Mediterr. J. Math.

(2018) 15:228
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00009-018-1271-0
c Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

General Natural (α, ε)-Structures

S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc
Dedicated to professor Vasile Oproiu.

Abstract. We study in a unified way the (α, ε)-structures of general

natural lift type on the tangent bundle of a Riemannian manifold. We
characterize the general natural α-structures on the total space of the
tangent bundle of a Riemannian manifold, and provide their integra-
bility conditions (the base manifold is a space form and some involved
coefficients are rational functions of the other ones). Then, we charac-
terize the two classes (with respect to the sign of αε) of (α, ε)-structures
of general natural type on T M . The class αε = −1 is characterized
by some proportionality relations between the coefficients of the metric
and those of the α-structure, and in this case, the structure is almost
Kählerian if and only if the first proportionality factor is the derivative
of the second one. Moreover, the total space of the tangent bundle is a
Kähler manifold if and only if it depends on three coefficients only (two
coefficients of the integrable α-structure and a proportionality factor).
Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 53C15, 53B35, 53C55.
Keywords. Natural lift, (α, ε)-Structure, Almost Hermitian metric,
Almost Kähler structure.

1. Introduction
In the last decades, manifolds endowed with (α, ε)-structures, also called
(J 2 = ±1)-metric manifolds (e.g., by Etayo and Santamaria [12–14]), have
been object of much study. In the sequel, we shall mention the four types of
(α, ε)-manifolds, quoting several references for each of them.
Almost Hermitian manifolds, treated for example by Kobayashi and No-
mizu [23] in 1969, were classified into 16 classes by Gray and Hervella [19].
The most important class of almost Hermitian manifolds is that of Kähler
manifolds (endowed with three mutually compatible structures: a Riemann-
ian metric, a complex structure, and a symplectic form), firstly studied by
Schouten and Van Dantzig in 1930, introduced by Kähler in 1933, and then
treated by Weil, who fixed the terminology.
Almost para-Hermitian manifolds were classified in 1988 by Bejan, who
obtained in [4] 36 classes, up to duality. Then, in 1991, Gadea and Muñoz

0123456789().: V,-vol
228 Page 2 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

Masqué gave a classification à la Gray-Hervella, obtaining in [16] 136 classes,

up to duality. The best-known class of para-Hermitian manifold is that of
almost para-Kähler manifolds (analogous to almost Kähler manifolds), firstly
studied by Rashevsky [39] in 1948, defined by Rozenfeld [40] in 1949, and
treated in the last decades, e.g. by Olszak [32], Cruceanu [8], Cruceanu and
Etayo [9], Ivanov and Zamkovoy [22], Alekseevsky, Medori, Tomassini [2],
Chursin et al. [7], Peyghan and Heydari [37], and last year, e.g. by Alegre
and Carriazo [3], Ida and Manea [20].
Almost anti-Hermitian or Norden manifolds were studied by Ganchev,
Borisov, Mihova [17] and [18], Mekerov and Manev [26,27], Oproiu [34], Pa-
paghiuc [36], Teofilova [42], and the references therein.
Almost product Riemannian manifolds, firstly studied by Yano in [43],
and by Prvanovic in [38] were classified in 1983 by Naveira [31] with respect
to their covariant derivatives, into 36 classes. Then, in 1992, Staikova and
Gribachev obtained a classification of the Riemannian almost product struc-
tures, for which the trace vanishes (see [41]). The basic class corresponds to
the nonintegrable almost product structures, studied in some recent articles,
such as [26].
(J 2 = ±1)-metric manifolds or manifolds endowed with (α, ε)-structures
were studied in a unified way by Etayo and Santamaria in [12–14].
Many authors considered different types of (α, ε)-structures on the tan-
gent bundle of a (pseudo-)Riemannian manifold (see [1,5,10,11,15,22,24,25,
28,30,33–36,43] and the references therein).
The results in [22,24] concerning the natural lifts allowed the exten-
sion of the Sasaki metric, which was very rigid in certain senses, to metrics
and almost complex structures of general natural lifted type (see [25,33]),
leading to interesting geometric structures studied in the last years (see
[1,6,10,11,34,35]).
In 1988, Kowalski and Sekizawa [25] provided a complete classification
of the metrics obtained as natural lifts of the Riemannian metric from the
base manifold to the total space of the tangent bundle. Having in mind this
result, in 1999, Oproiu considered on the total space T M of the tangent
bundle of a Riemannian manifold (M, g), a metric G, and a (1, 1)-tensor
field J, both obtained as “general natural lifts” of g to T M , i.e., naturally
induced by g and having as coefficients six smooth functions of the energy
density t on T M (see [33]). In the study of certain geometric properties of
T M , this type of metrics are more flexible than the Sasaki and Cheeger-
Gromol metric. More exactly, instead of nonexistence results or restrictions
to a flat base manifold, one obtains that the base manifold must be a space
form, and some relations between the coefficients of the metric or (and) the
coefficients of the (1, 1)-tensor field must be satisfied (see [11,35]).
In this paper, we will provide a unified presentation for the four types of
(α, ε)-structures of general natural lift type on the total space of the tangent
bundle of a Riemannian manifold, from which one can obtain the partic-
ular situations of (almost) Hermitian or (−1, 1)-structure (characterized in
[33]), (almost) para-Hermitian or (1, −1)-structure (treated in [10]), (almost)
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 3 of 13 228

