Arxiv:1808.05083V3 [Math.RT] 14 Apr 2021 Cin Hc Subcategories

arXiv:1808.05083v3 [math.RT] 14 Apr 2021 cin hc subcategories. thick action, e od n phrases. and words Key 2010 Date ..Gnrto of Generation diagram basis Dynkin root elliptic 4.3. elliptic The and groups system Weyl root 4.2. elliptic Elliptic and systems theorem root 4.1. main Elliptic first the of 4. Proof action Hurwitz 3.5. The 3.4. ..Terflcinlnt fCxtrtasomtos16 posets sequenc interval exceptional The by generated transformations subcategories 3.3. Coxeter Thick of length reflection 3.2. The bijection preserving order 3.1. An 3. ..Terflcinrltdt necpinlojc 11 10 for diagram object Coxeter-Dynkin exceptional extended group an An Weyl to extended related the reflection 2.5. and The system root extended 2.4. The 2.3. ..Ecpinlsqecsin sequences Exceptional 2.2. .Teetne otssesatce otecategories the to attached systems root extended The 2. Acknowledgments Notation Introduction 1. ..Tecategories The 2.1. EGTDPOETV IE :GNRLTE N THE AND GENERALITIES I: LINES PROJECTIVE WEIGHTED pi 5 2021. 15, April : XEDDWY RUS UWT RNIIIYAND TRANSITIVITY HURWITZ GROUPS, WEYL EXTENDED ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics Abstract. 2] gs-cie-hms[6 n rue[2.W hwth show We [32]. Krause line and [26] hereditary Igusa-Schiffler-Thomas in [28], subcategories thick of description natorial eeae ya xetoa euneadasboe ftein the of subposet a and formation sequence exceptional an by generated stastv nterdcdrflcinfcoiain of factorizations reflection reduced the on transitive is stesto rfie faCxtrtasomto ncrane certain in transformation Coxeter not forthcoming a [44]. a of in in prefixes Saito true by of be set to the shown as be will which condition, hoeia ol eso htti supino h transi the line on projective assumption weighted a this for that fulfilled show we tools theoretical ABR AMITR ARC EEE,ADSPIN YAHIATE SOPHIANE AND WEGENER, PATRICK BAUMEISTER, BARBARA X hr xssa re rsrigbjcinbtentethic the between bijection preserving order an exists there c nteWy ru fasml-ae xeddro ytmi th if system root extended simply-laced a of group Weyl the in esattesseai td fetne elgop,adco and groups, Weyl extended of study systematic the start We L coh( aeoyo oeetsevs oee rus xeddWey extended groups, Coxeter sheaves, coherent of category (Φ) X [id ) c , and ] coh( and D UUA CASE TUBULAR b rmr 61,0E0 05,05E18. 20F55, 05E10, 06B15, Primary X (coh( [id ) X Contents c , ftblrtp.I hscs ne lgtfurther slight a under case this In type. tubular of ] X gen )) 1 . coh( c aeoissatdb Ingalls-Thomas by started categories yuigcmiaoiladgroup and combinatorial using By . X ) evlpsto oee trans- Coxeter a of poset terval iiyo h uwt cinis action Hurwitz the of tivity lpi elgop described groups Weyl lliptic coh( ,teitra oe sgiven is poset interval the e, tfrawihe projective weighted a for at s17 es uctgre of subcategories k X ) and tnetecombi- the ntinue uwt action Hurwitz e D b (coh( rus Hurwitz groups, l coh( NE X )) X ) 25 24 21 21 20 19 18 15 12 8 7 6 5 2 7 2 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

4.4. Elliptic Weyl group 25 4.5. Coxeter transformation 27 4.6. Elliptic root systems for coh(X) 28 5. Hurwitz transitivity in tubular elliptic Weyl groups 29 References 36

1. Introduction This work is the first in a series of papers that study extended Weyl groups (introduced in Section 2.3). Extended Weyl groups are generalisations of affine Coxeter groups and therefore interesting by themselves. We investigate these groups also aiming to better understand hereditary categories. Hereditary categories are an important tool in the representation theory of algebras as they serve as prototypes for many phenomena appearing there (see for instance [41, 24, 2]). According to Happel there are up to derived equivalence two types of connected hereditary ext-finite categories with tilting object, namely the category mod(A) of finitely generated A-modules for some finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra A and the category of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line ([24, Theorem 3.1], [22]). One way to study the structure of a hereditary category (resp. the bounded derived category of a hereditary category) is via its lattice of thick subcategories (see for instance [25]). For a field k and a finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra A the thick subcategories in mod(A) that are generated by so called exceptional sequences (see Section 2.2) have been described combinatorially. This has been first done in a seminal paper by Ingalls and Thomas [28] for the case of a quiver algebra. Subsequently, this was accomplished in full generality for the category mod(A) by Igusa, Schiffler and Thomas [26] as well as Krause [32]. The category mod(A) is naturally equipped with a root system as well as a Weyl group W = W (A), which is in fact a Coxeter group. Its set of simple reflections S is obtained from a complete exceptional sequence consisting of the complete set of representatives of the simple modules. The product of the elements in S in a suitable order is a Coxeter element c of (W, S), which is induced by a functor of the category, the so called Auslander-Reiten functor (see for instance [25]). The results of Ingalls-Thomas as well as Igusa-Schiffler-Thomas and Krause provided an isomorphism between the poset of the thick subcategories of mod(A) that are generated by exceptional sequences and a combinatorial object, the poset of non-crossing partitions NC(W, c) in W . The latter poset consists of all the elements of W that are in the interval [1, c] with respect to some order relation on W , the absolute order (see Definition 3.11). This bijection yields a combinatorial description of the poset of the thick subcategories of mod(A) that are generated by exceptional sequences. There is the goal to transfer the results for the categories of finite dimensional modules to other hereditary categories, and therefore, motivated by Happel’s theorem [24], to develop such a theory for the category coh(X) of coherent sheaves on a weighted projective line X over a field k. In this paper we start a systematic study of the combinatorial and group theoretic objects that are related to the category coh(X), a category that is derived equivalent to the category of finitely generated modules over a canonical algebra (see the definition of canonical algebras in [42]). In our approach we view coh(X) as an abstract category characterized by certain properties (see Section 2.1). It would also be interesting to see whether the geometric characterization of coh(X) could give another interpretation of our results. The reader is referred to EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 3

[22] for this approach and more details regarding the category coh(X). According to [47] we are restricting ourselves to the case that the field k is algebraically closed and of characteristic zero. After a short introduction to coh(X) and its derived category in Section 2.1 we associate a simply-laced extended root system Φ to the category coh(X) (see Section 2). This enables us to define the extended Weyl group W = WΦ with generating system S. Notice that one distinguishes three different representation types for the category of coherent sheaves on a weighted projective line: coh(X) can be of domestic, tubular or of wild type. These three types give different types of extended Weyl groups. An extended Weyl group is equipped with a bilinear form, whose signature depends on the representation type. If the type is tubular, then the group is called elliptic (see Section 4), and if the type is domestic then there is a subset −1 Q of the set of all reflections T = w∈W wSw of W such that (W, Q) is an affine Coxeter system (see [9, Remark 2.5(c)]). If the type is wild, then W is a split extension of a Coxeter group of indefinite type by a free abelianS group of finite rank. Although the pair (W, S), consisting of an extended Weyl group W and its generating system S, is in general not a Coxeter system, we can define a Coxeter transformation c. One way to see this is as follows: a basic ingredient of Section 2 is the work by Shiraishi, Takahashi and Wada [47]. They use exceptional sequences in a triangulated category to obtain a root system, from which we can derive the extended root system Φ for coh(X) (see Section 2.3). In particular, the generating system S is again induced by a complete exceptional sequence. The entire information on Φ can be stored in a diagram whose set of vertices corresponds to the set S (see Section 2.5). In the same way as one defines a Coxeter element in a Coxeter system, the set S can be used to define a Coxeter transformation c, thus c is the product of the elements in S in some order, and this definition is independent of the chosen exceptional sequence (see Section 2.3). If (W, S) is a Coxeter system then the product of the elements in S in every order is a Coxeter element, while in an extended Weyl group we have a certain restriction (see Proposition 2.21). Since an extended Weyl group is also generated by the set of reflections T , we can consider the set of reduced factorizations of a Coxeter transformation c into reflections (see Section 3.3). There is an action, the so called Hurwitz action, of the braid group Bn on this set of reduced reflection factorizations, where n = |S| (see Section 3.4). Consider the category mod(A) of finitely generated A-modules for some finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra A. There are two important transitive actions of the braid group. It acts transitively on the set of (isomorphism classes of) complete exceptional sequences in mod(A) (see [43]) as well as via the Hurwitz action on the set of reduced reflection factorizations of a Coxeter element (see [26, 6]). Both actions are important steps in establishing the correspondence between the poset of thick subcategories of mod(A) generated by an exceptional sequence and the poset of non-crossing partitions NC(W, c) for a Coxeter element c in the related Weyl group W . We aim to establish a similar correspondence for the category coh(X). Therefore the actions of the braid group on the corresponding sets play a major role in our approach as well. Meltzer already showed the transitivity of the braid group on the set of complete exceptional sequences in coh(X) (see Theorem 2.4). Let us consider the Hurwitz action of the braid group on the set of reduced reflection factorizations of a Coxeter transformation. If (W, S) is a Coxeter system, then for every factorization of a Coxeter element into reflections, the set of involved reflections generates the whole group W . This is not necessarily true anymore for extended Weyl groups (see Example 4.23). Therefore in the study of coh(X) we have to replace the set of all reduced 4 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

T -factorizations by the set gen n RedT(c) := {(t1,...,tn) ∈ T | c = t1 · · · tn is reduced and generating} consisting of all the reduced reflection factorizations of the Coxeter transformation c that are generating (see Definition 3.12). We also need replacing the generalized non-crossing partitions, that is the interval poset [id, c], by the subposet [id, c]gen of [id, c] that consists of all the elements w ∈ [id, c] that possess a factorization that can be extended to a reduced generating factorization of c. In [9] it is shown that for coh(X) of domestic or wild type every reduced factorization is generating. In a forthcoming paper we are studying the poset [id, c]gen for the tubular case. In this paper we prove the following theorem for the category coh(X) under two further gen assumptions on the set RedT(c) . Both of which will turn out to be redundant. Theorem 1.1. Let X be a weighted projective line over the algebraically closed field k of characteristic zero, W the corresponding extended Weyl group with set of reflections T and c ∈ W a Coxeter transformation. Furthermore we assume: gen (a) that the Hurwitz action is transitive on the set RedT(c) ; gen (b) that if (t1,...,tn), (r1, . . . , rn) ∈ RedT(c) such that t1 · · · tk = r1 · · · rk for some gen 1 ≤ k ≤ n, then (t1,...,tk, rk+1, . . . , rn) ∈ RedT(c) . Then there exists an order preserving bijection between • the poset of thick subcategories of coh(X) that are generated by an exceptional sequence and ordered by inclusion; and • the subposet [id, c]gen of the interval poset [id, c]. In Theorem 1.3 it will be shown that the assumption (a) is redundant for the tubular cases, while the same is done for the domestic and wild cases in [9] Assumption (b) will be shown for the tubular cases in a forthcoming note, and for the domestic and wild cases in [9]. Theorem 1.1 itself will be proved in Section 3.5. The bijection in the theorem sends the thick subcategory that is generated by an exceptional sequence (E1,...,Er) to s[E1] · · · s[Er]

where s[Ei] is a reflection associated to the exceptional object Ei. This implies that there exists a bijection between the isomorphism classes of exceptional sequences of coh(X) and their corresponding products of reflections. Further this map is equivariant for the action of the braid group. Moreover by [15, Theorem 1.1] the latter theorem yields an order preserving bijection between the poset of thick subcategories of the derived bounded category Db(coh(X)) that are generated by exceptional sequences and the interval poset [id, c]gen. gen In this paper we also show the transitivity of the Hurwitz action on RedT(c) for the tubular types (see Section 5) and in [9] for the other types. Further note that it is well known if coh(X) is of domestic type then it is derived equivalent to the category of finitely generated modules over a finite dimensional hereditary tame k- algebra. It is a conclusion from this fact that Köhler’s PhD thesis [31] provides a complete combinatorial description of the thick subcategories of coh(X) in the domestic type. In the corresponding module category she proved that the only thick subcategories are those that are generated by exceptional sequences and those that are the thick subcategories of the full subcategory consisting of the regular objects. Notice also, if A is a finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra of finite representation type, then by [32, Remark 6.8] each thick subcategory of mod(A) is generated by an exceptional sequence. Thus the previous mentioned classification of thick subcategories of mod(A) that EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 5 are generated by exceptional sequences by Igusa et al [26] and Krause [32] yields that if A is of finite representation type then the lattice of thick subcategories is isomorphic to the poset of non-crossing partitions, which is therefore a lattice as well. In Section 3.1, as a part of the proof of our first main result, Theorem 1.1, we determine in the extended Weyl group W the length ℓT (c) of the Coxeter transformation c with respect to the generating subset T of W . More precisely we show the following.

