Classification Problems in Symplectic Linear Algebra


Check out the video of Jonathan Lorand’s talk, the second in the Applied Category Theory Seminar here at UCR. It was nicely edited by Paola Fernandez and uploaded by Joe Moeller.

Abstract. In this talk we will look at various examples of classification problems in symplectic linear algebra: conjugacy classes in the symplectic group and its Lie algebra, linear lagrangian relations up to conjugation, tuples of (co)isotropic subspaces. I will explain how many such problems can be encoded using the theory of symplectic poset representations, and will discuss some general results of this theory. Finally, I will recast this discussion from a broader category-theoretic perspective.

Check out the video of his talk above, and also his talk slides. It was nicely edited by Paola Fernandez and uploaded by Joe Moeller.

Here are some papers to read for more detail:

• Jonathan Lorand, Classifying linear canonical relations.

• Jonathan Lorand and Alan Weinstein, Decomposition of (co)isotropic relations.

Lorand is working on a paper with Weinstein and Christian Herrman that delves deeper into these topics. I first met him at the ACT2018 school in Leiden, where we worked along with Blake Pollard, Fabrizio Genovese (shown below) and Maru Sarazola on biochemical coupling through emergent conservation laws. Right now he’s visiting UCR and working with me to dig deeper into these questions using symplectic geometry! This is a very tantalizing project that keeps on not quite working…

5 Responses to Classification Problems in Symplectic Linear Algebra

  1. Grant Roy says:

    Hi John,

    Do you feel like any of this research (chemical reaction networks generally) might benefit from computations/analysis/simulations over very large graphs?

  2. This is kind of a stretch, but who else to ask?

    The objects in the ever-astounding field of “symplectic resolutions” are complex symplectic (not Kähler — the 2-form is (2,0) not (1,1)) manifolds whose affinization map X \to \mathrm{Spec}(\mathrm{Fun}(X)) is birational. As you know, the morphisms \mathrm{Hom}(M,N) are the Lagrangians in (-M)\times N.

    However, it appears to me that this isn’t quite the right category — the manifolds should come equipped with a symplectic circle action with compact fixed-point set. It’s then very interesting (Maulik-Okounkov’s approach to R-matrices) to consider changing the circle action on a given symplectic resolution.

    Have you run into this wrinkle? In particular, do you know what the morphisms in this richer category should be?

    • Ammar Husain says:

      Well their data is used to build targets for topological strings (as per later Okounkov w/ Mina etc), so what sort of changing the targets from X to Y do we need that we want to be in Hom(X,Y). Just a start for the ever daunting physical theorem to mathematical definition process.

You can use Markdown or HTML in your comments. You can also use LaTeX, like this: $latex E = m c^2 $. The word 'latex' comes right after the first dollar sign, with a space after it.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.