anti-Hermitian (Norden) or (−1, −1)-structure (given in [34]), and (almost)

product Riemannian or (1, 1)-structure (studied in [10]).
We first characterize the general natural α-structures on the total space
of the tangent bundle of a Riemannian manifold, and prove that they are in-
tegrable if and only if the base manifold is a space form, and some coefficients
(smooth functions of the energy density) involved in their expressions are cer-
tain rational functions of the other ones. Then, studying the ε-compatibility
relations between the obtained α-structures and any general natural metric
on T M , we classify the (α, ε)-structures of general natural type on T M , pro-
viding their characterization for the cases when α and ε have the same sign, or
different signs. An interesting fact is that when αε = −1, the (α, ε)-structure
of general natural lift type on T M is characterized by two proportionality
relations between the coefficients of the metric and those of the α-structure.
Since, in this case, the fundamental tensor field of type (0, 2) is a 2-form, we
study its closure conditions and obtain the almost Kählerian (α, ε)-structures
of general natural lift type on T M , depending only on four of the coefficients
of the α-structure, and on the first proportionality factor only, the other one
being its derivative. Moreover, imposing the integrability conditions, we ob-
tain that the manifold is of Kähler type if and only if it depends on two of
the coefficients of the integrable α-structure and on the first proportionality
factor.
Throughout this paper, the manifolds, tensor fields, and other geometric
objects are assumed to be differentiable of class C ∞ (i.e., smooth). The Ein-
stein summation convention is used, the range of the indices h, i, j, k, l, m, r,
being always {1, . . . , n}. The notation i = 1, n is used meaning ∀i ∈ {1, . . . , n}.

2. Preliminary Results
In this section, we shall recall some well-known facts from the geometry of
the tangent bundle, for which we quote the monograph [44].
The total space T M of the tangent bundle τ : T M → M of a smooth
n-dimensional Riemannian manifold (M, g) has a structure of 2n-dimensional
smooth manifold, induced from that of the base manifold. Thus, it was pos-
sible to introduce on the total space of the tangent bundle the concept of
M -tensor field (see [29]), which we shall use in this work. The main property
of an M -tensor field on T M is that the local coordinate change rule of its
components w.r.t. the change of induced local charts is the same as the local
coordinate change rule of the components of a tensor field on M w.r.t. the
change of local charts on M .
One has the direct sum decomposition
Ty T M = Vy T M ⊕ Hy T M, ∀y ∈ T M,
of the tangent space in y at T M into the vertical space Vy T M = Ker τ∗,y
and the horizontal space Hy T M , defined by ∇, ˙ the Levi–Civita connection
of the Riemannian metric g (see [44]). If we denote by (x1 , . . . , xn ) the local
coordinates on M , by (x1 , . . . , xn , y 1 , . . . , y n ) the local coordinates on T M ,
228 Page 4 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