Proposition 1.2. Let X, Φ and c as in Theorem 1.1. Then ℓT (c) equals the rank of the Grothendieck group K0(coh(X)). The remaining two sections are devoted to the study of the tubular cases. In Section 4 we introduce the notion of an elliptic root system, which is due to Saito [44], and we further recall the structure of an elliptic root system as well as its related reﬂection group, the elliptic Weyl group (see Sections 4.1 and 4.4). In particular, we remind that for each elliptic root system there is an elliptic Dynkin diagram that determines the elliptic root system up to isomorphism (see Proposition 4.11). We show that in the tubular case the extended Coxeter- Dynkin diagram of the extended root system attached to the category coh(X) is an elliptic Dynkin diagram with respect to an elliptic root basis. As a consequence we obtain that if X is of tubular type the extended root system attached to coh(X) is elliptic and simply-laced (see Corollary 4.21). We therefore call Φ a tubular elliptic root system and the corresponding Weyl group tubular elliptic Weyl group (see Section 4.6). The aim of the last section of the paper is to show that in tubular elliptic root systems the gen assumption of the transitivity of the Hurwitz action on RedT(c) in Theorem 1.1 is fulﬁlled. Theorem 1.3. Let Φ be a tubular elliptic root system, Γ = Γ(Φ) a tubular elliptic root basis and c ∈ W a Coxeter transformation with respect to Γ. Then the Hurwitz action is transitive gen on the set RedT(c) .

Notice that this result was already obtained by Kluitmann by different means and in a different (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) context in his PhD thesis [30] for the tubular elliptic root systems E6 , E7 and E8 . As a consequence of Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 we obtain our second main result. Theorem 1.4. For a weighted projective line X of tubular type over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic zero that satisfies assumption (b) of Theorem 1.1, there exists an order preserving bijection between • the set of thick subcategories of coh(X) that are generated by an exceptional sequence in coh(X); and • the subposet [id, c]gen of the interval poset [id, c]. This bijection has applications in both directions. At the moment we are working on a nice combinatorial description of the poset [id, c]gen, which will also yield, via the bijection, a description of the Schur roots in the Grothendieck group K0(X). Finally note that not every thick subcategory of coh(X) is generated by an exceptional sequence (see [31] or [32]). Notation. Finally we like to present some notation that is going to be used throughout this paper. Let V be a finite dimensional R-space and (−|−) a symmetric bilinear form. A set of 2(α|β) non-isotropic vectors Φ ⊆ V , that is (α | α) 6= 0 for all α ∈ Φ, that satisfies (β|β) ∈ Z for all α, β ∈ Φ is called crystallographic. Further for a subset Φ ⊆ V we put L(Φ) = spanZ(Φ). In 6 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE this paper Φ will always be chosen such that L(Φ) is a lattice. The set Φ is called simply-laced if (α | α) = 2 for all α ∈ Φ and it is called reduced if Φ ∩ Rα = {±α} for all α ∈ Φ. For every α ∈ Φ we define the reflection 2(α | v) s (v) := v − α, where v ∈ V, α (α | α) and let WΦ := hsα | α ∈ Φi the reflection group on V related to Φ. Notice the following is an easy to check consequence of the setting.

Lemma 1.5. If Φ ⊂ V is cystallographic, then w(L(Φ)) ⊆ L(Φ) holds for every w ∈ WΦ.

Acknowledgments. The authors specially thank Henning Krause for mentioning the ques- tion of the existence of a bijection as presented in Theorem 1.4 to us. Further we thank him, as well as Dieter Vossieck and Lutz Hille for fruitful discussions. Moreover they thank Jon McCammond for making the third author aware of Scherk’s theorem. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 7

2. The extended root systems attached to the categories coh(X) and Db(coh(X)) Throughout the following sections k will be an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero (see also [47]), and coh(X) the category of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line X in the sense of [22]. We will not introduce this category in detail, but recall some basic facts on coh(X) as well as on its bounded derived category D := Db(coh(X)) in the next subsection. Througout the whole section we will quote and prove some more properties that we are using in our combinatorial approach to the poset of thick subcategories of coh(X). We refer the reader to [22, 17, 2] for further details. 2.1. The categories coh(X) and Db(coh(X)). We start by recalling the definition of a 1 weighted projective line (see [17]). Let Pk be the projective line over k, let λ = (λ1, . . . , λr) be 1 a (possibly empty) collection of distinct closed points of Pk, and let p = (p1,...,pr) be a weight 1 sequence, that is, a sequence of positive integers. The triple X = (Pk, λ, p) is called a weighted projective line. Without loss we may assume that λ is normalized, that is λ1 = ∞, λ2 = 0 and λ3 = 1. By [2, Chapter 6, Section 10.2] or [17, Theorem 6.8.1] the category coh(X) satisfies the n following properties. Notice that in this paper we will abbreviate Homcoh(X) and Extcoh(X) as n HomX and ExtX, respectivley. • coh(X) is a connected abelian k-category, and each object in coh(X) is noetherian. • coh(X) is (skeletally) small and ext-finite, that is, all morphism and extension spaces are finite dimensional k-vector spaces. • There exists a Serre functor τ, that is an equivalence τ : coh(X) → coh(X) and natural 1 ∗ ∗ isomorphisms ExtX(X,Y ) = HomX(Y,τX) for all objects X,Y of coh(X), where (−) denotes the standard k-duality Homk(−, k). • coh(X) has a tilting object. In fact, the category coh(X) is characterized by these properties together with the remaining properties of [2, Chapter 6, Section 10.2]. For every abelian k-category A there is the concept of the bounded derived category Db(A). The derived category D(A) is obtained from the classes of cochain complexes in A up to homotopy by formally inverting all the quasi-isomorphisms. The full subcategory of D(A) consisting of the objects that are isomorphic to a complex A such that An = 0 for almost all n ∈ Z is denoted by Db(A). There is a functor on Db(A), the shift operator: let (A, d) be a cochain complex, that is a representative of an object of Db(A). For i ∈ Z we denote by A[i] the shifted complex with n i+n n n n+i A[i] = A and dA[i] = (−1) dA . b b In particular, [i] : [(A, d)] → [(A[i], dA[i])] is an isomorphism on D (A). Further D (A) is an ext-finite triangulated k-category. The concept of a bounded derived category of an abelian category A is a helpful tool also because of the following fact. n ∼ Proposition 2.1 ([17, Prop. 2.1.1]). ExtA(A, B) = HomDb(A)(A, B[n]) for all A, B ∈A and n ∈ Z.

Recall that a morphism φ : A → B between cochain complexes (A, dX ) and (B, dY ) consists n n n n n n+1 n of morphisms φ : A → B with dY φ = φ dX for all n ∈ Z. 8 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Following [47] we will attach to the categories D and coh(X) an extended root system (see Section 2.3 and the deﬁnition and discussion of an extended root system in [9]). The Grothendieck groups K0(D) and K0(coh(X)) will serve as replacements for the respective root lattices. Attached to them we have the so-called Euler form deﬁned as follows. For objects X,Y of coh(X) we set

n n χ([X], [Y ]) = (−1) dimk ExtX(X,Y ) n X≥0 and for objects X,Y of D n χ([X], [Y ]) = (−1) dimk HomD(X,Y [n]). n X∈Z The next result states the connection between these two groups and forms. Lemma 2.2 ([17, Chapter 3.5]). Let A be an ext-ﬁnite abelian k-category. The inclusion A→ b b D (A) induces an isomorphism K0(A) =∼ K0(D (A)). In addition, if the global dimension of A is ﬁnite, then the induced isomorphism is an isometry with respect to the respective Euler forms. 2.2. Exceptional sequences in coh(X). An object E in an abelian k-category A is called exceptional if i EndA(E)= k and ExtA(E, E) = 0 for i> 0, and an object E in a triangulated k-category C is called exceptional if

EndC(E)= k and HomC (E, E[i]) = 0 for i 6= 0. A pair (E, F ) of exceptional objects in A (resp. in C) is called exceptional pair provided it i holds in addition that ExtA(F, E) = 0 for i ≥ 0 (resp. that HomC(F, E[i]) = 0 for all i ∈ Z). A sequence E = (E1,...,Er) of exceptional objects in A (resp. in C) is called exceptional s sequence of length r if ExtA(Ej, Ei) = 0 (resp. HomC(Ej, Ei[s]) = 0) for i < j and all s ∈ Z. Provided the rank of the Grothendieck group K0(A) (resp. K0(C)) is ﬁnite an exceptional sequence in A (resp. in C) is called complete if its length equals this rank. Remark 2.3. We are only interested in isomorphism classes of objects, thus the exceptional sequences will be considered as a sequence of isomorphism classes. We recall the concept of mutations of exceptional sequences in D as well as in coh(X) and the braid group action on these. For more details consider for example [12, Chapter 2] and [39, Chapter 3.2]. We start by considering D. Given an exceptional pair (E, F ) in D, put

• Hom (E, F )= HomD(E, F [i])[−i], i M∈Z where we consider this as a complex of vector spaces with trivial diﬀerential. The corresponding cochain complex has on position i ∈ Z the vector space HomD(E, F [−i]). The objects LEF and RF E in D deﬁned by the distinguished triangles • LEF → Hom (E, F ) ⊗ E → F →LEF [1] • ∗ E → Hom (E, F ) ⊗ F → RF E → E[1] EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 9 are exceptional objects where (−)∗ denotes the complex with reverse grading. Set

Hom•(E, F ) ⊗ E = E[−i]dimk HomD(E,F [i]). i M∈Z A left (resp. right) mutation of an exceptional pair (E, F ) is the pair (LEF, E) (resp. (F, RF E)). A mutation of an exceptional sequence (E1,...,Er) is deﬁned as a mutation of a pair of adja- cent objects, where all the other objects are ﬁxed. Let Br be the braid group on r strands, that is the group with (standard) generators σ1,...,σr−1 and subject to the relations σiσj = σjσi for |i − j| ≥ 2 and σiσi+1σi = σi+1σiσi+1 for i = 1, . . . , r − 2. The group Br acts on an exceptional sequence (E1,...,Er) by

σi(E1,...,Er) = (E1,...,Ei−1, Ei+1, REi+1 Ei, Ei+2 ...,Er) −1 σi (E1,...,Er) = (E1,...,Ei−1, LEi Ei+1, Ei, Ei+2,...,Er). r We consider the semidirect product Z ⋉ Br given by the group homorphism Br → Sr → r AutZ(Z ) which is induced by the map σi 7→ (i, i + 1) and the natural action of the symmetric r group Sr on Z . r The group Z ⋉ Br acts on the set of exceptional sequences in D by deﬁning for a basis r element ei ∈ Z ei(E1,...,Er) = (E1,...,Ei−1, Ei[1], Ei+1,...,Er).

Now we consider coh(X). Given an exceptional pair (E, F ) in coh(X), denote by LEF (resp. RF E) the sheaf which coincides with LEF (resp. RF E) up to shifts in the derived category, since coh(X) is hereditary (see [17, Lemma 2.2.1]). In this situation the sheaf LEF is uniquely determined by one of the following exact sequences

0 → LEF → HomX(E, F ) ⊗ E → F → 0

0 → HomX(E, F ) ⊗ E → F → LEF → 0 1 0 → F → LEF → ExtX(E, F ) ⊗ E → 0, where V ⊗ E is defined to be the sum of dim(V ) copies of E for a finite dimensional vector space V . The sheaf RF E is defined similar. In particular we obtain an action of the braid group Br on the set of exceptional sequences of length r in coh(X) by

σi(E1,...,Er) = (E1,...,Ei−1, Ei+1,REi+1 Ei, Ei+2,...,Er), −1 σi (E1,...,Er) = (E1,...,Ei−1, LEi Ei+1, Ei, Ei+2,...,Er).

In the following we abbreviate the Grothendieck group K0(coh(X)) by K0(X). Recall the following well known properties. Theorem 2.4 ([39, Theorem 4.3.1] and [33, Theorem 1.1]). Let X be a weighted projective line and let n be the rank of K0(X). Then the braid group Bn acts transitively on the isomorphism classes of complete exceptional sequences in coh(X). Corollary 2.5 ([39, Corollary 4.3.2]). Let X be a weighted projective line and let n be the rank n of K0(X). Then the group Bn ⋉Z acts transitively on the isomorphism classes of complete exceptional sequences in D. The next two results state that all exceptional sequences can be enlarged to complete exceptional sequences. 10 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Lemma 2.6 ([39, Lemma 3.1.3] and [18, Lemma 1]). Every exceptional sequence in coh(X) or mod(A) for a hereditary algebra A can be enlarged to a complete exceptional sequence. Corollary 2.7. Every exceptional sequence in D can be enlarged to a complete exceptional sequence. Proof. The exceptional sequences of coh(X)root coincide with those of D up to shifts. There- fore the assertion follows directly from Lemma 2.6. The next lemma is a combination of the results [22, Proposition 4.1] and [39, Lemma 8.1.2]. Lemma 2.8. The category coh(X) of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line X contains a complete exceptional sequence. 2.3. The extended root system and the extended Weyl group. By [39, Lemma 4.1.2] all complete exceptional sequences in D = Db(coh(X)) are full in the sense of [47]. Therefore, because of Corollaries 2.5 and 2.7, the conditions of [47, Proposition 2.10] on D = Db(coh(X)) are satisﬁed, which yields that the quadruple s (K0(D),χ , ∆re(D), cD) is a simply-laced generalized root system in the sense of [47, Deﬁnition 2.1], that is

• K0(D) is the Grothendieck group of D; s • χ ([X], [Y ]) := χ([X], [Y ]) + χ([Y ], [X]), where χ is the Euler form on K0(D) and where [X] (resp. [Y ]) denotes the class in K0(D) of the object X ∈ D (resp. Y ∈ D); • ∆re(D) := W (B)B ⊆ K0(D), where (E1,...,En) is a complete exceptional sequence,

B := {[E1],..., [En]}

a basis of K0(D) and where W (B) is the subgroup of s (Aut(K0(D),χ ) that is generated by the reﬂections s[Ei] on K0(D) (for 1 ≤ i ≤ n); • the Coxeter transformation cD is the automorphism on K0(D) induced by the Coxeter functor CD := SD[−1] on D where SD is the Serre functor on D. s We call the quadruple Q := Q(D) := (K0(D),χ , ∆re(D), cD) the root quadruple related to D, and the group s W (D) := W∆re(D) = hsα ∈ Aut(K0(D),χ ) | α ∈ ∆re(D)i extended Weyl group related to D This deﬁnition makes sense as the root quadruple as well as the extended Weyl group do not depend on the choice of the complete exceptional sequence (E1,...,En) (see [47, Propo- sition 2.10]). Notice that the Coxeter transformation can also be obtained from a complete exceptional sequence:

Lemma 2.9 ([47, Section 2]). Let D, B and (E1,...,En) be as above. Then it holds

(a) cD = s[E1] · · · s[En]; s (b) χ (α, α) = 2 for all α ∈ ∆re(D); and (c) W (D)= W (B). Corollary 2.10. Let X be a weighted projective line, coh(X) the category of coherent sheaves over X. Then the quadruple s (K0(X),χ , ∆re(X), c) is a simply-laced generalized root system in the sense of [47, Deﬁnition 2.1] where EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 11

• K0(X) is the Grothendieck group of coh(X); s • χ ([X], [Y ]) := χ([X], [Y ]) + χ([Y ], [X]) where χ is the Euler form on K0(X) and [X] (resp. [Y ]) denotes the class in K0(X) of an object X ∈ coh(X) (resp. Y ∈ coh(X)) (for the deﬁnition of the Euler form see Section 2.1); • ∆re(X) := W (B)B ⊆ K0(X) where

B := {[E1],..., [En]}

for a complete exceptional sequence (E1,...,En) and W (B) is the subgroup of s Aut(K0(X),χ ) generated by the reﬂections s[Ei] on K0(X); • W (B)= W (X) := W∆re(X); • c is the Coxeter transformation of W (X), that is, the automorphism of K0(X) deﬁned

as c = s[E1] ...s[En]. Further, there is an isometry between the Z-modules K0(X) and K0(D) that sends ∆re(X) to ∆re(D). The latter also induces an isomorphism from W (X) to W (D) which maps c to cD. Proof. The exceptional sequences of coh(X) and D coincide up to shifts. Every shift by [1] or [−1] yields a change of sign in the Grothendieck group, thus the corresponding elements in the group coincide up to sign, where K0(X) is identiﬁed with K0(D) by Lemma 2.2. Thus the corresponding Weyl groups are equal, which yields that the sets of roots ∆re(D) and ∆re(X) coincide. In particular, the Coxeter transformations of W (X) and W (D) are equal.

Notice that our notation is differemt from that one in [47]. We call the set ∆re(X) extended root system related to X. The abstract notion of an extended root system is given in [9]. There we also show that ∆re(X) is indeed an extended root system in that sense. s We call Q := Q(X) := (K0(X),χ , ∆re(X), c) the root quadruple related to X. By Corol- lary 2.10, Q(X) and Q(D) are isomorphic quadruples. The group W (X) is the extended Weyl group related to X, and a group W will be called an extended Weyl group if there is a weighted projective line such that W = W (X). In the following we let T = wSw−1 w W [∈ be the set of reflections of W (X), where S := {s[E1],...,s[En]}. Remark 2.11. By definition of the Euler form we have χs([E], [E]) = 2 for each exceptional E ∈ coh(X). Since the group W (X) leaves the form χs(−, −) invariant, the extended root system ∆re(X) is simply-laced. In particular, it is reduced and crystallographic. 2.4. The reflection related to an exceptional object. In this section we show that an exceptional object in coh(X) uniquely determines a reflection, and we describe the action of such a reflection on the extended root system related to X as well as to D. We start by recalling that every exceptional object in coh(X) is uniquely determined by its class in the Grothendieck group. Lemma 2.12 ([39, Proposition 4.4.1]). Let E, F ∈ coh(X) be exceptional and [E] = [F ] in K0(X). Then E =∼ F . Lemma 2.13 ([47, Lemma 2.13]). For every exceptional object E ∈ coh(X) (resp. E ∈ D), the class [E] ∈ K0(X) (resp. [E] ∈ K0(D)) belongs to ∆re(X) (resp. ∆re(D)). Notice that the roots of the form [E] for an exceptional object E are called (real) Schur roots. 12 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Lemma 2.14. The map sending an isomorphism class of an exceptional object E from coh(X) to the reﬂection s[E] from W (X) is injective.

Proof. By Lemma 2.13 the map is well-deﬁned. Moreover, since ∆re(X) is reduced, if E and F are two exceptional objects with s[E] = s[F ], then [E] = ±[F ]. Then in this case [17, Proposition 6.3.7 (2)] yields that [E] = [F ] and Lemma 2.12 implies E =∼ F . Lemma 2.15. Let (E, F ) be an exceptional pair in D, then

s[E]([F ]) = −[LEF ] and s[F ]([E]) = −[RF E], and if (E, F ) is an exceptional pair in coh(X), then

s[E]([F ]) = ±[LEF ] and s[F ]([E]) = ±[RF E]. Proof. Consider the exceptional pair (E, F ) in D and the following distinguished triangles • LEF → Hom (E, F ) ⊗ E → F →LEF [1] • ∗ E → Hom (E, F ) ⊗ F → RF E → E[1].

In the Grothendieck group K0 it holds, as Hom(F, E[i]) = 0 for all i ∈ Z, that

• i s [Hom (E, F ) ⊗ E]= (−1) dimk HomD(E, F [i])[E] = χ ([E], [F ])[E]. i X∈Z Thus the ﬁrst triangle yields s [LEF ]= − [F ] − χ ([E], [F ])[E] = −s[E]([F ]) and the second yields s [RF E]= − [E] − χ ([E], [F ])[F ] = −s[F ]([E]). As the exceptional sequences of coh( X) coincide up to shifts with those of D the second part of the lemma follows.

2.5. An extended Coxeter-Dynkin diagram for coh(X). The aim of this section is to show that for a weighted projective line X we always ﬁnd a complete exceptional sequence E in coh(X) such that the associated diagram (see Deﬁnition 2.16) is an “extended star diagram”. Our strategy is as follows: we consider the module category of a bound quiver algebra whose quiver is the one point extended star quiver. There we state a complete exceptional sequence that induces an extended star diagram. As the latter module category is derived equivalent to coh(X) for a weighted projective line X by [47], we thereby obtain the desired diagram. It will provide a nice description of the corresponding extended root system ∆re(X).

Deﬁnition 2.16. We associate to every complete exceptional sequence E = (E1,...,En) in coh(X) (resp. in D) a diagram whose set of vertices is in bijection with {E1,...,En}. Let s Ei and Ej be two diﬀerent exceptional objects, that is i 6= j. If χ ([Ei], [Ej]) = k with k ∈ N we draw k edges between the corresponding vertices, and these edges are dotted if s s χ ([Ei], [Ej]) = −k. If χ ([Ei], [Ej]) = 0 we do not draw an edge between the corresponding vertices. As these diagrams are equal for coh(X) and D according to Corollary 2.10 we simply call it the generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram associated to (X, E). EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 13

1 Deﬁnition 2.17. Let r ≥ 3 be a positive integer and let X = (Pk, λ, p) be a weighted projective line (see Section 2). Set (1) (2) (1) (2) (λ1 , λ1 ) = (1, 0) and (λi , λi ) = (λi, 1), for i = 2,...,r.

Further let kTp be the quiver algebra corresponding to the one point extended star quiver given in Figure 1. Then deﬁne the bound quiver algebra to be e kTp,λ := kTp/I where I is the ideal r e e r (1) (2) I := λi fi,1∗ f1,i, λi fi,1∗ f1,i i=1 i=1 X X ∗ and where f1,i is the arrow from 1 to (i, 1) and fi,1∗ the arrow from (i, 1) to 1 . Remark 2.18. The one point extended star quiver is a ﬁnite acyclic quiver, which yields the admissibility of the ideal I, that is, there exists a positive integer m such that Am ⊆I⊆ A2 for A the two-sided ideal generated by the arrows of the quiver.

To state an explicit formula of the symmetrized Euler form attached to kTp,λ we need the following property. e Lemma 2.19. The global dimension of the bound quiver algebra kTp,λ is two. Proof. By [3] it is suﬃcient to calculate the projective dimensions of all simple modules E e ν corresponding to the vertices ν ∈ Q0. By [4, Chapter III, Lemma 1.11] we have that the global dimension of kTp,λ is at least two. ∗ ∗ We immediately get S1 = P1 and S(i,pi−1) = P(i,pi−1) for 1 ≤ i ≤ r. A direct calculation yields for 1 ≤ i ≤ r the following projective resolution e

pi−1

0 −→ P1∗ ⊕ P(i,j) −→ P(i,1) −→ S(i,1) −→ 0. j M=2 A projective resolution for S1 is given by r 2 0 −→ P1∗ −→ P(i,1) −→ P1 −→ S1 −→ 0 i M=1 and projective resolutions for the remaining simples, i.e. for 1 ≤ i ≤ r and 2 ≤ j ≤ pi − 2, are

pi−1

0 −→ P(i,k) −→ P(i,j) −→ S(i,j) −→ 0. k=Mj+1 All stated projective resolutions have length at most two, which yields the assertion.

Proposition 2.20. Consider the one point extended star quiver of Figure 1. Then the following holds.

(a) For every ν ∈ Q0 there is (up to isomorphism) precisely one simple kTp,λ-module, given by Eν. ′ (b) There exists a complete exceptional sequence E which contains the simplee modules Eν. 14 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

∗ 1

(1, p1 − 1) (1, p1 − 2) (1, 2) (1, 1) 1 (r, 1) (r, 2) (r, pr − 2) (r, pr − 1) ......

(2, 1) (r − 1, 1)

(2, 2) (r − 1, 2) ...... (2, p2 − 2) (r − 1, pr−1 − 2)

(2, p2 − 1) (r − 1, pr−1 − 1)

Figure 1. One point extended star quiver

∗ 1

(1, p1 − 1) (1, p1 − 2) (1, 2) (1, 1) (r, 1) (r, 2) (r, pr − 2) (r, pr − 1) ...... 1 (2, 1) (r − 1, 1)

(2, 2) (r − 1, 2) ...... (2, p2 − 2) (r − 1, pr−1 − 2)

(2, p2 − 1) (r − 1, pr−1 − 1)

Figure 2. Extended Coxeter-Dynkin diagram

s (c) The symmetrized Euler form χ on K0(kTp,λ) satisﬁes χs([X], [Y ]) = q (X ) + (Y ) − q (X ) − q (Y ) ν ν∈Q0 ω ω∈Qe0 ν ν∈Q0 ω ω∈Q0 ˜ for all X,Y ∈ mod(kTp,λ) with corresponding dimension vectors (Xν)ν∈Q0 resp. (Yν)ν∈Q0 where q is the Tits form given by 2 q((Zν )ν∈Q0 )= Zν − ZνZω + 2Z1∗ Z1 ν Q ν→ω X∈ 0 X |Q0|

Æ 0 for (Zν )ν∈Q0 ∈ \ . (d) There exists an exceptional sequence E = (...,E1, E1∗ ) in mod(kTp,λ) such that the corresponding roots in the Grothendieck group induce a generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram as illustrated in Figure 2. e We call the generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagrams given in Figure 2 extended Coxeter- Dynkin diagrams.

Proof. Denote by Eν (up to isomorphism) the simple kTp,λ-modules corresponding to the vertices in Q0 of the one point extended star quiver of Figure 1. Each simple module Eν 1 is an exceptional object in the category mod(kTp,λ). Thee k-dimension of Ext e (Eν , Eω) kTp,λ e EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 15 for vertices ν,ω ∈ Q0 is equal to the number of arrows from ν to ω and since the global 2 dimension of mod(kTp,λ) is two (Lemma 2.19), the k-dimension of Ext e (Eν, Eω) can easily kTp,λ be calculated by using [12, Proposition 1]. This implies that the sequence ′ e ∗ E = (E1, E(1,1), E(1,2),...,E(1,p1−1),...,E(r,1), E(r,2),...,E(r,pr−1), E1 ) is a complete exceptional sequence in mod(kTp,λ). An easy calculation yields that the Tits form on mod(kTp,λ) is given by e 2 q((X ) )= X − X X + 2X ∗ X e ν ν∈Q0 ν ν ω 1 1 ν Q ν→ω X∈ 0 X for X ∈ mod(kTp,λ) with corresponding dimension vectors (Xν )ν∈Q0 (see [13, Deﬁnition 2]). By part a) and [13, Proposition 2.2] the Euler quadratic form and the Tits form coincide. The latter yields duee to polarization the symmetrized Euler form s χ ([X], [Y ]) = q (Xν )ν∈Q0 + (Yω)ω∈Q0 − q (Xν )ν∈Q0 − q (Yω)ω∈Q0 for all X,Y ∈ mod(kTp,λ) with corresponding dimension vectors (X ν )ν∈Q0 resp. (Yν)ν∈Q0 . By knowing the symmetrized Euler form χs it is easy to see that the sequence E′ induces a basis b of the Grothendieck groupe of D (kTp,λ) such that the generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram is an extended Coxeter-Dynkin diagram (see Figure 2). The number of objects ine the complete exceptional sequence E′ is given by r −1 −1 −1 ′ m = i=1 pi −1 +2. By applying the braid σm−2 ...σ2 σ1 to E we obtain a new complete exceptional sequence E = (...,E1, E1∗ ). Due to Lemma 2.15 the roots corresponding to E induce P the same generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram. 1 s Proposition 2.21. Let X = (Pk, λ, p) be a weighted projective line and let (K0(X),χ , ∆re(X), c) be the associated root quadruple. Then there is a complete exceptional sequence E = (...,E1, E1∗ ) such that the following holds:

(a) ∆re(X) is an extended root system in K0(X) ⊗Z R, and the generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram associated to (X, E) is an extended Coxeter-Dynkin diagram; ∗ (b) the Coxeter transformation is c = · · · s[E1]s[E1 ]. Proof. Due to Corollary 2.5, [39, Lemma 8.1.2] and Lemma 2.8, the assumptions of [47, Proposition 2.10] are satisﬁed. So Corollary 2.10 yields the existence of an extended root b system ∆re(X) attached to coh(X). By [47, Proposition 2.24] the categories D (coh(X)) and b D (kTp,λ) are triangulated equivalent, thus their corresponding root quadruples are isomorphic (see Corollary 2.10). By Proposition 2.20 there exists a complete exceptional sequence E =e (...,E1, E1∗ ) and the corresponding elements in the Grothendieck group form a root basis of ∆re(X) whose generalized Coxeter-Dynkin diagram is an extended diagram.

