Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

79
Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups Michael Magee Durham University 29/03/2021

Transcript of Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Page 1: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Random Unitary Representations of

Surface Groups

Michael Magee

Durham University

29/03/2021

Page 2: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Plan

Free groups

Surface groups

Results

Ideas

Page 3: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 4: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 5: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 6: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 7: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 8: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Set up

Fr a non-abelian free group on r generators

e.g. F2 = 〈a, b〉, elements a, b, a2b, aba−1b−1 etc

G a compact Lie group

Examples

G = U(n)=n × n complex unitary matrices

G = SU(n) = unit determinant elements of U(n)

G = Sn = permutations of {1, . . . , n}

Page 9: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Word maps and matrix integrals

Given w ∈ Fr , have word map w : G r → G

e.g. w = a2b−2 ∈ F2, w(g1, g2) = g21 g−22

Expected trace (main object of talk)

For fixed w ∈ Fr , interested in

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=

∫U(n)r

tr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

du = prob. Haar measure on U(n)

E.g. r = 2, w = [a, b]def= aba−1b−1, E2,n[tr ◦ w ] = 1

n (Frobenius, 1896)

Page 10: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Word maps and matrix integrals

Given w ∈ Fr , have word map w : G r → G

e.g. w = a2b−2 ∈ F2, w(g1, g2) = g21 g−22

Expected trace (main object of talk)

For fixed w ∈ Fr , interested in

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=

∫U(n)r

tr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

du = prob. Haar measure on U(n)

E.g. r = 2, w = [a, b]def= aba−1b−1, E2,n[tr ◦ w ] = 1

n (Frobenius, 1896)

Page 11: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Word maps and matrix integrals

Given w ∈ Fr , have word map w : G r → G

e.g. w = a2b−2 ∈ F2, w(g1, g2) = g21 g−22

Expected trace (main object of talk)

For fixed w ∈ Fr , interested in

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=

∫U(n)r

tr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

du = prob. Haar measure on U(n)

E.g. r = 2, w = [a, b]def= aba−1b−1, E2,n[tr ◦ w ] = 1

n (Frobenius, 1896)

Page 12: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

Rationality

Weingarten calculus =⇒ for n ≥ n0(w), Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] agrees with a

rational function of n

(that depends on w of course)

Trivial vanishing

If w /∈ [Fr ,Fr ], i.e. cannot be written as a product of elements of the

form [g1, g2], then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = 0.

These facts appear explicitly in M-Puder ‘Matrix Group Integrals, Surfaces, and

Mapping Class Groups I: U(n)’

Page 13: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

Rationality

Weingarten calculus =⇒ for n ≥ n0(w), Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] agrees with a

rational function of n

(that depends on w of course)

Trivial vanishing

If w /∈ [Fr ,Fr ], i.e. cannot be written as a product of elements of the

form [g1, g2], then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = 0.

These facts appear explicitly in M-Puder ‘Matrix Group Integrals, Surfaces, and

Mapping Class Groups I: U(n)’

Page 14: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

Rationality

Weingarten calculus =⇒ for n ≥ n0(w), Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] agrees with a

rational function of n

(that depends on w of course)

Trivial vanishing

If w /∈ [Fr ,Fr ], i.e. cannot be written as a product of elements of the

form [g1, g2], then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = 0.

These facts appear explicitly in M-Puder ‘Matrix Group Integrals, Surfaces, and

Mapping Class Groups I: U(n)’

Page 15: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

Rationality

Weingarten calculus =⇒ for n ≥ n0(w), Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] agrees with a

rational function of n

(that depends on w of course)

Trivial vanishing

If w /∈ [Fr ,Fr ], i.e. cannot be written as a product of elements of the

form [g1, g2], then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = 0.

These facts appear explicitly in M-Puder ‘Matrix Group Integrals, Surfaces, and

Mapping Class Groups I: U(n)’

Page 16: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Analytic Estimates

Theorem (Voiculescu 1991)

If w ∈ Fr , w 6= id, then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = o(n)

as n→∞.

