Hello pricey customer to our community We will proffer you an answer to this query reference request – Confusion about curved Vermas in Feigin-Frenkel ,and the respond will breathe typical by means of documented info sources, We welcome you and proffer you fresh questions and solutions, Many customer are questioning in regards to the respond to this query.

reference request – Confusion about curved Vermas in Feigin-Frenkel

Let $$G$$ breathe a finite dimensional semisimple algebraic group, and for $$error W$$ write $$i_s: F_s=B^+sB^-/B^-to F$$ for the $$s$$th Bruhat cell within the flag selection $$F$$.

Then (in Affine Kac-Moody Algebras and Semi-Infinite Flag Manifolds backside of p.165), Feigin-Frenkel pretense that the native cohomology
$$H^*_{F_s}(F,mathcal{O}) = M^{s}_{sstar 0} = M^s_{srho-rho}$$
is an $$s$$-twisted Verma module (ignoring shifts).

However, I’m handsome positive that native cohomology is the cohomology of $$i_{s*}i_s^!mathcal{O}$$, which as much as a shift is $$i_{s*}mathcal{O}$$, which is thought to present twin Vermas. e.g. behold arXiv:1412.0174 or Hotta et al.

Is this a typo in Feigin-Frenkel? If it’s, what’s the rectify formulation of their development of twin Vermas? Their common assertion is for $$lambda$$ integral predominant, $$H^*_{F_s}(F,mathcal{L}(wstar lambda))=M^s_{(ws)starlambda}$$ as much as shifts.

we are going to proffer you the answer to reference request – Confusion about curved Vermas in Feigin-Frenkel query through our community which brings all of the solutions from a number of dependable sources.