3. An order preserving bijection In this section we prove Theorem 1.1. Let X be a weighted projective line, and recall the deﬁntions of the extended Weyl group W := W (X) related to X, the set S, and the extended root system Φ:=∆re(X) given in Section 2.3. We start by determining the reﬂection length of a Coxeter transformation. Then in the following three subsections we will introduce the necessary notation as far as it has not yet been introduced, and prove Theorem 1.1 in Section 3.5. 16 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

3.1. The reflection length of Coxeter transformations. The aim of this subsection is to show Proposition 1.2. Thus we determine the reflection length of a Coxeter transformation c of the extended Weyl group W . As T generates W , each x ∈ W is a product x = t1 · · · tr where ti ∈ T . If this product is of minimal length, then we say that this T -factorization is reduced and that ℓT (x) = r. We show that ℓT (c) = |S|, which implies that the factorization of c in pairwise different simple reflections is T -reduced. This fact will be an ingredient of the proof of Theorem 1.1. The reflection length of c can be proven using Scherk’s Theorem as we show now. In order to formulate Scherk’s theorem we like to recall some notation. Let k be a field of characterstic different from 2, and U a finite dimensional k-vector space that is equipped with a symmetric bilinear form (−, −). A null-space (totally isotropic subspace) of (U, (−, −)) is a subspace that consists only of isotropic vectors, that is, as char(k) 6= 2, a subspace where (−, −) vanishes. Theorem 3.1 (Scherk, [48, Theorem 260.1]). Let k be a field of characterstic different from 2, U a finite dimensional k-vector space with symmetric bilinear form (−, −). Further let σ 6= idU ⊥ be an isometry of U. Let F = CU (σ) be the fixed space of σ in U, and n the dimension of F , the orthogonal complement of F in U. If F ⊥ is not a null space, then σ is the product of n and not less than n reflections. If F ⊥ is a null space, then σ is the product of n + 2 and not less than n + 2 reflections. In order to apply Scherk’s Theorem to our situation we need the well known fact described in the following lemma. Let V be a finite dimensional real vector space and attached to it the symmetric bilinear form (−, −).

Lemma 3.2. Let β1,...,βm ∈ V be linear independent and non-isotropic vectors, and let v ∈ V , then sβ1 · · · sβm (v)= v if and only if sβi (v)= v for all 1 ≤ i ≤ m. Proof. A direct calculation yields

(β1, v) − β1 = sβ2 · · · sβm (v) − v ∈ spanR(β2,...,βm) (β1, β1) and the linear independence of {β1,...,βm} implies (β1, v) = 0. The latter is equivalent to sβ1 (v)= v. In the same manner we get inductively that sβi (v)= v for all 2 ≤ i ≤ m.

Now let us consider again the extended Weyl group W , and let V := K0(X) ⊗Z R, and (−, −) the symmetrized Euler form on V , and Φ the extended root system attached to W . Let n be the rank of W , so n = |S| = dimR(V ), and denote by R the radical of (−, −) in V . Lemma 3.3. Let W be an extended Weyl group and c ∈ W be a Coxeter transformation. Then CV (c)= R.

Proof. The proof is based on Lemma 3.2 and the following fact. Let α ∈ Φ, then CV (sα) = ⊥ ⊥ {v ∈ V | sα(v)= v} = α . The latter implies that CV (c)= α∈B CV (sα)= α∈B α . Since B is a basis of V the assertion CV (c)= R follows. T T Now we obtain as a corollary the reﬂection length of the Coxeter transformation, which proves Proposition 1.2 Corollary 3.4. Let W be an extended Weyl group of rank n and c ∈ W be a Coxeter transformation. Then ℓT (c)= n. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 17

Proof. Let c be a Coxeter transformation and CV (c) its fixed space. By Lemma 3.3 it holds ⊥ ⊥ ⊥ CV (c) = R = V , and therefore dimR(CV (c) ) = dimR(V ) = n. Since (−, −) does not vanish on V , for instance α1 ∈ V , Scherk’s Theorem 3.1 yields that ℓT (c) ≥ n. By the definition of c is the product of |S| = n reflections, so ℓT (n)= n. We continue by providing the for our work necessary framework on thick subcategories.

3.2. Thick subcategories generated by exceptional sequences. Deﬁnition 3.5. Let A be an abelian category and H a full subcategory of A. The category H is called thick if it is abelian and closed under extensions. If H is a class of objects in A, we denote the smallest thick subcategory which contains H by Thick(H) and call it the thick subcategory generated by H. Remark 3.6 ([19, Theorem 3.3.1] and [27, Proposition 9.1]). Let A be a hereditary abelian category. A full subcategory H of A is thick if and only if it is closed under direct summands and if it fulﬁls the following property. Given an exact sequence 0 → A → B → C → 0 in A and two of the three objects are in H then the third also lies in H. The latter property is called ’two out of three’ property.

Lemma 3.7. Let (E, F ) be an exceptional pair in coh(X), then LEF and RF E are objects in Thick(E, F ). Proof. We only consider the short exact sequence

0 → LEF → HomX(E, F ) ⊗ E → F → 0.

The argumentation for the other sequences is analogous. The object HomX(E, F ) ⊗ E is isomorphic to the sum of dim HomX(E, F ) copies of E. Thick subcategories are closed under extensions, thus the object Hom (E, F ) ⊗ E is in Thick(E, F ). The ’two out of three’ X property yields that LEF is an object of Thick(E, F ). For a subset C ⊆ coh(X) denote by ⊥ i C = {X ∈ coh(X) | ExtX(A, X) = 0 for all i ∈ N0 and A ∈ C} the right perpendicular of C and analogously by ⊥ i C = {X ∈ coh(X) | ExtX(X, A) = 0 for all i ∈ N0 and A ∈ C} the left perpendicular of C. The next result is well known and follows directly from Remark 3.6. Lemma 3.8. Let C ⊆ coh(X). Then C⊥ is a thick subcategory. Proof. By Remark 3.6 we need to check that C⊥ is closed under direct summands and that the ’two out of three’ property holds. Obviously C⊥ is closed under direct summands and the ’two out of three’ property follows by use of the long exact sequence induced by the covariant HomX functor.

Lemma 3.9. Let (E1,...,En) and (F1,...,Fn) be complete exceptional sequences in coh(X) and U = Thick(E1,...,Er), V = Thick(F1,...,Fs) for some r, s ≤ n. Then U = V if and only if r = s and (F1,...,Fr, Er+1,...,En) is a complete exceptional sequence. 18 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Proof. First assume that (F1,...,Fs, Er+1,...,En) is a complete exceptional sequence. Then ⊥ it holds r = s. Consider the right perpendicular category H := (Er+1,...,En) in coh(X). By [39, Theorems 3.3.2 and 3.3.3] the category H is equivalent to the category coh(X′) for a weighted projective line X′ of reduced weight or to mod(A) for a hereditary artin algebra A. By the same results the Grothendieck group is in both cases of rank r, so (E1,...,Er) and (F1,...,Fr) are complete exceptional sequences of H. By [33, Theorem 1.1] in the case of coh(X′) and by [43, Corollary Ch.7] in the case of mod(A) the exceptional sequences (E1,...,Er) and (F1,...,Fr) lie in the same orbit of the braid group action. By Lemma 3.7 thick subcategories are closed under left and right mutation, so Thick(E1,...,Er) = Thick(F1,...,Fr) holds. ⊥ Assume that U = V . By deﬁnition we have E1,...,Er ∈ (Er+1,...,En) and Lemma 3.8 implies with U = V ⊥ F1,...,Fs ∈ Thick(F1,...,Fs) = Thick(E1,...,Er) ⊆ (Er+1,...,En) .

Therefore (F1,...,Fs, Er+1,...,En) is an exceptional sequence. By Lemma [49, Lemma 3.25] we need to check that Thick(F1,...,Fs, Er+1,...,En) = coh(X). The latter follows by

Thick(F1,...,Fs, Er+1,...,En) = Thick (Thick(F1,...,Fs), Thick(Er+1,...,En))

= Thick (Thick(E1,...,Er), Thick(Er+1,...,En))

= Thick(E1,...,En) = coh(X).

Remark 3.10. Note that a thick subcategory in coh(X) is not necessarily generated by an exceptional sequence (see for instance [32, Proposition 6.13]). gen 3.3. The interval posets [id, c] and [id, c] . Recall that Φ=∆re(X) is the extended root system related to the category coh(X) and W the related extended Weyl group, and T the set of reflections in W . For x ∈ W with ℓT (x)= r we put r RedT (w) := {(t1,...,tr) ∈ T | w = t1 · · · tr}. Next we define the poset [id, c]. Definition 3.11. (a) Define a partial order on W by −1 x ≤ y if and only if ℓT (y)= ℓT (x)+ ℓT (x y)

for x,y ∈ W , called absolute order, where ℓT is the length function on W with respect to T . (b) For w ∈ W the interval [id, w]= {x ∈ W | id ≤ x ≤ w} is called the interval poset of w with respect to the partial order ≤. (c) Let w and (t1,...,tn) ∈ RedT (c). We call (t1,...,ti) a preﬁx of the factorization (t1,...,tn) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n.

Note that x ≤ w if and only if there exists a reduced factorization t1,...,tℓT (x) ∈ RedT (x) which is a preﬁx of a reduced factorization of w. By abuse of notation we sometimes call x to be a preﬁx of w. For the extended root systems we need studying generating factorizations. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 19

Deﬁnition 3.12.

(a) Let w ∈ W , ti ∈ T for 1 ≤ i ≤ n such that w = t1 · · · tn. We call the factorization (t1,...,tn) generating, if W = ht1,...,tni. (b) Assume that w ∈ W admits a generating factorization. Define the subposet [id, w]gen of [id, w] to be the set of prefixes of reduced generating factorizations of w. More gen precisely, we have x ∈ [id, w] if and only if there exists t1,...,tℓT (x) ∈ RedT (x) such that t ,...,t is a prefix of a reduced generating factorization for w. 1 ℓT (x)

Lemma 3.13. Let (sβ1 ,...,sβn ) be a generating factorization with βi ∈ Φ for 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Then L(Φ) = L({β1,...,βn}). Proof. Since the extended Coxeter-Dynkin diagram in Figure 2 has a spanning tree consisting of simple edges, it is easy to see that all simple reﬂections are conjugated in W . Therefore the set of reﬂections forms a single conjugacy class. In particular, for every β ∈ Φ there exists w ∈ −1 W = hsβ1 ,...,sβn i such that sw(β1) = wsβ1 w = sβ. As Φ is reduced and crystallographic

by Remark 2.11 and as w has a factorization in the reflections sβ1 ,...,sβn , it follows that β = ±w(β1) ∈ spanZ(β1,...,βn). Therefore Lemma 1.5 yields L(Φ) ⊆ spanZ(β1,...,βn). Remark 3.14. In Example 4.23 we will present an example of an extended root systems whose corresponding group W contains Coxeter transformations that admit a non-generating factorization. 3.4. The Hurwitz action. We define the Hurwitz action for arbitrary groups to connect the braid group action on exceptional sequences with a suitable action on tuples of reflections. n n Let G be a group and (g1,...,gn) an element of G . The Hurwitz action on G is defined by −1 σi(g1,...,gn) = (g1,...,gi−1, gi+1 , gi+1gigi+1, gi+2,...,gn), −1 −1 σi (g1,...,gn) = (g1,...,gi−1, gigi+1gi , gi , gi+2,...,gn). for the standard generator σi ∈Bn, for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1. In particular, for a subset T of G that is closed under conjugation, the Hurwitz action restricts to an action on T n. For later use, we already state the following result. Lemma 3.15. Let G be a group, T be a subset of G that is closed under conjugation and t1,...,tm,t ∈ T . Then for all x ∈ ht1,...,tmi there exists a braid σ ∈Bm+2 such that x x σ(t1,...,tm,t,t) = (t1,...,tm,t ,t ).

Proof. Put σ := (σiσi+1 · · · σm+1)(σm+1 · · · σi+1σi). A straightforward calculation shows that ti ti σ(t1,...,tm,t,t) = (t1,...,tm,t ,t ).

Later we will need the following fact.

Proposition 3.16. Let X be a weighted projective line and let n be the rank of K0(X). If there exist exceptional sequences (E1,...,En), (F1,...,Fn) of coh(X) and a braid σ ∈Bn such

that σ(E1,...,En) = (F1,...,Fn), then also σ(s[E1],...,s[En]) = (s[F1],...,s[Fn]). Proof. The fact that both braid group actions are compatible is due to Lemma 2.15. We can use the deﬁnition of a generating factorization to draw the following conclusion from Proposition 3.16. 20 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Corollary 3.17. Let W be an extended Weyl group of rank n and let c ∈ W be a Coxeter transformation. Assume that the braid group Bn acts transitively on the set of sequences (s1,...,sn) of reﬂections in W such that c = s1 · · · sn is a generating factorization of c. If c = t1 · · · tn is a reduced generating factorization of c then there exists up to isomorphism a unique complete exceptional sequence (F1,...,Fn) in coh(X) such that ti = s[Fi], for 1 ≤ i ≤ n. Proof. By Corollary 2.10 there exists a complete exceptional sequence

(E1,...,En) such that spanZ([E1],..., [En]) = spanZ(∆re(X)) and c = s[E1] · · · s[En], and by assumption there exists σ ∈Bn such that (t1,...,tn)= σ(s[E1],...,s[En]). Let (F1,...,Fn) be the complete exceptional sequence such that (F1,...,Fn)= σ(E1,...,En). It follows that s[Fi] = ti by Proposition 3.16. The uniqueness follows from Lemma 2.14. 3.5. Proof of the ﬁrst main theorem. Now we will prove Theorem 1.1. Notice that Proposition 1.2 implies that the reﬂection length of a Coxeter transformation equals the rank of the Grothendieck group K0(X).