Rationality of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] =⇒ Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = O(1) as n→∞.

M-Puder: Degree of rational function can be estimated in terms of algebraic

properties of w .

Page 17: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Analytic Estimates

Theorem (Voiculescu 1991)

If w ∈ Fr , w 6= id, then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = o(n)

as n→∞.

Rationality of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] =⇒ Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = O(1) as n→∞.

M-Puder: Degree of rational function can be estimated in terms of algebraic

properties of w .

Page 18: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Analytic Estimates

Theorem (Voiculescu 1991)

If w ∈ Fr , w 6= id, then

Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = o(n)

as n→∞.

Rationality of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] =⇒ Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] = O(1) as n→∞.

M-Puder: Degree of rational function can be estimated in terms of algebraic

properties of w .

Page 19: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Perspectives and applications

asymptotic ∗-freeness of independent Haar unitary matrices

convergence of spectral distribution of e.g.

A1 + A2 + A3 + A−11 + A−1

2 + A−13 ∈ End(Cn),

where A1,A2,A3 i.i.d. by Haar measure in U(n)

Full Laurent expansion of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] in variable 1n contains deep

algebraic invariants of w (M-Puder)

Page 20: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Perspectives and applications

asymptotic ∗-freeness of independent Haar unitary matrices

convergence of spectral distribution of e.g.

A1 + A2 + A3 + A−11 + A−1

2 + A−13 ∈ End(Cn),

where A1,A2,A3 i.i.d. by Haar measure in U(n)

Full Laurent expansion of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] in variable 1n contains deep

algebraic invariants of w (M-Puder)

Page 21: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Perspectives and applications

asymptotic ∗-freeness of independent Haar unitary matrices

convergence of spectral distribution of e.g.

A1 + A2 + A3 + A−11 + A−1

2 + A−13 ∈ End(Cn),

where A1,A2,A3 i.i.d. by Haar measure in U(n)

Full Laurent expansion of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] in variable 1n contains deep

algebraic invariants of w (M-Puder)

Page 22: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Perspectives and applications

asymptotic ∗-freeness of independent Haar unitary matrices

convergence of spectral distribution of e.g.

A1 + A2 + A3 + A−11 + A−1

2 + A−13 ∈ End(Cn),

where A1,A2,A3 i.i.d. by Haar measure in U(n)

Full Laurent expansion of Er ,n[tr ◦ w ] in variable 1n contains deep

algebraic invariants of w (M-Puder)

Page 23: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Surface groups

g ≥ 2, Σg a closed surface of genus g

Γg is the fundamental group of Σg

Γg = 〈a1, b1, . . . , ag , bg | [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] 〉 called a surface

group

Rg = [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] ∈ F2g the relator of Γg

Page 24: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Surface groups

g ≥ 2, Σg a closed surface of genus g

Γg is the fundamental group of Σg

Γg = 〈a1, b1, . . . , ag , bg | [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] 〉 called a surface

group

Rg = [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] ∈ F2g the relator of Γg

Page 25: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Surface groups

g ≥ 2, Σg a closed surface of genus g

Γg is the fundamental group of Σg

Γg = 〈a1, b1, . . . , ag , bg | [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] 〉 called a surface

group

Rg = [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] ∈ F2g the relator of Γg

Page 26: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Surface groups

g ≥ 2, Σg a closed surface of genus g

Γg is the fundamental group of Σg

Γg = 〈a1, b1, . . . , ag , bg | [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] 〉 called a surface

group

Rg = [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] ∈ F2g the relator of Γg

Page 27: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Surface groups

g ≥ 2, Σg a closed surface of genus g

Γg is the fundamental group of Σg

Γg = 〈a1, b1, . . . , ag , bg | [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] 〉 called a surface

group

Rg = [a1, b1][a2, b2] · · · [ag ,bg ] ∈ F2g the relator of Γg

Page 28: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Generalizing previous

Recall Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=∫

U(n)rtr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

We have

U(n)r ∼= Hom(Fr ,U(n))

tr ◦ w ∼= trw : φ 7→ tr(φ(w)).

