ARCHIVUM MATHEMATICUM (BRNO)
Tomus 44 (2008), 569–585
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES
Lenka Zalabová and Vojtěch Žádník
Abstract. The classical concept of affine locally symmetric spaces allows
a generalization for various geometric structures on a smooth manifold. We
remind the notion of symmetry for parabolic geometries and we summarize the
known facts for |1|-graded parabolic geometries and for almost Grassmannian
structures, in particular. As an application of two general constructions
with parabolic geometries, we present an example of non-flat Grassmannian
symmetric space. Next we observe there is a distinguished torsion-free affine
connection preserving the Grassmannian structure so that, with respect to
this connection, the Grassmannian symmetric space is an affine symmetric
space in the classical sense.
1. Introduction
Affine (locally) symmetric spaces present a very classical topic in differential
geometry, see e.g. to [9, chapter XI] for all details. In particular, a smooth manifold
M with an affine connection is called affine locally symmetric space if for each
point x ∈ M there is a local symmetry centered at x, i.e. a locally defined affine
transformation sx such that x is an isolated fixed point of sx and Txsx = − id. The
notion of local symmetry is easily modified for various geometric structures and
there are attempts to understand these generalizations. For instance, there is a lot
known on the so-called projectively symmetric spaces, see e.g. [10] and references
therein. In the framework of parabolic geometries, the general definition of local
symmetry fits nicely especially for |1|-graded parabolic geometries which includes
projective, conformal, and almost Grassmannian geometries as particular examples.
We open the article with a review of basic ideas and concepts for parabolic
geometries, including the notion of Weyl structures and normal coordinates. Then
we introduce local symmetries for general parabolic geometries and provide their
characterization in homogeneous model, Proposition 2.5. There is a couple of
general results for symmetric |1|-graded parabolic geometries [12, 14] which we
recover in section 3 in a slightly improved way. In particular, for a local symmetry
centered at x, Theorem 3.2 provides an existence of a torsion-free Weyl connection,
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: primary 53C15; secondary 53A40, 53C05, 53C35.
Key words and phrases: parabolic geometries, Weyl structures, almost Grassmannian structures,
symmetric spaces.
First author supported at different times by the Eduard Čech Center, project nr. LC505, and
the ESI Junior Fellows program; second author supported by the grant nr. 201/06/P379 of the
Grant Agency of Czech Republic.
570 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
locally defined in a neighborhood of x, which is invariant with respect to the
symmetry and whose Rho-tensor vanishes at x. Then we focus on Grassmannian
(locally) symmetric spaces, i.e. almost Grassmannian structures allowing a (local)
symmetry at each point. It turns out that the model Grassmannian structure is
always symmetric and a non-flat almost Grassmannian structure of type (p, q)
may be locally symmetric only if p or q is 2. In the latter case, the possible local
symmetries at a point are heavily restricted, see 3.4.
The rest of the paper is devoted to the description of an example of non-flat
Grassmannian locally symmetric space of type (2, q). This appears as the space of
chains of the homogeneous model of a parabolic contact geometry, Theorem 4.3.
(The notion of chains here generalizes the Chern–Moser chains on CR manifolds
of hypersurface type.) The example comes as an application of some general
constructions from [8] and [2], dealing with the parabolic geometry associated
to the path geometry of chains. The necessary background for a comfortable
understanding of the result is presented in 4.1 and 4.2. In addition, the constructed
space is globally symmetric and there is a torsion-free affine connection preserving
the Grassmannian structure which is invariant with respect to some distinguished
symmetries, Theorem 4.4. Hence, we end up with an affine symmetric space with a
compatible Grassmannian structure, Corollary 4.4.
Acknowledgement. We would like to mention the discussions with Andreas Čap,
Boris Doubrov, and Jan Slovák, as well as the remarks by the anonymous referee,
which were very helpful during the work on this paper.
2. Parabolic geometries, Weyl structures, and symmetries
In this section, we remind definitions and basic facts on Cartan geometries, Weyl
structures and symmetries for parabolic geometries. We primarily refer to [3, 6, 5]
for more intimate and comprehensive introduction to parabolic geometries, the
subsection dealing with symmetries is based on [12].
2.1. Definitions. Let G be a Lie group, P ⊂ G its Lie subgroup, and p ⊂ g
the corresponding Lie algebras. A Cartan geometry of type (G, P) on a smooth
manifold M is a couple (G → M, ω) consisting of a principal P-bundle G → M
together with a one-form ω ∈ Ω1
(G, g), which is P-equivariant, reproduces the
fundamental vector fields and induces a linear isomorphism TuG ∼= g for each u ∈ G.
The one-form ω is called the Cartan connection. The curvature of Cartan geometry
is defined as K := dω + 1
2 [ω, ω], which is a two-form on G with values in g. Easily,
the P-bundle G → G/P with the (left) Maurer–Cartan form µ ∈ Ω1
(G, g) form
a Cartan geometry of type (G, P) with vanishing curvature, which we call the
homogeneous model.
Parabolic geometry is a Cartan geometry (G → M, ω) of type (G, P), where
G is a semisimple Lie group and P its parabolic subgroup. The Lie algebra g of
the Lie group G is equipped (up to the choice of Levi factor g0 in p) with the
grading of the form g = g−k ⊕ · · · ⊕ g0 ⊕ · · · ⊕ gk such that the Lie algebra p
of P is p = g0 ⊕ · · · ⊕ gk. Suppose the grading of g is fixed and further denote
g− := g−k ⊕ · · · ⊕ g−1 and p+ := g1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ gk. Parabolic geometry corresponding
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 571
to the grading of length k is called |k|-graded. By G0 we denote the subgroup in
P, with the Lie algebra g0, consisting of all elements in P whose adjoint action
preserves the grading of g. Next, defining P+ := exp p+, we get P/P+ = G0 and
P = G0 P+.
The grading of g induces a P-invariant filtration g = g−k
⊃ g−k+1
⊃ · · · ⊃ gk
=
gk, where gi
:= gi ⊕· · ·⊕gk. This gives rise to a filtration of the tangent bundle TM
as follows. The Cartan connection ω provides an identification TM ∼= G ×P (g/p)
where the action of P on g/p is induced by the adjoint representation. Hence each
P-invariant subspace g−i
/p ⊂ g/p defines the subbundle T−i
M := G ×P (g−i
/p) in
TM, so we obtain the filtration TM = T−k
M ⊃ · · · ⊃ T−1
M. Alternatively, the
filtration is described using the adjoint tractor bundle which is the natural bundle
AM := G×P g corresponding to the (restriction of) adjoint representation of G on g.