Proof of Theorem 1.1. Let (E1,...,En+2) be a complete exceptional sequence in coh(X).

By Lemma 2.9 and Corollary 2.10 we have c = s[E1] · · · s[En+2]. For U = Thick(E1,...,Er), where r ≤ n + 2, put cox(U) := s[E1] · · · s[Er] ∈ W . Let us ﬁrst point out that cox(−) is well-deﬁned. Therefore choose another complete exceptional sequence (F1,...,Fn+2) in coh(X) such that U = Thick(F1,...,Fs) for some s ≤ n + 2. Then (F1,...,Fs, Er+1,...,En+2) is a complete exeptional sequence by Lemma 3.9, and r = s. By Theorem 2.4 and Proposition 3.16 we obtain

s[F1] · · · s[Fn+2] = s[F1] · · · s[Fr]s[Er+1] · · · s[En+2] = s[E1] · · · s[Er]s[Er+1] · · · s[En+2] = c.

Thus we get s[F1] · · · s[Fs] = s[E1] · · · s[Er]. By deﬁnition of cox(U) we have cox(U) ≤ c. Since the root quadruple is independent of the choice of the complete exceptional sequence it holds spanZ([E1],..., [En+2]) = spanZ(∆re(X)) gen and [Ei] ∈ ∆re(X) for 1 ≤ i ≤ n + 2. Hence cox(U) ∈ [id, c] . Next we show that the map induced by cox(−) is injective. Let (E1,...,En+2) and (F1,...,Fn+2) be complete exceptional sequences such that U = Thick(E1,...,Er) and V = Thick(F1,...,Fs) for some r, s ≤ n + 2 and such that cox(U) = cox(V ). That is, s[E1] · · · s[Er] = s[F1] · · · s[Fs] and since c is of length n + 2 we obtain r = s. In particular

c = s[F1] · · · s[Fr]s[Er+1] · · · s[En+2].

By assumption (b) and Corollary 3.17 we obtain that (F1,...,Fr, Er+1,...,En+2) is a complete exceptional sequence. By Lemma 3.9 we get U = V . The surjectivity of cox(−) follows directly from Corollary 3.17. It remains to show that cox(−) is order preserving. Therefore let V ⊆ U be thick subcategories with U = Thick(E1,...Er) and V = Thick(F1,...,Fs). As in the proof of the Lemma ⊥ 3.9 the subcategory U = (Er+1,...,En+2) is by [39, Theorems 2.4.2 and 2.4.3] equivalent either to a module category mod(A) for some hereditary algebra A or to a sheaf category coh(X′) ′ for a weighted projective line X and (F1,...,Fs) is an exceptional sequence in U. The rank of the Grothendieck group K0(U) implies s ≤ r. By Lemma 2.6 there exist exceptional ob- ′ ′ ′ ′ jects Fs+1,...,Fr such that (F1,...,Fs, Fs+1,...,Fr) is a complete exceptional sequence in ′ ′ U. Therefore by Theorem 2.4 (E1,...Er) and (F1,...,Fs, Fs+1,...,Fr) lie in the same orbit of the braid group action and s ...s s ′ ...s ′ = s ...s by Proposition 3.16. [F1] [Fs] [Fs+1] [Fr] [E1] [Er] Since c = s[E1] ...s[En+2] is reduced, we have s[F1] ...s[Fs] ≤ s[E1] ...s[Er]. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 21

4. Elliptic root systems and elliptic Weyl groups In this section we introduce the notion of an elliptic root system and an elliptic Weyl group due to Saito. We recall some of their properties (see [44]), sometimes with a proof if it is difficult to deduce if from [44]. Moreover, we present some new results as for instance Lemma 4.13. Further we show that every root quadruple and every extended Weyl group for a category coh(X) of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line X of tubular type are an elliptic root system and an elliptic Weyl group, respectively (see Corollary 4.21). 4.1. Elliptic root system and elliptic root basis. Definition 4.1. Let V be a finite dimensional vector space over R and (−|−) a positive semidefinite symmetric bilinear form with 2-dimensional radical. A set of non-isotropic vectors Φ ⊆ V that is (α | α) 6= 0 for all α ∈ Φ is called elliptic root system with respect to (−|−) if

(a) V = spanR(Φ); (b) sα(β) ∈ Φ for all α, β ∈ Φ; (c) Φ is reduced; (d) Φ is crystallographic.

The dimension of V is said to be the rank of Φ. We call W := WΦ the elliptic Weyl group (of type Φ). An elliptic root system Φ is reducible if Φ=Φ1 ∪ Φ2 where Φ1, Φ2 are nonempty subsets of Φ such that both satisfy condition (b) and such that (α | β) = 0 for all α ∈ Φ1, β ∈ Φ2. Otherwise Φ is called irreducible. By (a) L(Φ) is a full lattice in V ; it is called the root lattice of Φ. Note that the name elliptic root system was introduced in [45] while ﬁrst Saito used the name extended aﬃne root system [44]. From now on we assume that Φ is a simply-laced elliptic root system. The radical R of the bilinear form (−|−) on V and of the root lattice L(Φ) are, respectively, as L(Φ) is a full lattice in V ,

R := R(−|−) :={x ∈ V | (x | y) = 0 for all y ∈ V } and L(Φ) ∩ R ={x ∈ L(Φ) | (x | y) = 0 for all y ∈ L(Φ)}.

Let U be a one dimensional subspace of R, and denote by pR and pU the canonical epimor- phisms V → V/R and V → V/U respectively. Let (−|−)R be the induced bilinear form on V/R, that is (pR(x) | pR(y))R = (x | y) for all x,y ∈ V . Deﬁne (−|−)U analogously. Lemma 4.2 ([44, (3.1) Lemma 1, (3.2) Assertion i)]).

(a) Φfin := pR(Φ) is a finite root system with respect to (−|−)R; (b) Φaff := pU (Φ) is an affine root system with respect to (−|−)U ; (c) L(Φ) ∩ U and L(Φ) ∩ R are full lattices in U and R, respectively.

Note that Lemma 4.2(c) implies (L(Φ) ∩ R) ⊗Z R =∼ R. Assume from now on that Φ is irreducible. Then, as U ⊆ R and as R is the radical of the form (−|−), the root systems Φaff and Φfin are irreducible. Our next aim is to describe Φ (see Proposition 4.4). Let {β0,...,βn} be a simple system of Φaff such that β1,...,βn span a finite root system. By [29, Theorem 5.6] there exist m1,...,mn ∈ N such that n β0 + miβi i X=1 22 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE spans the lattice L(Φaff ) ∩ R/U. Let αi be a preimage of βi in Φ for 0 ≤ i ≤ n and set n b = α0 + miαi. i X=1 Then b is in L(Φ) ∩ R and

spanZ(b + U)= L(Φaﬀ ) ∩ R/U. Assume that a is in U such that L(Φ) ∩ U = Za. Lemma 4.3. We have L(Φ) ∩ R = Za ⊕ Zb. Proof. By the choice of a and b, the right hand side is a direct sum. Further a, b ∈ L(Φ) ∩ R by the choice of a and b. Thus Za ⊕ Zb ⊆ L(Φ) ∩ R. Now let α ∈ L(Φ) ∩ R. Then, as U ⊆ R yields (L(Φ) ∩ R)+ U = (L(Φ) + U) ∩ (R + U), and as (L(Φ) + U)/U = L(Φaﬀ ), it follows that

pU (α) ∈ [(L(Φ) + U)/U] ∩ R/U = L(Φaﬀ ) ∩ R/U.

Therefore pU (α)= zb + U for some z ∈ Z. As α, b ∈ L(Φ) it follows α − zb ∈ L(Φ) ∩ U = Za, which yields the assertion. Set n n Vaff = Rαi and Vfin = Rαi. i i X=0 X=1 Then α0 is in Vaff ∩Φ, and (−|−) restricted to Vfin is positiv definite, which yields that Φ := Vfin ∩Φ is a root system in Vfin that is isomorphic to Φfin. Now we are ready to state and proof the following description of the elliptic root system. b Proposition 4.4. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system with respect to (−|−) of rank at least four. Then there are a, b ∈ R = R(−|−) such that L(Φ) ∩ R = Za ⊕ Zb and Φ= Φ ⊕ Za ⊕ Zb where Φ and Φfin are isomorphic root systems. b Proof. Let a, b ∈ R and U be chosen as above. Then L(Φ) ∩ R = Za ⊕ Zb by Lemma 4.3. b Next we show Φ= Φ ⊕ Za ⊕ Zb. Let α ∈ Φ. Then pU (α) ∈ Φaff , so n b pU (α)= ziβi + zpU (b) for some zi, z ∈ Z, i=1 n X n and α = i=1 ziαi +zb+ra for some r ∈ R. We get ra = α− i=1 ziαi −zb ∈ L(Φ)∩U = Za. Thus r ∈ Z. Further, as p (α)= n z p (α ) is in Φ =∼ Φ, we get P R i=1 i R i fin P n P ziαi ∈ Φ b i X=1 and one inclusion holds. For the other inclusion considerb for α ∈ Φ the set

KR(α) := {x ∈ R | α + x ∈ Φ}, that is studied in [44, 1.16]. Saito shows for every α ∈ Φ that

(a) KR(α) contains a full lattice of R (the L in [44] is Vﬁn here); EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 23

1 1 1 2 3 4 3 2 1 D E 4 2 7 1 1 2 1 2 3 2 1 2 4 6 5 4 3 2 1 E6 E8

2 3

Figure 3. (Extended) Dynkin diagrams. Each vertex is labeled by the corresponding coeﬃcient in the linear combination of the highest root in the simple roots.

(b) KR(ϕ(α)) = KR(α) for every ϕ ∈ Aut(Φ); b (c) ∪α∈ΦKR(α) generates the lattice L(Φ) ∩ R. Since Φ is simply-laced, Φ is simply-laced as well, and, as Φ is ﬁnite, the related Dynkin

diagram is a tree. Therefore WΦb is transitive on Φ. Therefore (b) and (c) imply that KR(β)= ∪α∈Φb KR(α) generates L(Φ)b∩ R for every β ∈ Φ. b Now we show that KR(β) is itself a lattice, thatb is a subgroup of L(Φ). Let x,y ∈ KR(β), ∼ and, as Φﬁn = Φ is irreducible and of rank at least 2, we may choose α1, α2 ∈ Φﬁn with

(α1 | α2) = −1. Then sα2+y(α1 + x) = α1 + x + α2 + y ∈ Φ which implies x + y ∈

KR(α1 + α2) =bKR(β). Further sα2 (−α1 − x) = −α1 − x − α2 = −(α1 + α2) − x ∈ Φ and therefore −x ∈ KR(β) as well. Thus KR(β) is a lattice. Now (c) and Lemma 4.3 yield KR(β)= L(Φ) ∩ R = Za ⊕ Zb, which yields the other inclusion.

Remark 4.5. If the ﬁnite root system Φ of Proposition 4.4 is of type A1, so the corresponding simply-laced elliptic root system is of rank three, then there exist exactly two simply-laced elliptic root systems as described in [1,b Proposition 4.2 and Table 4.5]. Therefore, Proposi- tion 4.4 does not hold in this case.

n Set α := −α0 + b. Then α = i=1 miαi is the highest root in Φ with respect to the (1) simple system {α1,...,αn}. The DynkinP diagram of Φaff is one of the diagrams Xn given in Table Affe 1 of [29] where Xn ise one of the simply-laced types An (n ≥b2), Dn (n ≥ 4) or En (n ∈ {6, 7, 8}). In the following we identify Φfin and Φˆ, that is we think of Φfin as embedded into Φ.

In contrast to finite root systems, the Weyl group W = WΦ of an elliptic root system does not act anywhere properly on the ambient vector space. Hence there is no analogous of a Weyl chamber. Nevertheless Saito introduced the notion of a basis for Φ and classified the irreducible elliptic root systems in terms of so called elliptic Dynkin diagrams in [44]. ∼ Let Γaff = {α0,...,αn} be the set of simple roots of Φ ∩ Vaff = Φaff as chosen before Lemma 4.3.

Remark 4.6. By [44, Chapter 3] the set Γaﬀ is unique up to isomorphism of Φ. 24 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Notice that Proposition 4.4 also implies the splitting n Vaff ∩L(Φ) = Zαi ⊕ Zb = L(Φfin) ⊕ Zb, i ! M=1 which is isomorphic to L(Φaff ). In the following we identify if necessary Vx ∩ Φ with Φx and Vx ∩ L(Φ) with L(Φx) for x ∈ {fin, aff}. In the remainder of the paper we are interested in special irreducible elliptic root systems, the tubular ones:

Definition 4.7. An irreducible elliptic root system Φ is called tubular if Φfin is of type D4, E6, E7 or E8, respectively. The corresponding elliptic Weyl group W = WΦ is called tubular elliptic Weyl group. The term tubular will be justified in Section 4.6.

