arXiv:2102.02405v3 [math.RT] 22 Jul 2021 n sgn)temlilct resmercpis elet We pairs. symmetric free multiplicity the isogeny) and of G epnec sn oa ytm nteeorbits. B these the on via hope systems realized then local algebra We th Lie using orbits. of the respondence the of description representations on combinatorial understand actions a to monoidal provide modules. understand to Gelfand-Zeitlin to is of ticular sequel, the theory in its the naturally and in arise paper, and consider system we integrable subgroups Zeitlin The orbits. many finitely ntl ayobt.Ormi euti that is result main Our orbits. many finitely eeaie a ait of variety flag generalized a oepeiey ecntutacaso aaoi ugop of subgroups parabolic of class a construct we precisely, More hoe 1.1. Theorem subgroups parabolic R n ∩ nmr eal let detail, more In the on acting subgroups solvable certain consider we paper, this In e od n phrases. and words Key 2020 G pt etri the in center to up , (2) (1) G n − n 1 ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics ecito of description B SO hs risadso o oudrtn h lsr eain nt on comb relations complete closure a the give action. understand to monoid to results the the how these on of show use action and we monoid orbits paper, the these this describe to and sequel inductively a orbits the study to bea fibre GL Abstract. − h beof fibre the hr safir bundle fibre a is there 1 n n ealthat recall and − ( ( saprblcsbru of subgroup parabolic a is n n 1 obti bebnl vra over bundle fibre a is -orbit ) h The )). − B )(respectively 1) m o each For − B 1 nti ae,w osdrteobt faBrlsubgroup Borel a of orbits the consider we paper, this In obton -orbit n Q . G − G 1 n → BNLSO H LGVREY I VARIETY, THE ON -BUNDLES − n 1 K GL obt on -orbits = Q B B obt nflgvrey leri ru actions. group algebraic variety, flag on -orbits B n n AKCLRSOADSMEVENS SAM AND COLARUSSO MARK 1 B GL − − n ( m G a eietfidwt a with identified be may n SO − 1 1 -ae ent httepis( pairs the that note We )-case. 1 n cson acts Q o some for ( cso h a ait fBrlsubgroups Borel of variety flag the on acts -orbit − ( n n 1 → or ) − B ihfir ie by given fibre with 1. Q ) cigo h a variety flag the on acting 1)) osuyteeobt.I atclr eso hta that show we particular, In orbits. these study to G SO Q B B 1 Introduction 41,1L0 20G20. 14L30, 14M15, n n n < m where , n − on − ihfiieymn ris n eueteknown the use we and orbits, many finitely with ( 1 1 n and , obti eeaie a ait of variety flag generalized a in -orbit ,adembed and ), B efrhrueti bebnl structure bundle fibre this use further We . 1 n hr saseilparabolic special a is there , B Q n 1 − 1 sa is obt on -orbits B B B m m − n G − − 1 1 n -orbit 1 obt on -orbits B − obton -orbit 1 n B B G − sasmercsbru of subgroup symmetric a as n n 1 n G beover fibre of G , Q eoeaBrlsubgroup Borel a denote eeobt nterms in orbits hese n ntra oe for model inatorial 2 G iisnBrsencor- eilinson-Bernstein hc ecall we which , n B on − bebnl.In bundle. fibre = G B risadi par- in and orbits e n 1 oueteeresults these use to − r u ocenter to (up are ) m n GL B ope Gelfand- complex 1 − a ait with variety flag o some for m h olo this of goal The 1 G of R ( /R B . n n B G − (resp. ) of n n 1 n − ∩ − of with 1 G 1 obt on -orbits G n = G n n < m − othat so special n 1 ; with . 2 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

′ ′ If we denote the above Bn−1-orbit by Q = (Q1, Q2), then (Q1, Q2)= (Q1, Q2) if and ′ O O O only if Qi = Qi for i =1, 2.

Our theorem allows for an inductive description of Bn−1-orbits on the flag variety n in terms of special parabolics, data, and data derived inductively from Bthe same problem for a smaller index. The special parabolic subalgebras are in one- to-one correspondence with Gn−1-orbits on n. For the closed Gn−1-orbits on n, the corresponding special parabolics are the representativesB of these orbits given in PartB (2) of Propositions 2.8, 2.9, and 2.10. The special parabolics corresponding to Gn−1-orbits that are not closed are given in the orthogonal cases by taking parabolics containing the upper triangular matrices and corresponding to the choice of simple roots αi,...,αl where i = 1,...,l for type B and i = 1,...,l 1 for type D using the usual{ ordering of} simple roots (see (3.4) and (3.7)). In the general− linear case the special parabolics are given by choosing a consecutive subset of simple roots and a corresponding element of the Weyl group (see (3.3)). In a sequel to this paper, we use our results to give a combinatorial description of the Bn− -orbits on n. Further, we use the action of a monoid using both simple roots of Gn− 1 B 1 and of Gn to show that every Bn−1-orbit arises from a zero dimensional Bn−1-orbit using the monoid action. Richardson and Springer [RS90] have pointed out the seminal role of verifying this result in the description of the orbit closure relation. As a consequence of work of Richardson and Springer [RS90], we use this result to determine the closure relation between Bn−1-orbits in terms of the monoid action. An essential step in this process is to describe instances when this monoid action may be described efficiently using the fibre bundle description of the orbits of Theorem 1.1 (see Theorems 4.7, 4.11, and 4.12).

In the GL(n)-case, Hashimoto [Has04] describes the Bn−1-orbits on n, and discusses part of the monoid action that we consider in this paper. Our work advancesB on [Has04] in that our approach also describes orbits both in general linear and orthogonal cases in an essentially uniform manner, elucidates the bundle structure, and gives a complete description of the closure relation. While Hashimoto’s approach is based on analyzing orbits of a , our approach is based more on studying the orbits of Gn−1 on the flag manifold. It would also be interesting to relate our results to the work of Gandini and Pezzini [GP18], who study the general case of orbits of solvable subgroups of G with finitely many orbits on the flag variety of G. In particular, it would be of interest to understand some of the invariants they consider in their more general context in our situation. In Section 2 of this paper, we introduce notation and recall standard facts about orbits and embeddings of Gn−1 in Gn for later use. In Section 3, we establish the fibre bundle structure for Bn−1-orbits and use it to give an inductive method to describe Bn−1-orbits on n. In Section 4, we discuss the monoid action and compute it in cases where the role of theB bundle structure is salient. The remaining cases are treated in the sequel to this paper using a more explicit combinatorial description of the orbits. Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 3

We would like to thank Friedrich Knop, Jacopo Gandini, and Guido Pezzini for useful discussions which aided in the development of our results. During the preparation of this paper, the first author was supported in part by the National Security Agency grant H98230-16-1-0002 and the second author was supported in part by the Simons Foundation grant 359424.

2. Preliminaries

We discuss some notation and standard results that will be used throughout the paper.

2.1. Notation. By convention, all algebraic groups and Lie algebras discussed in this paper have complex coefficients. If an M is defined, we denote by the corresponding Gothic letter m its , and if a Lie subalgebra m of the Lie algebra of a complex G is given, we let M denote the connected subgroup of G with Lie algebra m. For an algebraic group M and g M, we denote by Ad(g) both the adjoint action of M on its Lie algebra, and the conjugation∈ action of M on itself. As a convention, we let m denote the flag variety of Borel subalgebras of the Lie algebra B m, and let n = g for g = gl(n) or so(n). For (V, β) a with symmetric B B n n bilinear form β and subspace U, we let U ⊥ := v V : β(u, v)=0 u U . Throughout the paper, we let ı denote a fixed choice of √ {1. ∈ ∀ ∈ } − 2.2. Realizations. We use the conventions for realizing so(n) from Chapters 1 and 2 of [GW98] (see also [CE19]). More explicitly, we let so(n) be the symmetry Lie algebra of the non-degenerate, symmetric bilinear form β on Cn given by β(x, y) = xT Jy, where n J is the automorphism of C such that J(ei) = en+1−i for the standard e1,...,en n of C and i = 1,...,n. Note that β(ej, en+1−j) = 1 for j = 1,...,n. We let SO(n) be the connected algebraic group with Lie algebra so(n). Then the subalgebra hn consisting of diagonal matrices in so(n) is a , and the subalgebra b+ consisting of upper triangular matrices in so(n) is a , and we refer to these as the standard Cartan and Borel subalgebras. We refer also to hn and b+ to denote the diagonal and upper triangular matrices in gl(n). For g = gl(n) or so(n), any parabolic subalgebra p b we refer to as a standard parabolic subalgebra. We also let Φ = Φ(g, h ) denote ⊃ + n the roots of g with respect to the Cartan subalgbra hn. If α Φ, we let gα denote the root space corresponding to the root α. ∈ n It will be convenient to relabel the standard basis e ,...,en of C depending on { 1 } whether n is even or odd. If n = 2l is even, then we let e−i := e2l+1−i for i = 1,...,l. Note that for j, k l, . . . , 1, 1,...,l , we have β(ej, ek) = δj,−k. If n = 2l + 1, then ∈ {− − } we let e := el and e−i := e l −i for i =1,...,l. For j, k l, . . . , 1, 0, 1,...,l , we 0 +1 2 +2 ∈ {− − } have β(ej, ek)= δj,−k. We recall the real rank one subalgebras for gl(n) and so(n). For g = gl(n), let t = diag[1,..., 1, 1] GL(n), and let θ(x) = txt−1 for x g. Then the fixed set gθ = gl(n 1) gl−(1),∈ regarded as block matrices, and g =∈gl(n 1) 0. − ⊕ n−1 − ⊕ 4 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

