Degenerate Principal Series Representations of GLnC) and GLn(R)

Journal of Functional Analysis

Volumn 166, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 244-309

  Howe, Roger ^a   Lee, Soo Teck ^b  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0001857803     PISSN: 00221236     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jfan.1999.3427     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Aslaksen H., Tan E., Zhu C. On certain rings of highest weight vectors. J. Algebra. 174:1995;159-186.
2. Brocker T., Dieck T. Representations of Compact Lie Groups. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. 98:1985;Springer-Verlag, New York.
3. Branson T., Olafsson G., Orsted B. Spectrum generating operators and intertwining operators for representations induced from a maximal parabolic subgroup. J. Funct. Anal. 135:1996;163-205.
4. Branson T. Group representations arising from Lorentz conformal geometry. J. Funct. Anal. 74:1987;199-241.
5. Barbasch D., Sahi S., Speh B. Degenerate series representations for GL(2n, R ) and Fourier analysis. Cantoni V. Indecomposable Representations of Lie Groups and Their Physical Applications. Sympos. Math. 31:1988;45-69.
6. Helgason S. Groups and Geometric Analysis. 1984;Academic Press, New York.
7. Howe R. Perspectives on invariant theory: Schur duality, multiplicity-free actions and beyond. Piateski-Shapiro Ilya, Gelbart Stephen. The Schur Lectures (1992). Israel Mathematical Conference Proceedings. 8:1995;1-182 Am. Math. Soc. Providence.
8. Howe R. Some simple examples in representation theory. Jahresber. Deutsch. Math.-Verein. 96:1995;131-159.
9. Howe R., Tan E. Homogeneous functions on light cones: the infinitesimal structure of some degenerate principal series representations. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 28:1993;1-74.
10. Howe R., Umeda T. The Capelli identity, the double commutant theorem, and multiplicity-free actions. Math. Ann. 290:1991;565-619.
11. Johnson K. Degenerate principal series and compact groups. Math. Ann. 287:1990;703-718.
12. Johnson K. Degenerate principal series on tube type domains. Contemp. Math. 138:1992;175-187.
13. Klimyk A., Gruber B. Infinitesimal operators and structure of the most degenerate representations of Sp(p+q) and Sp(p, q) in an Sp(p)×Sp(q) basis. J. Math. Physics. 25:1984;743-750.
14. Knapp A. Representation Theory of Semisimple Groups: An Overview Based on Examples. 1986;Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
15. Lee S. On some degenerate principal series representations of U(n, n). J. Funct. Anal. 126:1994;305-366.
16. Lee S. Degenerate principal series representations of Sp(2n, R ). Compositio Math. 103:1996;123-151.
17. Sahi S. The Capelli identity and unitary representations. Compositio Math. 81:1992;247-260.
18. Sahi S. Unitary representations on the Shilov boundary of a symmetric tube domain. Representations of Groups and Algebras. Comtemp. Math. 145:1993;. p. 275-286.
19. Sahi S. Jordan algebras and degenerate principal series. J. Reine Angew Math. 462:1995;1-18.
20. Samelson H. Notes on Lie Algebras. 1990;Springer-Verlag, New York.
21. Stein E. Analysis in matrix spaces and some new representations of SL(n, C ). Ann. of Math. 86:1967;461-490.
22. Vogan D. The unitary dual of GL(n) over an archimedean field. Invent. Math. 83:1986;449-505.
23. Warner G. Harmonic Analysis on Semisimple Lie Groups I. 1972;Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
24. Weyl H. The Classical Groups. 1946;Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton.
25. Zhang G. Jordan algebras and generalized principal series representation. Math. Ann. 302:1995;773-786.