An algebraic scheme for constructing deformations of structure constants for associative algebras generated by deformation driving algebras (DDAs) is discussed. An ideal of left divisors of zero plays a central role in this construction. Deformations of associative three-dimensional algebras with the DDA being a three-dimensional Lie algebra and their connection with integrable systems are studied.

1. Introduction

An idea to study deformations of structure constants for associative algebras goes back to the classical works of Gerstenhaber [1, 2]. As one of the approaches to deformation theory he suggested “to take the point of view that the objects being deformed are not merely algebras, but essentially algebras with a fixed basis” and to treat “the algebraic set of all structure constants as parameter space for deformation theory” [2].

Thus, following this approach, one chooses the basis P₀, P₁, …, P_N for a given algebra A, takes the structure constants

defined by the multiplication table

(1.1)

and looks for their deformations

where (x) = (x¹, …, x^M) is the set of deformation parameters, such that the associativity condition

(1.2)

or similar equation is satisfied.

A remarkable example of deformations of this type with M = N + 1 has been discovered by Witten [3] and Dijkgraaf et al. [4]. They demonstrated that the function F which defines the correlation functions 〈Φ_jΦ_kΦ_l〉 = ∂³F/∂x^j∂x^k∂x^l and so forth in the deformed two-dimensional topological field theory obeys the associativity equation (1.2) with the structure constants given by

(1.3)

where the constants are η^lm = (g⁻¹) ^lm and g_lm = ∂³F/∂x⁰∂x^l∂x^m where the variable x⁰ is associated with the units element. Each solution of the WDVV equations (1.2) and (1.3) describes a deformation of the structure constants of the N + 1- dimensional associative algebra of primary fields Φ_j.

The interpretation and formalization of the WDVV equation in terms of Frobenius manifolds proposed by Dubrovin [5, 6] provides us with a method to describe class of deformations of the so-called Frobenius algebras. An extension of this approach to general algebras and corresponding F-manifolds has been given by Hertling and Manin [7]. The beautiful and rich theory of Frobenius and F-manifolds has various applications from the singularity theory to quantum cohomology (see, e.g., [6, 8, 9]).

An alternative approach to the deformation theory of the structure constants for commutative associative algebras has been proposed recently in [10–14]. Within this method the deformations of the structure constants are governed by the so-called central system (CS). Its concrete form depends on the class of deformations under consideration and CS contains, as particular reductions, many integrable systems like WDVV equation, oriented associativity equation, and integrable dispersionless, dispersive, and discrete equations (Kadomtsev-Petviashvili equation, etc.). The common feature of the coisotropic, quantum, discrete deformations considered in [10–14] is that for all of them elements p_j of the basis and deformation parameters x_j form a certain algebra (Poisson, Heisenberg, etc.). A general class of deformations considered in [13] is characterized by the condition that the ideal J = 〈f_jk〉 generated by the elements representing the multiplication table (1) is the Poisson ideal. It was shown that this class contains a subclass of so-called integrable deformations for which the CS has a simple and nice geometrical meaning.

In the present paper we will discuss a purely algebraic formulation of such integrable deformations. We will consider the case when the algebra generating deformations of the structure constants, that is, the algebra formed by the elements p_j of the basis and deformation parameters x_k(deformation driving algebra (DDA)), is a Lie algebra. The basic idea is to require that all elements are left divisors of zero and that they generate the ideal J of left divisors of zero. This requirement gives rise to the central system which governs deformations generated by DDA. This central system of equations for structure constants differs, in general, from the associativity condition. So, deformed algebras form families of commutative but not necessarily associative algebras.

Here we will study the deformations of the structure constants for the three-dimensional algebra in the case when the DDA is given by one of the three-dimensional Lie algebras. Such deformations are parametrized by a single deformation variable x. Depending on the choice of DDA and identification of p₁, p₂, and x with the elements of DDA, the corresponding CS takes the form of the system of ordinary differential equations or the system of discrete equations (multidimensional mappings). In the first case the CS contains the third-order ODEs from the Chazy-Bureau list as the particular examples. This approach provides us also with the Lax form of the above equations and their first integrals.

The paper is organized as follows. General formulation of the deformation theory for the structure constants is presented in Section 2. Quantum, discrete, and coisotropic deformations are discussed in Section 3. Three-dimensional Lie algebras as DDAs are analyzed in Section 4. Deformations generated by general DDAs are studied in Section 5. Deformations driven by the nilpotent and solvable DDAs are considered in Sections 6 and 7, respectively.

