# Double Lie algebroids and representations up to homotopy

- 240 Downloads

## Abstract

We show that a double Lie algebroid, together with a chosen decomposition, is equivalent to a pair of 2-term representations up to homotopy satisfying compatibility conditions which extend the notion of matched pair of Lie algebroids. We discuss in detail the double Lie algebroids arising from the tangent bundle of a Lie algebroid and the cotangent bundle of a Lie bialgebroid.

## Keywords

Double Lie algebroids Representations up to homotopy Matched pairs## Mathematics Subject Classification

Primary 53D17 Secondary 17B66 18D05## 1 Introduction

Double Lie algebroids first arose as the infinitesimal form of double Lie groupoids [11, 14]. In the same way as the Lie theory of Lie groupoids and Lie algebroids expresses many of the basic infinitesimalization and integration results of differential geometry, the process of taking the double Lie algebroid of a double Lie groupoid captures two-stage differentiation processes, such as the iterated tangent bundle of a smooth manifold, and the relations between a Poisson Lie group, its Lie bialgebra and its symplectic double groupoid.

The transition from a double Lie groupoid to its double Lie algebroid is straightforward. To define an abstract concept of double Lie algebroid, however, is much more difficult, since there is no meaningful way in which a Lie algebroid bracket can be said to be a morphism with respect to another Lie algebroid structure. The solution ultimately found was to extend the duality between Lie algebroids and Lie-Poisson structures to the double context, using the duality properties of double vector bundles [16]. This definition was given a simple and elegant reformulation in terms of super geometry by Th. Voronov [26]. In terms of super geometry, an ordinary Lie algebroid structure on a vector bundle corresponds to a homological vector field *Q* of weight 1 on the parity-reversed bundle. A double vector bundle *D* with Lie algebroid structures on both bundle structures on *D* therefore involves two homological vector fields and if these are of suitable weights with respect to the grading from the double vector bundle structure, the main compatibility condition of [26] is that they commute.

In the present paper we give a third formulation of double Lie algebroids, in terms of representations up to homotopy as defined in [1, 4]; this differs from the concept of the same name introduced in [3].

In fact the representations up to homotopy which are relevant are concentrated in degrees 0 and 1 and we refer to them as *2-representations* for brevity (see Definition 2.8). A 2-representation is a special form of Quillen’s notion of superconnection; see below following 2.7. We could paraphrase the content of the paper as showing that double Lie algebroids can be regarded as matched pairs of flat Lie algebroid superconnections.

We now give a more detailed description of the background to the paper. Consider first a double vector bundle *D* with Lie algebroid structures on two parallel sides, which are compatible with the vector bundle structures on the other sides; these are the LA–vector bundles of [16], Definition 3.3] and, in an equivalent reformulation, the VB-algebroids of [4]. Further suppose that *D* is ‘decomposed’; that is, as a manifold it is the fibre product \(A\times _M B\times _M C\) of three vector bundles *A*, *B*, *C* on the same base *M*, and the vector bundle structures on *D* are the pullbacks of \(B\oplus C\) to *A* and of \(A\oplus C\) to *B*. Then [4] showed that LA–vector bundle structures on *D* are in bijective correspondence with 2-representations defined in terms of *A*, *B* and *C*.

Decompositions of double vector bundles may themselves be regarded as extensions of the notion of connection. One definition of a connection in a vector bundle (*E*, *q*, *M*) is a map \(\mathsf {C}:E\times _M TM\rightarrow TE\) which is linear both as a map from the pullback of *TM* over the projction \(E\rightarrow M\) and as a map from the pullback of *E* over the projection \(TM\rightarrow M\), and which is right-inverse to both projections. This formulation, which can be found in Dieudonné, is precisely a decomposition of *TE* in our sense. However for a decomposition of a double vector bundle to possess connection-like properties it is necessary for there to be bracket structures on at least one pair of parallel sides; that is, for it to have a LA–vector bundle structure.

We assume, as part of the definition of a double vector bundle, that a decomposition exists; this property is preserved by the various prolongation and dualization processes studied here and in the references. Decompositions may be regarded as trivializations of *D* at the double level; in this paper we do not need to trivialize *A*, *B* and *C*. For a formulation in coordinate terms, see [26].

Now consider an arbitrary double Lie algebroid *D*. The Lie algebroid structures on *D* may be considered as a pair of LA–vector bundle structures and accordingly a decomposition of *D* expresses the double Lie algebroid structure as a pair of 2-representations. Our main result (Theorem 3.6) determines the compatibility conditions between these and, conversely, proves that a suitable pair of 2-representations defines a double Lie algebroid structure on *D*.

Our formulation is significantly different from both the original formulation and that of [26]. Our treatment resembles the coordinate treatment in [26] inasmuch as the three intrinsic conditions of [16] are replaced by a greater number of conditions which are dependent on auxiliary data, but which are easier to work with. On the other hand, our methods are entirely ‘classical’ rather than supergeometric, and rely on a global decomposition rather than a local trivialization.

Our formulation may also be regarded as a considerable generalization of the description of a vacant double Lie algebroid in terms of a matched pair of representations [16, §6]—that is, of representations of Lie algebroids in the strict sense, without curvature. For this reason we regard the conditions (M1) to (M7) in Definition 3.1 as defining a matched pair of 2-representations.

In turn, [7] shows that the bicrossproduct of a matched pair of 2-representations is a split Lie 2-algebroid, in the same way that the bicrossproduct of a matched pair of representations of Lie algebroids is a Lie algebroid [10, 18]. In a different direction, [8] will apply our main result to show that double Lie algebroids which are transitive in a sense appropriate to the double structure are determined by a simple diagram of morphisms of ordinary Lie algebroids.

We now describe the contents of the paper.

In Sect. 2 we recall the basic notions needed throughout the paper. We begin with double vector bundles, the special classes of sections with which it is easiest to work, and the nonstandard pairing between their duals. In Sect. 2.2 we recall LA–vector bundles and double Lie algebroids, and in Sect. 2.3 we finally define 2-representations.

In Sect. 3 we state our main result and apply it to the double Lie algebroids which arise from the tangent and cotangent prolongations of a Lie algebroid. The main work of the proof of Theorem 3.6 is given in Sect. 4.

We have included definitions of the key concepts required; in particular it is not necessary to have a detailed knowledge of [1, 4, 16] or [26].

## 2 Background and definitions

### 2.1 Double vector bundles, decompositions and dualization

We briefly recall the definitions of double vector bundles, of their *linear* and *core* sections, and of their *linear splittings* and *lifts*. We refer to [4, 15, 20] for more detailed treatments.

## Definition 2.1

*double vector bundle*is a commutative square satisfying the following four conditions:

- 1.
all four sides are vector bundles;

- 2.
\(\pi _B\) is a vector bundle morphism over \(q_A\);

- 3.
\(+_B: D\times _B D \rightarrow D\) is a vector bundle morphism over \(+: A\times _M A \rightarrow A\), where \(+_B\) is the addition map for the vector bundle \(D\rightarrow B\);

- 4.
the scalar multiplication \(\mathbb {R}\times D\rightarrow D\) in the bundle \(D\rightarrow B\) is a vector bundle morphism over the scalar multiplication \(\mathbb {R}\times A\rightarrow A\),

The corresponding statements for the operations in the bundle \(D\rightarrow A\) follow.