and by Γhki (x) the Christoffel symbols of the metric g, then Hy T M is gener-
ated by δxδ i = ∂x ∂ l h ∂
i − y Γli ∂y h in y, with i = 1, n, and Vy T M is spanned by
∂ ∂ ∂
∂y i , with i = 1, n. Thus, the set of vector fields { ∂y 1 , . . . , ∂y n } on the domain
−1
of any induced local chart τ (U ) defines a local frame field for the verti-
cal distribution V T M , and for the horizontal distribution HT M , we have
the local frame field { δxδ 1 , . . . , δxδn }. If, by an abuse of notation, we identify
T T M with the set of all vector fields tangent to T M , we have the direct sum
decomposition:
T T M = V T M ⊕ HT M. (2.1)
The set { δxδ i , ∂y∂ j }i,j=1,n ,
denoted also by {δi , ∂j }i,j=1,n , defines a local
frame field on T M , adapted to the direct sum decomposition (2.1).
If X is a vector field on M , we denote, respectively, by X H and X V
the horizontal and vertical lift of X to T M . If X is locally expressed on U
∂
as X = X i ∂x i , then on τ
−1
(U ), we have, respectively:
δ ∂
XH = Xi, XV = Xi i . (2.2)
δxi ∂y
The energy density of any tangent vector y with respect to the Rie-
mannian metric g is given as follows:
1 1 1
t = y2 = gτ (y) (y, y) = gik (x)y i y k ≥ 0, ∀y ∈ τ −1 (U ). (2.3)
2 2 2
We mention the following lemma from [33], which we shall use through-
out the paper.
Lemma 2.1 ([33, Lemma 1]). Let (M, g) be an n > 1-dimensional Riemannian
manifold, and u, v two smooth functions on T M . If on the domain of any
induced local chart on T M , one has
ugij + vg0i g0j = 0, or uδij + vy j g0i = 0,
where g0i = y h ghi , then u = 0, v = 0.

3. α-Structures of General Natural Lift Type on T M

For the unified geometry of (J 2 = ±1)-manifolds or manifolds endowed with
α-structures, we quote Etayo and Santamaria [12–14] and recall here their
definition:
Definition 3.1. A differentiable manifold M is said to have an α-structure A
or to be an (A2 = ±1)-manifold if A is a (1, 1)-tensor field on M , such that
A2 = αI, α ∈ {−1, 1}. (3.1)
When α = −1, A is called almost complex structure and when α = 1, A is
called almost product structure. In these cases, the couple (M, A) is called al-
most complex manifold, and, respectively, almost product manifold. If, more-
over, the structure A is integrable, i.e., its Nijenhuis tensor field
NA (X, Y ) = [AX, AY ] − A[AX, Y ] − A[X, AY ] + α[X, Y ],
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 5 of 13 228

vanishes, then (M, A) is called complex manifold, and, respectively, locally

product manifold.

The classical almost complex structure J on T M is defined by the fol-

lowing:
J(X V ) = −X H , J(X H ) = X V , ∀X ∈ T01 (M ), (3.2)
and the simplest almost product structures on T M , denoted by P and Q,
are defined by the relations
P (X V ) = X V , P (X H ) = −X H , ∀X ∈ T01 (M ), (3.3)
V H H V
Q(X ) = X , Q(X ) = X , ∀X ∈ T01 (M ). (3.4)

Now, we introduce a (1, 1)-tensor field A on T M , naturally induced by

g, given by the relations:
AXyH = a1 (t)XyV + b1 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)yyV − a3 (t)XyH − b3 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)yyH ,
AXyV = a4 (t)XyV + b4 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)yyV + α[a2 (t)XyH + b2 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)yyH ],
(3.5)
∀X ∈ T01 (M ), ∀y ∈ T M, where ak and bk are smooth functions of the energy
density t, for k = 1, 4, and α ∈ {−1, 1}.
Particularizing the coefficients involved in (3.5), one can obtain the clas-
sical almost complex and almost product structures given by (3.2), (3.3),
(3.4), and also the general natural almost complex and almost product struc-
tures considered in [33] and [10].
With respect to the adapted frame {δi , ∂j }i,j=1,n on T M , the structure
A defined by the above relations has the expressions:
Aδi = (1 A)ji ∂j − (3 A)ji δj , A∂i = (4 A)ji ∂j + α(2 A)ji δj , (3.6)
where the M -tensor fields involved as coefficients have the forms
(k A)ji = ak (t)δij + bk (t)y j g0i , ∀k = 1, 4, (3.7)
with ak and bk smooth functions of the energy density t, and α ∈ {−1, 1}.
The matrix associated with the tensor field A with respect to the adapted
frame {δi , ∂j }i,j=1,n is
 3 j 
−( A)i (1 A)ji
A= . (3.8)
α(2 A)ji (4 A)ji

Theorem 3.2. A (1, 1)-tensor field A of general natural lift type on T M , given
by (3.6), defines an α-structure on T M , if and only if a4 = a3 , b4 = b3 , and
the coefficients a1 , a2 , a3 , b1 , b2 and b3 are related by
a1 a2 = 1 − αa23 , (a1 + 2tb1 )(a2 + 2tb2 ) = 1 − α(a3 + 2tb3 )2 . (3.9)

Proof. Replacing the expression (3.8) of the matrix A into the definition (3.1)
of an α-structure, we obtain the following system of equations:
228 Page 6 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

(3 A)ji (3 A)il + α(1 A)ji (2 A)il = αδlj ,

− (3 A)ji (1 A)il + (1 A)ji (4 A)il = 0,
− (2 A)ji (3 A)il + (4 A)ji (2 A)il = 0,
α(2 A)ji (1 A)il + (4 A)ji (4 A)il = αδlj .

