COMPLETE INTEGRABILITY OF THE PARAHORIC HITCHIN SYSTEM

arXiv:1608.05454v1 [math.AG] 18 Aug 2016

DAVID BARAGLIA, MASOUD KAMGARPOUR, AND ROHITH VARMA

Abstract. Let G be a parahoric group scheme over a complex projective curve of genus greater
than one. Let BunG denote the moduli stack of G-torsors on X. We conjecture that the Hitchin
map on T BunG defines an algebraically completely integrable system and prove several results in
support of this conjecture. First of all, we show that Ginzburgs proof that the global nilpotent
cone is isotropic generalises to the parahoric setting. Moreover, we show that BunG is very good
in the sense of Beilinson-Drinfeld and use this to prove Poisson commutativity of the Hitchin map.
Combined these results imply that the Hitchin map is a Lagrangian fibration. To establish that we
have a completely integrable system, it remains to show that the base is an affine space. This turns
out to be a difficult problem.
To determine the base of the parahoric Hitchin map, we restrict ourselves to the case when
the parahoric comes from a parabolic subgroup. In this case, T BunG identifies with the moduli
stack of (strongly) parabolic Higgs bundles. We prove that the image of the Hitchin map for all
parabolics in types A, B, C, and G2 and most parabolics in type D is isomorphic to an affine space.
Our method relies on crucial local computations, some of which are reminiscent of Kazhdan and
Lusztigs computations of the map from nilpotent orbits to conjugacy classes in the Weyl group.
Finally, in type A, we provide a parabolic analogue of the Kostant-Hitchin section.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Local results
3. Global results
4. Proofs of the local results
5. Proofs of the global results
References

1
7
11
16
25
34

1. Introduction
The Hitchin system [Hit87] is a completely integrable system associated to a complex reductive
group G and a smooth complex projective curve X. It lies at the crossroad of geometry (algebraic,
differential, and symplectic), Lie theory, and mathematical physics (integrable systems, conformal
field theory, and string theory). It has found remarkable applications to some of the deepest areas
in number theory, such as the Langlands program [BD97, Ngo10].
The main goal of this paper is to investigate the Hitchin map when G is replaced with a parahoric
group scheme. We start, however, by reviewing the classical theory.
1.1. Higgs bundles. The main object of study is the moduli of Higgs bundles. A Higgs bundle is
a pair (E, ) consisting of a G-bundle E on X together with a section of ad (E) . Here, ad (E)
is the vector bundle associated to E via the co-adjoint representation ad : G End(g ) and
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 17B67, 17B69, 22E50, 20G25.
1

is the canonical bundle on X.1 If one restricts attention to (semi-)stable Higgs bundles, then one
obtains the moduli space of Higgs bundles, a quasi-projective variety. On the other hand, if one
considers all Higgs bundles, then one has to work with the moduli stack. The semi-stable point of
view is crucial in the applications of Higgs bundles to non-abelian Hodge theory, while the stacky
point of view is necessary for applications in the Langlands program.2
In this article, we consider the stacky point of view. Let BunG (resp. MG ) denote the moduli
stack of G-bundles (resp. G-Higgs bundles) on X. It is known that these are algebraic (Artin)
stacks over C and that BunG is smooth. Moreover, an application of Serre duality implies that one
has an isomorphism
MG T BunG .
In particular, MG has a natural symplectic (and therefore, Poisson) structure. Note that since
we are dealing with stacks, one has to be careful when dealing with cotangent bundles. Following
[BD97], we say that a smooth equidimensional algebraic stack Y is very good if T Y 0 is dense
in T Y, where Y 0 is the biggest Deligne-Mumford substack of Y. In particular, for very good
stacks, one has that dim T Y = 2 dim Y. According to a theorem of Beilinson and Drinfeld, under
our assumption that the genus of X is bigger than one, BunG is very good. The proof of this
theorem depends on some considerations from the Hitchin system (see below). Note, however, that
BunG (P1 ) is not very good; cf. [Soi16].
1.2. Hitchin map. In what follows, for ease of notation, we assume that G is a simple simply
connected algebraic group unless stated otherwise. All results extend without difficulty to semisimple groups and, with some modification, to connected reductive groups. Let denote the rank of
G. According to a theorem of Chevalley, the invariant ring C[g]G is isomorphic to C[Q1 , , Q ]
where Qi s are algebraically independent homogeneous polynomials. The degrees of the generators
are canonically defined and are denoted by d1 d .
The Hitchin map is defined by applying (Q1 , , Q ) to the endomorphism . This gives a map
hG : MG AG :=

(X, di ).

i=1

The Hitchin map satisfies the following remarkable properties:

(i) The image of hG consists of Poisson commuting functions.
(ii) AG is an affine space and dim AG = dim BunG = (g 1) dim(G).
(iii) hG is flat and surjective and its fibres have pure dimension dim BunG .
(iv) There exists a non-empty open subset U AG such that h1
G (U ) U is proper and smooth
and each fibre is the product of an abelian variety with the classifying stack of the center
Z G.
(v) hG is the affinisation map; i.e., C[AG ] = (MG , O).
The main contribution to the above results is that of Hitchin [Hit87]. The above formulation is
taken from [BD97, 2.2.4]. Let us make a few remarks about the proof while at the same indicate
what comes next:
(a) Hitchin proved (i) using analytic methods. Subsequently, [Bot95] and [Mar94] gave algebraic
proofs. (Yet another algebraic proof was given by [BD97]). We will adapt Bottacins method
to establish the corresponding statement in the parahoric setting.
1Since G is reductive, the Killing form establishes an isomorphism between adjoint and coadjoint representations.

For parahoric group schemes, however, these representations are different and the co-adjoint representation is the
correct object to consider for constructing the Hitchin system.
2
Hecke operators do not preserve (semi-)stability.
2

(b) It is clear that AG is affine space. Computing its dimension is an easy application of
Riemann-Roch. In the parahoric case, determining whether the image is an affine space is
a major hurdle in our program. We can only solve it in some cases.
(c) The key input for the proof of (iii) is the following result. Let N ilpG MG denote the
preimage of 0 AG . This is known as the global nilpotent cone. According to a theorem of
Laumon [Lau88], Faltings [Fal93], and Ginzburg [Gin01], N ilpG is an isotropic substack of
MG . As we shall see, Ginzburgs proof generalise to the parahoric setting.3
(d) Using the fact that N ilpG is isotropic, Beilinson and Drinfeld proved that BunG is very
good. We shall prove that this results extends to all parahoric group schemes (Theorem
40).
(e) Statement (iv) was proved by Hitchin for classical groups and Faltings in general. We will
(partially) extend this result to the parabolic setting.
(f) Statement (v) follows from (iii) and (iv).
We note that the above theorem was generalised by Markman [Mar94] and Bottacin [Bot95]
to the case where is replaced by a line bundle L = (D) for some effective divisor D. In this
case, the moduli of L-valued Higgs bundles admits a P oisson structure and the Hitchin map is a
generalised integrable system [Mar94, Bot95].
1.3. Parahoric group schemes. Following a suggestion of X. Zhu, we consider the moduli of
bundles for integral models of G. In this subsection, we discuss what is meant by integral models
and parahoric group schemes. For each x X, we let Ox denote the algebra of functions on
the completed formal neighbourhood of a point and Kx denote the fraction field. If we choose a
uniformiser t, then Ox C[[t]] and Kx C((t)).
1.3.1. Integral models. An integral model for G is a smooth connected affine group scheme over X
whose generic fibre is isomorphic to G. If G is an integral model, then for all but finitely many x X,
called points of bad reduction or ramification points, one has an isomorphism G(Ox ) G(Ox ). The
study of integral models was initiated in the seminal work of Bruhat and Tits [BT84], [BT72].
More recently, Pappas and Rapoport [PR07] suggested that some of the properties (in particular, a
key property known as uniformisation) enjoyed by BunG should also hold for BunG . Subsequently,
Heinloth [Hei10] confirmed most of these expectations. One reason of interest in integral models is
that they provide a beautiful way of encoding ramifications in the Langlands program.4
Henceforth, we assume that we only have one point of bad reduction. This is only for the ease of
notation. As we shall see, none of our proofs depend on this assumption, so the result generalises
easily to the case of finitely many points.
1.3.2. Parahoric group schemes. Among all integral models, a special role is played by parahoric
group schemes. These are integral models G such that at the points of bad reduction, G(O) is a
parahoric subgroup of G(K). To give the reader an idea about parahoric subgroups of the loop
group G(K), we compare them with their cousins, namely, parabolic subgroups of G:
Given a subset of simple roots of G, the group generated by the corresponding root subgroups, together with the root subgroups corresponding to all negative simple roots and the
maximal torus, is a parabolic subgroup of G. This establishes a bijection between subsets of
simple roots and conjugacy classes of parabolics. A similar procedure provides a bijection
3As Tsao-Hsien Chen explained to us, Faltings proof also generalises to the parabolic setting.
4For arithmetical applications, it is important to consider groups whose generic fibres are twisted. Over C, this

means that the corresponding loop algebra is a twisted affine algebra. We shall only consider the case of constant
group scheme in this paper. This is because one of the main technical tools we use (the Balaji-Seshadri description
of parahoric torsor) has only been established in the constant case [BS15].
3

between proper subsets of affine simple roots and conjugacy classes of parahorics in G(K),
cf. [Kum02].
Alternatively, recall that parabolic subgroups are exactly those subgroups P G such that
G/P is proper. Similarly, parahoric subgroups are exactly those subgroups of the loop
group P G(K) such that the quotient G(K)/P is ind-proper, cf. [Kum02].
Our goal is to study the Hitchin map on the moduli stack of G-torsors (or G-bundles). One of
the main technical tools we use is a recent work of Balaji and Seshadri [BS15]. They have shown
that such G-bundles can be identified with usual G-bundles on a certain ramified cover of X.
1.3.3. Relationship to parabolic bundles. Among parahoric subgroups, the most familiar ones are
those constructed from parabolics in the following manner. Recall that one has a canonical evaluation map ev : G(O) G defined by t 7 0. Given a parabolic P G, we have that ev 1 (P )
is a parahoric subgroup of G(K). We refer to these as parahorics of parabolic type. It is easy to
see that if G is a parahoric of parabolic type, then a G-bundle is nothing but a G-bundle with a
P -reduction at x. Thus, we are reduced to the more familiar realm of parabolic G-bundles.
We note that for GLn , all parahorics are conjugate to those coming from parabolics. On the
other hand, as already mentioned above, for G = SL2 we already have three parahorics, only two of
which come from parabolics. In this case, however, the non-parabolic parahoric here is conjugate
in GL2 to SL2 (O). Similar considerations imply that in Type A, most questions about parahorics
reduce to the usual parabolic setting. This is definitely not the case in other types.
1.3.4. Bruhat-Tits group schemes. Given parahoric subgroups P1 , , Pl G(K) and finitely many
points x1 , , xl on the curve X, there exists integral models G over X with bad reduction exactly at
the xi s satisfying G(Oxi ) Pi . This is a consequence of the work of Bruhat and Tits [BT84,BT72];
see also [Yu02, BS15].
1.4. The Hitchin system for BunG . Let G be an integral model for G. A G-Higgs bundle is a
pair (E, ) consisting of a G-bundle together with an element (X, ad (E) ). Let MG denote
the moduli stack of G-Higgs bundles. Once again, using Serre duality, we conclude
MG T BunG .
Of course, if G has no points of bad reduction, then this is the same as MG . If G is a parahoric
group scheme of parabolic type, then a G-Higgs bundle is the same as a strongly parabolic G-Higgs
bundle. In more details, it is a G-bundle E with a parabolic structure at the point of bad reduction,
together with an endomorphism (X, E G g (x)) whose residue at x lies in the nilpotent
radical of the parabolic.
Now let us discuss the Hitchin map. It is defined, as before, by applying the algebraically
independent generators of the invariant ring Q1 , , Q to . It is easy to see that there exists
integers k1 , , k such that the Hitchin map factors as a map
M
hG : MG
(X, di (ki .x)).
i

For instance, if G is a parahoric group scheme, then one can take ki = di . However, contrary to the
usual Hitchin map, the map hG defined as such is L
not, in general, surjective. Let AG denote the
closure of its image. This is an affine subvariety of i (X, di (ki .x)).

