i,j}t^{r};~{}(i,j,r)\in B]~{}\text{and}~% {}I(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=\mathbbm{k}[(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p};~{}(i,j,r)\in B].italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = blackboard_k [ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B ] and italic_I ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = blackboard_k [ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B ] .

Hence, S(𝔬N[t])𝑆subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) is free as an I(𝔬N[t])𝐼subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡I(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_I ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] )-module with basis {Π(i,j,r)B(Fi,jtr)ω(i,j,r);ωΩ}subscriptΠ𝑖𝑗𝑟𝐵superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟𝜔Ω\{\Pi_{(i,j,r)\in B}(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{\omega(i,j,r)};~{}\omega\in\Omega\}{ roman_Π start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_ω ∈ roman_Ω }, where

Ω:={ω:B;0ω(i,j,r)<p,(i,j,r)B,ω(i,j,r)=0 for all but finitely many(i,j,r)B}.\Omega:=\left\{\omega:B\rightarrow\mathbb{N};~{}~{}\begin{array}[]{l}0\leq% \omega(i,j,r)<p,~{}\forall(i,j,r)\in B,\\ \text{$\omega(i,j,r)=0$ for all but finitely many}~{}(i,j,r)\in B\end{array}% \right\}.roman_Ω := { italic_ω : italic_B → blackboard_N ; start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 ≤ italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) < italic_p , ∀ ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) = 0 for all but finitely many ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY } .

Now, we must show that S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]I(𝔬N[t])𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝐼subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}\subseteq I(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊆ italic_I ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). Given fS(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑓𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡f\in S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_f ∈ italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, we thus write

f=wΩcω(i,j,r)B(Fi,jtr)ω(i,j,r)𝑓subscript𝑤Ωsubscript𝑐𝜔subscriptproduct𝑖𝑗𝑟𝐵superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟f=\sum\limits_{w\in\Omega}c_{\omega}\prod\limits_{(i,j,r)\in B}(F_{i,j}t^{r})^% {\omega(i,j,r)}italic_f = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w ∈ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

for cωI(𝔬N[t])subscript𝑐𝜔𝐼subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡c_{\omega}\in I(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_I ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ), all but finitely many of which are zero. Also fix a non-zero function ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω, we have to prove that cω=0subscript𝑐𝜔0c_{\omega}=0italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.

Suppose first that ω(i,j,r)>0𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟0\omega(i,j,r)>0italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) > 0 for some (i,j,r)B𝑖𝑗𝑟𝐵(i,j,r)\in B( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B with ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j. Choose s𝑠s\in\mathbb{N}italic_s ∈ blackboard_N that it is bigger that all hhitalic_h such that ω(k,l,h)>0𝜔𝑘𝑙0\omega(k,l,h)>0italic_ω ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) > 0 for (k,l,h)B𝑘𝑙𝐵(k,l,h)\in B( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) ∈ italic_B. If ii𝑖superscript𝑖i\neq i^{\prime}italic_i ≠ italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, then we see that

ad(Fi,its)(f)=ωΩcω(k,l,h)Bω(k,l,h)>0ω(k,l,h)adsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑠𝑓subscript𝜔Ωsubscript𝑐𝜔subscript𝑘𝑙𝐵𝜔𝑘𝑙0𝜔𝑘𝑙\displaystyle\operatorname{ad}(F_{i,i}t^{s})(f)=\sum_{\omega\in\Omega}c_{% \omega}\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}(k,l,h)\in B\\ \omega(k,l,h)>0\end{subarray}}\omega(k,l,h)roman_ad ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( italic_f ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω ∈ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) ∈ italic_B end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_ω ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) > 0 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) (Fk,lth)ω(k,l,h)1[Fi,its,Fk,lth]superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑘𝑙superscript𝑡𝜔𝑘𝑙1subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑠subscript𝐹𝑘𝑙superscript𝑡\displaystyle(F_{k,l}t^{h})^{\omega(k,l,h)-1}\left[F_{i,i}t^{s},F_{k,l}t^{h}\right]( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT [ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ]
×(k′′,l′′,h′′)B(k′′,l′′,h′′)(k,l,h)(Fk′′,l′′th′′)ω(k′′,l′′,h′′),\displaystyle\times\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}(k^{\prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime% },h^{\prime\prime})\in B\\ (k^{\prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime},h^{\prime\prime})\neq(k,l,h)\end{subarray}}% (F_{k^{\prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime}}t^{h^{\prime\prime}})^{\omega(k^{\prime% \prime},l^{\prime\prime},h^{\prime\prime})},× ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ∈ italic_B end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ≠ ( italic_k , italic_l , italic_h ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,

The choice of s𝑠sitalic_s in conjunction with [Fi,its,Fi,jtr]=Fi,jts+rsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑠subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑠𝑟[F_{i,i}t^{s},F_{i,j}t^{r}]=F_{i,j}t^{s+r}[ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s + italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT implies that the coefficient of

(Fi,jtr)ω(i,j,r)1Fi,jtr+s(k′′,l′′,h′′)B(k′′,l′′,h′′)(i,j,r)(Fk′′,l′′th′′)ω(k′′,l′′,h′′)superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟1subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑠subscriptproductsuperscript𝑘′′superscript𝑙′′superscript′′𝐵superscript𝑘′′superscript𝑙′′superscript′′𝑖𝑗𝑟superscriptsubscript𝐹superscript𝑘′′superscript𝑙′′superscript𝑡superscript′′𝜔superscript𝑘′′superscript𝑙′′superscript′′(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{\omega(i,j,r)-1}F_{i,j}t^{r+s}\prod_{\begin{subarray}{c}(k^{% \prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime},h^{\prime\prime})\in B\\ (k^{\prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime},h^{\prime\prime})\neq(i,j,r)\end{subarray}}% (F_{k^{\prime\prime},l^{\prime\prime}}t^{h^{\prime\prime}})^{\omega(k^{\prime% \prime},l^{\prime\prime},h^{\prime\prime})}( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r + italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_ARG start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ∈ italic_B end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ≠ ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_k start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

in this expression is cωω(i,j,r)subscript𝑐𝜔𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟c_{\omega}\omega(i,j,r)italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ). It must be zero because fS(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑓𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡f\in S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_f ∈ italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Since 0<ω(i,j,r)<p0𝜔𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝0<\omega(i,j,r)<p0 < italic_ω ( italic_i , italic_j , italic_r ) < italic_p, we conclude that cω=0subscript𝑐𝜔0c_{\omega}=0italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. If i=i𝑖superscript𝑖i=i^{\prime}italic_i = italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, then we consider the coefficient of the same term in ad(Fj,jts)(f)adsubscript𝐹𝑗𝑗superscript𝑡𝑠𝑓\operatorname{ad}(F_{j,j}t^{s})(f)roman_ad ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ( italic_f ) for s𝑠sitalic_s as before. By the same token, we can treat the case that ω(j,j,r)>0𝜔𝑗𝑗𝑟0\omega(j,j,r)>0italic_ω ( italic_j , italic_j , italic_r ) > 0 for some (j,j,r)B𝑗𝑗𝑟𝐵(j,j,r)\in B( italic_j , italic_j , italic_r ) ∈ italic_B. Hence the claim ()(\ast)( ∗ ) is proved.

Since the degree of the element (Fi,jtr)pδi,jFi,jtrpU(𝔬N[t])superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}-\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp}\in\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{% N}[t])( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) is rp+p𝑟𝑝𝑝rp+pitalic_r italic_p + italic_p, we have

grrp+p((Fi,jtr)pδi,jFi,jtrp)=(Fi,jtr)pS(𝔬N[t]).subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑆subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}_{rp+p}\big{(}(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}-\delta_{i,j}F_{i,j}t^{rp}% \big{)}=(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p}\in S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]).roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p + italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) .

The foregoing observation implies that the elements (2.4) are lifts of the algebraically independent generators of S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We obtain S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]grZp(𝔬N[t])𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡grsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}\subseteq\operatorname{gr}Z_{p}(% \mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊆ roman_gr italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). Owing to (2.5), we also have grZp(𝔬N[t])grZ(𝔬N[t])S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]grsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡gr𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\subseteq\operatorname{gr}Z(% \mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\subseteq S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}roman_gr italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊆ roman_gr italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊆ italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Consequently, grZ(𝔬N[t])=grZp(𝔬N[t])=S(𝔬N[t])𝔬N[t]gr𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡grsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝑆superscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=\operatorname{gr}Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N% }[t])=S(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])^{\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t]}roman_gr italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = roman_gr italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = italic_S ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. This yields Z(𝔬N[t])=Zp(𝔬N[t])𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). ∎

3. Orthogonal Yangians

3.1. The RTT generators

Following [AACFR], we define the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) as an associative algebra over 𝕜𝕜\mathbbm{k}blackboard_k with RTT generators {ti,j(r);1i,jN,r1}formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟1𝑖formulae-sequence𝑗𝑁𝑟1\{t_{i,j}^{(r)};~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,r\geq 1\}{ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_r ≥ 1 } satisfying certain quadratic relations. In order to write them down, introduce the formal series

ti,j(u):=δi,j+r1ti,j(r)urX(𝔬N)[[u1]]assignsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟Xsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]delimited-[]superscript𝑢1\displaystyle t_{i,j}(u):=\delta_{i,j}+\sum\limits_{r\geq 1}t_{i,j}^{(r)}u^{-r% }\in{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})[[u^{-1}]]italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) [ [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] ] (3.1)

and combine them into the matrix T(u):=(ti,j(u))1i,jNassign𝑇𝑢subscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑢formulae-sequence1𝑖𝑗𝑁T(u):=(t_{i,j}(u))_{1\leq i,j\leq N}italic_T ( italic_u ) := ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In terms of these series, the defining relations for the algebra X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) are written as

[ti,j(u),tk,l(v)]subscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡𝑘𝑙𝑣\displaystyle[t_{i,j}(u),t_{k,l}(v)][ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =1uv(tk,j(u)ti,l(v)tk,j(v)ti,l(u))absent1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑡𝑘𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑣subscript𝑡𝑘𝑗𝑣subscript𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑢\displaystyle=\frac{1}{u-v}\big{(}t_{k,j}(u)t_{i,l}(v)-t_{k,j}(v)t_{i,l}(u)% \big{)}= divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG ( italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) (3.2)
1uvκ(δk,iq=1Ntq,j(u)tq,l(v)δl,jq=1Ntk,q(v)ti,q(u)),1𝑢𝑣𝜅subscript𝛿𝑘superscript𝑖superscriptsubscript𝑞1𝑁subscript𝑡𝑞𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡superscript𝑞𝑙𝑣subscript𝛿𝑙superscript𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑞1𝑁subscript𝑡𝑘superscript𝑞𝑣subscript𝑡𝑖𝑞𝑢\displaystyle-\frac{1}{u-v-\kappa}\big{(}\delta_{k,i^{\prime}}\sum\limits_{q=1% }^{N}t_{q,j}(u)t_{q^{\prime},l}(v)-\delta_{l,j^{\prime}}\sum\limits_{q=1}^{N}t% _{k,q^{\prime}}(v)t_{i,q}(u)\big{)},- divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v - italic_κ end_ARG ( italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l , italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k , italic_q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_q end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) ,

where we set κ:=N/21assign𝜅𝑁21\kappa:=N/2-1italic_κ := italic_N / 2 - 1.

It was shown in [AACFR] (see also [AMR]) that the product T(uκ)Tt(u)𝑇𝑢𝜅superscript𝑇𝑡𝑢T(u-\kappa)T^{t}(u)italic_T ( italic_u - italic_κ ) italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_u ) is a scalar matrix with

T(uκ)Tt(u)=c(u)1,𝑇𝑢𝜅superscript𝑇𝑡𝑢𝑐𝑢1\displaystyle T(u-\kappa)T^{t}(u)=c(u)1,italic_T ( italic_u - italic_κ ) italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = italic_c ( italic_u ) 1 , (3.3)

where c(u):=1+r1c(r)urassign𝑐𝑢1subscript𝑟1superscript𝑐𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟c(u):=1+\sum_{r\geq 1}c^{(r)}u^{-r}italic_c ( italic_u ) := 1 + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a series in u1superscript𝑢1u^{-1}italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Tt(u)superscript𝑇𝑡𝑢T^{t}(u)italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_u ) denotes the matrix transposition defined by Tt(u)i,j=tj,i(u)superscript𝑇𝑡subscript𝑢𝑖𝑗subscript𝑡superscript𝑗superscript𝑖𝑢T^{t}(u)_{i,j}=t_{j^{\prime},i^{\prime}}(u)italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ). All its coefficients belong to the center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z(\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). The algebra generated by the coefficients {c(r);r>0}superscript𝑐𝑟𝑟0\{c^{(r)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } will be denoted ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). We call it the Harish-Chandra center of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).

3.2. The PBW theorem

Introduce an ascending filtration on the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) by setting degti,j(r)=r1degreesuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑟1\deg t_{i,j}^{(r)}=r-1roman_deg italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r - 1 for all r1𝑟1r\geq 1italic_r ≥ 1. Denote by grr1ti,j(r)subscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}t_{i,j}^{(r)}roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT the images of the elements ti,j(r)superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟t_{i,j}^{(r)}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the (r1)𝑟1(r-1)( italic_r - 1 )-th component of the associated graded algebra grX(𝔬N)grXsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). By the PBW theorem ([AMR, Corollary 3.10]), the mapping

grr1ti,j(r)Fi,jtr1+12δi,jζrmaps-tosubscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟112subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝜁𝑟\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}t_{i,j}^{(r)}\mapsto F_{i,j}t^{r-1}+\frac{% 1}{2}\delta_{i,j}\zeta_{r}roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ↦ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (3.4)

defines an isomorphism

grX(𝔬N)U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,],grXsubscript𝔬𝑁tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})\cong\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{% N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots],roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≅ roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] ,

where 𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] is the algebra of polynomials in indeterminants ζrsubscript𝜁𝑟\zeta_{r}italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and ζrsubscript𝜁𝑟\zeta_{r}italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the image of grr1c(r)subscriptgr𝑟1superscript𝑐𝑟\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}c^{(r)}roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

3.3. Gaussian generators

Apply the Gauss deomposition to the generator matrix T(u)𝑇𝑢T(u)italic_T ( italic_u ) associated with the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ),

T(u)=F(u)H(u)E(u),𝑇𝑢𝐹𝑢𝐻𝑢𝐸𝑢\displaystyle T(u)=F(u)H(u)E(u),italic_T ( italic_u ) = italic_F ( italic_u ) italic_H ( italic_u ) italic_E ( italic_u ) , (3.5)

where F(u),H(u)𝐹𝑢𝐻𝑢F(u),H(u)italic_F ( italic_u ) , italic_H ( italic_u ) and E(u)𝐸𝑢E(u)italic_E ( italic_u ) are uniquely determined matrices of the form

H(u)=(h1(u)000h2(u)000hN(u)),𝐻𝑢subscript1𝑢000subscript2𝑢000subscript𝑁𝑢H(u)=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}h_{1}(u)&0&\cdots&0\\ 0&h_{2}(u)&\cdots&0\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ 0&0&\cdots&h_{N}(u)\end{array}\right),italic_H ( italic_u ) = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) ,
E(u)=(1e1,2(u)e1,N(u)01e2,N(u)001),F(u)=(100f2,1(u)10fN,1(u)fN,2(u)1).formulae-sequence𝐸𝑢1subscript𝑒12𝑢subscript𝑒1𝑁𝑢01subscript𝑒2𝑁𝑢001𝐹𝑢100subscript𝑓21𝑢10subscript𝑓𝑁1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑁2𝑢1E(u)=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}1&e_{1,2}(u)&\cdots&e_{1,N}(u)\\ 0&1&\cdots&e_{2,N}(u)\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ 0&0&\cdots&1\end{array}\right),\>F(u)=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}1&0&\cdots&0% \\ f_{2,1}(u)&1&\cdots&0\\ \vdots&\vdots&\ddots&\vdots\\ f_{N,1}(u)&f_{N,2}(u)&\cdots&1\end{array}\right).italic_E ( italic_u ) = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) , italic_F ( italic_u ) = ( start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 0 end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL 1 end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY ) .