Using the expressions (3.7) of the coefficients (k A)ij and the relation
y i g0i = 2t, the second and third equations of the above system become,
respectively:

−a1 (a3 − a4 )δlj + [b1 (a4 − a3 ) − (b3 − b4 )(a1 + 2tb1 )]y j g0l = 0,
−a2 (a3 − a4 )δlj + [b2 (a4 − a3 ) − (b3 − b4 )(a2 + 2tb2 )]y j g0l = 0,
which yield a3 = a4 and b3 = b4 , due to Lemma 2.1. Then, the other two
equations of the system become

(αa1 a2 + a23 − α)δlj + [αb1 (a2 + 2tb2 ) + αa1 b2 + a3 b3 + b3 (a3 + 2tb3 )]y j g0l = 0,
from which it follows that the two above involved coefficients are zero. More-
over, if at the coefficient of δlj , we add the coefficient of y j g0l multiplied by
2t, the relations (3.9) in the statement are proved. 

Remark 3.3. The characterizations of the general natural almost complex

and, respectively, almost product structures on T M , i.e. [33, Proposition 2]
and [10, Theorem 3.1] can be obtained from the above theorem, by taking
α = −1 and α = 1, respectively.

Now, we provide the integrability conditions of the α-structures of gen-

eral natural lift type on T M .

Theorem 3.4. Let (M, g) be an n-dimensional connected Riemannian man-

ifold, with n > 2. A general natural α-structure A on T M , given by (3.6),
is integrable if and only if (M, g) has constant sectional curvature c, and the
coefficients b1 , b2 , b3 have the expressions:
a1 a1 + αc + 3a23 c − 2αa1 a2 ct + 2a22 c2 t
b1 = ,
a1 − 2a1 t + 2αa2 ct + 4αa2 ct2
2
2ta3 − 2ta1 a2 − αca22 − 2αa2 a2 ct + a1 a2
b2 = ,
a1 − 2a1 t + 2αa2 ct + 4αa2 ct2
a1 a3 − 2αa2 a3 c − 4αcta2 a3 + 2αcta2 a3
b3 = ,
a1 − 2a1 t + 2αa2 ct + 4αa2 ct2
when a1 − 2a1 t + 2αa2 ct + 4αa2 ct2 = 0.

Proof. Using Lemma 2.1, from the vanishing of NA (∂i , ∂j ), we obtain that
the horizontal component of this Nijenhuis bracket vanishes if and only if
a2 a3 + 2a3 b2 − a2 b3
a2 = , (3.10)
2(a3 + tb3 )
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 7 of 13 228

and the vertical component vanishes if and only if

(a1 a2 − a1 b2 − 2a3 b3 t)(δih g0j − δjh g0i ) − a22 y k Rkij
h
(3.11)
+ a2 b2 y k y l (g0i Rkjl
h h
− g0j Rkil ) = 0.
Since the curvature of the base manifold does not depend on y, we differen-
tiate with respect to y k in (3.11). From the value of this derivative at y = 0,
we get
h
Rkij = c(δih gkj − δjh gki ), (3.12)
where the function
a1 (0) 
c=α (a (0) − b2 (0)),
a22 (0) 2
depends on x1 , . . . , xn only. Then, applying Schur’s theorem, it follows that
c is constant when M is connected and n > 2.
Now, from the vanishing conditions of the vertical and horizontal com-
ponents of NA (δi , δj ), we obtain the expressions of a1 and a3 :
a1 b1 − c(α + 3a23 + 4ta3 b3 )  a1 b3 + 2αca2 (a3 + tb3 )
a1 = , a3 = . (3.13)
a1 + 2tb1 a1 + 2tb1
Replacing the obtained value of a3 in (3.10), and using the relations
(3.9), we have
−2αa3 b3 − a2 b1 + αca22
a2 = . (3.14)
a1 + 2tb1
The vertical component of the mixed Nijenhuis bracket NA (∂i , δj ) van-
ishes when we replace the values of a1 and a3 from (3.13) and a2 from (3.14).
The same values fulfill also the relation
a1 a2 + a1 a2 = −2αa3 a3 , (3.15)
obtained by differentiating the first of the relations (3.9) with respect to t.
Solving the system given by (3.10) and (3.13), with respect to b1 , b2 , b3 ,
and taking into account the relation (3.15), we obtain the expressions in the
statement, which satisfy the vanishing conditions of all the components of the
Nijenhuis tensor field NA . Thus, the α-structure A on T M is integrable. 

