INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORYSHINTARÔ KUROKI

Abstract. GKM theory has been developed to compute torus
equivariant cohomologies on some nice space called GKM space.
A set of GKM spaces consists of many classes in the spaces withtorus actions, e.g. the torus manifold is the GKM space. So we
can expect that to study GKM spaces will lead us in a deep understanding of torus actions. The aim of this article is to introduce
GKM theory.

Contents
1. Introduction
2. Basics of equivariant cohomology
2.1. Basics of group actions
2.2. Equivariant cohomology
2.3. Computations of equivariant cohomology for easy cases
3. GKM manifold and its equivariant cohomology
3.1. Equivariantly formal space
3.2. GKM manifold
4. GKM graph and graph equivariant cohomology
4.1. Graph4.2. GKM graph4.3. Graph equivariant cohomology
5. Relations with toric geometry
6. Problem
References

1
2
2
3
4
5
5
7
11
11
12
14
14
15
16

1. Introduction
Let G be a Lie group and M be a smooth compact manifold. We
call a smooth map ϕ : G × M → M a G-action on M , if ϕ satisfies thefollowing two properties:(1) ϕ(e, x) = x for the identity element e ∈ G and x ∈ M ;(2) ϕ(g, ϕ(h, x)) = ϕ(gh, x) for g, h ∈ G and x ∈ M .
The author was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education,
Science and Technology (2009-0063179).
1

2

SHINTARÔ KUROKI

On the other hand, if there exists such ϕ then we call that G acts on
M or M is a G-space. In particular, in this article, we put G = T n ,i.e., the n-dimensional, compact commutative group (we call it then-dimensional torus).
GKM theory is to study an equivariant cohomology (see Section 2) ofn
T -action on even dimensional smooth manifold M 2m with finite fixed
points, i.e., elements x ∈ M such that ϕ(g, x) = x for all g ∈ T n . In thepaper [GKM98], Goresky, Kottwitz and MacPherson showed that anequivariant cohomology ring of such torus action with suitable condition (we call it a GKM manifold) has a combinatorial description, thatis, we can describe the equivariant cohomology ring structure of GKM
manifolds by using the combinatorial notion (we call it a GKM description). From their point of view, in order to define the equivariant
cohomology of GKM manifolds, we do not need to use a chain complex any more; instead, we may only use graphs with axial functions
induced by torus actions. For example, in the paper [KT03], Knutson
and Tao adopted the GKM description as the definition of the equivariant cohomology on complex Grassmannians. Moreover, we can expect
to applications to graph theory from GKM theory (e.g. see [GZ01]). In
topological point of view, the most interesting part of this theory is to
expect to make bridges among several theories which developed individually, e.g., the theory of torus manifolds or the equivariant Schubert
calculus e.t.c.
The aim of this article is an introduction to GKM theory. The
organization of this article is as follows. In Section 2, we recall somebasic facts on the equivariant cohomology. In Section 3, we define the
GKM manifold and introduce the GKM description of the equivariant
cohomology of GKM manifolds. In Section 4, we abstractly define the
GKM graph and its graph equivariant cohomology. In Section 5, asa test case, we compute the ring structure of some graph equivariant
cohomology of GKM graph. In Section 6, finally we give the principal(but it suppose to be opne-ended) problem of GKM theory.
2. Basics of equivariant cohomology
In this section, we overview the basics of equivariant cohomology.
Basic references are [H75]1 or [GS99]2 for equivariant cohomology, [B72]
or [Ka91] for compact group actions and [MT91] for topology of compact Lie groups.
2.1. Basics of group actions. We first recall the basic terminologies
of group actions. Let ϕ : G × M → M be a G-action on M andx ∈ M . We often denote it as G yϕ M . In this article, we always
1The book [H75] is written from algebraic topological point of view.

2The book [GS99] is written from differential topological point of view relatedwith GKM theory.