For g = so(2l + 1), let t be an element of the Cartan subgroup with Lie algebra h2l+1 with the property that Ad(t) g = id for i = 1,...,l 1 and Ad(t) g = id. | αi − | αl − θ2l+1 Consider the involution θ2l+1 := Ad(t). Then k := g ∼= so(2l), realized as block matrices with the l + 1st rows and columns equal to 0 (see [Kna02], p. 700). Note that h = h k. For later use, let σ l be the diagonal matrix with respect to the basis 2l+1 2l ⊂ 2 +1 e ,...,el, e , e−l,...,e− such that σ l ej = ej for j = 0 and σ l e = e and { 1 0 1} 2 +1 · 6 2 +1 · 0 − 0 note that θ = θ2l+1 = Ad(σ2l+1). 2l 2l In the case g = so(2l), consider the involutive linear map σ l : C C such that 2 → σ2l(el)= e−l and σ2l(ei)= ei for i = l or l. Define an involution θ of g by θ = Ad(σ2l). θ2l 6 − Then k := g = so(2l 1), and θ l is the involution induced by the diagram automorphism ∼ − 2 interchanging the simple roots αl−1 and αl (see [Kna02], p. 703). If we realize h2l as diagonal matrices of the form x = diag[x1,...,xl, xl,..., x1] and define for i =1,...,l, ∗ − − ǫi h2l by ǫi(x)= xi, then the induced action of θ2l is via θ2l(ǫl)= ǫl and θ2l(ǫi)= ǫi for i =1∈ ,...,l 1. We will omit the subscripts 2l +1 and 2l from θ when− g is understood. − We also denote the involution of the corresponding G by θ. For G = θ θ GL(n), G ∼= GL(n 1) GL(1) is connected, while for G = SO(n), the group G ∼= S(O(n 1) O(1)) is− disconnected.× We let K := (Gθ)0 be the identity component of Gθ. − × θ Then K = SO(n 1), and K has Lie algebra k = g . ∼ − Remark 2.1. For SO(n), note that we can realize the subgroups SO(n 1) and SO(n 2) as follows. For n either odd or even, note that the 1 eigenspace−(Cn)−σn is one− − n −σn dimensional and is nondegenerate for the restriction of β. If (C ) = Cvn, then since the perpindicular of an SO(n 1)-stable subspace is SO(n 1)-stable, it follows that − − (2.1) SO(n 1) = g SO(n): g vn = vn . − { ∈ · } In the case n =2l, let V2 = Cel + Ce−l. Then (2.2) SO(2l 2) = g SO(2l): g v = v v V . − { ∈ · ∀ ∈ 2} Here SO(2l 2) is realized as determinant one orthogonal transformations of the orthog- − ⊥ onal complement V2 to V2. In the case n =2l +1, one similarly observes that

(2.3) SO(2l 1) = g SO(2l + 1) : g e = e , g (el e−l)= el e−l. − { ∈ · 0 0 · − − } For later use, we also note that if α1,...,αl are the simple roots for SO(2l +1), then the simple roots for SO(2l) are given by α1,...,αl−1,αl−1 +2αl. We may take as root vectors for the last two simple roots of the Lie algebra so(2l) the vectors eα − = El− ,l E− − − l 1 1 − l, (l 1) and eα = El− ,−l E − − and then their sum eα − + eα is the root vector for for l 1 − l, (l 1) l 1 l so(2l 1) for the simple root αl− . − 1

2.3. Description of K-orbits on n in the multiplicity free setting. Note that the B cases (g, gn−1)=(gl(n), gl(n 1)) or (so(n), so(n 1)) are up to center essentially the only situations where each irreducible− representation− of g has multiplicity free branching law when regarded as a representation of a symmetric subalgebra k. By abuse of notation, we use k to denote gn−1 and K to denote Gn−1. This property is well-known to be equivalent Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 5 to the property that a Borel subgroup BK of K has finitely many orbits on g, the variety of Borel subalgebras of g (see for example, Proposition 3.1.3 of [CE19]). B Notation 2.2. For a group A acting on a variety X, we let A X denote the collection of A-orbits on X \

We will need to use an explicit description of K g. We present this mostly without proof, and note that it follows from explicit study\B of the Richardson-Springer discussion of orbits in [RS90], and is worked out explicitly for GL(n) in Section 4.4 of [CE14] (see especially Example 4.16, and Examples 4.30 to 4.32) and for SO(n) in section 2.7 of [CE]. We first recall the monoidal action. Suppose M is a subgroup of G acting with finitely many orbits on the flag variety g of Borel subalgebras of g, the Lie algebra of connected B 1 G. For a simple root α for G, consider the P -bundle p : g α,g, B → P where α,g consists of the parabolic subalgebras of g with Lie algebra G-conjugate to P b0 + g−α, where b0 is a Borel subalgebra for which α is a simple root. We call the parabolic subalgebras in α,g simple parabolics of type α. Then if Q = M b is a M-orbit −1 P · in g, p p(Q) contains a unique open M-orbit, and we call this orbit m(sα) Q and note B ∗ that if m(sα) Q = Q, then dim(m(sα) Q) = dim(Q)+1. We let p = p(b) and let Pα ∗ 6 ∗ α denote the corresponding parabolic subgroup of G with unipotent radical Uα and if T is a of the group B with Lie algebra b, let Lα be the Levi subgroup of Pα containing T and let Zα be the center of Lα. We denote by Mα the image of M Pα in ∩ the group Sα := Pα/ZαUα locally isomorphic to SL(2). Then one of the following occurs.

(1) Complex Case: Mα contains a maximal unipotent subgroup of Sα and is contained −1 in a Borel subgroup of Sα. In this case, m(sα) Q meets p p(b) in a Mα-orbit isomorphic to C and the complement is a point;∗ (2) Noncompact/Real Case: Mα is locally isomorphic to a maximal torus of Sα. In −1 × this case, m(sα) Q meets p p(b) in a Mα-orbit isomorphic to C , and if Mα is a ∗ torus, the complement is a union of two Mα-orbits, and otherwise, the complement is a single Mα-orbit; −1 1 (3) Compact Case: Mα = Sα. In this case, m(sα) Q = Q and p p(b) = P is a single ∗ ∼ Mα-orbit. Definition 2.3. (1) In the complex case above, we say that the simple root α is com- plex stable for Q if m(sα) Q = Q and complex unstable for Q if m(sα) Q = Q; (2) In the noncompact/real case∗ above,6 we say that the simple root α is noncompact∗ for Q if m(sα) Q = Q and real for Q if m(sα) Q = Q; (3) In the compact∗ case6 above, we say the simple root∗ α is compact for Q, and note that in this case m(sα) Q = Q. ∗ The type of a simple root α for Q depends only on Q and not on the choice of b. We introduce some notation needed to describe K-orbits on g. B Remark 2.4. When M is the fixed point set of an involution G, then our description of roots by type coincides with the usual definition from real groups [RS90]. 6 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

Notation 2.5. For each simple root α, choose root vectors eα g , fα g , and ∈ α ∈ −α hα = [eα, fα] so that eα, fα, hα spans a subalgebra of g isomorphic to sl(2). Consider the unique Lie algebra φα : sl(2) g such that: → 0 1 0 0 1 0 (2.4) φα : eα, φα : fα, φα : hα  0 0  →  1 0  →  0 1  → − Let φα : SL(2) G be the induced Lie group homomorphism, and let → 1 1 ı (2.5) uα = φα . √2  ı 1 

In the remainder of this section, we consider the cases where K = Gn−1 as above, and consider the monoid action relative to the K-action on n. We now introduce some notation which will be used throughout the paper. B Notation 2.6. Let n =(V = 0 V Vi Vn = C ) F 0 { } ⊂ 1 ⊂···⊂ ⊂···⊂ n n be a full flag in C , with dim Vi = i and Vi = span v1,...,vi , with each vj C . We will denote this flag by { } ∈ F =(v v vi vi vn). F 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ ⊂ +1 ⊂···⊂ We will also make use of the following notation for partial flags in Cn. Let n =(V = 0 V Vi Vk = C ) P 0 { } ⊂ 1 ⊂···⊂ ⊂···⊂ denote a k-step partial flag with dim Vj = ij and Vj = span v1,...,vij for j = 1,...,k. Then we denote as { } P

=( v ,...,vi vi ,...,vi vi − ,...,vi ). P { 1 1 }⊂{ 1+1 2 }⊂···⊂{ k 1+1 k } Notation 2.7. Let T be the maximal torus of G with Lie algebra t, and let W be the Weyl group with respect to T . For an element w W , let w˙ NG(T ) be a representative of w. If m g is a Lie subalgebra which is normalized∈ by T , then∈ Ad(w ˙ )m is independent of the choice⊂ of representative of w, and we denote it by w(m). Similarly, we denote by w(M) the corresponding group. Proposition 2.8. Let g = gl(n) and k = gl(n 1). − (1) The number of K-orbits on is n+1 . B 2 (2) For i =1,...,n, let wi be the cycle (n, n 1,...i) in the symmetric group n, and − S let bi := wi(b ). The distinct closed K-orbits on are the K-orbits Qi = K bi + B · so there are exactly n closed K-orbits. Further, the Borel subalgebra bi is the stabilizer of the flag:

(2.6) i := (e ei− en ei en− ). F 1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂ ⊂ ⊂···⊂ 1 i |{z} Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 7

(3) The non-closed K-orbits are of the form:

(2.7) Qi,j = m(sα − ) ...m(sα ) Qi j 1 i ∗ with 1 i < j n. The codimension of Qi,j is n 1 (j i). Further, the Borel subalgebra:≤ ≤ − − −

(2.8) bi,j := Ad(ˆv)(b ) Qi,j, vˆ :=w ˙ i uα s˙α ... s˙α − , + ∈ · i · i+1 j 1 and bi,j is the stabilizer of the flag:

(2.9) i,j := (e ei− ei + en ei ej− en ej en− ). F 1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂ ⊂ +1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂ ⊂ ⊂···⊂ 1 i j

In particular, the unique open| {z orbit} is Q1,n, and it contains|{z} the Borel subalgebra

b1,n = Ad(w1)Ad(uα1 )sα2 ...sαn−1 (b+) which stabilizes the flag:

(2.10) ,n := (e + en e en− en). F1 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂

The following diagram indicates the K-orbits on 4, together with the order relations given by closure. For general n, the diagram has theB same shape, with n closed orbits, n 1 orbits one line below, and so forth, until we have one orbit on the last line. −

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4

Q1,2 Q2,3 Q3,4

Q1,3 Q2,4

Q1,4

We now classify the orbits of K = SO(n 1) on the flag variety for g = so(n). When − n =2l + 1 is odd, there is a bijection between so(n) and the set of all maximal isotropic flags in Cn, i.e., partial flags of the form B

=(V Vi Vl), IF 1 ⊂···⊂ ⊂···⊂ with dim(Vi) = i and B(u,w) = 0 for all u,w Vi. When n = 2l is even, the space of maximal isotropic flags in Cn consists of two SO∈ (2n)-orbits. To distinguish them, we choose a maximal isotropic flag U Ul, where Ui is the span of the standard 1 ⊂ ··· ⊂ basis e ,...,ei from Section 2.2. Then we identify so n with the maximal isotropic flags 1 B ( ) V Vl such that dim(Vl Ul) l (mod 2). As before, if Vi is the span of vectors 1 ⊂···⊂ ∩ ≡ v ,...,vi , we write the above maximal isotropic flag as { 1 } =(v v v n ). IF 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ [ 2 ] 8 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

We consider the type B and D cases separately, and use the enumeration of simple roots in [GW98]. Proposition 2.9. Let g = so(2l + 1) and k = so(2l). (1) There are exactly l +2 K-orbits on the flag variety of g. B (2) We let b− := sα (b ). Exactly two K-orbits on are closed, and they are Q := l + B + K b+ and Q− := K b−. Further, m(sαl ) Q+ = m(sαl ) Q− = K Ad(uαl )b+. (3) The· non-closed orbits· are of the form ∗ ∗ ·

Qi := m(sα ) m(sα ) m(sα − ) m(sα ) Q i+1 ∗ i+2 ··· l 1 ∗ l ∗ + for i =0,...,l 1. Moreover, the codimension of Qi in is i. Further, − B

(2.11) bi = Ad(ˆv)(b ) Qi, vˆ := uα s˙α − s˙α − ... s˙α . + ∈ l l 1 l 2 i+1 In particular, the unique open K-orbit contains the Borel subalgebra

(2.12) b0 = Ad(uαl )sαl−1 sαl−2 ...sα1 (b+). Proposition 2.10. Let g = so(2l) and k = so(2l 1). − (1) There are exactly l K-orbits in the flag variety of g. B (2) The orbit Q+ := K b+ is the only closed K-orbit. (3) Let ·

Qi := m(sα ) ...m(sα − ) Q i l 1 ∗ + and let

(2.13) bi = Ad(ˆv)(b ), vˆ :=s ˙α − s˙α − ... s˙α (b ) for i =1,...,l 1. + l 1 l 2 i + − Then Qi = K bi has codimension i 1 in . The distinct K-orbits are Q , Ql− ,...,Q . · − B + 1 1 In particular, the unique open orbit is Q1 and contains the Borel subalgebra

(2.14) b1 = sαl−1 sαl−2 ...sα1 (b+).

Remark 2.11. In case g = so(2l) or so(2l + 1), the Borel subalgebra b+ corresponds to the maximal isotropic flag (e e el). By Proposition 2.10, the Borel subalgebra 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ b in the open K-orbit in so l corresponds to the maximal isotropic flag (el e 1 B (2 ) ⊂ 1 ⊂···⊂ el−1). Similarly, by Proposition 2.9, it follows that the Borel subalgebra b0 in the open K- orbit in corresponds to the maximal isotropic flag (uα (el) e e el− ). Bso(2l+1) l ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 1 We may choose our root vectors so that C uα (el)= C (el +ı√2e +e−l). We consider the · l · 0 αl root vector e = El, E ,−l and take f to be the transpose of e, and let x = [e, f], and 0 − 0 note that e, x, f generates the three dimensional subalgebra sα := φα (sl(2)). Let V be { } l l 3 the span of el, e0, and e−l, and note that V3 is a representation of sαl and is isomorphic to the via an isomorphism mapping e−l f, e0 x, and el e. A brief computation using the composed isomorphism sl(2) →so(3) →V − above then→ gives → → 3 the above formula for uαl (el). Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 9

3. Structure of Bn−1-orbits

Recall that G = GL(n) or SO(n) and K = Gn−1 from Section 2.2. We show that Bn−1-orbits on the flag variety of G have a useful bundle structure and describe the data required to classify orbits. B

3.1. Fibre Bundle Structure. Let QK = K b be a K-orbit. Let R be a parabolic subgroup of G containing B and consider the· projection⊂ B π : := G/R. Then the morphism B → R −1 (3.1) φ : K K∩R R/B π π(QK ), φ(k, b ) = Ad(k) b , × → 1 · 1 −1 is an isomorphism, and the preimage φ (QK) is K K∩R (K R) b. This realizes both −1 × ∩ · π π(QK ) and QK as bundles over K/K R. Let R = L U be a of the parabolic R. Recall that the morphism∩ R b · given by b b l is an · → Bl 1 7→ 1 ∩ isomorphism, where b R b = R. 1 ∈ · ∼ B We now assume that R is θ-stable. Then by Theorem 2 of [BH00], there is a θ-stable Levi subgroup L of R, K R is a parabolic subgroup of K, and K R =(K L) (K U) is a Levi decomposition of∩K R. The group K R then acts on ∩ through∩ its· quotient∩ ∩ ∩ Bl K L, and it follows that we can identify QK with K K∩R (K L) (b l). Since K L is a∩ symmetric subgroup of L, K L acts with finitely× many orbits∩ on· ∩. ∩ ∩ Bl We now prove our basic result about K-orbits on for the multiplicity free pairs (G,K). B Theorem 3.1. Let QK = K b be a K-orbit on . Then there exists a θ-stable parabolic subgroup R B with θ-stable· Levi decompositionB R = L U such that the pair (l, l k) is of the same⊃ type as (g, k) up to abelian factors in the center· of l and the K L-orbit∩ (K L) (b l) is open in the flag variety . Thus, ∩ ∩ · ∩ Bl (3.2) QK = K K∩R (K L) (b l). ∼ × ∩ · ∩ is a K-homogenous fibre bundle over the partial flag variety K/K R with fibre the open K L-orbit on . ∩ ∩ Bl

Proof. If QK is closed, then B is θ-stable by Corollary 6.6 of [Spr85], and then l is abelian so that = b l is a point, and the assertion follows. Bl { ∩ } When QK is not closed, we consider the different types A, B, and D separately. In type A, by Proposition 2.8, the orbit QK = Qi,j = K bi,j for some i, j with 1 i < j n, and · ≤ ≤ bi,j is the Borel subalgebra in Equation (2.8). Let Pi,j be the standard parabolic subgroup of GL(n) which is the stabilizer of the flag

i,j := (e ei− ei,...,ej ej en) P 1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂{ } ⊂ +1 ⊂···⊂ and corresponds to the choice of simple roots αi,...,αj− . Recall the cycle wi =(n, n { 1} − 1,...i) from Proposition 2.8(2) and let r = ri,j := wi(pi,j). Then ri,j is the Lie algebra stabilizer of the partial flag wi( i,j) which is P (3.3) i,j := (e ei− ei, ei ,...,ej− , en ej ej en− .) R 1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂{ +1 1 } ⊂ ⊂ +1 ⊂···⊂ 1 10 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

By Proposition 2.8(3), bi,j is the stabilizer of the full flag in Equation (2.9). It follows that bi,j also stabilizes the partial flag i,j in (3.3), so that bi,j is in the parabolic ri,j. R Since the Cartan subalgebra hn is contained in ri,j, it follows that ri,j is θ-stable. Further, i−1 n−j ri,j has Levi decomposition ri,j = l u, where l = gl(1) gl(j i + 1) gl(1) . It ⊕ ∼ ⊕ − ⊕ follows from (3.3) that ri,j k is a standard parabolic subalgebra of k with Levi factor l k = gl(1)i−1 gl(j i) ∩gl(1)n−j. ∩ ∼ ⊕ − ⊕ To prove the Theorem when g = gl(n), it remains to show that (K L) (bi,j l) is open ∩ · ∩ in the flag variety of l. In the Levi decomposition of ri,j above, gl(j i + 1) is identified − with endomorphisms of the span of ei,...,ej−1, en . Observe that bi,j gl(j i + 1) is the stabilizer of the flag { } ∩ −