Remark 3.5. [33, Theorem 3] and [10, Theorem 3.3], which give the inte-
grability conditions of the almost complex and, respectively, of the almost
product structure of general natural lift type on T M , may be obtained as
corollaries of Theorem 3.4, by considering α = −1 and α = 1, respectively.

4. General Natural (α, ε)-Structures on T M

We refer again to Etayo and Santamaria [12–14] and recall the definition of
an (α, ε)- manifold.
228 Page 8 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

Definition 4.1. A 2m-dimensional manifold (M, g) is called an (α, ε)-manifold

or an (A2 = ±1)-metric manifold, if it is endowed with an α-structure A,
satisfying the ε-compatibility relation:
g(AX, AY ) = εg(X, Y ), ε ∈ {−1, 1}, ∀X, Y ∈ T01 (M ), (4.1)
where the metric g is semi-Riemannian of signature (m, m) if ε = −1, and
Riemannian if ε = 1.
In the sequel, we shall obtain the conditions under which the tangent
bundle T M endowed with an α-structure A determined in the previous sec-
tion and with a metric G of general natural lift type, is an (α, ε)-manifold.
Recall the expression of the semi-Riemannian metric G of general nat-
ural lift type on T M , considered by V. Oproiu in [33]:
G(XyH , YyH ) = c1 (t)gτ (y) (X, Y ) + d1 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)gτ (y) (Y, y),
G(XyV , YyV ) = c2 (t)gτ (y) (X, Y ) + d2 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)gτ (y) (Y, y), (4.2)
G(XyV , YyH ) = c3 (t)gτ (y) (X, Y ) + d3 (t)gτ (y) (X, y)gτ (y) (Y, y),
∀X, Y ∈ T01 (M ), ∀y ∈ T M, where ck , dk , with k = 1, 3, are six smooth
functions of the energy density on T M .
The conditions for G to be nondegenerate are assured if
c1 c2 − c23 = 0, (c1 + 2td1 )(c2 + 2td2 ) − (c3 + 2td3 )2 = 0.
The metric G is positive definite if
c1 + 2td1 > 0, c2 + 2td2 > 0, (c1 + 2td1 )(c2 + 2td2 ) − (c3 + 2td3 )2 > 0.

Now, we prove the following characterization theorem.

Theorem 4.2. If G and A are a metric and respectively an α-structure of
general natural lift type on the tangent bundle T M of a Riemannian manifold
(M, g), then (G, A) is
I. an (α, ε)-structure with α · ε = 1 on T M if and only if the coefficients
of G and A satisfy the relations:
a1 c2 − αa2 c1 = 2a3 c3 ,
(a1 + 2tb1 )(c2 + 2td2 ) − α(a2 + 2tb2 )(c1 + 2td1 ) = 2(a3 + 2tb3 )(c3 + 2td3 ),
II. an (α, ε)-structure with α · ε = −1 on T M if and only if the coefficients
of G and A satisfy the relations:
c1 c2 c3 c1 + 2td1 c2 + 2td2 c3 + 2td3
=ε = = λ, =ε = = λ + 2tμ,
a1 a2 a3 a1 + 2tb1 a2 + 2tb2 a3 + 2tb3
where the proportionality coefficients λ and λ + 2tμ are nonzero functions
depending on t. In the particular case of the (−1, 1)-structures on T M , λ
and λ + 2tμ are positive.
Proof. With respect to the adapted frame {δj , ∂i }i,j=1,n , (4.1) takes the form
G(Aδi , Aδj ) = εG(δi , δj ), G(A∂i , A∂j ) = εG(∂i , ∂j ), G(A∂i , Aδj ) = εG(∂i , δj ).
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 9 of 13 228