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

3

consider group actions under the smooth category. So we can define
the following representation from ϕ:Φ : G → Diff(M )byΦ(g) = ϕ(g, ),where the symbol Diff(M ) represents the set of all diffeomorphisms
on M and it has the compact-open topology. If Φ is injective, i.e.,ker Φ = {e} then we call this action ϕ is an effective action.
In our notation, the symbol G(x) represents the G-orbit of x and Gx
represents the isotropy subgroup of G on x, i.e.,
G(x) = {ϕ(g, x) ∈ M | g ∈ G}
andGx = {g ∈ G | ϕ(g, x) = x},
respectively. If G is compact, G(x) is diffeomorphic to G/Gx andker Φ = ∩x∈M Gx . The symbol M/G denotes the orbit space of Gaction on M , i.e, the set of all orbits.
By using the Milnor construction of G, we can construct the space
EG which satisfies the following two conditions:(1) EG is contractible;(2) G acts on EG freely, i.e., Gx = {e} for all x ∈ EG.
Because G acts on EG, we have its orbit space EG/G. The symbol
BG represents EG/G and we call it a classifying space of G.
2.2. Equivariant cohomology. Next we define the equivariant cohomology and recall its basic facts. Let M be a G-space and ϕ a G-action
on M . Now the product space EG × M has a diagonal G-action by(a, x) 7→ (ag −1 , ϕ(g, x))
where a ∈ EG, x ∈ M and g ∈ G. Therefore, we can take its orbit
space (EG × M )/G = EG ×G M . We call EG ×G M the Borel construction (or homotopy quotient). The symbol MG also represents theBorel construction of G-space M . Now we may define an equivariant
cohomology of G-space M .
Definition 2.1 (Equivariant cohomology). Let M be a G-space. The
equivariant cohomology of M is the ordinary cohomology of MG . We
describe the equivariant cohomology as HG∗ (M ), i.e.,
HG∗ (M ) = H ∗ (MG )(= H ∗ (EG ×G M ))Remark 2.2. In this paper, we consider the integer coefficient (i.e.,
Z-coefficient) or the rational coefficient (i.e., Q-coefficient) as the coefficient of cohomology rings. The symbol H ∗ (X) represents the cohomology with Z-coefficient and the symbol H ∗ (X; Q) represents thecohomology with Q-coefficient.

4

SHINTARÔ KUROKI

Because G acts on EG freely, we have the following fibration for the
Borel construction of M :ιπ

M −→ EG ×G M −→ BG.
Therefore, we also have the following sequence for the equivariant cohomology of M :
(2.1)

ι∗

π∗

H ∗ (M ) ←− HG∗ (M ) ←− H ∗ (BG).

Hence, we see that HG∗ (M ) is not only ring but also H ∗ (BG)-algebra
via the representation π ∗ . In general, the ring structure of H ∗ (BG) is
still open problem3. However, if G = T n , the ring structure of H ∗ (BT )is known as the polynomial ring, i.e.,H ∗ (BT n ) ' Z[x1 , . . . , xn ]where deg xi = 2 for i = 1, . . . , n.
2.3. Computations of equivariant cohomology for easy cases.
In the final part of this section, we compute HG∗ (M ) for special cases.
2.3.1. The case M is one point. Assume M = {∗}, i.e., one point.
Then we have EG ×G {∗} ∼= BG. Therefore, HG∗ ({∗}) ' H ∗ (BG).
2.3.2. The case G-action on M is freely. Assume G acts on M freely.
Then we have the following fibration for EG ×G M :EG −→ EG ×G M −→M/G.
Because EG is contractible, we have that EG ×G M → M/G induces
the homotopy equivariant map. Therefore, HG∗ (M ) ' H ∗ (M/G). In∗
particular, for all subgroups K ⊂ G, we have HK(G) ' H ∗ (G/K).
2.3.3. The case G-action on M is transitively. Assume G acts on M
transitively, i.e., G(x) = M for x ∈ M . In this case, we have M ∼= G/Hfor some subgroup H ⊂ G. Now we have the following equation:
EG ×G (G/H) ∼= EG/H ∼=h EH/H = BH,
where ∼=h represents homotopy equivalent. Therefore, HG∗ (G/H) ∼=∗H (BH).
3This is for Z-coefficient. For Q-coefficient (rational coefficient), the ring struc-ture of H ∗ (BG; Q) is known for all compact Lie groups (see [MT91, Chapter 6]).