(ei + en ei ej− en) ⊂ +1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ⊂ in gl(j i +1). By part (3) of Proposition 2.8, the point bi,j gl(j i + 1) is in the open − ∩ − K GL(j i +1)-orbit on gl(j−i+1). Hence, bi,j l is in the open K L-orbit on the flag variety∩ −of l. B ∩ ∩ Bl For the type B case, the relevant symmetric pair is (so(2l + 1), so(2l)). Recall from Proposition 2.9 that since QK is not closed, QK = Qi with i

(3.6) v := uα s˙α − ... s˙α L R. l l 1 i+1 ∈ ⊂ Hence, bi = Ad(v)b Ad(v)ri = ri. + ⊂ It remains to show that (K L) (b l) can be identified with the open K L-orbit in the flag variety . Note that b∩ ·l can∩ be identified with the standard Borel∩ subalgebra Bl + ∩ b+,l of upper triangular matrices in l. Since the element v in Equation (3.6) is in L, we have: b l = (Ad(v)b ) l = Ad(v)(b l) = Ad(v)b . ∩ + ∩ + ∩ +,l It follows from Equations (2.12) and (3.6) that Ad(v)b is a representative of the +,l ⊂ Bl open K L-orbit on . ∩ Bl The type D case is similar to type B. In this setting, g = so(2l) and k = so(2l 1), − and since QK is a K-orbit that is not closed, then by Proposition 2.10, QK = Qi has codimension i 1 < l 1. By part (3) of Proposition 2.10, we can take b = bi = − − Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 11

sα − sα − ...sα (b ). Let ri g be the standard parabolic subalgebra generated by b and l 1 l 2 i + ⊂ + the negative simple root spaces g−αl , g−αl−1 ,..., g−αi . Then ri has the Levi decomposition: i−1 (3.7) ri = l u with l = so(2(l i)+2) gl(1) . ⊕ ∼ − ⊕ We claim that ri is θ-stable. Indeed, we saw in Section 2.2 that θ(ǫl)= ǫl and θ(ǫk)= ǫk − for k = l. It follows that θ(αi) = αi for i = 1,...,l 2 and that αl− and αl are 6 − 1 complex θ-stable with θ(αl−1)= αl. It then follows easily that ri has Levi decomposition θ i−1 (3.7) and that θ = θ2(l−i)+2, whence l = k l = so(2(l i) + 1) gl(1) , and lss ∼ θ 0 | i−1 ∩ − ⊕ (L ) = K L ∼= SO(2(l i)+1) GL(1) . The remainder of the proof proceeds as in the previous∩ case. − ×

Q.E.D. Remark 3.2. In Proposition 12 of the paper [BH00], Brion and Helminck prove a closely related result which in the multiplicity free case, describes K-orbits on as bundles over a closed K-orbit with fibre an open orbit in a smaller flag variety. In theB orthogonal cases, our result coincides with the result of [BH00], but in the general linear case, our bundle is in many cases different from theirs. Remark 3.3. We call a parabolic of g a special parabolic subalgebra if it is one of the representatives of the closed K-orbits given in Part (2) of Propositions 2.8, 2.9, and 2.10 or is one of the parabolic subalgebras ri,j bi,j and ri bi constructed in the proof of Theorem 3.1. We also call the corresponding⊃ parabolic⊃ subgroups the special parabolic subgroups of G. Note that for r a special parabolic subalgebra of g, the standard Borel subalgebra bn− of k is in r. Hence, r k is a standard parabolic subalgebra of k. 1 ∩ Remark 3.4. Theorem 3.1 fails for other real rank one symmetric pairs. For example, if g = sp(6), and k = sp(4) sp(2), then there exists a K-orbit QK = K b where the ⊕ · minimal θ-stable parabolic subalgebra containing b is all of g. However, QK is not open.

K∩R For θ-stable parabolics R, K R is a parabolic of K and we let W WK be ∩ K ⊂ the representatives of shortest length for the cosets in WK /WK∩R. Now we use the fibre bundle structure of a K-orbit QK given in (3.2) to describe the Bn−1-orbits Q contained in QK as fibre bundles.

Theorem 3.5. Let QK = K b be a K-orbit in . Let r b be a special parabolic subalgebra, and let R G be· the corresponding parabolicB subgroup⊃ with θ-stable Levi ⊂ decomposition R = LU. Suppose Q is a Bn−1-orbit contained in QK. Then Q fibres over a Bn−1-orbit in the partial flag variety K/K R of R with fibre isomorphic to a Bn−1 L- orbit contained in the open K L -orbit of the∩ flag variety of l. More precisely, ∩ ∩ Bl

(3.8) Q = Bn− − ∩ (Bn− w(L)) Ad(w ˙ )b, ∼ 1 ×Bn 1 w(R) 1 ∩ · where w W K∩R, ∈ K (3.9) Bn− w(L)= w(Bn− L) 1 ∩ 1 ∩ 12 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS is a Borel subgroup of K w(L), and Ad(w ˙ )b is contained in the open K w(L)-orbit in ∩ ∩ the flag variety w R = w L of R. B ( ) ∼ B ( ) Further, we have a one-to-one correspondence:

(3.10) Bn−1 Bn−1 K/K R Bn−1 L Q˜K∩L , \B ↔  \ ∩ × ∩ \  R speciala where Q˜K∩L is the open K L-orbit on (see Notation 2.2). ∩ Bk∩l

Proof. Consider the fibre bundle QK = K K∩R (K L) b in Equation (3.2). Let × ∩ · ′ π QK : QK K/K R = QK,r be the canonical projection. Let Q = Bn−1 b be a Bn−1- | → ∩ · orbit in QK . Its image under π is a Bn−1-orbit in the partial flag variety K/K R. Since K∩R ∩ K∩R WK indexes Bn−1-orbits in K/K R, then π(Q) = Bn−1 w(r) for some w WK , and we may assume that b′ = w(b) by∩ replacing b by a K L· -conjugate. Then∈ the fibre bundle structure from Equation (3.1) identifies Q as ∩

(3.11) Q = Bn− B − ∩w R (Bn− w(R)) Ad(w ˙ )(b). ∼ 1 × n 1 ( ) 1 ∩ · Now the group Bn− w(R) acts on w(R)/w(B) = through its image in the quotient 1 ∩ ∼ Bw(l) w(R)/w(U). Denote this image by Bˆw(L). We claim that

(3.12) Bˆw L = Bn− w(L)= w(L Bn− ), ( ) 1 ∩ ∩ 1 so that Bˆ is a Borel subgroup in K w(L). To verify the claim, first consider w(l) bn− . w(L) ∩ ∩ 1 By Remark 3.3, the special parabolic r contains bn−1, so bn−1 is a Borel subalgebra of + K∩R r k. Let Φ be the roots appearing in the Borel subalgebra b − l. Since w W , l∩k n 1 K ∩ + + ∩ ∈ standard results imply that w(Φ ) Φ . Thus w(l bn−1) w(l) bn−1. It follows l∩k ⊂ bn−1 ∩ ⊂ ∩ that w(l) bn− = w(l bn− ), so that w(l bn− ) is a Borel subalgebra of l k with ∩ 1 ∩ 1 ∩ 1 ∩ corresponding Borel subgroup w(L Bn−1)= w(L) Bn−1, yielding the second equality in Equation (3.12). To get the first equality∩ of Equation∩ (3.12), we consider the Lie algebra bˆ = Lie(Bˆ ). Since h k w(r) k, we have the decomposition w(L) w(L) n ∩ ⊂ ∩ w(r) bn− = w(l) bn− w(u) bn− . ∩ 1 ∩ 1 ⊕ ∩ 1 Thus, bˆw L = w(l) bn− and Equation (3.12) follows. Equation (3.8) now follows from ( ) ∩ 1 (3.11). Note that the orbit (Bn−1 w(L)) Ad(w ˙ )b in the fibre of the bundle in (3.8) is −1∩ · isomorphic via translation byw ˙ to an orbit of the standard Borel subgroup Bn−1 L of L K contained in the open K L-orbit of . ∩ ∩ ∩ Bl The one-to-one correspondence in Equation (3.10) follows easily.

Q.E.D.

