Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 37 references

A family of structure isomorphisms for the Cohomological Hall Algebra of an acyclic quiver

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that the cohomological Hall algebra of an acyclic quiver is a tensor product of exterior algebras indexed by the positive roots of any admissible collection of Dynkin subquivers.

desk verdict A topological proof of CoHA decompositions that the author openly says are implicit in earlier work; the proof method is genuinely different, but it leans on an unpublished quantum dilogarithm identity and an open rational-singularity assumption, so it is a conditional contribution that still deserves a referee. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.00567 v3 pith:EJCVJUXK submitted 2019-08-01 math.AG math.RT

Justin Allman This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.RT MSC 16G2055R4057R20
keywords CohomologicalHallAlgebraDynkinquiveracyclicpolynomialtensorproductdecompositionflagvarietyquantumdilogarithmidentityequivariantcohomology
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper proves a structural theorem for the cohomological Hall algebra (CoHA) of any acyclic quiver: given an admissible partition of the quiver into Dynkin subquivers—connected subquivers of types A, D, or E whose contraction leaves the quiver acyclic—the whole algebra is a tensor product of very small subalgebras, each isomorphic to the CoHA of the one-vertex, no-arrow quiver $A_1$, which is an exterior algebra on countably many generators. The factors are indexed by the positive roots of the subquivers, taken in a Reineke order (a total order compatible with the quiver's Euler form), and the isomorphism is given by the CoHA's own multiplication. A second formulation regroups the factors to show that the CoHA of the whole acyclic quiver is isomorphic to a tensor product of the CoHAs of the chosen Dynkin subquivers. The paper also shows that products of Dynkin quiver polynomial classes—the equivariant fundamental classes of representation-space orbits—compute the fundamental classes of certain 'quiver strata' in the ambient CoHA. In the Dynkin case the theorem interpolates between the two known decompositions, and for general acyclic quivers it gives an explicit topological realization of decompositions previously obtained by stability-condition methods.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a collection of quiver flag varieties—products, over the quiver's vertices, of ordinary flag varieties whose step sizes are the entries of the dimension vectors—and their incidence subvarieties. For dimension vectors $\gamma_1,\dots,\gamma_r$ consistent with the ordered partition $Q_\bullet$, the consistency subset $\Sigma_{\gamma_1,\dots,\gamma_r}(Q_\bullet)$ inside the product of the flag variety and the representation space consists of flags preserved by all arrows lying inside the subquivers $Q_j$. Its equivariant fundamental class equals the Euler class of a tautological bundle $G(Q_\bullet)$ (Proposition 4.7), and Proposition 4.4 rewrites a multifactor CoHA product as the equivariant pushforward of that Euler class; this is the formula that lets the paper remove all arrows between different subquivers. A desingularization theorem for quiver orbit closures, applied factorwise, shows that the same incidence variety resolves the closure of the quiver stratum $\eta_m$, so $[\eta_m]$ is itself a CoHA product of units $1_{\beta_u}$. Injectivity comes from restricting the product to a normal locus (the affine subspace where each subquiver component is held at a chosen point): the composed map lands in an integral domain and becomes $f_1\cdots f_r\cdot\varepsilon_m$ with $\varepsilon_m$ a nonzero Euler class (Proposition 7.4). Surjectivity comes from comparing twisted Poincaré series, where a quantum dilogarithm identity $E(y_{e_1})\cdots E(y_{e_n})=E(y_{\beta_1})\cdots E(y_{\beta_r})$ from the companion paper equates the two sides factor by factor.