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

5

2.3.4. Summary and problem. Summarizing the above arguments, wehave the following proposition.
Proposition 2.3. We have the following equations for HG∗ (M ):(1) if M = {∗}, then HG∗ (∗) ' H ∗ (BG);(2) if G acts on M freely, then HG∗ (M ) ' H ∗ (M/G);(3) if G acts on M transitively and M ∼= G/H for some subgroup∗∗
H, then HG (G/H) ' H (BH).
In general, group actions on M are more complicated than the above
cases. So we can naturally ask the following question:
Problem 2.4. Find an useful method to compute HG∗ (M ) for vastcases.
One of the answers of Problem 2.4 is GKM theory. We will argue itfrom the next section.
3. GKM manifold and its equivariant cohomology
Henceforth, we put G = T n , i.e., T n = S 1 ×· · ·×S 1 (n times productof S 1 ’s) and we assume that M 2m is a 2m-dimensional, connected,
finite T -manifold, i.e., it has the finite T -CW complex structure4, wheren ≤ m. Before we define a GKM manifold, we introduce the notion ofan equivariantly formal space.
3.1. Equivariantly formal space. Recall the sequence (2.1):π∗ι∗H ∗ (BT ) −→ HT∗ (M ) −→ H ∗ (M ).
Now we may define an equivariantly formal space.
Definition 3.1 (Equivariantly formal space). If ι∗ : HT∗ (M ) → H ∗ (M )is surjective, then we call M an equivariantly formal space.
Remark 3.2. In the paper [GKM98], if ι∗ : HT∗ (M ; Q) → H ∗ (M ; Q) is
surjective then we call M an equivariantly formal space. In this case,this property is equivalent to HT∗ (M ; Q) is the free H ∗ (BT ; Q)-module.
However, for the Z-coefficient, this is not true in general (see [FP06,
Example 5.2]).
We also remark the following proposition. This proposition is one of
the criterion when HT∗ (M ) is the free H ∗ (BT )-module for the equivariantly formal space.
Proposition 3.3. Let M a simply connected, equivariantly formal T space. Then we also have the following properties:(1) π ∗ : H ∗ (BT ) → HT∗ (M ) is injective;
4This assumption is more general than the compactness.

Moreover, from thisassumption, the cohomology ring of M is finite in each dimension, i.e., dim H i (M ) <∞ for all i = 0, . . . , 2m.

6SHINTARÔ KUROKI(2) HT∗ (M ) is free H ∗ (BT )-module.
Proof. Due to [MT91, Chapter 3: Lemma 2.15, Theorem 4.4], the Serre
spectral sequence of the fibration M → MT → BT collapses. Therefore, by using [MT91, Chapter 3: Theorem 4.2], we have these properties.
¤
Before we state the key theorem in GKM theory, we introduce thenotion k-skelton. Let M be a T -space. Then we have the following
sequence constructed by T -invariant subspaces:
M T = M0 ⊂ M1 ⊂ · · · ⊂ Mn = M 2m ,where
Mk = {x ∈ M | dim T (x) ≤ k}called the k-skelton of T -action on M . Note that M0 = M T , i.e., theset of fixed points and Mn = M 2m . Now we may state the following
important key theorem in GKM theory (see [FP07, Theorem 2.3]):
Theorem 3.4 (ABFP exact sequence). Let M be an equivariantly formal space. If the isotropy subgroup Tx is connected for all x ∈ M , thenthe following sequence is exact:
∂∗

ρ∗

0
0 −→ HT∗ (M ) −→ HT∗ (M T ) −→HT∗+1 (M1 , M0 )

∂∗

∂∗

∗
∂n−2

1
2
−→
HT∗+2 (M2 , M1 ) −→· · · −→ HT∗+n−1 (Mn−1 , Mn−2 )∗∂n−1−→ HT∗+n (Mn , Mn−1 ) −→ 0,
where the map ρ : M T → M represents the embedding and ∂`∗ :HT∗ (M` , M`−1 ) → HT∗+1 (M`+1 , M` ) is defined by the long sequence of(M`+1 , M` , M`−1 ).
We call the sequence in Theorem 3.4 the Atiyah-Bredon-Franz-Puppe
sequence (the ABFP sequence for short).
If we put some assumption on M then we can change the assumption
for the T -action in Theorem 3.4 to weaker condition as follows.
Theorem 3.5. Let M be a simply connected, equivariantly formal
space. If Tx /Txo ' Z`(x) or {e} for all x ∈ M and some `(x) ∈Z−{0, ±1} (where Txo is the identity component of Tx ), then the ABFP
sequence is exact.
Proof. Using Proposition 3.3 and [FP07, Theorem 2.2], we have thistheorem.
¤
As a corollary of the exactness of the ABFP sequence, we have thefollowing famous facts:

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

7

Corollary 3.6. Let ρ1 : M T → M1 be the natural embedding. If the
ABFP sequence is exact, then we have the following diagram:
ρ∗