*D*;

*A*,

*B*;

*M*), the vector bundles

*A*and

*B*are called the

*side bundles*. The

*core*

*C*of a double vector bundle is the intersection of the kernels of \(\pi _A\) and \(\pi _B\). It has a natural vector bundle structure over

*M*, the restriction of either structure on

*D*, the projection of which we call \(q_C: C \rightarrow M\). The inclusion \(C \hookrightarrow D\) is usually denoted by

*A*,

*B*,

*C*on the same base manifold

*M*, the fibre product \(\overline{D}:=A\times _M B\times _M C\) has a natural structure of double vector bundle with side bundles

*A*and

*B*and core

*C*; the vector bundle structure on \(\overline{D}\rightarrow A\) is the pullback of \(B\oplus C\) to

*A*and likewise the vector bundle structure on \(\overline{D}\rightarrow B\) is the pullback of \(A\oplus C\) to

*B*. We can now state the fifth condition of Definition 2.1:

- 5.
there is a diffeomorphism from

*D*to the double vector bundle \(\overline{D} = A\times _M B\times _M C\), where*C*is the core of*D*, which is the identity on*A*,*B*and*C*and is an isomorphism of vector bundles \(D\rightarrow \overline{D}\) over*A*and*B*.

*morphism of double vector bundles*from (

*D*;

*A*,

*B*;

*M*) to \((D';A',B';M')\) consists of smooth maps \(\phi :D\rightarrow D'\), \(\phi _A:A\rightarrow A'\), \(\phi _B:B\rightarrow B'\) and \(\phi _M:M\rightarrow M'\) such that each of \((\phi , \phi _A)\), \((\phi , \phi _B)\), \((\phi _A, \phi _M)\) and \((\phi _B, \phi _M)\) is a vector bundle morphism.

Given a double vector bundle (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*), the space of sections \(\Gamma _B(D)\) is generated as a \(C^{\infty }(B)\)-module by two distinguished classes of sections (see [16]), the *linear* and the *core sections* which we now describe.

## Definition 2.2

*core section*\(c^\dagger :B \rightarrow D\) is defined as

We denote the corresponding core section \(A\rightarrow D\) by \(c^\dagger \) also, relying on the argument to distinguish between them.

## Definition 2.3

A section \(\xi \in \Gamma _B(D)\) is called *linear* if \(\xi :B \rightarrow D\) is a bundle morphism from \(B \rightarrow M\) to \(D \rightarrow A\) over a section \(a\in \Gamma (A)\).

*D*over

*B*will be written \(\Gamma _B^c(D)\) and the space of linear sections \(\Gamma ^\ell _B(D)\). Given \(\psi \in \Gamma (B^*\otimes C)\), there is a linear section \(\widetilde{\psi }:B\rightarrow D\) over the zero section \(0^A:M\rightarrow A\) given by

*core-linear section*.

## Example 2.4

*M*and consider \(\overline{D}=A\times _M B \times _M C\) with the vector bundle structures described in Definition 2.1. We call a double vector bundle of this type

*decomposed*or a

*trivial double vector bundle with core*

*C*. The core sections are given by

*A*and

*B*and core \(M\times 0\).

#### 2.1.1 Decompositions and lifts

A *decomposition* of (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) is a diffeomorphism \(\mathbb {I}:D\rightarrow \overline{D} = A\times _M B\times _M C\), as in Definition 2.1; that is, \(\mathbb {I}\) is an isomorphism of double vector bundles over the identity maps on *A*, *B* and *C*.

Given an injective morphism of double vector bundles \(\Sigma :A\times _M B\hookrightarrow D\) over the identity on the sides *A* and *B*, define a decomposition of *D* by \(\mathbb {I}(a_m,b_m,c_m)=\Sigma (a_m,b_m)+_B(\tilde{0}_{{b_m}} +_A \overline{c_m})\). Decompositions of *D* are in bijective correspondence with such morphisms \(\Sigma \). We will often refer to \(\Sigma \) as a decomposition of *D*.

*D*are also equivalent to splittings \(\sigma _A\) of the short exact sequence of \(C^\infty (M)\)-modules

*lift*. Given a decomposition, the lift \(\sigma _A:\Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma _B^\ell (D)\) is given by \(\sigma _A(a)(b_m)=\Sigma (a(m), b_m) = {\mathbb {I}}^{-1}(a(m), b_m,0_m)\) for all \(a\in \Gamma (A)\) and \(b_m\in B\).

In the case of the tangent double of a vector bundle \(E\rightarrow M\), the lift from vector fields on *M* to vector fields on *E* (see Sect. 2.1.2) would be the horizontal lift corresponding to a connection. We avoid the word ‘horizontal’ here since ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ refer to the two structures on *D*.

By the symmetry of a decomposition, this implies that a lift \(\sigma _A:\Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma _B^\ell (D)\) is equivalent to a lift \(\sigma _B:\Gamma (B)\rightarrow \Gamma _A^\ell (D)\). Given a lift \(\sigma _A:\Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma ^\ell _B(D)\), the corresponding lift \(\sigma _B:\Gamma (B)\rightarrow \Gamma ^\ell _A(D)\) is given by \(\sigma _B(b)(a(m))=\sigma _A(a)(b(m))\) for all \(a\in \Gamma (A)\), \(b\in \Gamma (B)\).

Note finally that two decompositions of *D* differ by a section \(\phi _{12}\) of \(A^*\otimes B^*\otimes C\simeq {\text {Hom}}(A,B^*\otimes C)\simeq {\text {Hom}}(B,A^*\otimes C)\) in the following sense. For each \(a\in \Gamma (A)\) the difference \(\sigma _A^1(a)-_B\sigma _A^2(a)\) of lifts is the core-linear section defined by \(\phi _{12}(a)\in \Gamma (B^*\otimes C)\). By symmetry, \(\sigma _B^1(b)-_A\sigma _B^2(b)=\widetilde{\phi _{12}(b)}\) for each \(b\in \Gamma (B)\).

#### 2.1.2 The tangent double vector bundle of a vector bundle

*TE*has two vector bundle structures; one as the tangent bundle of the manifold

*E*, and the second as a vector bundle over

*TM*. The structure maps of \(TE\rightarrow TM\) are the derivatives of the structure maps of \(E\rightarrow M\). The space

*TE*is a double vector bundle with core bundle \(E \rightarrow M\).

*linear vector field*. It is well-known (see e.g. [15]) that a linear vector field \(\xi \in \mathfrak {X}^l(E)\) covering \(X\in \mathfrak {X}(M)\) corresponds to a derivation \(D^*:\Gamma (E^*) \rightarrow \Gamma (E^*)\) over \(X\in \mathfrak {X}(M)\), and hence to a derivation \(D:\Gamma (E)\rightarrow \Gamma (E)\) over \(X\in \mathfrak {X}(M)\) (the dual derivation). The precise correspondence is given by

^{1}

*D*of \(\Gamma (E)\). The choice of a decomposition for (

*TE*;

*TM*,

*E*;

*M*) is equivalent to the choice of a connection on

*E*: Since a decomposition gives us a linear vector field \(\sigma _{TM}(X)\in \mathfrak {X}^l(E)\) for each

*X*, we can define \(\nabla :\mathfrak {X}(M)\times \Gamma (E)\rightarrow \Gamma (E)\) by \(\sigma _{TM}(X)=\widehat{\nabla _X}\) for all \(X\in \mathfrak {X}(M)\). Conversely, a connection \(\nabla :\mathfrak {X}(M)\times \Gamma (E)\rightarrow \Gamma (E)\) defines a lift \(\sigma _{TM}^\nabla \) for (

*TE*;

*TM*,

*E*;

*M*) and a decomposition of

*E*.