In terms of quasideterminants of [GR] (see also [Mol1, Section 1.11]), we have the following descriptions (cf. [JLM, Section 4]):

hi(u)=|t1,1(u)t1,i1(u)t1,i(u)ti1,1(u)ti1,i1(u)ti1,i(u)ti,1(u)ti,i1(u)ti,i(u)|,subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡11𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖11𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖𝑖1𝑢fragmentst𝑖𝑖(u)\displaystyle h_{i}(u)=\left|\begin{array}[]{cccc}t_{1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{1,i-1}(% u)&t_{1,i}(u)\\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\ t_{i-1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{i-1,i-1}(u)&t_{i-1,i}(u)\\ t_{i,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{i,i-1}(u)&\hbox{\begin{tabular}[]{|c|}\hline\cr$t_{i,i}(u% )$\\ \hline\cr\end{tabular}}\end{array}\right|,italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = | start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY | , (3.11)

whereas

ei,j(u)=hi(u)1|t1,1(u)t1,i1(u)t1,j(u)ti1,1(u)ti1,i1(u)ti1,j(u)ti,1(u)ti,i1(u)ti,j(u)|,subscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑖superscript𝑢1subscript𝑡11𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖11𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖𝑖1𝑢fragmentst𝑖𝑗(u)e_{i,j}(u)=h_{i}(u)^{-1}\left|\begin{array}[]{cccc}t_{1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{1,i-1}% (u)&t_{1,j}(u)\\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\ t_{i-1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{i-1,i-1}(u)&t_{i-1,j}(u)\\ t_{i,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{i,i-1}(u)&\hbox{\begin{tabular}[]{|c|}\hline\cr$t_{i,j}(u% )$\\ \hline\cr\end{tabular}}\end{array}\right|,italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY | , (3.12)

and

fj,i(u)=|t1,1(u)t1,i1(u)t1,i(u)ti1,1(u)ti1,i1(u)ti1,i(u)tj,1(u)tj,i1(u)tj,i(u)|hi(u)1.subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡11𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡1𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖11𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑖1𝑖𝑢subscript𝑡𝑗1𝑢subscript𝑡𝑗𝑖1𝑢fragmentst𝑗𝑖(u)subscript𝑖superscript𝑢1f_{j,i}(u)=\left|\begin{array}[]{cccc}t_{1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{1,i-1}(u)&t_{1,i}(u% )\\ \vdots&\ddots&\vdots&\vdots\\ t_{i-1,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{i-1,i-1}(u)&t_{i-1,i}(u)\\ t_{j,1}(u)&\cdots&t_{j,i-1}(u)&\hbox{\begin{tabular}[]{|c|}\hline\cr$t_{j,i}(u% )$\\ \hline\cr\end{tabular}}\end{array}\right|{h}_{i}(u)^{-1}.italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = | start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋱ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL start_CELL ⋮ end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL ⋯ end_CELL start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL start_ROW start_CELL italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL end_ROW end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY | italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (3.13)

We use the following notation for the coefficients:

hi(u)=r0hi(r)ur,h~i(u)=r0h~i(r)ur:=hi(u)1;formulae-sequencesubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟subscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript~𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsubscript𝑖superscript𝑢1h_{i}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 0}h_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r},~{}\tilde{h}_{i}(u)=\sum% \limits_{r\geq 0}\tilde{h}_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=h_{i}(u)^{-1};italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ;
ei,j(u)=r1ei,j(r)ur,fj,i(u)=r1fj,i(r)ur.formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟e_{i,j}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 1}e_{i,j}^{(r)}u^{-r},~{}f_{j,i}(u)=\sum\limits_% {r\geq 1}f_{j,i}^{(r)}u^{-r}.italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Furthermore, set

ki(u):=h~i(u)hi+1(u),ei(u):=ei,i+1(u),fi(u):=fi+1,i(u),formulae-sequenceassignsubscript𝑘𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑢formulae-sequenceassignsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑖1𝑢assignsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖1𝑖𝑢\displaystyle k_{i}(u):=\tilde{h}_{i}(u)h_{i+1}(u),~{}e_{i}(u):=e_{i,i+1}(u),~% {}f_{i}(u):=f_{i+1,i}(u),italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , (3.14)

with i=1,,n𝑖1𝑛i=1,\dots,nitalic_i = 1 , … , italic_n for type B𝐵Bitalic_B and with i=1,,n1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n-1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n - 1 for type D𝐷Ditalic_D. In the latter case we also set

kn(u):=h~n1(u)hn+1(u)assignsubscript𝑘𝑛𝑢subscript~𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle k_{n}(u):=\tilde{h}_{n-1}(u)h_{n+1}(u)italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) (3.15)

and

en(u):=en1,n+1(u),fn(u):=fn+1,n1(u).formulae-sequenceassignsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢assignsubscript𝑓𝑛𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛1𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle e_{n}(u):=e_{n-1,n+1}(u),~{}f_{n}(u):=f_{n+1,n-1}(u).italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) . (3.16)

We will also use the coefficients of the series defined by

ei(u)=r1ei(r)urandfi(u)=r1fi(r)ur.subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟andsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟\displaystyle e_{i}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 1}e_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}~{}\text{and}~{}f% _{i}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 1}f_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}.italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (3.17)

3.4. Drinfeld presentation of the extended Yangian

We will give the modular analogue of [JLM, Theorem 5.14]. To state the result, we will assume that the simple roots of 𝔬Nsubscript𝔬𝑁\mathfrak{o}_{N}fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are α1,,αnsubscript𝛼1subscript𝛼𝑛\alpha_{1},\dots,\alpha_{n}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with αi:=ϵiϵi+1assignsubscript𝛼𝑖subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖1\alpha_{i}:=\epsilon_{i}-\epsilon_{i+1}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for i=1,,n1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n-1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n - 1, and

αn:={ϵnforN=2n+1,ϵn1+ϵnforN=2n,assignsubscript𝛼𝑛casessubscriptitalic-ϵ𝑛for𝑁2𝑛1subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑛1subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑛for𝑁2𝑛\alpha_{n}:=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}\epsilon_{n}&~{}\text{for}~{}N=2n+1,\\ \epsilon_{n-1}+\epsilon_{n}&~{}\text{for}~{}N=2n,\end{array}{}\right.italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL for italic_N = 2 italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

where ϵ1,,ϵnsubscriptitalic-ϵ1subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑛\epsilon_{1},\dots,\epsilon_{n}italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an orthogonal basis of a vector space with the bilinear form such that (ϵi,ϵi)=1subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖1(\epsilon_{i},\epsilon_{i})=1( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 1 for i=1,,n𝑖1𝑛i=1,\dots,nitalic_i = 1 , … , italic_n. The associated Cartan matrix C=(ci,j)i,j=1n𝐶superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑗𝑖𝑗1𝑛C=(c_{i,j})_{i,j=1}^{n}italic_C = ( italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is defined by ci,j:=(αi,αj)assignsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑗subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗c_{i,j}:=(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{j})italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for series D𝐷Ditalic_D, and by

ci,j:={(αi,αj)ifi<n,2(αi,αj)ifi=n,assignsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑗casessubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗if𝑖𝑛2subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗if𝑖𝑛c_{i,j}:=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{j})&~{}\text{if}~{}i<n,% \\ 2(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{j})&~{}\text{if}~{}i=n,\end{array}{}\right.italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL start_CELL if italic_i < italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL 2 ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_CELL start_CELL if italic_i = italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

for series B𝐵Bitalic_B. We will use the series introduced in (3.14)-(3.16) along with

ei(u):=r>1ei(r)urandfi(u):=r>1fi(r)ur.formulae-sequenceassignsubscriptsuperscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟andassignsubscriptsuperscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟e^{\circ}_{i}(u):=\sum\limits_{r>1}e_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}\ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ f^{% \circ}_{i}(u):=\sum\limits_{r>1}f_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}.italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r > 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r > 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .
Theorem 3.1.

The extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is generated by the coefficients of the series hi(u)subscript𝑖𝑢h_{i}(u)italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) with i=1,,n+1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n+1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n + 1, and the series ei(u)subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢e_{i}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) and fi(u)subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢f_{i}(u)italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) with i=1,,n𝑖1𝑛i=1,\dots,nitalic_i = 1 , … , italic_n, subject only to the following relations, where the indices take all admissible values unless specified otherwise. We have

[hi(u),hj(v)]=subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑗𝑣absent\displaystyle\big{[}h_{i}(u),h_{j}(v)\big{]}=[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =  0, 0\displaystyle\,0,0 , (3.18)
[ei(u),fj(v)]=subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣absent\displaystyle\big{[}e_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)\big{]}=[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = δi,jki(u)ki(v)uv.subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝑘𝑖𝑢subscript𝑘𝑖𝑣𝑢𝑣\displaystyle\,\delta_{i,j}\frac{k_{i}(u)-k_{i}(v)}{u-v}.italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG . (3.19)

For in𝑖𝑛i\leq nitalic_i ≤ italic_n and all j𝑗jitalic_j, and for i=n+1𝑖𝑛1i=n+1italic_i = italic_n + 1 and jn2𝑗𝑛2j\leq n-2italic_j ≤ italic_n - 2 we have

[hi(u),ej(v)]=subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣absent\displaystyle\big{[}h_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)\big{]}=[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = (ϵi,αj)hi(u)(ej(u)ej(v))uv,subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣𝑢𝑣\displaystyle-(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{j})\frac{h_{i}(u)\big{(}e_{j}(u)-e_{j}(v)% \big{)}}{u-v},- ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.20)
[hi(u),fj(v)]=subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣absent\displaystyle\big{[}h_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)\big{]}=[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = (ϵi,αj)(fj(u)fj(v))hi(u)uv,subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗subscript𝑓𝑗𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣subscript𝑖𝑢𝑢𝑣\displaystyle\,(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{j})\frac{\big{(}f_{j}(u)-f_{j}(v)\big{)}h% _{i}(u)}{u-v},( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) divide start_ARG ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.21)

where ϵn+1=0subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑛10\epsilon_{n+1}=0italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. For N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1, we have

[hn+1(u),en1(v)]=0=[hn+1(u),fn1(v)],subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣0subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle[h_{n+1}(u),e_{n-1}(v)]=0=[h_{n+1}(u),f_{n-1}(v)],[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = 0 = [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] , (3.22)
[hn+1(u),en(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),e_{n}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =12(uv)hn+1(u)(en(u)en(v))absent12𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle=\frac{1}{2(u-v)}h_{n+1}(u)\big{(}e_{n}(u)-e_{n}(v)\big{)}= divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) (3.23)
12(uv1)(en(u1)en(v))hn+1(u)12𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle-\frac{1}{2(u-v-1)}\big{(}e_{n}(u-1)-e_{n}(v)\big{)}h_{n+1}(u)- divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u )

and

[hn+1(u),fn(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),f_{n}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =12(uv)(fn(u)fn(v))hn+1(u)absent12𝑢𝑣subscript𝑓𝑛𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle=-\frac{1}{2(u-v)}\big{(}f_{n}(u)-f_{n}(v)\big{)}h_{n+1}(u)= - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) (3.24)
+12(uv1)hn+1(u)(fn(u1)fn(v)),12𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑢1subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣\displaystyle+\frac{1}{2(u-v-1)}h_{n+1}(u)\big{(}f_{n}(u-1)-f_{n}(v)\big{)},+ divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v - 1 ) end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) ,

whereas for N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n we have

[hn+1(u),en1(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),e_{n-1}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hn+1(u)(en1(v)en1(u))uv,absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢𝑢𝑣\displaystyle=\frac{h_{n+1}(u)\big{(}e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-1}(u)\big{)}}{u-v},= divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.25)
[hn+1(u),fn1(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),f_{n-1}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(fn1(v)fn1(u))hn+1(u)uvabsentsubscript𝑓𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑓𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑢𝑣\displaystyle=-\frac{\big{(}f_{n-1}(v)-f_{n-1}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(u)}{u-v}= - divide start_ARG ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG

and

[hn+1(u),en(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),e_{n}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hn+1(u)(en(u)en(v))uv,absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣𝑢𝑣\displaystyle=\frac{h_{n+1}(u)\big{(}e_{n}(u)-e_{n}(v)\big{)}}{u-v},= divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.26)
[hn+1(u),fn(v)]subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}h_{n+1}(u),f_{n}(v)\big{]}[ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(fn(u)fn(v))hn+1(u)uv.absentsubscript𝑓𝑛𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑢𝑣\displaystyle=-\frac{\big{(}f_{n}(u)-f_{n}(v)\big{)}h_{n+1}(u)}{u-v}.= - divide start_ARG ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG .

Moreover,

[ei(u),ei(v)]=(αi,αi)2(ei(u)ei(v))2uv,subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣2𝑢𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}e_{i}(u),e_{i}(v)\big{]}=\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2}% \frac{\big{(}e_{i}(u)-e_{i}(v)\big{)}^{2}}{u-v},[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.27)
[fi(u),fi(v)]=(αi,αi)2(fi(u)fi(v))2uv,subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖𝑣subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖𝑣2𝑢𝑣\displaystyle\big{[}f_{i}(u),f_{i}(v)\big{]}=-\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2% }\frac{\big{(}f_{i}(u)-f_{i}(v)\big{)}^{2}}{u-v},[ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = - divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG , (3.28)

and for i<j𝑖𝑗i<jitalic_i < italic_j we have

u[ei(u),ej(v)]v[ei(u),ej(v)]𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑒𝑗𝑣\displaystyle u\big{[}e^{\circ}_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)\big{]}-v\big{[}e_{i}(u),e^{% \circ}_{j}(v)\big{]}italic_u [ italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] - italic_v [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(αi,αj)ei(u)ej(v),absentsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣\displaystyle=-(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{j})e_{i}(u)e_{j}(v),= - ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , (3.29)
u[fi(u),fj(v)]v[fi(u),fj(v)]𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣𝑣subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle u\big{[}f^{\circ}_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)\big{]}-v\big{[}f_{i}(u),f^{% \circ}_{j}(v)\big{]}italic_u [ italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] - italic_v [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∘ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(αi,αj)fj(v)fi(u).absentsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑗subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{j})f_{j}(v)f_{i}(u).= ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) . (3.30)

We have the Serre relations

σ𝔖k[ei(uσ(1)),[ei(uσ(2)),,[ei(uσ(k)),ej(v)]]]subscript𝜎subscript𝔖𝑘subscript𝑒𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎1subscript𝑒𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎2subscript𝑒𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎𝑘subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣\displaystyle\sum_{\sigma\in\mathfrak{S}_{k}}\big{[}e_{i}(u_{\sigma(1)}),\big{% [}e_{i}(u_{\sigma(2)}),\dots,\big{[}e_{i}(u_{\sigma(k)}),e_{j}(v)\big{]}\dots% \big{]}\big{]}∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ∈ fraktur_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( 1 ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( 2 ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , … , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( italic_k ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] … ] ] =0,absent0\displaystyle=0,= 0 , (3.31)
σ𝔖k[fi(uσ(1)),[fi(uσ(2)),,[fi(uσ(k)),fj(v)]]]subscript𝜎subscript𝔖𝑘subscript𝑓𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎1subscript𝑓𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎2subscript𝑓𝑖subscript𝑢𝜎𝑘subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle\sum_{\sigma\in\mathfrak{S}_{k}}\big{[}f_{i}(u_{\sigma(1)}),\big{% [}f_{i}(u_{\sigma(2)}),\dots,\big{[}f_{i}(u_{\sigma(k)}),f_{j}(v)\big{]}\dots% \big{]}\big{]}∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ∈ fraktur_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( 1 ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( 2 ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , … , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_σ ( italic_k ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] … ] ] =0,absent0\displaystyle=0,= 0 , (3.32)

for ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j with k=1+|cij|𝑘1subscript𝑐𝑖𝑗k=1+|c_{ij}|italic_k = 1 + | italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT |.

Proof.