∂∗

0
0 −→ HT∗ (M ) −→ HT∗ (M T ) −→HT∗+1 (M1 , M T )∗↑ ρ1∗
HT (M1 )such that• ρ∗ is injective (the localization theorem);• Im ρ∗ = ker ∂0∗ = Im ρ∗1 (the Chang-Skjelbred lemma).
Therefore, in order to compute HT∗ (M ) of the equivariantly formal T space with suitable conditions for Tx , we may only compute the imageof ρ∗1 , i.e.,Im ρ∗1 = ρ∗1 (HT∗ (M1 )) ⊂ HT∗ (M T ).
This fact is one of the motivations for the definition of GKM manifold.
Remark 3.7. In [FP07, Theorem 2.4], there are the best conditions
which induce the Chang-Skjelbred sequence, i.e., the first sequence inCorollary 3.6, is exact.
For the Q-coefficient, we do not need to assume Tx is connected in
Theorem 3.4.
3.2. GKM manifold. In this section, we define a GKM manifold.
Before we define it, we recall some notations. Let p ∈ M T and dim M =2m. Because we assume in this paper the T -action on M is smooth, we
can induce a T -representation of the tangent space Tp M on p from T y
M . We call this representation a tangential representation. Since T isisomorphic to S 1 × · · · × S 1 , the tangent space Tp M can be decomposed
into the irreducible T -representations as follows:
Tp M ' V (α1 ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ V (αm ),where αi ∈ Hom(T n , S 1 ) and V (αi ) ' C (for all i = 1, . . . , m).
Now we may define a GKM manifold.
Definition 3.8 (GKM manifold). Let M 2m be a 2m-dimensional (simply connected) manifold with effective T n -action, where m ≥ n. The
manifold M 2m is called the GKM manifold if it satisfies the following
three conditions:(1) M is equivariantly formal (and Tx /Txo ' Z`(x) for all x ∈ M );(2) M T is finite;(3) For Tp M ' V (α1 ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ V (αm ), the set {α1 , . . . , αm } ⊂Hom(T n , S 1 ) ' H 2 (BT n ) is pairwise linearly independent, i.e.,
for all pair (αi , αj )’s (i 6= j) are linearly independent in H 2 (BT n ).
Here, we give the meaning of each assumptions in Definition 3.8.
The first assumption is for using the Chang-Skjelbred exact sequence in8SHINTARÔ KUROKI

Corollary 3.6. The second assumption is for the finiteness of dimH ∗ (BT ) HT∗ (M T ).
Therefore, we haveHT∗ (M T ) ' ⊕p∈M T HT∗ (p) ' ⊕p∈M T Z[x1 , . . . , xn ].
The third assumption is equivalent to the following geometric condition:
dim M1 = 2,
where M1 is the 1-skelton of T y M . This condition is also identified
with the following equation:
M1 /T = Γ,where Γ is the graph (also see Section 4.1) such that the set of vertices
V Γ = M T and the set of edges E Γ (resp. legs LΓ ) is the set of invariant
spheres which connect two fixed points on M (resp. invariant C whose
origin is a fixed point). Note that if M is compact then there is no legsin the graph M1 /T , and the second assumption holds automatically.
Example 3.9. For example, the following spaces are GKM manifolds:(1) Equivariantly formal torus manifolds (i.e., torus manifolds with
H odd (M ) = 0):(2) Hypertoric manifolds with residual S 1 -actions:(3) Homogeneous spaces G/H with same rank, i,e, T ⊂ H ⊂ G for
maximal torus T ⊂ G and H and G are connected:
Proof. For the fact that the first example, see the papers [MP06] and[MMP07]. For the second, see the papers [HP04] and [HH05]. For thethird, see the paper [GHZ06].
¤


































 




















The location of torus manifolds in GKM manifolds are as the following Figure 1. In Figure 1, each parenthesis represents the corresponding


NF



㧕

P

6

P

P

)  % 6 P 

Figure 1. A set of GKM manifolds.

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

9

combinatorial theory. Therefore, in some sense, we can regard a GKM
graph as the universal combinatorial theory which describes GKM manifolds (see Section 4).
We give more concrete examples in Example 3.9 (1), where here atorus manifold is a 2n-dimensional T n -manifold with fixed points:
Example 3.10. Let S 2 ⊂ R ⊕ C be a 2-dimensional sphere. Figure 2
is the picture of T 1 y S 2 .