Conjecture 1. Suppose G is a parahoric group scheme. Then we have:

(i) The affine variety AG is isomorphic to an affine space of dimension equal to dim(BunG ).
(ii) hG : T BunG AG defines an algebraically completely integrable system.
4

It would be interesting to investigate these statement beyond the parahoric case; e.g., one can
ask for which integral models G is BunG very good. We discuss this briefly in the setting of MoyPrasad-Yu group schemes; see 2.5.
1.5. What was known before this work? Let G be a parahoric group scheme on X. If G has
no point of bad reduction (i.e., in which case G G X), then we are reduced to the usual Hitchin
system. Next, suppose the parahoric group scheme is parabolic of Borel type. Then as Faltings
notes in [Fal93, V], parts (i) and (ii) of the conjecture also easy to establish. For more general
parabolics (and parahorics), the conjecture is more difficult.
In type A, the conjecture was proved by Scheinost and Schottenloher [SS95] using an ingenuous
analytic argument. First of all, they prove that a generalisation of the Hitchin system, whereby
one replaces X with a higher dimensional Kahler manifold Y , also defines a completely integrable
system.5 Next, starting with a parabolic subgroup, they construct an elliptic surface Y and use
non-abelian Hodge theory to prove that Higgs bundles on Y correspond bijectively to parabolic
Higgs bundles on X. They then use the fact that the Hitchin system on Y is completely integrable
to conclude that (strongly) parabolic Hitchin system is completely integrable.
As previously mentioned, the study of parahorics in type A essentially reduces to parabolics,
so the work of [SS95] confirms the conjecture in type A. It is conceivable that their work can
be generalised to parahorics of other types, thus providing a possible approach to settling the
conjecture, but as far as we know this has not been done. In any case, we give an alternative
algebraic (and easier) proof of Scheinost and Schottenlohers result and generalise it to certain
parabolics in other types (see below).
As far as we know, the above summarises all that was known about Conjecture 1 before the
present work. Let us mention that strongly parabolic Higgs bundles have a variant called weakly
parabolic Higgs bundles. These are pairs (E, ) consisting of G-bundle E with parabolic reduction
at a point x and an endomorphism (E G g (x)) whose residue lies in p. (By comparison,
in the strongly parabolic case considered in this article, the residue lies in the nilpotent radical
n.) If G is of type A, then Logares and Marten [LM10] have proved that the Hitchin map on the
moduli of weakly parabolic Higgs bundles defines a generalised completely integrable system, see
also [Mar94,Bot95]. Note that this implies that generic symplectic leaves are integrable systems (in
the weak sense of being Lagrangian fibrations). However we can not immediately deduce from this
that the strongly parabolic moduli space is integrable because it may not be a generic symplectic
leaf. In any case, the results of Markman, Bottacin, Logares-Martens were all proven in type A.
Finally we mention that the weakly parabolic Hitchin system has also been used in the work of
Yun on the global analogue of Springer correspondence [Yun11].
1.6. Our main results. In this section, we give a rough version of our main results. For more
precise versions, see 3. Let G be a parahoric group scheme and let hG : BunG AG denote the
parahoric Hitchin map. Let N ilpG = h1
G (0) denote the parahoric global nilpotent cone.
Theorem 2. N ilpG is isotropic.
To prove this, we adapt arguments of Ginzburg to the parahoric setting, see Theorem 39. Next,
we have
Theorem 3. BunG is very good.
To prove this theorem, we generalise the argument of Beilinson and Drinfeld to the parahoric
case. The above theorem means, in particular, that we can work with T BunG as if it were a
5This is a very interesting result in its own right and deserves more attention, see also [GS16].
5

variety. For instance, we use this property to adapt an argument of Bottacin to prove that the
Hamiltonians on T BunG Poisson commute and conclude:6
Theorem 4. The parahoric Hitchin map is a Lagrangian fibration.
To conclude that the Hitchin map is an algebraically completely integrable system, we need to
know the image of the Hitchin map. This is a difficult problem which we can solve only in some
cases.
Theorem 5. Suppose G is of type A, B, C, D, or G2 . Suppose P is an arbitrary parabolic in
types A, B, C, and G2 and is a parabolic of certain type in type D (see Assumption 12). Let G be
a parahoric group scheme of parabolic type P . Then
(i) AG is isomorphic to an affine space of dimension equal to BunG .
(ii) hG defines a completely integrable system.
If we choose the appropriate coefficients of the characteristic polynomials as generators of the
invariant ring (see Assumption 13) then we have the following remarkable description of the image
of the Hitchin map.
Theorem 6. Under Assumptions 12 and 13, we have
M
AG
(X, di (di mi ))

where m1 , m2 , , m are the fundamental invariants of the Levi subgroup of P .

Remark 7.
(i) In type A, we construct explicitly a section for the above map which can be considered
as the parabolic analogue of Kostant-Hitchin section, see 2.4. The construction is quite
involved and we do not know how to generalise it to other types.
(ii) The above theorem is a refinement of a recent result of Xinwen Zhu [Zhu12]; see 2.5 for
more details.
(iii) The above description of the image of the Hitchin map may not hold if we choose a different
set of generators for the invariant ring, see 2.6.
1.6.1. Local Hitchin map. The key ingredient in the proofs of Theorems 5 and 6 is certain local
computations. The local Hitchin map is defined by7
= (Q1 , , Q ) : g(K) A(K) .
Let p be a parabolic subgroup and let p = ptg(O) denote the corresponding parahoric subalgebra.
One can show that p t1 n g(O). Then the main problem we are faced with is to determine
(p ). In classical types (and G2 ) we can take appropriate coefficients of characteristic polynomials
as the basis of invariant polynomial. In this case, the problem essentially reduces to the following
linear algebra problem: suppose we are given a matrix satisfying additional properties (depending
on the type). Suppose we allow singularities of order one at certain entries of the matrix (depending
on the parabolic). Then we can ask: how singular can the coefficients of invariant polynomials
become? We solve this nontrivial linear algebra problem in types A, B, C and G2 and for most
parabolics in type D.
6Presumably this argument would go through even in absence of the very good property, provided one works in the

derived setting.
7It is easy to give a definition of this map independent of the choice of the generators Q .
i
6

1.6.2. Relationship to Kazhdan and Lusztigs work. Recall that coefficients of characteristic polynomial are closely related to the eigenvalues of the operator. Thus, a closely related question (to
the one posed in the previous paragraph) is how singular the eigenvalues of such matrices are. This
is essentially the question considered by Kazhdan and Lusztig [KL87, 9] in the course of their
investigation of the map from the nilpotent orbits in g to conjugacy classes in W . Kazhdan and
Lusztig themselves solved this problem in type A and for certain parabolics in types B, C, and D.
We note that despite much effort in the intervening three decades (especially by Spaltenstein), the
description of Kazhdan-Lusztig map is not yet complete, cf. [Lus12]. This gives some indication
of why the problem of computing the image of the parabolic Hitchin map is nontrivial. We note
that the above problem for type C was treated in [Var16] using an approach directly inspired by
Kazhdan and Lusztig.
1.7. Organisation of the text. In 2, we set up the notation used throughout the paper and
state the main local results alluded to in the previous subsection. The precise version of our global
results are stated in 3. Proofs of the local and global results are provided in 4 and 5, respectively.
1.8. Acknowledgements. The idea of considering the Hitchin map for BunG is due to Xinwen
Zhu. We thank him for sharing his insights with us. We would also like to thank Dima Arinkin,
David Ben-Zvi, Tsao-Hsien Chen, Arun Ram and Zhiwei Yun for helpful discussions. DB and MK
were supported by the Australian Research Council DECRA Fellowships and RV was supported
by a post-doctoral fellowship at TIFR,Mumbai.
2. Local results
In this section we establish our notation and state our main local results concerning the Hitchin
map. In 2.1 we recall the construction of parahoric subgroups and their Lie algebras. We define
the local parahoric Hitchin map in 2.2 and state our main local theorem concerning the image of
this map in 2.3.
2.1. Lie theory. Let G be a simple, simply-connected complex algebraic group of rank . Fix a
choice of maximal torus T G and let t g be the corresponding Lie algebras. Let X(T ) =
Hom(T, Gm ) be the character group, Y (T ) = Hom(Gm , T ) the group of 1-parameter subgroups
of T and denote by ( , ) : Y (T ) X(T ) Z the canonical pairing. Let R X(T ) be the root
system associated to G and fix a choice of positive roots R+ R. The choice of positive roots R+
determines a Borel subgroup B G with unipotent radical U . Associated to each root R,
we have a root space gr g, a root homomorphism ur : Ga G and a corresponding subgroup
Ur G, called the root group corresponding to r.
Let 1 , . . . , be the simple roots and max the highest root. We let U denote the rational Weyl
alcove
U = {x Y (T ) Q | (x, max ) 1, (x, i ) 0, positive roots i }
o
and let U denote the points x U which satisfy (x, max ) < 1.
Let O = C[[t]] be the local ring of formal power series in t and K = C((t)) the fraction field of O.
For any U and root r R, consider the integer
mr () = (, r).
Then the subgroup
P = hT (O), {z mr () Ur (O)}rR i G(K)
is a parahoric subgroup in the sense of Bruhat-Tits. Note that P and the constructions that follow
depend only on the choice of through the facet of the affine apartment Y (T ) R on which
7

lies, but to keep the notation simple we will avoid any further mention of facets. From Bruhat-Tits
theory, we get a smooth affine group scheme G over Spec(O), which satisfies:
G Spec(K).
(i) G Spec(O) Spec(K) =
(ii) G (O) = P .
Associated to U we also have the corresponding parahoric subalgebra p g(K), which may
be defined as:
M
(1)
p = t(O)
tmr () gr (O).
rR

Let be the Killing form on g. We define the dual p

as
p
= {u g(K) | (u, v) O v p }.
We have a natural isomorphism
: p
HomO (p , O)

which sends u p
to the homomorphism v 7 (u, v). This isomorphism identifies p with the
dual of p as O-modules. From (1) we see that:
M
=
t(O)

p
tmr () gr (O).

rR

We will see later that elements of p

should be interpreted as local parahoric Higgs fields.
In this paper we will be particularly interested in the case where Uo . In this case, also
determines a parabolic subgroup P G which is generated by T and the root groups Ur for which
mr () = 0. Moreover P and P are related by:
P = ev 1 (P ),
where ev : G(O) G is the evaluation map sending t to zero. We refer to the case Uo as the
parabolic case and we call P a parahoric subgroup of parabolic type.
Example 8. If lies in the interior of the Weyl alcove then P = B is a Borel subgroup. In this
case P is called an Iwahori subgroup of G(O).
To simplify notation we will often drop the subscript and write P for the parabolic subgroup of
G determined by . Let L and N denote the Levi and unipotent radical of P and let l, n, p denote
the corresponding Lie algebras. In the parabolic case, one easily finds that:
p = p tg(O),
1
p
= t n g(O).

2.2. Local Hitchin map. For an algebraic variety Y , we let C[Y ] denote the algebra of regular
functions on Y . We apply the same notation to proalgebraic varieties or stacks. Let c := g//G =
Spec(C[g]G ). The inclusion C[g]G C[g] gives rise to a morphism
:gc
known as the characteristic polynomial map.
Definition 9. The local Hitchin map is the morphism
: g(K) c(K).
8

Remark 10. It is known that the invariant ring C[g]G is a polynomial algebra generated by algebraically independent homogeneous generators Q1 , , Q , hence c is an affine space of dimension
. These generators are not unique; however, their degrees are canonically defined and are called
the fundamental degrees of g. We let d1 , d2 , , d denote these degrees. If we choose generators
Q1 , , Q , then c(K) identifies with K and the map is given by
: g(K) K ,

7 (Q1 (), Q ()).

Notation 11. Let aG, = (p

) c(K).
Recall that elements of p
are to be interpreted as local parahoric Higgs fields. Thus aG, is the
local parahoric analogue of the Hitchin base. An important problem that we will partially solve is
to find a description of aG, as a subset of c(K).
2.3. Main local theorem. In what follows we will give an explicit description of aG, for some
parabolic subgroups. In order to state the condition recall that parabolic subgroups P G may
be classified by subsets S {1 , . . . , } of simple roots. Namely, if P = P for some U0 , then
we declare that i S if and only if (, i ) > 0.
Assumption 12. Assume that Uo , let P = P be associated parabolic subgroup and p the Lie
algebra of P . Assume that the pair (g, p) is one of the following types:
(1) g is of type A, B, C, or G2 and p is arbitrary, or,
(2) g is of type D and p is the parabolic subalgebra of so2 corresponding to a subset S =
{i1 , i2 , . . . , ik } of simple roots, with i1 < i2 < < ik satisfying 2( ik ) max(i1 , i2
i1 , . . . , ik ik1 , 4), where the simple roots 1 , . . . , of D are as indicated in the following
diagram:
1
2
1
2

Let Uo and (g, p) be as in Assumption 12. Recall that we use l p to denote the Levi
subalgebra of p. The Levi l is a reductive Lie algebra of reductive rank . Let m1 , m2 , , m
denote the fundamental degrees of l. In types A, B, C, G2 we arrange the fundamental degrees in
increasing order m1 m2 m . In type D under Assumption 12, we have that one of the
fundamental degrees is equal to s := ik . We arrange the fundamental degrees in such a way
that m1 m2 m1 and m = s. By convention the fundamental degree of the trivial Lie
algebra C is 1.
Assumption 13. If is an n n matrix with coefficients in K = C((t)), we write
det(I ) = n + c1 ()n1 + + cn ().
Then we use the following generators for the invariant ring:
Type An1 : identify g with traceless n n matrices and use (c2 , , cn ) as generators.
Type Bn : identify g with skew-symmetric (2n+1)(2n+1) matrices and use (c2 , c4 , , c2n ).
Type Cn : identify g with 2n2n matrices preserving a symplectic form and use (c2 , c4 , , c2n ).
Type Dn : identify g with skew-symmetric 2n 2n matrices and use (c2 , c4 , , c2n2 , Pf).
Here Pf denotes the Pfaffian which is defined to be a square root of c2n .
Type G2 : take the embedding G2 SL7 and use (c2 , c6 ); cf. [Hit07, 5.2].
Let d1 , d2 , , d be the degrees of the invariant polynomials taken in the order specified above.
As will become clear in 4, one always has mi di .
9

Theorem 14. Suppose that Uo and (G, P ) satisfy Assumption 12. Using the basis of invariant
polynomials defined in Assumption 13, we have
aG,

tdi +mi O.

i=1

Moreover, in type A the above inclusion is an equality.