The proof in [JLM, Theorem 5.14] works perfectly in positive characteristic, see also the proof of [Mol2, Theorem 6.1]. ∎

Remark 3.2.

(1) We note that the relations (5.47), (5.56) and (5.57) in [JLM, Theorem 5.14] contain some typos, as corrected in [Mol2, Page 487].

(2) We identify grX(𝔬N)grXsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] via the isomorphism (3.4). The proof in [JLM, Theorem 5.14] shows moreover that the images of the elements ei,j(r+1),fj,i(r+1)superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑟1e_{i,j}^{(r+1)},f_{j,i}^{(r+1)}italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and hi(r+1)superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑟1h_{i}^{(r+1)}italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT all belong to the r𝑟ritalic_r-th component of grX(𝔬N)grXsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), and under our identification we have that

Fi,jtr+12δi,jζr+1={grrei,j(r+1)ifi<j<i,grrfi,j(r+1)ifj<i<j,grrhi(r+1)if1i=jn+1.subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟12subscript𝛿𝑖𝑗subscript𝜁𝑟1casessubscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟1if𝑖𝑗superscript𝑖subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑖𝑗𝑟1if𝑗𝑖superscript𝑗subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑟1if1𝑖𝑗𝑛1F_{i,j}t^{r}+\frac{1}{2}\delta_{i,j}\zeta_{r+1}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{lll}% \operatorname{gr}_{r}e_{i,j}^{(r+1)}&\text{if}&i<j<i^{\prime},\\ \operatorname{gr}_{r}f_{i,j}^{(r+1)}&\text{if}&j<i<j^{\prime},\\ \operatorname{gr}_{r}h_{i}^{(r+1)}&\text{if}&1\leq i=j\leq n+1.\end{array}\right.italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL if end_CELL start_CELL italic_i < italic_j < italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL if end_CELL start_CELL italic_j < italic_i < italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL if end_CELL start_CELL 1 ≤ italic_i = italic_j ≤ italic_n + 1 . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (3.33)

Recall that Fi,i+Fi,i=0subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖subscript𝐹superscript𝑖superscript𝑖0F_{i,i}+F_{i^{\prime},i^{\prime}}=0italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. Then (3.33) readily implies that111The corrects the formula for type D𝐷Ditalic_D in [JLM, Section 5.5], see also the footnote in [Mol2, Page 489].

grrhn+1(r+1)={12ζr+1forN=2n+1,Fn,ntr+12ζr+1forN=2n.subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑛1𝑟1cases12subscript𝜁𝑟1for𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟12subscript𝜁𝑟1for𝑁2𝑛\operatorname{gr}_{r}h_{n+1}^{(r+1)}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{lll}\frac{1}{2}% \zeta_{r+1}&\text{for}&N=2n+1,\\ -F_{n,n}t^{r}+\frac{1}{2}\zeta_{r+1}&\text{for}&N=2n.\end{array}\right.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL for end_CELL start_CELL italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL for end_CELL start_CELL italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (3.34)
Lemma 3.3.

In the extended Yangian X(𝔬2n+1)Xsubscript𝔬2𝑛1\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{2n+1})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) we have

[en1,n+1(u),en(v)]=en(v)[en1(u),en(v)].subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣[e_{n-1,n+1}(u),e_{n}(v)]=e_{n}(v)[e_{n-1}(u),e_{n}(v)].[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] . (3.35)
Proof.

By (3.29) (see also [JLM, (5.28)]) one obtains

[en1(u),en(v)]=1uv(en1,n+1(v)en1,n+1(u)en1(v)en(v)+en1(u)en(v)).subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣[e_{n-1}(u),\,e_{n}(v)]=\frac{1}{u-v}\left(e_{n-1,n+1}(v)-e_{n-1,n+1}(u){-}e_{% n-1}(v)e_{n}(v){+}e_{n-1}(u)e_{n}(v)\right).[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) + italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) . (3.36)

Moreover, we apply [JLM, Lemma 4.3] to see that

[en1,n+1(u),hn(v)]=1uvhn(v)en(v)(en1(v)en1(u))subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛𝑣1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢[e_{n-1,n+1}(u),h_{n}(v)]=\frac{1}{u-v}h_{n}(v)e_{n}(v)\big{(}e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-% 1}(u)\big{)}[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) )

and

[en1,n+1(u),hn(v)en(v)]=1uvhn(v)en(v)(en1,n+1(v)en1,n+1(u)).subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢[e_{n-1,n+1}(u),h_{n}(v)e_{n}(v)]=\frac{1}{u-v}h_{n}(v)e_{n}(v)\big{(}e_{n-1,n% +1}(v)-e_{n-1,n+1}(u)\big{)}.[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) .

Then (3.36) yields

[en1,n+1(u),en(v)]subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle[e_{n-1,n+1}(u),e_{n}(v)][ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =1uv(en(v)(en1,n+1(v)en1,n+1(u))en(v)(en1(v)en1(u))en(v))absent1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle=\frac{1}{u-v}\big{(}e_{n}(v)(e_{n-1,n+1}(v)-e_{n-1,n+1}(u))-e_{n% }(v)(e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-1}(u))e_{n}(v)\big{)}= divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=en(v)[en1(u),en(v)].absentsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle=e_{n}(v)[e_{n-1}(u),e_{n}(v)].= italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] .

Lemma 3.4.

For all ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j, we have the relation in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

[ei(u),[ei(u),ej(v)]]=0=[fi(u),[fi(u),fj(v)]].subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣0subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle[e_{i}(u),[e_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)]]=0=[f_{i}(u),[f_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)]].[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] = 0 = [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] . (3.37)
Proof.

We observe by the Serre relations ((3.31)-(3.32)) that

[ei(u),ej(v)]=0=[fi(u),fj(v)]subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣0subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle[e_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)]=0=[f_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)][ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = 0 = [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] forci,j=0,forsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑗0\displaystyle\ \ \ \ \ \text{for}~{}~{}c_{i,j}=0,for italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 , (3.38)
[ei(u),[ei(u),ej(v)]]=0=[fi(u),[fi(u),fj(v)]]subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣0subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle[e_{i}(u),[e_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)]]=0=[f_{i}(u),[f_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)]][ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] = 0 = [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] forci,j=1.forsubscript𝑐𝑖𝑗1\displaystyle\ \ \ \ \ \text{for}~{}~{}c_{i,j}=-1.for italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - 1 . (3.39)

Hence, it remains to show that the following relations hold in the algebra X(𝔬2n+1)Xsubscript𝔬2𝑛1\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{2n+1})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

[en(u),[en(u),en1(v)]]=0=[fn(u),[fn(u),fn1(v)]].subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣0subscript𝑓𝑛𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛𝑢subscript𝑓𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle[e_{n}(u),[e_{n}(u),e_{n-1}(v)]]=0=[f_{n}(u),[f_{n}(u),f_{n-1}(v)% ]].[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] = 0 = [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] . (3.40)

We just prove the first equality and the argument for second one is similar. By (3.36), we have

(vu)[en(u),en1(v)]=en1,n+1(v)en1,n+1(u)en1(v)en(u)+en1(u)en(u).𝑣𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢(v-u)[e_{n}(u),e_{n-1}(v)]=e_{n-1,n+1}(v)-e_{n-1,n+1}(u)-e_{n-1}(v)e_{n}(u)+e_% {n-1}(u)e_{n}(u).( italic_v - italic_u ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) + italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) .

Then the Leibniz rule for aden(u)adsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u)roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) in conjunction with (3.35) implies that

[en(u),[en(u),en1(u)]=(1+uv)[en(u),[en(u),en1(v)]].[e_{n}(u),[e_{n}(u),e_{n-1}(u)]=(1+u-v)[e_{n}(u),[e_{n}(u),e_{n-1}(v)]].[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ] = ( 1 + italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ] .

Now let v:=u+1assign𝑣𝑢1v:=u+1italic_v := italic_u + 1 to deduce that the left-hand side is zero, then divide by 1+uv1𝑢𝑣1+u-v1 + italic_u - italic_v to complete the proof. ∎

Lemma 3.5.

For all ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j, we have the following relations in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

[ei(u),[ei(v),ej(w)]]+[ei(v),[ei(u),ej(w)]]=0,subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑗𝑤subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑗𝑤0\displaystyle[e_{i}(u),[e_{i}(v),e_{j}(w)]]+[e_{i}(v),[e_{i}(u),e_{j}(w)]]=0,[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) ] ] + [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) ] ] = 0 , (3.41)
[fi(u),[fi(v),ej(w)]]+[fi(v),[fi(u),fj(w)]]=0.subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑗𝑤subscript𝑓𝑖𝑣subscript𝑓𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑤0\displaystyle[f_{i}(u),[f_{i}(v),e_{j}(w)]]+[f_{i}(v),[f_{i}(u),f_{j}(w)]]=0.[ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) ] ] + [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , [ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) ] ] = 0 . (3.42)
Proof.

As before, we only prove (3.41). Again by the Serre relations, we only need to consider the case that i=n𝑖𝑛i=nitalic_i = italic_n and j=n1𝑗𝑛1j=n-1italic_j = italic_n - 1 for N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1. It is enough to show that the expression

(uv)(uw)(vw)[en(u),[en(v),en1(w)]]𝑢𝑣𝑢𝑤𝑣𝑤subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑤(u-v)(u-w)(v-w)[e_{n}(u),[e_{n}(v),e_{n-1}(w)]]( italic_u - italic_v ) ( italic_u - italic_w ) ( italic_v - italic_w ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_w ) ] ]

is symmetric in u𝑢uitalic_u and v𝑣vitalic_v. Then the proof, which uses (3.27), (3.36), (3.35) and (3.37) is similar to the proof of [BK, Lemma 5.7]. ∎

Lemma 3.6.

The following relations hold in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

(uv)[ei(u),hi(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),h_{i}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hi(v)(ei(v)ei(u)),absentsubscript𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=-h_{i}(v)\big{(}e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u)\big{)},= - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) , (3.43)
(uv)[ei(u),hi+1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),h_{i+1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u)),whereinforN=2n+1,formulae-sequenceabsentsubscript𝑖1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1\displaystyle=h_{i+1}(v)\big{(}e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u)\big{)},\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,% where~{}i\neq n~{}for~{}N=2n+1,= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) , italic_w italic_h italic_e italic_r italic_e italic_i ≠ italic_n italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , (3.44)
(uv)[en(u),hn1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{n}(u),h_{n-1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ={0,forN=2n+1,hn1(v)(en(v)en(u)),forN=2n,absentcases0𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&for~{}N=2n+1,\\ -h_{n-1}(v)(e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u)),&for~{}N=2n,\end{array}\right.= { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) , end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (3.47)
(uv)[ei(u),h~i(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),\tilde{h}_{i}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(ei(v)ei(u))h~i(v),absentsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑣\displaystyle=\big{(}e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u)\big{)}\tilde{h}_{i}(v),= ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , (3.48)
(uv)[ei(u),h~i+1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),\tilde{h}_{i+1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =(ei(v)ei(u))h~i+1(v),whereinforN=2n+1,formulae-sequenceabsentsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖1𝑣𝑤𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑖𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1\displaystyle=-\big{(}e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u)\big{)}\tilde{h}_{i+1}(v),\,\,\,\,\,\,% where~{}i\neq n~{}for~{}N=2n+1,= - ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , italic_w italic_h italic_e italic_r italic_e italic_i ≠ italic_n italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , (3.49)
(uv)[en(u),h~n1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript~𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{n}(u),\tilde{h}_{n-1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] ={0,forN=2n+1,(en(v)en(u))h~n1(v),forN=2n.absentcases0𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript~𝑛1𝑣𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}0,&for~{}N=2n+1,\\ (e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u))\tilde{h}_{n-1}(v),&for~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.= { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL 0 , end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (3.52)
Proof.

Equations (3.43)-(3.47) follow immediately from (3.20) and (3.26). Then (3.48)-(3.52) follow from (3.43)-(3.47) using hj(v)h~j(v)=1subscript𝑗𝑣subscript~𝑗𝑣1h_{j}(v)\tilde{h}_{j}(v)=1italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) = 1. ∎

Corollary 3.7.

The following relations hold in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

ei(u(ϵi,αi))hi(u)subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝑖𝑢\displaystyle e_{i}(u-(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{i}))h_{i}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) =hi(u)ei(u),absentsubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=h_{i}(u)e_{i}(u),= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , h~i(u)ei(u(ϵi,αi))subscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖\displaystyle\ \tilde{h}_{i}(u)e_{i}(u-(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{i}))over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) =ei(u)h~i(u),absentsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=e_{i}(u)\tilde{h}_{i}(u),= italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , (3.53)
ei(u(ϵi+1,αi))hi+1(u)subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖1subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝑖1𝑢\displaystyle e_{i}(u-(\epsilon_{i+1},\alpha_{i}))h_{i+1}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) =hi+1(u)ei(u),absentsubscript𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=h_{i+1}(u)e_{i}(u),= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , h~i+1(u)ei(u(ϵi,αi))subscript~𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖\displaystyle\ \tilde{h}_{i+1}(u)e_{i}(u-(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{i}))over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) =ei(u)h~i+1(u),absentsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖1𝑢\displaystyle=e_{i}(u)\tilde{h}_{i+1}(u),= italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , (3.54)

where in𝑖𝑛i\neq nitalic_i ≠ italic_n in (3.54). For N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n we have

en(u+1)hn+1(u)subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢1subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle e_{n}(u+1)h_{n+1}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) =hn+1(u)en(u),absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢\displaystyle=h_{n+1}(u)e_{n}(u),= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , en1(u1)hn+1(u)subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢1subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle\ e_{n-1}(u-1)h_{n+1}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) =hn+1(u)en1(u),absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle=h_{n+1}(u)e_{n-1}(u),= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , (3.55)
Proof.

Equations (3.53)-(3.54) follow from (3.43)-(3.44) and (3.48)-(3.49) by specializing v𝑣vitalic_v. For example, to get the first relation in (3.53), set v:=u+(ϵi,αi)assign𝑣𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖v:=u+(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{i})italic_v := italic_u + ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) in (3.43), simplify, then replace u𝑢uitalic_u by u(ϵi,αi)𝑢subscriptitalic-ϵ𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖u-(\epsilon_{i},\alpha_{i})italic_u - ( italic_ϵ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). The relations (3.55) follow from (3.25) and (3.26). ∎

Lemma 3.8.