What would settle it

Take an acyclic quiver obtained by appending a single vertex to an E6 (or E7) Dynkin quiver along one arrow, choose the admissible partition consisting of that Dynkin subquiver and the new $A_1$ vertex, and compute the twisted Poincaré series of both sides of (22) using the formulas (30) and (31); any $q$-degree in which they differ would refute the claimed isomorphism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 6.3. For an acyclic quiver $Q$ and an admissible, ordered, Dynkin subquiver partition $Q_\bullet=\{Q_1,\dots,Q_\ell\}$ in which no $Q_j$ is an orientation of $E_8$, write the positive roots $\Phi^+(Q_\bullet)$ of the union in a Reineke order (a total order compatible with the Euler form) as $\beta_1,\dots,\beta_r$. Then the left-to-right $\ast$-multiplication induces an isomorphism $\mathcal{A}_{\beta_1}\otimes\cdots\otimes\mathcal{A}_{\beta_r}\xrightarrow{\sim}H(Q)$, where each $\mathcal{A}_{\beta_u}$ is the subalgebra generated by polynomials in one equivariant Chern-root variable at a chosen vertex of $\beta_u$ and is isomorphic to $H(A_1)$. Equivalently, the $\ast$-multiplication induces an isomorphism $H(Q_1)\otimes\cdots\otimes H(Q_\ell)\xrightarrow{\sim}H(Q)$. A corollary identifies, for every $Q_\bullet$-partition $m$, the product of the Dynkin orbit classes $[\Omega_{m_j}(Q_j)]$ with the equivariant fundamental class $[\eta_m]$ of the quiver stratum $\eta_m$—the locus where each subquiver component lies in a fixed Dynkin orbit—so the Dynkin quiver polynomials serve as structure constants of the entire acyclic CoHA.

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends on an unproved property of the exceptional Dynkin diagrams E6 and E7: the closures of their representation-space orbits must have only rational singularities, a regularity condition known to hold for types A and D but still open for E.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any admissible Dynkin subquiver partition of an acyclic quiver yields an explicit tensor decomposition of its CoHA into $A_1$-type factors, so the same algebra carries many different decompositions parameterized by such partitions.
  • Grouping consecutive factors by subquiver gives $H(Q)\cong H(Q_1)\otimes\cdots\otimes H(Q_\ell)$; the CoHA of an acyclic quiver is therefore built, as an algebra, from the CoHAs of the Dynkin subquivers in the partition.
  • The fundamental class of every quiver stratum $\eta_m$ is a left-to-right product of Dynkin quiver polynomial classes, meaning the structure constants of any acyclic CoHA can be approached through the well-developed combinatorics of quiver polynomials.
  • When $Q$ is itself a Dynkin quiver, the theorem with $Q_\bullet=\{Q\}$ recovers the positive-root decomposition and with singleton subquivers recovers the simple-root decomposition, interpolating between the two previously known presentations.
  • For general acyclic quivers, the proof realizes the semistable CoHA decompositions of earlier work in explicit topological and characteristic-class terms rather than through stability conditions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An unresolved regularity fact stands between the proof and full generality for E6/E7: if rational singularities for those orbit closures are proved, the paper's argument closes as written; if a counterexample appears, the isomorphism might still hold but would need a new identification of the product of units with the stratum class.
  • The paper notes that the Dynkin hypothesis on the subquivers may be stronger than needed for the tensor decomposition; a plausible extension is that any admissible partition into acyclic subquivers gives a topological decomposition, though without the quiver-polynomial reading that Corollary 6.7 exploits.
  • The same incidence-variety formula (Proposition 4.4) suggests an algorithmic route: compute CoHA structure constants for small acyclic quivers by explicit flag-variety integrals, which could test conjectures about non-Dynkin CoHAs beyond the cases treated here.
  • Since each admissible partition corresponds to a stability condition, a natural converse is to classify the stability conditions for which every semistable factor is isomorphic to $H(A_1)$ and ask whether all of them arise topologically from admissible Dynkin subquiver partitions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proves a tensor decomposition theorem for the cohomological Hall algebra (CoHA) of an acyclic quiver Q with an admissible ordered partition into Dynkin subquivers, none of which is an orientation of E8. The main theorem (Theorem 6.3) states that the CoHA is spanned by certain subalgebras A_β, each isomorphic to the CoHA of A1, indexed by the positive roots of the subquivers, and that the multifactor ∗-multiplication in Reineke order gives an isomorphism from their tensor product to H(Q). As corollaries, it recovers a factorization H(Q) ≅ H(Q1)⊗⋯⊗H(Qℓ) and expresses products of Dynkin quiver polynomials as classes of quiver strata. The proof combines equivariant localization, a direct injectivity argument via restriction to a normal locus, and a Poincaré-series comparison using quantum dilogarithm identities.