This theorem is proved in 4.
L
2.4. A section in Type A. In type A, we prove the reverse inclusion aG, i tdi +mi O directly
by constructing an appropriate variation of the companion matrix as follows. Let V be an ndimensional complex vector space and p sln a parabolic subalgebra. In Section 4.1.2 we show
that with respect to a certain basis, we have the following. For a2 , , an O, define

0
a2 a3

an
t1
0
0

0
2
t
0
0
0
A(a2 , , an ) =
,
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.

n1
0

0
t
0
where i = 1 if the corresponding element in the matrix is in n and i = 0 otherwise. We show that
this matrix is an element of p
and that
det(I A(a2 , , an )) = n + t2+m1 a2 n2 + + tn+mn1 an .
Unfortunately, we dont know of an appropriate companion matrix compatible with a parabolic p
in other types.
2.5. Comparison with Zhus result. This subsection is independent of the rest of the article
and can be skipped by the reader. In [Zhu12, 3], the author has obtained an upper bound for
the image of the local parabolic Hitchin map. In fact, Zhu works in the setting of Moy-Prasad
filtrations of arbitrary parahoric subgroups. Let p be a parahoric subalgebra of g(K). Let us recall
Zhus setting and his main local result. Let
p(0) = p p(1) p(2)
denote the Moy-Prasad filtration of p. Note that p(m) = tp where m is the denominator of the
coordinates of the barycentre of of the facet in the affine apartment Y (T ) R fixed by P , cf.
[Gro10]. Therefore, we can extend the above filtration of p to a filtration of g(K) by O-lattices
p(i) = tN p(i + N m),

N 0.

It is easy to show that

p(i) = p(1 n m).
M
di (1n)
Proposition 15 (Zhu). (p(i) )
tdi + m O.
i

Note that Zhus result is independent of the chosen generators for the invariant ring. Theorem
14 can be considered as a refinement of Zhus result when i = 0. (A quantum analogue of Zhus
result appeared in [CK16].) Indeed, it is easy to see that Theorem 14 implies the above proposition.
To see that Theorem 14 is a finer result, consider the case that p is a maximal nontrivial parabolic
subalgebra of sln . In this case, m = 2, so Zhus results states that
n

(p ) t1 O t1 O t2 O t2 O t 2 O.
10

On the other hand, the Levi l sln1 C has degrees 1, 2, , n 1; thus, Theorem 14 states that
if is defined using the coefficients of the characteristic polynomial, then we have
(p ) = t1 O t1 O t1 O.
2.5.1. Moy-Prasad level structure. Using the coefficients of characteristic polynomial, it is also
possible to give a refinement of Zhus result for certain Moy-Prasad subalgebras. For instance,
consider the case of g = sl6 . Let i = ei,i ei+1,i+1 , i = 1, , 5 denote the simple roots. Let p
be the parabolic corresponding to the subset {2 , 4 , 5 } and let p be the corresponding parahoric
subalgebra. Note that in this case, m = 2 and Zhus result states that
(p(2) ) t2 O + t4 O + t5 O + t6 O + t8 O.
On the other hand, using coefficients of characteristic polynomial, one can prove that
(p(2) ) = t2 O + t4 O + t5 O + t6 O + t7 O.
We plan to return to this in future work.
2.6. On the choice of algebraically independent generators. We shall now demonstrate the
necessity of using the coefficient of characteristic polynomials (cf. Assumption 13) in our main
results on the image of the Hitchin map. Let g = sln and let p denote a maximal parabolic
subalgebra given by the stabiliser of a 1-dimensional subspace and let p denote the corresponding
parahoric. Then we have

O
O
..
..
..
..

.
.
.
(2)
p = sln .
.
O

O
O
t1 O t1 O O
As we have mentioned above, using coefficients of the characteristic polynomial, we obtain
(p ) =

n1
M

t1 O

i=1

On other hand, it is easy to see that if n 4, then the trace Tr(An ) can have a pole of order greater
than or equal to 2 for some A p . Thus, the above equality does not hold if we use traces of
powers of matrices as algebraically independent generators for the invariant ring.
3. Global results
Let X be a connected smooth projective curve over C of genus g > 1. Let = X denote the
canonical bundle on X. In 3.1 we recall the notion of torsors for a parahoric Bruhat-Tits group
scheme G on X, and in 3.2 we introduce the corresponding notion of parahoric Higgs bundles for
G. In 3.4 we define the global parahoric Hitchin map and the global parahoric Hitchin base. In
3.5-3.6 we then summarise our main global results concerning integrability of the moduli stack of
parahoric Higgs bundles for G.
3.1. Parahoric torsors. As mentioned in the introduction, a smooth group scheme G over X is
called a parahoric (Bruhat-Tits) group scheme over X if there is a finite subset R = {xi } of X such
that:
(i) G|XR
= G (X R) as group schemes over X R.
(ii) For each xi R, let Oxi denote the completed local ring and Dxi = Spec(Oxi ). Then as
group schemes over Dxi , we have G|Dxi
= Gi for some i U.
11

For simplicity of notation, we restrict to the case where R = {x} consists of a single marked
point x X throughout this paper. It will be clear that the formulation and the proof of the results
extend with no difficulty to the case of finitely many marked points with different parahorics at
each marked point.
Fix a marked point x X and parahoric subgroup P G(K) associated to some U. One
can construct a parahoric Bruhat-Tits group scheme GX,x, for which GX,x, |Xx
= G (X x)

and G|Dx = G . Denote by BunGX,x, the stack of GX,x, -torsors on X. The group scheme GX,x, is
not uniquely determined up to isomorphism by the data (X, x, ), but it follows from [BS15] that
the corresponding stacks BunGX,x, are all equivalent once (X, x, ) are fixed. In [Hei10] it is shown
that BunGX,x, is a smooth algebraic stack, which is locally of finite type. One can show that the
dimension of BunGX,x, is given by [BS15]:
dim(BunGX,x, ) = (g 1) dim(G) + #{r R+ | h, ri =
6 0, 1}.
In the parabolic case, i.e. when Uo , torsors for GX,x, correspond to the more familiar notion
of parabolic bundles. We recall the definition:
Definition 16. Let P G be a parabolic subgroup of G. A (quasi-)parabolic G-bundle on X with
parabolic structure of type P at x is a pair (E, ExP ), where E is a principal G-bundle on X and ExP
is a P -reduction of E at x; i.e. an element of Ex G (G/P ).
More generally, if Uo and S is a scheme over C, then the objects of BunGX,x, (S) are pairs
(E, ExP ), where E is a principal G-bundle on X S and ExP is a P -reduction of E over x S, i.e. a
section of E G (G/P ) over x S. We also have the obvious notion of isomorphism for objects of
BunGX,x, (S).
When a fixed choice of Uo is understood, we will simply write P for the parabolic subgroup
of G determined by . We will also refer to elements of BunGX,x, simply as parabolic bundles,
omitting the prefix quasi-. Note that the choice of a particular element U0 of a given facet of
the Weyl alcove corresponds to a choice of parabolic weights. In this paper we are not concerned
with semi-stability and the element is used only for the purpose of choosing a particular facet of
the Weyl alcove.
3.2. Parahoric Higgs bundles. Associated to the group scheme GX,x, , we have a bundle of Lie
algebras Lie(GX,x, ) X over X. This is a vector bundle equipped with a Lie bracket on its
sheaf of sections. Away from x it is just given by the trivial bundle (X x) g, while in a formal
neighborhood D = Spec(Ox ) of x, it is the bundle of Lie algebras determined by the parahoric
subalgebra p . Suppose that E X is a parahoric GX,x, -torsor. We define the adjoint bundle of
E by
ad(E) = E GX,x, Lie(GX,x, ),
where GX,x, acts on Lie(GX,x, ) by the adjoint action. We note that ad(E) is a vector bundle over
X and is equipped with a Lie bracket on its sheaf of sections. We let ad (E) denote the dual bundle.
Definition 17. Let E BunGX,x, be a parahoric torsor. A parahoric Higgs field is a section
(X, ad(E) ). A parahoric Higgs bundle is a pair (E, ) consisting of a parahoric torsor E
and a parahoric Higgs field .
More generally, to define the stack MGX,x, of parahoric Higgs bundles, let S be an arbitrary
scheme over C and define
MGX,x, (S) = {(E, ) | E BunGX,x, (S), (X S, ad(E) 1XS/S )},
12

with the obvious notion of isomorphism between objects. We recall that BunGX,x, is a smooth
equidimensional algebraic stack. From standard deformation theory, we deduce an isomorphism of
stacks

MG
.
= T BunG
X,x,

X,x,

Thus, MGX,x, is a symplectic stack; in particular, we may speak of the Poisson bracket and of
isotropic substacks. Note that in the setting of stacks, care has to be taken to study the above
notions; see [BD97, 1] for details.
In the parabolic case, where Uo the notion of parahoric Higgs bundle reduces to the more
familiar notion of parabolic Higgs bundle, which we now recall. Note that some authors call such
Higgs bundles strongly parabolic.
Definition 18. Let (E, ExP ) be a parabolic bundle. A parabolic Higgs field is a section (X, E G
g (x)) such that Res() n. A parabolic Higgs bundle is a triple (E, ExP , ) consisting of a
parabolic bundle (E, ExP ) and a parabolic Higgs field .
3.3. Relation to equivariant bundles. In this section we remark on the relation between parahoric torsors and parahoric Higgs bundles to equivariant torsors and equivariant Higgs bundles on
a Galois cover of X.
Suppose that p : Y X is a Galois cover with Galois group such that p has ramification over
the marked point x X and nowhere else. Let y Y be one of the points lying over x and let
y be the stabilizer, which is cyclic of order n say. Let g y be a generator. Following [BS15],
we define a (, G)-bundle on Y to be a principal G-bundle E Y with G acting on the right,
equipped with a lift of to an action on E commuting with the G-action. In other words, E is a
-equivariant principal G-bundle. Given a local trivialization of E around y, we can identify the
fibre Ey with G such that the right action is just group multiplication on the right. We have that
y acts on Ey
= G commuting with the right G-action. This implies that there is a homomorphism
y : y G such that the action of y on Ey
= G is left multiplication by y (). Since
y = hgi is a cyclic group of order n, the homomorphism y : y G corresponds to choosing
an element h G of order n so that y (g) = h. If we choose a different local trivialization of E,
then y and hence h G change by conjugation. Thus associated to the (, G)-bundle E is a well
defined conjugacy class [h] G. Recall that a point in the rational Weyl alcove corresponds to
a conjugacy class = G of finite order. We say that E has type if [h] = [ ]. In this case, we
may choose our local trivialization such that h = , in other words y (g) = .
We let BunY (, G) denote the stack of -equivariant principal G-bundles on Y of type . According to Balaji-Seshadri [BS15, Theorem 5.3.1], this stack is equivalent to BunGX,x, . We will
occasionally find it useful to work with equivariant bundles on Y in place of parahoric bundles on
X. We note that from the equivariant bundle point of view there is clearly no difficulty in allowing
G to be any connected reductive group. This will be important for us in the proof of Theorem 40.
However, when G is non-simply connected the relation between equivariant bundles and parahoric
bundles requires more care, see [BS15, 8.1.13].
If E Y is an equivariant bundle of type , an equivariant Higgs field on E is defined to be
a -equivariant section of ad (E) Y . We may then speak of equivariant Higgs bundles of type
. One sees that the stack of all such Higgs bundles is precisely T BunY (, G). The equivalence
BunGX,x,
= BunY (, G) gives T BunGX,x,
= T BunY (, G). In other words, we obtain an
equivalence between parahoric Higgs bundles on X for the group scheme GX,x, and equivariant
Higgs bundles on Y of type . We will make use of equivariant Higgs bundles in the proof of
Theorem 40.
13

3.4. Parahoric Hitchin map. Let Q1 , , Q be algebraically independent homogeneous generators of the invariant ring C[g]G of degrees d1 , . . . , d . Recall that in the setting of Higgs bundles
without marked points, the Hitchin map is given by
M
(E, ) 7 (Q1 (), Q2 (), . . . , Q ())
(X, di ),
i

which takes a Higgs bundle (E, ) and applies the invariant polynomials Q1 , . . . , Q to the Higgs
field . In the parahoric setting, the Higgs field acquires a pole at the marked point x and hence
the differentials Q1 (), . . . , Q () will likewise acquire poles of various orders. To make this more
precise, suppose that U and let GX,x, be the corresponding Bruhat-Tits group scheme over
X. If (E, ) is a parahoric Higgs bundle for GX,x, , then the germ of at x may be identified
with an element of p
(the identification depends on a local trivialisation of the canonical bundle
and a choice of isomorphism GX,x, |Dx
= G , where G is the Bruhat-Tits group scheme over
Dx
= Spec(Ox ) corresponding to P ). Since we are assuming U, it is easy to see that mr () 1
for all roots r R. It follows that if is a parahoric Higgs field then Qi () has at most a pole of
order di at x. In particular, Qi () (X, di (di x)). Let
M
AeGX,x, :=
(X, di (di x)).
i

Definition 19. The parahoric Hitchin map is the map

hGX,x, : MGX,x, AeGX,x, ,
(E, ExP , ) 7 (Q1 (), . . . , Q ()).

Note that any two choices of generators of C[g]G are related by an isomorphism of c as an
algebraic variety over C. The corresponding Hitchin maps are likewise related by an isomorphism
of AeGX,x, . In this sense the Hitchin map is essentially independent of the choice of generators.

Notation 20. Let AGX,x, denote the closure in AeGX,x, of the image of hGX,x, .

The map hGX,x, : MGX,x, AeGX,x, factors through AGX,x, and we will denote by h the
factorisation h : MGX,x, AGX,x, . We will also refer to h as the parahoric Hitchin map.

