# Totally nonnegative and oscillatory elements in semisimple groups

## 1. Introduction

In this note, we extend some classical theorems in the theory of total positivity to the case of an arbitrary semisimple complex Lie group. We begin by reviewing the results we are going to generalize.

Let $`G=GL_n()`$ or $`SL_n()`$. The following theorem is due to C. Loewner  and A. Whitney  (cf. \[9, Lemma 9.1\]).

###### Theorem 1.1.

For a matrix $`xG`$, the following are equivalent:

* all minors of $`x`$ are nonnegative real numbers;
* $`x`$ lies in the closure of the set of matrices with positive minors;
* $`x`$ belongs to the multiplicative monoid in $`G`$ generated by elementary Jacobi matrices with nonnegative matrix entries.

(Here in (c), an “elementary Jacobi matrix” is a matrix that differs from the identity matrix in a single entry, located either on the main diagonal, or immediately above or below it.) 

A matrix $`xG`$ satisfying any of the equivalent conditions (a)–(c) above is called *totally nonnegative*. Furthermore, $`x`$ is *totally positive* if all its minors are positive. Totally positive matrices are distinguished among the totally nonnegative ones as follows.

###### Theorem 1.2.

For a totally nonnegative matrix $`xG`$, the following are equivalent:

* $`x`$ is totally positive;
* all solid minors of $`x`$ involving either $`x_{1n}`$ or $`x_{n1}`$ are positive;
* $`x`$ belongs to the intersection of opposite open Bruhat cells $`Bw_\mathrm{o}BB_{}w_\mathrm{o}B_{}`$.

(Here in (e), a “solid minor” is a minor formed by several consecutive rows and as many consecutive columns. In (f), we denote by $`B`$ (resp. $`B_{}`$) the subgroup of upper-triangular (resp. lower-triangular) matrices, and $`w_\mathrm{o}`$ is the permutation matrix with $`1`$’s on the main antidiagonal.) 

Part $`(\mathrm{d})(\mathrm{e})`$ of Theorem 1.2 is a refinement of the classical Fekete criterion due to M. Gasca and J. M. Peña \[8, Theorem 4.3\]; the equivalence $`(\mathrm{e})(\mathrm{f})`$ is a well-known (and easy) linear-algebraic fact (cf., e.g., \[6, Theorem II.4.1\]).

In their pioneering study of total positivity undertaken in 1930s, F. R. Gantmacher and M. G. Krein introduced and studied the intermediate class of *oscillatory* matrices defined as follows: a matrix $`xG`$ is called oscillatory if $`x`$ is totally nonnegative while some power of $`x`$ is totally positive. The following characterization of this class was obtained in  (see §II.7; cf. also \[9, Theorem 9.3\]).

###### Theorem 1.3.

For a totally nonnegative matrix $`xG`$, the following are equivalent:

* $`x`$ is oscillatory;
* $`x_{i,i+1}>0`$ and $`x_{i+1,i}>0`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},n1`$.

Gantmacher and Krein  further showed that the definition of oscillatory matrices can be refined as follows.

###### Theorem 1.4.

A totally nonnegative matrix $`xG`$ is oscillatory if and only if $`x^{n1}`$ is totally positive.

In this paper, we extend Theorems 1.1, 1.3, and 1.4 to an arbitrary semisimple complex Lie group $`G`$, using the notion of *generalized minors* introduced in . A generalization of Theorem 1.2 follows from results in  or , and is presented below (see Theorem 3.2) for the sake of completeness.

Even in the case of $`SL_n`$, our version of the criterion (h) is more general than the one given above. (Earlier in , we gave a family of total positivity criteria generalizing (e).) It should also be noted that our proofs are quite different from the ones in . Our main technical tools involve combinatorics of reduced words in Weyl groups, the subdivison of a semisimple group into double Bruhat cells, and the “generalized determinantal calculus” developed in ; in particular, the fundamental role is played by a generalized determinantal identity \[4, Theorem 1.17\].

The study of total positivity in reductive groups other than $`GL_n`$ and $`SL_n`$ was initiated by G. Lusztig , who suggested to use the natural generalization of (c) as the definition of a total nonnegative element. Our extension of the equivalence $`(\mathrm{a})(\mathrm{c})`$ can be rephrased as saying that Lusztig’s definition is equivalent to the one in terms of the generalized minors of .

## 2. Terminology and notation

We will use the setup of , which is briefly reviewed below in this section. Proofs and further details can be found in  (see Sections 1.1-1.4).

Let $`G`$ be a simply connected semisimple complex Lie group of rank $`r`$ with a fixed pair of opposite Borel subgroups $`B_{}`$ and $`B`$; thus $`H=B_{}B`$ is a maximal torus in $`G`$. Let $`N_{}`$ and $`N`$ be the unipotent radicals of $`B_{}`$ and $`B`$, respectively.