Replacing in the above relations the expressions of the α-structure A and of

the metric G, and using Lemma 2.1, we have that the coefficients of gij and
g0i g0j vanish. From the vanishing conditions of the coefficients of gij , we get
the following homogeneous linear system in c1 , c2 , c3 :
(a23 − ε)c1 + a21 c2 − 2a1 a3 c3 = 0,
a22 c1 + (a23 − ε)c2 + 2αa2 a3 c3 = 0, (4.3)
− αa2 a3 c1 + a1 a3 c2 + (αa1 a2 − a23 − ε)c3 = 0,
whose matrix has the determinant equal to zero, and a minor of order two
Δ2 = 2(α − ε)a23 .
Case I If, α · ε = 1, it follows that Δ2 = 0, i.e., the system has rank 1,
and it reduces to the relation:
−αa2 c1 + a1 c2 − 2a3 c3 = 0.
Case II If α · ε = −1, it follows that Δ2 = 4αa23 . Then, one obtains
c3 c3
c1 = a1 , c2 = −α a2 ,
a3 a3
and since in this case −α = ε, the first relation in Case II is proved.
The vanishing conditions for the coefficients of g0i g0j in (4.1) lead to a
more complicated system. Multiplying the equations of the new system by
2t, and then adding the corresponding equations from (4.3), we obtain:
(a3 2 − ε)c1 + a1 2 c2 − 2a1 a3 c3 = 0,
a2 2 c1 + (a3 2 − ε)c2 + 2αa2 a3 c3 = 0, (4.4)
2
− αa2 a3 c1 + a1 a3 c2 + (αa1 a2 − a3 − ε)c3 = 0,
where we denoted, respectively, by a1 , a2 , a3 the coefficients a1 + 2tb1 , a2 +
2tb2 , a3 + 2tb3 , and by c1 , c2 , c3 , the unknowns c1 + 2td1 , c2 + 2td2 , c3 + 2td3 ,
respectively.
Using the second relation in (3.9), by a similar reasoning as that from
(4.3), we obtain the second relation in Case II. Hence, the theorem is proved.

Remark 4.3. Particularizing item I of the above statement to the general
natural Riemannian almost product and, respectively, almost anti-Hermitian
structures on T M , we obtain [10, Theorem 4.1] and, respectively, [34, The-
orem 4.1]. Particularizing item II, we obtain as consequences [33, Theorem
4] and, respectively, [10, Theorem 4.3], which characterize the general natu-
ral almost Hermitian, and, respectively, almost para-Hermitian structures on
TM.
The fundamental tensor field Ω of type (0, 2), defined by the (α, ε)-
structure (G, A) on T M , is given as follows:
Ω(X, Y ) = G(X, AY ), ∀X, Y ∈ T01 (T M ).
Since in the case when α · ε = −1, it follows that Ω is a 2-form, we can
prove the following result, which includes both almost Kähler and almost
para-Kähler subcases, i.e., [33, Theorem 6] and [10, Theorem 5.2]:
228 Page 10 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

Theorem 4.4. On the tangent bundle of a Riemannian manifold (M, g), the
general natural (α, ε)-structure (G, A) with α · ε = −1 is of almost Kähler
type (i.e., the fundamental tensor field is closed) if and only if
μ = λ .
Proof. The expression of the 2-form Ω associated with a general natural
(α, ε)-structure (G, A) with α · ε = −1 on T M is given by
   
Ω XyV , YyV = 0, Ω XyH , YyH = 0,
   
Ω XyH , YyV = −Ω XyV , YyH = α(λgτ (y) (X, Y ) + μgτ (y) (y, X)gτ (y) (y, Y )),
for every tangent vector fields X, Y ∈ T01 (M ), and every tangent vector
y ∈ TM.
In the local adapted frame {δi , ∂j }i,j=1,n on T M , we have
Ω = α(λgij + μg0i g0j )dxi ∧ Dy j , (4.5)
where Dy i = dy i + y l Γilh dxh is the absolute differential of y i .
Next, by computations similar to those in [33], we obtain the exterior
differential of Ω:
1
dΩ = α(μ − λ )(gij g0k − g0i gjk )Dy k ∧ Dy i ∧ dxj ,
2
which vanishes if and only if μ = λ . 

Remark 4.5. The family of almost Kähler general natural (α, ε)-structures
with α · ε = −1 on T M depends on five coefficients, a1 , a3 , b1 , b3 , and
λ = const
√ . In the particular situation of classical almost Kähler manifolds,
t
characterized in [33, Theorem 6], a1 and λ must have the same sign, and also
a1 + 2tb1 and λ + 2tλ .
Combining theorems 3.2, 3.4, and 4.4, we may state
Theorem 4.6. A general natural (α, ε)-structure with α · ε = −1 is of Kähler
type if and only if the α-structure is integrable (see Theorem 3.4) and μ = λ .
Remark 4.7. The family of general natural (α, ε)-structures of Kähler type,
with α · ε = −1 on T M depends on three parameters, a1 , a3 , and λ = const
√ .
t
In the particular situation of classical Kähler manifolds, a1 must have the
same sign with λ, and also a1 + 2tb1 with λ + 2tλ , where b1 is that from
Theorem 3.4.