Notation 3.6. We use the notation of Theorem 3.5. Given a Bn−1 orbit Qr in K/K − ∩ R and a Bn−1 L-orbit Q in the open K L-orbit on , we let (Qr, Q ) be the ∩ l ∩ Bl O l corresponding Bn− -orbit on from this theorem. Theorem 3.5 implies that for any K- 1 B orbit QK the Bn−1-orbits contained in QK are of the form (Qr, Q ) as above. O l Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 13

Remark 3.7. Let bvˆ be one of the representatives for bi,j, bi, b+, or b− for K-orbits on discussed in Propositions 2.8, 2.9, and 2.10. Let Q be a Bn− -orbit in one of the above B 1 K-orbits QK and let bvˆ = Ad(ˆv)b+. Then

(3.13) Q = Bn− Ad(w ˙ )Ad(ℓ)bv = Bn− Ad(wℓ ˙ vˆ)b 1 · ˆ 1 · + K∩R for a representative w˙ of unique w W and for ℓ K L such that Ad(ℓ)(bv l) ∈ K ∈ ∩ ˆ ∩ is a representative of the Bn− L-orbit Q contained in the open K L-orbit on the 1 ∩ l ∩ flag variety of l. In the notation given above in 3.6, the orbit Qr = Bn−1 w(r), and Bl · Q =(Bn− L) Ad(ℓ)(bv l). l 1 ∩ · ˆ ∩

By Equation (3.10), the problem of describing the Bn−1-orbits on G/B reduces to the K description of Bn− -orbits on partial flag varieties K/(K R) via W and the problem 1 ∩ R∩K of determining Bn− -orbits in the open K-orbit in . We now address this second issue. 1 B

3.2. Bn−1-orbits in the open K-orbit. Recall the pair (G,K) with G = Gn and K = Gn−1 from Section 2.2.

Theorem 3.8. Let Q˜K be the open K-orbit on n. There are bijections B (3.14) Bn− orbits on QK Bn− K/Bn− Bn− orbits on n− , { 1 − } ←→ 1\ 2 ←→ { 2 − B 1} − where the last equivalence is inducede by the self-map g g 1 of K. 7→

Proof. To prove the first equivalence, it suffices to find a point by in Q˜K with stabilizer Bn−2 in K. The second equivalence is then clear. We prove the first equivalence by considering the three cases separately.

When g = gl(n), by Proposition 2.8, the open K-orbit Q ,n on n is the orbit through 1 B the flag (e + en e en− en). Thus, Q ,n = GL(n 1) y, where 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂ ··· ⊂ 1 ⊂ 1 − ·F y := (en− + en e e en− en). Suppose that g GL(n 1) fixes y. F 1 ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 2 ⊂ ∈ − F For j = 1,...,n 1, let Uj be the span of e ,...,ej and note that GL(n 1) := g − 1 − { ∈ GL(n): g en = en, and g Un− = Un− . Since g fixes the line C(en− + en) in the flag · · 1 1} 1 and g en = en, we see that g en− = en− . Since g GL(n 1), then g ej Un− · · 1 1 ∈ − · ∈ 1 for j = 1,...,n 2. But also g ej C(en− + en)+ Uj for j = 1,...,n 2. Thus, for − · ∈ 1 − j =1,...,n 2, the vector g ej Un− (C(en− + en)+ Uj)= Uj. Hence, g stabilizes − · ∈ 1 ∩ 1 Un− , so g GL(n 2), and also g stabilizes the standard flag (e e en− ) in 2 ∈ − 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 2 Un− . Thus, g Bn− . Since Bn− fixes y, this proves the Theorem in case of GL(n). 2 ∈ 2 2 F Next, consider the case g = so(2l) and recall the basis e1,...,el, e−l,...,e−1. By Remark 2.11, the open SO(2l 1)-orbit on is identified with the SO(2l 1)-orbit − Bso(2l) − through the maximal isotropic flag y := (el e el− ). Let g SO(2l 1)y, IF ⊂ 1 ⊂···⊂ 1 ∈ − the stabilizer of y. Since g SO(2l 1), then g commutes with the element σ2l on 2l IF ∈ − C (see Section 2.2). Since g stabilizes the flag y, we see that g el = ael for some × IF · a C . Since g commutes with σ l, it follows that g e−l = ae−l, and since β(el, e−l) = 1, ∈ 2 · the scalar a = 1. But g SO(2l 1), so by Equation (2.1), g fixes the vector el e−l. ± ∈ − − Thus, a = 1 and by Equation (2.2), g SO(2l 2), so that SO(2l 1)y = SO(2l 2)y. ∈ − − − 14 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

But B l− is clearly in SO(2l 2)y so since SO(2l 2)y is solvable and B l− is a Borel 2 2 − − 2 2 subgroup of SO(2l 2), it follows that B2l−2 = SO(2l 2)y = SO(2l 1)y, proving the required assertion. − − −

Now let g = so(2l+1) and recall the basis e1,...,el, e0, e−l,...,e−1 from Section 2.2. By Remark 2.11, the open orbit is the SO(2l)-orbit through the point in correspond- Bso(2l+1) ing to the maximal isotropic flag (el + √2ıe + e−l e e el− ). We can choose 0 ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 1 an element s of SO(2l) in the diagonal torus that s (el +√2ıe0 +e−l)= ıel +√2ıe0 ıe−l, so that the open orbit is the SO(2l)-orbit through· the point y in corresponding− Bso(2l+1) to the maximal isotropic flag y = (ıel + √2ıe ıe−l e e el− ). Note IF 0 − ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 1 that by a small calculation using the root vectors in b2l−1, we see that B2l−1 is contained in the stabilizer SO(2l)y. Now let g SO(2l)y. Since g SO(2l), then g e = e . Since ∈ ∈ · 0 0 g stabilizes the line in the flag, we see that g (el e−l)= el e−l, so that g SO(2l 1) · − − ∈ − by Equation (2.3). As in the preceding paragraph, it follows that B l− = SO(2l 1)y. 2 1 − Q.E.D.

Remark 3.9. For later use, we make explicit the correspondence between Bn−1-orbits on the open K-orbit QK in n and Bn− -orbits on n− given in Equation (3.14). Let B 2 B 1 Q = Bn−1 Ad(k)b˜ QK = K b˜, where b˜ is the stabilizer of the (isotropic) flag y ( y) · ⊂ e · F IFop given in the proof of Theorem 3.8. Denote the corresponding Bn−2-orbit in n−1 by Q . op e −1 B Note that Q = Bn− Ad(k ) bn− . We can realize this correspondence geometrically 2 · · 1 as follows. Let q : K QK ∼= K/Bn−2 and π : K n−1 be the natural projections, and let ψ : K K be the→ inversion map, i.e., ψ(k)= →k−1 B. Then → e (3.15) Qop = π(ψ(q−1(Q))).

More generally, if QK is any Bn− -stable subvariety, it corresponds to a Bn− -stable Y ⊂ 1 2 subvariety of n− : B 1 e (3.16) op = π(ψ(q−1( ))). Y Y Using (3.16), we note that op (3.17) dim = dim + dim bn− dim bn− . Y Y 2 − 1 Note the easily verified numerical identity

(3.18) dim bn− dim bn− = rank(k). 1 − 2 Equation (3.17) then becomes (3.19) dim op = dim rank(k). Y Y −

4. The monoid action for Bn− -orbits on n 1 B In this section, we use Theorems 3.5 and Theorem 3.8 to describe several monoid actions for the Bn−1-orbits on n = g . One of the major points is to compute the monoid action B B n Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 15 on an Bn−1-orbit (Qr, Q ) in n in terms of other monoidal actions. In later work, we O l B apply this action to the study the order relation on Bn− -orbits on n. 1 B

4.1. Left and Right Monoid Actions. Recall Notation 2.2 and before let K = Gn−1. Let K∆ G K be the diagonal copy of K in the product G K. Note that there is a canonical⊂ bijection× ×

χ : Bn− K K , 1\B → ∆\B×B given by χ(Q)= K (Q, eB − ) and we let Q denote χ(Q). Further, Q K Q, ∆ n 1 ∆ ∆ ∼= Bn−1 and it follows that the· map Q Q preserves topological properties like closure× relations 7→ ∆ and open sets, and dim(Q ) = dim(Q) + dim( n− ). ∆ B 1 In particular, K∆ has finitely many orbits on n−1, and hence the set K∆ n−1 has 2 different monoid actions, coming from theB monoid ×B actions for the two different\B×B kinds of simple roots of g k via the generalities from Section 2.3. We decompose the simple × roots Π = Π Πg. g×k k ∪

Notation 4.1. For a simple root α Π , we call the monoid action Q m(sα) Q ∈ k ∆ → ∗ ∆ a left monoid action. If α Πg, we call the monoid action Q∆ m(sα) Q∆ a right ∈ → ∗ monoid action. We use the equivalence between Bn− and K n− to similarly 1\B ∆\B×B 1 define left and right monoid actions m(sα) on Bn− . 1\B

In more detail, for α Π , the left action uses the projection pα : G/Bn K/Bn− ∈ k × 1 → G/Bn K/Pα where Pα is the parabolic of K with Lie algebra bn− + k−α. Thus, if × 1 Q = K (Q, eBn− ), then ∆ ∆ · 1 −1 p pα(Q )= K (Q, Pα/Bn− )= K (Pα Q, eBn− ). α ∆ ∆ · 1 ∆ · · 1 It follows that for α Π , and Q = Bn− xBn/Bn. ∈ k 1 (4.1) m(sα) Q is the unique open Bn− orbit in Pα Q = PαxBn/Bn. ∗ 1 − ·

Similar analysis shows that if Q = Bn−1xBn/Bn and α Πg, then ∈

(4.2) m(sα) Q is the unique open Bn− orbit in Bn− xPα/Bn, ∗ 1 − 1 where Pα here is the parabolic of G whose Lie algebra is bn + g−α. For a useful generalization of the right monoid action, we recall the notion of strongly orthogonal roots. Definition 4.2. Two nonproportional roots α, β Φ(g, h) are said to be strongly orthog- onal if α β is not a root. ∈ ± Recall that by elementary arguments, strongly orthogonal roots are necessarily orthog- onal and the corresponding sl(2) subalgebras, sα and sβ, commute. We also make use of the following notation. 16 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