Let $`\alpha _1,\mathrm{},\alpha _r`$ be the system of simple roots for which the corresponding root subgroups are contained in $`N`$. For every $`i[1,r]`$, let $`\phi _i:SL_2G`$ be the canonical embedding corresponding to the simple root $`\alpha _i`$.

For any nonzero $`t`$ and any $`i[1,r]`$, we define

$$x_{\overline{i}}(t)=\phi _i(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ t& 1\end{array}),t^{h_i}=\phi _i(\begin{array}{cc}t& 0\\ 0& t^1\end{array}),x_i(t)=\phi _i(\begin{array}{cc}1& t\\ 0& 1\end{array}).$$

Thus $`t^{h_i}H`$, and $`tx_i(t)`$ (resp. $`tx_{\overline{i}}(t)`$) is a one-parameter subgroup in $`N`$ (resp. in $`N_{}`$).

The *weight lattice* $`P`$ can be defined as the group of multiplicative characters of $`H`$, here written in the exponential notation: a weight $`\gamma P`$ acts by $`aa^\gamma `$. The lattice $`P`$ has a $``$-basis formed by the *fundamental weights* $`\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _r`$ defined by $`(t^{h_j})^{\omega _i}=t^{\delta _{ij}}`$.

The *Weyl group* $`W`$ of $`G`$ is defined by $`W=\mathrm{Norm}_G(H)/H`$. The action of $`W`$ on $`H`$ by conjugation gives rise to the action of $`W`$ on the weight lattice $`P`$ given by $`a^{w(\gamma )}=(w^1aw)^\gamma `$ for $`wW`$, $`aH`$, $`\gamma P`$. The group $`W`$ is a Coxeter group with simple reflections $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r`$ which can be defined by specifying their representatives in $`\mathrm{Norm}_G(H)`$: we set

$$\overline{s_i}=\phi _i(\begin{array}{cc}0& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array})\mathrm{Norm}_G(H).$$

The family $`\{\overline{s_i}\}`$ satisfies the braid relations in $`W`$; thus the representative $`\overline{w}`$ can be unambiguously defined for any $`wW`$ by requiring that $`\overline{uv}=\overline{u}\overline{v}`$ whenever $`\mathrm{}(uv)=\mathrm{}(u)+\mathrm{}(v)`$; here $`\mathrm{}(w)`$ denotes the length of $`wW`$.

A *reduced word* for $`wW`$ is a sequence of indices $`(i_1,\mathrm{},i_m)`$ that satisfies $`w=s_{i_1}\mathrm{}s_{i_m}`$ and has the shortest possible length $`m=\mathrm{}(w)`$. The set of reduced words for $`w`$ will be denoted by $`R(w)`$.

As customary, $`w_\mathrm{o}`$ denotes the unique element of maximal length in $`W`$.

We denote by $`G_0=N_{}HN`$ the open subset of elements $`xG`$ that have Gaussian decomposition; this decomposition will be written as $`x=[x]_{}[x]_0[x]_+`$.

For $`u,vW`$ and $`i[1,r]`$, the *generalized minor* $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _i,v\omega _i}`$ is the regular function on $`G`$ whose restriction to the open set $`\overline{u}G_0\overline{v}^1`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _i,v\omega _i}(x)=\left[\overline{u}^1x\overline{v}\right]_0^{\omega _i}.$$

It can be shown that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _i,v\omega _i}`$ depends on the weights $`u\omega _i`$ and $`v\omega _i`$ alone, not on the particular choice of $`u`$ and $`v`$. In the special case $`G=SL_n`$, the generalized minors are nothing but the ordinary minors of a matrix.

## 3. Main results

We generalize the Loewner-Whitney Theorem (Theorem 1.1) as follows.

###### Theorem 3.1.

For an element $`xG`$, the following are equivalent:

* all generalized minors $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\gamma ,\delta }`$ take nonnegative real values at $`x`$;
* $`x`$ lies in the closure of the set of elements with positive generalized minors;
* $`x`$ lies in the multiplicative monoid generated by the elements of the form $`t^{h_i}`$, $`x_i(t)`$, and $`x_{\overline{i}}(t)`$, with positive $`t`$.

An element $`xG`$ satisfying any of the equivalent conditions (a)–(c) of Theorem 3.1 is called *totally nonnegative.* The set of all such elements is denoted by $`G_0`$.

The following generalization of Theorem 1.2 is immediate from the results in Lusztig ; a proof based on the results in  will be given in Section 4 below.

###### Theorem 3.2.

For an element $`xG_0`$, the following are equivalent:

* all generalized minors of $`x`$ are positive;
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _i,w_\mathrm{o}\omega _i}(x)>0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{w_\mathrm{o}\omega _i,\omega _i}(x)>0`$ for any $`i[1,r]`$;
* $`x`$ belongs to the intersection of open Bruhat cells $`Bw_\mathrm{o}BB_{}w_\mathrm{o}B_{}`$.