2. Deformations of the Structure Constants Generated by DDA

So, we consider a finite-dimensional commutative algebra A with (or without) unit element P₀ in the fixed basis composed by the elements P₀, P₁, …, P_N. The multiplication table (1) defines the structure constants . The commutativity of the basis implies that . In the presence of the unit element one has where is the Kronecker symbol.

Following Gerstenhaber′s suggestion [1, 2] we will treat the structure constants as the objects to deform and will denote the deformation parameters by x¹, x², …, x^M. For the undeformed structure constants the associativity conditions (1.2) are nothing else than the compatibility conditions for the table of multiplication (1.1). In the construction of deformations we should first specify a “deformed” version of the multiplication table and then require that this realization is self-consistent and meaningful.

Thus, to define deformations one has the following.

1 We associate a set of elements p₀, p₁, …, p_N, x¹, x², …, x^M with the elements of the basis P₀, P₁, …, P_N and deformation parameters x¹, x², …, x^M.
2 We consider the Lie algebra B of the dimension N + M with the basis elements e₁, …, e_N+M obeying the commutation relations:
(2.1)

3 We identify the elements p₁, …, p_N, x¹, x², …, x^M with the elements e₁, …, e_N+M, thus defining the deformation driving algebra (DDA). Different identifications define different DDAs. We assume that the element p₀ commutes with all elements of DDA and we put p₀ = 1. The commutativity of the basis in the algebra A implies the commutativity between p_j, and in this paper we assume the same property for all x^k. So, we will consider the DDAs defined by the commutation relations of the type
(2.2)
where and are some constants.
4 We consider the elements
(2.3)
of the universal enveloping algebra U(B) of the algebra DDA(B). These f_jk “represent” the table (1) in U(B).
5 We require that all f_jk are left zero divisors and have a common right zero divisor.

In this case f_jk generate the left ideal J of left zero divisors. We remind that non-zero elements a and b are called left and right divisors of zero if ab = 0 (see e.g., [15]).

Definition 2.1. The structure constants are said to define deformations of the algebra A generated by given DDA if all f_jk are left zero divisors with common right zero divisor.

To justify this definition we first observe that the simplest possible realization of the multiplication table (1) in U(B) given by the equations f_jk = 0, j, k = 1, …, N is too restrictive in general. Indeed, for instance, for the Heisenberg algrebra B [12] such equations imply that

and, hence, all

are constants. So, one should look for a weaker realization of the multiplication table. A condition that all f_jk are left zero divisors is a natural candidate. The condition of compatibility of the corresponding equations f_jk · Ψ_jk = 0, j, k = 1, …, N where Ψ_jk are right zero divisors requires that the l.h.s. of these equations and, hence, Ψ_jk should have a common divisor (see, e.g., [15]). We restrict ourselves to the case when Ψ_jk = Ψ · Φ_jk, j, k = 1, …, N where Φ_jk are invertible elements of U(B). In this case one has the set of equations

(2.4)

that is, all left zero divisors f_jk have common right zero divisor Ψ.

These conditions impose constraints on

. To clarify these constraints we will use the associativity of U(B). First we observe that due to the relations (2.2) one has the identity (p₀ = 1)

(2.5)

where

are certain functions of x¹, …, x^M only. Then, taking into account (2.2) and associativity of U(B), one obtains

(2.6)

where

(2.7)

Thus, the identity (2.6) gives

(2.8)

Due to the relations (2.4), (2.8) implies that

(2.9)

These equations are satisfied if

(2.10)

This system of equations plays a central role in our approach. If Ψ has no left zero divisors linear in p_j, the relation (2.10) is the necessary condition for existence of a common right zero divisor for f_jk since U(B) has no zero elements linear in p_j (see e.g., [16]).

At N ≥ 3 it is also a sufficient condition. Indeed, if

are such that (2.10) is satisfied, then

(2.11)

Generically, it is the system of (1/2)N²(N − 1) linear equations for N(N + 1)/2 unknowns f_st with noncommuting coefficients

. At N ≥ 3 for generic (nonzeros, nonzero divisors)

the system (2.11) implies that

(2.12)

(2.13)

where α_jk, β_lm, and γ_jk are certain elements of U(B) (see e.g., [17, 18]). Thus, all f_jk are right zero divisors. They are also left zero divisors. Indeed, due to Ado′s theorem (see e.g., [16]) finite-dimensional Lie algebra B and, hence, U(B) are isomorphic to matrix algebras. For the matrix algebras zero divisors (matrices with vanishing determinants) are both right and left zero divisors [15]. Then, under the assumption that all α_jk and β_lm are not zero divisors, the relations (2.12) imply that the right divisor of one of f_jk is also the right zero divisor for the others.

