Skip to paper

Chapter 4 of 10

§Basic structure of VOAs

We review subalgebras, homomorphisms, ideals, quotients, extensions, and tensor products before turning to orbifolds and cosets in separate chapters. Throughout, tensor products are over C\mathbb C.

§4.1 Vertex subalgebras and conformal vectors

Definition 4.1 (Vertex subalgebra)

A vertex subalgebra of a vertex algebra VV is a linear subspace U⊆VU\subseteq V such that

1∈U,YV(u,x)v∈U((x))(u,v∈U).\mathbf1\in U,\qquad Y_V(u,x)v\in U((x)) \quad(u,v\in U).

Its fields are the restrictions YU(u,x)=YV(u,x)∣UY_U(u,x)=Y_V(u,x)|_U.

Proposition 4.2 (Inherited vertex-algebra structure)

A vertex subalgebra U⊆VU\subseteq V is a vertex algebra with vacuum 1\mathbf1 and translation operator T∣UT|_U. If VV is a VOA and ωV∈U\omega_V\in U, then UU is a VOA with the same conformal vector and central charge, graded by

Uh=U∩Vh.U_h=U\cap V_h.

If VV is of CFT type, so is UU.

Exercise. Prove Proposition 4.2. Hint: Use Y(u,x)1=exTuY(u,x)\mathbf1=e^{xT}u to check TT-stability, and L0L_0-stability to recover the grading.

Definition 4.3 (VOA subalgebra)

In this chapter, a VOA subalgebra (U,ωU)(U,\omega_U) of VV means a graded vertex subalgebra U=⨁h(U∩Vh)U=\bigoplus_h(U\cap V_h) with ωU∈U∩V2\omega_U\in U\cap V_2 making UU a VOA, whose grading agrees with the ambient grading:

L0U=L0V∣U.L_0^U=L_0^V|_U.

It is full if ωU=ωV\omega_U=\omega_V.

The translation operators necessarily agree on UU, since both are determined by ∂xYU(u,x)1∣x=0\left.\partial_xY_U(u,x)\mathbf1\right|_{x=0}. The conformal vectors need not agree. Keeping them distinct is essential for the coset construction, where their difference will supply the complementary conformal structure under suitable hypotheses. Terminology for subalgebras varies; the convention above follows Yamauchi, §3.8.

§4.2 Homomorphisms and automorphisms

Definition 4.4 (Homomorphisms and automorphisms)

A vertex-algebra homomorphism f:U→Vf:U\to V is a linear map satisfying

f(1U)=1V,f(YU(u,x)v)=YV(f(u),x)f(v)(u,v∈U).f(\mathbf1_U)=\mathbf1_V,\qquad f\bigl(Y_U(u,x)v\bigr)=Y_V(f(u),x)f(v) \quad(u,v\in U).

For VOAs, a VOA homomorphism additionally satisfies f(ωU)=ωVf(\omega_U)=\omega_V. A bijective VOA homomorphism V→VV\to V is a VOA automorphism; these form the group Aut⁡(V)\operatorname{Aut}(V).

Proposition 4.5 (Compatibility with translation and grading)

A vertex-algebra homomorphism satisfies fTU=TVffT_U=T_Vf. A VOA homomorphism also satisfies

fYU(ωU,x)=YV(ωV,x)f,f(Uh)⊆Vh,cU=cV.fY_U(\omega_U,x)=Y_V(\omega_V,x)f, \qquad f(U_h)\subseteq V_h, \qquad c_U=c_V.

Consequently, for g∈Aut⁡(V)g\in\operatorname{Aut}(V),

gY(a,x)g−1=Y(ga,x),[g,Y(ω,x)]=0,g(Vh)=Vh.gY(a,x)g^{-1}=Y(ga,x),\qquad [g,Y(\omega,x)]=0,\qquad g(V_h)=V_h.

Exercise. Prove Proposition 4.5. Hint: Apply the homomorphism identity to Y(u,x)1Y(u,x)\mathbf1 and Y(ω,x)ωY(\omega,x)\omega.

The inclusion of a VOA subalgebra is always a vertex-algebra homomorphism; it is a VOA homomorphism in the above sense precisely when the subalgebra is full.

§4.3 Ideals and simplicity

Definition 4.6 (Ideal and simple VOA)

An ideal of a VOA VV is a linear subspace I⊆VI\subseteq V such that

Y(a,x)b∈I((x))(a∈V, b∈I).Y(a,x)b\in I((x))\qquad(a\in V,\ b\in I).

A nonzero VOA VV is simple if its only ideals are 00 and VV.

Proposition 4.7 (Properties of ideals)

An ideal I⊆VI\subseteq V is stable under the Virasoro operators, in particular under TT, and is graded:

I=⨁h(I∩Vh).I=\bigoplus_h(I\cap V_h).

It is also two-sided:

Y(b,x)a∈I((x))(b∈I, a∈V).Y(b,x)a\in I((x))\qquad(b\in I,\ a\in V).