An element $`xG`$ satisfying any of the equivalent conditions (d)–(f) of Theorem 3.2 is called *totally positive.* The set of all such elements will be denoted by $`G_{>0}`$.

Let us call an element $`xG_0`$ *oscillatory* if for some positive integer $`m`$, the element $`x^m`$ is totally positive. We will give equivalent reformulations of this property which in particular generalize the criterion (h) in Theorem 1.3. In fact, our version of criterion (h) will be more general even in the special case $`G=SL_n`$.

Let $`i`$ and $`j`$ be two indices lying in the same connected component of the Dynkin graph of $`G`$ (the case $`j=i`$ is not excluded). Let

$$i=i(1),i(2),\mathrm{},i(l)=j$$

be the unique path from $`i`$ to $`j`$ in the Dynkin graph. Thus $`\{i(k),i(k+1)\}`$ is an edge for $`k=1,\mathrm{},l1`$, and all indices $`i(k)`$ are distinct. Let us denote $`c(ji)=s_{i(2)}s_{i(3)}\mathrm{}s_j`$ (in particular, $`c(ii)=e`$), and set

$`\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Delta }_{ji}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{c(ji)\omega _j,s_ic(ji)\omega _j},\hfill \\ \mathrm{\Delta }_{j\overline{i}}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_ic(ji)\omega _j,c(ji)\omega _j}.\hfill \end{array}`$   
For a given $`i`$, we say that each minor of the form $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{ji}`$ (resp. $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{j\overline{i}}`$) is an $`i`$-*indicator* (resp. $`\overline{i}`$-indicator).

###### Theorem 3.3.

Let $`C`$ be a collection of $`2r`$ generalized minors that contains, for every $`i[1,r]`$, an $`i`$-indicator and an $`\overline{i}`$-indicator. Then, for an element $`xG_0`$, the following are equivalent:

* $`x`$ is oscillatory;
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)>0`$ for any $`\mathrm{\Delta }C`$;
* $`x`$ does not belong to a proper parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ containing $`B`$ or $`B_{}`$.

Note that the equivalence $`(\mathrm{g})(\mathrm{h})`$ in Theorem 3.3 generalizes Theorem 1.3. Indeed, for $`G=SL_n`$ and the standard numbering of fundamental weights, one checks that $`x_{i,i+1}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{1i}`$ and $`x_{i+1,i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{1\overline{i}}`$. Thus the set $`C`$ consisting of these matrix entries satisfies the condition of Theorem 3.3.

Our last main result is a generalization of Theorem 1.4 to all classical groups.

###### Theorem 3.4.

For any given $`G`$, there exists a positive integer $`m`$ with the following property: an element $`xG_0`$ is oscillatory if and only if $`x^mG_{>0}`$. A positive integer $`m`$ has this property if and only if for any permutation $`𝐢=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_r)`$ of indices $`1,\mathrm{},r`$, the concatenation of $`m`$ copies of $`𝐢`$ has a reduced word for $`w_\mathrm{o}`$ as a subword. 

Let $`m(G)`$ denote the smallest positive integer $`m`$ that has the property described in Theorem 3.4.

###### Theorem 3.5.

For a simple group $`G`$, the value of $`m(G)`$ is given by the table

| Type | $`A_r`$ | $`B_r`$ or $`C_r`$ | $`D_r`$, $`r`$ even | $`D_r`$, $`r`$ odd | $`E_6`$ | $`E_7`$ | $`E_8`$ | $`F_4`$ | $`G_2`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| $`m(G)`$ | $`r`$ | $`r`$ | $`r1`$ | $`r`$ | $`8`$ | $`9`$ | $`15`$ | $`6`$ | $`3`$ |

.

The remaining sections contain the proofs of Theorems 3.13.5.

## 4. Proof of Theorem 3.2

The group $`G`$ has two *Bruhat decompositions*, with respect to opposite Borel subgroups $`B`$ and $`B_{}`$:

$$G=\underset{uW}{}BuB=\underset{vW}{}B_{}vB_{}.$$

The *double Bruhat cells* $`G^{u,v}`$ are defined by $`G^{u,v}=BuBB_{}vB_{}`$.

Let $`H_{>0}`$ be the subgroup of $`H`$ generated by the elements $`t^{h_i}`$ for any $`t>0`$ and $`i[1,r]`$; equivalently, $`H_{>0}`$ consists of all $`aH`$ such that $`a^\gamma >0`$ for any weight $`\gamma P`$. Following G. Lusztig, let us define the set $`G_0`$ as the multiplicative monoid in $`G`$ generated by $`H_{>0}`$ and the elements $`x_i(t)`$ and $`x_{\overline{i}}(t)`$, for $`i[1,r]`$ and $`t>0`$. In other words, we use condition (c) of Theorem 3.1 as the interim definition of $`G_0`$.