At N = 2 one has only two relations of the type (2.12) and a right zero divisor of one of f₁₁, f₁₂, f₂₂ is the right zero divisor of the others. We note that it is not easy to control assumptions mentioned above. Nevertheless, (2.4) and (2.10) certainly are fundamental one for the whole approach.

We will refer to the system (2.10) as the Central System (CS) governing deformations of the structure constants of the algebra A generated by a given DDA. Its concrete form depends strongly on the form of the brackets which are defined by the relations (2.2) for the elements of the basis of DDA. For stationary solutions () the CS (2.10) is reduced to the associativity conditions (1.2).

3. Quantum, Discrete, and Coisotropic Deformations

Coisotropic, quantum, and discrete deformations of associative algebras considered in [10–14] represent particular realizations of the above general scheme associated with different DDAs.

For the quantum deformations one has M = N and the deformation driving algebra is given by the Heisenberg algebra [12]. The elements of the basis of the algebra A and deformation parameters are identified with the elements of the Heisenberg algebra in such a way that

(3.1)

where ℏ is the real constant (Planck′s constant in physics). For the Heisenberg DDA

(3.2)

and consequently

(3.3)

Quantum CS (3.3) governs deformations of structure constants for associative algebra driven by the Heisenberg DDA. It has a simple geometrical meaning of vanishing Riemann curvature tensor for torsionless Christoffel symbols identified with the structure constants () [12].

In the representation of the Heisenberg algebra (3.1) by operators acting in a linear space H left divisors of zero are realized by operators with nonempty kernel. The ideal J is the left ideal generated by operators f_jk which have nontrivial common kernel or, equivalently, for which equations

(3.4)

have nontrivial common solutions |Ψ〉 ⊂ H. The compatibility condition for (3.4) is given by the CS (3.3). The common kernel of the operators f_jk forms a subspace H_Γ in the linear space H. So, in the approach under consideration the multiplication table (1) is realized only on H_Γ, but not on the whole H. Such type of realization of the constraints is well known in quantum theory as Dirac′s recipe for quantization of the first-class constraints [19]. In quantum theory context equation (3.4) serves to select the physical subspace in the whole Hilbert space. Within the deformation theory one may refer to the subspace H_Γ as the “structure constants” subspace. In [12] the recipe (3.4) was the starting point for construction of the quantum deformations.

Quantum CS (3.3) contains various classes of solutions which describe different classes of deformations. An important subclass is given by isoassociative deformations, that is, by deformations for which the associativity condition (1.2) is valid for all values of deformation parameters. For such quantum deformations the structure constants should obey the following equations:

(3.5)

These equations imply that

where Φⁿ are some functions while the associativity condition (1.2) takes the following form:

(3.6)

It is the oriented associativity equation introduced in [5, 20]. Under the gradient reduction

equation (3.7) becomes the WDVV equations (1.2) and (1.3).

Non-isoassociative deformations for which the condition (3.5) is not valid are of interest too. They are described by some well-known integrable soliton equations [12]. In particular, there are Boussinesq equation among them for N = 2 and Kadomtsev-Petviashvili (KP) hierarchy for the infinite-dimensional algebra of polynomials in the Faa′ de Bruno basis [12]. In the latter case the deformed structure constants are given by

(3.7)

with

(3.8)

where τ is the famous tau-function for the KP hierarchy and

where P_k(t₁, t₂, t₃, …) are Schur polynomials defined by the generating formula

Discrete deformations of noncommutative associative algebras are generated by the DDA with M = N and commutation relations

(3.9)

In this case

(3.10)

where for an arbitrary function φ(x) the action of T_j is defined by T_jφ(x⁰, …, x^j, …, x^N) = φ(x⁰, …, x^j + 1, …, x^N). The corresponding CS is of the form

(3.11)

where the matrices C_j are defined as

The discrete CS (3.11) governs discrete deformations of associative algebras. The CS (3.11) contains, as particular cases, the discrete versions of the oriented associativity equation, WDVV equation, Boussinesq equation, and discrete KP hierarchy and Hirota-Miwa bilinear equations for KP τ-function [13].