The filtration of g induces a filtration AM = A−k
M ⊃ · · · ⊃ A0
M ⊃ · · · ⊃ Ak
M so
that T−i
M ∼= A−i
M/A0
M, in particular, TM ∼= AM/A0
M. Next by gr(TM) we
denote the associated graded bundle gr(TM) = gr−k(TM)⊕· · ·⊕gr−1(TM), where
gr−i(TM) := T−i
M/T−i+1
M is the associated bundle to G with the standard fiber
g−i
/g−i+1
which is isomorphic to g−i as a G0-module. Since P+ ⊂ P acts freely
on G, the quotient G/P+ =: G0 is a principal bundle over M with the structure
group P/P+ = G0. Hence gr(TM) ∼= G0 ×G0 g− and the Lie bracket on g− induces
an algebraic bracket on gr(TM).
By definition, the curvature K ∈ Ω2
(G, g) of a parabolic geometry is strictly
horizontal and P-equivariant, hence it is fully described by a two-form on M
with values in G ×P g = AM, which is denoted by κ. Note that by the same
symbol we also denote the corresponding frame form, which is a P-equivariant
map G → ∧2
(g/p)∗
⊗ g, the so-called curvature function. The Killing form on g
provides an identification (g/p)∗ ∼= p+, hence the curvature function is viewed as
having values in ∧2
p+ ⊗ g. The grading of g brings a grading to this space and
parabolic geometry is called regular if the curvature function has values in the
part of positive homogeneity. The parabolic geometry is regular if and only if the
algebraic bracket on gr(TM) above coincides with the Levi bracket, which is the
natural bracket induced by the Lie bracket of vector fields. Next, the parabolic
geometry is called torsion-free if κ has values in ∧2
p+ ⊗ p; note that torsion-free
parabolic geometry is automatically regular. Altogether, for a regular parabolic
geometry, there is an underlying structure on M consisting of a filtration of the
tangent bundle (which is compatible with the Lie bracket of vector fields) and a
reduction of the structure group of gr(TM) to the subgroup G0.
The correspondence between regular parabolic geometries of specified type and
the underlying structures can be made bijective (up to isomorphism) provided one
impose some normalization condition: The parabolic geometry is called normal
if ∂∗
◦ κ = 0, where ∂∗
: ∧2
p+ ⊗ g → p+ ⊗ g is the differential in the standard
complex computing the homology H∗(p+, g) of p+ with coefficients in g. Dealing
with regular normal parabolic geometries, there is the notion of harmonic curvature
κH, which is the composition of κ with the natural projection ker(∂∗
) → H2(p+, g).
By definition, κH is a section of G ×P H2(p+, g) and, since P+ acts trivially on
H∗(p+, g), it can be interpreted in terms of the underlying structure. The main issue
572 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
is that the harmonic curvature κH is much simpler object than the curvature κ,
however, still involving the whole information about κ. Note that, as a G0-module,
each Hj(p+, g) is isomorphic to ker ⊂ ker ∂∗
⊂ ∧j
p+ ⊗ g, the kernel of the
Kostant Laplacian. As a consequence of [4, Corollary 4.10], which is an application
of generalized Bianchi identity, we conclude:
Lemma. Let κ and κH be the Cartan curvature and the harmonic curvature of
a regular normal parabolic geometry of type (G, P). Then the lowest non-zero
homogeneous component of κ has values in ker ⊂ ∧2
p+ ⊗ g, i.e. it coincides with
the corresponding homogeneous component of κH. In particular, κH = 0 if and
only if κ = 0.
If κ = 0, the parabolic geometry is called flat (or locally flat). Flat parabolic
geometry of type (G, P) is locally isomorphic to the homogeneous model (G →
G/P, µ).
2.2. Examples. Here we focus on two classes of parabolic geometries which are
often mentioned in the sequel:
(1) An important family of examples is formed by |1|-graded parabolic geometries.
Any |1|-graded parabolic geometry is trivially regular and the main feature of any
such geometry is that the tangent bundle TM has not got any nontrivial natural
filtration. Hence (up to one exception) the underlying structure on M is just a
classical first order G0-structure. All the section 3 deals with |1|-graded parabolic
geometries, with almost Grassmannian structures in particular.
(2) Another interesting examples are the parabolic contact geometries, which
are |2|-graded parabolic geometries with underlying contact structure. Parabolic
contact geometry corresponds to a contact grading of a simple Lie algebra g, which
is a grading g = g−2 ⊕ g−1 ⊕ g0 ⊕ g1 ⊕ g2 such that g−2 is one dimensional and
the Lie bracket [ , ]: g−1 × g−1 → g−2 is non-degenerate. The filtration of TM
looks like TM = T−2
M ⊃ T−1
M so that D := T−1
M is the contact distribution.
For regular parabolic contact geometries, the Levi bracket L: D × D → TM/D
is non-degenerate and the reduction of gr(TM) = (TM/D) ⊕ D to the structure
group G0 corresponds to an additional structure on D.
The best known examples of parabolic contact geometries are non-degenerate
partially integrable almost CR structures of hypersurface type where the additional
structure on D is an almost complex structure. Another examples are the
Lagrangean contact structures which are introduced in 4.3 in some detail.
2.3. Weyl structures and connections. Let (G → M, ω) be a parabolic geometry
of type (G, P), let G0 = G/P+ be the underlying G0-bundle as in 2.1, and let
π: G → G0 be the canonical projection. A Weyl structure of the parabolic geometry
is a global smooth G0-equivariant section σ: G0 → G of the projection π. In particular,
any Weyl structure provides a reduction of the principal bundle G → M to
the subgroup G0 ⊂ P. For arbitrary parabolic geometry, Weyl structures always
exist and any two Weyl structures σ and ˆσ differ by a G0-equivariant mapping
Υ: G0 → p+ so that ˆσ(u) = σ(u) · exp Υ(u), for all u ∈ G0. Since Υ is the frame
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 573
form of a one-form on M, all Weyl structures form an affine space modelled over
Ω1
(M) and the relation above is simply written as ˆσ = σ + Υ.