Figure 2. T 1 y S 2 and S 2 /T 1 .
Precisely, this is defined as follows. The 1-dimensional torus T 1 acts
on S 2 byϕ(t, (r, z)) = (r, tz),
where (r, z) ∈ S 2 , i.e., r ∈ R and z ∈ C such that r2 + |z|2 = 1. Then
this is an equivariantly formal torus manifolds because this action has
2 fixed points and H odd (S 2 ) = 0. Therefore, this is one of the example
of GKM manifolds.
Example 3.11. Let CP (n) = (Cn+1 − {0})/C∗ be a n-dimensional
complex projective space. Then the n-dimensional torus T n acts on
CP (n) as follows:ϕ((t1 , . . . , tn ), [z0 : z1 : · · · : zn ]) = [z0 : t1 z1 : · · · : tn zn ],where [z0 : z1 : · · · : zn ]. Figure 3 is the 1-skelton of T 2 y CP (2).

=?

=[\?
=Z\?

=?

=?
=Z[?

Figure 3. The 1-skelton of T 2 y CP (2).

10SHINTARÔ KUROKI

We can easily show that this is one of the example of GKM manifolds because the complex projective space with the above action is theequivariantly formal torus manifolds.
We can compute the equivariant cohomology of GKM manifolds byusing the following theorem.
Theorem 3.12 (GKM description). Let M be a GKM manifold. Then
we have the following combinatorial description for the equivariant cohomology:HT∗ (M ) ' {f : M T → H ∗ (BT ) | f (p) − f (q) ≡ 0 (mod α(pq))},where p, q ∈ M T are connected by an edge in M1 /T and α(pq) ∈H 2 (BT ) is the T -representation along the tangent space of S 2 whichconnects p and q.
Before we explain an outline of the proof of this theorem, we willdraw the picture of the T -representation along the tangent space of S 2(see Figure 4).









R


α RS

6R /

S

T

S

Figure 4. This is the picture of decomposition of thetangential representation on the fixed point p ∈ M T .
The left figure in Figure 4 represents the 1-skeltons around fixed
point p ∈ M T , and in the right figure we pick up one of the 1-skeltons
around p. By the definition (3) of the GKM manifold, we have thefollowing decomposition on p ∈ M T :Tp M ' V (α1 ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ V (αm ).
Then there are invariant 2-spheres Si2 (i = 1, . . . , m) such that p ∈(Si2 )T and its tangential representation is equal to αi . In the figure,one of the decomposition of Tp M represents by the right figure as therepresentation of the T -action on Tp S 2 , where S 2 is the invariant spherewhich connects p and q. Moreover, we can get the one dimensional
representation from the T -action on Tp S 2 which corresponds to one of
the factors in the decomposition of the tangential representation. We
denote this representation as α(pq) : T → S 1 (see the right figure).

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

11

Outline of the proof. By using Corollary 3.6, we haveHT∗ (M ) ' ι∗1 (HT∗ (M1 )) ⊂ HT∗ (M T ).
Therefore, we may only need to know the ring structure of ι∗1 (HT∗ (M1 )).
This ring structure is easy to know by using the Mayer-Vietoris argument.
¤
From the next section, we will give the abstract description of theabove facts by using the GKM graph and its graph equivariant cohomology.
4. GKM graph and graph equivariant cohomology
In this section, we define the GKM graph and its graph equivariant
cohomology.
Motivated by Theorem 3.12, we introduce the graph with axial functions and its cohomology ring called graph equivariant cohomology ring.
These ideas are introduced by Guilleminn-Zara in the paper [GZ01] by
abstracting from Hamiltonian torus actions, Maeda-Masuda-Panov in[MMP07] abstracting from equivariantly formal torus manifolds, andHarada-Holm in [HH05] for hypertoric manifolds and Kuroki [Ku] abstracting hypertoric manifolds.
4.1. Graph. First of all we recall the graph Γ. A graph Γ5 is the setof finite vertices V Γ , the set of edges E Γ and the set of legs LΓ , where
the edge is the one dimensional interval which connects two vertices pq
and the leg is the one dimensional half line outgoing from one vertex
p. The symbol E Γ represents E Γ ∪ LΓ . The Figure 5 is the picture ofgraphs in this paper.