For coisotropic deformations of commutative algebras [10, 11] again M = N, but the DDA is the Poisson algebra with p_j and x^k identified with the Darboux coordinates, that is,

(3.12)

where {, } is the standard Poisson bracket. The algebra U(B) is the commutative ring of functions and divisors of zero are realized by functions with zeros. So, the functions f_jk should be functions with common set Γ of zeros. Thus, in the coisotropic case the multiplication table (1) is realized by the following set of equations [10]:

(3.13)

The compatibility condition for these equations is (see e.g., [10])

(3.14)

The set Γ is the coisotropic submanifold in R^2(N+1). The condition (3.14) gives rise to the following system of equations for the structure constants:

(3.15)

while the equations

have the form of associativity conditions (1.2):

(3.16)

Equations (3.15) and (3.16) form the CS for coisotropic deformations [10]. In this case is transformed as the tensor of the type (1, 2) under the general transformations of coordinates x^j, and the whole CS of (3.15) and (3.16) is invariant under these transformations [14]. The bracket has appeared for the first time in [21] where the so-called differential concomitants were studied. It was shown in [16] that this bracket is a tensor only if the tensor obeys the algebraic constraint (3.16). In [7] the CS of (3.15) and (3.16) has appeared implicitly as the system of equations which characterizes the structure constants for F-manifolds. In [10] it has been derived as the CS governing the coisotropic deformations of associative algebras.

The CS of (3.15) and (3.16) contains the oriented associativity equation, the WDVV equation, dispersionless KP hierarchy, and equations from the genus zero universal Whitham hierarchy as the particular cases [10, 11]. Yano manifolds and Yano algebroids associated with the CS of (3.15) and (3.16) are studied in [14].

We would like to emphasize that for all deformations considered above the stationary solutions of the CSs obey the global associativity condition (1.2).

4. Three-Dimensional Lie Algebras as DDA

In the rest of the paper we will study deformations of associative algebras generated by three-dimensional real Lie algebra L. The complete list of such algebras contains 9 algebras (see e.g. [16]). Denoting the basis elements by e₁, e₂, e₃, one has the following nonequivalent cases:

1 abelian algebra L₁,
2 general algebra L₂: [e₁, e₂] = e₁, [e₂, e₃] = 0, [e₃, e₁] = 0,
3 nilpotent algebra L₃ : [e₁, e₂] = 0, [e₂, e₃] = e₁, [e₃, e₁] = 0,
47 four nonequivalent solvable algebras: [e₁, e₂] = 0, [e₂, e₃] = αe₁ + βe₂, [e₃, e₁] = γe₁ + δe₂ with αδ − βγ ≠ 0,
89 simple algebras L₈ = so (3) and L₉ = so (2, 1).

In virtue of the one-to-one correspondence between the elements of the basis in DDA and the elements p_j, x^k an algebra L should have an abelian subalgebra and only one of its elements may play the role of the deformation parameter x. For the original algebra A and the algebra B one has two options.

(1)
A is a two-dimensional algebra without unit element and B = L.
(2)
A is a three-dimensional algebra with the unit element and B = L₀ ⊕ L where L₀ is the algebra generated by the unity element p₀.

After the choice of B one should establish a correspondence between p₁, p₂, x and e₁, e₂, e₃ defining DDA. For each algebra L_k there are obviously, in general, six possible identifications if one avoids linear superpositions. Some of them are equivalent. The incomplete list of nonequivalent identifications is as follows

(1)
algebra L₁ : p₁ = e₁, p₂ = e₂, x = e₃; DDA is the commutative algebra with
(4.1)
(2)
algebra L₂:
- case (a)
  p₁ = −e₂, p₂ = e₃, x = e₁; the corresponding DDA is the algebra L_2a with the commutation relations:
  (4.2)
- case (b)
  p₁ = e₁, p₂ = e₃, x = e₂; the corresponding DDA L_2b is defined by
  (4.3)
(3)
algebra L₃: p₁ = e₁, p₂ = e₂, x = e₃; DDA L₃ is
(4.4)
(4)
solvable algebra L₄ with α = 0, β = 1, γ = −1, δ = 0 : p₁ = e₁, p₂ = e₂, x = e₃; DDA L₄ is
(4.5)
(5)
solvable algebra L₅ at α = 1, β = 0, γ = 0, δ = 1 : p₁ = e₁, p₂ = e₂, x = e₃; DDA L₅ is
(4.6)

For the second choice of the algebra B = L₀ ⊕ L mentioned above the table of multiplication (1.1) consists of the trivial part P₀P_j = P_jP₀ = P_j, j = 0,1, 2 and the nontrivial part:

(4.7)

For the first choice B = K the multiplication table is given by (4.7) with A = D = K = 0.