Denote by ωi the gi-component of the Cartan connection ω ∈ Ω1
(G, g). The
choice of the Weyl structure σ defines the collection of G0-equivariant one-forms
σ∗
ωi ∈ Ω1
(G0, gi). The one-form σ∗
ω0 reproduces the fundamental vector fields
of the principal action of G0 on G0, hence it defines a principal connection on G0
which we call the Weyl connection of the Weyl structure σ. The Weyl connection
induces connections on all bundles associated to G0 and these are often called by
the same name. For any i = 0, the one-form σ∗
ωi is strictly horizontal, hence it
descends to a one-form on M with values in AiM := Ai
M/Ai+1
M. In particular,
the whole negative part σ∗
ω− = σ∗
ω−k ⊕ · · · ⊕ σ∗
ω−1, which is called the soldering
form, provides an identification of the tangent bundle TM with the associated
graded tangent bundle gr(TM) ∼= A−kM ⊕· · ·⊕A−1M. The positive part σ∗
ω+ =
σ∗
ω1 ⊕ · · · ⊕ σ∗
ωk is called the Rho-tensor and denoted as P. The Rho-tensor is
used to compare the Cartan connection ω on G and the principal connection on G
extending the Weyl connection σ∗
ω0 from the image of σ: G0 → G. By definition,
P is a one-form on M with values in A1M ⊕ · · · ⊕ AkM and since this bundle is
identified with T∗
M, the Rho-tensor can be viewed as a section of T∗
M ⊗ T∗
M.
Among general Weyl structures, there are various specific subclasses. We focus
on the so-called normal Weyl structures which play some role in the sequel. Normal
Weyl structures are related to the notion of normal coordinates as follows. Given a
parabolic geometry (p: G → M, ω) of type (G, P) and a fixed element u ∈ G, the
normal coordinates at x = p(u) is the local diffeomorphism Φu from a neighborhood
U of 0 ∈ g− to a neighborhood of x ∈ M, defined by X → p(Fl
ω−1
(X)
1 (u)). (By
ω−1
(X) we denote the constant vector field on G corresponding to X.) Now, over
the image Φu(U) ⊂ M, there is a unique G0-equivariant section σu : G0 → G such
that Fl
ω−1
(U)
1 (u) ⊂ σu(G0), which we call the normal Weyl structure at x. Although
the normal Weyl structure is indexed by u ∈ G, it obviously depends only on
the orbit of u ∈ p−1
(x) by the action of G0. If and P is the corresponding
affine connection and Rho-tensor, respectively, then the normal Weyl structure
σu is characterized by the property that for all k ∈ N the symmetrization of
( ξk
. . . ξ1
P)(ξ0) over all ξi ∈ TM vanishes at x = p(u). Hence, in particular,
P(x) = 0, cf. [6, Theorem 3.16].
2.4. Automorphisms and symmetries. An automorphism of Cartan geometry
(G → M, ω) of type (G, P) is a principal bundle automorphism ϕ: G → G such that
ϕ∗
ω = ω. It is well known that all automorphisms of (a connected component of)
the homogeneous model (G → G/P, µ) are just the left multiplications by elements
of G. Any g ∈ G induces a base map g : G/P → G/P and it turns out that two
elements of G have got the same base map if and only if they differ by an element
from the kernel K of the pair (G, P), which is the maximal normal subgroup of
G contained in P. (If K is trivial then G acts effectively on G/P.) Moreover, the
same characterization holds also for general Cartan geometries, [11, chapters 4 and
5].
574 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
In the cases of parabolic geometries, the kernel K is always discrete and very
often finite if not trivial. An automorphism ϕ: G → G of parabolic geometry is
then uniquely determined by its base map ϕ: M → M up to a smooth equivariant
function G → K which has to be constant over connected components of M.
Definition. Let (G → M, ω) be a regular |k|-graded parabolic geometry, let
TM = T−k
M ⊃ · · · ⊃ T−1
M be the corresponding filtration of the tangent bundle,
and let x ∈ M be a point. A local symmetry of the parabolic geometry centered at
x is a locally defined diffeomorphism sx of a neighborhood of x such that:
(i) sx(x) = x,
(ii) Txsx|T −1
x M = − idT −1
x M ,
(iii) sx is covered by an automorphism of the parabolic geometry.
If the local symmetry can be extended to a global symmetry on M, we just speak
about symmetry. The parabolic geometry is called (locally) symmetric if there is a
(local) symmetry at each point x ∈ M.
Note that for |1|-graded parabolic geometries the restriction in the condition (ii)
above is actually superfluous since T−1
M = TM. Hence it can be shown that sx is
involutive and x is an isolated fixed point. In this view, the definition above reflects
the classical notion of affine locally symmetric spaces. The main difference to the
classical issues is that parabolic geometries are not structures of first order, hence,
in particular, the conditions above do not determine the symmetry uniquely.
Note also that the condition (ii) cannot be extended to the whole TM in
general: Any symmetry is by definition covered by an automorphism of the parabolic
geometry, hence it has to preserve the underlying structure. For instance,
consider a parabolic contact geometry introduced in example 2.2(2). In particular,
the underlying structure comprise of the contact distribution D ⊂ TM
and the non-degenerate Levi bracket L: D × D → TM/D. If there was a map
s satisfying (i), (iii), and Txs = − idTxM , then for any ξ, η ∈ Dx it would hold
s(L(ξ, η)) = L(s(ξ), s(η)) = L(ξ, η) and, simultaneously, s(L(ξ, η)) = −L(ξ, η),
which would contradict the non-degeneracy of L.
2.5. Symmetries of homogeneous models. Let (G → G/P, µ) be the homogeneous
model of a parabolic geometry of type (G, P) and let G/P be connected.
As we mentioned in the beginning of 2.4, all automorphisms of the homogeneous
model are just the left multiplications by elements of G. Next, an analog of the
Liouville theorem states that any local automorphism can be uniquely extended
to a global one. Hence if the homogeneous model is locally symmetric then it is
symmetric. By the transitivity of the action of G on G/P and the above characterization
of the automorphisms, in order to decide whether the homogeneous model
is symmetric, it suffices to find a symmetry at the origin. Due to the identification
T(G/P) ∼= G ×P (g/p) as in 2.1, the previous task is equivalent to find an element
in P which acts as − id on g−1
/p ⊂ g/p. Since P = G0 P+ and P+ acts trivially
on g−1
/p, one is actually looking for an element of G0 acting as − id on g−1.
Altogether, we have got the following general statement:
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 575
Proposition. All symmetries of the homogeneous model (G → G/P, µ) of a
parabolic geometry of type (G, P) centered at any point are parametrized by the
elements g0 exp Z ∈ P, where Z ∈ p+ is arbitrary and g0 ∈ G0 such that Adg0 |g−1 =
− id |g−1
. In particular, if there is one symmetry at a point then there is an infinite
amount of them.