The set $`G_0`$ is the disjoint union of *totally positive varieties* $`G_{>0}^{u,v}`$ defined by

$$G_{>0}^{u,v}=G_0G^{u,v}.$$

We denote $`[\overline{1},\overline{r}]=\{\overline{1},\mathrm{},\overline{r}\}`$. For any sequence $`𝐢=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_m)`$ of indices from the alphabet $`[1,r][\overline{1},\overline{r}]`$, let us define the map $`x_𝐢:H\times ^mG`$ by

(4.1) 
$$x_𝐢(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)=ax_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_m}(t_m).$$

By definition, an element $`xG_0`$ can be represented as $`x=x_𝐢(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$, for some sequence $`𝐢`$, with all the $`t_k`$ positive and $`aH_{>0}`$.

A *double reduced word* for the elements $`u,vW`$ is a reduced word for an element $`(u,v)`$ of the Coxeter group $`W\times W`$. To avoid confusion, we will use the indices $`\overline{1},\overline{2},\mathrm{},\overline{r}`$ for the simple reflections in the first copy of $`W`$, and $`1,2,\mathrm{},r`$ for the second copy. A double reduced word for $`(u,v)`$ is nothing but a shuffle of a reduced word for $`u`$ written in the alphabet $`[\overline{1},\overline{r}]`$ and a reduced word for $`v`$ written in the alphabet $`[1,r]`$. We denote the set of double reduced words for $`(u,v)`$ by $`R(u,v)`$.

The *weak order* is the partial order on $`W`$ defined as follows: $`u^{}u`$ stands for $`\mathrm{}(u)=\mathrm{}(u^{})+\mathrm{}(u_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}u)`$. (In other words, a reduced word for $`u^{}`$ can be extended on the right to form a reduced word for $`u`$.) We note that $`ww_\mathrm{o}`$ for any $`wW`$.

The following lemma provides alternative descriptions of the totally positive varieties $`G_{>0}^{u,v}`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

For an element $`xG^{u,v}`$, the following conditions are equivalent:

* $`xG_{>0}^{u,v}`$;
* for some (equivalently, any) double reduced word $`𝐢R(u,v)`$, we have $`x=x_𝐢(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ with $`aH_{>0}`$ and $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_m>0`$;
* $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _i,v^{}\omega _i}(x)>0`$ for all $`i[1,r]`$ and all $`u^{}u`$, $`v^{}v^1`$.

Proof. See \[4, Theorems 1.3 and 1.11\]. (The equivalence $`(\mathrm{c}^{})(\mathrm{c}^{\prime \prime })`$ was essentially established in .) $`\mathrm{}`$

Now everything is ready for the proof of Theorem 3.2. The implication $`(\mathrm{f})(\mathrm{d})`$ is a special case of $`(\mathrm{c}^{})(\mathrm{c}^{\prime \prime \prime })`$, while $`(\mathrm{d})(\mathrm{e})`$ is trivial. Finally, to show that $`(\mathrm{e})(\mathrm{f})`$, it suffices to note that

$$G^{w_\mathrm{o},w_\mathrm{o}}=w_\mathrm{o}G_0G_0w_\mathrm{o}=\{xG:\mathrm{\Delta }_{w_\mathrm{o}\omega _i,\omega _i}(x)0,\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _i,w_\mathrm{o}\omega _i}(x)0(i[1,r])\}$$

(cf. \[4, Corollary 2.5\] or \[5, Proposition 4.1\]). ∎

## 5. Proof of Theorem 3.1

### 5.1. Proof of $`(\mathrm{b})(\mathrm{a})`$

This is obvious since all generalized minors are continuous functions on $`G`$.

### 5.2. Proof of $`(\mathrm{c})(\mathrm{b})`$

In view of Lemma 4.1, it suffices to show that the closure of $`G_{>0}^{w_\mathrm{o},w_\mathrm{o}}`$ contains all totally positive varieties $`G_{>0}^{u,v}`$. Suppose $`xG_{>0}^{u,v}`$ for some $`u`$ and $`v`$. Take any $`𝐢R(u,v)`$ and write $`x=x_𝐢(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ as in ($`\mathrm{c}^{\prime \prime }`$). Choose a word $`𝐣R(w_\mathrm{o},w_\mathrm{o})`$ that has $`𝐢`$ as an initial segment. Then

(5.1) 
$$x=x_𝐢(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)=\underset{t+0}{lim}x_𝐣(a;t_1,\mathrm{},t_m,t,\mathrm{},t),$$

and $`(\mathrm{b})`$ follows.