It is convenient also to arrange the structure constants A, B, …, N into the matrices C₁, C₂ defined by

. One has

(4.8)

In terms of these matrices the associativity conditions (1.2) are written as

(4.9)

Simple algebras L₈ and L₉ do not contain two commuting elements to be identified with p₁ and p₂, and, hence, they cannot be DDA. Deformations generated by algebras L₆ and L₇ will be considered elsewhere.

5. Deformations Generated by General DDAs

(1) Commutative DDA (4.1) does not force any deformation of structure constants. So, we begin with the three-dimensional commutative algebra A and DDA L_2a defined by the commutation relations (4.2). These relations imply that for an arbitrary function φ(x)

(5.1)

where Δ₁ = (x∂/∂x), Δ₂ = 0. Consequently, one has the following CS:

(5.2)

In terms of the matrices C₁ and C₂ defined above this CS has a form of the Lax equation:

(5.3)

The CS (5.3) has all remarkable standard properties of the Lax equations (see e.g. [20, 21]): it has three independent first integrals:

(5.4)

and it is equivalent to the compatibility condition of the linear problems:

(5.5)

where Φ is the column with three components and λ is a spectral parameter. Though the evolution in x described by the second linear problem (5.5) is too simple, nevertheless the CS (5.2) or (5.3) has the meaning of the isospectral deformations of the matrix C₂ that is typical to the class of integrable systems (see e.g. [22, 23]).

CS (5.3) is the system of six equations for the structure constants D, E, G, L, M, N with free A, B, C:

(5.6)

where D^′ = x∂D/∂x and so forth. Here we will consider only simple particular cases of the CS (5.6). First it corresponds to the constraint A = 0, B = 0, C = 0, that is, to the nilpotent P₁. The corresponding solution is

(5.7)

where α, β, γ, δ, μ are arbitrary constants. The three integrals for this solution are

(5.8)

The second example is given by the constraint B = 0, C = 1, G = 0 for which the quantum CS (3.3) is equivalent to the Boussinesq equation [12]. Under this constraint the CS (5.6) is reduced to the single equation:

(5.9)

and the other structure constants are given by

(5.10)

where α, β, γ are arbitrary constants. The corresponding first integrals are

(5.11)

Integral I₃ reproduces the well-known first integral of (5.9). Solutions of (5.9) are given by elliptic integrals (see e.g., [24]). Any such solution together with the formulae (5.10) describes deformation of the three-dimensional algebra A driven by DDA L_2a.

Now we will consider deformations of the two-dimensional algebra A without unit element according to the first option mentioned in the previous section. In this case the CS has the form (5.3) with the 2 × 2 matrices

(5.12)

or in components

(5.13)

In this case there are two independent integrals of motion:

(5.14)

The corresponding spectral problem is given by (5.5). Eigenvalues of the matrix C₂, that is, are invariant under deformations and . We note also an obvious invariance of (5.6) and (5.13) under the rescaling of x.

The system of (5.13) contains two arbitrary functions B and C. In virtue of the possible rescaling P₁ → μ₁P₁, P₂ → μ₂P₂ of the basis for the algebra A with two arbitrary functions μ₁, μ₂, one has four nonequivalent choices (1) B = 0, C = 0, (2) B = 1, C = 0, (3) B = 0, C = 1, and (4) B = 1, C = 1.

In the case B = 0, C = 0 (nilpotent P₁) the solution of the system (5.13) is

(5.15)

where α, β, γ are arbitrary constants. For this solution the integrals are equal to I₁ = α, I₂ = γ + (1/2)α², and

At B = 1, C = 0 the system (5.13) has the following solution:

(5.16)

where α, β, γ, δ are arbitrary constants. The integrals are I₁ = α, I₂ = δ + (1/2)α². The formulae (5.15) and (5.16) provide us with explicit deformations of the structure constants.

In the last two cases the CS (5.13) is equivalent to the simple third-order ordinary differential equations. At B = 0, C = 1 with additional constraint I₁ = 0 one gets

(5.17)

while at B = 1, C = 1, and I₁ = 0 the system (5.13) becomes

(5.18)

The second integral for these ODEs is

(5.19)

Equation (5.17) with G^′ = ∂G/∂y is the Chazy V equation from the well-known Chazy-Bureau list of the third-order ODEs having Painlevé property [25, 26]. The integral (5.19) is known too (see e.g. [27]).