The following relations hold in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for all m0𝑚0m\geq 0italic_m ≥ 0:

(uv)[ei(u),(ei(v)ei(u))m]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),\big{(}e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)\big{)}^{m}]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] =(αi,αi)2m(ei(v)ei(u))m+1,absentsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2𝑚superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚1\displaystyle=\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2}m\big{(}e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)% \big{)}^{m+1},= divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_m ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (3.56)
(uv)[ei(u),hi(v)(ei(v)ei(u))m]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚\displaystyle(u-v)[e_{i}(u),h_{i}(v)\big{(}e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)\big{)}^{m}]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] =((αi,αi)2m1)hi(v)(ei(v)ei(u))m+1,absentsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2𝑚1subscript𝑖𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚1\displaystyle=\left(\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2}m-1\right)h_{i}(v)\big{(}% e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)\big{)}^{m+1},= ( divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_m - 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , (3.57)
(uv)[en1(u),hn+1(v)(en1(v)en1(u))m]=(m1)hn+1(v)(en1(v)en1(u))m+1,forN=2n,formulae-sequence𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢𝑚𝑚1subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢𝑚1𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛(u-v)[e_{n-1}(u),h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-1}(u)\big{)}^{m}]=(m-1)h_{n+% 1}(v)\big{(}e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-1}(u)\big{)}^{m+1},\\ for~{}N=2n,start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_m - 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW (3.58)
(uv)[en(u),hn1(v)(en(v)en(u))m]=(m1)hn1(v)(en(v)en(u))m+1,forN=2n,formulae-sequence𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑚1subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛(u-v)[e_{n}(u),h_{n-1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}]=(m-1)h_{n-1}(v)% \big{(}e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m+1},\\ for~{}N=2n,start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_m - 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW (3.59)
(uv)[ei(u),hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))m]=(m+1)hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))m+1, where in for N=2n+1,formulae-sequence𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚𝑚1subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚1 where 𝑖𝑛 for 𝑁2𝑛1(u-v)[e_{i}(u),h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u))^{m}]=(m+1)h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v)% \!-\!e_{i}(u))^{m+1},\\ \mbox{~{}where~{}}i\neq n\mbox{~{}for~{}}N=2n+1,start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_m + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL where italic_i ≠ italic_n for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW (3.60)
[en(u),hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m]=(m+1)12(uv)hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m+1+12(vu1)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))mfor N=2n+1,formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑚112𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚112𝑣𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚for 𝑁2𝑛1[e_{n}(u),h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}]=(m+1)\frac{1}{2(u% -v)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m+1}\\ +\frac{1}{2(v-u-1)}\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}% (v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}\quad\mbox{for~{}}N=2n+1,start_ROW start_CELL [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_m + 1 ) divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_v - italic_u - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW (3.61)
[en(u),(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m]=(m+1)12(uv)×(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m+1for N=2n+1,formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚𝑚112𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1for 𝑁2𝑛1[e_{n}(u),\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e% _{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}]=(m+1)\frac{1}{2(u-v)}\times\\ \big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)% \big{)}^{m+1}\quad\mbox{for~{}}N=2n+1,start_ROW start_CELL [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ( italic_m + 1 ) divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG × end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW (3.62)
(uv)[ei(u),hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))mh~i(v)]=(m+2)hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))m+1h~i(v), where in for N=2n+1,formulae-sequence𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚subscript~𝑖𝑣𝑚2subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑚1subscript~𝑖𝑣 where 𝑖𝑛 for 𝑁2𝑛1(u-v)[e_{i}(u),\,h_{i+1}(v)\big{(}e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)\big{)}^{m}\tilde{h}_{i% }(v)]=(m+2)h_{i+1}(v)\big{(}e_{i}(v)\!-\!e_{i}(u)\big{)}^{m+1}\tilde{h}_{i}(v)% ,\\ \mbox{~{}where~{}}i\neq n\mbox{~{}for~{}}N=2n+1,start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = ( italic_m + 2 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL where italic_i ≠ italic_n for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW (3.63)
[en(u),hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))mh~n(v)]=(m+3)2(uv)hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m+1h~n(v)+12(vu1)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))mh~n(v)for N=2n+1,formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚subscript~𝑛𝑣𝑚32𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1subscript~𝑛𝑣12𝑣𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚subscript~𝑛𝑣for 𝑁2𝑛1[e_{n}(u),\,h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}\tilde{h}_{n}(v)]% =\frac{(m+3)}{2(u-v)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m+1}\tilde% {h}_{n}(v)\\ +\frac{1}{2(v-u-1)}\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}% (v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}\tilde{h}_{n}(v)\quad\mbox{for~{}}N=2n+1,start_ROW start_CELL [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG ( italic_m + 3 ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_v - italic_u - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) for italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW (3.64)
[en(u),hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))mh~n1(v)]=(m+2)hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m+1h~n1(v),forN=2n.formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚subscript~𝑛1𝑣𝑚2subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1subscript~𝑛1𝑣𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛[e_{n}(u),\,h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}\tilde{h}_{n-1}(v% )]=(m+2)h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m+1}\tilde{h}_{n-1}(v),% \\ for~{}N=2n.start_ROW start_CELL [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = ( italic_m + 2 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW (3.65)
Proof.

The relation (3.56) follows from (3.27) and the Leibniz rule. Then (3.43), (3.25), (3.47), (3.44) and (3.23) imply that (3.57)-(3.61) hold for the case m=0𝑚0m=0italic_m = 0. In the general case, we use (3.56) together with the Leibniz rule. For (3.62), we have by (3.56) and (3.23) that

[en(u),(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)]subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle[e_{n}(u),\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)][ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ]
=\displaystyle== [en(u),(en(v1)en(u))]hn+1(v)+(en(v1)en(u))[en(u),hn+1(v)]subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle[e_{n}(u),\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}]h_{n+1}(v)+\big{(% }e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}[e_{n}(u),h_{n+1}(v)][ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) ] italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) + ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ]
=\displaystyle== 12(uv+1)(en(v1)en(u))2hn+1(v)+(en(v1)en(u))×\displaystyle\frac{1}{2(u-v+1)}\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{2}h_{n+1% }(v)+\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}\timesdivide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v + 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) + ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) ×
(12(uv)hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))+12(vu1)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v))12𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢12𝑣𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle\left(\frac{1}{2(u-v)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u)\big{)}+% \frac{1}{2(v-u-1)}\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)-e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\right)( divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_v - italic_u - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=\displaystyle== 12(uv)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u)).12𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢\displaystyle\frac{1}{2(u-v)}\big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)% \big{(}e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u)\big{)}.divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) .

Then the general case follows from (3.56) and (3.61) using Leibniz again. The relations (3.63)-(3.65) can be treated similarly. ∎

We introduce the following notation:

v,um:=assignsubscriptsuperscript𝑚𝑣𝑢absent\displaystyle\mathcal{H}^{m}_{v,u}:=caligraphic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := m!(2(uv))mhn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m𝑚superscript2𝑢𝑣𝑚subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚\displaystyle\frac{m!}{\big{(}2(u-v)\big{)}^{m}}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!% e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m}divide start_ARG italic_m ! end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
+m(m1)!(2(uv))m1×2(vu1)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m1,𝑚𝑚1superscript2𝑢𝑣𝑚12𝑣𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1\displaystyle+\frac{m(m-1)!}{\big{(}2(u-v)\big{)}^{m-1}\times 2(v-u-1)}\big{(}% e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m% -1},+ divide start_ARG italic_m ( italic_m - 1 ) ! end_ARG start_ARG ( 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT × 2 ( italic_v - italic_u - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ,
~v,um1:=assignsubscriptsuperscript~𝑚1𝑣𝑢absent\displaystyle\tilde{\mathcal{H}}^{m-1}_{v,u}:=over~ start_ARG caligraphic_H end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := (m+1)!2×(2(uv))m1hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m1h~n(v)𝑚12superscript2𝑢𝑣𝑚1subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚1subscript~𝑛𝑣\displaystyle\frac{(m+1)!}{2\times\big{(}2(u-v)\big{)}^{m-1}}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}% e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}^{m-1}\tilde{h}_{n}(v)divide start_ARG ( italic_m + 1 ) ! end_ARG start_ARG 2 × ( 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v )
+(m1)m!2×(2(uv))m2×2(vu1)(en(v1)en(u))hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))m2h~n(v)𝑚1𝑚2superscript2𝑢𝑣𝑚22𝑣𝑢1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣1subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑚2subscript~𝑛𝑣\displaystyle+\frac{(m-1)m!}{2\times\big{(}2(u-v)\big{)}^{m-2}\times 2(v-u-1)}% \big{(}e_{n}(v-1)\!-\!e_{n}(u)\big{)}h_{n+1}(v)\big{(}e_{n}(v)\!-\!e_{n}(u)% \big{)}^{m-2}\tilde{h}_{n}(v)+ divide start_ARG ( italic_m - 1 ) italic_m ! end_ARG start_ARG 2 × ( 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT × 2 ( italic_v - italic_u - 1 ) end_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v - 1 ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v )

Using (3.61), (3.62) and (3.64), we obtain the following corollary:

Corollary 3.9.

For N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 we have

[en(u),v,um]=v,um+1,[en(u),~v,um1]=~v,um.formulae-sequencesubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑚𝑣𝑢subscriptsuperscript𝑚1𝑣𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscriptsuperscript~𝑚1𝑣𝑢subscriptsuperscript~𝑚𝑣𝑢\displaystyle[e_{n}(u),\mathcal{H}^{m}_{v,u}]=\mathcal{H}^{m+1}_{v,u},\ \ \ [e% _{n}(u),\tilde{\mathcal{H}}^{m-1}_{v,u}]=\tilde{\mathcal{H}}^{m}_{v,u}.[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , caligraphic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = caligraphic_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , [ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , over~ start_ARG caligraphic_H end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] = over~ start_ARG caligraphic_H end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (3.66)

We introduce one more family of elements. Set

hi(u)subscript𝑖𝑢\displaystyle h_{i\downarrow\ell}(u)italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) :=hi(u)hi(u1)hi(u+1),assignabsentsubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢1subscript𝑖𝑢1\displaystyle:=h_{i}(u)h_{i}(u-1)\cdots h_{i}(u-\ell+1),:= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - roman_ℓ + 1 ) , (3.67)
hi(u)subscript𝑖𝑢\displaystyle h_{i\uparrow\ell}(u)italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) :=hi(u)hi(u+1)hi(u+1).assignabsentsubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢1subscript𝑖𝑢1\displaystyle:=h_{i}(u)h_{i}(u+1)\cdots h_{i}(u+\ell-1).:= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + 1 ) ⋯ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ - 1 ) . (3.68)
Lemma 3.10.

The following relations hold for all in𝑖𝑛i\leq nitalic_i ≤ italic_n and 11\ell\geq 1roman_ℓ ≥ 1:

(uv)[hi(u),ei(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[h_{i\downarrow\ell}(u),e_{i}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hi(u)(ei(v)ei(u)),absentsubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢\displaystyle=\ell h_{i\downarrow\ell}(u)\big{(}e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u)\big{)},= roman_ℓ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) , (3.69)
(uv)[hi(u),ei1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[h_{i\uparrow\ell}(u),e_{i-1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hi(u)(ei1(u)ei1(v)).absentsubscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑣\displaystyle=\ell h_{i\uparrow\ell}(u)\big{(}e_{i-1}(u)-e_{i-1}(v)\big{)}.= roman_ℓ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) . (3.70)

For N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n we have

(uv)[hn+1(u),en(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[h_{n+1\uparrow\ell}(u),e_{n}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hn+1(u)(en(u)en(v)),absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle=\ell h_{n+1\uparrow\ell}(u)\big{(}e_{n}(u)-e_{n}(v)\big{)},= roman_ℓ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) , (3.71)
(uv)[hn+1(u),en1(v)]𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)[h_{n+1\downarrow\ell}(u),e_{n-1}(v)]( italic_u - italic_v ) [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↓ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] =hn+1(u)(en1(v)en1(u)).absentsubscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle=\ell h_{n+1\downarrow\ell}(u)\big{(}e_{n-1}(v)-e_{n-1}(u)\big{)}.= roman_ℓ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↓ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) . (3.72)
Proof.

The proof is similar to the proof of [BT, Lemma 4.10] (see also [CH, Lemma 3.15]). We prove (3.71) in detail here in order to highlight the minor differences. We will prove it in the following equivalent form:

(uv+)hn+1(u)en(v)=(uv)en(v)hn+1(u)+hn+1(u)en(u).𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢\displaystyle(u-v+\ell)h_{n+1\uparrow\ell}(u)e_{n}(v)=(u-v)e_{n}(v)h_{n+1% \uparrow\ell}(u)+\ell h_{n+1\uparrow\ell}(u)e_{n}(u).( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) = ( italic_u - italic_v ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) + roman_ℓ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) . (3.73)

This follows when =11\ell=1roman_ℓ = 1 from (3.26). To prove (3.73) in general, we proceed by induction on \ellroman_ℓ. Given (3.73) for some 11\ell\geq 1roman_ℓ ≥ 1, multiply both sides on the left by (uv++1)hn+1(u+)𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑛1𝑢(u-v+\ell+1)h_{n+1}(u+\ell)( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) to deduce that:

(uv++1)(uv+)hn+1+1(u)en(v)𝑢𝑣1𝑢𝑣subscript𝑛11𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣\displaystyle(u-v+\ell+1)(u-v+\ell)h_{n+1\uparrow\ell+1}(u)e_{n}(v)( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ + 1 ) ( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) =(uv)(uv++1)hn+1(u+)en(v)hn+1(u)absent𝑢𝑣𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢\displaystyle=(u-v)(u-v+\ell+1)h_{n+1}(u+\ell)e_{n}(v)h_{n+1\uparrow\ell}(u)= ( italic_u - italic_v ) ( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u )
+(uv++1)hn+1+1(u)en(u).𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑛11𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢\displaystyle+\ell(u-v+\ell+1)h_{n+1\uparrow\ell+1}(u)e_{n}(u).+ roman_ℓ ( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↑ roman_ℓ + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) . (3.74)

Using the case of =11\ell=1roman_ℓ = 1 in (3.73) and replacing u𝑢uitalic_u by u+𝑢u+\ellitalic_u + roman_ℓ give that

(uv++1)hn+1(u+)en(v)=(uv+)en(v)hn+1(u+)+hn+1(u+)en(u+).𝑢𝑣1subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣𝑢𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢(u-v+\ell+1)h_{n+1}(u+\ell)e_{n}(v)=(u-v+\ell)e_{n}(v)h_{n+1}(u+\ell)+h_{n+1}(% u+\ell)e_{n}(u+\ell).( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) = ( italic_u - italic_v + roman_ℓ ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) + italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u + roman_ℓ ) .

Then substituting the above identity into (3.4) and using the first relation in (3.55) we obtain (3.73) with \ellroman_ℓ replaced by +11\ell+1roman_ℓ + 1, as required. By using the second relation in (3.55) instead of the first one, (3.72) is a similar argument to (3.71). ∎

3.5. Automorphisms

We list the following (anti)automorphisms of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) which are needed in the next section.

  1. (1)

    (“Transposition”) The mapping τ:ti,j(u)tj,i(u):𝜏maps-tosubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑡𝑗𝑖𝑢\tau:t_{i,j}(u)\mapsto t_{j,i}(u)italic_τ : italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ↦ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) defines an anti-automorphism of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). On Drinfeld generators, we have

    τ(ei,j(u))=fj,i(u),τ(fj,i(u))=ei,j(u)formulae-sequence𝜏subscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢𝜏subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢\tau(e_{i,j}(u))=f_{j,i}(u),\tau(f_{j,i}(u))=e_{i,j}(u)italic_τ ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_τ ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u )

    for i<j𝑖𝑗i<jitalic_i < italic_j, and τ(hi(u))=hi(u)𝜏subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢\tau(h_{i}(u))=h_{i}(u)italic_τ ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) for all i𝑖iitalic_i (cf. [Mol2, (2.9) and Lemma 4.1]).

  2. (2)

    (“Permutation”) Let SNsubscript𝑆𝑁S_{N}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be the Symmetric group on N𝑁Nitalic_N objects. For each wSN𝑤subscript𝑆𝑁w\in S_{N}italic_w ∈ italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, if w(i)=w(i)𝑤superscript𝑖𝑤superscript𝑖w(i^{\prime})=w(i)^{\prime}italic_w ( italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_w ( italic_i ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for all 1iN1𝑖𝑁1\leq i\leq N1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_N, then there is an automorphism w:X(𝔬N)X(𝔬N):𝑤Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsubscript𝔬𝑁w:{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})\rightarrow{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})italic_w : roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) → roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) sending ti,j(r)tw(i),w(j)(r)maps-tosuperscriptsubscript𝑡𝑖𝑗𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑤𝑖𝑤𝑗𝑟t_{i,j}^{(r)}\mapsto t_{w(i),w(j)}^{(r)}italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ↦ italic_t start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w ( italic_i ) , italic_w ( italic_j ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. This is clear from the RTT relation (3.2).

For later use we define

I1:={(i,j);1i,jN,i<j<i}\{(i,n+1);1i<n},I2:={(n+1,j);n<j1}.I_{1}:=\{(i,j);~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,~{}i<j<i^{\prime}\}\backslash\{(i,n+1);~{}1% \leq i<n\},\ \ I_{2}:=\{(n+1,j);~{}n^{\prime}<j\leq 1^{\prime}\}.italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := { ( italic_i , italic_j ) ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i < italic_j < italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } \ { ( italic_i , italic_n + 1 ) ; 1 ≤ italic_i < italic_n } , italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT := { ( italic_n + 1 , italic_j ) ; italic_n start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < italic_j ≤ 1 start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } .

for N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1, and we set I:=I1I2assign𝐼subscript𝐼1subscript𝐼2I:=I_{1}\cup I_{2}italic_I := italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∪ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. For N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n we set

I:={(i,j);1i,jN,i<j<i}.I:=\{(i,j);~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,~{}i<j<i^{\prime}\}.italic_I := { ( italic_i , italic_j ) ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , italic_i < italic_j < italic_i start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT } .

Moreover, we also set J:={(j,i);1i,jN,(i,j)I}J:=\{(j,i);~{}1\leq i,j\leq N,(i,j)\in I\}italic_J := { ( italic_j , italic_i ) ; 1 ≤ italic_i , italic_j ≤ italic_N , ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I }.

Lemma 3.11.

If (i,j)I1𝑖𝑗subscript𝐼1(i,j)\in I_{1}( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT or (i,j)I𝑖𝑗𝐼(i,j)\in I( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I for N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n, then there exists a permutation automorphism ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) sending ei,j(u)ei(u)maps-tosubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢e_{i,j}(u)\mapsto e_{i}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ↦ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ). If (i,j)I2𝑖𝑗subscript𝐼2(i,j)\in I_{2}( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, then there is a permutation automorphism ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω sending ei,j(u)en+1,n+2(u)maps-tosubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢e_{i,j}(u)\mapsto e_{n+1,n+2}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ↦ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ).

Proof.

We first assume that N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 and (i,j)I1𝑖𝑗subscript𝐼1(i,j)\in I_{1}( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. By definition, we may assume further 1in11𝑖𝑛11\leq i\leq n-11 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1. As jn+1𝑗𝑛1j\neq n+1italic_j ≠ italic_n + 1, the transposition (j,i+1)𝑗𝑖1(j,i+1)( italic_j , italic_i + 1 ) can be extended to an automorphism of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Then (3.11)-(3.13) implies the transposition (j,i+1)𝑗𝑖1(j,i+1)( italic_j , italic_i + 1 ) maps ei,j(u)ei(u)maps-tosubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢e_{i,j}(u)\mapsto e_{i}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ↦ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ). Let (i,j)I2𝑖𝑗subscript𝐼2(i,j)\in I_{2}( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We then extend the transposition (j,n+2)𝑗𝑛2(j,n+2)( italic_j , italic_n + 2 ) to a permutation ω=(j,n+2)(j,n)𝜔𝑗𝑛2superscript𝑗𝑛\omega=(j,n+2)(j^{\prime},n)italic_ω = ( italic_j , italic_n + 2 ) ( italic_j start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_n ). It is easy to see that ω𝜔\omegaitalic_ω gives rise to a permutation automorphism sending en+1,j(u)en+1,n+2(u)maps-tosubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢e_{n+1,j}(u)\mapsto e_{n+1,n+2}(u)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ↦ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) using again (3.11)-(3.13).

One argues similarly for the case N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n. ∎

4. The centers of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )

In this section, we will describe the center of the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)𝑋subscript𝔬𝑁X(\mathfrak{o}_{N})italic_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), and give precise formulas for the generators.

4.1. Harish-Chandra center

Recall from Subsection 3.1 the Harish-Chandra center ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) of the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is defined to be the subalgebra generated by the coefficients of c(u)𝑐𝑢c(u)italic_c ( italic_u ) (see (3.3)). The following result provides a formula for the series c(u)𝑐𝑢c(u)italic_c ( italic_u ) in terms of the Gaussian generators hi(u)subscript𝑖𝑢h_{i}(u)italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) with i=1,,n+1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n+1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n + 1 ([JLM, Theorem 5.8] and [Mol2, Theorem 5.3]).

Theorem 4.1.

We have the relations in the extended Yangian X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ):

c(u)𝑐𝑢\displaystyle c(u)italic_c ( italic_u ) =i=1nhi(ui+1)hi(ui)×hn+1(un+1/2)hn+1(un)forN=2n+1,andformulae-sequenceabsentsuperscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1𝑛subscript𝑖𝑢𝑖1subscript𝑖𝑢𝑖subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑛12subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑛𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1𝑎𝑛𝑑\displaystyle=\prod\limits_{i=1}^{n}\frac{h_{i}(u-i+1)}{h_{i}(u-i)}\times h_{n% +1}(u-n+1/2)h_{n+1}(u-n)\ \ \ \ for~{}N=2n+1,and= ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_i + 1 ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_i ) end_ARG × italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n + 1 / 2 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n ) italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , italic_a italic_n italic_d
c(u)𝑐𝑢\displaystyle c(u)italic_c ( italic_u ) =i=1n1hi(ui+1)hi(ui)×hn(un+1)hn+1(un+1)forN=2n.formulae-sequenceabsentsuperscriptsubscriptproduct𝑖1𝑛1subscript𝑖𝑢𝑖1subscript𝑖𝑢𝑖subscript𝑛𝑢𝑛1subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑛1𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle=\prod\limits_{i=1}^{n-1}\frac{h_{i}(u-i+1)}{h_{i}(u-i)}\times h_% {n}(u-n+1)h_{n+1}(u-n+1)\ \ \ \ for~{}N=2n.= ∏ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_i + 1 ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_i ) end_ARG × italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n + 1 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n + 1 ) italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n .

4.2. Off-diagonal p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements

In this subsection, we investigate the p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements that lie in the “root subalgebras” X(𝔬N)i,j+,X(𝔬N)j,iXsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑗𝑖{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+},{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{j,i}^{-}roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for (i,j)I𝑖𝑗𝐼(i,j)\in I( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I, that is, the subalgebras generated by {ei,j(r);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑟0\{e_{i,j}^{(r)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } and {fj,i(r);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑟𝑟0\{f_{j,i}^{(r)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 }, respectively.

Lemma 4.2.

For (i,j)I𝑖𝑗𝐼(i,j)\in I( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I, all coefficients in the power series (ei,j(u))psuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢𝑝(e_{i,j}(u))^{p}( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and (fj,i(u))psuperscriptsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢𝑝(f_{j,i}(u))^{p}( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belong to Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

Proof.

In view of [JLM, Proposition 5.7], we know that en+1,n+2(u)=en(u1/2)subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢12e_{n+1,n+2}(u)=-e_{n}(u-1/2)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 / 2 ) for N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1. Then using Lemma 3.11 and the anti-automorphism τ𝜏\tauitalic_τ, it only needs to be proved that the coefficients of (ei(u))psuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝(e_{i}(u))^{p}( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are central in X(𝔬N)𝑋subscript𝔬𝑁X(\mathfrak{o}_{N})italic_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) for each i=1,,n𝑖1𝑛i=1,\dots,nitalic_i = 1 , … , italic_n. Since we are in characteristic p𝑝pitalic_p, it suffices to establish the following identities in X(𝔬N)[[u1,v1]]𝑋subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]superscript𝑢1superscript𝑣1X(\mathfrak{o}_{N})[[u^{-1},v^{-1}]]italic_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) [ [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] ] for all admissible j𝑗jitalic_j:

(adei(u))p(ej(v))superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣\displaystyle(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(e_{j}(v))( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =0,absent0\displaystyle=0,= 0 , (4.1)
(adei(u))p(hj(v))superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑗𝑣\displaystyle(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(h_{j}(v))( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =0,absent0\displaystyle=0,= 0 , (4.2)
(adei(u))p(fj(v))superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑓𝑗𝑣\displaystyle(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(f_{j}(v))( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =0.absent0\displaystyle=0.= 0 . (4.3)

When ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j, the identity (4.1) is clear beacuse (adei(u))2(ej(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢2subscript𝑒𝑗𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{2}(e_{j}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 by (3.37). To show that (adei(u))p(ei(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(e_{i}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0, we use (3.27) and (3.56) repeatedly:

(uv)p(adei(u))p(ei(v))=superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣absent\displaystyle(u-v)^{p}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(e_{i}(v))=( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = (αi,αi)2(uv)p1(adei(u))p1(ei(v))(ei(u))2subscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝1superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢2\displaystyle\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2}(u-v)^{p-1}(\operatorname{ad}e_{% i}(u))^{p-1}(e_{i}(v))\!-\!(e_{i}(u))^{2}divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) - ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== 2((αi,αi)2)2(uv)p2(adei(u))p2(ei(v))(ei(u))32superscriptsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖22superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝2superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝2subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢3\displaystyle 2(\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2})^{2}(u-v)^{p-2}(% \operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-2}(e_{i}(v))\!-\!(e_{i}(u))^{3}2 ( divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) - ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== =p!((αi,αi)2)p(ei(v)ei(u))p+1=0.𝑝superscriptsubscript𝛼𝑖subscript𝛼𝑖2𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝10\displaystyle\cdots=p!(\frac{(\alpha_{i},\alpha_{i})}{2})^{p}(e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u% ))^{p+1}=0.⋯ = italic_p ! ( divide start_ARG ( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 .

To check (4.2), we first consider the case that in2𝑖𝑛2i\leq n-2italic_i ≤ italic_n - 2. It is immediate from (3.20) if j<i𝑗𝑖j<iitalic_j < italic_i or j>i+1𝑗𝑖1j>i+1italic_j > italic_i + 1. For j=i𝑗𝑖j=iitalic_j = italic_i, we have by (3.20) and (3.57) with m=1𝑚1m=1italic_m = 1 that (adei(u))2(hi(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢2subscript𝑖𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{2}(h_{i}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0. Then we use (3.60) to see that

(uv)p(adei(u))p(hi+1(v))superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑖1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)^{p}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(h_{i+1}(v))( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =(uv)p1(adei(u))p1(hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))\displaystyle=(u-v)^{p-1}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v)% -e_{i}(u))= ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) )
=2(uv)p2(adei(u))p2(hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))2\displaystyle=2(u-v)^{p-2}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-2}(h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v% )-e_{i}(u))^{2}= 2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT
==p!(hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))p=0,\displaystyle=\cdots=p!(h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u))^{p}=0,= ⋯ = italic_p ! ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 ,

it proves that the case j=i+1𝑗𝑖1j=i+1italic_j = italic_i + 1. For the case i=n1𝑖𝑛1i=n-1italic_i = italic_n - 1, if j=i𝑗𝑖j=iitalic_j = italic_i or j=i+1𝑗𝑖1j=i+1italic_j = italic_i + 1, then we can use (3.57)-(3.60) and the same argument to get (adei(u))p(hj(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑗𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(h_{j}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0. When j=i+2=n+1𝑗𝑖2𝑛1j=i+2=n+1italic_j = italic_i + 2 = italic_n + 1, we have (aden1(u))2(hn+1(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑢2subscript𝑛1𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{n-1}(u))^{2}(h_{n+1}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 by (3.58) with m=1𝑚1m=1italic_m = 1. We turn to the case i=n𝑖𝑛i=nitalic_i = italic_n in (4.2). By (3.20), we only have to consider the cases j{n1,n,n+1}𝑗𝑛1𝑛𝑛1j\in\{n-1,n,n+1\}italic_j ∈ { italic_n - 1 , italic_n , italic_n + 1 }. If j=n1𝑗𝑛1j=n-1italic_j = italic_n - 1, then we have (aden(u))2(hn1(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢2subscript𝑛1𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{2}(h_{n-1}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 by (3.59) with m=1𝑚1m=1italic_m = 1. Moreover, the relation (3.57) implies that (aden(u))3(hn(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢3subscript𝑛𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{3}(h_{n}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0. This proves the case i=j=n𝑖𝑗𝑛i=j=nitalic_i = italic_j = italic_n. When j=n+1𝑗𝑛1j=n+1italic_j = italic_n + 1, a consecutive application of (3.60) and (3.66) implies

(uv)p(aden(u))p(hn+1(v))superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)^{p}(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p}(h_{n+1}(v))( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =p!hn+1(v)(en(v)en(u))p=0,forN=2n,formulae-sequenceabsent𝑝subscript𝑛1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝0𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle=p!h_{n+1}(v)(e_{n}(v)-e_{n}(u))^{p}=0,~{}~{}for~{}N=2n,= italic_p ! italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 , italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n ,
(aden(u))p(hn+1(v))superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝subscript𝑛1𝑣\displaystyle(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p}(h_{n+1}(v))( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =v,up=0,forN=2n+1.formulae-sequenceabsentsuperscriptsubscript𝑣𝑢𝑝0𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1\displaystyle=\mathcal{H}_{v,u}^{p}=0,~{}~{}for~{}N=2n+1.= caligraphic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 , italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 .

Finally, for (4.3), it follows when ij𝑖𝑗i\neq jitalic_i ≠ italic_j immediately from (3.19). When i=j𝑖𝑗i=jitalic_i = italic_j, we observe using (3.63) repeatedly that

(uv)p1(adei(u))p1(hi+1(v)h~i(v))=superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝1superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑖1𝑣subscript~𝑖𝑣absent\displaystyle(u-v)^{p-1}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(h_{i+1}(v)\tilde{h}_% {i}(v))=( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 2(uv)p2(adei(u))p2(hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))h~i(v))2superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝2superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝2subscript𝑖1𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑣\displaystyle 2\ (u-v)^{p-2}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-2}(h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}% (v)-e_{i}(u))\tilde{h}_{i}(v))2 ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=\displaystyle== 3!(uv)p3(adei(u))p3(hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))2h~i(v))3superscript𝑢𝑣𝑝3superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝3subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢2subscript~𝑖𝑣\displaystyle 3!(u-v)^{p-3}(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-3}(h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(% v)-e_{i}(u))^{2}\tilde{h}_{i}(v))3 ! ( italic_u - italic_v ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=\displaystyle== =p!hi+1(v)(ei(v)ei(u))p1h~i(v)=0.𝑝subscript𝑖1𝑣superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript~𝑖𝑣0\displaystyle\cdots=p!\,h_{i+1}(v)(e_{i}(v)-e_{i}(u))^{p-1}\tilde{h}_{i}(v)=0.⋯ = italic_p ! italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) = 0 .

Hence, (adei(u))p1(hi+1(v)h~i(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑖1𝑣subscript~𝑖𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(h_{i+1}(v)\tilde{h}_{i}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0. We can also set v=u𝑣𝑢v=uitalic_v = italic_u in this identity to see that (adei(u))p1(hi+1(u)h~i(u))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑖1𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑢0(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(h_{i+1}(u)\tilde{h}_{i}(u))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = 0. Then using (3.19) we obtain for in𝑖𝑛i\neq nitalic_i ≠ italic_n

(uv)(adei(u))p(fi(v))𝑢𝑣superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝subscript𝑓𝑖𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p}(f_{i}(v))( italic_u - italic_v ) ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =(adei(u))p1(ki(u)ki(v))absentsuperscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑘𝑖𝑢subscript𝑘𝑖𝑣\displaystyle=(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(k_{i}(u)-k_{i}(v))= ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=(adei(u))p1(hi+1(u)h~i(u)hi+1(v)h~i(v))=0.absentsuperscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑖1𝑢subscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑣subscript~𝑖𝑣0\displaystyle=(\operatorname{ad}e_{i}(u))^{p-1}(h_{i+1}(u)\tilde{h}_{i}(u)-h_{% i+1}(v)\tilde{h}_{i}(v))=0.= ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 .

When i=j=n𝑖𝑗𝑛i=j=nitalic_i = italic_j = italic_n for N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n, we note that kn(u)=hn+1(u)h~n1(u)subscript𝑘𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript~𝑛1𝑢k_{n}(u)=h_{n+1}(u)\tilde{h}_{n-1}(u)italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ). One argues similarly to obtain (aden(u))p(fn(v))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣0(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p}(f_{n}(v))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 using (3.65). When i=j=n𝑖𝑗𝑛i=j=nitalic_i = italic_j = italic_n for N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1, we have by (3.64) that

(aden(u))p1(hn+1(v)h~n(v))=~v,up1=0.superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript~𝑛𝑣superscriptsubscript~𝑣𝑢𝑝10(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p-1}(h_{n+1}(v)\tilde{h}_{n}(v))=\tilde{\mathcal{% H}}_{v,u}^{p-1}=0.( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = over~ start_ARG caligraphic_H end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v , italic_u end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 .