Notation 4.3. Let S Πg be a subset of the simple roots of g, and let mS g be the standard Levi subalgebra⊂ of g given by the subset S. We denote the corresponding⊂ standard parabolic subalgebra by p b and its Levi decomposition by p = mS uS, and if S is S ⊃ + S ⊕ understood, we let m = mS and u = uS. Let PS, MS, US be the corresponding connected subgroups of G. Remark 4.4. Suppose S Πg is a subset of simple roots, let α Πg be a simple root which is strongly orthogonal⊂ to the roots in S, and let S′ = S ∈ α . The projection 1 ∪{ } G/PS G/PS′ is a P -bundle. Hence, if H is a subgroup of G acting on G/PS with 7→ finitely many orbits, there is a right monoid action m(sα) on H G/PS. \ Remark 4.5. There are additional monoid actions we will use. Let α Π , and consider ∈ k the finite set Bn−1 K/P ) where P is a standard parabolic subgroup of K. As above, there is a bijection \

χ : Bn−1 K/P K∆ K/Bn−1 K/P \ n→−1 \ × given by χ(Q) = K∆ (eBn−1, Q) =: Q∆ . This bijection satisfies similar properties as the above bijection also· denoted χ. (1) It follows that if α Π is a simple root of Π with root space in the first factor, ∈ k k×k then there is another left monoid action m(sα) on K K/Bn− K/P and hence by the \ 1 × equivalence of orbits induced by this version of χ, there is a left monoid action m(sα) on Bn− K/P . Similar analysis to the previous left monoid action verifies the following 1\ assertion. For Q Bn− K/P , ∈ 1\

(4.3) m(sα) Q is the unique open orbit in Pα Q. ∗ · (2) There is also a right monoid action in the strongly orthogonal setting. Again, we let α Πk. The standard parabolic P K is P = PS for S Πk. Suppose α is strongly orthogonal∈ to the roots of S. Then if⊂ the root space of α Π⊂ is in the second factor, it ∈ k×k follows from Remark 4.4 that there is a right monoid action m(sα) on K K/Bn− K/P ∆\ 1 × and hence on Bn−1 K/P via the bijection χ. It can be shown that if Q = Bn−1 xPS/PS, then \ ·

(4.4) m(sα) Q is the unique open orbit in Bn− xPS′ /PS, ∗ 1 where PS′ is the standard parabolic subgroup of K corresponding to the subset of simple roots S′ = S α . ∪{ } Remark 4.6. We will abuse notation by using the same symbol m(sα) to denote both the left monoid action by a root α Π on Bn− and for the left monoid action on ∈ k 1\B Bn− K/P. This may require some parsing on the part of the reader. For example, if we 1\ consider a Bn−1-orbit (Qr, Q ) on , then we will prove that in certain circumstances, O l B m(sα) (Qr, Q ) = (m(sα) Qr, Q ). In this equality, on the left hand side of the ∗ O l O ∗ l equality, the monoid action is the left monoid action on Bn− and on the right hand 1\B side of the equality, the monoid action is the left monoid action on Bn− K/P. 1\ Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 17

4.2. Computation of Monoid Actions. It follows from definitions that if α Π and ∈ k Q QK , then m(sα) Q QK . We now examine the effect of the left monoid action on ⊂ ∗ ⊂ the fibre bundle structure of Q = (Qr, Q ) QK after first recalling some notation from O l ⊂ Remark 3.7. Suppose QK = K b, where b = bvˆ = Ad(ˆv)b+ is the representative given in Propositions 2.8, 2.9, and· 2.10 respectively. Let r b∈be B the special parabolic ⊃ subalgebra of g associated to the K-orbit QK , and let r = l u be its Levi decomposition. K∩R ⊕ Then Q = Bn− Ad(w ˙ )Ad(ℓ)b, where w W and ℓ K L (see Equation (3.13)). 1 · ∈ K ∈ ∩ Further Qr = Bn−1 w(r) and Q =(Bn−1 L) Ad(ℓ)(bvˆ l). · l ∩ · ∩ Theorem 4.7. Let α be a root in Π . Let πr : G/B+ G/R be the projection. Then k → (4.5) πr(m(sα) (Qr, Q )) = m(sα) Qr, ∗ O l ∗ where the monoid action on Bn−1 K/K R in the right hand side is given in Remark 4.5. \ ∩ Suppose also that α w(Φ ). Then α is a simple root of k w(l) with respect to the Borel ∈ l ∩ subalgebra bn− w(l) of k w(l), and 1 ∩ ∩ (4.6) m(sα) (Qr, Q )= (Qr, m(sw−1(α)) Q ). ∗ O l O ∗ l Suppose α w(Φ ). Then 6∈ l (4.7) m(sα) (Qr, Q )= (m(sα) Qr, Q ). ∗ O l O ∗ l

Proof. By Equation (4.1), m(sα) Q is the open Bn− -orbit in the variety := PαwℓB/B˙ . ∗ 1 Y By equivariance of πr, its restriction πr : PαwR/R˙ is open since quotient morphisms Y → are open (Section 12.2 of [Hum75]). Thus, m(sα) Q projects to the open Bn− -orbit in ∗ 1 PαwR/R˙ . Under the identification QK,r = K/K R, the latter orbit is identified with ∼ ∩ the open Bn−1-orbit in Pαw˙ (K R)/(K R). But this orbit is exactly m(sα) Qr by Equation (4.3). Equation (4.5) follows.∩ ∩ ∗

Note that the Pα-orbit fibres over Pα/(Pα w(R)) via the identification Y ∩ (4.8) = Pα P ∩w R (Pα w(L))Ad(wℓ ˙ )b. Y ∼ × α ( ) ∩ Indeed, the identification = Pα P ∩w R (Pα w(R))Ad(wℓ ˙ )b is formal, and since the Y ∼ × α ( ) ∩ diagonal torus of K normalizes Pα,w(L), and w(U), it follows that the action of Pα w(R) ∩ on Ad(wℓ ˙ )b is through Pα w(L). Now suppose that α is a root of w(l) k. It follows that ∩ ∩ PαwR/R = Bn−1wR/R, whence m(sα) Qr = Qr. Further the fibre bundle in Equation (4.8) may be written as ∗

(4.9) = Bn− B − ∩w R (Pα w(L))Ad(wℓ ˙ )(b l). Y ∼ 1 × n 1 ( ) ∩ ∩ We observed in Equation (3.9) that Bn− w(L) is a Borel subgroup of the Levi subgroup 1 ∩ K w(L) of K. Since Pα w(L) Bn− w(L) and α Π , it immediately follows that ∩ ∩ ⊃ 1 ∩ ∈ k Pα w(L) is a parabolic subgroup of K w(L) and α is a simple root with respect to the ∩ ∩ Borel subalgebra bn− w(l) of k w(l). 1 ∩ ∩ Equation (4.9) implies that

(4.10) m(sα) Q = Bn− − ∩ , ∗ ∼ 1 ×Bn 1 w(R) O 18 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS where is the open Bn− w(R)-orbit in the variety (Pα w(L))Ad(wℓ ˙ )(b l) . O 1 ∩ ∩ ∩ ⊂ Bw(l) Now Bn− w(R) acts on through its image in the quotient w(R)/w(U) = . In 1 ∩ Bw(l) ∼ Bw(l) the proof of Theorem 3.5, we observed that this image is the Borel subgroup Bn−1 w(L) of w(L) K (see Equation (3.12)). Equation (4.6) now follows by translating byw∩ ˙ −1, as is prescribed∩ in the last comments of the proof of Theorem 3.5, and from Equations (3.9) and (4.1).

We now suppose that α is not a root of k w(l). Then Pα w(L)= Bn−1 w(L). Thus, we can rewrite Equation (4.8) as ∩ ∩ ∩

= Pα P ∩ w R (Bn− w(L))Ad(wℓ ˙ )b = Pα P ∩w R Ad(w ˙ )Q , Y ∼ × α Ad( ˙ ) 1 ∩ × α ( ) l where the last equality uses the definition of Q . Therefore, the Bn− -orbits in are in one- l 1 Y to-one correspondence with the Bn−1-orbits on the base PαwR/R ∼= Pαw(K R)/(K R). Thus, ∩ ∩ −1 m(sα) Q = πr Y (m(sα) Qr)= (m(sα) Qr, Q ), ∗ | ∗ O ∗ l yielding (4.7). Q.E.D.

To understand how the bundle structure of Q QK behaves with respect to the right ⊂ monoid action by roots α Πg, we need some preparation. ∈ Proposition 4.8. Let α Πg. Suppose that Q QK. Then ∈ ⊂ (4.11) m(sα) Q m(sα) QK ∗ ⊂ ∗ In particular, if m(sα) QK = QK , then m(sα) Q = Q. ∗ 6 ∗ 6

Proof. Let Q = Bn− xBn/Bn. It follows from definitions that m(sα) QK is the unique 1 ∗ open K-orbit in the variety KxPα/Bn. Since Bn− xPα/Bn KxPα/Bn, the subvariety 1 ⊂ m(sα) QK Bn− xPα/Bn is non-empty and open in Bn− xPα/Bn. Since Bn− xPα/Bn is ∗ ∩ 1 1 1 irreducible, it follows from Equation (4.2) that m(sα) Q m(sα) QK = . This implies equation (4.11). ∗ ∩ ∗ 6 ∅ Q.E.D.