Acknowledgements
The author wants to express her gratitude to Professor Fernando Etayo
Gordejuela, for carefully reading the paper, and for his valuable suggestions,
that led to the improvement of the paper.
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 11 of 13 228

References
[1] Abbassi, M.T.K., Sarih, M.: On some hereditary properties of Riemannian
g-natural metrics on tangent bundles of Riemannian manifolds. Diff. Geom.
Appl. 22, 19–47 (2005)
[2] Alekseevsky, D.V., Medori, C., Tomassini, A.: Homogeneous para-Kahler Ein-
stein manifolds. Russ. Math. Surv. 64(1), 1–43 (2009)
[3] Alegre, P., Carriazo, A.: Slant submanifolds of para-Hermitian manifolds.
Mediterr. J. Math. 14(5), 214 (2017)
[4] Bejan, C.: A classification of the almost parahermitian manifolds. Proc. Con-
ference on Diff. Geom. and Appl., Dubrovnik, 23–27 (1988)
[5] Bejan, C.: Almost parahermitian structures on the tangent bundle of an almost
paracohermitian manifold. Proc. Fifth Nat. Sem. Finsler and Lagrange spaces,
Braşov, 105–109 (1988)
[6] Bejan, C.L., Druţă-Romaniuc, S.L.: Harmonic almost complex structures with
respect to general natural metrics. Mediterr. J. Math. 11, 123–136 (2014)
[7] Chursin, M., Schäfer, L., Smoczyk, K.: Mean curvature flow of space-like La-
grangian submanifolds in almost para-Kähler manifolds. Calc. Var. 41(12), 111–
125 (2011)
[8] Cruceanu, V.: Selected Papers (37. Para-Hermitian and para-Kähler manifolds,
pp. 339–387.), Editura PIM, Iaşi (2006)
[9] Cruceanu, V., Etayo, F.: On almost para-Hermitian manifolds. Algebras
Groups Geom. 16(1), 47–61 (1999)
[10] Druţă-Romaniuc, S.L.: General natural Riemannian almost product and para-
Hermitian structures on tangent bundles. Taiwan. J. Math. 16(2), 497–510
(2012)
[11] Druţă, S.L., Oproiu, V.: General natural Kähler structures of constant holo-
morphic sectional curvature on tangent bundles. An. Ştiinţ. Univ. “Al. I. Cuza”
Iaşi. Mat. (N.S.) 53(1), 149–166 (2007)
[12] Etayo, F., Santamaria, R.: (J 2 = ±1)− metric manifolds. Publ. Math. Debre-
cen. 57(3–4), 435–444 (2000)
[13] Etayo, F., Santamaria, R.: Distinguished connections on (J 2 = ±1)−metric
manifolds. Arch. Math. (Brno) 52, 159–203 (2016)
[14] Etayo, F., Santamaria, R.: The well adapted connection of a (J 2 = ±1)-metric
manifold. Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fs. Nat. Ser. A Math. RACSAM
111(2), 355–375 (2017)
[15] Falcitelli, M., Ianus, S., Pastore, A.M.: Linear pseudoconnections on the tan-
gent bundle of a differentiable manifold (Italian). Bull. Math. Soc. Sci. Math.
Répub. Soc. Roum., Nouv. Sér. 28(76), 235–249 (1984)
[16] Gadea, P.M., Muñoz Masqué, J.: Classification of almost para-Hermitian man-
ifolds. Rend. Mat. Appl. 7(11), 377–396 (1991)
[17] Ganchev, G., Borisov, A.V.: Note on the almost complex manifolds with a
Norden metric. C. R. Acad. Bulgare Sci. 39(5), 31–34 (1986)
[18] Ganchev, G., Mihova, V.: Canonical connection and the canonical conformal
group on an almost complex manifold with B-metric. Annuaire Univ. Sofia Fac.
Math. Inform. 81(1), 195–206 (1987)
[19] Gray, A., Hervella, L.M.: The sixteen classes of almost Hermitian manifolds
and their linear invariants. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 123(1), 35–58 (1980)
228 Page 12 of 13 S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc MJOM