*E*. Given \(\nabla \), it is easy to see using the equalities in (3) that, writing \(\sigma \) for \(\sigma _{TM}^\nabla \):

*M*and the connection encode completely the Lie bracket of vector fields on

*E*. One result of this paper is an extension of this description to general double Lie algebroids.

*TE*. The lift \(\sigma _{E}^\nabla :\Gamma (E)\rightarrow \Gamma _{TM}^\ell (TE)\) is given by

#### 2.1.3 Dualization and lifts

*D*as a vector bundle over

*A*by Open image in new window and likewise for Open image in new window . The dual Open image in new window is itself a double vector bundle, with side bundles

*A*and \(C^*\) and core \(B^*\) [13, 16].Note also that by dualizing again Open image in new window over \(C^*\), we getwith core \(B^*\). In the same manner, we get a double vector bundle Open image in new window with sides

*B*and \(C^*\) and core \(A^*\).

*d*and we set Open image in new window .

This implies in particular that Open image in new window is canonically (up to a sign) isomorphic to Open image in new window and Open image in new window is isomorphic to Open image in new window . We will use this below.

*a*. Namely \(\xi \) induces a function Open image in new window which is fibrewise-linear over

*B*and, using the definition of the addition in Open image in new window [16, Equation (7)], it follows that \(\ell _\xi \) is also linear over \(C^*\). The corresponding section of Open image in new window is denoted \(\xi ^\sqcap \) [16]. Thus

Given a decomposition \(\Sigma :A\times _M B\rightarrow D\) of *D*, we get hence a decomposition

*D*. We identify Open image in new window with Open image in new window using Open image in new window . Thus we define the lift Open image in new window byfor all \(a\in \Gamma (A)\). Note that by (6), this implies that

*a*. To be more explicit, check or recall from [15, Equation (28), p. 352] that Open image in new window for all \(\alpha \in \Gamma (A^*)\) (and \(\alpha ^\dagger \) the corresponding core section of Open image in new window over \(C^*\)). But \(\langle \sigma _A^{\star ,B}(a), \alpha ^\dagger \rangle _{C^*}=q_{C^*}^*\langle a, \alpha \rangle \) by definition of the pairing of Open image in new window with Open image in new window . Hence, without the choice of sign that we make, \(\sigma _A^\star (a)\) would be linear over \(-a\), hence

*not*a lift.

### 2.2 LA–vector bundles and double Lie algebroids

*D*;

*A*,

*B*;

*M*) be a double vector bundlewith core

*C*. Then (

*D*;

*A*,

*B*;

*M*) is a LA–vector bundle [12] if there are Lie algebroid structures on \(D\rightarrow B\) and \(A\rightarrow M\), such that the vector bundle operations in \(D\rightarrow A\) are Lie algebroid morphisms over the corresponding operations in \(B\rightarrow M\). As a consequence, the anchor \(\Theta _B:D\rightarrow TB\) is a morphism of double vector bundles.

*VB-algebroid*if \(D \rightarrow B\) is a Lie algebroid, the anchor \(\Theta _D:D \rightarrow TB\) is a bundle morphism over \(\rho _A: A \rightarrow TM\) and the Lie bracket is linear:

## Example 2.5

For a vector bundle *E* on *M*, the tangent double vector bundle (*TE*; *E*, *TM*; *M*) has an LA–vector bundle structure \((TE\rightarrow E, TM\rightarrow M)\) with respect to the standard Lie algebroid structures on \(TE\rightarrow E\) and \(TM\rightarrow M\).

If *D* is an LA–vector bundle with Lie algebroid structures on \(D\rightarrow B\) and \(A\rightarrow M\) the dual vector bundle Open image in new window has a *Lie-Poisson structure* (a linear Poisson structure), and the structure on Open image in new window is also Lie-Poisson with respect to Open image in new window [16, 3.4]. Dualizing this bundle gives a Lie algebroid structure on Open image in new window . This equips the double vector bundle Open image in new window with a LA–vector bundle structure. Using the isomorphism defined by Open image in new window , the double vector bundle Open image in new window also has a LA–vector bundle structure.

## Definition 2.6

[16] A *double Lie algebroid* is a double vector bundle (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) with core denoted *C*, and with Lie algebroid structures on each of \(A\rightarrow M\), \(B\rightarrow M\), \(D\rightarrow A\) and \(D\rightarrow B\) such that each pair of parallel Lie algebroids gives *D* the structure of an LA–vector bundle, and such that Open image in new window with the induced Lie algebroid structures on base \(C^*\) as defined above, is a Lie bialgebroid.

Equivalently, *D* is a double Lie algebroid if the pair Open image in new window with the induced Lie algebroid structures on base \(C^*\) and the pairing Open image in new window , is a Lie bialgebroid. One aim of this paper is to reformulate this definition in terms of specific classes of sections, so as to allow the user to bypass frequent use of the duality of doubles; see Theorem 3.6.

### 2.3 Representations up to homotopy and LA–vector bundles

*A*-connection \(\nabla \) on a vector bundle \(E\rightarrow M\). Then the space \(\Omega ^\bullet (A,E)\) of

*E*-valued Lie algebroid forms has an induced operator \(\mathbf {d}_\nabla \) given by the É. Cartan formula:

## Definition 2.7

*representation up to homotopy of*

*A*

*on*\({\mathcal E}\) is a map \({\mathcal D}:\Omega ^\bullet (A, {\mathcal E}) \rightarrow \Omega ^\bullet (A,{\mathcal E})\) with total degree 1 and such that \({\mathcal D}^2=0\) and

Note that Gracia-Saz and Mehta [4] defined this concept independently and called it a “superrepresentation”; it is related to Quillen’s notion of superconnection [22] in the same way that representations of Lie algebroids are related to the general notion of *A*-connection.

The representations up to homotopy which we will consider are always on graded vector bundles \({\mathcal E}=E_0\oplus E_1\) concentrated on degrees 0 and 1; so-called 2*-term graded vector bundles*. In this case the data of [1] can be reformulated as follows (see [1, 4]).

## Definition 2.8

*A*be a Lie algebroid and let \({\mathcal E}= E_0\oplus E_1\) be a 2-term graded vector bundle on the same base. Then a 2

*-term representation up to homotopy*or, for brevity, a 2-

*representation of*

*A*

*on*\({\mathcal E}\), consists of

- (i)
a map \(\partial :E_0\rightarrow E_1\),

- (ii)
two

*A*-connections, \(\nabla ^0\) and \(\nabla ^1\) on \(E_0\) and \(E_1\), respectively, such that \(\partial \circ \nabla ^0 = \nabla ^1 \circ \partial \), - (iii)
an element \(R \in \Omega ^2(A, {{\mathrm{Hom}}}(E_1, E_0))\) such that \(R_{\nabla ^0} = R\circ \partial \), \(R_{\nabla ^1}=\partial \circ R\) and \(\mathbf {d}_{\nabla ^{{{\mathrm{Hom}}}}}R=0\), where \(\nabla ^{{{\mathrm{Hom}}}}\) is the connection induced on \({{\mathrm{Hom}}}(E_1,E_0)\) by \(\nabla ^0\) and \(\nabla ^1\).