3.5. Image of the Hitchin map. Finding an explicit description of AGX,x, is an important and
challenging problem. For example, our proof of Theorem 27 below relies on the non-trivial fact
that the image of the Hitchin map is non-singular (in fact, an affine space) under Assumption 12.
The problem of describing the image remains difficult even when we restrict to the parabolic case.
However, using our main local result, Theorem 14, we obtain a description of the image for all
parabolics in types A, B, C and G2 and for most parabolics in type D, using specific generators
for the invariant polynomials.
Theorem 21. Under Assumptions 12 and 13, we have an isomorphism
M
AGX,x,
(X, di ((di mi ).x)).
i

In particular, AGX,x, is isomorphic to an affine space of the same dimension as BunGX,x, .

The above description of the image of the Hitchin map need not hold if we use a generating set
for C[g]G different to the ones described in Assumption 13. For instance, as described in Subsection
2.6, the above description does not hold if we use traces of powers of matrices for generators of the
invariant ring.8 Of course, the fact that the image AGX,x, is an affine space of dimension equal to
dim BunGX,x, holds irrespective of the chosen generators. However, we dont know how to prove
8We speculate that the reason is that traces of powers do not form an integral basis of the invariant ring.
14

this fact without using the specific choice of coefficients of characteristic polynomials used in the
above theorem.
Conjecture 22. We conjecture that the Hitchin base AGX,x, is always isomorphic to an affine
space of dimension equal to dim BunGX,x, , without any restrictions on G, .
3.6. Main global results.
3.6.1. Global nilpotent cone. Recall that for any scheme S over C, we have
MGX,x, (S) = {(E, s) | E BunGX,x, (S), (X S, ad(E) 1XS/S )}.
Since GX,x, |(Xx)
= G (X x), we have, via the isomorphism g
= g induced by the killing form,
ad(E) 1XS/S |(Xx)S
= ad(E) 1XS/S |(Xx)S . Thus for any point y (X x) S, we
have
(y) g k(y).
Thus we say |(Xx)S is nilpotent if
y (X x) S, (y) g k(y) is nilpotent.
We define the global nilpotent cone as the substack N ilpX,x, of MGX,x, , given by
N ilpX,x, (S) = {(E, ) MGX,x, | |(Xx)S is nilpotent}.
We have the following key result:
Theorem 23. N ilpGX,x, is an isotropic substack of MGX,x, .
3.6.2. BunGX,x, is very good. Recall [BD97, 1], that a smooth equidimensional algebraic stack Y
is said to be good if dim(T Y) = 2 dim(Y) and is said to be very good if
codim{y Y | dim(Gy ) = d} > d

for all d > 0,

where Gy denotes the automorphism group of y. Equivalently Y is very good if T Y 0 is dense in

T Y, where Y 0 is the largest Deligne-Mumford substack of Y. Note that very good implies good.
Using the fact that N ilpGX,x, is isotropic, we prove:
Theorem 24. The stack BunGX,x, is very good.
The proof largely follows the argument of Beilinson-Drinfeld [BD97, 2] used to show that BunG
is very good, though some additional care is required to carry out the dimension arguments.
3.6.3. Poisson commutativity. Recall that h denotes the parahoric Hitchin map. Note that h is a
map
h : C[AGX,x, ] (MGX,x, , O).
Theorem 25. The image of the pullback h consists of Poisson commuting functions.
3.6.4. Lagrangian fibration. Using the above theorems, we prove:
Theorem 26. We have:
(i) Any irreducible component of any fibre of h has dimension dim(BunGX,x, ). In particular,
N ilpGX,x, is a Lagrangian substack of MGX,x, .
(ii) We have that AGX,x, is irreducible and has dimension dim(BunGX,x, ).
Together with Poisson commutativity of the Hitchin map, this shows that the parahoric Hitchin
fibration h : MGX,x, AGX,x, is a Lagrangian fibration.
15

3.6.5. Complete integrability. So far, we have shown that the parahoric Hitchin map is a Lagrangian
fibration. For this to be a completely integrable system, we need the base to be an affine space
and we need the generic fibres to be abelian varieties (more precisely, a generic fibre is a gerbe
over a disjoint union of abelian varieties). We prove complete integrability for parabolics satisfying
Assumption 12. Theorem 21 shows that under Assumption 12, the closure of the image of h is an
affine space. Moreover, using miracle flatness, we obtain the following:
Theorem 27. Suppose that G, satisfies Assumption 12. Then h : MGX,x, AGX,x, is flat and
surjective.
This shows that under Assumption 12, the set-theoretic image of the Hitchin map agrees with
the scheme-theoretic image, AGX,x, , which we have already shown to be an affine space. Next, we
have the following result concerning the fibres of the Hitchin map:
Theorem 28. Suppose G, satisfies Assumption 12. Let Z G be the center of G. Then the
generic fibres of h are Z-gerbes over a disjoint union of abelian varieties. More precisely, there
exists a non-empty Zariski open set U AGX,x, such that the morphism h1 (U ) U is proper
and smooth and each fibre is a Z-gerbe over a disjoint union of abelian varieties.
Together these results show that the parahoric Hitchin map defines a completely integrable
system, at least for parabolics satisfying Assumption 12. We conjecture that this is always the
case, that is:
Conjecture 29. The parahoric Hitchin map h : MGX,x, AGX,x, is a completely integrable
system for all G, . In particular, Theorems 27, 28 hold without assumption on G, .
3.7. A global section for parabolic bundles of type GLn . In Subsection 5.6 we construct a
section s : AGX,x, MGX,x, of the parabolic Hitchin map for parabolic Higgs bundles of type
G = GLn , which is the global analogue of the companion matrix described in Subsection 2.4. More
precisely, we have:
Proposition 30. Let G = GLn . For any parabolic subgroup P = P G, there exists a section
s : AGX,x, MGX,x, of the Hitchin map. Let a AGX,x, and set s(a) = (E, ). The determinant
of E is given by


1

det(E) = 2 n(n1) O(x) dim(G/P ) .

In particular, the degree of E is deg(E) = n(n 1)(g 1) dim(G/P ).

A surprising feature of our section s is that is takes values in a component of the GLn moduli
stack for which the underlying vector bundles have degree dim(G/P )(mod n). If dim(G/P )
happens to be a multiple of n, then we can tensor s by a suitable line bundle on X to get a section
of the corresponding SLn moduli stack. On the other hand, if dim(G/P ) is not a multiple of n
then we can not construct a section of the SLn moduli stack in this way and we speculate that in
this case there does not exist any such section.
4. Proofs of the local results
The main aim of this section is to prove Theorem 14. Thus we assume throughout this section
that we are in the parabolic case Uo and we let P G be the corresponding parabolic subgroup.
Some of the computations which appear closely resemble those in [KL87, 9], see 1.6.2 for further
remarks in this direction. Results closely related to our computations in type A can be found in
[SS95].
4.1. Type A.
16

4.1.1. Setup. We prove Theorem 14 for g = gln and deduce the sln case from this.
Let V = Cn be the standard representation of g = gln and let p g be a parabolic subalgebra.
Then p can be described as the subalgebra of g
= End(V ) preserving a flag of subspaces
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk = V.
In other words, an endomorphism T : V V is in p if and only if T (Fj ) Fj for all j. The
type of parabolic p is determined by the dimensions of subspaces in the flag. More specifically, let
nj = dim(Fj /Fj1 ) so that n = n1 +n2 + +nk is a partition of n. Choose splittings Fj = Fj1 Vj
of the flag so that
V = V1 V2 Vk .
Then p, n are given by
p=

Hom(Vi , Vj ),

ij

n=

Hom(Vi , Vj ).

i>j

For g(K), write the characteristic polynomial as

det(I ) = n + c1 ()n1 + + cn () K[].
The nj coefficient cj : g(K) K is a degree j invariant polynomial. The gln local Hitchin map
is given by
: g(K) Kn ,

7 (c1 (), cn ()).

Let l be the Levi subalgebra of p, which is reductive of rank n. We have that

M
l=
End(Vi ).
i

Let m0 m1 mn1 denote the fundamental degrees of l and let 1 2 m be

the conjugate partition of (n1 , n2 , . . . , nk ). Since End(Vi ) has fundamental degrees 1, 2, . . . , ni it is
easy to see that m0 , m1 , . . . , mn1 are given by the following sequence:
(3)

1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, . . . , m, m, . . . , m .
| {z } | {z }
|
{z
}
1 times

2 times

m times

Note that in the sln case, the corresponding Levi is the trace-free part of l, which has rank n 1
and the fundamental degrees are then m1 m2 mn1 .
1
Recall that p = p + tg(O) and p
= t n + g(O). We will show that
(p
)=

n1
M

ti1+mi O.

i=0

From this we easily obtain Theorem 14 in the case of sln . As tp

= n + tg(O), this is clearly
equivalent to showing:
(4)

(tp
)=

n1
M

tmi O.

i=0

We will prove Equation (4) by showing inclusions in both directions.

17

Ln1 mi
4.1.2. The inclusion i=0
t O (tp
). Recall that cj : g(K) K is an invariant polynomial of
degree j. Let cj (A1 , A2 , . . . , Aj ) denote the corresponding degree j invariant symmetric multilinear
map, defined so that cj (A) = cj (A, A, . . . , A). It is easy to see that cj is the trace of the linear map
j V j V given by
(5)

v1 vj 7

(1)j X
A(1) (v1 ) A(j+1) (vj+1 ),
j!

where the sum is over all permutations of 1, . . . , j. Indeed, the above expression is clearly symmetric
and if we set A1 = = Aj = A, we recover the definition of cj (A).
Choose basis e1,1 , . . . , e1,n1 for V1 and so on up to ek,1 , . . . , ek,nk for Vk . Let ei,i be the dual basis
vectors. Then a basis for p is given by {ei,i ej,j }ij and a basis for n by {ei,i ej,j }i>j .
Lemma 31. Given two sequences (i1 , i1 ), . . . , (ij , ij ) and (j1 , j1 ), . . . , (jj , jj ) of length j, let xu =
eiu ,iu eju ,ju . Then

(1) sign() if (i1 , i1 ), . . . , (ij , ij ) are distinct and

(ju , ju ) = (i(u) , i(u) ) for a permutation ,
cj (x1 , . . . , xj ) =

0
otherwise.
Proof. Straightforward from Equation (5).

Let S(n1 , . . . , nk ) = {(a, b) Z2 | 1 a k, 1 b na }. For each (a, b) S we have

a corresponding basis vector e(a,b) Va . Define a function s : {0, 1, . . . , n 1} S as follows.
Let s(0) = (k, 1). Then we obtain s(i + 1) from s(i) in the following manner. Suppose that
s(i) = ((i), (i)). If there is an element of S of the form ( , (i)) for < (i) then we let s(i + 1)
be the element of this form which has maximal . If there is no such element then we look for
elements of S of the form ( , (i) + 1). If there is such an element we take s(k + 1) to be the
element of this form with maximal . Such an element will exist unless i = n 1. Comparing the
definition of the sequence (0), (1), . . . , (n 1) with (3), we see that (j) = mj .
We say that j 1 is a decrease if s(j 1) = (a, b), s(j) = (a , b ) and a < a. It follows that
(mj 1) is the number of i {1, 2, . . . , j} such that i is not a decrease. Thus for any given j, the
number of decreases that are less than or equal to j is exactly j + 1 mj . For j = 1, . . . , n 1, let
j = 1 if j is a decrease and 0 otherwise. So 1 + + j = j + 1 mj . Now define E g(K) to be:
E = t1 es(0) es(1) + t2 es(1) es(2) + + tn1 es(n2) es(n1) .
Suppose we are given f0 , f1 , f2 , . . . , fn1 O. We construct a variant of the usual notion of
companion matrix, defined as:
A(f0 , f1 , , fn1 ) := E

n1
X

fj es(j) es(0) p
.

j=0

In matrix form A(f0 , , fn1 ) is given by:

f0 f1 f2

fn1
t1
0
0

t 2
0
0
0
A(f0 , , fn1 ) = 0
.
..
..
..
..
..
.
.
.
.
.
0

0
tn1
0
18

We claim that cj (A) = tj+mj1 fj1 . Indeed, the only basis element of j V which contributes
to the trace of (1)j j A is es(0) es(1) es(j1) , and for this element we find


(1)j j A(es(0) es(1) es(j1) ) = (1)j1 t(1 ++j1 ) fj1 es(1) es(2) es(j1) es(0)

= tj+mj1 fj1 es(0) es(1) es(j1) .

Ln1 m
Thus cj (tA) = tmj1 fj1 . This proves the inclusion i=0
t i O (tp
), since f0 , f1 , . . . , fn1 O
were arbitrary.
Ln1 mi
4.1.3. The inclusion (tp
i=0 t O.
)

Proposition 32. Let x1 , . . . , xj End(V ). Then cj (x1 , x2 , . . . , xj ) = 0 whenever j + 1 mj1 or

more of the xi s belong to n.

We will prove the proposition below. But first, let us see why it implies our desired result.
Ln1 mi
Corollary 33. We have the inclusion (tp
i=0 t O.
)

Proof. Any A tp
can be written as A = y + tz, where y n and z g(O). Then cj (A) =
cj (y + tz, y + tz, . . . , y + tz). Expanding this out and using Proposition 32, we see that cj (A) is
divisible by tmj1 .

For 1 r n 1, we define
Jr = {(j1 , . . . , jk ) Zk | 0 ja na , j1 + + jk = r}.
For each (j1 , . . . , jk ) Jr we further define
S(j1 , . . . , jk ) = {(a, b) Z2 | 1 a k, 1 b ja }.
Let Perm(S(j1 , . . . , jk )) be the set of all permutations of S(j1 , . . . , jk ). If Perm(S(j1 , . . . , jk ))
and (a, b) S(j1 , . . . , jk ) we say that (a, b) is a decrease for if (a, b) = (a , b ) with a < a. Let
Dec() be the total number of decreases of . Let
(j1 , . . . , jk ) =
r =

max

Perm(S(j1 ,...,jk ))

max

(j1 ,...,jm )Jr

{Dec()} ,

{(j1 , . . . , jk )} .