Remark 4.8. For the types D4, E6, E7 and E8, we list in Figure 3 the non-negative integers n mi such that α = −α0 + b = i=1 miαi in the corresponding (extended) Dynkin diagrams next to the vertices representing αi (for 1 ≤ i ≤ n). P Now we definee a root basis for an elliptic root system. If the root system is tubular, then this root basis is a basis of the underlying vector space V . Notice that our definition agrees with that one in [44, Section 8] by Proposition 4.4. Definition 4.9. With the notation as in Remark 4.8. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced ∗ elliptic root system. For α ∈ Γaff put α = α + a. Define ∗ mmax := max{mi | 1 ≤ i ≤ n} and Γmax = {αi | mi = mmax}.

The set Γ := Γ(Φ) := Γaﬀ ∪ Γmax is called elliptic root basis for Φ. Note that the name elliptic root basis was ﬁrst used in [46]. Proposition 4.10 ([44, Section 9]). Let Γ = Γ(Φ) be an elliptic root basis of an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system Φ. Then the following holds.

(a) W = WΓ; (b) Φ= WΓ(Γ). 4.2. The elliptic Dynkin diagram. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system with elliptic root basis Γ. The elliptic Dynkin diagram with respect to Γ is deﬁned as the undirected graph with vertex set in bijection with Γ. Let α, β ∈ Γ be diﬀerent roots. If (α | β) = 0 there is no edge between the vertices corresponding to α and β. If (α | β) = ±1 there is a single edge between the corresponding vertices. This edge is dotted if (α | β) = 1. If (α | β)= ±2 there is a double edge between the corresponding vertices. This edge is again dotted if (α | β) = 2. Note that (α | β) ∈ {0, ±1, ±2} for all α, β ∈ Γ if Φ is simply-laced. Proposition 4.11 ([44, (9.6) Theorem]). Let (Φ, Γ) be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system with basis Γ. The elliptic Dynkin diagram for (Φ, Γ) is uniquely determined by the isomorphism class of Φ. Conversely, the elliptic Dynkin diagram for Φ uniquely determines the isomorphism class of (Φ, Γ). If X is the elliptic Dynkin diagram of the irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system (Φ, Γ), then we say also that (Φ, Γ) or simply Φ is of type X. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 25

4.3. Generation of L(Φ). Here we study the bases of the lattice L(Φ) and show that in a simply-laced elliptic root system of rank n a set of n roots generates the root lattice if and only if the related reflections are generating the related extended Weyl group (see Lemma 4.13). We need some further notation. Let Φ be an elliptic root system. We call Φ′ ⊆ Φ a subsystem if Φ′ is itself an elliptic root system. If Φ is simply-laced, then so is Φ′. Lemma 4.12. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system of rank at least four and Φ′ ⊆ Φ a subsystem of the same rank as Φ. Then: (a) Φ′ = {α ∈ L(Φ′) | (α, α) = 2}; (b) If in addition, L(Φ) = L(Φ′), then Φ=Φ′. Proof. One inclusion is clear since Φ′ is simply-laced. Therefore let α ∈ L(Φ′) with (α, α) = 2. By Proposition 4.4 there exist a′, b′ ∈ R such that ′ ′ ′ ′ Φ =Φfin ⊕ Za ⊕ Zb . In particular, we have ′ ′ ′ ′ L(Φ )= L(Φfin) ⊕ Za ⊕ Zb . ′ ′ ′ Hence α = α + ka + ℓb with α ∈ L(Φfin). Therefore we have 2 = (α, α) = (α, α). ′ By [7, Lemma 5.7] or [25, Theorem 3.12] the condition (α, α) = 2 is equivalent to α ∈ Φfin. Hence α ∈ Φ′, which proves (a). For part (b) note that (a) (a) Φ′ = {α ∈ L(Φ′) | (α, α) = 2} = {α ∈ L(Φ) | (α, α) = 2} = Φ.

Lemma 4.13. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system of rank n ≥ 4, Φ =

Φﬁn ⊕Za ⊕ Zb and β1,...,βn ∈ Φ. Then W = hsβ1 ,...,sβn i if and only if L({β1,...,βn})= L(Φ).

Proof. Let W = hsβ1 ,...,sβn i. Since the irreducible simply laced elliptic root systems have elliptic Dynkin diagrams that contain spanning trees with simple edges (see [44, Table 1]), Lemma 3.13 stays valid for these systems. The latter implies L({β1,...,βn})= L(Φ). ′ Now assume that L({β1,...,βn}) = L(Φ). Put Q := {β1,...,βn} and Φ := WQ(Q). ′ ′ Then L(Φ) = L(Q) ⊆ L(Φ ) ⊆ L(Φ) which shows L(Φ ) = L(Φ). Thus V = spanR(L(Φ)) = ′ ′ ′ ′ spanR(L(Φ )) = spanR(Φ ) ⊆ V . Therefore V = spanR(Φ ) and Φ is a root subsystem of Φ. ′ Hence Lemma 4.12 (b) yields Φ =Φ. It remains to show that WQ = WΦ′ , as this then yields ′ ′ WQ = WΦ′ = WΦ = W . As Q ⊆ Φ we have WQ ⊆ WΦ′ . Let α ∈ Φ = WQ(Q), that is α = w(β) for some w ∈ WQ and β ∈ Q. Then −1 sα = sw(β) = wsβw ∈ WQ, so WΦ′ ⊆ WQ as well. 4.4. Elliptic Weyl group. The aim of this section is to determine the structure of an elliptic Weyl group for an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system Φ. Recall that V = Vfin ⊕Ra⊕ Rb and that every α in Φ splits uniquely into α = αf + αR where αf ∈ Φfin and αR ∈ L(Φ) ∩ R = Za ⊕ Zb. As in [44, Section (1.14)] we define a semi-group structure ◦ on V ⊗ (V/R) by

ϕ1 ◦ ϕ2 := ϕ1 + ϕ2 − (ϕ1 | ϕ2), 26 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

1 1 2 2 j j where (ϕ1 | ϕ2) := i1,i2 fi1 ⊗ (gi1 | fi2 )gi2 for ϕj = ij fij ⊗ gij , for j = 1, 2. The map P P E : V ⊗ (V/R) → End(V ), fi ⊗ gi 7→ v 7→ v − (gi | v)fi i i ! X X is called Eichler-Siegel map for V with respect to (−|−). We collect some properties of this map. Lemma 4.14 ([44, Sections (1.14) and (1.15)]). (a) E is injective; (b) E is a homomorphism of semi-groups that is E(ϕ ◦ ψ)= E(ϕ)E(ψ); (c) the subspace R ⊗ (V/R) is closed under ◦ and the semi-group structure coincides with the additive structure of the vector space on this subspace; (d) for non-isotropic α ∈ V , it is sα = E(α ⊗ α); (e) the inverse of E on W is well-deﬁned: E−1 : W → V ⊗ (V/R); −1 (f) E (W ) ⊆ L(Φ) ⊗Z (L(Φ)/(L(Φ) ∩ R)); −1 (g) TR := E (W ) ∩ (R ⊗ (V/R)) is a lattice in R ⊗ (V/R); (h) let r ∈ R and v ∈ V non-isotropic. Then

E((v + ra) ⊗ v)= E(v ⊗ v)E(ra ⊗ v)= svE(ra ⊗ v).

Using the splitting V = Vﬁn ⊕R we can write down the reﬂection sα explicitly.

Lemma 4.15. Let α be a root in Φ and α = αf + αR where αf is in Vﬁn and αR in R. Then sα(v)= v − (αf | v)αf − (αf | v)αR for all v ∈ V .

Lemma 4.16. Let αf ∈ Φﬁn and r ∈ R. Then the following holds.

(a) sαf sαf +r = E(r ⊗ αf ); −1 (b) wE(r ⊗ αf )w = E(r ⊗ w(αf )) for all w ∈ W . Proof. Assertion (a) follows from Lemma 4.14 (c) and (f). Now we can deduce part (b) from part (a): We have

(a) −1 (a) −1 E(r ⊗ w(αf )) = sw(αf )sw(αf )+r = sw(αf )sw(αf +r) = wsαf sαf +rw = wE(r ⊗ αf )w . Lemma 4.17. Let Φ be an irreducible simply-laced elliptic root system. Then

TR = (L(Φ) ∩ R) ⊗Z L(Φﬁn). −1 Proof. Let α ∈ Φ. Since sαsα∗ is an element of W , we can calculate its image under E . It is −1 −1 −1 E (sαsα∗ )= E (sα) ◦ E (sα∗ ) = (α ⊗ α) ◦ (α∗ ⊗ α) = α ⊗ α + α∗ ⊗ α − α ⊗ (α∗ | α)α = (α + α∗) ⊗ α + (−2)α ⊗ α = (α + α∗ − 2α) ⊗ α = a ⊗ α. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 27

Similar arguments show that b ⊗ α is in the image of E−1 for each α ∈ Φ. In particular, if we take a set of simple roots {α1,...,αn} of Φﬁn we see that −1 {x ⊗ αi | x ∈ {a, b}, 1 ≤ i ≤ n}⊆ E (W ).

Since {a, b} is a basis of L(Φ) ∩ R and {α1,...,αn} is a basis of L(Φﬁn), we obtain −1 (L(Φ) ∩ R) ⊗ L(Φﬁn) ⊆ E (W ). By the properties of the Eichler-Siegel map the assertion follows.

By [44, Section 1.15] and Lemma 4.17, we obtain the following description of W . Theorem 4.18. Let Φ be a simply-laced elliptic root system. Then ∼ W = WΦfin ⋉ E(TR) = WΦfin ⋉ ((L(Φ) ∩ R) ⊗Z L(Φfin))

is the split extension of the ﬁnite Coxeter group WΦﬁn of rank n by a free abelian group of rank

2(n − 1) and the action of WΦfin on E(TR) is given by Lemma 4.16 (b). 4.5. Coxeter transformation. Definition 4.19. Let Φ be a tubular elliptic root system. A Coxeter transformation c ∈ W = WΦ with respect to the elliptic root basis Γ=Γ(Φ)=Γaff ∪ Γmax∗ is defined as the element

c := c(Γ) := sα · sαsα∗ ∗ α α∈Γ\(ΓYmax∪Γmax) ∈YΓmax in W , where the ﬁrst product is taken in arbitrary order.

Let L := L(Φ). By choosing Γ the elements a, b ∈ R such that L({a, b}) = L ∩ R are fixed, see above. Therefore, the definition of the Coxeter transformations in W is based on the same choice of a and b, and we get different Coxeter transformations in W if we change the order of the reflections in the product sα. ∗ α∈Γ\(ΓYmax∪Γmax) Notice that all the Coxeter transformations are conjugated in W (see Proposition 4.20(a)). Let O(L) := O(L(Φ)) := {ϕ ∈ O(V ) | ϕ(L(Φ)) = L(Φ)}. As W leaves the bilinear form (−|−) invariant it is a subgroup of O(L). Proposition 4.20. Let c ∈ W be a Coxeter transformation. Then the following holds. (a) All the Coxeter transformations are conjugated in W ; (b) in O(L) the sign change a 7→ −a maps the conjugacy class of c in W onto the conjugacy class of c−1 in W ; (c) for every choice of Γ, that is of a, b ∈ R, the elements c(Γ) are conjugated in O(L); (d) a Coxeter transformation is semi-simple of finite order ℓmax + 1 where ℓmax is the maximal length of a component of the diagram Γaff \{α ∈ Γaff | mα = mmax}. Proof. Except for part (c) this is precisely [44, Section 9, Lemma A]. Regarding part (c), if a1, a2, b1, b2 ∈ R \ {0} such that L({ak, bk}) = L ∩ R for k = 1, 2, then the map ϕ that is the identity on Γfin := {α1,...,αn} and that sends a1 and b1 onto a2 and b2, respectively, is an isometry of (V, (−, −)) mapping the elliptic basis Γ1 related to a1 and b1 onto the elliptic basis Γ2 related to a2 and b2. Therefore ϕ is in O(L) and maps a Coxeter transformation c(Γ1) onto a Coxeter transformation c(Γ2) in W . Now (c) follows with (a). 28 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

(1,1) (1,1) D4 E7

(1,1) (1,1) E6 E8

Figure 4. Elliptic Dynkin diagrams for the tubular elliptic root systems

Notice that Proposition 4.20(a) follows also from [9, Lemma 4.1].

4.6. Elliptic root systems for coh(X). In this section we describe the root quadruple s (K0(X),χ , ∆re(X), c) attached to the category of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line X of tubular type. By deﬁnition a weighted projective line X is tubular if the so-called Euler characterstic is zero (see [2, Section 6, 10.5] ). This is exactly the case if the radical of the symmetrized Euler form attached to the category coh(X) has rank two (see [34, Proposition 18.8]). Thus [2, Section 6, Proposition 10.12] yields that X is a projective line with weight sequence (2, 2, 2, 2), (3, 3, 3), (2, 2, 4) or (2, 3, 6). Therefore for X tubular the set ∆re(X) can be identiﬁed with the extended root system described in Section 2.5, where the weight sequences are precisley the previous four sequences. s Corollary 4.21. Let X be a weighted projective line of tubular type, and let (K0(X),χ , ∆re(X), c) be the associated extended root system. Then the following holds.