## Proposition 2.9

*A*be a Lie algebroid and let \({\mathcal E}= E_0\oplus E_1\) be a 2-term graded vector bundle on the same base. Given a 2-representation of

*A*on \({\mathcal E}\), define \({{\mathcal D}}:\Gamma E^0 \rightarrow \Omega ^1(A,E^0) \oplus \Gamma E^1\) by \({{\mathcal D}}(e^0) = \nabla ^0(e^0) \oplus \partial (e^0)\) and define \({{\mathcal D}}:\Omega ^1(A,E^0) \oplus \Gamma E^1 \rightarrow \Omega ^2(A,E^0) \oplus \Omega ^1(A,E^1)\) by

*A*on \({\mathcal E}\). This defines a bijective correspondence between 2-representations of

*A*on \({\mathcal E}\) and representations up to homotopy of

*A*on \({\mathcal E}\).

Let \((D \rightarrow B; A \rightarrow M)\) be an LA–vector bundle. Recall that since the anchor \(\Theta _B\) is linear, it sends a core section \(c^\dagger \), \(c\in \Gamma (C)\) to a vertical vector field on *B*. This defines the *core-anchor* \(\partial _B:C\rightarrow B\) given by, \(\Theta _B(c^\dagger )=(\partial _Bc)^\uparrow \) for all \(c\in \Gamma (C)\) (see [11]).

The following theorem is proved in [4].

## Theorem 2.10

Let \((D \rightarrow B; A \rightarrow M)\) be a LA–vector bundle and choose a decomposition \(\Sigma :A\times _MB\rightarrow D\). The triple \((\nabla ^{AB},\nabla ^{AC},R)\) defined as above is a 2-representation of *A* on the complex \(\partial _B:C\rightarrow B\).

Conversely, let (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) be a double vector bundle such that *A* has a Lie algebroid structure and choose a decomposition \(\Sigma :A\times _MB\rightarrow D\). Then if \((\nabla ^{AB},\nabla ^{AC},R)\) is a 2-representation of *A* on a complex \(\partial _B:C\rightarrow B\), then the four equations above define a LA–vector bundle structure on \((D\rightarrow B; A\rightarrow M)\).

Note that (10) and (11) can also be proved by diagrammatic methods.

## Example 2.11

Choose a linear connection \(\nabla :\mathfrak {X}(M)\times \Gamma (E)\rightarrow \Gamma (E)\) and consider the corresponding decomposition \(\Sigma ^\nabla \) of *TE* as in Sect. 2.1.2. The description of the Lie bracket of vector fields in (4) shows that the 2-representation induced by \(\Sigma ^\nabla \) is the 2-representation of *TM* on \({{\mathrm{Id}}}_E:E\rightarrow E\) given by \((\nabla ,\nabla ,R_\nabla )\).

## Remark 2.12

#### 2.3.1 Dualization and 2-representations

Let (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) be a LA–vector bundle with Lie algebroid structures on \(D\rightarrow B\) and \(A\rightarrow M\). Let \(\Sigma :A\times _MB\rightarrow D\) be a decomposition of *D* and denote by \((\nabla ^B,\nabla ^C,R)\) the 2-representation of the Lie algebroid *A* on \(\partial _B:C\rightarrow B\). We have seen above that Open image in new window has an induced LA–vector bundle structure, and we have shown that the decomposition \(\Sigma \) induces a natural decomposition Open image in new window of Open image in new window . The 2-representation of *A* that is associated to this decomposition is then \(({\nabla ^C}^*,{\nabla ^B}^*,-R^*) \) on the complex \(\partial _B^*:B^*\rightarrow C^*\). This is easy to verify, and proved in the appendix^{2} of [2]. One only needs to recall for the proof that, by construction, \(\ell _{\sigma _A^\star (a)}\) equals \(\ell _{\sigma _A(a)}\) as a function on Open image in new window .

#### 2.3.2 The tangent of a Lie algebroid

Let \((A\rightarrow M,\rho ,[\cdot \,,\cdot ])\) be a Lie algebroid. Then the tangent \(TA\rightarrow TM\) has a Lie algebroid structure with bracket defined by \([Ta_1, Ta_2]=T[a_1,a_2]\), \([Ta_1, a_2^\dagger ]=[a_1,a_2]^\dagger \) and \([a_1^\dagger , a_2^\dagger ]=0\) for all \(a_1,a_2\in \Gamma (A)\). The anchor of *Ta* is \(\widehat{[\rho (a),\cdot ]}\in \mathfrak {X}(TM)\) and the anchor of \(a^\dagger \) is \(\rho (a)^\uparrow \) for all \(a\in \Gamma (A)\). This defines a LA–vector bundle structure \((TA\rightarrow TM; A\rightarrow M)\) on (*TA*; *TM*, *A*; *M*).

*TM*-connection on

*A*, and so a decomposition \(\Sigma ^\nabla \) of

*TA*as in Section 2.1.2, the 2-representation of

*A*on \(\rho :A\rightarrow TM\) encoding the LA–vector bundle is \((\nabla ^\mathrm{bas},\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}, R_\nabla ^\mathrm{bas})\), where the connections are defined by

## 3 Main theorem and examples

We define in this section the notion of *matched pair of* 2*-representations*. We then state our main result, Theorem 3.6: a double vector bundle endowed with two LA–vector bundle structures (one horizontal, one vertical) is a double Lie algebroid if and only if, for each decomposition, the two induced 2-representations form a matched pair.

In the second part of this section, we work out the example of the structures on the tangent double vector bundle of a Lie algebroid.

### 3.1 Matched pairs of 2-representations and main result

## Definition 3.1

*A*acts on \(\partial _B:C\rightarrow B\) up to homotopy via \((\nabla ^{AB},\nabla ^{AC}, R_{A})\) and

*B*acts on \(\partial _A:C\rightarrow A\) up to homotopy via \((\nabla ^{BA},\nabla ^{BC}, R_{B})\). Then we say that the two 2-representations form a

*matched pair*if the following hold:

^{3}

- (M1)
\(\nabla _{\partial _Ac_1}c_2-\nabla _{\partial _Bc_2}c_1=-\nabla _{\partial _Ac_2}c_1+\nabla _{\partial _Bc_1}c_2\),

- (M2)
\([a,\partial _Ac]=\partial _A(\nabla _ac)-\nabla _{\partial _Bc}a\),

- (M3)
\([b,\partial _Bc]=\partial _B(\nabla _bc)-\nabla _{\partial _Ac}b\),

- (M4)
\(\nabla _b\nabla _ac-\nabla _a\nabla _bc-\nabla _{\nabla _ba}c+\nabla _{\nabla _ab}c= R_{B}(b,\partial _Bc)a-R_{A}(a,\partial _Ac)b\),

- (M5)
\(\partial _A(R_{A}(a_1,a_2)b)=-\nabla _b[a_1,a_2]+[\nabla _ba_1,a_2]+[a_1,\nabla _ba_2]+\nabla _{\nabla _{a_2}b}a_1-\nabla _{\nabla _{a_1}b}a_2\),

- (M6)
\(\partial _B(R_{B}(b_1,b_2)a)=-\nabla _a[b_1,b_2]+[\nabla _ab_1,b_2]+[b_1,\nabla _ab_2]+\nabla _{\nabla _{b_2}a}b_1-\nabla _{\nabla _{b_1}a}b_2\),

- (M7)
\(\mathbf {d}_{\nabla ^A}R_{B}=\mathbf {d}_{\nabla ^B}R_{A}\in \Omega ^2(A, \wedge ^2B^*\otimes C)=\Omega ^2(B,\wedge ^2 A^*\otimes C)\), where \(R_{B}\) is seen as an element of \(\Omega ^1(A, \wedge ^2B^*\otimes C)\) and \(R_{A}\) as an element of \(\Omega ^1(B, \wedge ^2A^*\otimes C)\).