### 5.3. Proof of $`(\mathrm{a})(\mathrm{c})`$

Suppose that $`xG^{u,v}`$ satisfies $`(\mathrm{a})`$. It suffices to check condition $`(\mathrm{c}^{\prime \prime \prime })`$ in Lemma 4.1. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$ denote the set of all pairs $`(u^{},v^{})W\times W`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _i,v^{}\omega _i}(x)>0`$ for all $`i`$. Our aim is to show that

(5.2) 
$$(u^{},v^{})\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)\text{for}u^{}u,v^{}v^1.$$

As a first step we notice that

(5.3) 
$$(u,e),(e,v^1)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x);$$

this follows from the well-known fact that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _i,\omega _i}`$ vanishes nowhere on the Bruhat cell $`BuB`$; see, e.g., \[5, Lemma 3.4\].

We shall write $`u^{}u^{\prime \prime }`$ if $`u^{\prime \prime }=u^{}s_i`$ for some $`i`$, and $`\mathrm{}(u^{\prime \prime })=\mathrm{}(u^{})+1`$. In view of (5.3), the desired inclusions (5.2) are consequences of the following statements:

(5.6) $`\begin{array}{c}\text{if }u^{}u^{\prime \prime }\text{ and }(u^{\prime \prime },e)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)\text{, then }(u^{},e)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)\text{;}\hfill \\ \text{if }u^{}u^{\prime \prime }\text{ and }(e,u^{\prime \prime })\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)\text{, then }(e,u^{})\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)\text{;}\hfill \end{array}`$   
(5.7) if $`u^{}u^{\prime \prime }`$, $`v^{}v^{\prime \prime }`$, $`(u^{},v^{\prime \prime })\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$, $`(u^{\prime \prime },v^{})\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$, then $`(u^{\prime \prime },v^{\prime \prime })\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$.   
Our proof of both (5.6) and (5.7) relies on the following identity \[4, Theorem 1.17\]:

(5.8) 
$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _i,v^{}\omega _i}\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{\prime \prime }\omega _i,v^{\prime \prime }\omega _i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _i,v^{\prime \prime }\omega _i}\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{\prime \prime }\omega _i,v^{}\omega _i}+\underset{ji}{}\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _j,v^{}\omega _j}^{a_{ji}},$$

whenever $`u^{}u^{\prime \prime }=u^{}s_i`$ and $`v^{}v^{\prime \prime }=v^{}s_i`$; here the numbers $`a_{ji}`$ are the entries of the Cartan matrix of $`G`$.

To prove (5.6), suppose that $`u^{}u^{\prime \prime }=u^{}s_i`$ and $`(u^{\prime \prime },e)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$. Now specialize (5.8) at $`v^{}=e`$ and evaluate both sides at $`x`$. Using the fact that $`u^{}\omega _j=u^{\prime \prime }\omega _j`$ for $`ji`$, we see that the second summand on the right-hand side is strictly positive. Since all generalized minors of $`x`$ are nonnegative, we conclude that both factors on the left-hand side are positive. In particular, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _i,\omega _i}(x)>0`$, i.e., $`(u^{},e)\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$, as desired. The second part of (5.6) is proved in the same way.

To prove (5.7), suppose that $`u^{}u^{\prime \prime }=u^{}s_i`$ and $`v^{}v^{\prime \prime }=v^{}s_j`$, and both $`(u^{},v^{\prime \prime })`$ and $`(u^{\prime \prime },v^{})`$ belong to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$. We need to show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{\prime \prime }\omega _k,v^{\prime \prime }\omega _k}(x)>0`$ for all $`k`$. If $`ki`$, then $`u^{\prime \prime }\omega _k=u^{}\omega _k`$ and we are done since $`(u^{},v^{\prime \prime })\mathrm{\Sigma }(x)`$. The case $`kj`$ is treated in the same way. It thus remains to consider the case $`k=j=i`$. But then in (5.8), the first summand on the right (evaluated at $`x`$) is positive, implying $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{\prime \prime }\omega _i,v^{\prime \prime }\omega _i}(x)>0`$, as desired. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6. Proof of Theorem 3.3

### 6.1. Proof of $`(\mathrm{g})(\mathrm{i})`$

Since total positivity is described by condition $`(\mathrm{f})`$ in Theorem 3.2, it suffices to show that every proper parabolic subgroup of $`G`$ containing $`B`$ or $`B_{}`$ has empty intersection with the open double Bruhat cell $`G^{w_\mathrm{o},w_\mathrm{o}}`$. The latter follows at once from the well known description of maximal proper parabolic subgroups containing $`B`$ or $`B_{}`$: they are the subgroups $`P_1,\mathrm{},P_r`$ and $`P_{\overline{1}},\mathrm{},P_{\overline{r}}`$ given by

(6.1) 
$$P_i=\underset{i\mathrm{Supp}(v)}{}B_{}vB_{},P_{\overline{i}}=\underset{i\mathrm{Supp}(u)}{}BuB,$$

where $`\mathrm{Supp}(w)`$ denotes the set of indices that occur in some (equivalently, any) reduced word for $`wW`$.