(a) ∆re(X) is a tubular elliptic root system in K0(X) ⊗Z R with respect to the bilinear form χs; (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (b) the type of ∆re(X) is D4 , E6 , E7 or E8 , respectively, where these diagrams are as in Figure 4;

(c) c is a Coxeter transformation in the corresponding tubular elliptic Weyl group W∆re(X). Proof. Consider the following weight sequences that characterize the tubular types p ∈ {(2, 2, 2, 2), (3, 3, 3), (2, 2, 4), (2, 3, 6)} and a normalized λ. By Propositions 2.21 and 4.11 the root system corresponding to coh(X) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) with X of tubular type is of type D4 , E6 , E7 or E8 , respectivley. (1,1) Remark 4.22. Let Φ := ∆re(X) be a tubular elliptic root system of type Xn . Hence Φfin is a finite root system of type Xn where the diagram Xn is as given in Figure 5. By Proposition 4.11 an elliptic root basis Γ for Φ can explicitely be defined. As before we choose {α1,...,αn} as a basis of Φfin where we number the simple roots as given in Figure 5. Recall that α0 = −α + b. Then (1,1) ∗ Γ(D4 ) := {α0, α1,...,α4, α2} e EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 29

3 1 3 4 5 6 7 E 1 2 7 D 4 4 2 1 3 4 5 6 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 E6 E8

2 2

Figure 5. Dynkin diagrams: Numbering

(1,1) is an elliptic root basis for D4 and (1,1) ∗ Γ(En ) := {α0, α1,...,αn, α4} (1,1) is an elliptic root basis for En (for n = 6, 7, 8). The elliptic Dynkin diagrams with respect to these elliptic root bases are precisely those given in Figure 4. Finally we present the example of a non-generating factorization of a Coxeter transformation. (1,1) Example 4.23. Consider a tubular elliptic root system of type E6 and let {α1,...,α6} be a simple system for Φﬁn of type E6. The elliptic root basis in Remark 4.22 yields a factorization of the Coxeter transformation c which is generating. Consider the roots

β1 = α1 − b, β2 = α2 + 2b, β3 = α3 + 2b, β4 = α4 − 3b,

β5 = α5 + 2b, β6 = α6 − b, β7 = α − a + b, β8 = α4 + b, then c = sβ1 sβ2 sβ3 sβ5 sβ6 sβ7 sβ4 sβ8 . An easy calculation yields that this is not a generating factorization. e Remark 4.24. Although in the tubular cases not each reduced factorization of the Coxeter transformation is generating, this a priori does not imply that [id, c]gen ( [id, c]. That is, for each element w with w ≤ c there might be at least one generating factorization for c such that w is a preﬁx of this factorization. The latter is always true in the wild and domestic cases as we show in [9].

Remark 4.25. Barot and Geiss [5] studied the cluster algebras given by a matrix whose associated quiver is given by one of the quivers in Figure 6 (note that these quivers are mutation ﬁnite). They categoriﬁed the corresponding cluster algebras and described the (real) Schur roots for X of tubular type.

5. Hurwitz transitivity in tubular elliptic Weyl groups

In this section we prove Theorem 1.3. Therefore, we assume that W = WΦ is a tubular (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) elliptic Weyl group, that is Φ is of type Xn where Xn ∈ D4 , E6 , E7 or E8 (see Corollary 4.21). According to Remark 4.22 we ﬁx the Coxeter transformation

c = s1s3s4s0s2s2∗ (1,1) in the case Φ= D4 and c = s1 · · · s4 · · · sns0s4s4∗

b 30 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

∗ 1 1∗

1 (1, 3) (1, 2) (1, 1) 1 (3, 1) (3, 2) (3, 3) (1,1) (1, 1) (4, 1) (1,1) D4 E7 (2, 1) (2, 1) (3, 1)

∗ 1 1

1 1 E(1,1) E(1,1) 6 (1, 2) (1, 1) (3, 1) (3, 2) 8 (1, 2) (1, 1) (3, 1) (3, 2) (3, 3) (3, 4) (3, 5) (2, 1) (2, 1)

(2, 2)

Figure 6. Elliptic Dynkin quivers of tubular type

(1,1) ∗ ∗ in the cases Φ= En (n = 6, 7, 8), where si = sαi for i ≥ 0 and sj = sαj . Let (t1,...,tn+2) ∈ gen RedT(c) be a factorization of c such that W = ht1,...,tn+2i, and for 1 ≤ i ≤ n + 2 let + ki,ℓi ∈ Z and βi ∈ Φfin := spanZ≥0 (α1,...,αn) ∩ Φfin such that ti = sβi+kia+ℓib. The action of W on V := pU (V ) = V/U induces the canonical group homomorphism W → Aut(V ). Let W be the image of this map. Furthermore, we put ∼ Φ:=Φaff = pU (Φ) = Φfin +Zb.

We denote by v and by w the images of v in V and w in W , respectivley. The reflection sα acts as sα on V for α ∈ Φ. Therefore, αi is a representant of the coset αi for 0 ≤ i ≤ n, and si is a representant of si for 0 ≤ i ≤ n, and st∗ = st. Thus W = hsi, st∗ | 0 ≤ i ≤ ni is isomorphic to the affine Coxeter group Waff := hs0,s1,...,sni with simple system Saff := {s0,s1,...,sn} and root system Φaff . In particular our notation implies ti = sβi+lib for 1 ≤ i ≤ n + 2. It follows that

c = t1 · · · tn+2 = s1 · · · st · · · sns0 (1,1) (1,1) where t := 2 for Φ= D4 and t := 4 for Φ= En . Thus c is a standard parabolic Coxeter element in (W , S). Therefore b

ℓS(c)= n = ℓT (c)

where T the set of reﬂections in W , and ℓS (and ℓT are the canonical length functions attached to the generating sets S and T of W , respectively (see [6, Lemma 2.1]). By [51, Lemma 2.3] there exists a braid τ1 ∈Bn+2 such that

τ1(t1,..., tn+2) = (r1,..., rn, rn+1, rn+1), where ri ∈ T for 1 ≤ i ≤ n+1. Note that c = r1 · · · rn is a reduced reﬂection factorization of a standard parabolic Coxeter element in W . By [6, Theorem 1.3] there exists a braid τ2 ∈Bn+2 such that

τ2(r1,..., rn, rn+1, rn+1) = (s1,..., st,...,sn,s0, rn+1, rn+1).

b EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 31

+ Let β ∈ Φ and k ∈ Z such that rn+1 = sβ+kb, and recall that s0 = sα0 = s−αe+b, where n ′ α = i=1 miαi is the highest root in Φﬁn ⊆ Φ. In particular, there are k1,...,kn,ℓ,ℓ , ℓ ∈ Z such that P e ′ (1) τ2τ1(t1,...,tn+2) = (sα1+k1a,..., s\αt+kta,...,sαn+kna,s−αe+b+ℓa,sβ+ℓa+kb,sβ+ℓ a+kb). Our next goal is to investigate the root β. n + Lemma 5.1. Let λj,mj ∈ Z≥0 such that β = i=1 λiαi ∈ Φﬁn. Then (a) (λt, k) ∈ {(1, 0), (mt − 1, −1)} and P (b) |ℓ − ℓ′| = 1.

Proof. The reﬂections t1,...,tn+2 generate W by assumption and the Hurwitz action pre- serves this property. In particular, the tuple obtained by applying the braid τ2τ1 to the tuple (t1,...,tn+2) generates W . Therefore equation (1) and Lemma 4.13 yield another generating set of the lattice L(Φ) \ ′ Z : = spanZ(α1 + k1a, . . . , αt + kta, . . . , αn + kna, −α + b + ℓa, β + ℓa + kb, β + ℓ a + kb) \ ′ = spanZ(α1 + k1a, . . . , αt + kta, . . . , αn + kna, −α + b + ℓa, β + ℓa + kb, (ℓ − ℓ )a). e In particular, the rank of Z is n + 2, and since a ∈ Z we have that ℓ − ℓ′ ∈ Z∗ = {±1}, which shows (b). Therefore e

Z = spanZ(α1,..., αt,...,αn, −α + b, β + kb, a). ′ Let us show part (a). First assume that λt = 0. Since αt ∈ Z there exist µ1,...,µn,µ,µ ∈ Z with b e n ′ αt = µiαi + µ(−α + b)+ µ (β + kb). i=1X, i6=t ′ This shows 1 = −mtµ + λtµ = −mtµ and in particulare mt ∈ {±1}. By [14] the following holds: Φﬁn D4 E6 E7 E8 mt 2 3 4 6 which yields a contradiction. Thus we can assume that λt > 0. The fact that αt ∈ Z implies n ′ αt = µiαi + µ(−α + b)+ µ (β + kb), i , i t =1X6= and therefore e ′ ′ 0= µ + µ k and 1= −mtµ + λtµ . So ′ ′ ′ 1= mtµ k + λtµ = µ (mtk + λt). ′ Hence µ ,mtk + λt ∈ {±1}. As 1 ≤ λt ≤ mt (see [14]), we get (k, λt) = (0, 1) if mtk + λt = 1 and (k, λt) = (−1,mt − 1) if mtk + λt = −1, which is the assertion.

Lemma 5.2. The reﬂection sβ is conjugate to st under the group H := hsαe,s1,..., st,...,sni.

b 32 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

n Proof. By Lemma 5.1 we have β = i=1 λiαi where λt ∈ {1,mt − 1}. Assume λt > 1. Then λt = mt −1 and Φf is of type En for some n ∈ {6, 7, 8}. According to P [14, Plates V- VI] the longest root α is perpendicular to α1,...,αn beside one αj. Moreover there all the roots β are listed that have the property λt = mt − 1. It is easily checked that for n all these roots mj = 1. Therefore ite follows that sαe(β)= i=1 µiαi with µi ∈ Z and µt = 1. Thus we may assume that λt = 1, then [14] yields that λj ∈ {0, 1} for all 1 ≤ j ≤ n. In P this case it is easy to see that sβ is conjugated to st under H.

Remark 5.3. (a) We exhibit this for an example: For the root β = α1 + α3 + α4 + α5 + α6 in a root system of type E7, we have w(β)= αt, where w := s3s1s5s6 ∈ H. (b) The last paragraph of the proof of the previous lemma is also a direct consequence of [9, Section 5].

By Lemma 5.1 (a) and Lemma 3.15 we obtain that there exists a braid τ3 ∈Bn+2 such that

′ τ3(sα1+k1a,..., s\αt+kta,...,sαn+kna,s−αe+b+ℓa,sβ+ℓa+kb,sβ+ℓ a+kb)=

(s ,..., s\ ,...,s ,s ,s ′ ,s ′′ ), α1+k1a αt+kta αn+kna −αe+b+ℓa αt+ℓ a+kb αt+ℓ a+kb where ℓ′, ℓ′′, k ∈ Z. By Lemma 5.1 (a) we have |ℓ′ − ℓ′′| = 1. Part (b) of the same lemma implies that we have • either k = 0, • or k = −1 and Φﬁn is of type D4 (as in this case mt = 2). In the next lemma we state the existence of a Hurwitz move such that the last two reﬂections of the resulting factorization do not depend on b.

Lemma 5.4. There exists a braid τ4 ∈Bn+2 such that

τ (s ,..., s\ ,...,s ,s ,s ′ ,s ′′ )= 4 α1+k1a αt+kta αn+kna −αe+b+ℓa αt+ℓ a+kb αt+ℓ a+kb

(s ,..., s\ ,...,s ,s ,s e′ ,s e′′ ), α1+k1a αt+kta αn+kna −αe+b+ℓa αt+ℓ a αt+ℓ a with ℓ′, ℓ′′ ∈ Z and |ℓ′ − ℓ′′| = 1.

Proof. As we have seen, the assertion holds for Φﬁn of type En (n = 6, 7, 8). So assume that e e (1,1) e e Φ is of type D4 . Then

\ ′ ′′ (sα1+k1a,..., sαt+kta,...,sαn+kna,s−αe+b+ℓa,sα2+ℓ a+kb,sα2+ℓ a+kb)=

(sα1+k1a,sα3+k3a,sα4+k4a,s−αe+b+ℓa,sα2+ℓ′a−b,sα2+ℓ′′a−b).

Since s4s3s1s−αe+b(α2 − b) = −α2, Lemma 3.15 yields the existence of a braid τ4 ∈ B6 such that

τ4(sα1+k1a,sα3+k3a,sα4+k4a,s−αe+b+ℓa,sα2+ℓ′a−b,sα2+ℓ′′a−b)= (s ,s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e ), α1+k1a α3+k3a α4+k4a −αe+b+ℓa α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a and Lemma 5.1 yields that |ℓ′ − ℓ′′| = 1. We want to show that after suitable Hurwitz moves, we can assume that k =0= ℓ for e e i 1 ≤ i ≤ n, i 6= t. To achieve this, we need some preparation. By Lemma 4.17 we have ∼ −1 spanZ(a, b) ⊗Z L(Φfin) = E (W ) ∩ (R ⊗R V/R) EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 33 and by Theorem 4.18 we have ∼ W = WΦfin ⋉ (spanZ(a, b) ⊗Z L(Φfin)), where as before Φfin is a finite crystallographic root system, spanZ(a, b) = R ∩ L(Φ) and E is the Eichler-Siegel map introduced in Section 4.4. Note that the inverse of E on W is well defined by Lemma 4.14 (e). By Lemma 4.16 we have −1 (2) wE(a ⊗ x1 + b ⊗ x2)w = E(a ⊗ w(x1)+ b ⊗ w(x2)), where w ∈ W, x,y ∈ V/R. For the group operation in WΦfin ⋉ (spanZ(a, b) ⊗Z L(Φfin)) we therefore obtain

w1E(a ⊗ x1 + b ⊗ x2) · w2E(a ⊗ y1 + b ⊗ y2)

−1 = (w1w2)(w2 E(a ⊗ x1 + b ⊗ x2)w2E(a ⊗ y1 + b ⊗ y2)

(2) −1 −1 = (w1w2)E(a ⊗ w2 (x1)+ b ⊗ w2 (x2))E(a ⊗ y1 + b ⊗ y2)