## Remark 3.2

*A*has nonzero rank, then (12) can be obtained from (M2) by replacing

*a*with

*fa*for \(f\in C^\infty (M)\). If

*B*has nonzero rank, then (12) can similarly be obtained from (M3). If both

*A*and

*B*have rank zero, then it is trivially satisfied.

## Remark 3.3

*A*has nonzero rank, then (M0) can be obtained from (M5) by replacing \(a_2\) with \(fa_2\) for \(f\in C^\infty (M)\). If

*B*has nonzero rank, then (M0) can be similarly obtained from (M6). If both

*A*and

*B*have rank zero, then it is trivially satisfied.

## Remark 3.4

Note that if *C* is trivial, then \(\partial _A,\partial _B\), \(R_A, R_B\) and \(\nabla ^{AC}, \nabla ^{BC}\) are trivial. In that case, equations (M1)–(M4), (M7) and the left hand sides of (M5) and (M6) vanish. Bearing in mind that (M5)–(M6) imply (M0), we find the definition of a matched pair of representations of Lie algebroids [10, 18]. In particular we find that (M0) is in fact redundant in the definition of a matched pair of representations of Lie algebroids.

## Remark 3.5

The vector bundle *C* inherits a Lie algebroid structure with anchor \(\rho _C:=\rho _A\circ \partial _A=\rho _B\circ \partial _B\) and with bracket given by \([c_1, c_2]=\nabla _{\partial _Ac_1}c_2-\nabla _{\partial _Bc_2}c_1\) for all \(c_1,c_2\in \Gamma (C)\). Using Remark 2.12 one can see that the Lie algebroid structure on *C* does not depend on the choice of splitting.

The proof of the Jacobi identity is not completely straightforward; it follows from (M2), (M3) and (M4). A detailed proof of a more general result, but with the same type of computation, is given in [7, Theorem 7.7]. Note that (M2) together with \(\partial _A \circ \nabla ^{BC} = \nabla ^{BA} \circ \partial _A\) (Equation (ii) in Definition 2.8) shows that \(\partial _A :C \rightarrow A\) is a Lie algebroid morphism. In the same manner, (M3) together with \(\partial _B \circ \nabla ^{AC} = \nabla ^{AB} \circ \partial _B\) shows that \(\partial _B :C \rightarrow B\) is a Lie algebroid morphism.

The Lie algebroid structure on *C* was defined intrinsically in [16]. Referring to Definition 2.6, the Lie bialgebroid Open image in new window induces a Poisson structure (natural up to sign) on its base \(C^*\); this Poisson structure is linear [16, §4] and so induces a Lie algebroid structure on *C*. As with the specific formula for the bracket above, the sign of the Poisson structure is determined by the requirement that \(\partial _A\) and \(\partial _B\) be morphisms of Lie algebroids.

Theorem 3.6 is our main result. The proof is in Sect. 4.

## Theorem 3.6

Let (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) be a double vector bundle with LA–vector bundle structures on both \((D\rightarrow A, B\rightarrow M)\) and \((D\rightarrow B, A\rightarrow M)\). Choose a decomposition \(\Sigma \) of *D* and let \({\mathcal D}_A\) and \({\mathcal D}_B\) be the two 2-representations defined by the lifts \(\sigma _A\) and \(\sigma _B\). Then (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*) is a double Lie algebroid if and only if the two 2-representations form a matched pair.

## Remark 3.7

An immediate consequence of Theorem 3.6 is that, if \({\mathcal D}_A\) and \({\mathcal D}_B\) are 2-representations that form a matched pair, and \({\mathcal D}'_A\) and \({\mathcal D}'_B\) are the 2-representations obtained by the transformation in Remark 2.12, then \({\mathcal D}'_A\) and \({\mathcal D}'_B\) will also form a matched pair. In other words, equations (M1) to (M7) are invariant under the transformation in Remark 2.12,

## Remark 3.8

Given a matched pair of representations of Lie algebroids *A* and *B* on the same base *M*, the direct sum vector bundle \(A\oplus B\) has a Lie algebroid structure, the *bicrossproduct Lie algebroid*, denoted \(A\bowtie B\) [10, 18]. The matched pair structure also induces on the decomposed double vector bundle \(A\times _M B\) a double Lie algebroid structure and, conversely, any vacant double Lie algebroid (that is, a double Lie algebroid for which the core is zero) arises from a matched pair of Lie algebroids in this way [16, §6].

### 3.2 Comparison with the equations of Voronov

In [26] Th. Voronov extended the notion of double Lie algebroid to supergeometry and thereby gave an exceptionally elegant reformulation of the original definition. A vector bundle *A* may be characterized as a Lie algebroid if its parity-reversion \(\Pi A\) has a vector field *Q* of degree \(+1\) which is homological in the sense that \(Q^2 = 0\) [24, 25].

Consider now a supermanifold *D* with a double vector structure (*D*; *A*, *B*; *M*). Write \(\Pi _AD\) and \(\Pi _BD\) for the parity reversions and let \(Q_A\) and \(Q_B\) be homological vector fields on \(\Pi _AD\) and \(\Pi _BD\) which have degrees (1, 0) and (0, 1). It follows that \(Q_A\) and \(Q_B\) induce Lie algebroid structures on \(\Pi A\) and \(\Pi B\). Then [26] defines *D* to be a (*super*) *double Lie algebroid* if \([Q_A,Q_B] = 0\).

Most of the calculations in [26] are carried out in terms of coordinates. Equations (47) and (48) of [26] give coordinate descriptions of the homological vector fields that are equivalent to the two Lie algebroid structures Open image in new window and Open image in new window .

The main work of [26] is to establish an equivalence between the Lie bialgebroid condition in the definition of a double Lie algebroid (Condition III in [26]) and the commutativity condition which we refer to briefly as \([Q_A,Q_B] = 0\). (In fact \(Q_A\) and \(Q_B\) are defined on different bundles, but admit“parity reversions” to \(\Pi ^2 D = \Pi _A \Pi _B D \cong \Pi _B \Pi _A D\) and it is these parity reversions which must commute.)

This is expressed in terms of eight coordinate equations (50)–(57). We now relate these to our equations (M1) to (M7) and (M0).

A choice of coordinates as in [26] constitutes a local choice of decomposition of *D*, and yields local decompositions of the duals Open image in new window and Open image in new window . By Remark 3.7, it is in fact enough to check (M1) to (M7) in local decompositions. As in [26] the letters \(\xi _i\) denote basis sections for *A* and \(\xi ^i\) denote the dual basis sections for \(A^*\). The letters \(\eta _\alpha \) denote basis sections for *B* and \(\eta ^\alpha \) denote the dual basis sections for \(B^*\). The letters \(x_a\) denote coordinates on the base manifold *M*. Finally the letters \(z_\mu \) are basis sections for *C* and \(z^\mu \) are the dual basis sections for \(C^*\).