Now, instead, for given γ ∈ Γg we want to integrate

trγ : φ 7→ tr(φ(γ))

over Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) with respect to some nice measure.

Page 29: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Generalizing previous

Recall Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=∫

U(n)rtr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

We have

U(n)r ∼= Hom(Fr ,U(n))

tr ◦ w ∼= trw : φ 7→ tr(φ(w)).

Now, instead, for given γ ∈ Γg we want to integrate

trγ : φ 7→ tr(φ(γ))

over Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) with respect to some nice measure.

Page 30: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Generalizing previous

Recall Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=∫

U(n)rtr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

We have

U(n)r ∼= Hom(Fr ,U(n))

tr ◦ w ∼= trw : φ 7→ tr(φ(w)).

Now, instead, for given γ ∈ Γg we want to integrate

trγ : φ 7→ tr(φ(γ))

over Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) with respect to some nice measure.

Page 31: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Generalizing previous

Recall Er ,n[tr ◦ w ]def=∫

U(n)rtr(w(u1, u2, . . . , ur ))du1 · · · dur

We have

U(n)r ∼= Hom(Fr ,U(n))

tr ◦ w ∼= trw : φ 7→ tr(φ(w)).

Now, instead, for given γ ∈ Γg we want to integrate

trγ : φ 7→ tr(φ(γ))

over Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) with respect to some nice measure.

Page 32: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure

Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) is just the collection of

{ (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) ∈ SU(n)2g : [A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ] = id }

Not a group!

On the manifold Hom(Γg ,SU(n))irr/SU(n) there is a naturalsymplectic form defined in works of Atiyah-Bott and Goldman. Thisalso gives a volume form.M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott. The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,

Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1983.

W. M. Goldman. The symplectic nature of fundamental groups of surfaces.

Advances in Mathematics, 1984.

Page 33: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure

Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) is just the collection of

{ (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) ∈ SU(n)2g : [A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ] = id }

Not a group!

On the manifold Hom(Γg ,SU(n))irr/SU(n) there is a naturalsymplectic form defined in works of Atiyah-Bott and Goldman. Thisalso gives a volume form.M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott. The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,

Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1983.

W. M. Goldman. The symplectic nature of fundamental groups of surfaces.

Advances in Mathematics, 1984.

Page 34: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure

Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) is just the collection of

{ (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) ∈ SU(n)2g : [A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ] = id }

Not a group!

On the manifold Hom(Γg ,SU(n))irr/SU(n) there is a naturalsymplectic form defined in works of Atiyah-Bott and Goldman. Thisalso gives a volume form.

M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott. The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,

Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1983.

W. M. Goldman. The symplectic nature of fundamental groups of surfaces.

Advances in Mathematics, 1984.

Page 35: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure

Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) is just the collection of

{ (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) ∈ SU(n)2g : [A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ] = id }

Not a group!

On the manifold Hom(Γg ,SU(n))irr/SU(n) there is a naturalsymplectic form defined in works of Atiyah-Bott and Goldman. Thisalso gives a volume form.M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott. The Yang-Mills Equations over Riemann Surfaces.

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A,

Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 1983.

W. M. Goldman. The symplectic nature of fundamental groups of surfaces.

Advances in Mathematics, 1984.

Page 36: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The measure: finite groups example

Suppose G a finite group, f is a G -conjugation invariant function on G 2g

(e.g. tr ◦ w for some w ∈ F2g )

How to evaluate∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure)? (weighted sum)

This is the same as

|G |2g

|Hom(Γg ,G)|

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )1{Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) = idG}.

Schur orthogonality =⇒

1{x = idG} =1

|G |∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)tr(ρ(x)),

where G is the set of equivalence classes of irreducible representations

of G ; here each ρ : G → Aut(Vρ) is a linear representation.

Page 37: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The measure: finite groups example

Suppose G a finite group, f is a G -conjugation invariant function on G 2g

(e.g. tr ◦ w for some w ∈ F2g )

How to evaluate∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure)? (weighted sum)

This is the same as

|G |2g

|Hom(Γg ,G)|

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )1{Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) = idG}.