−1 −1 = (w1w2)E(a ⊗ (w2 (x1)+ y1)+ b ⊗ (w2 (x2)+ y2), where we used part (h) of Lemma 4.14 to obtain the last equality. In the following we will use Kluitmann’s notation [30, Section 3.1], that is, we write the element (w, a ⊗ x1 + b ⊗ x2) ∈ w W ⋉(span (a, b)⊗ L(Φ )) in the vector notation x . By what we have observed above, Φﬁn Z Z ﬁn  1 x2 the group operation is then given by  

w1 w2 w1w2 −1 x1 · y1 = w2 (x1)+ y1 .      −1  x2 y2 w2 (x2)+ y2      

Lemma 5.5. Up to Hurwitz action it holds k1 = . . . = kt−1 = kt+1 = . . . = kn = ℓ = 0. (1,1) Proof. For Φ= D4 we get

s1s3s4s−αe s1 s3 s4 s−αe s2 s2 c = −α = −k α · −k α · −k α · ℓα · −ℓ′α · −ℓ′′α  2   1 1  3 3  4 4    2  2 α 0 0 0 α 0 0            e   e  s1s3s4s−αe e e = −k α − k α − k α + ℓα + (ℓ′ − ℓe′′)α .  1 1 3 3 4 4 2 α  e e  Since α = α1 + 2α2 + α3 + α4 it holds e ′ ′′ e −1 = 2ℓ + ℓ − ℓ and ℓ = k1 = k3 = k4. e As already discussed before, the only possible cases are ℓ′ − ℓ′′ = ±1. ′ ′′ e e ′ ′′ If ℓ − ℓ = −1 it follows directly 0= ℓ = k1 = k3 = k4. Therefore let ℓ − ℓ = 1. We get −1= ℓ = k1 = k3 = k4 and hence e e e e (s ,s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e )e e α1+k1a α3+k3a α4+k4a −αe+b+ℓa α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a =(s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e ,s e ). α1−a α3−a α4−a −α+b−a α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a 34 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Since s1s3s4s−αe is in the center of the Weyl group WD4 , application of the braid

τ := (σ4σ5)(σ3σ4)(σ2σ3)(σ1σ2)(σ2σ3σ4σ5)(σ1σ2σ3σ4) gives

τ(s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e ,s e ) α1−a α3−a α4−a −α+b−a α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a =(σ σ )(σ σ )(σ σ )(σ σ )(s e ,s e ,s ,s ,s ,s e ) 4 5 3 4 2 3 1 2 α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a α1 α3 α4 −α+b =(s ,s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e ). 1 3 4 0 α2+ℓ′a−b α2+ℓ′′a−b In this situation the assumptions of Lemma 5.4 are still satisﬁed thus it yields the factorization (s ,s ,s ,s ,s e ,s e ), that is, up to Hurwitz action it holds k = . . . = k = k = 1 3 4 0 α2+ℓ′a α2+ℓ′′a 1 t−1 t+1 . . . = kn = ℓ = 0. (1,1) Let Φ= E6 and we get analogously

s1s2s3s5s6s−αe c = −α4  α    s1 s2 s3 s5 s6 s−αe s4 s4 = −k α e · −k α · −k α · −k α · −k α · ℓα · −ℓ′α · −ℓ′′α  1 1  2 2  3 3  5 5  6 6    4  4 0 0 0 0 0 α 0 0              e   e  s1s2s3s5s6s−αe e = −k α − k α − (k + k )α − k α − (k + k )α − (k −eℓ)α + (ℓ′ − ℓ′′)α .  1 1 2 2 1 3 3 5 5 5 6 6 2 4 α  e e  Since α = α1 + 2α2 + 2α3 + 3α4 + 2α5 + α6 it holds e 1 2 e 2 1 k = ℓ, k = − ℓ, k = −ℓ, k = − ℓ, k = ℓ, ℓ′ − ℓ′′ = −1+ ℓ. e 1 3 2 3 3 5 3 6 3 ′ ′′ 2 Since ℓ − ℓ = ±1 it follows that ℓ ∈ {0, 2}. If ℓ = 2 we get k1 = e3 ∈ Ze, a contradiction. Thus ℓ = 0 and hence 0= ℓ = k1 = k2 = k3 = k5 = k6. e e (1,1) (1,1) The proofs of the other cases E7 and E8 are similar and are therefore omitted.

Proof of Theorem 1.3. By what we have shown so far in this section, there exists a braid σ ∈Bn+2 such that

σ(t ,...,tn ) = (s ,..., st,...,sn,s ,s e′ ,s e′′ ). 1 +2 1 0 αt+ℓ a αt+ℓ a

Therefore (s e′ ,s e′′ ) is a reduced factorization of sαt sαt+a. In particular, we have αt+ℓ a αt+ℓ a b id id ′ ′′ −αt = stst∗ = s e′ s e′′ = (ℓ − ℓ )αt   αt+ℓ a αt+ℓ a   0 0    e e  Hence we obtain ℓ′ − ℓ′′ = −1. A direct calculation yields n ∗ σ (st,st ) = (sαt+na,sα +(n+1)a) e e 1 t for all n ∈ Z, which shows that (s e′ ,s e′′ ) and (st,st∗ ) lie in the same Hurwitz orbit. αt+ℓ a αt+ℓ a Altogether we have shown that (t1,...,tn+2) and (s1,..., st,...,sn,s0,st,st∗ ) lie in the same Hurwitz orbit. By Proposition 4.20 all Coxeter transformations are conjugated in W , b EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 35 thus the Hurwitz transitivity on the set of reduced factorizations which generate the group is valid for all Coxeter transformations. 36 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

References

[1] Bruce N. Allison, Saeid Azam, Stephen Berman, Yun Gao, and Arturo Pianzola, Extended affine Lie algebras and their root systems, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 126 (1997), no. 603, x+122. [2] Lidia Angeleri Hügel, Dieter Happel, and Henning Krause, Basic results of classical tilting theory, Hand- book of tilting theory, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 332, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2007, pp. 9–13. [3] Maurice Auslander, On the dimension of modules and algebras. III. Global dimension, Nagoya Math. J. 9 (1955), 67–77. [4] Maurice Auslander, Idun Reiten, and Sverre O. Smalø, Representation theory of Artin algebras, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 36, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997, Corrected reprint of the 1995 original. [5] Michael Barot and Christof Geiss, Tubular cluster algebras I: categorification, Math. Z. 271 (2012), no. 3-4, 1091–1115. [6] Barbara Baumeister, Matthew Dyer, Christian Stump, and Patrick Wegener, A note on the transitive Hurwitz action on decompositions of parabolic Coxeter elements, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 1 (2014), 149–154. [7] Barbara Baumeister, Thomas Gobet, Kieran Roberts, and Patrick Wegener, On the Hurwitz action in finite Coxeter groups, J. Group Theory 20 (2017), no. 1, 103–131. [8] Barbara Baumeister and Patrick Wegener, A note on Weyl groups and root lattices, Arch. Math. (Basel) 111 (2018), no. 5, 469–477. [9] Barbara Baumeister, Patrick Wegener, and Sophiane Yahiatene, Extended Weyl groups, Hurwitz transitivity and weighted projective lines II: The wild case, arxiv. [10] , Hurwitz transitivity and extended Weyl groups of wild or tame type, to appear on arXiv (2021). [11] David Bessis, The dual braid monoid, Ann. Sci. École Norm. Sup. (4) 36 (2003), no. 5, 647–683. [12] A. I. Bondal, Representations of associative algebras and coherent sheaves, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 53 (1989), no. 1, 25–44. [13] Klaus Bongartz, Algebras and quadratic forms, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 28 (1983), no. 3, 461–469. [14] Nicolas Bourbaki, Lie groups and Lie algebras. Chapters 4–6, Elements of Mathematics (Berlin), Springer- Verlag, Berlin, 2002, Translated from the 1968 French original by Andrew Pressley. [15] Kristian Brüning, Thick subcategories of the derived category of a hereditary algebra, Homology Homotopy Appl. 9 (2007), no. 2, 165–176. [16] R. W. Carter, Conjugacy classes in the Weyl group, Compositio Math. 25 (1972), 1–59. [17] Xiao-Wu Chen and Henning Krause, Introduction to coherent sheaves on weighted projective lines, arXiv e-prints (2009), arXiv:0911.4473. [18] William Crawley-Boevey, Exceptional sequences of representations of quivers, Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Representations of Algebras (Ottawa, ON, 1992), Carleton-Ottawa Math. Lecture Note Ser., vol. 14, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, ON, 1992, p. 7. [19] N.D. Dichev, Thick subcategories for quiver representations, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Paderborn, Ger- many, 2009. [20] J. Matthew Douglass, Götz Pfeiffer, and Gerhard Röhrle, On reflection subgroups of finite Coxeter groups, Comm. Algebra 41 (2013), no. 7, 2574–2592. [21] The GAP Group, GAP – Groups, Algorithms, and Programming, Version 4.11.0, 2020. [22] Werner Geigle and Helmut Lenzing, A class of weighted projective curves arising in representation theory of finite-dimensional algebras, Singularities, representation of algebras, and vector bundles (Lambrecht, 1985), Lecture Notes in Math., vol. 1273, Springer, Berlin, 1987, pp. 265–297. [23] E. L. Green, Ø . Solberg, and D. Zacharia, Minimal projective resolutions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), no. 7, 2915–2939. [24] Dieter Happel, A characterization of hereditary categories with tilting object, Invent. Math. 144 (2001), no. 2, 381–398. [25] Andrew Hubery and Henning Krause, A categorification of non-crossing partitions, J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 18 (2016), no. 10, 2273–2313. [26] Kiyoshi Igusa and Ralf Schiffler, Exceptional sequences and clusters, J. Algebra 323 (2010), no. 8, 2183– 2202. EXTENDED WEYL GROUPS, HURWITZ TRANSITIVITY AND WEIGHTED PROJECTIVE LINES I 37

[27] Colin Ingalls, Charles Paquette, and Hugh Thomas, Semi-stable subcategories for Euclidean quivers, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 110 (2015), no. 4, 805–840. [28] Colin Ingalls and Hugh Thomas, Noncrossing partitions and representations of quivers, Compos. Math. 145 (2009), no. 6, 1533–1562. [29] Victor G. Kac, Infinite-dimensional Lie algebras, Progress in Mathematics, vol. 44, Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1983, An introduction. [30] Paul Kluitmann, Ausgezeichnete Basen erweiterter affiner Wurzelgitter, Bonner Mathematische Schriften, vol. 185, Universität Bonn, Mathematisches Institut, Bonn, 1987, Dissertation, Rheinische Friedrich- Wilhelms-Universität, Bonn, 1986. [31] C. Köhler, A combinatorial classification of thick subcategories of derived and stable categories, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Bielefeld, Germany, 2011. [32] Henning Krause, Report on locally finite triangulated categories, J. K-Theory 9 (2012), no. 3, 421–458. [33] Dirk Kussin and Hagen Meltzer, The braid group action for exceptional curves, Arch. Math. (Basel) 79 (2002), no. 5, 335–344. [34] Helmut Lenzing, Coxeter transformations associated with finite-dimensional algebras, Computational methods for representations of groups and algebras (Essen, 1997), Progr. Math., vol. 173, Birkhäuser, Basel, 1999, pp. 287–308. [35] Joel Brewster Lewis, Jon McCammond, T. Kyle Petersen, and Petra Schwer, Computing reflection length in an affine Coxeter group, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 371 (2019), no. 6, 4097–4127. [36] Joel Brewster Lewis and Victor Reiner, Circuits and Hurwitz action in finite root systems, New York J. Math. 22 (2016), 1457–1486. [37] I. G. Macdonald, Affine root systems and Dedekind’s η-function, Invent. Math. 15 (1972), 91–143. [38] Jon McCammond and T. Kyle Petersen, Bounding reflection length in an affine Coxeter group, J. Algebraic Combin. 34 (2011), no. 4, 711–719. [39] Hagen Meltzer, Exceptional vector bundles, tilting sheaves and tilting complexes for weighted projective lines, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 171 (2004), no. 808, viii+139. [40] G. Paolini and M. Salvetti, Proof of the k(π, 1) conjecture for affine artin groups, Invent. math. (2020). [41] Idun Reiten, Tilting theory and quasitilted algebras, Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathe- maticians, Vol. II (Berlin, 1998), no. Extra Vol. II, 1998, pp. 109–120. [42] Claus Michael Ringel, Tame algebras and integral quadratic forms, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1099, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1984. [43] , The braid group action on the set of exceptional sequences of a hereditary Artin algebra, Abelian group theory and related topics (Oberwolfach, 1993), Contemp. Math., vol. 171, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1994, pp. 339–352. [44] Kyoji Saito, Extended affine root systems. I. Coxeter transformations, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 21 (1985), no. 1, 75–179. [45] Kyoji Saito and Tadayoshi Takebayashi, Extended affine root systems. III. Elliptic Weyl groups, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 33 (1997), no. 2, 301–329. [46] Kyoji Saito and Daigo Yoshii, Extended affine root system. IV. Simply-laced elliptic Lie algebras, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 36 (2000), no. 3, 385–421. [47] Yuuki Shiraishi, Atsushi Takahashi, and Kentaro Wada, On Weyl groups and Artin groups associated to orbifold projective lines, J. Algebra 453 (2016), 249–290. [48] Ernst Snapper and Robert J. Troyer, Metric affine geometry, second ed., Dover Books on Advanced Mathematics, Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1989. [49] Chao Sun, Bounded t-structures on the bounded derived category of coherent sheaves over a weighted projective line, arXiv e-prints (2017), arXiv:1708.05274. [50] Patrick Wegener, On the Hurwitz action in affine Coxeter groups, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 224 (2020), no. 7, 106308. [51] Patrick Wegener and Sophiane Yahiatene, A note on non-reduced reflection factorizations of coxeter elements, Algebraic Combinatorics 3 (2020), no. 2, 465–469. 38 B.BAUMEISTER,P.WEGENER,ANDS.YAHIATENE

Barbara Baumeister, Universität Bielefeld, Germany Email address: [email protected]

Patrick Wegener, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Germany Email address: [email protected]

Sophiane Yahiatene, Universität Bielefeld, Germany Email address: [email protected]