It is usually a simple exercise to find all elements from G0 with the property
as above. Note that different choices of the pair of Lie groups (G, P) with the
Lie algebras p ⊂ g may lead to different amount of such elements. This actually
corresponds to the cardinality of the kernel K, as defined in 2.4.
3. |1|-graded and Grassmannian locally symmetric spaces
Firstly we collect the facts on symmetries which hold for general |1|-graded
parabolic geometries. Then we focus on Grassmannian locally symmetric spaces
and provide a discussion which is specific in that case. In any case, the parabolic
geometry in question is |1|-graded, so the tangent map to a possible symmetry at
x ∈ M acts as − id on all of TxM. Hence the following fact is obvious and often
used below:
3.1. Lemma. For a |1|-graded parabolic geometry on M, tensor field of odd degree
which is invariant with respect to a symmetry at x ∈ M vanishes at x.
3.2. General restrictions. Following [6, section 4], we start with a bit of notation
we use below. Let (G → M, ω) be a normal |1|-graded parabolic geometry, let κ
be the Cartan curvature, and let κH be its harmonic curvature. Let σ: G0 → G be
a Weyl structure, and let τi := σ∗
ωi be the corresponding Weyl forms as in 2.3.
Let us consider the curvature dτ + 1
2 [τ, τ] = σ∗
κ ∈ Ω2
(G0, g) and its decomposition
T + W + Y according to the values in g−1 ⊕ g0 ⊕ g1 = g. As before, T, W, and
Y is represented by a two-form on M with values in A−1M ∼= TM, A0M ∼=
End0(TM), and A1M ∼= T∗
M, respectively. By definition, T = dτ−1 + [τ−1, τ0],
hence it coincides with the torsion of the affine connection on M induced by the
Weyl connection τ0. By lemma 2.1, this further coincides with the homogeneous
component of degree one of the harmonic curvature κH, hence it is independent
of the choice of Weyl structure. Similarly, W = dτ0 + 1
2 [τ0, τ0] + [τ−1, τ1], where
the first two summands represent just the curvature R of . Since τ1 = P, the last
summand is rewritten as ∂P, where (∂P)(ξ, η) = {ξ, P(η)} + {P(ξ), η}, where { , }
is the algebraic bracket on AM given by the Lie bracket in g. Altogether,
(1) W = R + ∂P
and we call W the Weyl curvature. If T = 0 then W coincides by lemma 2.1 with
the homogeneous component of κH of degree two and so it is invariant with respect
to the change of Weyl structure.
As an immediate application of lemma 3.1 we have got the following:
Proposition. If a |1|-graded parabolic geometry is locally symmetric then it is
torsion-free. In particular, any underlying Weyl connection is torsion-free.
576 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
Now we are going to find some information on the curvature of symmetric
|1|-graded parabolic geometries. If ϕ is an automorphism of the parabolic geometry
then for arbitrary Weyl structure ˆσ the pullback ϕ∗
ˆσ is again Weyl structure, hence
ϕ∗
ˆσ = ˆσ + Υ, for some uniquely given one-form Υ. If ϕ in addition covers some
symmetry at x then one checks that the Weyl structure σ := ˆσ + 1
2 Υ satisfies
ϕ∗
σ = σ in the fiber over x. (Restricted to the fiber over x, the definition of σ does
not depend on ˆσ.) Next, let ¯σ be the normal Weyl structure at x which is uniquely
determined by σ over x. Since ϕ∗
¯σ is again normal and by construction ϕ∗
¯σ = ¯σ
over x, it has to coincide with ¯σ on its domain. Altogether, [14, sections 9 and 10]:
Lemma. Let ϕ be an automorphism of |1|-graded parabolic geometry which covers
a local symmetry at a point x. Then
(1) there is a Weyl structure which is invariant under ϕ over the point x,
(2) there is a unique normal Weyl structure which is invariant under ϕ over
some neighborhood of x.
Let be the affine connection corresponding to the normal Weyl structure on
a neighborhood of x as above and let T, R, W, and P be its torsion, curvature,
Weyl curvature, and Rho-tensor, respectively. By construction, the connection is
invariant with respect to the local symmetry at x and by the previous Proposition,
T = 0. Similarly, W is also invariant under the symmetry at x, however, it is a
tensor field of degree five which vanishes at x by lemma 3.1. Since is normal at
x, P vanishes at x, hence from the equation (1) we conclude that also R = 0 at x:
Theorem. Suppose there is a local symmetry sx of a |1|-graded parabolic geometry
centered at x. Then, on a neighborhood of x, there exists a torsion-free Weyl
connection which is invariant under sx and whose Rho-tensor vanishes at x.
Consequently, R vanishes at x.
3.3. Almost Grassmannian structures. The notion of almost Grassmannian
structure on a smooth manifold generalizes the geometry of Grassmannians. The
Grassmannian of type (p, q) is the space Gr(p, Rp+q
) of p-dimensional linear subspaces
in the real vector space Rp+q
. It is well known that, for any E ∈ Gr(p, Rp+q
),
the tangent space of Gr(p, Rp+q
) in E is identified with E∗
⊗(Rp+q
/E), the space of
linear maps from E to the quotient. In particular, the dimension of Gr(p, Rp+q
) is pq.
Note that Gr(1, R1+q
) is the real projective space RPq
, so we always assume p > 1
hereafter. Under this assumption, the Grassmannian Gr(p, Rp+q
) may be considered
as the space of (p − 1)-dimensional projective subspaces in RPp+q−1
= P(Rp+q
).
The Lie group ˆG := PGL(p+q, R) acts transitively (and effectively) on Gr(p, Rp+q
)
and the stabilizer of a fixed element is the parabolic subgroup ˆP as described below.
The Grassmannian of type (p, q) is then the homogeneous model of the parabolic
geometry of type ( ˆG, ˆP).
The Lie algebra of ˆG is ˆg = sl(p + q, R) and let us consider its grading which is
schematically described by the block decomposition
ˆg0 ˆg1
ˆg−1 ˆg0
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 577
with blocks of sizes p and q along the diagonal. In particular, ˆg−1
∼= Rp∗
⊗ Rq
,
ˆg0
∼= s(gl(p, R) ⊕ gl(q, R)), and ˆg1
∼= Rp
⊗ Rq∗
. The parabolic subgroup ˆP ⊂ ˆG is
represented by block upper triangular matrices with the Lie algebra ˆp = ˆg0 ⊕ ˆg1,
the subgroup ˆG0 corresponds then to the block diagonal matrices in ˆP.