Also, set v=u𝑣𝑢v=uitalic_v = italic_u, it gives (aden(u))p1(hn+1(u)h~n(u))=0superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript~𝑛𝑢0(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p-1}(h_{n+1}(u)\tilde{h}_{n}(u))=0( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = 0. Then using again (3.19) we have for N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 that

(uv)(aden(u))p(fn(v))𝑢𝑣superscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝subscript𝑓𝑛𝑣\displaystyle(u-v)(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p}(f_{n}(v))( italic_u - italic_v ) ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) =(aden(u))p1(kn(u)kn(v))absentsuperscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑘𝑛𝑢subscript𝑘𝑛𝑣\displaystyle=(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p-1}(k_{n}(u)-k_{n}(v))= ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) )
=(aden(u))p1(hn+1(u)h~n(u)hn+1(v)h~n(v))=0.absentsuperscriptadsubscript𝑒𝑛𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑛1𝑢subscript~𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑣subscript~𝑛𝑣0\displaystyle=(\operatorname{ad}e_{n}(u))^{p-1}(h_{n+1}(u)\tilde{h}_{n}(u)-h_{% n+1}(v)\tilde{h}_{n}(v))=0.= ( roman_ad italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) - italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ) = 0 .

For use in the next theorem, we let

pi,j=rppi,j(r)ur:=ei,j(u)p,qj,i=rpqj,i(r)ur:=fj,i(u)p.formulae-sequencesubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗subscript𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗superscript𝑢𝑝subscript𝑞𝑗𝑖subscript𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑞𝑗𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖superscript𝑢𝑝\displaystyle p_{i,j}=\sum\limits_{r\geq p}p_{i,j}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=e_{i,j}(u)^{p}% ,\ \ q_{j,i}=\sum\limits_{r\geq p}q_{j,i}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=f_{j,i}(u)^{p}.italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (4.4)
Theorem 4.3.

For (i,j)I𝑖𝑗𝐼(i,j)\in I( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I, the algebras Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)j,i𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑗𝑖Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{j,i}^{-}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are infinite rank polynomial algebra freely generated by the central elements {pi,j(rp);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{p_{i,j}^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } and {qj,i(rp);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑞𝑗𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{q_{j,i}^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 }, respectively. We have that degpi,j(rp)=degqj,i(rp)=rppdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝degreesuperscriptsubscript𝑞𝑗𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg p_{i,j}^{(rp)}=\deg q_{j,i}^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = roman_deg italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrpppi,j(rp)=(Fi,jtr1)p,grrppqj,i(rp)=(Fj,itr1)p.formulae-sequencesubscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑞𝑗𝑖𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑗𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}p_{i,j}^{(rp)}=(F_{i,j}t^{r-1})^{p},~{}\ % \ \operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}q_{j,i}^{(rp)}=(F_{j,i}t^{r-1})^{p}.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (4.5)

For r>p𝑟𝑝r>pitalic_r > italic_p with prnot-divides𝑝𝑟p\nmid ritalic_p ∤ italic_r, we have that degpi,j(r)=rp1degreesuperscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑟𝑝1\deg p_{i,j}^{(r)}=r-p-1roman_deg italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r - italic_p - 1 and it is a polynomial in the elements {pi,j(sp);0<sr/p}superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑠𝑝0𝑠𝑟𝑝\{p_{i,j}^{(sp)};~{}0<s\leq\lfloor r/p\rfloor\}{ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 0 < italic_s ≤ ⌊ italic_r / italic_p ⌋ }. Analogous statements with pi,jsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗p_{i,j}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT replaced by qj,isubscript𝑞𝑗𝑖q_{j,i}italic_q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT also hold.

Proof.

Using the anti-automorphism τ𝜏\tauitalic_τ, it suffices to prove all of the statements for X(𝔬N)i,j+Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+}roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We write A𝐴Aitalic_A for the tensor algebra U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] and Z(A)𝑍𝐴Z(A)italic_Z ( italic_A ) for its center. By Theorem 2.1, we know that

Z(A)=Z(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]=Zp(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,].𝑍𝐴tensor-product𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2tensor-productsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2Z(A)=Z(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]=Z_{p}% (\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots].italic_Z ( italic_A ) = italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] .

Denote by Ai,j+superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗A_{i,j}^{+}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT the commutative subalgebra of A𝐴Aitalic_A generated by {Fi,jtr;r0}subscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑟0\{F_{i,j}t^{r};~{}r\geq 0\}{ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r ≥ 0 }. It follows that

Z(A)Ai,j+=𝕜[(Fi,jtr)p;r>0].𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗𝕜delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑟0Z(A)\cap A_{i,j}^{+}=\mathbbm{k}[(F_{i,j}t^{r})^{p};~{}r>0].italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = blackboard_k [ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 ] .

Note that gr(Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+)Z(A)Ai,j+gr𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗\operatorname{gr}(Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i% ,j}^{+})\subseteq Z(A)\cap A_{i,j}^{+}roman_gr ( italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ⊆ italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. By Lemma 4.2, we know that pi,j(rp)superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝p_{i,j}^{(rp)}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belongs to Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Thanks to [BT, Lemma 2.1], we have degpi,j(rp)=rppdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg p_{i,j}^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrpppi,j(rp)=(grr1ei,j(r))p=(Fi,jtr1)p.subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}p_{i,j}^{(rp)}=(\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}{e_{i,j}^{(r)}}% )^{p}=(F_{i,j}t^{r-1})^{p}.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Consequently, gr(Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+)=Z(A)Ai,j+gr𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖𝑗\operatorname{gr}(Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i% ,j}^{+})=Z(A)\cap A_{i,j}^{+}roman_gr ( italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and the elements {pi,j(rp);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{p_{i,j}^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } are algebraically independent generators for Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Suppose that r>p𝑟𝑝r>pitalic_r > italic_p with prnot-divides𝑝𝑟p\nmid ritalic_p ∤ italic_r. Since the coefficient pi,j(r)superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑗𝑟p_{i,j}^{(r)}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is central by Lemma 4.2, applying again [BT, Lemma 2.1] gives the remaining assertions. ∎

Corollary 4.4.

For (i,j)I𝑖𝑗𝐼(i,j)\in I( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I and r>0𝑟0r>0italic_r > 0, we have that (ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))pZ(X(𝔬N))superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁(e_{i,j}^{(r)})^{p},(f_{j,i}^{(r)})^{p}\in Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) and

grrpp(ei,j(r))p=(Fi,jtr1)p,grrpp(fj,i(r))p=(Fj,itr1)p.\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}(e_{i,j}^{(r)})^{p}=(F_{i,j}t^{r-1})^{p},% ~{}\ \ \operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}(f_{j,i}^{(r)})^{p}=(F_{j,i}t^{r-1})^{p}.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT . (4.6)
Proof.

We only prove the case that N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 and the argument for type D𝐷Ditalic_D is similar. Using the anti-automorphism τ𝜏\tauitalic_τ and Lemma 3.11, this reduces to showing that the elements (ei(r))psuperscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑝(e_{i}^{(r)})^{p}( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and (en+1,n+2(r))psuperscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟𝑝(e_{n+1,n+2}^{(r)})^{p}( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belong to Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) for all 1in11𝑖𝑛11\leq i\leq n-11 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1. Assume first that 1in11𝑖𝑛11\leq i\leq n-11 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1. Then (3.27) implies that the elements ei(r)superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟e_{i}^{(r)}italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT satisfy the relations

[ei(r),ei(s)]=t=rs1ei(t)ei(r+s1t)superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑠superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑟𝑠1superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑠1𝑡[e_{i}^{(r)},e_{i}^{(s)}]=\sum\limits_{t=r}^{s-1}e_{i}^{(t)}e_{i}^{(r+s-1-t)}[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + italic_s - 1 - italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

for all 1r<s1𝑟𝑠1\leq r<s1 ≤ italic_r < italic_s. According to [BT, Lemma 2.1 and Remark 2.2], the elements pi,i+1(rp)superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑖1𝑟𝑝p_{i,i+1}^{(rp)}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT can be expressed as polynomials in the elements {(ei(s))p;0<sr}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑝0𝑠𝑟\{(e_{i}^{(s)})^{p};~{}0<s\leq r\}{ ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 0 < italic_s ≤ italic_r }. Remember that we already proved pi,i+1(rp)Z(X(𝔬N))superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑖𝑖1𝑟𝑝𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁p_{i,i+1}^{(rp)}\in Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). By induction on r𝑟ritalic_r one obtains the elements {(ei(r))p;r>0}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{(e_{i}^{(r)})^{p};~{}r>0\}{ ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } are central in X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). We recall that en+1,n+2(u)=en(u1/2)subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛𝑢12e_{n+1,n+2}(u)=-e_{n}(u-1/2)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 / 2 ), while (αn,αn)=1subscript𝛼𝑛subscript𝛼𝑛1(\alpha_{n},\alpha_{n})=1( italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 1, the application of (3.27) with i=n𝑖𝑛i=nitalic_i = italic_n yields

[en+1,n+2(u),en+1,n+2(v)]=12(en+1,n+2(v)en+1,n+2(u))2uv.subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑣12superscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑣subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢2𝑢𝑣[e_{n+1,n+2}(u),e_{n+1,n+2}(v)]=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\big{(}e_{n+1,n+2}(v)-e_{n+1,% n+2}(u)\big{)}^{2}}{u-v}.[ italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG divide start_ARG ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG .

We replace en+1,n+2(u/2)subscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢2e_{n+1,n+2}(u/2)italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u / 2 ) by e~n+1,n+2(u):=r1e~n+1,n+2(r)urassignsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢subscript𝑟1superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}(u):=\sum_{r\geq 1}\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(r)}u^{-r}over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. It follows that

[e~n+1,n+2(u),e~n+1,n+2(v)]=(e~n+1,n+2(v)e~n+1,n+2(u))2uv.subscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢subscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑣superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑣subscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢2𝑢𝑣[\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}(u),\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}(v)]=\frac{\big{(}\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+% 2}(v)-\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}(u)\big{)}^{2}}{u-v}.[ over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = divide start_ARG ( over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) - over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_u - italic_v end_ARG .

By the same token, we have

[e~n+1,n+2(r),e~n+1,n+2(s)]=t=rs1e~n+1,n+2(t)e~n+1,n+2(r+s1t)superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑠superscriptsubscript𝑡𝑟𝑠1superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑡superscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟𝑠1𝑡[\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(r)},\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(s)}]=\sum\limits_{t=r}^{s-1}% \tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(t)}\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(r+s-1-t)}[ over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_s - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + italic_s - 1 - italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

for all 1r<s1𝑟𝑠1\leq r<s1 ≤ italic_r < italic_s. The proof of Lemma 4.2 also implies that all coefficients in the power series (en+1,n+2(u))psuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑢𝑝(e_{n+1,n+2}(u))^{p}( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belong to Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). Then [BT, Lemma 2.1 and Remark 2.2] again show that the elements {(e~n+1,n+2(r))p;r>0}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript~𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{(\tilde{e}_{n+1,n+2}^{(r)})^{p};~{}r>0\}{ ( over~ start_ARG italic_e end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } are central. As a result, (en+1,n+2(r))pZ(X(𝔬N))superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑛1𝑛2𝑟𝑝𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁(e_{n+1,n+2}^{(r)})^{p}\in Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 , italic_n + 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). ∎

Remark 4.5.

By passing to the associated graded algebra, we see that the central elements {(ei,j(r))p;r>0}superscriptsuperscriptsubscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{(e_{i,j}^{(r)})^{p};~{}r>0\}{ ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } give another algebraically independent set of generators for Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i,j+𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖𝑗Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i,j}^{+}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT lifting the central elements {(Fi,jtr1)p;r>0}superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑗superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝𝑟0\{(F_{i,j}t^{r-1})^{p};~{}r>0\}{ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } of grX(𝔬N)grXsubscript𝔬𝑁\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).

4.3. Diagonal p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements

This subsection we introduce the p𝑝pitalic_p-central elements that belong to the diagonal subalgebras

X(𝔬N)i0:=𝕜[hi(r);r>0]assignXsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0𝕜delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑟𝑟0{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i}^{0}:=\mathbbm{k}[h_{i}^{(r)};~{}r>0]roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := blackboard_k [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 ]

of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). For i=1,,n+1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n+1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n + 1, we define

bi(u)=r0bi(r)ur:=hip(u)=hi(u)hi(u1)hi(up+1).subscript𝑏𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsubscript𝑖𝑝𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢1subscript𝑖𝑢𝑝1\displaystyle b_{i}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 0}b_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=h_{i\downarrow p% }(u)=h_{i}(u)h_{i}(u-1)\cdots h_{i}(u-p+1).italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 ) . (4.7)
Lemma 4.6.

For all i=1,,n+1𝑖1𝑛1i=1,\dots,n+1italic_i = 1 , … , italic_n + 1 and r>0𝑟0r>0italic_r > 0, the elements bi(r)superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟b_{i}^{(r)}italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belongs to Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

Proof.

In view of (3.18), it suffices to check that

[bi(u),ej(v)=0=[bi(u),fj(v)][b_{i}(u),e_{j}(v)=0=[b_{i}(u),f_{j}(v)][ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) = 0 = [ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ]

for all 1jn1𝑗𝑛1\leq j\leq n1 ≤ italic_j ≤ italic_n. By applying the anti-automorphism τ𝜏\tauitalic_τ (Subsection 3.5(1)), it suffices to check just the first equality. Assume first that 1in1𝑖𝑛1\leq i\leq n1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n. It is clear when j{i1,i}𝑗𝑖1𝑖j\notin\{i-1,i\}italic_j ∉ { italic_i - 1 , italic_i } by (3.20). When j=i𝑗𝑖j=iitalic_j = italic_i or j=i1𝑗𝑖1j=i-1italic_j = italic_i - 1, the identities (3.69)-(3.70) imply that

[bi(u),ei(v)]=[hip(u),ei(v)]=0subscript𝑏𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣subscript𝑖𝑝𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑣0[b_{i}(u),e_{i}(v)]=[h_{i\downarrow p}(u),e_{i}(v)]=0[ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = 0

and

[bi(u),ei1(v)]=[hip(u),ei1(v)]=[hip(up+1),ei1(v)]=0.subscript𝑏𝑖𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑣subscript𝑖𝑝𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑣subscript𝑖𝑝𝑢𝑝1subscript𝑒𝑖1𝑣0[b_{i}(u),e_{i-1}(v)]=[h_{i\downarrow p}(u),e_{i-1}(v)]=[h_{i\uparrow p}(u-p+1% ),e_{i-1}(v)]=0.[ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = [ italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i ↑ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 ) , italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v ) ] = 0 .

If i=n+1𝑖𝑛1i=n+1italic_i = italic_n + 1 and N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n, then (3.20) again implies that we may assume that j=n𝑗𝑛j=nitalic_j = italic_n or j=n1𝑗𝑛1j=n-1italic_j = italic_n - 1. One argues similarly for this case using (3.71)-(3.72) instead of (3.69)-(3.70). We now treat the case i=n+1𝑖𝑛1i=n+1italic_i = italic_n + 1 and N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1. In view of Theorem 4.1 and (3.18), we obtain

cp(u)subscript𝑐absent𝑝𝑢\displaystyle c_{\downarrow p}(u)italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) :=c(u)c(u1)c(up+1)assignabsent𝑐𝑢𝑐𝑢1𝑐𝑢𝑝1\displaystyle:=c(u)c(u-1)\cdots c(u-p+1):= italic_c ( italic_u ) italic_c ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_c ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 )
=hn+1p(un+1/2)hn+1p(un)absentsubscript𝑛1𝑝𝑢𝑛12subscript𝑛1𝑝𝑢𝑛\displaystyle=h_{n+1\downarrow p}(u-n+1/2)h_{n+1\downarrow p}(u-n)= italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n + 1 / 2 ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n )
=bn+1(un+1/2)bn+1(un)=(bn+1(u))2.absentsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢𝑛12subscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢𝑛superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢2\displaystyle=b_{n+1}(u-n+1/2)b_{n+1}(u-n)=(b_{n+1}(u))^{2}.= italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n + 1 / 2 ) italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_n ) = ( italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Since all the coefficients of c(u)𝑐𝑢c(u)italic_c ( italic_u ) are central, so are cp(u)subscript𝑐absent𝑝𝑢c_{\downarrow p}(u)italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ↓ italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ), the centrality of bn+1(r)superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑟b_{n+1}^{(r)}italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT follows by induction. ∎

Theorem 4.7.