*R*, \(\nabla \) and \(\partial \) refer to the 2-representations induced by the local decomposition. We believe that the term \(\xi _i\eta ^\alpha Q_{i\alpha }^j\) in (V 47) should have a minus sign for consistency with (V 26) and (V 28).

**Equation (V 50):**\(Q_\alpha ^aQ_\mu ^\alpha -Q_\mu ^iQ_i^a=0\) is satisfied for all \(\mu \) and

*a*if and only if

*a*. But this is

*a*. Since \(x_a\) are coordinates on the base manifold and \(\{z_\mu \}\) is a basis for

*C*, we get \(\rho _A\circ \partial _A=\rho _B\circ \partial _B\).

**Equation (V 51):**\(0=-Q^i_\mu Q^\lambda _{\nu i}+Q_\mu ^\alpha Q_{\nu \alpha }^\lambda -Q_\nu ^i Q_{\mu i}^\lambda +Q_\nu ^\alpha Q_{\mu \alpha }^\lambda \) for all \(\mu ,\nu ,\lambda \) is

As the reader can see, the proof of the equivalences requires writing out Voronov’s equations in terms of the 2-representations (see (13) and (14)), and using the duality of the coordinates. The proof of the remaining equivalences can be done in the same manner. We leave the details to the reader.

**Equation (V 52):** \(Q_{\alpha j}^{\beta }\,Q_{\beta }^a+Q_j^b\,\partial _bQ_{\alpha }^a-Q_{j\alpha }^i\,Q_i^a = Q_{\alpha }^b\,\partial _bQ_j^a\) is our (M0).

**Equation (V 53):** \(Q_j^a\partial _a\,Q_{\mu }^{i}+Q_{\mu }^k\,Q_{jk}^i- Q_{\mu }^\alpha \,Q_{j\alpha }^i = -Q_{\mu j}^{\lambda }\,Q_{\lambda }^i\) is (M2).

**Equation (V 54):**

**Equation (V 55)**: \(-Q_{\mu }^i\,Q_{\alpha i}^{\gamma } +Q_{{\lambda }}^{\gamma }\,Q_{\mu \alpha }^{{\lambda }} -Q_{\mu }^{\beta }\,Q_{\beta \alpha }^{\gamma }= -Q_{\alpha }^a\,\partial _aQ_{\mu }^{\gamma }\) is (M3).

**Equation (V 56):**

**Equation (V 57):**

**Equation (V 58):**

## Remark 3.9

Regarding differences in signs, it is worth observing that, given a Lie bialgebroid \((E, E^*)\), taking the opposite structure on either *E* or \(E^*\), or reversing their order, still results in a Lie bialgebroid. Thus varying the Lie bialgebroid chosen in the definition of double Lie algebroid has no important consequence, though some choices are easier to work with than others.

We now verify equations (M1) to (M7) on a basic example.

### 3.3 The tangent double vector bundle of a Lie algebroid

*TA*loosely as the

*tangent double Lie algebroid.*

- (i)
The LA–vector bundle \((TA\rightarrow A,TM\rightarrow M)\) is described by the 2-representation of

*TM*on \({{\mathrm{Id}}}_A:A\rightarrow A\) via \((\nabla ,\nabla ,R_\nabla )\) (Example 2.11). The anchor of*TM*is \({{\mathrm{Id}}}_{TM}\) and the bracket is the Lie bracket of vector fields. - (ii)
The LA–vector bundle \((TA\rightarrow TM, A\rightarrow TM)\) is described by the 2-representation of

*A*on \(\rho :A\rightarrow TM\) via \((\nabla ^\mathrm{bas},\nabla ^\mathrm{bas},R_\nabla ^\mathrm{bas})\) as in Sect. 2.3.2.

In the following, \(X,X_1,X_2\) will be arbitrary vector fields on *M* and \(a,a_1,a_2\) arbitrary sections of *A*.

**(M4)**The left-hand side of (M4) is

**(M6)**This equation is easily verified:

**(M7)**As one would expect, checking (M7) is a long, but straightforward computation. We carry this out in detail here, but will omit similar calculations in later cases. We begin by computing

## Remark 3.10

Infinitesimal ideal systems [5, 9] may also be understood in terms of 2-representations. It is proved in [2] that infinitesimal ideal systems are in bijective correspondence with double subbundles of (*TA*; *A*, *TM*; *M*) of the form \((F;A,F_M;M)\), such that \((F\rightarrow A, F_M\rightarrow M)\) and \((F\rightarrow F_M, A\rightarrow M)\) are sub-LA–vector bundles of \((TA\rightarrow A, TM\rightarrow M)\) and \((TA\rightarrow TM, A\rightarrow M)\), respectively.

More explicitly, suppose given a decomposition of *TA* that is *adapted* to the double subbundle *F* in the sense that the LA–vector bundle \((F\rightarrow A, F_M\rightarrow M)\) is described by the 2-representation \(({{\mathrm{Id}}}_A:A\rightarrow A, \bar{\nabla },\bar{\nabla },R_{\bar{\nabla }})\), where \(\bar{\nabla }:\Gamma (F_M)\times \Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma (A)\) is the restriction to \(F_M\) of the connection \(\nabla \) corresponding to the decomposition [2]. Then the LA–vector bundle \((F\rightarrow F_M, A\rightarrow TM)\) is described by the 2-representation of *A* on \(\rho :J\rightarrow F_M\) via \((\overline{\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}},\overline{\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}},\overline{R_\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}})\), where the \(\overline{\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}}\) are the (well-defined!) restrictions of the basic connections to \(\Gamma (A)\times \Gamma (J)\rightarrow \Gamma (J)\) and \(\Gamma (A)\times \Gamma (F_M)\rightarrow \Gamma (F_M)\) [2].

It is easy to see that (M1)–(M7) for the tangent double (*TA*; *A*, *TM*; *M*) restrict to (M1)–(M7) for this pair of 2-representations. This refines the result in [2] to a bijective correspondence between infinitesimal ideal systems and sub-double Lie algebroids of (*TA*; *A*, *TM*; *M*).

### 3.4 The cotangent double of a Lie bialgebroid

Let \((A,\rho , [\cdot \,,\cdot ])\) be a Lie algebroid over a smooth manifold *M*, and assume that \(A^*\) also has a Lie algebroid structure, with anchor denoted by \(\rho _\star \) and with bracket \([\cdot \,,\cdot ]_\star \).

*A*has a linear Poisson structure, and so \((T^*A\rightarrow A,A^*\rightarrow M)\) has a LA–vector bundle structure. The Lie algebroid bracket is given by

*A*induces a LA–vector bundle structure on \((T^*(A^*)\rightarrow A^*,A\rightarrow M)\), satisfying corresponding equations. Using the natural diffeomorphism \(T^*(A^*)\rightarrow T^*A\) of [17], this LA–vector bundle structure may be transferred to \((T^*A\rightarrow A^*,A\rightarrow M)\) and equips the double vector bundlewith two LA–vector bundle structures. If \((A, A^*)\) is a Lie bialgebroid then (18) is a double Lie algebroid with core \(T^*M\) ([16]; see also [23]). We now establish an equivalent result in terms of 2-representations.