Lemma 34. Let (j1 , . . . , jk ) Jr . Then

(j1 , . . . , jk ) = r max(j1 , . . . , jk ).
Proof. We first show that there is a permutation with Dec() = r max(j1 , . . . , jk ). For this we
construct a map s : {1, . . . , r} S(j1 , . . . , jk ) as follows. Let s(1) = (a, 1), where a is the maximal
element of {1, . . . , k} with ja 6= 0. Then we obtain s(i + 1) from s(i) as follows. Suppose that
s(i) = ((i), (i)). If there is an element of S(j1 , . . . , jk ) of the form ( , (i)) for < then we
let s(i + 1) be the element of this form which has maximal . If there is no such element then
we look for elements of S(j1 , . . . , jk ) of the form ( , (i) + 1). If there is such an element we take
s(i + 1) to be the element of this form with maximal . Such an element will exist unless i = r.
Let be the cyclic permutation = (s(1), s(2), . . . , s(r)). From this construction it is clear that
the number of decreases of is r max(j1 , . . . , jk ).
Now we show that for any permutation of S(j1 , . . . , jk ) we have Dec() r max(j1 , . . . , jk ).
We claim that if is not a cyclic permutation then we can find a cyclic permutation
with
Dec() Dec(
). To see this, suppose that is not cyclic and consider any two cycles of ,
say, (s1 , s2 , . . . , su ), (t1 , t2 , . . . , tv ). We can write theses cycles in such a way that su and tv are
19

not decreases (since every cycle must have at least one non-decrease). Now let be the permutation obtained from by replacing the cycles (s1 , s2 , . . . , su ), (t1 , t2 , . . . , tv ) with a single cycle
(s1 , s2 , . . . , su , t1 , t2 , . . . , tv ). By construction Dec() Dec( ). Continuing in this fashion we obtain the desired cyclic permutation
.
We have reduced the problem to showing that Dec() r max(j1 , . . . , jk ) for any cyclic
permutation . Let a be such that ja = max(j1 , . . . , jk ). We consider the entries in of the form
(a, b) for some b. That is, we write as:
= (. . . , (a, b1 ), . . . , (a, b2 ), . . . , (a, bja ), . . . ).
Between any two terms (a, bi ), (a, bi+1 ) and between (a, bja ) and (a, b1 ), there must be at least one
non-decrease. Thus Dec() r ja as claimed.

Lemma 35. We have j = j mj1 .
Proof. By Lemma 34 we have
r =
=

max

{(j1 , . . . , jk )}

max

{r max(j1 , . . . , jk )}

(j1 ,...,jk )Jr

(j1 ,...,jk )Jr

=r
Therefore it suffices to show that:
mr1 =
=

min

{max(j1 , . . . , jk )} .

min

{max(j1 , . . . , jk )}

min

{max(j1 , . . . , jk )}

(j1 ,...,jk )Jr

(j1 ,...,jk )Jr

(j1 ,...,jk )Zk
0ja na
j1 ++jk =r

But this is immediate, since the mj are given by the sequence (3).

Proof of Proposition 32. For this we may as well take x1 , . . . , xj to be of the form xu = eiu ,iu eju ,ju
for some pair of sequences (i1 , i1 ), . . . , (ij , ij ) and (j1 , j1 ), . . . , (jj , jj ). To prove Proposition 32, we
show that if cj (x1 , . . . , xj ) 6= 0, then at most j mj1 of the xu belong to n. So suppose that
cj (x1 , . . . , xj ) 6= 0. By Lemma 31, we may assume that (i1 , i1 ), . . . , (ij , ij ) are distinct and that
(ju , ju ) = (i(u) , i(u) ) for some permutation of 1, . . . , j. After re-ordering the basis elements of
V1 , . . . , Vk , we may as well assume that our sequence {(iu , iu )} is of the form
(1, 1), (1, 2), . . . , (1, j1 ), (2, 1), . . . , (2, j2 ), . . . , (k, 1), . . . , (k, jk ),
for some (j1 , . . . , jk ) Jj . This sequence is exactly the elements of the set S(j1 , . . . , jk ). Then
is a permutation of S(j1 , . . . , jk ) and the number of xu belonging to n is precisely the number of
decreases of . The proposition now follows, since Dec() (j1 , . . . , jk ) j = j mj1 , by
Lemma 35.

4.2. Type B. Let g = so2n+1 which we view as the subalgebra of sl2n+1 preserving a nondegenerate symmetric bilinear form. Let V be the standard 2n + 1-dimensional representation.
A parabolic subalgebra p so2n+1 can be described as the subalgebra of g preserving a flag of
isotropic subspaces
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk .
Clearly any A so2n+1 preserving this flag also preserves the flag of length 2k + 1 given by
(6)

F1 F0 = V.
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk Fk Fk1
20

Note that Fk 6= Fk because dim(V ) is odd. Let r = dim(Fk ). Then W := Fk /Fk1 inherits an
orthogonal structure from V . Let 2s + 1 = dim(Fk /Fk ) so that 2n + 1 = 2r + 2s + 1, or n = r + s.
For j = 1, . . . , k let rj = dim(Fj /Fj1 ) so that r = r1 + r2 + + rk is a partition of r. We may
= F V so that
choose splittings Fj = Fj1 Vj , Fk = Fk W and Fj1
j
j
V = V1 V2 Vk W Vk V2 V1
and such that the orthogonal pairing pairs Vj with Vj and W with itself.
The flag of subspaces in V given by (6) defines a parabolic subalgebra p sl2n+1 for which
be the nilpotent
p = p so2n+1 . Let n denote the nilpotent radical of p so2n+1 and similarly let n
so2n+1 . In particular, we have an inclusion
radical of p sl2n+1 . It follows that n = n
1
1
p
+ sl2n+1 (O).
= t n + g(O) t n

We will use this to obtain lower bounds for the valuations of the invariant polynomials c2 , c4 , . . . , c2n
from the corresponding lower bounds obtained for type A in Section 4.1. Let l be the Levi subalgebra
of p and m
1 m
2 m
2n the fundamental degrees of p arranged in non-decreasing order.
Then since we have proven Theorem 14 for type A, we immediately have:
n
M
2i1
t2i+m
O.
)

(p

i=1

Therefore, to prove Theorem 14 for type B it suffices to show the following:

Proposition 36. We have an equality mi = m
2i1 .

Proof. Let 1 2 m be the conjugate partition to r = r1 + r2 + + rk . There are four

cases to consider according to whether m is even or odd and whether m 2s or m > 2s. We give
the proof in the case that m is even and m 2s, the other cases being similar. The flag given by
(6) corresponds to the partition of 2n + 1 given by (r1 , r1 , r2 , r2 , . . . , rk , rk , 2s + 1). Since m is even
and m 2s it follows that the sequence m
0, m
1, . . . , m
2n (where we set m
0 = 1) is given by:
1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 1, m + 2, . . . , 2s, 2s + 1.
|
{z
}
| {z } | {z }

21 +1 times 22 +1 times

2m +1 times

Therefore, the subsequence m

1, m
3, . . . , m
2n1 is given by:

1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, 3, 3, . . . , 3, 4, 4, . . . , 4, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 2, m + 4, . . . , 2s.
| {z } | {z } | {z } | {z }
|
{z
}
1 times

2 +1 times

3 times

4 +1 times

m +1 times

On the other hand, the Levi subalgebra l p is given by

M
End(Vi ) so(W ).
l
=
i

Thus the fundamental degrees of l are 1, 2, . . . , r1 , 1, 2, . . . , r2 , . . . , 1, 2, . . . , rk , 2, 4, 6, . . . , 2s. The

sequence m1 m2 mn is obtained by putting the fundamental degrees in non-decreasing
order. Clearly this is the same as the sequence m
1, m
3, . . . , m
2n1 given above.

4.3. Type C. We proceed in much the same way as for type B. Let g = sp2n which we view
as the subalgebra of sl2n preserving a symplectic form. Let V be the standard 2n-dimensional
representation. A parabolic subalgebra p sp2n can be described as the subalgebra of g preserving
a flag of isotropic subspaces
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk .
Any A sp2n preserving this flag also preserves the flag given by
(7)

{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk Fk Fk1
F1 F0 = V.
21

In the type C case, the inclusion Fk Fk may be an equality (this happens precisely when Fk
is a Lagrangian). In any case the (possibly zero-dimensional) space W := Fk /Fk1 inherits a
symplectic structure from V . Let 2s = dim(Fk /Fk ) so that 2n = 2r + 2s and note that s may be
zero. For j = 1, . . . , k let rj = dim(Fj /Fj1 ) so that r = r1 + r2 + + rk is a partition of r. We
= F V so that
may choose splittings Fj = Fj1 Vj , Fk = Fk W and Fj1
j
j
V = V1 V2 Vk W Vk V2 V1
and such that the symplectic form pairs Vj with Vj and W with itself.
The flag of subspaces in V given by (7) defines a parabolic subalgebra p sl2n for which
as the nilpotent
p = p sp2n . Let n denote the nilpotent radical of p sp2n and similarly define n

radical of p sl2n . It follows that n = n sp2n and we obtain an inclusion

1
1
p
+ sl2n (O).
= t n + g(O) t n

Let l be the Levi subalgebra of p and m

1 m
2 m
2n the fundamental degrees of p arranged
in non-decreasing order. As we have proven Theorem 14 for type A, we immediately have:
(p
)

n
M

2i1
O.
t2i+m

i=1

To prove Theorem 14 for type C it suffices to show the following:

Proposition 37. We have an equality mi = m
2i1 .
Proof. The proof is almost identical to the type B case. Let 1 2 m be the conjugate
partition to r = r1 + r2 + + rk . There are four cases to consider according to whether m is even
or odd and whether m 2s or m > 2s. We give the proof in the case that m is even and m 2s.
The flag given by (7) corresponds to the partition of 2n given by (r1 , r1 , r2 , r2 , . . . , rk , rk , 2s). Since
m is even and m 2s it follows that the sequence m
0, m
1, . . . , m
2n (where we set m
0 = 1) is given
by:
1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 1, m + 2, . . . , 2s.
| {z } | {z }
|
{z
}
21 +1 times 22 +1 times

2m +1 times

Therefore, the subsequence m

1, m
3, . . . , m
2n1 is given by:

1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, 3, 3, . . . , 3, 4, 4, . . . , 4, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 2, m + 4, . . . , 2s.
| {z } | {z } | {z } | {z }
|
{z
}
1 times

2 +1 times

3 times

4 +1 times

m +1 times

On the other hand, the Levi subalgebra l p is given by

M
End(Vi ) sp(W ).
l
=
i

Thus the fundamental degrees of l are 1, 2, . . . , r1 , 1, 2, . . . , r2 , . . . , 1, 2, . . . , rk , 2, 4, 6, . . . , 2s (if s = 0

the fundamental degrees are 1, 2, . . . , r1 , 1, 2, . . . , r2 , . . . , 1, 2, . . . , rk ). The sequence m1 m2
mn is obtained by putting the fundamental degrees in non-decreasing order. Clearly this is
the same as the sequence m
1, m
3, . . . , m
2n1 given above.

4.4. Type D. Identify g = so2n with the subalgebra of sl2n preserving a non-degenerate symmetric
bilinear form. Let V be the standard 2n-dimensional representation. Let p so2n be a parabolic
subalgebra of the type specified in Assumption 12. Such a parabolic subalgebra is the subalgebra
of g preserving a flag of isotropic subspaces
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk .
22

Let r = dim(Fk ) and rj = dim(Fj /Fj1 ) so that r = r1 + r2 + + rk is a partition of r. We also

set s = n r. Assumption 12 is the requirement that s 2 and 2s m = maxj (rj ). In particular
s > 0, so Fk 6= Fk . Observe that p also preserves the flag of length 2k + 1 given by

F1 F0 = V.
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk Fk Fk1

(8)

= F V so that
Choose splittings Fj = Fj1 Vj , Fk = Fk W and Fj1
j
j

V = V1 V2 Vk W Vk V2 V1
and such that the orthogonal pairing pairs Vj with Vj and W with itself.
The flag of subspaces in V given by (8) defines a parabolic subalgebra p sl2n for which
the nilpotent radical of p sl2n .
p = p so2n . Let n denote the nilpotent radical of p so2n and n

Then n = n so2n and we have an inclusion

1
1
p
+ sl2n (O).
= t n + g(O) t n

Let l be the Levi subalgebra of p and m

1 m
2 m
2n the fundamental degrees of p arranged
in non-decreasing order. From Theorem 14 for type A, we have:
(p
)

n1
M

2i1
O tn+
t2i+m

m
2n1

O.

i=1

To prove Theorem 14 it remains to show the following:

Proposition 38. Using the ordering convention for m1 , m2 , , mn specified in Section 3.5, we
2n1
= s.
have equalities mi = m
2i1 for i < n and mn = m
2
Proof. Let 1 2 m be the conjugate partition to r = r1 + r2 + + rk . Our assumption
gives 2s m. There are two cases to consider according to whether m is even or odd. We give
the proof in the case m is even, the other case being essentially the same. The flag given by (8)
corresponds to the partition of 2n given by (r1 , r1 , r2 , r2 , . . . , rk , rk , 2s). Since m is even and m 2s
it follows that the sequence m
0, m
1, . . . , m
2n (where we set m
0 = 1) is given by:
1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 1, m + 2, . . . , 2s, 2s.
|
{z
}
| {z } | {z }

21 +1 times 22 +1 times

2m +1 times

2n1
Therefore, the sequence m
1, m
3, . . . , m
2n3 , m
2 is given by:

1, 1, . . . , 1, 2, 2, . . . , 2, 3, 3, . . . , 3, 4, 4, . . . , 4, . . . , m, m, . . . , m, m + 2, m + 4, . . . , 2s 2, s.
|
{z
}
| {z } | {z } | {z } | {z }
1 times

2 +1 times

3 times

4 +1 times

m +1 times

If m = 2s then the last instance of m = 2s in this sequence should be replaced by s.