For 1in1𝑖𝑛1\leq i\leq n1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n, the algebra Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i0𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i}^{0}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is an infinite rank polynomial algebra freely generated by the central elements {bi(rp);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{b_{i}^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 }. The statement also holds for i=n+1𝑖𝑛1i=n+1italic_i = italic_n + 1 and N=2n𝑁2𝑛N=2nitalic_N = 2 italic_n. We have that degbi(rp)=rppdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg b_{i}^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrppbi(rp)=(Fi,itr1)pFi,itrpp+(ζrpζrpp+1)/2.subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝜁𝑟𝑝subscript𝜁𝑟𝑝𝑝12\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{i}^{(rp)}=(F_{i,i}t^{r-1})^{p}-F_{i,i}% t^{rp-p}+(\zeta_{r}^{p}-\zeta_{rp-p+1})/2.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / 2 . (4.8)

For 1<r<p1𝑟𝑝1<r<p1 < italic_r < italic_p, we have that bi(r)=0superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟0b_{i}^{(r)}=0italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0. For r>p𝑟𝑝r>pitalic_r > italic_p with prnot-divides𝑝𝑟p\nmid ritalic_p ∤ italic_r, we have that degbi(r)=rp1degreesuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑝1\deg b_{i}^{(r)}=r-p-1roman_deg italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r - italic_p - 1 and it is a polynomial in the elements {bi(sp);0<sr/p}superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑠𝑝0𝑠𝑟𝑝\{b_{i}^{(sp)};~{}0<s\leq\lfloor r/p\rfloor\}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 0 < italic_s ≤ ⌊ italic_r / italic_p ⌋ }.

Proof.

Similar to the proof of Theorem 4.3, we denote by A𝐴Aitalic_A the tensor algebra U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] and Z(A)𝑍𝐴Z(A)italic_Z ( italic_A ) for its center. Let Ai0superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖0A_{i}^{0}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be the commutative subalgebra of A𝐴Aitalic_A generated by {Fi,itr+ζr+1/2;r0}subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝜁𝑟12𝑟0\{F_{i,i}t^{r}+\zeta_{r+1}/2;~{}r\geq 0\}{ italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 ; italic_r ≥ 0 }. One sees that

Z(A)Ai0=𝕜[(Fi,itr+ζr+1/2)p(Fi,itrp+ζrp+1/2);r0].𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖0𝕜delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝜁𝑟12𝑝subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝜁𝑟𝑝12𝑟0Z(A)\cap A_{i}^{0}=\mathbbm{k}[(F_{i,i}t^{r}+\zeta_{r+1}/2)^{p}-(F_{i,i}t^{rp}% +\zeta_{rp+1}/2);~{}r\geq 0].italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = blackboard_k [ ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 ) ; italic_r ≥ 0 ] .

We have that gr(Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i0)Z(A)Ai0gr𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖0\operatorname{gr}(Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i% }^{0})\subset Z(A)\cap A_{i}^{0}roman_gr ( italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) ⊂ italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. By Lemma 4.6, we know that bi(rp+p)superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑝b_{i}^{(rp+p)}italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p + italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belongs to Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i0𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i}^{0}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. According to [BT, Lemma 2.9] and (3.33), we see that degbi(rp+p)=rpdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑟𝑝\deg b_{i}^{(rp+p)}=rproman_deg italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p + italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p and

grrpbi(rp+p)=(Fi,itr+ζr+1/2)p(Fi,itrp+ζrp+1/2).subscriptgr𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝜁𝑟12𝑝subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝subscript𝜁𝑟𝑝12\operatorname{gr}_{rp}b_{i}^{(rp+p)}=(F_{i,i}t^{r}+\zeta_{r+1}/2)^{p}-(F_{i,i}% t^{rp}+\zeta_{rp+1}/2).roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p + italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / 2 ) .

We thus obtain gr(Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i0)=Z(A)Ai0gr𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0𝑍𝐴superscriptsubscript𝐴𝑖0\operatorname{gr}(Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i% }^{0})=Z(A)\cap A_{i}^{0}roman_gr ( italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = italic_Z ( italic_A ) ∩ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and the elements {bi(rp);r>0}superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{b_{i}^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 } are algebraically independent generators for Z(X(𝔬N))X(𝔬N)i0𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Xsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑖0Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})_{i}^{0}italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Again, [BT, Lemma 2.9] implies that bi(r)=0superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟0b_{i}^{(r)}=0italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 0 for 1<r<p1𝑟𝑝1<r<p1 < italic_r < italic_p and that degbi(r)=rp1degreesuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑟𝑝1\deg b_{i}^{(r)}=r-p-1roman_deg italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r - italic_p - 1 if r>p𝑟𝑝r>pitalic_r > italic_p with prnot-divides𝑝𝑟p\nmid ritalic_p ∤ italic_r. Since it is central by Lemma 4.6, it must be a polynomial in the elements {bi(sp);0<sr/p}superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑠𝑝0𝑠𝑟𝑝\{b_{i}^{(sp)};~{}0<s\leq\lfloor r/p\rfloor\}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 0 < italic_s ≤ ⌊ italic_r / italic_p ⌋ }. ∎

4.4. The center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )

We define the p𝑝pitalic_p-center Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) to be the subalgebra generated by

{bi(rp);1in+1,r>0}{(ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))p;(i,j)I,r>0}\displaystyle\{b_{i}^{(rp)};~{}1\leq i\leq n+1,r>0\}\cup\big{\{}\big{(}e_{i,j}% ^{(r)}\big{)}^{p},\big{(}f_{j,i}^{(r)}\big{)}^{p};~{}(i,j)\in I,r>0\big{\}}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n + 1 , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I , italic_r > 0 } (4.9)

According to Lemma 4.2 and Lemma 4.6, we know that both ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) and Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) are subalgebras of Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

We let

bc(u):=r0bc(r)ur:=c(u)c(u1)c(up+1).assign𝑏𝑐𝑢subscript𝑟0𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assign𝑐𝑢𝑐𝑢1𝑐𝑢𝑝1\displaystyle bc(u):=\sum\limits_{r\geq 0}bc^{(r)}u^{-r}:=c(u)c(u-1)\cdots c(u% -p+1).italic_b italic_c ( italic_u ) := ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_c ( italic_u ) italic_c ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_c ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 ) .

Then Theorem 4.1 readily implies

bc(u)={(bn+1(u))2forN=2n+1,bn(u)bn+1(u)forN=2n.𝑏𝑐𝑢casessuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢2𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝑏𝑛𝑢subscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle bc(u)=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}(b_{n+1}(u))^{2}&for~{}N=2n+1,\\ b_{n}(u)b_{n+1}(u)&for~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.italic_b italic_c ( italic_u ) = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_f italic_o italic_r italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (4.12)

By definition each bc(r)𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟bc^{(r)}italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT can be expressed as a polynomial in the elements {c(s);s>0}superscript𝑐𝑠𝑠0\{c^{(s)};~{}s>0\}{ italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_s ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_s > 0 }, so that it belongs to ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). It is also a polynomial in the elements {bi(r);i=n+1,(n+1),s>0}formulae-sequencesuperscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑖𝑛1superscript𝑛1𝑠0\{b_{i}^{(r)};~{}i=n+1,(n+1)^{\prime},s>0\}{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_i = italic_n + 1 , ( italic_n + 1 ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_s > 0 }, so that it belongs to Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) by Theorem 4.7. Consequently, bc(r)ZHC(X(𝔬N))Zp(X(𝔬N))𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁bc^{(r)}\in Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap Z_{p}({\rm X}% (\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∈ italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

Lemma 4.8.

For r>0𝑟0r>0italic_r > 0, we have degbc(rp)=rppdegree𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg bc^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrppbc(rp)=ζrpζrpp+1.subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscript𝜁𝑟𝑝subscript𝜁𝑟𝑝𝑝1\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}bc^{(rp)}=\zeta_{r}^{p}-\zeta_{rp-p+1}.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . (4.13)
Proof.

We just go through the case N=2n+1𝑁2𝑛1N=2n+1italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1, since another case is similar. Set

Hn+1(u):=1+r>0Hn+1(r)ur:=(hn+1(u))2.assignsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑢1subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsuperscriptsubscript𝑛1𝑢2H_{n+1}(u):=1+\sum_{r>0}H_{n+1}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=(h_{n+1}(u))^{2}.italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) := 1 + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r > 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

It is easy to check that degHn+1(r)=r1degreesuperscriptsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑟𝑟1\deg H_{n+1}^{(r)}=r-1roman_deg italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r - 1 and grr1Hn+1(r)=2grr1hn+1(r)subscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑟2subscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑛1𝑟\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}H_{n+1}^{(r)}=2\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}h_{n+1}^{(r)}roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 2 roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Observe that

bc(u)=Hn+1(u)Hn+1(u1)Hn+1(up+1).𝑏𝑐𝑢subscript𝐻𝑛1𝑢subscript𝐻𝑛1𝑢1subscript𝐻𝑛1𝑢𝑝1bc(u)=H_{n+1}(u)H_{n+1}(u-1)\cdots H_{n+1}(u-p+1).italic_b italic_c ( italic_u ) = italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 ) .

Applying [BT, Lemma 2.9], we see that degbc(rp)=rppdegree𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg bc^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrppbc(rp)=(grr1Hn+1(r))pgrrppHn+1(rpp+1)=(2grr1hn+1(r))p2grrpphn+1(rpp+1).subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝superscriptsubscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑟𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐻𝑛1𝑟𝑝𝑝1superscript2subscriptgr𝑟1superscriptsubscript𝑛1𝑟𝑝2subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑛1𝑟𝑝𝑝1\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}bc^{(rp)}=(\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}H_{n+1}^{(r)})^{p}-% \operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}H_{n+1}^{(rp-p+1)}=(2\operatorname{gr}_{r-1}h_{n+1}^{(% r)})^{p}-2\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}h_{n+1}^{(rp-p+1)}.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p - italic_p + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( 2 roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p - italic_p + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Our assertion now follows from (3.34). ∎

Theorem 4.9.

The center Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is generated by ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) and Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). Moreover:

  1. (1)

    ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is the free polynomial algebra generated by {c(r);r>0}superscript𝑐𝑟𝑟0\{c^{(r)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 };

  2. (2)

    Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is the free polynomial algebra generated by

    {bi(rp);1in+1,r>0}{(ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))p;(i,j)I,r>0};\{b_{i}^{(rp)};~{}1\leq i\leq n+1,r>0\}\cup\big{\{}\big{(}e_{i,j}^{(r)}\big{)}% ^{p},\big{(}f_{j,i}^{(r)}\big{)}^{p};~{}(i,j)\in I,r>0\big{\}};{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n + 1 , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I , italic_r > 0 } ; (4.14)
  3. (3)

    Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is the free polynomial algebra generated by

    {bi(rp),c(r);1in,r>0}{(ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))p;(i,j)I,r>0};\{b_{i}^{(rp)},c^{(r)};~{}1\leq i\leq n,r>0\}\cup\big{\{}\big{(}e_{i,j}^{(r)}% \big{)}^{p},\big{(}f_{j,i}^{(r)}\big{)}^{p};~{}(i,j)\in I,r>0\big{\}};{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I , italic_r > 0 } ; (4.15)
  4. (4)

    ZHC(X(𝔬N))Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o% }_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is the free polynomial algebra generated by {bc(rp);r>0}𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝𝑟0\{bc^{(rp)};~{}r>0\}{ italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; italic_r > 0 }.

Proof.

(1) This was proved in [AMR, Corollary 3.9], see also [AACFR].

(2) The given elements generate Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) by the definition. It follows from (4.6) and (4.8) that they are lifts of the algebraically independent elements of the associated graded algebra U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ]. This yields the assertion.

(3) Let Z𝑍Zitalic_Z be the subalgebra of Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) generated by the given elements. In view of Theorem 2.1, we have

grZgrZ(X(𝔬N))Z(grX(𝔬N))=Zp(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,].gr𝑍gr𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁𝑍grXsubscript𝔬𝑁tensor-productsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{gr}Z\subseteq\operatorname{gr}Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))% \subseteq Z(\operatorname{gr}{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))=Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}% [t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots].roman_gr italic_Z ⊆ roman_gr italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ⊆ italic_Z ( roman_gr roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] .

Then the foregoing observations in conjunction with Theorem 2.1 imply that the generators of Z𝑍Zitalic_Z are lifts of the algebraically independent elements of Zp(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ]. Moreover, by (4.6) and (4.8) , it is clear that Zp(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]grZtensor-productsubscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2gr𝑍Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]% \subseteq\operatorname{gr}Zitalic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] ⊆ roman_gr italic_Z. This implies that Z=Z(X(𝔬N))𝑍𝑍Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z=Z({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z = italic_Z ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

(4) We already observed that all bc(rp)𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝bc^{(rp)}italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belong to ZHC(X(𝔬N))Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))\cap Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o% }_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ∩ italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ), while (4.13) implies they are algebraically independent. We claim that Zp(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Xsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) is freely generated by the elements

{bi(rp),bc(rp);1in,r>0}{(ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))p;(i,j)I,r>0}.\{b_{i}^{(rp)},bc^{(rp)};~{}1\leq i\leq n,r>0\}\cup\big{\{}\big{(}e_{i,j}^{(r)% }\big{)}^{p},\big{(}f_{j,i}^{(r)}\big{)}^{p};~{}(i,j)\in I,r>0\big{\}}.{ italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I , italic_r > 0 } .

We know already from (3) that all of these elements different from bc(rp)𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝bc^{(rp)}italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are algebraically independent of anything in ZHC(X(𝔬N))subscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). Our result thus follows from the claim. To prove the claim, we use (4.6), (4.8) and (4.13) to pass to the associated graded algebra. Let A0superscript𝐴0A^{0}italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be the subalgebra of U(𝔬N[t])𝕜[ζ1,ζ2,]tensor-productUsubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝕜subscript𝜁1subscript𝜁2\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])\otimes\mathbbm{k}[\zeta_{1},\zeta_{2},\dots]roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) ⊗ blackboard_k [ italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ζ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … ] generated by {grrppbi(rp);1in+1,r>0}formulae-sequencesubscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝1𝑖𝑛1𝑟0\{\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{i}^{(rp)};~{}1\leq i\leq n+1,r>0\}{ roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n + 1 , italic_r > 0 }. By (2), it suffices to verify that

{grrppbi(rp),grrppbc(rp);1in,r>0}formulae-sequencesubscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑏superscript𝑐𝑟𝑝1𝑖𝑛𝑟0\{\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{i}^{(rp)},\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}bc^{(rp)};~{}1% \leq i\leq n,r>0\}{ roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 }

freely genetrate A0superscript𝐴0A^{0}italic_A start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. This is easily seen from (4.8) and (4.13). ∎

4.5. The center Z(Y(𝔬N))𝑍Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )

The Yangian Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is defined as the subalgebra of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) which consists of the elements stable under the automorphisms

μf:T(u)f(u)T(u):subscript𝜇𝑓𝑇𝑢𝑓𝑢𝑇𝑢\displaystyle\mu_{f}:T(u)\rightarrow f(u)T(u)italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_T ( italic_u ) → italic_f ( italic_u ) italic_T ( italic_u ) (4.16)

for all series f(u)1+u1𝕜[[u1]]𝑓𝑢1superscript𝑢1𝕜delimited-[]delimited-[]superscript𝑢1f(u)\in 1+u^{-1}\mathbbm{k}[[u^{-1}]]italic_f ( italic_u ) ∈ 1 + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT blackboard_k [ [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] ]. That is,

Y(𝔬N):={xX(𝔬N);μf(x)=xforallf(u)1+u1𝕜[[u1]]}.assignYsubscript𝔬𝑁formulae-sequence𝑥Xsubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝜇𝑓𝑥𝑥forall𝑓𝑢1superscript𝑢1𝕜delimited-[]delimited-[]superscript𝑢1{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}):=\{x\in{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N});~{}\mu_{f}(x)=x~{}{% \rm for~{}all~{}}f(u)\in 1+u^{-1}\mathbbm{k}[[u^{-1}]]\}.roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) := { italic_x ∈ roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ; italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = italic_x roman_for roman_all italic_f ( italic_u ) ∈ 1 + italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT blackboard_k [ [ italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] ] } .