A linear connection \(\nabla :\mathfrak {X}(M)\times \Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma (A)\), is equivalent to a decomposition \(\Sigma _\nabla \) of *TA* and so to a decomposition \(\Sigma ^\star _\nabla \) of (18). Using (8), one can check that \(\Sigma _\nabla ^\star :A\times A^*\rightarrow T^*A\) sends \((a_m,\alpha _m)\) to \(\mathbf {d}_{a_m}\ell _\alpha -(T_{a_m}q)^*\langle \nabla _\cdot \alpha ,a_m\rangle \) for any \(\alpha \in \Gamma (A^*)\) such that \(\alpha (m)=\alpha _m\) (see also [6]).

*TM*. The two connections above are their duals.)

*A*to Open image in new window , which is \((T^*A\rightarrow A^*, A\rightarrow M)\). Recall that the decomposition \(\Sigma ^\nabla \) of

*TA*and this LA–vector bundle structure define the 2-representation \((\rho :A\rightarrow TM, \nabla ^\mathrm{bas}, \nabla ^\mathrm{bas}, R_\nabla ^\mathrm{bas})\). The discussion in Sect. 2.3.1 yields then that the 2-representation of

*A*describing \((T^*A\rightarrow A^*, A\rightarrow M)\) in terms of the decomposition \(\Sigma _\nabla ^\star \) is on the complex \(\rho ^*:T^*M\rightarrow A^*\) and is defined by the connections

## Theorem 3.11

Let \((A,\rho ,[\cdot \,\cdot ])\) and \((A,\rho _\star ,[\cdot \,\cdot ]_\star )\) be two Lie algebroids in duality. Then \((A,A^*)\) is a Lie bialgebroid if and only if for any connection \(\nabla :\mathfrak {X}(M)\times \Gamma (A)\rightarrow \Gamma (A)\), the 2-representation \((\rho _\star ^*:T^*M\rightarrow A,{(\nabla ^*)^\mathrm{bas}}^*,{(\nabla ^*)^\mathrm{bas}}^*, {R_{\nabla ^*}^\mathrm{bas}}^*)\) of \(A^*\) and the 2-representation \((\rho ^*:T^*M\rightarrow A, {\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}}^*, {\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}}^*, -{R_\nabla ^\mathrm{bas}}^*)\) of *A* form a matched pair.

## 4 Proof of the main theorem

We will prove the theorem by checking the Lie bialgebroid condition only on particular families of sections; the linear sections and the core sections. The main difficulty is to understand the additional conditions which have to be verified by the families of sections for the proof to be complete. This is done in Sect. 4.1. In Sect. 4.2, we will show how the equations found in Sect. 4.1 imply (M1)–(M7) and vice-versa.

### 4.1 Families of sections of Lie bialgebroids

We recall the definition of a Lie bialgebroid [17]; see also [15, Chapter 12]. We will then show how the equation defining a Lie bialgebroid \((A,A^*)\) need be verified only on families of spanning sections of *A* and \(A^*\).

## Definition 4.1

Let \(q_A:A\rightarrow M\) and \(q_{A^*}:A^*\rightarrow M\) be a pair of dual vector bundles, and suppose each has a Lie algebroid structure, with anchors \(\rho :A\rightarrow TM\) and \(\rho _*:A^*\rightarrow TM\) respectively, and brackets \([\cdot \,,\cdot ]\) and \([\cdot \,,\cdot ]_*\).

*Lie bialgebroid*if for all \(a_1,a_2\in \Gamma (A)\):

The brackets on the RHS are extensions to 2-vectors by standard Schouten calculus.

It is often very convenient to check this condition only on the elements of a given set of sections \({\mathcal S}\subseteq \Gamma (A)\) which spans \(\Gamma (A)\) as a \(C^\infty (M)\)-module. We will formalize this technique shortly. We first need to recall some consequences of the definition.

The proof of the following proposition is a straightforward computation.

## Proposition 4.2

*A*and \(A^*\) be dual vector bundles with Lie algebroid structures. For \(a_1,a_2\in \Gamma (A)\), \(\alpha _1,\alpha _2\in \Gamma (A^*)\) and \(f\in C^\infty (M)\), we have

*A*has rank 1 then (25) below is vacuously true.) Equation (24) now reduces to

*M*, which we take to be the

*Poisson structure on*

*M*

*induced by the Lie bialgebroid structure.*

These considerations lead to the following result.

## Proposition 4.3

Let \(q_A:A\rightarrow M\) and \(q_{A^*}:A^*\rightarrow M\) be a pair of dual vector bundles, and suppose each has a Lie algebroid structure, with anchors \(\rho :A\rightarrow TM\) and \(\rho _*:A^*\rightarrow TM\) respectively, and brackets \([\cdot \,,\cdot ]\) and \([\cdot \,,\cdot ]_*\). Let \({\mathcal S}\) be a subset of \(\Gamma (A)\) which spans \(\Gamma (A)\) as a \(C^\infty (M)\)-module.

- (B1)
\(\mathbf {d}_{A^*}[a_1,a_2]=[\mathbf {d}_{A^*}a_1,a_2]+[a_1,\mathbf {d}_{A^*}a_2]\) for all \(a_1,a_2\in {\mathcal S}\),

- (B2)
\([\rho (a),\rho _*(\alpha )](f)-\rho _*({{\pounds }}_{a}\alpha )(f)+\rho ({{\pounds }}_{\alpha }a)(f)-\rho _*(\mathbf {d}_{A}f)\langle a,\alpha \rangle =0\) for all \(a\in {\mathcal S}\), \(\alpha \in \Gamma (A^*)\) and \(f\in C^\infty (M)\), and

- (B3)
\(-\rho \circ \rho _*^*=\rho _*\circ \rho ^*\).

## Proof

## Remark 4.4

In Proposition 4.3, the first two conditions are \(C^\infty (M)\)-linear in the \(\Gamma (A^*)\)-argument, so it is sufficient to check them on a subset \({{\mathcal R}}\subseteq \Gamma (A^*)\) that spans \(\Gamma (A^*)\) as a \(C^\infty (M)\)-module.

### 4.2 The Lie bialgebroid conditions on lifts and on core sections

## Proposition 4.5

Condition (B3) on \({\mathcal S}\) and \({\mathcal R}\) is equivalent to \(\rho _A\circ \partial _A=\rho _B\circ \partial _B\) and (M1).

## Proof

Since \(\Theta _A\circ \Theta _B^*\) and \(\Theta _B\circ \Theta _A^*\) are vector bundle maps \(T^*C^*\rightarrow TC^*\), it is sufficient to check (B3) on \(\mathbf {d}F\) for \(F\in C^\infty (C^*)\). In fact, it is even sufficient to check (B3) on \(\mathbf {d}(q_{C^*}^*f)\) for \(f\in C^\infty (M)\) and \(\mathbf {d}\ell _c\) for \(c\in \Gamma (C)\).

As a corollary of this proof, we find the following result. Recall that the map \(\Theta _B \circ \Theta ^*_A :T^*C^*\rightarrow TC\) defines a Poisson structure on \(C^*\) (see (26) and the considerations following it).

## Corollary 4.6

*C*as in Remark 3.5. More explicitly, it is given by

## Remark 4.7

Note that the apparent asymmetry between the structures over *A* and *B* arises from unavoidable choices in the identifications between the various duals. The Poisson structure on \(C^*\) is nonetheless determined by requiring \(\partial _A\) and \(\partial _B\) to be morphisms of Lie algebroids.