The Levi subalgebra l p is given by
M
End(Vi ) so(W ).
l
=
i

Thus the fundamental degrees of l are 1, 2, . . . , r1 , 1, 2, . . . , r2 , . . . , 1, 2, . . . , rk , 2, 4, 6, . . . , 2s 2, s.

Recall from Section 3.5 that the sequence m1 , m2 , , mn is obtained by taking mn = s and
arranging the remaining fundamental degrees in non-decreasing order m1 m2 mn1 .
2n1
given above.

Clearly this is the same as the sequence m
1, m
3, . . . , m
2n3 , m
2
4.5. Subtleties in type D. We give some examples to illustrate the difficulties that arise for
parabolic subalgebras not satisfying Assumption 12.
23

4.5.1. Example 1. Consider g = so(14) and p the parabolic subalgebra preserving a 5-dimensional
isotropic subspace F1 . Thus k = 1, r = r1 = 5 and s = 2. Then 2s = 4  m = 5, so this example
fails Assumption 12. We note that p preserves the flag F1 F1 and dim(F1 ) = 9. Let p sl14
sl14
be the parabolic subalgebra of sl14 preserving this flag so that p = p g and similarly n = n
for the corresponding nilpotent radicals. The fundamental degrees m
1, m
2, , m
14 for the Levi
p are thus:
subalgebra of
1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 4, 4, 5, 5,
which implies an inclusion
(9)

2
2
3
4
4
3
(tp
) tO t O t O t O t O t O t O,

since the Pfaffian must vanish to order at least 25 = 3. On the other hand the Levi subalgebra of
p is isomorphic to gl5 so(4) which has fundamental degrees 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 2, 2. These do not match
the powers of t in (9), which are 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 3. Note however that (9) yields
1
2
4
5
6
8
4
(p
) t O t O t O t O t O t O t O.

This shows that the codimension of O7 in (p ) is 30 = dim(g/p), which is the correct codimension required for integrability of the corresponding global Hitchin system.
4.5.2. Example 2. Consider g = so(8) and let p be the parabolic subalgebra preserving a maximal
isotropic subspace F1 . Then s = 0, so clearly this example fails Assumption 12. Let p sl8 be the
sl8 for the corresponding
parabolic subalgebra preserving F1 , so that p = p g and similarly n = n
nilpotent radicals. The fundamental degrees m
1, m
2, , m
8 for the Levi subalgebra of p are thus:
1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4,
which implies an inclusion
(10)

2
3
2
(tp
) tO t O t O t O.

The Levi subalgebra of p is isomorphic to gl4 which has fundamental degrees 1, 2, 3, 4. These do not
match the powers of t in (10), which are 1, 2, 3, 2. Unlike the previous example, the two sequences
1, 2, 3, 4 and 1, 2, 3, 2 do not even give the same total. From (10) we have:
1
2
3
2
(p
) t O t O t O t O.

This shows that the codimension of O4 in (p ) is 8. However in this case we have dim(g/p) =
6 < 8, which suggests that the image of the Hitchin map applied to p
lies in a codimension 2
1
2
3
2
subvariety of t O t O t O t O (indeed, Theorem 42 (ii) implies this).
4.6. Type G2 . Let g be the Lie algebra of type G2 and V its 7-dimensional representation. The G2
Lie algebra preserves a symmetric non-degenerate bilinear form h , i and a 3-form 3 V . There
are three parabolic subalgebras to consider, two maximal parabolics and the Borel subalgebra. We
consider each of these separately.
4.6.1. Stabiliser of an isotropic line. Let F1 V be a 1-dimensional isotropic subspace. Let p g
be the maximal parabolic subalgebra preserving F1 . Suppose that F1 is spanned by v1 . Set
F3 = {v V | (v, v1 , . ) = 0}. One can check that F3 is a 3-dimensional isotropic subspace of V
containing F1 , hence p preserves the flag given by
(11)

{0} F1 F3 F3 F1 V.

Thus p is contained in the parabolic subalgebra p of sl7 preserving this flag. Letting n denote the
the nilpotent radical of p, we have an inclusion n n
. Hence we
nilpotent radical of p and n
+ sl7 (O). Let l be the Levi subalgebra of
also have an inclusion p = t1 n + g(O) t1 n
p and

m
1 m
2 m
6 the fundamental degrees of p arranged in non-decreasing order. The flag (11)
24

corresponds to the partition 7 = 1 + 2 + 1 + 1 + 2 + 1, so we get m

1, . . . , m
6 = 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2. This
gives an inclusion
m
1
5
O tm
O = tO t2 O.
(tp
)t
On the other hand, the Levi subalgebra of p is isomorphic to gl2 , which has fundamental degrees
m1 O tm2 O as required.
m1 , m2 = 1, 2. Thus (tp
)t
4.6.2. Stabiliser of a -isotropic plane. Let F2 V be a 2-dimensional subspace of V . We say F2
is -isotropic if (v, w, . ) = 0 for all v, w F2 . One can check that a -isotropic plane is also
isotropic with respect to h , i. Let p g be the subalgebra preserving a -isotropic plane F2 . Then
p is a maximal parabolic subalgebra. Clearly p preserves the flag
(12)

{0} F2 F2 V.

Let p be the parabolic subalgebra of sl7 preserving this flag. Letting n denote the nilpotent radical
the nilpotent radical of
and p = t1 n + g(O)
of p and n
p, we have as usual inclusions n n
+ sl7 (O). Let l be the Levi subalgebra of p and m
1 m
2 m
6 the fundamental degrees
t1 n
of p arranged in non-decreasing order. The flag (12) corresponds to the partition 7 = 2 + 3 + 2, so
we get m
1, . . . , m
6 = 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3. This gives an inclusion
m
1
5
(tp
O tm
O = tO t2 O.
)t

The Levi subalgebra of p is isomorphic to gl2 , which has fundamental degrees m1 , m2 = 1, 2. Thus
m1 O tm2 O as required.
(tp
)t
4.6.3. Borel subalgebra. Suppose that p g is a Borel subalgebra and n the opposite nilpotent
radical. In this case p will preserve a flag F1 F2 , where F1 is an isotropic line and F2 is a
-isotropic plane. From (11) and (12) we see that p preserves a maximal flag, which corresponds
to the partition 7 = 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 1. Arguing as in the previous cases we get an inclusion
(tp
) tO tO.
The Levi subalgebra of p is isomorphic to gl1 gl1 , which has fundamental degrees m1 = 1, m2 = 1.
m1 O tm2 O as required.
Thus (tp
)t
5. Proofs of the global results
5.1. The global nilpotent cone is isotropic.
Theorem 39. N ilpGX,x, is an isotropic substack of MGX,x, .
Proof. The proof is an adaptation of [Gin01, Lemma 5] and hence we will restrict ourselves to
explaining the necessary modifications involved. Let E be a GX,x, torsor on X and let
(X, ad(E) X ) be nilpotent. Let B GX,x, be the Borel subgroup scheme, defined as the
flat closure of (X x) B in GX,x, , for a Borel subgroup B G. From Heinloth [Hei10, Lemma
23], we have the natural morphism f : BunB BunGX,x, is surjective.
Now we can find a finite Galois cover p : Y X, with Galois group , such that the stack of
-equivariant principal G-bundles on Y of a fixed local type determined by , is equivalent to the
stack of GX,x, torsors on X [BS15, Theorem 5.3.1]. As explained in [BS15], if we choose one such
equivariant bundle F on Y , we have an isomorphism of group schemes on X:
R (Ad(F))
= GX,x, ,
Y /X

where Ad(F) denotes the adjoint bundle of F and RY /X () denotes the invariant direct image
functor. The equivalence of the categories between equivariant bundles on Y of fixed local type
and GX,x, -torsors is obtained by

F 7 RY /X (F G F op ),
25

where for any right G-torsors E, F on Y , E G F op denotes the contracted product [BS15]:
E G F op :=

E Y F
.
(xg, y) (x, yg1 )

Next, we have a -equivariant B reduction FB of F, such that RY /X (Ad(FB ))

= B. Let E be the
equivariant bundle on Y , which corresponds to E under the equivalence mentioned above. Then

we have an equivariant section of ad(E ) Y , which descends to . As in [Gin01], there exists

an equivariant B reduction of E over the generic point of Y , for which is a section of nE Y ,

where n denotes the nilradical of the Borel subalgebra and nE denotes the corresponding bundle

of Lie algebras determined by the B reduction of E . Since G/B is projective, we can extend this

B reduction EB of E to the whole of Y . Thus we have a B reduction EB of E given by

EB = RY /X (EB G FBop )
such that over the generic point, nEB X . As in [Gin01], this implies that f (s) = 0
(X, ad(EB ) X ) as it vanishes on the generic point. Following the notations of [Gin01, Lemma
3], for N1 = BunB and N2 = BunGX,x, , we have N ilpX,x, = pr2 (Yf ). The rest of the proof can be
done exactly as in the proof of [Gin01, Lemma 5].

5.2. BunGX,x, is very good.
Theorem 40. The stack BunGX,x, is very good for any U.
Proof. As mentioned in 3.3, we prefer to work with equivariant principal bundles of type on a
Galois cover p : Y X, as opposed to parahoric bundles on X. We will allow G to be a connected
semisimple group throughout this proof. We will prove that BunY (, G) is very good by adapting
the argument used by Beilinson-Drinfeld [BD97, 2.10.5] in the non-equivariant setting. Most of the
argument carries over with minor changes, except that we need to be more careful with dimensions.
We also need the fact that the nilpotent cone in T BunY (, G) is isotropic for any semisimple G.
The proof of Theorem 39 clearly extends to this case without difficulty.
We must show that BunY (, G) satisfies:
codim{E BunY (, G) | dim(H0 (Y, ad(E)) = d} > d for all d > 0,
Where H0 (Y, ad(E)) denotes the space of -equivariant sections of ad(E). This is equivalent to
showing that
(13)

dim(A(G) \ A0 (G)) < dim(BunY (, G)),

where A(G) is the stack of pairs (E, s), E BunY (, G), s H0 (Y, ad(E)) and A0 (G) A(G) is
the closed substack of pairs with s = 0.
Let c = Spec(C[g]G ) be the affine space whose coordinate ring is the ring of invariant polynomials
on g. Recall that
c = g//G = t/W,
where W is the Weyl group. The morphism g c induces a map H0 (Y, ad(E)) M or(Y, c) = c,
in other words, we apply invariant polynomials to s H0 (Y, ad(E)). This gives a natural map
f : A(G) c.
For h t, let h c be the image of h under t c and set Ah (G) = f 1 (h). Set Gh = {g
G | Adg h = h} and gh = Lie(Gh ) = {a g | [a, h] = 0}. Note that h t is semisimple and so Gh
is reductive. In fact Gh is the Levi of a parabolic subgroup of G. Denote by zh the center of gh .
26

Since h zh and there are a finite number of subalgebras of g of the form zh , (13) follows from the
inequality dim(Ah (G) \ A0 (G)) < dim(BunY (, G)) dim(zh ). So it is enough to show that
(14)

dim(Ah (G)) < dim(BunY (, G)) dim(zh ) for h 6= 0

(15)

dim(A0 (G) \ A0 (G)) < dim(BunY (, G)).