By Proposition 4.8, if α Πg and m(sα) QK = QK, then m(sα) Q QK . For ∈ ∗ ∗ ⊂ such α, we study the monoid action by m(sα) in terms of the fibre bundle description of the orbit (Qr, Q ) of Q. But first we need to determine the roots α Πg for which O l ∈ m(sα) QK = QK . The following results are well-known and partly appear in tables on page 92∗ of [Col85]. For the case of g = gl(n), proofs are given in Examples 4.16 and 4.30 of [CE14] and for the type B and D cases, see Propositions 2.23 and 2.24 of [CE].

Proposition 4.9. (1) Let g = gl(n). First, consider the case when QK = Qi is a closed K-orbit as in Part (2) of Proposition 2.8. Then the roots αi−1 and αi are non-compact for QK and all other simple roots are compact. Next, consider the case when QK = Qi,j as in Part (3) of Proposition 2.8. Then the roots αi−1 and αj Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 19

are complex stable for QK. All other simple roots αk with k = i, j 1 are compact 6 − for QK . If j = i +1, then the root αi is real for QK. If j > i +1, the roots αi and αj−1 are complex unstable. (2) Let g = so(2l + 1). If QK is one of the two closed K-orbits given in Part (2) of Proposition 2.9, then the root αl is non-compact for QK, and all other simple roots are compact. Consider the orbit QK = Qi as in Part (3) of Proposition 2.9. Then the root αi is complex stable for QK . The root αi+1 is complex unstable for QK unless i = l 1 in which case it is real. All other simple roots are compact for − QK . (3) Let g = so(2l). In the case QK = Q+ is the unique closed orbit, then the roots αl−1 and αl are complex stable for Q+ and all other simple roots are compact. In the case QK = Qi as in Part (3) of Proposition 2.10, then the roots αi−1 and αi are complex for Qi with αi−1 stable and αi unstable. All other simple roots are compact for Qi, unless i = l 1 in which case αl is also complex unstable. − We use Proposition 4.9 to study the relation between roots α Πg such that m(sα) ∈ ∗ QK = QK and the special parabolic subalgebras r g constructed in Theorem 3.1. Let w˜ W be given as follows: ⊂ ∈ wi =(n, n 1,...,i +1, i) if g = gl(n), and QK = Qi,j or Qi − (4.12)w ˜ =  id if g = so(n), and QK = Qi or Q+  ,   sαl if g = so(2l + 1), and QK = Q− and let w˜˙ be a fixed representative ofw ˜. Then it follows from the construction of the special parabolic subalgebra r in Theorem 3.1 that r =w ˜(pS), where pS is a standard parabolic subalgebra of g defined by the subset S Πg given by: ⊂ αi,...,αj− for g = gl(n), QK = Qi,j { 1} (4.13) S =  αi,...,αl for g = so(2l), QK = Qi  , { }  αi ,...,αl for g = so(2l + 1), QK = Qi  { +1 } and where S = andr is a Borel if QK is closed. Proposition 4.9 implies the following observation. ∅ Corollary 4.10. Let S Πg be the subset of simple roots given in (4.13). Then ⊂ (1) If α S, m(sα) QK = QK . ∈ ∗ (2) If α Πg S and m(sα) QK = QK , then α is compact for QK . ∈ \ ∗

We can now describe the right monoid action on a Bn− -orbit Q QK by a simple 1 ⊂ root α Πg with m(sα) QK = QK . Recalling notation from Theorem 4.7, we let ∈ ∗ K∩R Q = (Qr, Q ) = Bn−1 Ad(w ˙ )Ad(ℓvˆ)b+, where w W and ℓ K L, with O l · ∈ K ∈ ∩ Qr = Bn−1 w(r) and Ql =(Bn−1 L) Ad(ℓ)(bvˆ l), andv ˆ is given in Propositions 2.8, 2.9, 2.10 · ∩ · ∩ Theorem 4.11. Suppose α Πg. ∈ 20 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

(1) If α S, then ∈ (4.14) m(sα) (Qr, Q )= (Qr, m(sw˜(α)) Q ). ∗ O l O ∗ l (2) If α Πg S and m(sα) QK = QK , then w˜(α) Πk is a standard simple root strongly∈ orthogonal\ to the∗ roots of S, and ∈

(4.15) m(sα) (Qr, Q )= (m(sw˜(α)) Qr, Q ), ∗ O l O ∗ l where m(sw˜(α)) Qr is the right monoid action of the simple root w˜(α) on the ∗ Bn−1-orbit Qr in the partial flag variety QK,r = K/K R of k defined in Part (2) of Remark 4.5. ∩

Proof. First, suppose that α S. Then by Corollary 4.10, m(sα) QK = QK . Recall that ∈ ∗ by Equation (4.2) m(sα) Q is the open Bn− -orbit in the variety := Bn− wℓ˙ vPˆ α/B . ∗ 1 Z 1 + Since α S, Pα PS. Further, the representativev ˆ = wp˜˙ , where w˜˙ is the above ∈ ⊂ representative ofw ˜ given by (4.12) and p MS (see Equations (2.8), (2.11), and (2.13)). ∈ It follows that the special parabolic subalgebra r = Ad(ˆv)p . Thus, πr : G/B G/R S → maps to Bn−1 w(r)= Qr and hence πr : Qr is a Bn−1-equivariant fibre bundle. We callZ the fibre· F , and using Equation (3.8)Z → and Remark 3.7, we can identify F = (Bn− w(L)) Ad(wℓ ˙ vˆ)(Pα b ). Using Equation (3.9), we see F is isomorphic to 1 ∩ · · + (4.16) (Bn− L) Ad(ℓvˆ)(Pα b ) = (Bn− L)ℓvˆ(Pα MS)/(B MS). 1 ∩ · · + ∼ 1 ∩ ∩ + ∩ The open Bn−1-orbit in fibres over Qr with fibre isomorphic to the open Bn−1 L-orbit in the variety F . UsingZ the decompositionv ˆ = wp˜˙ , we can rewrite F as ∩ −1 (4.17) (Bn− L)ℓwp˜ w˜ (Pw α L)/(Ad(w ˜)B L). 1 ∩ ˜( ) ∩ + ∩ But the open Bn−1 L-orbit in (4.17) is exactly m(sw˜(α)) Ql, using Equation (4.2). Equation (4.14) follows.∩ ∗

Let α Πg S with m(sα) QK = QK. By (4.2), m(sα) QK is the open Bn−1-orbit in the variety∈ \ ∗ ∗

(4.18) = Bn− Ad(wℓ ˙ vˆ)(Pα b )= Bn− Ad(wℓ ˙ )(P b). Y 1 · · + 1 · Ad(ˆv)α · We begin by analyzing the PAd(ˆv)α/B. First, consider the root Ad(ˆv)α of Ad(ˆv)hn. We claim (4.19) Ad(ˆv)α =w ˜(α) Π , ∈ k wherew ˜ W is given by (4.12). We show (4.19) in the case where g = gl(n). If ∈ QK = Qi is a closed K-orbit as in Part (2) of Proposition 2.8, thenv ˆ = wi =w ˜. Since m(sα) QK = QK , then by Proposition 4.9, α = αj, j = i 1, i. It is routine to check ∗ 6 − thatw ˜(αj) = wi(αj) = αj− for i < j n andw ˜(αj) = αj for j < i 1. In either 1 ≤ − case,w ˜(α) Π = α ,...,αn− . Now suppose QK = Qi,j is not closed as in Part ∈ k { 1 2} (3) of Proposition 2.8. Thenv ˆ = wiuαi+1 sαi+1 ...sαj−1 by Equation (2.8). Then since α Πg S with m(sα) QK = QK , then it follows from Definition 4.2 and Proposition ∈ \ ∗ 4.9 that α is strongly orthogonal to the roots of S = αi,...,αj− (see Equation (4.13)). { 1} In particular, α is orthogonal to the roots of S, so Ad(ˆv)α =wu ˜ αi (α). Further, since α Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 21

is strongly orthogonal to αi, Proposiiton 6.72 of [Kna02] implies that uαi (α)= α, and we conclude that Ad(ˆv)α =w ˜(α). The remainder of the argument proceeds as in the case where QK = Qi is closed, and the claim in (4.19) is established in the gl(n) case. The orthogonal cases are simpler and can be handled in an analogous fashion.

Now it follows from Part (2) of Corollary 4.10 that α is compact for QK . It then follows from our discussion in Section 2.3 that the space Pw˜(α)/B is a single orbit of a Levi factor of Pw α . Let Mα Pα be the Hn-stable Levi factor, so that Mw α := ˜( ) ⊂ ˜( ) Ad(w ˜)Mα K is a Levi factor of P . Thus, the variety in Equation (4.18) equals ⊂ w˜(α) Y = Bn−1 Ad(wℓ ˙ )(Mw˜(α) b). Since α is strongly orthogonal to the roots of S, it follows Ythatw ˜(α)· is strongly orthogonal· to the roots of l. Since L K L, it follows that the ∩ ⊂ groups Mw α and L K commute. Therefore, ˜( ) ∩ (4.20) πr( )= Bn−1wMw˜(α)(K R)/(K R). Y ∩ ∩ If J Π , we let SJ K be the standard parabolic subgroup of K given by the subset ⊂ k ⊂ J of Πk. Now we claim that

(4.21) πr( )= Bn−1wSΠ ∪w˜(α)(K R)/(K R), Y l∩k ∩ ∩ Indeed,

Bn−1wSΠ ∪w˜(α)(K R)/(K R)= Bn−1wSw˜(α)(K R)/(K R) l∩k ∩ ∩ ∩ ∩ = Bn− wMw α (K R)/(K R) 1 ˜( ) ∩ ∩ = πr( ). Y

Now by Equation (4.4), m(sw˜(α)) Qr is the open Bn−1-orbit in the variety Bn−1wSΠ ∪w˜(α)(K ∗ l∩k ∩ R)/(K R) = πr( ). Since the group Mw˜(α) acts trivially on l k, the variety has ∩ Y ∩ Y the structure of a Bn−1-equivariant fibre bundle with smooth base πr( ) and fibre Q . It Y l follows that πr Y is a flat morphism and is therefore open by Exercise III.9.1 of [Har77]. | Thus, πr(m(sα) Q)= m(sw˜(α)) Qr and Equation (4.15) now follows. ∗ ∗ Q.E.D.