An almost Grassmannian structure of type (p, q) on a smooth manifold M is
defined to be a |1|-graded parabolic geometry of type ( ˆG, ˆP) where the groups are as
above. The underlying structure on M is equivalent to the choice of auxiliary vector
bundles E → M and F → M of rank p and q, respectively, and an isomorphism
E∗
⊗ F → TM. Note that a different choice of the Lie group to the Lie algebra
ˆg = sl(p + q, R) gives rise to an additional structure on M. In particular, the usual
choice for ˆG to be SL(p + q, R) leads to a preferred trivialisation of ∧p
E ⊗ ∧q
F
which is often supposed in the literature. In contrast to the previous choice, this
group has got a non-trivial center provided p + q is even.
3.4. Grassmannian locally symmetric spaces. When we speak about a Grassmannian
(locally) symmetric space, we mean a smooth manifold with an almost
Grassmannian structure which is (locally) symmetric in the sense of 2.4. For technical
reasons we always assume the almost Grassmannian structure is represented
by a normal parabolic geometry of type ( ˆG, ˆP), which is uniquely determined
by the underlying structure up to isomorphism. Note that by Proposition 3.2,
any Grassmannian locally symmetric space admits a torsion-free affine connection
preserving the structure, hence the almost Grassmannian structure is actually
Grassmannian, i.e. it is integrable in the sense of G-structures.
According to Proposition 2.5, it is an easy exercise to decide whether the
homogeneous model ˆG/ ˆP is symmetric or not. A direct calculation shows that, [14,
section 7]:
Proposition. The homogeneous model of almost Grassmannian structures of type
(p, q) is always symmetric.
An explicit description of the harmonic curvature in individual cases yields that
if p > 2 and q > 2 then this has got two components in homogeneity one, i.e. two
torsions. Hence by Propositions 3.2 and lemma 2.1 we conclude that, [12, Corollary
3.2]:
Proposition. Grassmannian locally symmetric space of type (p > 2, q > 2) is flat,
i.e. locally isomorphic to the homogeneous model.
Hence the only non-flat almost Grassmannian structures which can carry (local)
symmetries are of type (p, q) where p or q is 2; this is always supposed hereafter.
In all these cases, the harmonic curvature has two components which are mostly
of homogeneity one and two. (Note that the extremal case p = q = 2 has a
specific feature, namely, there are two components of homogeneity two. Moreover,
an almost Grassmannian structure of type (2, 2) is equivalent to a conformal
pseudo-Riemannian structure of the split signature, [3, section 3.5].) Since the
torsion part vanishes for any Grassmannian locally symmetric space, the remaining
component of homogeneous degree two corresponds to the Weyl curvature which is
then the only obstruction to the local flatness of the structure.
578 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
From 3.2 we know that the existence of a local symmetry at a point x yields
some restriction on the Weyl curvature at that point. This heavily forces the
freedom for another possible symmetries at x: Suppose there are two different
local symmetries at x which are covered by ϕ1 and ϕ2. Let σ1 and σ2 be the Weyl
structures associated to ϕ1 and ϕ2 by lemma 3.2 and let Υ be the one-form such
that σ2 = σ1 + Υ. In this way, two different symmetries at x define an element Υx
in T∗
x M ∼= Ex ⊗ F∗
x , which turns out to be non-zero. With this notation, it can be
proved the following, [13, section 4.3]:
Theorem. Let M be a smooth manifold with an almost Grassmannian structure
of type (2, q) or (p, 2). If there are two different local symmetries centered at a point
x ∈ M and the corresponding covector Υx constructed above has maximal rank then
the Weyl curvature vanishes at x and, consequently, the Cartan curvature vanishes
at x.
(Note that the Theorem is originally formulated with respect to a one-form
which was constructed in a different way. However, it is easy to check the two
one-forms coincide up to a non-zero multiple at x.)
4. The example
In this section we present an example of non-flat homogeneous Grassmannian
symmetric space. By the previous results, this has to be necessarily either of type
(2, q) or of type (p, 2). Our example is of the former type and it comes as a particular
application of more general constructions from [8] and [3] where we refer for details.
The section concludes with a discussion on an invariant connection preserving the
Grassmannian structure on the constructed space.
4.1. Path geometry of chains. Let (G → M, ω) be a contact parabolic geometry
of type (G, P) and let g be the corresponding Lie algebra with the contact grading
as in example 2.2(2). The 1-dimensional subspace g−2 ⊂ g− gives rise to a family
of distinguished curves on M which are called the chains and which play a crucial
role in the sequel. More specifically, chains are defined as projections of flow lines of
constant vector fields on G corresponding to non-zero elements of g−2. Equivalently,
using the notion of development of curves, chains are the curves which develop to
model chains in the homogeneous model G/P. The latter curves passing through
the origin are the curves of type t → b exp(tX)P, for b ∈ P and X ∈ g−2. As
non-parametrized curves, chains are uniquely determined by a tangent direction in
a point, [7, section 4]. By definition, chains are defined only for directions which
are transverse to the contact distribution D ⊂ TM. In classical terms, the family
of chains defines a path geometry on M restricted, however, only to the directions
transverse to D.
A path geometry on M is equivalent to a decomposition Ξ = E ⊕ V of the
tautological subbundle Ξ ⊂ TPTM where V is the vertical subbundle of the
obvious projection PTM → M and E is a fixed transversal line subbundle. (Given
such a decomposition, the paths in the family are the projections of integral
submanifolds of the distribution E.) Lie bracket of vector fields behave specifically
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 579
with respect to the decomposition above and it turns out this structure on PTM
can be described as a parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P), where ˜G = PGL(m+1, R),
m = dim M, and ˜P is the parabolic subgroup as follows. Let us consider the grading
of ˜g = sl(m + 1, R) which is schematically described by the block decomposition
with blocks of sizes 1, 1, and m − 1 along the diagonal:


˜g0 ˜gE
1 ˜g2
˜gE
−1 ˜g0 ˜gV
1
˜g−2 ˜gV
−1 ˜g0

 .