Significance. If the proof is completed, the paper gives an explicit topological realization, in the language of characteristic classes, of CoHA decompositions previously obtained through stability conditions by Davison–Meinhardt and Franzen–Reineke. The injectivity argument (Propositions 7.3 and 7.4, Lemma 7.6) is an elegant extension of Rimányi's localization method, and the worked examples are pedagogically useful. The paper also provides a clear link between CoHA products and quiver polynomials. However, the proof as written is conditional: it depends on quantum dilogarithm identities quoted from the author's unpublished preprint [All18], and on the open rational-singularity assumption for type E Dynkin orbit closures. These dependencies are load-bearing; the manuscript is therefore not yet a complete proof of the theorem as stated.

major comments (4)
  1. [Sections 5 and 7.3, Propositions 5.1 and 5.2] The Poincaré-series comparison that completes the proof of Theorem 6.3 depends entirely on Propositions 5.1 and 5.2, both quoted from the unpublished preprint [All18]. Proposition 5.1 is the identity E(y_{e1})⋯E(y_{en}) = E(y_{β1})⋯E(y_{βr}) in the completed quantum algebra Â_Q, and Proposition 5.2 supplies the signs s_m and q-exponents w_m used in the coefficient comparison at (32). Neither identity is proved or derived in this paper, and [All18] is cited as a 2018 preprint without an arXiv identifier or other public availability. An error in either identity would break the equality of the Poincaré series and hence the surjectivity of (22). This is load-bearing; please include complete proofs of both propositions in the manuscript, or otherwise make the full content of [All18] available for verification.
  2. [Remark 4.9, Proposition 4.10, and Lemma 7.9] Theorem 6.3 as stated claims an unconditional isomorphism for every admissible, ordered, Dynkin subquiver partition with no E8 factor. However, the proof of Proposition 4.10 uses the assumption, acknowledged in Remark 4.9, that type E Dynkin quiver orbit closures have rational singularities. This assumption enters the proof of Proposition 7.4 through the identification of the rational function g in (28) with the Euler class ε_m, and Lemma 7.9 uses the degree of ε_m, namely codim(η_m; Rep_γ), for the degree shift in equation (32). Without the rational-singularity assumption, that degree shift is not established, so the Poincaré-series comparison, and hence surjectivity of (22), rests on an open problem. The abstract and Theorem 6.3 do not list this as a hypothesis. Please either prove the degree shift by a direct localization computation independent of rational singularities, or restate the main theorem and its corollaries as explicitly conditional on this assumption.
  3. [Section 6, Proposition 6.1] The assertion that each subalgebra A_β is isomorphic to H(A1) is central: it justifies the identification (A_{β_u,m_u})_{k_u} ≅ H^{2k_u}(BGL(C_{m_u})) used in formula (31) to write the Poincaré series of the domain of (22). The proof given for general positive roots is only a sketch: it states that the dependence on variables at other vertices 'cancels thanks to supersymmetry' without presenting the cancellation. This is a nontrivial property of the multifactor multiplication (11). Please provide a complete proof, or reduce the statement to the known Dynkin-quiver case of Rimányi ([Rim13, Theorem 11.3]) by observing that all factors and all products within A_β are supported on a single subquiver Q_j, so the multiplication in question is the CoHA product of that Dynkin subquiver.
  4. [Section 7.2, proof of Proposition 7.4] The proof asserts that 'there is only one torus fixed point in Σ ... over ν_m' and that all other localization terms vanish after applying ι*_m. This is a crucial geometric claim because it makes formula (28) exact, and it feeds into Lemma 7.9. The claim is not proved; it is only illustrated in Example 7.5. Please supply a proof, for instance by describing the torus fixed points of the quiver flag variety and checking the incidence conditions, or provide a reference that covers this statement in the present acyclic generality.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction, paragraph after Corollary 6.7] The phrase 'representations of a cyclic quivers' appears to be a typo; it should presumably read 'acyclic quivers'.
  2. [Theorem 6.3 statement] The theorem's hypotheses omit the rational-singularity assumption from Remark 4.9. Since the proof is conditional on that assumption, the theorem should state it explicitly in its hypothesis list, not only in a remark.
  3. [Section 5, equation (18) and Proposition 5.2] The notation codim_C(η_m; Rep_γ(Q)) is used without prior definition; please define it when the stratum η_m is introduced in Definition 4.2.
  4. [Lemma 7.6] The proof says Proposition 7.3 implies injectivity of (22) because it holds for all Q•-partitions; a sentence explaining that a map between graded vector spaces is injective if every graded summand is injective would make the argument clearer.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The Poincaré-series comparison used to prove surjectivity in Theorem 6.3 is imported verbatim from the author's unpublished preprint [All18] (Propositions 5.1–5.2) and is not proved here; the central isomorphism still has independent content via the injectivity argument.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 5, Propositions 5.1–5.2; Section 7.3, 'Completing the proof of Theorem 6.3'.]
    "Proposition 5.1 ([All18], Theorem 4.2). ... We have the identity E(ye1)···E(yen) = E(yβ1)···E(yβr). ... Proposition 5.1 states that (30) and (31), and hence (32), are the same."