The appearance of the Chazy V equation among the particular cases of the system (5.13) indicates that for other choices of B and C the CS (5.13) may be equivalent to the other notable third-order ODEs. It is really the case. Here we will consider only the reduction C = 1 with I₁ = N + E = 0. In this case the system (5.13) is reduced to the following equation:

(5.20)

where Φ = B^′ + (1/2)B². The second integral is

(5.21)

and

Choosing particular B or Φ, one gets equations from the Chazy-Bureau list. Indeed, at Φ = 0 one has the Chazy V equation (5.17). Choosing Φ = G^′, one gets the Chazy VII equation:

(5.22)

At B = 2G (5.20) becomes the Chazy VIII equation:

(5.23)

Choosing the function Φ such that

(5.24)

one gets the Chazy III equation:

(5.25)

In the above particular cases the integral I₂ (5.21) is reduced to those given in [27].

All Chazy equations presented above have the Lax representation (5.3) with E = −N = −(1/2)(G^′ + G² + GB), M = −(1/2)(G^′′ + 3GG^′ + G³ + G²B + (GB) ^′), C = 1, and the proper choice of B.

Solutions of all these Chazy equations provide us with the deformations of the structure constants (5.12) for the two-dimensional algebra A generated by the DDA L_2a.

(2) Now we pass to the DDA L_2b. The commutation relations (4.3) imply that

(5.26)

where φ(x) is an arbitrary function and Tφ(x) = φ(x + 1). Using (5.26), one finds the corresponding CS:

(5.27)

where Δ₁ = T − 1, Δ₂ = 0. In terms of the matrices C₁ and C₂, this CS is

(5.28)

For nondegenerated matrix C₁ one has

(5.29)

The CS (5.29) is the discrete version of the Lax equation (5.3) and has similar properties. It has three independent first integrals:

(5.30)

and it represents itself the compatibility condition for the linear problems:

(5.31)

Note that det C₂ is the first integral too.

The CS (5.28) is the discrete dynamical system in the space of the structure constants. For the two-dimensional algebra A with matrices (5.12) it is

(5.32)

where B and C are arbitrary functions. For nondegenerated matrix C₁, that is, at BG − CE ≠ 0, one has the resolved form (5.29), that is,

(5.33)

This system defines discrete deformations of the structure constants.

6. Nilpotent DDA

For the nilpotent DDA L₃, in virtue of the defining relations (4.5), one has

(6.1)

(6.2)

where a₂₁ = 1, a₁₁ = a₁₂ = a₂₂ = 0. Using (6.2), one gets the following CS:

(6.3)

In the matrix form it is

(6.4)

For invertible matrix C₁

(6.5)

This system of ODEs has three independent first integrals:

(6.6)

and it is equivalent to the compatibility condition for the linear system:

(6.7)

So, as in the previous section the CS (6.4) describes isospectral deformations of the matrix C₁. This CS governs deformations generated by L₃.

For the two-dimensional algebra A without unit element the CS is given by (6.4) with the matrices (5.12). First integrals in this case are I₁ = B + G, I₂ = (1/2)(B² + G² + 2CE) and

Since det C₁ is a constant on the solutions of the system, then at det C₁ ≠ 0 one can always introduce the variable y defined by x = ydet C₁ such that CS (6.5) takes the form

(6.8)

where B^′ = ∂B/∂y and so forth and M, N are arbitrary functions. At det C₁ = BG − CE = 1 this system becomes

(6.9)

Choosing M = N = 0, one gets

(6.10)

The solution of this system is

(6.11)

where α, β, γ, δ are arbitrary constants subject to the constraint βγ − αδ = 1. First integrals for this solution are I₁ = β + γ, I₂ = (1/2)(β² + γ² + 2αδ).

With the choice M = 0, N = 1 and under the constraint I₁ = B + G = 0 the system (6.8) takes the form

(6.12)

This system can be written as a single equation in the different equivalent forms. One of them is

(6.13)

where α is an arbitrary constant and

(6.14)

The second integral is equal to −1.

Solutions of (6.13) can be expressed through the elliptic integrals. Solutions of (6.13) and the formulae (6.14) define deformations of the structure constants driven by DDA L₃.