It follows from Theorems 4.7 and 4.11 that to understand the monoid action on Q = (Qr, Q ) QK by roots α Πg Π such that m(sα) QK = QK, it suffices to O l ⊂ ∈ ∪ k ∗ understand the monoid action on Bn− -orbits in K/(K R) discussed in Remark 4.5 as 1 ∩ well as the monoid action on Ql. The former is well understood, and in the next result, we use the correspondence Q Qop in Equation (3.14) to understand the latter. For the 7→ statement of the next result, we recall the particular representative b˜ of the open K-orbit that is used in the proof of Theorem 3.8 to establish the correspondence in (3.14). We let

QK = K b˜ where b˜ is the Borel subalgebra of g which stabilizes the flag ˜: · F (en− + en e e en− en) if g = gl(n), e 1 ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 2 ⊂ (4.22) ˜ =  (el e1 e2 el−1) if g = so(2l)  , F ⊂ ⊂ ⊂···⊂  (ıel + √2ıe ıe−l e e el− ) if g = so(2l + 1)  0 − ⊂ 1 ⊂ 2 ⊂···⊂ 1   22 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

Theorem 4.12. Let Q = Bn−1 Ad(k)b˜ be a Bn−1-orbit in the open K-orbit QK on n, op −1 · B and let Q = Bn−2 Ad(k )bn−1 be the corresponding Bn−2-orbit on n−1 as in Remark 3.9. · B e Let α Π , then ∈ k op op (4.23) (m(sα) Q) = m(sα) Q n− , ∗ ∗ ⊂ B 1 where m(sα) Q denotes the left monoid action of sα on the Bn−1-orbit Q in n, and op ∗ op B m(sα) Q denotes the right monoid action of sα on the Bn− -orbit Q in n− . ∗ 2 B 1 Let α = αj Πg be a simple root which is compact for Q˜K. Then ∈ op op (4.24) (m(sα ) Q) = m(sα − ) Q , j ∗ j 1 ∗ op where m(sαj ) Q is the right monoid action of sαj on Q and m(sαj−1 ) Q is the left ∗ op ∗ monoid action of sα − on Q and αj−1 Π is a standard simple root. j 1 ∈ kn−2 Moreover, the correspondences in Equations (4.23) and (4.24) preserve root types. That is to say that α is complex stable, complex unstable, non-compact, etc for Q if and only op if α is complex stable, unstable, non-compact, etc for Q in (4.23) and similarly for αj and αj−1 in (4.24).

Proof. Let α Π . Then by Equation 4.1, we know m(sα) Q is the open Bn− -orbit in ∈ k ∗ 1 the variety Q := PαkBn−2/Bn−2 Q˜. Under the correspondence in Equation (3.16), we have Y ⊂ op −1 = Bn− k Pα/Bn− . YQ 2 1 op −1 Since m(sα) Q is the open Bn−2-orbit in Bn−2k Pα/Bn−1, Equation (4.23) now follows from Equation∗ (4.2). Now we consider the right monoid action. Let α Πg be compact for the open K-orbit ∈ QK = K b˜. Let b˜ = Ad(g)b . By Equation (4.2), m(sα) Q is the open Bn− -orbit · + ∗ 1 in the variety Bn− Ad(kg)(Pα b ). Since α is compact for QK , gPα/B is a single e 1 · · + + K Ad(g)Pα-orbit, so that gPα/B = (K Ad(g)Pα)/(K Ad(g)B ). Therefore, ∩ + ∼ ∩ ∩ e + (4.25) Bn− Ad(kg)(Pα b ) = Bn− Ad(k)((Ad(g)Pα K) bn− ). 1 · · + ∼ 1 · ∩ · 2 Using (3.16) and (4.25), it follows that op −1 (4.26) (Bn− Ad(kg)(Pα b )) = (Ad(g)Pα K) Ad(k )bn− . 1 · · + ∩ · 1 We now claim that the group Ad(g)Pα K in (4.26) is the simple parabolic subgroup of ∩ Kn−2 corresponding to the simple root αj−1. Equation (4.24) now follows from (4.26). We verify the claim in the case where g = gl(n). Suppose α = αj is compact for QK = Q1,n. By Proposition 4.9, it follows that j = 1, n 1. The image of the flag from Equation 6 − e (4.22) is the partial flag z denoted en− + en e ej− ej− , ej ej PF 1 ⊂ 1 ⊂···⊂ 2 ⊂{ 1 } ⊂ +1 ⊂ en− en. As in the proof of Theorem 3.8, we compute the stabilizer Gn− ,z of this ···⊂ 2 ⊂ 1 partial flag in Gn−1. For g in Gn−1,z, since g stabilizes the line spanned by en−1 + en, we see that g en− = en− . Recalling the notation setting Uk equal to the span of e ,...,ek, · 1 1 1 Bn−1-BUNDLES ON THE FLAG VARIETY, I 23 we see as before that g Uk Uk + C(en− + en) for k = 1,...,n 2 and k = j 1, · ⊂ 1 − 6 − and for k = j 1, g Uj− Uj + C(en− + en). As in Theorem 3.8, since g Gn− and − · 1 ⊂ 1 ∈ 1 hence stabilizes the subspace Un− , we see that g Gn− and the claim follows since the 1 ∈ 2 subgroup of Gn− stablilizing the partial flag (e ej− , ej en− ) is the 2 1 ⊂···⊂{ 1 }⊂···⊂ 2 simple parabolic subgroup of Gn−2 corresponding to αj−1. The proofs of the claim in the orthogonal cases are similar, and are left to the reader. −1 To see the assertion about root types, consider the variety Q = p (K (Q, eBn− )), Y · 1 where p : G/B K/Bn−1 G/Pα K/Bn−1 in case α Πg and p : G/B K/Bn−1 × → × ∈ × → G/B K/Pn− ,α in case α Π . For α Π , then α is complex stable for Q if and only if × 1 ∈ k ∈ k Q consists of two double cosets with K (Q, eBn−1) connected and codimension 1 in the closureY of the other double coset. This is· the same as the condition for α to be complex stable for Qop. The remaining cases are similar.

Q.E.D. Remark 4.13. As a consequence of the above results, we have completely understood the monoid action for simple roots of k, and for simple roots of g in the subset S associated to the orbit QK by (4.13), and for simple roots α of g not in S when m(sα) QK = QK . We will treat the remaining cases in a sequel to this paper. ∗

References [BH00] Michel Brion and Aloysius G. Helminck, On orbit closures of symmetric subgroups in flag vari- eties, Canad. J. Math. 52 (2000), no. 2, 265–292. [CE] Mark Colarusso and Sam Evens, Eigenvalue coincidences and multiplicity free spherical pairs, arXiv:1410.3901, October 15, 2014, 36 pages. [CE14] Mark Colarusso and Sam Evens, The Gelfand-Zeitlin integrable system and K-orbits on the flag variety, Symmetry: and its applications, Progr. Math., vol. 257, Birkh¨auser/Springer, New York, 2014, pp. 85–119. [CE19] Mark ColarussoandSam Evens, The Complex Orthogonal Gelfand–Zeitlin System, International Mathematics Research Notices 2021 (2019), no. 4, 2682–2722. [Col85] David H. Collingwood, Representations of rank one Lie groups, Research Notes in Mathematics, vol. 137, Pitman (Advanced Publishing Program), Boston, MA, 1985. [GP18] Jacopo Gandini and Guido Pezzini, Orbits of strongly solvable spherical subgroups on the flag variety, J. Algebraic Combin. 47 (2018), no. 3, 357–401. [GW98] Roe Goodman and Nolan R. Wallach, Representations and invariants of the classical groups, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 68, Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, 1998. [Har77] Robin Hartshorne, Algebraic geometry, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1977, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 52. [Has04] Takashi Hashimoto, Bn−1-orbits on the flag variety GLn/Bn, Geom. Dedicata 105 (2004), 13–27. [Hum75] James E. Humphreys, Linear algebraic groups, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1975, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, No. 21. [Kna02] Anthony W. Knapp, Lie groups beyond an introduction, second ed., Progress in Mathematics, vol. 140, Birkh¨auser Boston Inc., Boston, MA, 2002. 24 M. COLARUSSO AND S. EVENS

[RS90] R. W. Richardson and T. A. Springer, The Bruhat order on symmetric varieties, Geom. Dedi- cata 35 (1990), no. 1-3, 389–436. [Spr85] T. A. Springer, Some results on algebraic groups with involutions, Algebraic groups and related topics (Kyoto/Nagoya, 1983), Adv. Stud. Pure Math., vol. 6, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1985, pp. 525–543.

Department of Math and Stats, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Al, 36608 Email address: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN, 46556 Email address: [email protected]