Then ˜p := ˜g0 ⊕ ˜g1 ⊕ ˜g2 is a parabolic subalgebra of ˜g and ˜P ⊂ ˜G is the subgroup
represented by block upper triangular matrices so that its Lie algebra is ˜p. As
usual, the parabolic geometry associated to the path geometry on M is uniquely
determined (up to isomorphism) provided we consider it is regular and normal in
the sense of 2.1.
Back to the initial setting, given a contact manifold M with a parabolic contact
geometry of type (G, P), the path geometry of chains gives rise to a parabolic
geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) restricted to the open subset ˜M ⊂ PTM consisting of
all lines which are transverse to the contact distribution D ⊂ TM. Let Q ⊂ P be
the subgroup which stabilizes the subspace g−2 ⊂ g− under the action of P on g−
induced from the adjoint action on g; the Lie algebra of Q is evidently q = g0 ⊕ g2.
By [8, lemma 2.2], the space ˜M of all lines in TM transverse to D is identified
with the orbit space G/Q.
Altogether, for a parabolic contact structure on M given by a regular and normal
parabolic geometry (G → M, ω) of type (G, P), let ( ˜G → ˜M, ˜ω) be the regular
normal parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) corresponding to the path geometry
of chains. Due to the identification ˜M ∼= G/Q, the couple (G → ˜M, ω) forms a
Cartan (but not parabolic) geometry of type (G, Q). In some cases, the two Cartan
geometries over ˜M can be directly related by a pair of maps (i: Q → ˜P, α: g → ˜g)
so that ˜G ∼= G×Q
˜P and j∗
˜ω = α◦ω, where j is the canonical inclusion G → G×Q
˜P.
The two maps (i, α) has to be compatible in some strong sense by the equivariancy
of j and the fact that both ω and ˜ω are Cartan connections, [8, Proposition 3.1].
On the other hand, any pair of maps (i, α) which are compatible in the above sense
gives rise to a functor from Cartan geometries of type (G, Q) to Cartan geometries
of type ( ˜G, ˜P) and there is a perfect control over the natural equivalence of functors
associated to different pairs. For what follows, we need to understand the effect of
such construction on the curvature of the induced Cartan geometry. In particular,
[8, Proposition 3.3] shows that:
Lemma. Let a flat Cartan geometry of type (G, Q) be given. Then the Cartan
geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) induced by the pair (i, α) is flat if and only if α is a
homomorphism of Lie algebras.
4.2. Correspondence spaces and twistor spaces. Below we enjoy an application
of another general construction relating parabolic geometries of different types,
namely, the construction of correspondence spaces and twistor spaces in the sense
of [2] or [3], to which we refer for all details.
580 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
Let ˜G be a semisimple Lie group and ˜P1 ⊂ ˜P2 ⊂ ˜G parabolic subgroups. If a
parabolic geometry ( ˜G → ˜N, ˜ω) of type ( ˜G, ˜P2) on a smooth manifold ˜N is given,
then the correspondence space of ˜N corresponding to the subgroup ˜P1 ⊂ ˜P2 is
defined as the orbit space C ˜N := ˜G/ ˜P1. The couple ( ˜G → C ˜N, ˜ω) forms a parabolic
geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P1). Let V ⊂ TC ˜N be the vertical subbundle of the natural
projection C ˜N → ˜N. Then easily, iξ ˜κ = 0 for any ξ ∈ V, where ˜κ is the Cartan
curvature of ˜ω. Note that V corresponds to the ˜P1-invariant subspace ˜p2/˜p1 ⊂ ˜g/˜p1
under the identification TC ˜N ∼= ˜G × ˜P1
(˜g/˜p1).
Conversely, given a parabolic geometry ( ˜G → ˜M, ˜ω) of type ( ˜G, ˜P1), let ˜κ
be its Cartan curvature, and let V ⊂ T ˜M be the distribution corresponding to
˜p2/˜p1 ⊂ ˜g/˜p1. Then, locally, ˜M is a correspondence space of a parabolic geometry
of type ( ˜G, ˜P2) if and only if iξ ˜κ = 0 for all ξ ∈ V, [3, Theorem 3.3]. Note that
this condition in particular implies the distribution V is integrable and the local
leaf space of the corresponding foliation is called the twistor space. The parabolic
geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P2) is locally formed over the corresponding twistor space.
Note that the present considerations does not restrict only to parabolic geometries,
as we actually partially observed in the previous subsection. Still, for
parabolic geometries the constructions above are always compatible with the normality
condition. Concerning the regularity, this is not true in general, but an
efficient control of this condition is usually very easy. Dealing with a regular normal
parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P1), let ˜κH be the harmonic curvature and let
V ⊂ T ˜M be as above. Then there is the following useful simplification of the
previous characterization of correspondence spaces, [3, Proposition 3.3]: If iξ ˜κH = 0
for all ξ ∈ V then iξ ˜κ = 0 for all ξ ∈ V.
Example. Let ( ˜G → PTM, ˜ω) be the Cartan geometry associated to a path
geometry on M, i.e. a parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) with the notation as in 4.1.
Let ˆP ⊂ ˜G be the subgroup (containing ˜P and) consisting of block upper triangular
matrices with Lie algebra ˆp = ˜gE
−1 ⊕ ˜p according to the description above. Note
that the underlying structure of a parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˆP) is just the
Grassmannian structure of type (2, q), where q = dim M −1, cf. the definition in 3.3.
The distribution in TPTM corresponding to the linear subspace ˆp/˜p ⊂ ˜g/˜p is just
the line subbundle E determined by the path geometry on M, in particular this is
always involutive. Hence the corresponding local twistor space ˜N coincides locally
with the space of paths of the path geometry. From the above characterization of
correspondence spaces and the explicit description of the irreducible components of
the harmonic curvature ˜κH of the Cartan connection ˜ω, it follows that [3, example
3.4]:
Lemma. Let ( ˜G → PTM, ˜ω) be a Cartan geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) and let ˜N be
the local twistor space as above. Then the Cartan geometry on PTM descends to a
Grassmannian structure on ˜N if and only if ˜ω is torsion-free.
4.3. Applications. Now, the promised example of a Grassmannian symmetric
space appears as an application of the general principles described in previous
paragraphs. We are going to start with the model Lagrangean contact structure,
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 581
however the analogous ideas work for another parabolic contact structures as well.
This is discussed in remark 4.5(4) where we also highlight the differences.