*A*, the Lie derivative \({{\pounds }}_{}:\Gamma (A)\times \Gamma (A^*)\rightarrow \Gamma (A^*)\) is defined by

## Lemma 4.8

Note that in these equations, \(R(a,\cdot )b\) is seen as a section of \({\text {Hom}}(C^*,A^*)\) and \(R(b,\cdot )a\) is seen as a section of \({\text {Hom}}(C^*,B^*)\).

## Proof

The formulas describing the Lie derivative Open image in new window can be verified in the same manner. \(\square \)

## Proposition 4.9

Condition (B2) on \({\mathcal S}\) and \({\mathcal R}\) is equivalent to (M2), (M3), (M4) and (M0).

## Proof

The idea of this proof is to check (B2) on linear and core sections in \({\mathcal S}\) and \({\mathcal R}\), and on linear and \(q_{C^*}\)-pullback functions on \(C^*\). We start with core sections. Choose \(\alpha \in \Gamma (A^*)\) and \(\beta \in \Gamma (B^*)\). We have \([\Theta _B(\alpha ^\dagger ), \Theta _A(\beta ^\dagger )]=[(\partial _A^*\alpha )^\uparrow ,(\partial _B^*\beta )^\uparrow ]=0\). By Lemma 4.8 and with Open image in new window , we find that (B2) is trivially satisfied on \(\alpha ^\dagger , \beta ^\dagger \) and any element of \(C^\infty (C^*)\).

We conclude the proof of Theorem 3.6 with the study of (B1) on linear and core sections.

## Proposition 4.10

Condition (B1) on elements of \({\mathcal S}\) and \({\mathcal R}\) is equivalent to (M5), (M6) and (M7).

*A*and \(A^*\) be a pair of Lie algebroids in duality. Then, for all \(a\in \Gamma (A)\) and \(\alpha _1,\alpha _2\in \Gamma (A^*)\):

## Proof

This completes the proof of Theorem 3.6.

## Footnotes

- 1.
Since its flow is a flow of vector bundle morphisms, a linear vector field sends linear functions to linear functions and pullbacks to pullbacks.

- 2.
The construction of the “dual” decomposition of Open image in new window , given a decomposition of

*D*, is done in [2] by dualizing the decomposition and taking its inverse. The resulting decomposition of Open image in new window is the same. - 3.
For the sake of simplicity, from now on we usually write \(\nabla \) for all four connections. It is always clear from the arguments which connection is meant. We write \(\nabla ^A\) for the

*A*-connection induced by \(\nabla ^{AB}\) and \(\nabla ^{AC}\) on \(\wedge ^2 B^*\otimes C\) and \(\nabla ^B\) for the*B*-connection induced on \(\wedge ^2 A^*\otimes C\).

## Notes

### Acknowledgements

The Research of M. JL, was partially supported by a fellowship for prospective researchers (PBELP2_137534) of the Swiss NSF for a postdoctoral stay at UC Berkeley, and by a Dorothea–Schlözer fellowship of the University of Göttingen. The authors are very grateful to Th. Voronov, and to an anonymous referee, for helpful comments.

## References

- 1.Arias, A.C., Crainic, M.: Representations up to Homotopy of Lie Algebroids. J. Reine Angew. Math.
**663**, 91–126 (2012)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - 2.Drummond, T., Jotz, M., Ortiz, C.: VB-Algebroid Morphisms and Representations up to Homotopy. Differ. Geom. Appl.
**40**, 332–357 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 3.Evens, S., Lu, J.-H., Weinstein, A.: Transverse Measures, the Modular Class and a Cohomology Pairing for Lie Algebroids. Q. J. Math. Oxf. Ser.
**50**(200), 417–436 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 4.Gracia-Saz, A., Mehta, R.A.: Lie Algebroid Structures on Double Vector Bundles and Representation Theory of Lie Algebroids. Adv. Math.
**223**(4), 1236–1275 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 5.Hawkins, E.: A Groupoid Approach to Quantization. J. Symplectic Geom.
**6**(1), 61–125 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 6.Jotz, M.: Dorfman Connections and Courant Algebroids (2013). arXiv:1209.6077
- 7.Jotz Lean, M.: N-manifolds of Degree 2 and Metric Double Vector Bundles (2015). arXiv:1504.00880
- 8.Jotz Lean, M., Mackenzie, K.C.H.: Transitive Double Lie Algebroids (2014) (
**in preparation**)Google Scholar - 9.Jotz Lean, M., Ortiz, C.: Foliated Groupoids and Infinitesimal Ideal Systems. Indag. Math. (N. S.)
**25**(5), 1019–1053 (2014)Google Scholar - 10.Lu, J.-H.: Poisson Homogeneous Spaces and Lie Algebroids Associated to Poisson Actions. Duke Math. J.
**86**(2), 261–304 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 11.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: Double Lie Algebroids and Second-Order Geometry. I. Adv. Math.
**94**(2), 180–239 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 12.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: Double Lie Algebroids and Iterated Tangent Bundles (1998). arXiv:math/9808081
- 13.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: On symplectic Double Groupoids and the Duality of Poisson Groupoids. Int. J. Math.
**10**(4), 435–456 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 14.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: Double Lie Algebroids and Second-Order Geometry. II. Adv. Math.
**154**(1), 46–75 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 15.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: General Theory of Lie Groupoids and Lie Algebroids, vol 231 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
- 16.Mackenzie, K.C.H.: Ehresmann Doubles and Drinfel’d Doubles for Lie Algebroids and Lie Bialgebroids. J. Reine Angew. Math.
**658**, 193–245 (2011)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - 17.Mackenzie, K.C.H., Xu, P.: Lie Bialgebroids and Poisson Groupoids. Duke Math. J.
**73**(2), 415–452 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 18.Mokri, T.: Matched Pairs of Lie Algebroids. Glasg. Math. J.
**39**(2), 167–181 (1997)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 19.Pradines, J.: Représentation des jets non holonomes par des morphismes vectoriels doubles soudés. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. A
**278**, 1523–1526 (1974)Google Scholar - 20.Pradines, J.: Fibrés vectoriels doubles et calcul des jets non holonomes, vol 29 of Esquisses Mathématiques [Mathematical Sketches]. Université d’Amiens U.E.R. de Mathématiques, Amiens (1977)Google Scholar
- 21.Pradines, J.: Remarque sur le groupoïde cotangent de Weinstein–Dazord. C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sér. I Math.
**306**(13), 557–560 (1988)MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar - 22.Quillen, D.: Superconnections and the Chern Character. Topology
**24**(1), 89–95 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar - 23.Roytenberg, D.: Courant Algebroids, Derived Brackets and Even Symplectic Supermanifolds. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 1999. Thesis (Ph.D.), University of California, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
- 24.Yu, A.: Vaĭntrob. Lie Algebroids and Homological Vector Fields. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk.
**52**(2(314)), 161–162 (1997)Google Scholar - 25.Voronov, Th. Th.: Graded manifolds and Drinfeld doubles for Lie bialgebroids. In: Quantization, Poisson brackets and beyond (Manchester, 2001), vol 315 of Contemp. Math. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, pp. 131–168 (2002)Google Scholar
- 26.Voronov, Th. Th.: Q-Manifolds and Mackenzie Theory. Commun. Math. Phys.
**315**(2), 279–310 (2012)Google Scholar

## Copyright information

**Open Access**This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.