Figure 5. This is the picture of graphs. The left graphis the 2-valent graph with the multi-edge, the middle
graph is the 3-valent graph, and the right graph is the
4-valent graph with 6 legs.
In this paper, we assume that if pq ∈ E Γ then qp ∈ E Γ , i.e., we
distinguish two orientations on one edge. We denote the initial vertex
of e ∈ E Γ as i(e) and the terminal vertex as t(e) ∈ E Γ , e.g., i(pq) = p
5 The definition of the graph in this paper is the part of the definition of thehypergraph.

12

SHINTARÔ KUROKI

and t(pq) = q if e = pq is the edge, i(e) = p and t(e) = ∅ if e is the leg.
Moreover, we introduce the notation that EpΓ = {e ∈ E Γ | i(e) = p}.
In this paper, we assume #EpΓ = m for all p ∈ V Γ where #EpΓ is the
cardinality of the set EpΓ , and we call such graph an m-valent graph.
4.2. GKM graph. Let Γ = (V Γ , E Γ ) be an m-valent graph. In order to define a GKM graph, we will define a connection and an axial
function.
Before we define a connection, we prepare the set θ = {θpq | pq ∈ E Γ }which is a collection of bijective maps
θpq : EpΓ → EqΓ
for all edges pq ∈ E Γ . Since Γ is an m-valent graph, we have |EpΓ | =m = |EqΓ | for all p, q ∈ V Γ . Hence the bijective map θe always exists
for all edges e ∈ E Γ .
Definition 4.1. A connection on Γ is the set θ = {θpq | pq ∈ E Γ } which
satisfies the following two conditions:−1• θqp = θpq;• θpq (pq) = qp.
Remark 4.2. We can easily show that an m-valent graph Γ admits
different ((m−1)!)g connections, where g is the number of (unoriented)
edges E Γ .
Next we define an axial function. In order to define it, we prepare
some notations. Let t be a Lie algebra of T , tZ a lattice of t, and t∗
the dual algebra of t. The symbol Hom(T, S 1 ) represents a set of allhomomorphisms from the group T to S 1 , and we know that it canbe regarded as a lattice of the dual algebra t∗Z . Hence, we have theidentification Hom(T, S 1 ) ' t∗Z ' H 2 (BT ).
Definition 4.3. An axial function
α : E Γ → Hom(T, S 1 ) ' t∗Z ' H 2 (BT )is a map which satisfies the following condition:• α(qp) = ±α(pq) for all edges pq ∈ E Γ .
Definition 4.4 (GKM graph). Let G = (Γ, α, θ) be a collection ofan m-valent graph Γ = (V Γ , E Γ ), a connection θ on Γ, and an axial
functionα : E Γ → Hom(T, S 1 ) ' t∗Z ' H 2 (BT ).
We call G = (Γ, α, θ) a GKM graph if it satisfies the following conditions for all p ∈ V Γ :(1) α(EpΓ ) = {α(e) | e ∈ EpΓ } is pairwise linearly independent for
all p ∈ V Γ , that is, for two distinct elements e1 , e2 ∈ EpΓ ,α(e1 ), α(e2 ) are linearly independent in t∗Z ;INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

13(2) α satisfies the congruence relation for all edges pq ∈ E Γ , thatis, the relation α(e) − α(θpq (e)) ≡ 0 (mod α(pq)) holds for alle ∈ EpΓ .
Example 4.5. Figure 6 is an example of a GKM graph. Here, we
attach the axial function α : E Γ → Hom(T 2 , S 1 ) ' H 2 (BT ) =< α, β >as follows, where we regard α : T 2 → S 1 as the projection of the 1st
coordinate and β : T 2 → S 1 as the projection of the 2nd coordinate:α(pq) = α,α(qp) = −α;α(pr) = β,α(rp) = −β;α(qr) = −α + β, α(rq) = α − β.

T
α−β

−β

−α+β

β
R

α

−α

S

Figure 6. GKM graph. Here, α, β are the generators in HT2 2 (pt).
On the other hand, the GKM graph can be defined from the GKM
manifold by taking the tangential representation as its axial function.
For example, recall Example 3.11 for the n = 2 case (also see Figure3). We may regard the tangent space of p = [1 : 0 : 0], q = [0 : 1 : 0],r = [0 : 0 : 1] as
Tp CP (2) = {[1 : z1 : z2 ] | z1 , z2 ∈ C} ' V (α) ⊕ V (β);
Tq CP (2) = {[z0 : 1 : z2 ] | z0 , z2 ∈ C} ' V (−α) ⊕ V (β − α);
Tr CP (2) = {[z0 : z1 : 1] | z0 , z1 ∈ C} ' V (−β) ⊕ V (α − β).
Attaching these tangential representations along the invariants 2-spheres,
we have the GKM graph as Figure 6.
If a triple of the subgraph Γ0 and the restriction of the axial function
and the connection to Γ0 , we denote it as (Γ0 , α|Γ0 , θ|Γ0 ) ⊂ G, satisfies
the definition of the GKM graph, then we call G 0 = (Γ0 , α|Γ0 , θ|Γ0 ) a
GKM subgraph.