7. Solvable DDAs

(1) For the solvable DDA L₄ the relations of (4.5) imply that

(7.1)

where φ(x) is an arbitrary function and T is the shift operator Tφ(x) = φ(x + 1). With the use of (7.1) one arrives at the following CS:

(7.2)

For nondegenerated matrix C₁ (7.2) is equivalent to the equation

(7.3)

where

. Using this form of the CS, one promptly concludes that the CS (7.2) has three independent first integrals:

(7.4)

and it is representable as the commutativity condition for the linear system:

(7.5)

For the two-dimensional algebra A one has the CS (7.2) with the matrices (5.12). It is the system of four equations for six functions:

(7.6)

Choosing B and C as free functions and assuming that BG − CE ≠ 0, one can easily resolve (7.6) with respect to TE, TG, TM, TN. For instance, with B = C = 1 one gets the following four-dimensional mapping:

(7.7)

(2) In a similar manner one finds the CS associated with the solvable DDA L₅. Since in this case

(7.8)

the CS takes the form

(7.9)

For nondegenerated C₂ it is equivalent to

(7.10)

where V≑T⁻¹C₁ · C₂. Similar to the previous case the CS has three first integrals:

(7.11)

and it is equivalent to the compatibility condition for the linear system:

(7.12)

Note that the CS (7.9) is of the form (3.11) with T₁ = T, T₂ = T⁻¹. Thus, the deformations generated by L₅ can be considered as the reductions of the discrete deformations (3.11) under the constraint

A class of solutions of the CS (7.9) is given by

(7.13)

where g is 3 × 3 matrix and T₀ = 1, T₁ = T, T₂ = T⁻¹. Since

, one has

and hence

where Φ⁰, Φ¹, Φ² are arbitrary functions. So, this subclass of deformations are defined by three arbitrary functions.

To describe the isoassociative deformations for which C₁(x)C₂(x) = C₂(x)C₁(x) for all x these functions should obey the systems of equations:

(7.14)

It is a version of the discrete oriented associativity equation.

Acknowledgment

The author is very grateful to the referees for careful reading of the manuscript and various useful and fruitful remarks.