### 6.2. Proof of $`(\mathrm{i})(\mathrm{g})`$

Consider the monoid $``$ whose generators $`T_1,\mathrm{},T_r`$ are subject to relations

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill T_i^2& =& T_i;\hfill \\ \hfill \underset{m_{ij}}{\underset{}{T_iT_jT_i\mathrm{}}}& =& \underset{m_{ij}}{\underset{}{T_jT_iT_j\mathrm{}}}(ij);\hfill \end{array}$$

here $`m_{ij}`$ is the order of $`s_is_j`$ in $`W`$. A well known theorem of Tits on reduced words (see, e.g., \[3, II,§3C\]) has the following implications. First, if $`(i_1,\mathrm{},i_m)R(w)`$, then the product $`T_{i_1}\mathrm{}T_{i_m}`$ only depends on $`w`$ and so can be unambiguously denoted by $`T_w`$. Second, the correspondence $`wT_w`$ is a bijection between $`W`$ and $``$. Finally, we have the following criterion for determining when a product of generators is equal to $`T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$.

###### Lemma 6.1.

For a word $`(i_1,\mathrm{},i_N)`$ in the alphabet $`[1,r]`$, we have $`T_{i_1}\mathrm{}T_{i_N}=T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$ if and only if this word has a reduced word for $`w_\mathrm{o}`$ as a subword.

The relevance of $``$ to our problem is clear from the following lemma.

###### Lemma 6.2.

For any $`xG_{>0}^{u,v}`$ and $`yG_{>0}^{u^{},v^{}}`$, we have $`xyG_{>0}^{u^{\prime \prime },v^{\prime \prime }}`$, where the elements $`u^{\prime \prime }`$ and $`v^{\prime \prime }`$ are given by $`T_{u^{\prime \prime }}=T_uT_u^{}`$ and $`T_{v^{\prime \prime }}=T_vT_v^{}`$.

Proof. Follows from condition $`(\mathrm{c}^{\prime \prime })`$ of Lemma 4.1, together with the commutation relations among the elementary factors $`x_i(t)`$ and $`x_{\overline{i}}(t)`$, as given in \[1, Theorem 3.1\] and \[4, Section 2.2\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

By Lemma 6.2 and condition $`(\mathrm{f})`$ of Theorem 3.2, for any $`xG_{>0}^{u,v}`$ and any positive integer $`m`$, we have

(6.2) 
$$x^mG_{>0}T_u^m=T_v^m=T_{w_\mathrm{o}}.$$

Suppose that a totally nonnegative element $`x`$ satisfies condition $`(\mathrm{i})`$. By (6.1), $`xG_{>0}^{u,v}`$ for some elements $`u,vW`$ such that $`\mathrm{Supp}(u)=\mathrm{Supp}(v)=[1,r]`$. We need to show that $`x`$ is oscillatory. In view of (6.2), this means that $`T_u^m=T_v^m=T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$ for sufficiently large $`m`$. The latter is clear from Lemma 6.1: just take $`m=\mathrm{}(w_\mathrm{o})`$.

### 6.3. Proof of $`(\mathrm{h})(\mathrm{i})`$

This equivalence can be restated as follows.

###### Lemma 6.3.

Let $`i[1,r]`$, and let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be an $`i`$-indicator (resp. $`\overline{i}`$-indicator). Then $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ vanishes on $`P_i`$ (resp. $`P_{\overline{i}}`$), and $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)>0`$ for any $`xG_0`$ outside $`P_i`$ (resp. $`P_{\overline{i}}`$).

Proof. It is enough to consider $`i`$-indicators, the case of $`\overline{i}`$-indicators being totally similar. Changing if necessary the numeration of fundamental weights, we can assume without loss of generality that $`i=1`$, and

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{\Delta }_{j1}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _j,s_1u\omega _j},$$

where $`u=c(j1)=s_2\mathrm{}s_j`$, with nonzero Cartan matrix entries $`a_{k,k+1}`$ for $`k=1,\mathrm{},j1`$.

First let us show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }(x)=0`$ for $`xP_1`$. We will denote by $`x^T`$ the “transpose” of $`x`$; more precisely, $`xx^T`$ is the anti-automorphism of $`G`$ defined by

$$a^T=a(aH),x_i(t)^T=x_{\overline{i}}(t),x_{\overline{i}}(t)^T=x_i(t).$$

As in , we will use the notation $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _i}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _i,\omega _i}`$ for the $`i`$th “principal minor.” Using \[4, (1.10), (2.25)\], we obtain:

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }(x)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _j,s_1u\omega _j}(x)=\mathrm{\Delta }_{s_1u\omega _j,u\omega _j}(x^T)=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _j}(\overline{s_1u}^1x^T\overline{u})\\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _j}(\overline{u^1s_1u}^1\overline{u^1}x^T\overline{u})=\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^1s_1u\omega _j,\omega _j}(\overline{u^1}x^T\overline{u}).\end{array}$$