14

SHINTARÔ KUROKI

4.3. Graph equivariant cohomology. Let G = (Γ, α, θ) be a GKM
graph. First we put the set of generators of t∗Z by {α1 , · · · , αn }. Then
we can consider the equivariant cohomology of a point as follows:HT∗ (pt) = H ∗ (BT ) ' Z[α1 , · · · , αn ].
Definition 4.6 (graph equivariant cohomology). We define the ringHT∗ (G) of G = (Γ, α, θ) as follows:HT∗ (G) = {f : V Γ → HT∗ n (pt) | f (p) − f (q) ≡ 0 (mod α(pq))},where pq ∈ E Γ is an edge and α(pq) ∈ t∗Z ' H 2 (BT ). We call HT∗ (G) agraph equivariant cohomology. We also call the relation f (p) − f (q) ≡0 (mod α(pq)) a congruence relation of f .
Example 4.7. Let G be the GKM graph in Example 4.5. Now we may
look at the element in HT∗ (G). For the GKM graph in Figure 6, thefollowing map f : V Γ → Z[α, β] is one of the elements in HT∗ (G):f (p) = αβ;
f (q) = αβ 2 + α;
f (r) = α2 β + β,because f satisfies the congruence relation.
5. Relations with toric geometry
A quasitoric manifold is the equivariantly formal torus manifold,i.e., H odd (M ) = 0 such that its orbit space is combinatorially same as asimple polytope P . Because the quasitoric manifold is the equivariantly
formal torus manifold, the quasitoric manifold is the GKM manifold by
Example 3.9. Hence, we can define the GKM graph G of the quasitoric
manifolds. In this section, we quickly review the generators and theirrelations of its graph equivariant cohomology HT∗ (G).
By the definition of the quasitoric manifold, its 1-skelton correspondswith the 1-skelton of its orbit polytope, i.e., for the orbit projection
p : M → P , the inverse of 1-skelton p−1 Γ(P ) is M1 (where Γ(P ) is
the 1-skelton of P ). We can easily see that Γ(P ) is an n-valent graphif dim M = 2n. Due to [MP06], we see that the generator of HT (G)is the set of all facets of G, i.e., the set of all (n − 1)-valent
GKM
Q
subgraphs and their relation is the ideal generated by H⊂Γ τH suchthat ∩H⊂Γ H = ∅, where τH ∈ HT∗ (G) is the element which correspondswith the facet H.
Example 5.1. Recall Example 4.5. This is defined by the quasitoric
manifolds CP (2). We look at its generators and multiplications inHT∗ (G).
In Figure 7, we show the generators in the GKM graph in Example
4.5. There are just three facets: pr, qr, pq, i.e., 1-valent GKM subgraphs in G of Example 4.5. The corresponding elements of these facets

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY
T

T

15

T
0

α−β

−β

0
R

α

R

S

−α+β

β

0
−α

S

R

S

Figure 7. The generators τpr , τqr , τpq (from left) of the
GKM graph in Example 4.5.
in HT∗ (G) is the elements shown in Figure 7, i.e.,τpr (p) = α, τpr (q) = 0,τpr (r) = α − β;τqr (p) = 0, τqr (q) = −α,τqr (r) = −β;τpq (p) = β, τpq (q) = −α + β, τpq (r) = 0,
and their relations areτpr τqr (p) = 0,
τpr τqr (q) = 0,
τpr τqr (r) = −β(α − β);τpr τpq (p) = αβ, τpr τpq (q) = 0,
τpr τpq (r) = 0;
τqr τpq (p) = 0,
τqr τpq (q) = −α(−α + β), τqr τpq (r) = 0,andτpr τqr τpq = 0,
that is, we haveHT∗ (G) ' Z[τpr , τqr , τpq ]/ < τpr τqr τpq >' HT∗ (CP (2)).
This is the face ring of ∆2 .
6. Problem
Finally, we give the (principle) problem of GKM theory (also see[GZ01]).
Problem 6.1. Let G be a GKM graph. What is the ring structure ofHT∗ (G)? That is, determine generators and their multiplicative structure.
As we see in the Section 2, GKM manifolds include equivariantly
formal torus manifolds, hypertoric varieties, and Grassmanianns, e.t.c.
Moreover, we have already known the independent formulations ofHT∗ (M ) for these three classes, e.g. the face ring of simplicial poset for
the equivariantly formal torus manifold (see [MP06] and [MMP07]), theStanley-Reisner ring of unoriented matroid for hypertoric varieties (see[HP04] and [HH05]), and the equivariant Schubert calculus for Grassmanianns (see [KT03]). If we had the answer of Problem 6.1, then wewould unite the above independent formulations!

