Varieties Related to the Problem of Lifting \(G_r\)-Modules to G

  • Paul SobajeEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics book series (PROMS, volume 242)


Let G be a simple simply connected algebraic group over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic p, with rth Frobenius kernel \(G_r\). Let M be a \(G_r\)-module and V a rational G-module. We put a variety structure on the set of all \(G_r\)-summands of V that are isomorphic to M, and study basic properties of these varieties. This is primarily to set the stage for later work that will bring techniques from geometric invariant theory to bear on the problem of lifting \(G_r\)-modules to G. However, we do give a few applications of the work in this paper to the representation theory of G, in particular noting that the truth of Donkin’s tilting module conjecture is equivalent to the linearizability of G-actions on certain affine spaces.

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification

17B10 (primary ) 20G05 (secondary) 



We wish to thank Chris Drupieski and Eric Friedlander for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper. We thank Hanspeter Kraft for pointing us to work on reductive groups acting on affine spaces in positive characteristic. This work was partially supported by the Research Training Grant, DMS-1344994, from the NSF.


  1. 1.
    J. Ballard, Injective modules for restricted enveloping algebras, Math. Z. 163 (1978), 57–63.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Bialynicki-Birula, Remarks on the action of an algebraic torus on  \(k^n\), Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys. 14 (1966), 177–181.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    S. Donkin, On tilting modules for algebraic groups, Math. Z. 212 (1993), 39–60.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Ferrer Santos, A. Rittatore, Actions and invariants of algebraic groups, Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 269 (CRC Press, Florida, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huisgen-Zimmermann, B. Fine and coarse moduli spaces in the representation theory of finite dimensional algebras. Expository lectures on representation theory, 1–34, Contemp. Math., 607, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, (2014).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J.E. Humphreys, D.-n. Verma, Projective modules for finite Chevalley groups, Bull. A.M.S 79 (1973), 467–468.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    J.C. Jantzen, Representations of Algebraic Groups, 2nd ed. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 107, American Mathematical Society 2003.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. Kraft, V. Popov, Semisimple group actions on the three dimensional affine space are linear, Comment. Math. Helv. 60 (1985), no. 3, 466–479.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    B. Parshall, L. Scott, Variations on a theme of Cline and Donkin, Algebras and Representation Theory (2013), Volume 16, Issue 3, 793–817.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Sobaje, On liftings of projective indecomposable  \(G_1\)-modules, J. of Algebra 475 (2017), 61–79 (Sandy Green Memorial issue).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Sobaje, On \((p,r)\)-filtrations and tilting modules, to appear in Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    T. A. Springer, Linear Algebraic Groups, Progress in Math. 9, Birkhäuser, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsUniversity of GeorgiaAthensUSA

Personalised recommendations