[20] Ida, C., Manea, A.: On the Integrability of generalized almost para-Norden
and para-Hermitian Structures. Mediterr. J. Math. 14(4), 173 (2017)
[21] Ivanov, S., Zamkovoy, S.: Parahermitian and paraquaternionic manifolds. Diff.
Geom. Appl. 23(2), 205–234 (2005)
[22] Janyška, J.: Natural 2-forms on the tangent bundle of a Riemannian mani-
fold. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, Serie II, Supplemento, The Proceedings of the
Winter School Geometry and Topology Srnı́-January 1992 32, 165–174 (1993)
[23] Kobayashi, S., Nomizu, K.: Foundations of Differential Geometry, vol. I and
II. Interscience, N. York (1963, 1969)
[24] Kolář, I., Michor, P., Slovak, J.: Natural Operations in Differential Geometry.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1993)
[25] Kowalski, O., Sekizawa, M.: Natural transformations of Riemannian metrics on
manifolds to metrics on tangent bundles - a classification. Bull. Tokyo Gakugei
Univ. 4(40), 1–29 (1988)
[26] Mekerov, D.: On Riemannian almost product manifolds with nonintegrable
structure. J. Geom. 89(1–2), 119–129 (2008)
[27] Mekerov, D., Manev, M.: Natural connection with totally skew-symmetric tor-
sion on Riemann almost product manifolds. Int. J. Geom. Methods Modern
Physics 9, 1, 14 (2012)
[28] Mihai, I., Nicolau, C.: Almost product structures on the tangent bundle of an
almost paracontact manifold. Demonstratio Math. 15, 1045–1058 (1982)
[29] Mok, K.P., Patterson, E.M., Wong, Y.C.: Structure of symmetric tensors of
type (0,2) and tensors of type (1,1) on the tangent bundle. Trans. Amer. Math.
Soc. 234, 253–278 (1977)
[30] Munteanu, M.I.: Some aspects on the geometry of the tangent bundles and
tangent sphere bundles of a Riemannian manifold. Mediterr. J. Math. 5(1),
43–59 (2008)
[31] Naveira, A.M.: A classification of Riemannian almost-product manifolds. Rend.
Mat. 3, 577–592 (1983)
[32] Olszak, Z.: Four-dimensional para-Hermitian manifold. Tensor (N. S.) 56, 215–
226 (1995)
[33] Oproiu, V.: A generalization of natural almost Hermitian structures on the
tangent bundles. Math. J. Toyama Univ. 22, 1–14 (1999)
[34] Oproiu, V.: General natural almost Hermitian and anti-Hermitian structures
on the tangent bundles. Bull. Math. Soc. Sc. Math. Roumanie 43(93), 325–340
(2000)
[35] Oproiu, V., Papaghiuc, N.: General natural Einstein Kahler structures on tan-
gent bundles. Diff. Geom. Appl. 27, 384–392 (2009)
[36] Papaghiuc, N.: Some almost complex structures with Norden metric on the
tangent bundle of a space form. An Ştiinţ. Univ. “Al. I. Cuza”, Iaşi, Mat. N.S.
46(1), 99–110 (2000)
[37] Peyghan, E., Heydari, A.: A class of locally symmetric para-Kähler Einstein
structures on the cotangent bundle. International Mathematical Forum 5(3),
145–153 (2010)
[38] Prvanovic, M.: Holomorphically projective transformations in a locally product
space. Math. Balkanika (N.S.) 1, 195–213 (1971)
MJOM General Natural (𝛼, 𝜀)-Structures Page 13 of 13 228

[39] Rashevsky, P.K.: The scalar field in a stratified space. Trudy Sem. Vektor.
Tenzor. Anal. 6, 225–248 (1948)
[40] Rozenfeld, B.A.: On unitary and stratified spaces. Trudy Sem. Vektor. Tenzor.
Anal. 7, 260–275 (1949)
[41] Staikova, M., Gribachev, K.: Cannonical connections and conformal invariants
on Riemannian almost product manifolds. Serdica Math. J. 18, 150–161 (1992)
[42] Teofilova, M.: Almost complex connections on almost complex manifolds with
Norden metric. In: Sekigawa, K., Gerdjikov, V.S., Dimiev, S. (eds.) Trends in
Differential Geometry, Complex Analysis and Mathematical Physics Proceed-
ings of the 9th International Workshop on Complex Structures, Integrability
and Vector Fields, Sofia, Bulgaria, 25–29 August 2008 pp. 231–240. World
Scientific, Singapore (2009)
[43] Yano, K.: Differential Geometry of Complex and Almost Complex Spaces. Perg-
amon Press, Oxford (1965)
[44] Yano, K., Ishihara, K.: Tangent and Cotangent Bundles. M. Dekker Inc., New
York (1973)

S. L. Druţă-Romaniuc
Department of Mathematics and Informatics
Technical University “Gheorghe Asachi” of Iaşi
Bd. Carol I, No. 11
700506 Iasi
Romania
e-mail: simonadruta@yahoo.com

Received: March 18, 2018.

Revised: July 16, 2018.
Accepted: November 8, 2018.