Observe that $`\overline{u^1}x^T\overline{u}P_{\overline{1}}`$ for any $`xP_1`$ (since all three factors belong to $`P_{\overline{1}}`$). It remains to prove that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^1s_1u\omega _j,\omega _j}`$ vanishes on $`P_{\overline{1}}`$. To see this we use the following description of $`P_{\overline{1}}`$ equivalent to (6.1): $`P_{\overline{1}}=\pi ^1(X_{w_\mathrm{o}^{}})`$, where $`\pi `$ is the projection of $`G`$ onto the flag variety $`G/B`$, the element $`w_\mathrm{o}^{}W`$ is the longest element of the parabolic subgroup generated by $`s_2,\mathrm{},s_r`$, and $`X_w`$ is the Schubert variety corresponding to $`w`$ (i.e., the closure of the Schubert cell $`(BwB)/B`$). Our claim that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^1s_1u\omega _j,\omega _j}`$ vanishes on $`P_{\overline{1}}`$ now follows from the fact that $`1\mathrm{Supp}(u^1s_1u)`$, which means that $`u^1s_1u`$ is *not* smaller than or equal to $`w_\mathrm{o}^{}`$ in the Bruhat order (cf., e.g., \[5, Lemma 3.4\]; in the notation of , $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\gamma ,\omega _j}(x)=p_\gamma (\pi (x))`$).

To complete the proof of Lemma 6.3 and Theorem 3.3, it remains to show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{j1}(x)>0`$ for any element $`xG_0`$ not belonging to $`P_1`$. We proceed by induction on $`j`$. Let us first consider the case $`j=1`$ when we need to show that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _1,s_1\omega _1}(x)>0`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _1,s_1\omega _1}(b_{}x)=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _1}(b_{})\mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _1,s_1\omega _1}(x)`$ for any $`b_{}B_{}`$, we can assume without loss of generality that $`x`$ has the form

$$x=x_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_m}(t_m)$$

for some sequence of (unbarred) indices $`i_1,\mathrm{},i_m`$ and some positive numbers $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_m`$. The condition $`xP_1`$ means that at least one of the indices $`i_k`$ is equal to $`1`$; let $`k`$ be the maximal index such that $`i_k=1`$. Using the fact that $`\overline{s_1}^1x_i(t)\overline{s_1}N`$ for any $`i1`$, and the commutation relation \[4, (2.13)\], we conclude that

$$\begin{array}{c}\hfill \mathrm{\Delta }_{\omega _1,s_1\omega _1}(x)=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _1}(x_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_k}(t_k)\overline{s_1}(\overline{s_1}^1x_{i_{k+1}}(t_{k+1})\mathrm{}x_{i_m}(t_m)\overline{s_1}))\\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _1}(x_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_k}(t_k)\overline{s_1})=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _1}(x_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_{k1}}(t_{k1})x_{\overline{1}}(t_k^1)t_k^{h_1}).\end{array}$$

Since the element $`x^{}=x_{i_1}(t_1)\mathrm{}x_{i_{k1}}(t_{k1})x_{\overline{1}}(t_k^1)t_k^{h_1}`$ is totally nonnegative, and any principal minor is positive on $`G_0`$ (see \[4, Corollary 2.5 and Proposition 2.29\]), we conclude that $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _1}(x^{})>0`$, as desired.

Now assume that $`j2`$, and that we already know that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{j^{}1}(x)>0`$ for $`j^{}=1,\mathrm{},j1`$. Let us apply the identity (5.8) for $`i=j`$, $`u^{}=s_2\mathrm{}s_{j1}`$, and $`v^{}=s_1\mathrm{}s_{j1}`$. In our present notation, it takes the following form:

(6.3) 
$$\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _j}\mathrm{\Delta }_{j1}=\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{}\omega _j,v^{\prime \prime }\omega _j}\mathrm{\Delta }_{u^{\prime \prime }\omega _j,v^{}\omega _j}+\underset{j^{}>j}{}(\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _j^{}})^{a_{j^{}j}}\underset{j^{}=1}{\overset{j1}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_{j^{}1}^{a_{j^{}j}};$$

here we used that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{u\omega _j,v\omega _j}=\mathrm{\Delta }^{\omega _j}`$ whenever $`u`$ and $`v`$ belong to the parabolic subgroup of $`W`$ generated by all simple reflections except $`s_j`$. By the inductive assumption, the second summand in the right-hand side of (6.3) is positive at $`x`$, while the first summand is nonnegative. It follows that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{j1}(x)>0`$, completing the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 7. Proof of Theorems 3.4 and 3.5

### 7.1. Proof of Theorem 3.4

This is an immediate consequence of (6.2) and Lemma 6.1.