Consider (E, s) Ah (G). Then s H0 (Y, ad(E)) and s maps to h c. Let us write s = ss + sn ,
where ss is semisimple, sn is nilpotent and [ss , sn ] = 0. With respect to a local trivialisation of E
around y, we may identify with an element of G and ss (y) with an element of g. By -equivariance
of s, we have that Ad (ss (y)) = ss (y). Choosing a different trivialisation will change and ss (y)
by conjugation. Next we note that since ss (y) maps to h C
= t/W , we can choose a local
trivialisation in which ss (y) = h. In this trivialisation the equation Ad (ss (y)) = ss (y) becomes
Ad (h) = h. So Gh . Denote by Z h the center of Gh . Then we may regard as an element of
Gh and also of Gh /Z h . Thus it makes sense to speak of the stacks BunY (, Gh ), BunY (, Gh /Z h )
and also of Ah (Gh ), A0 (Gh ), A0 (Gh /Z h ). We will now argue that (14) follows from (15) with G
replaced by Gh /Z h .
Next we observe that since h zh , there is an obvious isomorphism A0 (Gh )
= Ah (Gh ) and a
further isomorphism Ah (Gh )
= Ah (G). The latter follows from the fact that if (E, s) Ah (G),
then ss , the semisimple part of s defines a reduction of structure group to Gh .
Observe that there is a natural morphism : A0 (Gh ) A0 (Gh /Z h ). A non-empty fibre of is
isomorphic to BuneY (, Z h )
= BunX (Z h ), where e denotes the identity element of Z h . So
dim(Ah (G)) dim(BunX (Z h )) + dim(A0 (Gh /Z h )).
Let us define e() and e(, h) by:
e() = #{r R+ | h, ri 6= 0, 1},
e(, h) = #{r R+ | h, ri 6= 0, 1 and hh, ri = 0}
Then one can show [BS15] that:
dim(BunY (, G)) = (g 1) dim(G) + e(),
dim(BunY (, Gh /Z h )) = (g 1) dim(Gh /Z h ) + e(, h).
Now since dim(BunX (Z h )) = (g 1) dim(zh ) and (15) implies that dim(A0 (Gh /Z h )) < (g
1) dim(gh /zh ) + e(, h), we get:
dim(Ah (G)) (g 1) dim(zh ) + (g 1) dim(gh /zh ) + e(, h)
= (g 1) dim(G) (g 1) dim(g/gh ) + e(, h)
(g 1) dim(G) + e() (g 1) dim(g/gh )
= dim(BunY (, G)) (g 1) dim(g/gh ).
But dim(g/gh ) 2 dim(zh ) > dim(zh ), if h 6= 0. This shows (14).
To prove (15) we will show that if V A0 (G) is a locally closed reduced irreducible substack,
then dim(V ) dim(BunY (, G)) and dim(V ) = dim(BunY (, G)) if and only if V A0 (G).
Given such a V , let A0 (G)V denote the irreducible component of A0 (G) containing V . Let
N ilp denote the nilpotent cone in BunY (, G). We have shown that N ilp is isotropic, hence
dim(N ilp) dim(BunY (, G)).
27

For H0 (Y, Y )
= H 0 (X, X ) consider the morphism m : A0 (G)V N ilp defined by
(E, s) 7 (E, s). The morphisms m define m : A0 (G)V H 0 (X, ) N ilp. The image of
m is contained in some locally closed reduced irreducible substack Z N ilp. If 6= 0 then
m induces an embedding V Z , where Z is the closed substack of Z consisting of pairs
(E, ) such that the restriction of to the subspace D = {y Y | (y) = 0} is zero. So
dim(V ) dim(Z ) dim(Z) dim(N ilp) dim(BunY (, G)). If dim(V ) = dim(BunY (, G)),
then Z = Z for all non-zero H 0 (X, X ). This means that = 0 for all (E, ) Z and
therefore s = 0 for all (E, s) V , i.e. V A0 (G).

5.3. Poisson commutativity. The aim of this subsection is to prove Theorem 25. Our proof is
analytic as we will make use of Dolbeault cohomology. However, it should be possible to give a

purely algebraic proof by replacing instances of Dolbeault cohomology with Cech

cohomology. This
would lead to a proof along the same lines as given by Bottacin for parabolics of type A [Bot95].
However, we found the analytic approach to be the most efficient and easiest to understand.
Let (E, ) be a parahoric Higgs bundle. Thus H 0 (X, ad(E) ). If is a section of ad(E)
and is a section of ad(E) , then [, ] is a section of ad(E) . We therefore have the following
two-term complex:
ad(E)

[, . ]

/ ad(E) .

Borrowing notation from [Bot95], we denote this complex by [, . ].

For any parahoric Higgs bundle (E, ), we have that H0 (X, [, . ]) is the Lie algebra of infinitesimal automorphisms of (E, ). If H0 (X, [, . ]) = 0, then around (E, ) the moduli stack is
Deligne-Mumford and H1 (X, [, . ]) is the tangent space at (E, ). Observe that the dual complex
Hom([, . ], C) tensored by is canonically isomorphic to [, . ]. Thus, by the extension of Serre duality to hypercohomology, we see that Hj (X, [, . ])
= H2j (X, [, . ]) . Therefore H0 (X, [, . ]) = 0
2
implies that H (X, [, . ]) = 0 as well. When j = 1, Serre duality gives a symplectic form on
H1 (X, [, . ]), which coincides with the canonical symplectic form on the moduli stack of Higgs
bundles.
In Dolbeault cohomology an element of H1 (X, [, . ]) is represented by a pair (, ), where
0,1 (X, ad(E)) and 0,0 (X, ad(E) ) satisfying:
= [, ].
Moreover, the symplectic form on the moduli space of Higgs bundles is given by:
Z
(1 , 2 ) (2 , 1 ),
((1 , 1 ), (2 , 2 )) =
X

where denotes the Killing form. This is clear since the above formula is simply the Dolbeault
realisation of Serre duality.
Theorem 41. The image of the pullback h consists of Poisson commuting functions.
Proof. Let Bun0GX,x, be the substack of parahoric torsors E with H 0 (X, ad(E)) = 0, i.e. Bun0GX,x,
is the largest Deligne-Mumford substack of BunGX,x, . By Theorem 40, BunGX,x, is very good,
hence T Bun0GX,x, is dense in T BunGX,x, . Thus, to show Poisson commutativity of functions in
the image of h , it is enough to show such functions Poisson commute on T Bun0GX,x, . We therefore
restrict attention to parahoric Higgs bundles (E, ) with H 0 (X, ad(E)) = 0. This also implies that
H0 (X, [, . ]) = 0.
28

Let be an invariant polynomial on g of degree d . Then for any parahoric Higgs bundle (E, )
we can regard () as a holomorphic section of d (d x). Let H 1 (X, 1d (d x)). By Serre
duality we can pair () with to get a complex number
Z
() C.
f, (E, ) = h(), i =
X

This defines a regular function f, on the Hitchin base and such functions generate the ring of all
regular functions on the base. Thus we just need to show that any two such functions f, , f ,
Poisson commute.
To prove Poisson commutativity, we work out the Hamiltonian vector field X, associated to
f, . By definition this is the vector field whose value at (E, ) satisfies
(16)

df, (E, )(Y ) = (X, (E, ), Y )

for all tangent vectors Y at (E, ). Suppose

R we represent Y in Dolbeault cohomology as (Y , Y )
and X, (E, ) as (, ). Differentiating X f, () in the Y -direction gives
Z
d (, . . . , , Y ).
df, (E, )(Y ) =
X

We also find:
(X, (E, ), Y ) =

(, Y ) (Y , ).
X

Comparing these expressions, we see that Equation (16) will be satisfied if we choose = 0 and let
be defined by:
(, ) = d (, , . . . , , ).
In order for this to be a representative in Dolbeault cohomology, we need to check that (, )
chosen in this way is a cocycle, i.e. [, ] = 0. For all sections y of ad(E), we have:
([, ], y) = (, [, y])
= d (, , . . . , , [, y])
= 0,
where in the last line we use ad-invariance of . Hence [, ] = 0, as required.
We have shown that the Hamiltonian vector field X, of f, evaluated at the point (E, ) may
be represented by a Dolbeault cocycle of the form (, , 0). Similarly if we have another such
function f , then its Hamiltonian vector field X , evaluated at (E, ) may be represented in the
form ( , , 0). From the definition of the Poisson bracket we have:
{f, , f , }(E, ) = (X, (E, ), X , (E, ))
Z
(, , 0) ( , , 0)
=
X

= 0.

This proves Poisson commutativity of the functions {f, }, and hence any two functions in the
image of the pullback h will Poisson commute.

29

5.4. Lagrangian Fibration.

Theorem 42. We have:
(i) Any irreducible component of any fibre of h has dimension dim(BunGX,x, ). In particular,
N ilpGX,x, is a Lagrangian substack of MGX,x, .
(ii) We have that AGX,x, is irreducible and has dimension dim(BunGX,x, ).
Proof. Our proof is largely modelled on [Gin01, Proposition 1]. First we show that AGX,x, is irreducible. Indeed, since by Theorem 40, BunGX,x, is very good and connected we deduce that
MGX,x, = T BunGX,x, is irreducible [BD97, 1]. It follows that the image of h is an irreducible
topological space and hence its closure, which is AGX,x, , is also irreducible.
Since BunGX,x, is good, we have dim(MGX,x, ) = dim(T BunGX,x, ) = 2 dim(BunGX,x, ). It
follows that each irreducible component of any fibre of h has dimension greater than or equal to
2 dim(BunGX,x, )dim(AGX,x, ). In particular, if N is an irreducible component of N ilpGX,x, , then:
dim(N ) 2 dim(BunGX,x, ) dim(AGX,x, ).
On the other hand, by Theorem 39, we have that N ilpGX,x, is an isotropic substack of T BunGX,x, .
From the definition of an isotropic substack, one sees that we have an inequality
dim(N ) dim(BunGX,x, ).
Moreover, N ilpGX,x, is Lagrangian if and only if the above is an equality for each irreducible component N of N ilpGX,x, .
Next, let F be a generic non-singular fibre of h. By Theorem 41, we have that F is a coisotropic
substack of T BunGX,x, and it follows that every irreducible component of F has dimension at least
dim(BunGX,x, ). Using the natural C -action on T BunGX,x, , we can put the fibre F into a family
parametrized by A1 , so that the central fibre is N ilpGX,x, and all other fibres are isomorphic to F .
One deduces from this that dim(F ) dim(N ilpGX,x, ). Combining these dimension estimates, we
have
dim(BunGX,x, ) dim(F ) dim(N ilpGX,x, ) dim(BunGX,x, ).
We must have equality throughout and hence dim(F ) = dim(N ilpGX,x, ) = dim(BunGX,x, ). Since
the generic fibres of h have dimension dim(BunGX,x, ) and MGX,x, is irreducible, we deduce that
AGX,x, has dimension dim(T BunGX,x, ) dim(BunGX,x, ) = dim(BunGX,x, ), which proves (ii).
Repeating the argument using the C -action shows that every fibre of h has dimension at most
dim(N ilpGX,x, ) = dim(BunGX,x, ). On the other hand, any irreducible component of any fibre of h
has dimension at least dim(T BunGX,x, ) dim(AGX,x, ) = dim(BunGX,x, ). Hence any irreducible
component of any fibre has dimension equal to dim(BunGX,x, ), proving (i).

5.5. Complete integrability.
Theorem 43. Under Assumptions 12 and 13, we have an isomorphism
M
AGX,x,
(X, di ((di mi ).x)).
i

In particular, AGX,x, is an affine space of the same dimension as BunGX,x, .

Proof. Using our main local result, Theorem 14, we immediately have an inclusion AGX,x,
L
di
42, we know that dim(AGX,x, ) = dim(BunGX,x, ). Therei (X, ((di mi ).x)). By Theorem


L
fore it suffices to show that dim
(X,
di ((di mi ).x)) = dim(BunGX,x, ). Let BunG be the
i
30

moduli stack of principal G-bundles on X. Since GX,x, is of parabolic type, we have

dim(BunGX,x, ) = dim(BunG ) + dim(G/P )
= dim(G)(g 1) + dim(G/P ).
On the other hand, by Riemann-Roch, we have:
!
M
X
di
(X, ((di mi ).x)) =
(2di 1)(g 1) + (di mi )
dim
i

1
(dim(G) dim(L))
2
= dim(G)(g 1) + dim(G/P ),
= dim(G)(g 1) +

where L denotes the Levi subgroup of P . This gives the desired equality of dimensions.

Theorem 44. Suppose that G, satisfies Assumption 12. Then h : MGX,x, AGX,x, is flat and
surjective.
Proof. We have that BunGX,x, is very good, in particular it is good. As described in [BD97, 2], this
implies MGX,x, = T BunGX,x, is a local complete intersection and in particular Cohen-Macaulay.
By Theorem 21 we have that AGX,x, is an affine space, hence smooth. It then follows from miracle
flatness that h is flat. As h is flat we deduce that the image of h is an open subset of the affine
space AGX,x, . Moreover, the image is preserved by the C -action and contains the origin, hence
the image is the whole of AGX,x, , i.e. h is surjective.

Theorem 45. Suppose G, satisfies Assumption 12. Let Z G be the center of G. Then the
generic fibres of h are Z-gerbes over a disjoint union of abelian varieties. More precisely, there
exists a non-empty Zariski open set U AGX,x, such that the morphism h1 (U ) U is proper
and smooth and each fibre is a Z-gerbe over a disjoint union of abelian varieties.
Proof. Clearly there exists a non-empty Zariski open set U AGX,x, such that the morphism
h1 (U ) U is smooth. Using our choice of U0 , we may define the notions of stability and
semistability for parabolic Higgs bundles. Let Ms MGX,x, denote the open substack of Higgs
bundles that are stable with respect to . Since BunGX,x, is very good, we know that T BunGX,x,
is irreducible and hence Ms is a dense open substack. Under Assumption 12, we have by Theorem
44 that h is flat and in particular an open map. It follows that we can choose U with U h(Ms ).
Next, let W T BunGX,x, be the open substack of pairs (E, ) whose automorphism group is Z.
If W is non-empty then we can further assume U is chosen with U h(W ). We have that W is
non-empty because there exist ordinary G-Higgs bundles (E, ) whose automorphism group is Z,
where ordinary means E is a principal G-bundle and is a holomorphic section of ad(E) . Let
ExP be any reduction to P at x. Then (E, ExP , ) is a parabolic Higgs bundle with automorphism
group Z.
With our assumptions on U we have that every fibre of h1 (U ) contains a stable Higgs bundle
and also contains a Higgs bundle with automorphism group Z. We will give an argument using
Hamiltonian flows to show that in fact every Higgs bundle in h1 (U ) is stable and has automorphism
group Z. To show this, we need to switch to an analytic point of view. Thus we let E X denote
a fixed C principal G-bundle on X (in fact, E is trivial since G is assumed simply connected).
We fix also a reduction of structure of E to P over x. A parabolic G-Higgs bundle (E, ) is defined
analytically by a pair ( E , ) where E is a -operator on E and is a section of ad(E) (x)
such that E = 0 and Resx () n. Let be an invariant polynomial on g of degree d , let
H 1 (X, 1d (d x)) and define the function f, as the proof of Theorem 41. Let X, be
31