Schur orthogonality =⇒

1{x = idG} =1

|G |∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)tr(ρ(x)),

where G is the set of equivalence classes of irreducible representations

of G ; here each ρ : G → Aut(Vρ) is a linear representation.

Page 38: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The measure: finite groups example

Suppose G a finite group, f is a G -conjugation invariant function on G 2g

(e.g. tr ◦ w for some w ∈ F2g )

How to evaluate∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure)? (weighted sum)

This is the same as

|G |2g

|Hom(Γg ,G)|

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )1{Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) = idG}.

Schur orthogonality =⇒

1{x = idG} =1

|G |∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)tr(ρ(x)),

where G is the set of equivalence classes of irreducible representations

of G ; here each ρ : G → Aut(Vρ) is a linear representation.

Page 39: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The measure: finite groups example

Suppose G a finite group, f is a G -conjugation invariant function on G 2g

(e.g. tr ◦ w for some w ∈ F2g )

How to evaluate∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure)? (weighted sum)

This is the same as

|G |2g

|Hom(Γg ,G)|

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )1{Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) = idG}.

Schur orthogonality =⇒

1{x = idG} =1

|G |∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)tr(ρ(x)),

where G is the set of equivalence classes of irreducible representations

of G ; here each ρ : G → Aut(Vρ) is a linear representation.

Page 40: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Finite groups example continued

Hence for G finite∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure) =

|G |2g−1

|Hom(Γg ,G)|∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))

Theorem (Sengupta 2003)

When G = SU(n)

The average of f with respect to the Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure is

proportional to the right hand side above if the right hand side is abso-

lutely convergent.

(Witten’s formula) The normalization constant is

ζSU(n)(2g − 2)def=

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

1(dim ρ)2g−2 .

Page 41: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Finite groups example continued

Hence for G finite∫Hom(Γg ,G)

f d(uniform measure) =

|G |2g−1

|Hom(Γg ,G)|∑ρ∈G

(dim ρ)

∫G2g

f (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))

Theorem (Sengupta 2003)

When G = SU(n)

The average of f with respect to the Atiyah-Bott-Goldman measure is

proportional to the right hand side above if the right hand side is abso-

lutely convergent.

(Witten’s formula) The normalization constant is

ζSU(n)(2g − 2)def=

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

1(dim ρ)2g−2 .

Page 42: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

For γ ∈ Γg , let EΓg ,n[trγ ]def=∫Hom(Γg ,SU(n))

trγ dµABG .

TheoremFor any g ≥ 2 and γ ∈ Γg there is an infinite sequence of rational

numbers

a−1(γ), a0(γ), a1(γ), a2(γ), . . .

such that for any M ∈ N, as n→∞

EΓg ,n[trγ ] = a−1(γ)n + a0(γ) +a1(γ)

n+ · · ·+ aM−1(γ)

nM−1+ O(n−M).

Appears in arXiv:2101.00252

Page 43: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

For γ ∈ Γg , let EΓg ,n[trγ ]def=∫Hom(Γg ,SU(n))

trγ dµABG .

TheoremFor any g ≥ 2 and γ ∈ Γg there is an infinite sequence of rational

numbers

a−1(γ), a0(γ), a1(γ), a2(γ), . . .

such that for any M ∈ N, as n→∞

EΓg ,n[trγ ] = a−1(γ)n + a0(γ) +a1(γ)

n+ · · ·+ aM−1(γ)

nM−1+ O(n−M).

Appears in arXiv:2101.00252

Page 44: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Algebraic properties

For γ ∈ Γg , let EΓg ,n[trγ ]def=∫Hom(Γg ,SU(n))

trγ dµABG .