An ideal containing 1\mathbf1 equals VV. Sums and intersections of ideals are ideals.

Proof.

Apply the ideal condition to Y(ω,x)Y(\omega,x); stability under the diagonalizable operator L0L_0 gives the grading. Skew-symmetry and TT-stability give

Y(b,x)a=exTY(a,−x)b∈I((x)).Y(b,x)a=e^{xT}Y(a,-x)b\in I((x)).

If 1∈I\mathbf1\in I, creation gives a=Y(a,x)1∣x=0∈Ia=\left.Y(a,x)\mathbf1\right|_{x=0}\in I for every a∈Va\in V. The assertions about sums and intersections follow from linearity.

Remark 4.8 (The ordering of ideals)

Ideals are partially ordered by inclusion. By Proposition 4.7, they form a complete lattice: the greatest lower bound of a family is its intersection, and its least upper bound is its sum,

⋀αIα=⋂αIα,⋁αIα=∑αIα.\bigwedge_\alpha I_\alpha=\bigcap_\alpha I_\alpha, \qquad \bigvee_\alpha I_\alpha=\sum_\alpha I_\alpha.

The least and greatest ideals are 00 and VV. Among proper ideals, maximal means that no strictly larger proper ideal contains it, whereas largest means that it contains every proper ideal. A largest proper ideal need not exist merely because sums of ideals exist: their sum might be VV.

§4.4 Quotients and simple quotients

Proposition 4.9 (Quotient VOA)

Let I⊊VI\subsetneq V be an ideal and write [a]=a+I[a]=a+I. Then V/IV/I is a VOA with

YV/I([a],x)[b]=[YV(a,x)b],1V/I=[1],ωV/I=[ω].Y_{V/I}([a],x)[b]=[Y_V(a,x)b],\qquad \mathbf1_{V/I}=[\mathbf1],\qquad \omega_{V/I}=[\omega].

Its grading and central charge are

(V/I)h≃Vh/(I∩Vh),cV/I=cV.(V/I)_h\simeq V_h/(I\cap V_h),\qquad c_{V/I}=c_V.

The projection V→V/IV\to V/I is a surjective VOA homomorphism. If VV is of CFT type, so is V/IV/I.

Exercise. Use two-sidedness to check independence of representatives, then descend the VOA axioms. Properness ensures [1]≠0[\mathbf1]\ne0.

Proposition 4.10 (Kernels and the first isomorphism theorem)

For a VOA homomorphism f:V→Wf:V\to W, the kernel is an ideal and ff induces a VOA isomorphism

V/ker⁡f→∼im⁡f,[a]↦f(a).V/\ker f\xrightarrow{\sim}\operatorname{im}f,\qquad [a]\mapsto f(a).

In particular, every VOA homomorphism from a simple VOA to a nonzero VOA is injective.

Exercise. Apply ff to Y(a,x)bY(a,x)b for b∈ker⁡fb\in\ker f, and use preservation of the vacuum. For the general quotient and kernel constructions, see Joyce, lectures 1–2.

Proposition 4.11 (Largest proper ideal and simple quotient for CFT type)

Let VV be a nonzero VOA of CFT type, so that V=⨁h≥0VhV=\bigoplus_{h\geq0}V_h and V0=C1V_0=\mathbb C\mathbf1. Then

J(V)=∑I⊊VI an idealIJ(V)=\sum_{\substack{I\subsetneq V\\I\text{ an ideal}}}I

is the largest proper ideal of VV: every proper ideal II satisfies I⊆J(V)I\subseteq J(V). In particular, J(V)J(V) is the unique maximal proper ideal, and V/J(V)V/J(V) is the unique simple quotient, up to the isomorphism induced by a quotient map. Moreover, J(V)=0J(V)=0 if and only if VV is simple.

Proof.

By Proposition 4.7, every proper ideal is graded and excludes 1\mathbf1. Since V0=C1V_0=\mathbb C\mathbf1, every proper ideal is contained in ⨁h>0Vh\bigoplus_{h>0}V_h. Their sum J(V)J(V) is therefore an ideal with zero weight-zero part, so it is proper. By construction it contains every proper ideal.

The inverse image of a nonzero proper ideal of V/J(V)V/J(V) would be a proper ideal strictly containing J(V)J(V), a contradiction. Thus V/J(V)V/J(V) is simple. Conversely, the kernel of any surjective VOA homomorphism from VV onto a nonzero simple VOA is a maximal proper ideal, hence equals J(V)J(V). The uniqueness follows from Proposition 4.10. Finally, J(V)=0J(V)=0 precisely when VV has no nonzero proper ideals.

Remark 4.12 (What CFT type guarantees)

This argument applies to every nonzero VOA of CFT type, including universal Virasoro VOAs; it is not specific to minimal-model central charges. A unique largest proper ideal may itself contain smaller nonzero ideals, so the proposition does not assert that there is only one nonzero proper ideal.