### 7.2. Proof of Theorem 3.5

We will need some basic facts about Coxeter elements in Weyl groups (the proofs can be found in \[2, Section V.6\]). Recall that a *Coxeter element* $`cW`$ is a product of simple reflections $`s_1,\mathrm{},s_r`$ taken in any order. All such elements are conjugate to each other and thus have the same order; this order is called the *Coxeter number* of $`W`$ and denoted by $`h`$. Here are the statements we need:

* If $`W`$ is irreducible, then $`h/2=\mathrm{}(w_\mathrm{o})/r`$.
* If $`w_\mathrm{o}=1`$ (i.e., $`w_\mathrm{o}(\lambda )=\lambda `$ for any weight $`\lambda `$), then $`h`$ is even, and $`c^{h/2}=w_\mathrm{o}`$ for any Coxeter element $`cW`$.

Now suppose that $`G`$ is simple, so the Weyl group $`W`$ is irreducible. Combining Theorem 3.4 with (C1)–(C2), we conclude that $`m(G)=h/2=\mathrm{}(w_\mathrm{o})/r`$ whenever $`w_\mathrm{o}=1`$. According to the tables in , this gives the desired answer for $`m(G)`$ for all the types except $`A_r`$ ($`r2`$), $`D_r`$ ($`r`$ odd), and $`E_6`$. Let us consider these remaining cases separately.

Throughout, we denote by $`𝐢=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_r)`$ a permutation of indices $`1,\mathrm{},r`$. It will be convenient to use the notation $`𝐢^k`$ for the concatenation of $`k`$ copies of $`𝐢`$.

*Type $`A_r`$*. As usual, we identify $`W`$ with the symmetric group $`S_{r+1}`$; under this identification, $`s_i`$ becomes the transposition of adjacent indices $`i`$ and $`i+1`$, and $`w_\mathrm{o}(i)=r+2i`$ for $`i[1,r+1]`$. If $`𝐢=(1,\mathrm{},r)`$, then $`𝐢^{r1}`$ does not contain a reduced word for $`w_\mathrm{o}`$, since any such reduced word must have a subword $`r,r1,\mathrm{},2,1`$ (because $`w_\mathrm{o}`$ switches 1 and $`r+1`$). For an arbitrary permutation $`𝐢`$ of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$, let us now consider the sequence $`𝐢^r`$. We will form a subsequence $`𝐣`$ of $`𝐢^r`$ as follows. First, $`𝐣`$ will include all $`r`$ entries of $`𝐢^r`$ which are equal to 1. Between any two consecutive 1’s, there is a 2; let $`𝐣`$ include all these 2’s (there will be $`r1`$ of them). We then include in $`𝐣`$ the 3’s that interlace these 2’s ($`r2`$ more entries), etc. It is straightforward to check that the subsequence $`𝐣`$ thus obtained will be a reduced word for $`w_\mathrm{o}`$. Thus $`m(G)=r`$, as claimed.

*Type $`D_r`$ ($`r`$ odd).* In this case $`h/2=\mathrm{}(w_\mathrm{o})/r=r1`$. Using the standard combinatorial interpretation of $`D_r`$, one checks that $`(s_1\mathrm{}s_r)^{r1}w_\mathrm{o}`$, and so $`m(G)r`$. To prove the reverse inequality, consider the standard embedding of $`W`$ into the Coxeter group $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ of type $`D_{r+1}`$. We know that the Coxeter number $`\stackrel{~}{h}`$ of $`\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is equal to $`2r`$, and the longest element $`\stackrel{~}{w}_\mathrm{o}\stackrel{~}{W}`$ is equal to $`1`$. Let $`𝐢=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_r)`$ be a permutation of $`1,\mathrm{},r`$, and denote $`\stackrel{~}{𝐢}=(i_1,\mathrm{},i_r,r+1)`$. Then $`\stackrel{~}{𝐢}^r`$ is a reduced word for $`\stackrel{~}{w}_\mathrm{o}`$, and therefore it contains a reduced word for $`w_\mathrm{o}W`$ as a subword. We conclude that $`m(G)=r`$, as desired.

*Type $`E_6`$*. The upper bound $`m(G)8`$ can be proved using the fact that $`(s_1s_4s_6s_2s_3s_5)^6=1`$ (in the notation of Figure 1), together with the following observation based on Lemma 6.1: if $`(T_c)^k=T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$ for a Coxeter element $`cW`$, then $`(T_c^{})^{k+1}=T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$ for any Coxeter element $`c^{}`$ obtained by taking a cyclic permutation of any reduced word for $`c`$. The lower bound is proved by exhibiting a Coxeter element (namely, $`c=s_1s_2s_3s_4s_5s_6`$) such that $`(T_c)^7T_{w_\mathrm{o}}`$. (The latter verification is due to H. Derksen.) $`\mathrm{}`$

## Acknowledgements

Harm Derksen contributed to Section 7.2 by first bringing the statements (C1)–(C2) to our attention, and then by verifying the type $`E_6`$ case of Theorem 3.5. We are grateful to Harm for his input.