A Lagrangean contact structure on a smooth manifold M of odd dimension
m = 2n + 1 consists of a contact distribution D ⊂ TM with a decomposition
D = L ⊕ R such that the subbundles are isotropic with respect to the Levi
bracket L: D × D → TM/D. Lagrangean contact structure is an instance of
parabolic contact structure corresponding to the contact grading of simple Lie
algebra g = sl(n + 2, R), which is schematically indicated by the following block
decomposition with blocks of sizes 1, n, and 1 along the diagonal:


g0 gL
1 g2
gL
−1 g0 gR
1
g−2 gR
−1 g0

 .
As in general, the subspace g−1 defines the contact distribution, however now it
is split as g−1 = gL
−1 ⊕ gR
−1 such that this splitting is invariant under the adjoint
action of g0 and the subspaces gL
−1 and gR
−1 are isotropic with respect to the
restricted Lie bracket [ , ]: g−1 × g−1 → g−2. Let G = PGL(n + 2, R) be the Lie
group with Lie algebra g and let P ⊂ G be the subgroup represented by block
upper triangular matrices with the Lie algebra p = g0 ⊕ g1 ⊕ g2. The homogeneous
space G/P is identified with PT∗
RPn+1
, the projectivized cotangent bundle of real
projective space of dimension n+1, and the model Lagrangean contact structure on
PT∗
RPn+1
is induced from the flat projective structure on RPn+1
. Note that this
correspondence is just another instance of the correspondence space constructions
from 4.2, see [2, section 4.1].
Now, put M = G/P and follow the construction from 4.1:
(1) The subset ˜M = P0TM, consisting of all lines in TM which are transverse
to the contact distribution D, is identified with the homogeneous space G/Q.
(2) The flat parabolic geometry (G → G/P, µ) of type (G, P), for µ being the
Maurer–Cartan form on G, defines the flat Cartan geometry (G → G/Q, µ) of type
(G, Q).
(3) The latter induces the parabolic geometry (G ×Q
˜P → G/Q, ˜ω) of type
( ˜G, ˜P) via the pair of maps (i, α) which are explicitly given in [8, section 3.5]. Note
that α: g → ˜g is not a homomorphism of Lie algebras, hence by lemma 4.1 the
induced Cartan geometry is not flat. By [8, section 3.6], this is the unique regular
normal parabolic geometry associated to the path geometry of chains:
Lemma. Let (G → G/Q, µ) be the flat Cartan geometry of type (G, Q) and let
(i, α) be the pair of maps as in step (3) above. Then the induced parabolic geometry
(G ×Q
˜P → G/Q, ˜ω) is a non-flat torsion-free (and hence regular) normal parabolic
geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P).
(4) Finally, let ˜N be the space of all chains on M = G/P, understood as
non-parametrized curves as above. By definition, this is a locally defined leaf space
of the foliation of ˜M corresponding to the distribution E as in 4.2. In this model
case, ˜N is a homogeneous space and it turns out to be a Grassmannian symmetric
space which is not flat, i.e. not locally isomorphic to the homogeneous model ˜G/ ˆP:
582 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
Theorem. Let M = G/P be the model Lagrangean contact structure. Then the
space ˜N of all chains in M is a non-flat homogeneous Grassmannian symmetric
space of type (2, q), where q = dim M − 1.
Proof. Almost everything follows immediately from the previous profound prepa-
ration:
Lemmas 4.3 and 4.2 yield that ˜N is endowed with a Grassmannian structure
and the fact that the induced Cartan geometry of type ( ˜G, ˜P) on ˜M = G/Q has a
non-trivial curvature implies the curvature of the corresponding Cartan geometry
on the twistor space ˜N is non-trivial as well. Since ˜M = P0TM is a homogeneous
space and any chain is uniquely determined by an element of ˜M, the group G
acts transitively on the space ˜N of all chains. Let H ⊂ G be the stabilizer of the
chain exp tX · P, X ∈ g−2, passing through the origin in M = G/P. An easy direct
computation shows that H is the subgroup consisting of block matrices in G so that
its Lie algebra is h = g−2 ⊕ g0 ⊕ g2, i.e. H = exp g−2 Q. Altogether, ˜N ∼= G/H
and consequently T ˜N ∼= G ×H (g/h).
By the very construction, elements of G act as automorphisms of the induced
Cartan geometry on ˜M and since the quotient ˆP/ ˜P is obviously connected, these
descend to automorphisms of the Grassmannian structure on ˜N by [2, remark
2.4]. In order to show there is a symmetry at any point of ˜N, it suffices to find an
element in H which acts as − id on g/h. However, this is rather easy task and after
a while of calculation one shows that the block matrix


−1 0 0
0 In 0
0 0 −1


represents the unique element with this property.
Remark. In the proof above we have constructed a global symmetry of the
Grassmannian structure at the origin of ˜N = G/H, which leads to a distinguished
symmetry at each point. Any such symmetry is represented by an element of
G and it will be called the G-symmetry. Any G-symmetry primarily defines an
automorphism of the Lagrangean contact structure on M = G/P and, easily, this
is a symmetry on M in the sense of 2.4. Since the parabolic contact structure on
M is flat, there is a lot of symmetries at any point, but only one of them induces a
symmetry on ˜N. On the other hand, apart from the G-symmetry, there may be
another local symmetries at any point of ˜N. However, according to Theorem 3.4,
all the possible symmetries may differ from the G-symmetry in a very restricted
sense. More specifically, by the homogeneity of the induced Grassmannian structure
on ˜N, the corresponding Weyl curvature is nowhere vanishing, hence the covector
Υx from Theorem 3.4 measuring the difference of two symmetries at x must be of
rank one.
4.4. Invariant connection. Let us conclude by a discussion on an affine connection
on ˜N which preserves the Grassmannian structure and which is invariant with
respect to some symmetries. Note that the following statement can be seen as an
instance of [1, Theorem 1] which deals with invariant connections on reductive
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 583
homogeneous spaces with a compatible additional structure of general |1|-graded
parabolic geometry. Of course, in our specific setting we can approach the result in
a more direct way.
Theorem. Let ˜N = G/H be the space of chains of model Lagrangean contact
structure on M = G/P. Then there is a G-invariant torsion-free affine connection
˜ on ˜N preserving the Grassmannian structure.