By the same proof as [AMR, Theorem 3.1], we have the tensor product decomposition

X(𝔬N)=ZHC(X(𝔬N))Y(𝔬N).Xsubscript𝔬𝑁tensor-productsubscript𝑍HCXsubscript𝔬𝑁Ysubscript𝔬𝑁\displaystyle{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})=Z_{\operatorname{HC}}({\rm X}(\mathfrak% {o}_{N}))\otimes{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}).roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_HC end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) ⊗ roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) . (4.17)

On Gaussian generators, clearly

μf(hi(u))=f(u)hi(u),μf(ei,j(u))=ei,j(u)andμf(fj,i(u))=fj,i(u).formulae-sequencesubscript𝜇𝑓subscript𝑖𝑢𝑓𝑢subscript𝑖𝑢subscript𝜇𝑓subscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢subscript𝑒𝑖𝑗𝑢andsubscript𝜇𝑓subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢subscript𝑓𝑗𝑖𝑢\mu_{f}(h_{i}(u))=f(u)h_{i}(u),~{}\mu_{f}(e_{i,j}(u))=e_{i,j}(u)~{}\text{and}~% {}\mu_{f}(f_{j,i}(u))=f_{j,i}(u).italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_f ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) and italic_μ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) ) = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) .

Recall from (3.14) and (3.15) that

ki(u)=r0ki(r)ur:={h~i(u)hi+1(u),if1in1,h~n(u)hn+1(u),ifi=nandN=2n+1,h~n1(u)hn+1(u),ifi=nandN=2n.subscript𝑘𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript𝑘𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assigncasessubscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑖1𝑢𝑖𝑓1𝑖𝑛1subscript~𝑛𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛1subscript~𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑛1𝑢𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛k_{i}(u)=\sum\limits_{r\geq 0}k_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}% \tilde{h}_{i}(u)h_{i+1}(u),&~{}if~{}1\leq i\leq n-1,\\ \tilde{h}_{n}(u)h_{n+1}(u),&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n+1,\\ \tilde{h}_{n-1}(u)h_{n+1}(u),&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

Since h~i(u)=r0h~i(r)ur=hi(u)1subscript~𝑖𝑢subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript~𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟subscript𝑖superscript𝑢1\tilde{h}_{i}(u)=\sum_{r\geq 0}\tilde{h}_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}=h_{i}(u)^{-1}over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) = ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, we have h~i(0)=1superscriptsubscript~𝑖01\tilde{h}_{i}^{(0)}=1over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1 and h~i(r)=t=1rhi(t)h~i(rt)superscriptsubscript~𝑖𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑡1𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑡superscriptsubscript~𝑖𝑟𝑡\tilde{h}_{i}^{(r)}=-\sum_{t=1}^{r}h_{i}^{(t)}\tilde{h}_{i}^{(r-t)}over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r - italic_t ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In particular, degki(r+1)=rdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑘𝑖𝑟1𝑟\deg k_{i}^{(r+1)}=rroman_deg italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r and grrhi(r+1)=grrh~i(r+1)subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑖𝑟1subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript~𝑖𝑟1\operatorname{gr}_{r}h_{i}^{(r+1)}=-\operatorname{gr}_{r}\tilde{h}_{i}^{(r+1)}roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over~ start_ARG italic_h end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Moreover, the identifications (3.33)-(3.34) yield:

grrki(r+1)={Fi+1,i+1trFi,itr,if1in1,Fn,ntr,ifi=nandN=2n+1,Fn,ntrFn1,n1tr,ifi=nandN=2n.subscriptgr𝑟superscriptsubscript𝑘𝑖𝑟1casessubscript𝐹𝑖1𝑖1superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑓1𝑖𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟subscript𝐹𝑛1𝑛1superscript𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle\operatorname{gr}_{r}k_{i}^{(r+1)}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}F_{i% +1,i+1}t^{r}-F_{i,i}t^{r},&~{}if~{}1\leq i\leq n-1,\\ -F_{n,n}t^{r},&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n+1,\\ -F_{n,n}t^{r}-F_{n-1,n-1}t^{r},&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r + 1 ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (4.21)

The decomposition (4.17) and Theorem 4.1 imply that the subalgebra Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) of X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is generated by

{ki(r);1in,r>0}{ei(r),fi(r);1in,r>0},\{k_{i}^{(r)};~{}1\leq i\leq n,r>0\}\cup\{e_{i}^{(r)},f_{i}^{(r)};~{}1\leq i% \leq n,r>0\},{ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 } ,

see [JLM, Proposition 6.1]. The ascending filtration on the Yangian Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is induced by the one on X(𝔬N)Xsubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm X}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_X ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). In particular, under the identification (3.4), we have grY(𝔬N)=U(𝔬N[t])grYsubscript𝔬𝑁Usubscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})=\operatorname{U}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_gr roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_U ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) (cf. [AMR, Theorem 3.6]).

Let

ai(u)subscript𝑎𝑖𝑢\displaystyle a_{i}(u)italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) =r0ai(r)ur:=ki(u)ki(u1)ki(up+1)absentsubscript𝑟0superscriptsubscript𝑎𝑖𝑟superscript𝑢𝑟assignsubscript𝑘𝑖𝑢subscript𝑘𝑖𝑢1subscript𝑘𝑖𝑢𝑝1\displaystyle=\sum_{r\geq 0}a_{i}^{(r)}u^{-r}:=k_{i}(u)k_{i}(u-1)\cdots k_{i}(% u-p+1)= ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r ≥ 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT := italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - 1 ) ⋯ italic_k start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u - italic_p + 1 )
={bi+1(u)bi(u)1if1in1,bn+1(u)bn(u)1ifi=nandN=2n+1,bn+1(u)bn1(u)1ifi=nandN=2n,absentcasessubscript𝑏𝑖1𝑢subscript𝑏𝑖superscript𝑢1𝑖𝑓1𝑖𝑛1subscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑏𝑛superscript𝑢1𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝑏𝑛1𝑢subscript𝑏𝑛1superscript𝑢1𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛\displaystyle=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}b_{i+1}(u)b_{i}(u)^{-1}&~{}if~{}1\leq i% \leq n-1,\\ b_{n+1}(u)b_{n}(u)^{-1}&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n+1,\\ b_{n+1}(u)b_{n-1}(u)^{-1}&~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n,\end{array}\right.= { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY (4.25)

where the last equality follows from the definitions ((3.14), (3.15) and (4.7)). In view of Lemma 4.6, each ai(r)superscriptsubscript𝑎𝑖𝑟a_{i}^{(r)}italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT belongs to Z(Y(𝔬N))𝑍Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ). We define the p𝑝pitalic_p-center of Y(𝔬N)Ysubscript𝔬𝑁{\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N})roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) to be the subalgebra Zp(Y(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) of Z(Y(𝔬N))𝑍Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) generated by

{ai(rp);1in,r>0}{(ei,j(r))p,(fj,i(r))p;(i,j)I,r>0}.\displaystyle\{a_{i}^{(rp)};~{}1\leq i\leq n,r>0\}\cup\big{\{}\big{(}e_{i,j}^{% (r)}\big{)}^{p},\big{(}f_{j,i}^{(r)}\big{)}^{p};~{}(i,j)\in I,r>0\big{\}}.{ italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n , italic_r > 0 } ∪ { ( italic_e start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ( italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ; ( italic_i , italic_j ) ∈ italic_I , italic_r > 0 } . (4.26)
Theorem 4.10.

The generators (4.26) of Zp(Y(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) are algebraically independent, and we have that grZp(Y(𝔬N))=Zp(𝔬N[t])=Z(𝔬N[t])grsubscript𝑍𝑝Ysubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡𝑍subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}Z_{p}({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))=Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])=Z% (\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_gr italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ) = italic_Z ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). In particular, Zp(Y(𝔬N))=Z(Y(𝔬N))subscript𝑍𝑝Ysubscript𝔬𝑁𝑍Ysubscript𝔬𝑁Z_{p}({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))=Z({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) = italic_Z ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ).

Proof.

From (4.5) , we know that degai(rp)=rppdegreesuperscriptsubscript𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑟𝑝𝑝\deg a_{i}^{(rp)}=rp-proman_deg italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_r italic_p - italic_p and

grrppai(rp)={grrppbi+1(rp)grrppbi(rp)if1in1,grrppbn+1(rp)grrppbn(rp)ifi=nandN=2n+1,grrppbn+1(rp)grrppbn1(rp)ifi=nandN=2n.subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑝casessubscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖1𝑟𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑖𝑓1𝑖𝑛1subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑟𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛𝑟𝑝𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛1subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑟𝑝subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑏𝑛1𝑟𝑝𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}a_{i}^{(rp)}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}\operatorname{% gr}_{rp-p}b_{i+1}^{(rp)}-\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{i}^{(rp)}&~{}if~{}1\leq i% \leq n-1,\\ \operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{n+1}^{(rp)}-\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{n}^{(rp)}&~{% }if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n+1,\\ \operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{n+1}^{(rp)}-\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}b_{n-1}^{(rp)}&% ~{}if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_b start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

It follows from (4.8) that

grrppai(rp)={(Fi+1,i+1tr1Fi,itr1)p(Fi+1,i+1trppFi,itrpp)if1in1,Fn,ntrpp(Fn,ntr1)pifi=nandN=2n+1,(Fn,ntrpp+Fn1,n1trpp)(Fn,ntr1+Fn1,n1tr1)pifi=nandN=2n.subscriptgr𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑝casessuperscriptsubscript𝐹𝑖1𝑖1superscript𝑡𝑟1subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝subscript𝐹𝑖1𝑖1superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝subscript𝐹𝑖𝑖superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝𝑖𝑓1𝑖𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛1subscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝subscript𝐹𝑛1𝑛1superscript𝑡𝑟𝑝𝑝superscriptsubscript𝐹𝑛𝑛superscript𝑡𝑟1subscript𝐹𝑛1𝑛1superscript𝑡𝑟1𝑝𝑖𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑁2𝑛\operatorname{gr}_{rp-p}a_{i}^{(rp)}=\left\{\begin{array}[]{ll}\!\!\!(F_{i+1,i% +1}t^{r-1}-F_{i,i}t^{r-1})^{p}-(F_{i+1,i+1}t^{rp-p}-F_{i,i}t^{rp-p})&\!\!\!\!% if~{}1\leq i\leq n-1,\\ \!\!\!F_{n,n}t^{rp-p}-(F_{n,n}t^{r-1})^{p}&\!\!\!\!if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n+1,\\ \!\!\!(F_{n,n}t^{rp-p}+F_{n-1,n-1}t^{rp-p})-(F_{n,n}t^{r-1}+F_{n-1,n-1}t^{r-1}% )^{p}&\!\!\!\!if~{}i=n~{}and~{}N=2n.\end{array}\right.roman_gr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_r italic_p ) end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = { start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i + 1 , italic_i + 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i , italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f 1 ≤ italic_i ≤ italic_n - 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n + 1 , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_p - italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) - ( italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n , italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n - 1 , italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL italic_i italic_f italic_i = italic_n italic_a italic_n italic_d italic_N = 2 italic_n . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

Combining with (4.6), we see that the generators (4.26) are lifts of generator for Zp(𝔬N[t])subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ). This establishes the algebraic independence and that grZp(Y(𝔬N))=Zp(𝔬N[t])grsubscript𝑍𝑝Ysubscript𝔬𝑁subscript𝑍𝑝subscript𝔬𝑁delimited-[]𝑡\operatorname{gr}Z_{p}({\rm Y}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}))=Z_{p}(\mathfrak{o}_{N}[t])roman_gr italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Y ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) = italic_Z start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( fraktur_o start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ italic_t ] ), and the remaining assertion thus follows from Theorem 2.1. ∎


Acknowledgment. We would like to thank Ming Liu and Alexander Molev for helpful discussions. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 11801394, 12461005), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No. CCNU24JC001) and Key Laboratory of MEA, Ministry of Education.


References

  • [AACFR] D. Arnaudon, J. Avan, N. Crampé, L. Frappat and E. Ragoucy, R𝑅Ritalic_R-matrix presentation for super-Yangians Y(osp(m|2n))𝑌𝑜𝑠𝑝conditional𝑚2𝑛Y(osp(m|2n))italic_Y ( italic_o italic_s italic_p ( italic_m | 2 italic_n ) ). J. Math. Phys. 44 (2003), 302–308.
  • [AMR] D. Arnaudon, A. Molev and E. Ragoucy, On the R𝑅Ritalic_R-matrix realization of Yangians and their representations. Ann. Henri Poincaré 7 (2006), 1269–1325.
  • [BT] J. Brundan and L. Topley, The p𝑝pitalic_p-centre of Yangians and shifted Yangians. Mosc. Math. J. 18 (2018), no. 4, 617-657.
  • [BK] J. Brundan and A. Kleshchev, Parabolic presentations of the Yangian Y(𝔤𝔩n)𝑌𝔤subscript𝔩𝑛Y(\mathfrak{gl}_{n})italic_Y ( fraktur_g fraktur_l start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Comm. Math. Phys. 254 (2005), 191–220.
  • [CH] H. Chang and H.-M. Hu, The centre of the modular super Yangian Ym|nsubscript𝑌conditional𝑚𝑛Y_{m|n}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m | italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 107 (2023), 1074–1109.
  • [CHL] H. Chang, J.-X. Hu and L. Topley, Modular epresentations of the Yangian Y2subscript𝑌2Y_{2}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. J. London Math. Soc. (2) 111 (2025), Paper No. e70056.
  • [D1] V. G. Drinfeld, Hopf algebras and the quantum Yang–Baxter equation. Soviet Math. Dokl. 32 (1985), 254–258.
  • [D2] V. G. Drinfeld, A new realization of Yangians and quantized affine algebras. Soviet Math. Dokl. 36 (1988), 212–216.
  • [GR] I. Gelfand and V. Retakh, Quasideterminants. I. Selecta Math. 3 (1997), 517–546.
  • [GRW] N. Guay, V. Regelskis and C. Wendlandt, Equivalences between three presentations of orthogonal and symplectic Yangians. Lett. Math. Phys. 109 (2019), 327–379.
  • [Hum] J. E. Humphreys, Conjugacy classes in semisimple algebraic groups. Math. Surv. Monogr., 43, American Mathematical Society (AMS), Providence, RI, 1995.
  • [Jan] J. C. Jantzen, Representations of Lie algebras in prime characteristic. in: A. Broer (Ed.), Representation Theories and Algebraic Geometry, in: Proceedings, Montreal, NATO ASI Series, vol. C 514, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998, pp. 185–235.
  • [JLM] N. Jing, M. Liu and A. Molev, Isomorphism between the R-matrix and Drinfeld presentations of Yangian in types B𝐵Bitalic_B, C𝐶Citalic_C and D𝐷Ditalic_D. Comm. Math. Phys. 361 (2018), 827–872.
  • [Mol1] A. Molev, Yangians and classical Lie algebras. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 143. AMS, Providence, RI, 2007.
  • [Mol2] A. Molev, A Drinfeld-type presentation of the orthosymplectic Yangians. Algebr. Represent. Theory 27 (2024), 469–494.
  • [MNO] A. Molev, M. Nazarov, and G. Olshanskii, Yangians and classical Lie algebras. Russ. Math. Serv. 51 (1996), 205–282.
  • [TF] L. Takhtadzhyan and L. Faddeev, The quantum method of the inverse problem and the Heisenberg XYZ𝑋𝑌𝑍XYZitalic_X italic_Y italic_Z-model. Russ. Math. Serv. 34 (1979), 11–68.