For comparison, let WW be a nonzero simple VOA of CFT type and equip V=W⊕WV=W\oplus W with componentwise fields, vacuum (1W,1W)(\mathbf1_W,\mathbf1_W), and conformal vector (ωW,ωW)(\omega_W,\omega_W). The proper ideals W⊕0W\oplus0 and 0⊕W0\oplus W sum to VV, so no largest proper ideal exists. Here dim⁡V0=2\dim V_0=2, and VV is not of CFT type.

§4.5 Extensions

Definition 4.13 (VOA extension)

An extension of a VOA UU is a VOA VV together with an injective VOA homomorphism ι:U↪V\iota:U\hookrightarrow V. Identifying UU with its image, this means that UU is a full VOA subalgebra of VV:

1U=1V,ωU=ωV,YV(u,x)∣U=YU(u,x)(u∈U).\mathbf1_U=\mathbf1_V,\qquad \omega_U=\omega_V,\qquad Y_V(u,x)|_U=Y_U(u,x)\quad(u\in U).

The extension is proper if U≠VU\ne V.

By Proposition 4.5, an extension has Uh=U∩VhU_h=U\cap V_h and cU=cVc_U=c_V. Thus a proper extension adds states while retaining the original conformal structure.

§4.6 Tensor products

Proposition 4.14 (Tensor product of VOAs)

Let U,WU,W be VOAs. Their tensor product is a VOA with

1U⊗W=1U⊗1W,YU⊗W(u⊗v,x)(u′⊗v′)=YU(u,x)u′⊗YW(v,x)v′,ωU⊗W=ωU⊗1W+1U⊗ωW.\begin{aligned} \mathbf1_{U\otimes W}&=\mathbf1_U\otimes\mathbf1_W,\\ Y_{U\otimes W}(u\otimes v,x)(u'\otimes v') &=Y_U(u,x)u'\otimes Y_W(v,x)v',\\ \omega_{U\otimes W}&=\omega_U\otimes\mathbf1_W +\mathbf1_U\otimes\omega_W. \end{aligned}

The product on the second line uses the same formal variable in both factors. Its grading and central charge are

(U⊗W)h=⨁r+s=hUr⊗Ws,cU⊗W=cU+cW.\begin{aligned} (U\otimes W)_h&=\bigoplus_{r+s=h}U_r\otimes W_s,\\ c_{U\otimes W}&=c_U+c_W. \end{aligned}

If both factors are of CFT type, so is their tensor product.

Proof.

For fixed u,u′,v,v′u,u',v,v', both YU(u,x)u′Y_U(u,x)u' and YW(v,x)v′Y_W(v,x)v' are lower-bounded Laurent series. Their tensor product in the same variable is therefore well-defined and lower truncated. The vacuum and creation axioms follow factorwise. Translation covariance follows from the Leibniz rule with

TU⊗W=TU⊗id⁡W+id⁡U⊗TW.T_{U\otimes W}=T_U\otimes\operatorname{id}_W +\operatorname{id}_U\otimes T_W.

For locality, choose exponents NN and MM for the pairs u,u′u,u' and v,v′v,v', respectively. Multiplication by (x−y)N+M(x-y)^{N+M} allows us to exchange the two UU-fields using the first factor (x−y)N(x-y)^N, and then the two WW-fields using (x−y)M(x-y)^M. Thus the tensor-product fields are local.

The conformal field is

YU⊗W(ωU⊗W,x)=YU(ωU,x)⊗id⁡W+id⁡U⊗YW(ωW,x).Y_{U\otimes W}(\omega_{U\otimes W},x) =Y_U(\omega_U,x)\otimes\operatorname{id}_W +\operatorname{id}_U\otimes Y_W(\omega_W,x).

The two summands act on separate factors, so their Virasoro commutators add, with central charge cU+cWc_U+c_W; their translation operators add to the operator above. The sum of the two L0L_0 operators gives the grading. Since both gradings are bounded below, only finitely many pairs r+s=hr+s=h occur at each weight, and each summand is finite-dimensional. The CFT-type assertion follows from the same grading formula.

Remark 4.15 (The two tensor factors)

The maps u↦u⊗1Wu\mapsto u\otimes\mathbf1_W and v↦1U⊗vv\mapsto\mathbf1_U\otimes v identify the factors with VOA subalgebras carrying their own conformal vectors. Their fields commute:

[Y(u⊗1W,x),Y(1U⊗v,y)]=0.[Y(u\otimes\mathbf1_W,x),Y(\mathbf1_U\otimes v,y)]=0.

Indeed, these fields act on separate tensor factors. They recover every pure tensor through

Y(u⊗1W,x)(1U⊗v)∣x=0=u⊗v.\left.Y(u\otimes\mathbf1_W,x)(\mathbf1_U\otimes v)\right|_{x=0} =u\otimes v.

The ambient conformal vector is the sum of those of the two subalgebras.

§4.7 References

License · CC0 1.0 · Peerpedia collaboration terms

Copy reference

This link points to the version you are reading.