16

SHINTARÔ KUROKI

Acknowledgement This is a proceeding article of 2009 ASARC
workshop held in Muju resort from June 4th to 6th. The author would
like to thank to organizers of the workshop. In particular, he would
like to thank to Prof. DongYoup Suh for giving him an opportunity totalk in the workshop. Finally, he would like to thank to Prof. Mamoru
Mimura for invaluable comments.

References[B72] G.E. Bredon, Introduction to compact transformation groups, Academic
Press, 1972.
[BP02] V.M. Buchstaber and T.E. Panov: Torus actions and their applications in
topology and combinatorics, Amer. Math. Soc., 2002.
[CS74] T. Chang and T. Skjelbred: The topological Schur lemma and related results,
Ann. of Math. (2) 100 (1974), 307–321.
[DJ91] M. Davis and T. Januszkiewicz: Convex polytopes, Coxeter orbifolds andtorus action, Duke Math. J. 62 (1991), 417–451.
[FP06] M. Franz and V. Puppe: Exact cohomology sequences with integral coefficients for torus actions, Trans. Groups 11 (2006), 65–76.
[FP07] M. Franz and V. Puppe: Freeness of equivariant cohomology and mutantsof compactified representations, arXiv:0710.2302.
[GKM98] M. Goresky, R. Kottwitz and R. MacPherson: Equivariant cohomology,
Koszul duality, and the localization theorem, Invent. Math. 131 (1998), 25–83.
[GHZ06] V. Guillemin, T.S. Holm and C. Zara: A GKM description of the equivariant cohomology ring of a homogeneous space, J. Algebraic Combin., 23(2006), 21–41.
[GS99] V. Guilleminn and S. Sternberg: Supersymmetry and equivariant de Rhamtheory, Springer Berlin, 1999.
[GZ01] V. Guilleminn and C. Zara: One-skeleta, Betti number and equivariant
cohomology, Duke Math. J. 107 (2001), 283–349.
[HH05] M. Harada and T.S. Holm: The equivariant cohomology of hypertoric varieties and their real loci, Comm. Anal. Geom., 13 (2005), 645–677.
[HP04] M. Harada and N. Proudfoot: Properties of the residual circle action on a
hypertoric variety, Pacific J. of Math, 214 (2004), 263–284.
[HM03] A. Hattori and M. Masuda: Theory of multi-fans, Osaka. J. Math., 40(2003), 1–68.
[H75] W.Y. Hsiang: Cohomology Theory of Topological Transformation Groups
Ergeb. Math. 85, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1975.
[Ka91] K. Kawakubo: The theory of transformation groups, Oxford Univ. Press,
London, 1991.
[KT03] A. Knutson and T. Tao: Puzzles and (equivariant) cohomology of Grassmannians, Duke Math. J. 119 (2003), 221–260.
[Ku] S. Kuroki: Hypertorus graphs and graph equivariant cohomologies, preprint.
[MMP07] H. Maeda, M. Masuda and T. Panov: Torus graphs and simplicial posets,Adv. Math. 212 (2007), 458–483.
[MP06] M. Masuda and T. Panov: On the cohomology of torus manifolds, Osaka
J. Math., 43 (2006), 711–746.
[MT91] M. Mimura and H. Toda, Topology of Lie Groups, I and II, Amer. Math.
Soc., 1991.

INTRODUCTION TO GKM THEORY

17

Department of Mathematical Sciences, KAIST, 335 Gwahangno, Yuseonggu, Daejeon 305-701, Republic of Korea
E-mail address: kuroki@kaist.ac.kr