TheoremFor any g ≥ 2 and γ ∈ Γg there is an infinite sequence of rational

numbers

a−1(γ), a0(γ), a1(γ), a2(γ), . . .

such that for any M ∈ N, as n→∞

EΓg ,n[trγ ] = a−1(γ)n + a0(γ) +a1(γ)

n+ · · ·+ aM−1(γ)

nM−1+ O(n−M).

Appears in arXiv:2101.00252

Page 45: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Estimates

TheoremLet g ≥ 2. If γ ∈ Γg is not the identity, then EΓg ,n[trγ ] = Oγ(1) as

n→∞.

Appears in arXiv:2101.03224

Previous two theorems for SU(n) replaced by Sn and tr replaced by the standard

(n − 1)-dim character of Sn obtained in

M-Puder ‘The asymptotic statistics of random covering surfaces’ 2020

Page 46: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Estimates

TheoremLet g ≥ 2. If γ ∈ Γg is not the identity, then EΓg ,n[trγ ] = Oγ(1) as

n→∞.

Appears in arXiv:2101.03224

Previous two theorems for SU(n) replaced by Sn and tr replaced by the standard

(n − 1)-dim character of Sn obtained in

M-Puder ‘The asymptotic statistics of random covering surfaces’ 2020

Page 47: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Estimates

TheoremLet g ≥ 2. If γ ∈ Γg is not the identity, then EΓg ,n[trγ ] = Oγ(1) as

n→∞.

Appears in arXiv:2101.03224

Previous two theorems for SU(n) replaced by Sn and tr replaced by the standard

(n − 1)-dim character of Sn obtained in

M-Puder ‘The asymptotic statistics of random covering surfaces’ 2020

Page 48: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Convergence in probability?

Is it true that for fixed γ 6= id, for any ε > 0

µABG

{φ ∈ Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) :

|trγ(φ)|n

> ε

}→ 0

as n→∞?

For Γg replaced by Fr , true (Voiculescu 1991)

Levy family, Gromov-Milman

Page 49: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Convergence in probability?

Is it true that for fixed γ 6= id, for any ε > 0

µABG

{φ ∈ Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) :

|trγ(φ)|n

> ε

}→ 0

as n→∞?

For Γg replaced by Fr , true (Voiculescu 1991)

Levy family, Gromov-Milman

Page 50: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Convergence in probability?

Is it true that for fixed γ 6= id, for any ε > 0

µABG

{φ ∈ Hom(Γg ,SU(n)) :

|trγ(φ)|n

> ε

}→ 0

as n→∞?

For Γg replaced by Fr , true (Voiculescu 1991)

Levy family, Gromov-Milman

Page 51: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The shape of things, recap

To calculate EΓg ,n[trγ]:

Normalization factor = value of Witten zeta function

well understood, tends to 1 as n → ∞ (Guralnick, Larsen,

Manack)

pick w ∈ F2g that projects to γ ∈ Γg

EΓg ,n[trγ ] essentially of the form

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

dim(ρ)×

∫SU(n)2g

tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρ([A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ])))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

Page 52: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The shape of things, recap

To calculate EΓg ,n[trγ]:

Normalization factor = value of Witten zeta function

well understood, tends to 1 as n → ∞ (Guralnick, Larsen,

Manack)

pick w ∈ F2g that projects to γ ∈ Γg

EΓg ,n[trγ ] essentially of the form

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

dim(ρ)×

∫SU(n)2g

tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρ([A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ])))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

Page 53: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The shape of things, recap

To calculate EΓg ,n[trγ]:

Normalization factor = value of Witten zeta function

well understood, tends to 1 as n → ∞ (Guralnick, Larsen,

Manack)

pick w ∈ F2g that projects to γ ∈ Γg

EΓg ,n[trγ ] essentially of the form

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

dim(ρ)×

∫SU(n)2g

tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρ([A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ])))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

Page 54: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

The shape of things, recap

To calculate EΓg ,n[trγ]:

Normalization factor = value of Witten zeta function

well understood, tends to 1 as n → ∞ (Guralnick, Larsen,

Manack)

pick w ∈ F2g that projects to γ ∈ Γg

EΓg ,n[trγ ] essentially of the form

∑ρ∈ ˆSU(n)

dim(ρ)×

∫SU(n)2g

tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρ([A1,B1] · · · [Ag ,Bg ])))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

Page 55: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 56: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 57: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously.

(Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 58: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 59: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 60: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 61: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 62: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations I

We want to chop the sum into a ‘head’ and a ‘tail’.

Head = finitely many representations. Contribution from each of

these is rational function.

Tail = all other representations. Hope to control all

simultaneously. (Enough for first theorem)

Different ways to try this.

e.g. ˆSU(n) ∼=Young diagrams with ≤ n − 1 rows. Head of sum

corresponds to bounded number of boxes?

Not right perspective (Chiral)

Page 63: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations II

Correct perspective: every pair of Young diagrams (λ, µ) gives rise, for

n ≥ `(λ) + `(µ) to a family of representations ρn[λ,µ]

of U(n) w/ highest weight

(λ1, λ2, . . . , λ`(λ), 0, . . . , 0,−µ`(µ), . . . ,−µ2,−µ1) ∈ Zn.

Figure: From Koike 1989

Head of sum ∼ (roughly speaking) to representations that come from λ, µ with

bounded total number of boxes. (dim(ρn[λ,µ]

) � n|λ|+|µ|)

Page 64: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations II

Correct perspective: every pair of Young diagrams (λ, µ) gives rise, for

n ≥ `(λ) + `(µ) to a family of representations ρn[λ,µ]

of U(n) w/ highest weight

(λ1, λ2, . . . , λ`(λ), 0, . . . , 0,−µ`(µ), . . . ,−µ2,−µ1) ∈ Zn.

Figure: From Koike 1989

Head of sum ∼ (roughly speaking) to representations that come from λ, µ with

bounded total number of boxes.

(dim(ρn[λ,µ]

) � n|λ|+|µ|)

Page 65: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Organizing representations II

Correct perspective: every pair of Young diagrams (λ, µ) gives rise, for

n ≥ `(λ) + `(µ) to a family of representations ρn[λ,µ]

of U(n) w/ highest weight

(λ1, λ2, . . . , λ`(λ), 0, . . . , 0,−µ`(µ), . . . ,−µ2,−µ1) ∈ Zn.

Figure: From Koike 1989

Head of sum ∼ (roughly speaking) to representations that come from λ, µ with

bounded total number of boxes. (dim(ρn[λ,µ]

) � n|λ|+|µ|)

Page 66: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1.

Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 67: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 68: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 69: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 70: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word

and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 71: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 72: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Tail

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

|λ|+ |µ| � 1. Challenge: Weingarten calculus not suited

Symmetry ∫SU(n)2g

F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

where F (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ) depends only on bottom left D × D of each

A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg , D = D(w).

This means F is SU(n − D) bi-invariant and now can first integrate

tr(ρ(Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))) over SU(n − D) double cosets

Rg is a very special word and so these integrals can be done using Weingarten

calculus + branching laws for SU(n) + Gelfand-Tsetlin bases.

(new methods)

Page 73: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed.

Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 74: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed. Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 75: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed. Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 76: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed. Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 77: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed. Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 78: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Head

∫SU(n)2g tr(w(A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg ))tr(ρn

[λ,µ](Rg (A1,B1, . . . ,Ag ,Bg )))dA1 · · · dAgdB1 · · · dBg

λ, µ fixed. Challenge: All known topological expansions do not give good enough

decay

Solution part 1

ρn[λ,µ] is subrepresentation of (Cn)⊗|λ| ⊗ ˇ(Cn)⊗|µ|

, new ideas in

Weingarten calculus based on ‘mixed’ Schur -Weyl duality due to

Koike (1989)

refined topological expansions

Solution part 2

Choosing the initial w ∈ F2g projecting to γ ∈ Γg carefully to get best

results from topological expansions

(Dehn’s algorithm)

Page 79: Random Unitary Representations of Surface Groups

Free groups Surface groups Results Ideas

Thanks for your attention!