Proof. As we know from 4.2, the construction of twistor space and the corresponding
Cartan geometry is very local in nature. However, in our model case,
there is the global surjective submersion p: ˜M = G/Q → G/H = ˜N to the twistor
space. The principal ˜P-bundle π: G ×Q
˜P → ˜M is defined according to the Lie
group homomorphism i: Q → ˜P, which we referred to in step (3) in 4.3. The
homomorphism i can be extended to a homomorphism ˆi: H → ˆP so that ˆi = α|h,
the total space of the principal bundle G ×Q
˜P → ˜M is identified with G ×H
ˆP,
and the composition p ◦ π: G ×H
ˆP → ˜N is a principal ˆP-bundle. The properties
of the Cartan connection ˜ω as above, namely the torsion freeness, yield the
couple (G ×H
ˆP → ˜N, ˜ω) is a parabolic geometry of type ( ˜G, ˆP) and ˜M is the
correspondence space for ˜P ⊂ ˆP.
Now, let ˆG0 be the Lie subgroup of ˜G as in 3.3. Namely, ˆG0 is represented
by block diagonal matrices with the Lie algebra ˆg0 = ˜gE
−1 ⊕ ˜g0 ⊕ ˜gE
1 , i.e. the
reductive part of ˆp. Since ˆi: H → ˆP is a homomorphism of Lie groups, ˆi = α|h,
and α(h) ⊂ ˆg0, it follows that ˆi(H) ⊂ ˆG0. This gives rise to the principal ˆG0-bundle
G×H
ˆG0 → ˜N, which is a distinguished reduction of G×H
ˆP → ˜N to the structure
group ˆG0 ⊂ ˆP. In terms of 2.3, this is a Weyl structure, which is evidently
G-invariant. Finally, let ˜ be the affine connection on ˜N induced by the Weyl
structure above. By construction, ˜ is G-invariant and torsion-free and, by general
principles, it preserves the underlying geometric structure on ˜N.
In remark 4.3 we have defined the notion of G-symmetry at x ∈ ˜N. Since any
G-symmetry is induced by an element of G, the connection ˜ constructed above is
invariant with respect to all G-symmetries. Hence:
Corollary. Let ˜ be the affine connection on ˜N = G/H from the theorem above.
Then ( ˜N, ˜ ) is an affine symmetric space in the classical sense, whose unique
symmetry at each point is the G-symmetry.
4.5. Final remarks. (1) For a reader’s convenience and better orientation in the
text, let us gather all the relations we have discussed from 4.3 till now into the
584 L. ZALABOVÁ AND V. ŽÁDNÍK
picture at the following page.
G ×Q
˜P
˜P

G ×H
ˆP
ˆP

G
+
VVqqqqqqqqqqqq
Q
88wwwwwwwwwwww
P

G ×H
ˆG0
3 S
ffwwwwwwwwww
ˆG0
ÑÑÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓÓ
˜M = G/Q
ÐÐÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒ
88wwwwwwwwww
˜N = G/H
M = G/P
(2) Note that ˜N = G/H is a reductive homogeneous space, namely, the reductive
decomposition is g = n ⊕ h where h = g−2 ⊕ g0 ⊕ g2 as above and n = g−1 ⊕ g1. In
particular, restriction of the Cartan–Killing form of g to n gives rise to a G-invariant
(pseudo-)Riemannian metric on ˜N whose Levi–Civita connection is the canonical
G-invariant affine connection on G/H = ˜N. Since both this canonical connection
and the connection from Theorem 4.4 are invariant with respect to the G-symmetry
at each point, so is their difference tensor, which has to vanish by Lemma 3.1.
Hence the two connections do actually coincide.
(3) Note also that for the lowest possible dimension of M, i.e. 3, the dimension of
˜N is 4 and the induced almost Grassmannian structure is of type (2, 2). As we mentioned
in 3.4, this structure on ˜N is equivalent to the conformal pseudo-Riemannian
structure of split signature. Hence the constructions above yield to an example of
non-flat conformal symmetric space in this specific signature.
(4) Note finally that the procedure of 4.3 and 4.4 can be applied to any parabolic
contact geometry, however, the resulting structure on the space of chains may differ.
For instance, starting with the flat projective contact structure, it turns out that
the associated path geometry of chains is locally flat, hence it descends to a locally
flat almost Grassmannian structure on the space of chains. On the other hand,
the story for CR structures of hypersurface type is completely parallel to that in
the Lagrangean contact case. Of course, understanding the behavior for another
parabolic contact structures is on the order of the day.
References
[1] Biliotti, L., On the automorphism group of a second order structure, Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ.
Padova 104 (2000), 63–70.
[2] Čap, A., Correspondence spaces and twistor spaces for parabolic geometries, J. Reine Angew.
Math. 582 (2005), 143–172.
REMARKS ON GRASSMANNIAN SYMMETRIC SPACES 585
[3] Čap, A., Two constructions with parabolic geometries, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl.
79 (2006), 11–37.
[4] Čap, A., Schichl, H., Parabolic geometries and canonical Cartan connection, Hokkaido Math.
J. 29 (2000), 453–505.
[5] Čap, A., Slovák, J., Parabolic Geometries, to appear in Math. Surveys Monogr., 2008.
[6] Čap, A., Slovák, J., Weyl Structures for Parabolic Geometries, Math. Scand. 93 (2003),
53–90.
[7] Čap, A., Slovák, J., Žádník, V., On distinguished curves in parabolic geometries, Transform.
Groups 9 (2) (2004), 143–166.
[8] Čap, A., Žádník, V., On the geometry of chains, eprint arXiv:math/0504469.
[9] Kobayashi, S., Nomizu, K., Foundations of Differential Geometry, vol. II, John Wiley &
Sons, New York, 1969.
[10] Podesta, F., A class of symmetric spaces, Bull. Soc. Math. France 117 (3) (1989), 343–360.
[11] Sharpe, R. W., Differential geometry: Cartan’s generalization of Klein’s Erlangen program,
Grad. Texts in Math. 166 (1997).
[12] Zalabová, L., Remarks on symmetries of parabolic geometries, Arch. Math. (Brno), Suppl.
42 (2006), 357–368.
[13] Zalabová, L., Symmetries of almost Grassmannian geometries, Proceedings of 10th International
Conference on Differential Geometry and its Applications, Olomouc, 2007, pp. 371–381.
[14] Zalabová, L., Symmetries of Parabolic Geometries, Ph.D. thesis, Masaryk University, 2007.
Faculty of Applied Informatics, Tomáš Baťa University
Zlín, Czech Republic
and
International Erwin Schrödinger Institute for Mathematical Physics
Wien, Austria
E-mail: zalabova@math.muni.cz
Faculty of Education, Masaryk University
Brno, Czech Republic
E-mail: zadnik@math.muni.cz