References

1 Gerstenhaber M., On the deformation of rings and algebras, Annals of Mathematics. (1964) 79, 59–103, MR0171807, ZBL0123.03101.
10.2307/1970484
Web of Science® Google Scholar
2 Gerstenhaber M., On the deformation of rings and algebras. II, Annals of Mathematics. (1966) 84, 1–19, MR0207793, https://doi.org/10.2307/1970528, ZBL0147.28903.
10.2307/1970528
Web of Science® Google Scholar
3 Witten E., On the structure of the topological phase of two-dimensional gravity, Nuclear Physics B. (1990) 340, no. 2-3, 281–332, MR1068086, https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(90)90449-N.
10.1016/0550-3213(90)90449-N
Web of Science® Google Scholar
4 Dijkgraaf R., Verlinde H., and Verlinde E., Topological strings in d < 1, Nuclear Physics B. (1991) 352, no. 1, 59–86, MR1103047, https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(91)90129-L.
10.1016/0550-3213(91)90129-L
Web of Science® Google Scholar
5 Dubrovin B., Integrable systems in topological field theory, Nuclear Physics B. (1992) 379, no. 3, 627–689, MR1175565, https://doi.org/10.1016/0550-3213(92)90137-Z.
10.1016/0550-3213(92)90137-Z
Web of Science® Google Scholar
6 Dubrovin B., Geometry of 2D topological field theories, Integrable Systems and Quantum Groups (Montecatini Terme, 1993), 1996, 1620, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 120–348, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, MR1397274, https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0094793.
10.1007/BFb0094793
Google Scholar
7 Hertling C. and Manin Y. I., Weak Frobenius manifolds, International Mathematics Research Notices. (1999) no. 6, 277–286, https://doi.org/10.1155/S1073792899000148, MR1680372, ZBL0960.58003.
10.1155/S1073792899000148
Web of Science® Google Scholar
8 Manin Y. I., Frobenius Manifolds, Quantum Cohomology, and Moduli Spaces, 1999, 47, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, USA, American Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications, MR1702284, ZBL0960.58003.
10.1090/coll/047
Google Scholar
9 C. Hertling and M. Marcolli, Frobenius Manifolds, Quantum Cohomology and Singularities, 2004, E36, Friedrich Vieweg & Sohn, Wiesbaden, Germany, Aspects of Mathematics.
10.1007/978-3-322-80236-1
Google Scholar
10 Konopelchenko B. G. and Magri F., Coisotropic deformations of associative algebras and dispersionless integrable hierarchies, Communications in Mathematical Physics. (2007) 274, no. 3, 627–658, MR2328906, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-007-0295-2, ZBL1136.37038.
10.1007/s00220-007-0295-2
Web of Science® Google Scholar
11 Konopelchenko B. G. and Magri F., Dispersionless integrable equations as coisotropic deformations: generalizations and reductions, Theoretical and Mathematical Physics. (2007) 151, no. 3, 803–819, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11232-007-0066-4, MR2406033, ZBL1142.37043.
10.1007/s11232-007-0066-4
Web of Science® Google Scholar
12 Konopelchenko B. G., Quantum deformations of associative algebras and integrable systems, Journal of Physics A. (2009) 42, no. 9, 18, 095201, https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/42/9/095201, MR2525529, ZBL1159.81032.
10.1088/1751-8113/42/9/095201
Google Scholar
13 Konopelchenko B. G., Discrete integrable systems and deformations of associative algebras, Journal of Physics A. (2009) 42, no. 45, 35, 454003, https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/42/45/454003, MR2556645.
10.1088/1751-8113/42/45/454003
Google Scholar
14 Konopelchenko B. G. and Magri F., Yano manifolds, F-manifolds and integrable systems, unpublished.
Google Scholar
15 van der Waerden B. L., Algebra, 1971, Springer, New York, NY, USA.
Google Scholar
16 Bourbaki N., Groupes et Algebres de Lie, 1972, Hermann, Paris, France, MR0573068.
Google Scholar
17 Dieudonné J., Les déterminants sur un corps non commutatif, Bulletin de la Société Mathématique de France. (1943) 71, 27–45, MR0012273, ZBL0028.33904.
10.24033/bsmf.1345
Google Scholar
18 Gelfand I. M. and Retakh V. S., Determinants of matrices over noncommutative rings, Functional Analysis and Its Applications. (1991) 25, no. 2, 91–102, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01079588, MR1142205.
10.1007/BF01079588
Web of Science® Google Scholar
19 Dirac P. A. M., Lectures on Quantum Mechanics, 1964, Yeshiva University, New York, NY, USA.
Google Scholar
20 Losev A. and Manin Y. I., C. Hertling and M. Marcoli, Extended modular operads, Frobenius Manifolds, Quantum Cohomology and Singularities, 2004, E36, Vieweg, Wiesbaden, Germany, 181–211, Aspects Mathematics, MR2115771, ZBL1080.14066.
10.1007/978-3-322-80236-1_8
Google Scholar
21 Yano K. and Ako M., On certain operators associated with tensor fields, Kōdai Mathematical Seminar Reports. (1968) 20, 414–436, MR0234370, https://doi.org/10.2996/kmj/1138845745, ZBL0167.19702.
10.2996/kmj/1138845745
Google Scholar
22 Novikov S., Manakov S. V., Pitaevskiĭ L. P., and Zakharov V. E., Theory of Solitons, 1984, Plenum, New York, NY, USA, Contemporary Soviet Mathematics, MR779467.
Google Scholar
23 Ablowitz M. J. and Segur H., Solitons and the Inverse Scattering Transform, 1981, 4, SIAM, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics, MR642018.
10.1137/1.9781611970883
Google Scholar
24 Baker H. F., Abelian Functions, 1995, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, Cambridge Mathematical Library, MR1386644.
Google Scholar
25 Chazy J., Sur les équations différentielles du troisième ordre et d′ordre supérieur dont l′intégrale générale a ses points critiques fixes, Acta Mathematica. (1911) 34, no. 1, 317–385, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02393131, MR1555070.
10.1007/BF02393131
Web of Science® Google Scholar
26 Bureau F. J., Differential equations with fixed critical point. II, Annali di Matematica Pura ed Applicata. Serie Quarta. (1964) 66, 1–116, MR0178205, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02412437.
10.1007/BF02412437
Google Scholar
27 Cosgrove C. M., [email protected], Chazy classes IX-XI of third-order differential equations, Studies in Applied Mathematics. (2000) 104, no. 3, 171–228, https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9590.00134, ZBL1136.34351.
10.1111/1467-9590.00134
Web of Science® Google Scholar

Citing Literature

All articles

On the Deformation Theory of Structure Constants for Associative Algebras

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Deformations of the Structure Constants Generated by DDA

3. Quantum, Discrete, and Coisotropic Deformations

4. Three-Dimensional Lie Algebras as DDA

5. Deformations Generated by General DDAs

6. Nilpotent DDA

7. Solvable DDAs

Acknowledgment

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

On the Deformation Theory of Structure Constants for Associative Algebras

Abstract

1. Introduction

2. Deformations of the Structure Constants Generated by DDA

3. Quantum, Discrete, and Coisotropic Deformations

4. Three-Dimensional Lie Algebras as DDA

5. Deformations Generated by General DDAs

6. Nilpotent DDA

7. Solvable DDAs

Acknowledgment

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information