the Hamiltonian vector field associated to f, and recall that X, evaluated at the point (E, )
may be represented in Dolbeault cohomology by a cocycle of the form (, (), 0), where , ()
is defined by:
(, (), ) = d (, , . . . , , ).
For t R, let (Et , t ) be the Higgs bundle obtained by flowing (E, ) along X, for time t and let
Et be the -operator on E defining the holomorphic bundle Et . Since X, (Et , t ) = (, (t ), 0),
we see that t t = 0, or t = is constant. Thus , (t ) = , () is t-independent and it follows
that
( Et , t ) = ( E + t, (), ).
Now suppose that : E E is a C principal bundle isomorphism that preserves . Then as
preserves the Killing form and the invariant polynomial , we find that preserves , ().
Therefore preserves E if and only if it preserves Et for any given t R. In particular this means
that the automorphism group of (Et , t ) is independent of t. Suppose we had chosen (E, ) with
automorphism group Z. Then for each t, the automorphism group of (Et , t ) is also Z. In a similar
manner we see that for each t, (Et , t ) is stable if and only if (E, ) is stable.
We note that any two points in the same connected component of a fibre of h1 (U ) U are
connected by a series of Hamiltonian flows along vector fields of the form Xj ,j for various choices
of j and j . Thus any two Higgs bundles in the same connected component of a fibre have the
same automorphism group. This shows that W h1 (U ) is non-empty and is open and closed in
the analytic topology. But h1 (U ) is connected since it is a Zariski open subset of T BunGX,x, ,
which is irreducible since BunGX,x, is very good. Thus W h1 (U ) = h1 (U ) and so every
Higgs bundle in h1 (U ) has automorphism group Z, as claimed. A similar argument shows that
Ms h1 (U ) = h1 (U ), so every Higgs bundle in h1 (U ) is stable.
Note that the underlying space of Ms can be identified with the coarse moduli space of stable
parabolic Higgs bundles. The above results show that h1 (U ) is a Z-gerbe over its underlying
coarse moduli space. Next we use that the Hitchin map on the coarse moduli space of semistable
parabolic Higgs bundles is proper to see that the restriction h : h1 (U ) U is proper. Let F be
the underlying space of a connected component of a fibre of h1 (U ) U . The Hamiltonian vector
fields X1 , . . . , Xm associated to the coordinates h1 , . . . , hm of the Hitchin map give a global frame
of commuting holomorphic vector fields on F . Since F is compact in the analytic topology, then
the existence of such vector fields implies that F is biholomorphic to a complex torus. Moreover
we have that T BunGX,x, , AGX,x, and h are all algebraic, hence F is itself algebraic and it is well
known that a complex torus which is algebraic is an abelian variety.

Remark 46. We have shown (under Assumption 12) that each connected component of a generic
fibre of the Hitchin map is a Z-gerbe over an abelian variety. It is natural to conjecture that
this is a trivial gerbe, so that each connected component is the product of an abelian variety with
the classifying stack of Z. Indeed, this is the case in the non-parabolic setting [DP12] and is a
requirement for Langlands duality of Hitchin systems for Langlands dual groups. Triviality in type
A can be seen using the spectral data description of fibres of the Hitchin system. Similarly for
groups of arbitrary type, one sees triviality using cameral data. The notion of spectral data for
parabolic Higgs bundles of type A has been developed in [SS95] and from this description it is
easy to see that the gerbe is trivial on the fibres also in this case. Showing triviality of the gerbe
along the fibres for more general parahorics presumably requires the development of a theory of
parahoric cameral data. We leave this as an interesting topic for future work.
32

5.6. A section in Type A. This is the analogue of the Hitchin section constructed in [Hit92]. As
will become clear, this construction works for the moduli stack of parabolic Higgs bundles of type
G = GLn . In contrast to the non-parabolic setting, this section takes values in a component of the
GLn moduli stack for which the underlying bundles usually have degree 6= 0(mod n), so does not
define a section of the corresponding SLn moduli stack. Our construction is the global analogue of
the companion matrix construction given in Subsection 4.1.2. We do not know whether there is an
analogue of this section for other groups.
Let G = GLn , g = gln and P = P G a fixed choice of parabolic subgroup. We denote by
MGX,x, the moduli stack of parabolic GLn -Higgs bundles on X and by L the line bundle L = (x).
Although the group GLn is not simple, it is easy to see that our main global results concerning
complete integrability of MGX,x, can be adapted to this case. However some care is required for
statements involving dimensions, since generic GLn -Higgs bundles have 1-dimensional stabilizer
groups given by Z(G)
= C .
Recall from Subsection 4.1 that associated to a parabolic subgroup P GLn , we have the
fundamental degrees m0 , m1 , . . . , mn1 . For j = 1, . . . , n 1, set j = mj mj1 . Let E be the
rank n vector bundle
E = E1 E2 En ,
where E1 = O and for 1 j (n 1), we set
(17)

Ej+1 = Lj ((mj 1)x),

so that Ej+1 /Ej = L1 (j x) for j = 1, . . . , n 1. Fix once and for all a section t of O(x) vanishing
at x. Although t is only unique up to rescaling, one can easily check that our construction is up to
isomorphism, independent of this choice. Note also that t is the global analogue of the uniformizing
parameter t O = C[[t]]. Define a section : E E L of the form
=

n1
X

j,j+1 +

n
X

j,1

j=1

j=1

where j,j+1 : Ej Ej+1 L is the section of (Ej+1 /Ej1 )L

= O(j x) given by tj and j,1 : Ej E1
Q
is the section of Ej L
= Lj (uj1 u x) given by aj /sj , where sj = uj1 tu = tmj1 1 .
Clearly the divisor of sj is (mj1 1)x. On the other hand we have seen that aj vanishes at x
to order at least mj1 . Hence aj /sj is holomorphic and vanishes at x to order 1. Notice
that (E, ) is just the global analogue of the companion matrix construction of Section 4.1.2. In
particular, this means that the characteristic polynomial of is exactly n + a1 n1 + + an .
Lastly observe that since each of the terms j,1 vanishes at x, we have that (x) is nilpotent with
Jordan blocks of sizes 1 , 2 , . . . , .
For the following lemma, cf. [Nam06, Theorem 2.6].
Lemma 47. Let n1 , n2 , . . . , nk be a partition of n and 1 2 the conjugate partition.
Let N : Cn Cn be a nilpotent endomorphism of Cn with Jordan blocks of sizes 1 , 2 , . . . , .
Then there is a unique flag
{0} = F0 F1 F2 Fk = Cn ,
such that for j = 1, 2, . . . , k, we have dim(Fj /Fj1 ) = nj and N (Fj ) Fj1 .
By this lemma, there is a unique parabolic structure ExP which makes (E, ExP , ) into a parabolic
Higgs bundle.
33

Lemma 48. We have the following identity:

1
dim(G/P ) = n(n 1)
2

a .

1b<a

Proof. This follows from the well known identity relating a partition n1 , . . . , nk and its conjugate
partition 1 2 :
X
n21 + n22 + + n2k = n + 2
a ,
together with dim(G/P ) = dim(n) =

1b<ai

1b<ak

na nb , where n is the nilpotent radical of p.

Proposition 49. The construction (E, ExP , ) given above defines a section s : AGX,x, MGX,x,
of the Hitchin map, which does not depend on the choice of t. The determinant of E is given by


1
det(E) = 2 n(n1) O(x) dim(G/P ) .

In particular, the degree of E is deg(E) = n(n 1)(g 1) dim(G/P ).

Proof. The fact that our section is independent of the choice of t is a straightforward verification
and we omit the proof. It remains only to compute det(E). From Equation (17), we get:
det(E) =

n
O

Ej

j=1

= L 2 n(n1) O ((mn1 + mm2 + + m0 n)x)

1

= L 2 n(n1) O ((1 + 22 + + n)x)

1

= L 2 n(n1) O ((2 + 23 + + ( 1) )x)

X
1
1
= 2 n(n1) O n(n 1) +
a x
2
1b<a


1
= 2 n(n1) O(x) dim(G/P ) ,

where we have used Lemma 48 in the last step.

Remark 50. Let A be a line bundle on X. Tensoring by A gives a new section s A : AGX,x,
MGX,x, of the Hitchin map which has determinant
det(E A) = det(E) An



1
= 2 n(n1) O(x) dim(G/P ) An .

It follows that one can find a line bundle A on X for which det(E A) = O if and only if dim(G/P )
is a multiple of n. In particular, for most parabolic subgroups P GLn , our construction can
not be modified in this way to obtain a section of the corresponding SLn moduli space. In the
case where there are no marked points, we recover the usual Hitchin section of [Hit92] by taking
A = (n1)/2 , where 1/2 is a choice of theta characteristic on X.
References
[BS15] V. Balaji and C.S. Seshadri, Moduli of parahoric G-torsors on a compact Riemann surface, J. Algebraic
Geom. 24 (2015), no. 1, 149.
[BD97] A. Beilinson and V. Drinfeld, Quantization of Hitchins integrable system and Hecke eigensheaves (1997).
34

[BT84] F. Bruhat and J. Tits, Groupes reductifs sur un corps local, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. 60 (1984),
no. 1, 5184.
[BT72]
, Groupes reductifs sur un corps local, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. 41 (1972), no. 1, 5251.

[Bot95] F. Bottacin, Symplectic geometry on moduli spaces of stable pairs, Ann. Sci. Ecole
Norm. Sup. (4) 28
(1995), no. 4, 391433.
[CK16] T-H. Chen and M. Kamgarpour, Preservation of depths in local geometric Langlands correspondence, Transactions of AMS (2016).
[DP12] R. Donagi and T. Pantev, Langlands duality for Hitchin systems, Invent. Math. 189 (2012), no. 3, 653735.
[Fal93] G. Faltings, Stable G-bundle and projective connections, J. Algebraic Geom. 2 (1993), no. 3, 507568.
[GS16] A. A. Gerasimov and S. L. Shatashvili, On spectral cover equations in Simpson integrable systems, arXiv
preprint arXiv:1603.05550 (2016).
[Gin01] V. Ginzburg, The global nilpotent variety is Lagrangian, Duke Math. J. 109 (2001), no. 3, 511519.
[Gro10] B. Gross, Parahorics, unpublished notes (2010).
[Lau88] G. Laumon, Un analogue global du c
one nilpotent, Duke Math. J. 57 (1988), no. 2, 647671.
[Hei10] J. Heinloth, Uniformization of G-bundles, Math. Ann. 347 (2010), no. 3, 499528.
[Hit87] N. Hitchin, Stable bundles and integrable systems, Duke Math. J. 54 (1987), no. 1, 91114.
[Hit92]
, Lie groups and Teichm
uller space, Topology 31 (1992), no. 3, 449473.
[Hit07]
, Langlands duality and G2 spectral curves, Q. J. Math. 58 (2007), no. 3, 319344.
[KL87] D. Kazhdan and G. Lusztig, Fixed point varieties on affine flag manifolds, Israel J. Math. 62 (1987), no. 2,
129168.
[Kum02] S. Kumar, Kac-Moody Groups, their Flag Varieties and Representation Theory, Vol. 204, Springer Science
& Business Media, 2002.
[Lau88] G. Laumon, Un analogue global du c
one nilpotent, Duke Math. J. 57 (1988), no. 2, 647671.
[Mar94] E. Markman, Spectral curves and integrable systems, Compositio Math. 93 (1994), no. 3, 255290.
[LM10] M. Logares and J. Martens, Moduli of parabolic Higgs bundles and Atiyah algebroids, J. Reine Angew. Math.
2010 (2010), no. 649, 89116.
[Lus12] G Lusztig, From conjugacy classes in the Weyl group to unipotent classes, II, Represent. Theory 16 (2012),
no. 6, 189211.
[Nam06] Y. Namikawa, Birational geometry of symplectic resolutions of nilpotent orbits, Moduli spaces and arithmetic
geometry, Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 45, 2006, pp. 75116.
[Kum02] S. Kumar, Kac-Moody Groups, their Flag Varieties and Representation Theory, Vol. 204, Springer Science
& Business Media, 2002.

[Ng
o10] B. C. Ng
o, Le lemme fondamental pour les alg`ebres de Lie., Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Etudes
Sci. 111
(2010), 1169.
[PR07] G. Pappas and M. Rapoport, Some questions about G-bundles on curves, Algebraic and arithmetic structures
of moduli spaces (Sapporo 2007), 159C171, Adv. Stud. Pure Math 58 (2007).
[Var16] R. Varma, Global nilpotent cone is isotropic: parahoric torsors on curves, arXiv preprint arXiv:1607.00735
(2016).
[SS95] P. Scheinost and M. Schottenloher, Metaplectic quantization of the moduli spaces of flat and parabolic
bundles, J. Reine Angew. Math. 466 (1995), 145219.
[Soi16] A. Soibelman, Parabolic bundles over the projective line and the DeligneSimpson problems, Q. J. Math. 67
(2016), no. 1, 75108.
[Yu02] J.-K. Yu, Smooth models associated to concave functions in Bruhat-Tits theory, preprint (2002).
[Yun11] Z. Yun, Global springer theory, Adv.Math. 228 (2011), no. 1, 266328.
[Zhu12] X. Zhu, Frenkel-Gross irregular connection and Heinloth-Ng
o-Yuns are the same, arXiv:1210.2680 (2012).
Department of Mathematics, University of Adelaide
E-mail address: david.baraglia@adelaide.edu.au
School of Mathematics and Physics, The University of Queensland
E-mail address: masoud@uq.edu.au
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research
E-mail address: rvarma.kvm@gmail.com

35