    Surjectivity of (22) is obtained solely by comparing (30) and (31) via Proposition 5.1, which is quoted from the author's unpublished [All18] and not proved here. Because (30) is the Poincaré series of H(Q) and (31) is the Poincaré series of Aβ1⊗···⊗Aβr, the cited identity is precisely the dimension equality needed to upgrade the injective map to an isomorphism; Proposition 5.2 from [All18] supplies the signs and q-exponents used in (32). Thus the dimension-counting input is an unverified self-citation, though the injectivity proof is independent.

full rationale

The core isomorphism (22) is not assumed as a hypothesis: the paper proves injectivity of the natural multiplication map in Section 7.2 via the equivariant localization computation of Proposition 7.4, and then proves surjectivity by comparing Poincaré series. The Poincaré-series equality, however, is not established in the paper; it is Proposition 5.1, restated from the author's unpublished preprint [All18], with the companion Proposition 5.2 used for the explicit coefficient comparison. Because these propositions are exactly the dimension-counting input that completes the bijection, the proof as written is not self-contained at its most load-bearing step, and the cited source overlaps with the author. This matches the 'self-citation load-bearing' pattern rather than a full definitional circularity: the injectivity argument and the topological realization are independent content, and the theorem is acknowledged to be implicit in published work of Franzen–Reineke and Davison–Meinhardt. The additional caveat in Remark 4.9—that the proof assumes type E Dynkin quiver orbit closures have rational singularities—is an explicit openness/conditionality flag, not a circularity. There is no evidence that any fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is smuggled in beyond the cited quantum dilogarithm identity. Overall score 4: substantial self-citation in the central proof, but the central claim retains independent mathematical content.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper contributes a new proof using standard tools of equivariant cohomology and characteristic classes. The central claim rests on two external inputs: the author's earlier quantum dilogarithm identities ([All18]) and an open rational-singularity assumption for type E orbit closures. No free parameters are fitted; the constructions are parameterized by combinatorial data (partitions, orderings, choices of vertices i(u)), but these are not numerical parameters adjusted to data.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Kontsevich-Soibelman definition and associativity of CoHA multiplication (formula (11))
    Prior foundational result [KS11, Theorem 1] used throughout; accepted as standard in the field.
  • standard math Equivariant localization theorem for pushforwards (Atiyah-Bott/Berline-Vergne)
    Used in Proposition 4.4 and Proposition 7.4 to compute CoHA products via integrals over flag varieties.
  • domain assumption Reineke's desingularization theorem [Rei03, Theorem 2.2]
    Used in Proposition 4.8 to assert the consistency subset is a desingularization of quiver orbit closures; applied per Dynkin subquiver.
  • domain assumption Bobinski-Zwara rational singularity results for type A and D orbit closures [BZ01, BZ02]
    Invoked in Remark 4.9 to justify Propositions 4.10 and later steps when all subquivers are type A or D.
  • domain assumption Type E Dynkin quiver orbit closures have rational singularities
    Explicitly assumed in Remark 4.9; the paper notes this is open. Needed for Proposition 4.10 and the Poincaré series comparison when E6/E7 subquivers appear.
  • domain assumption Quantum dilogarithm identities of [All18] (Theorems 4.2 and Proposition 5.1)
    Restated as Propositions 5.1 and 5.2 from the author's own unpublished preprint; the Poincaré series comparison in Section 7.3 depends on them, and their proofs are not included.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A family of structure isomorphisms for the Cohomological Hall Algebra of an acyclic quiver." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EJCVJUXK

@misc{pith2026190800567,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A family of structure isomorphisms for the Cohomological Hall Algebra of an acyclic quiver},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EJCVJUXK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.00567}
}
read the original abstract

For any acyclic quiver, we establish a family of structure isomorphisms for its cohomological Hall algebra (CoHA). The family is parameterized by partitions of the quiver into Dynkin subquivers. For each such partition, we write the domain of our isomorphism as a tensor product of subalgebras in two ways. In the first, each tensor factor is isomorphic to the CoHA of the quiver with a single vertex and no arrows. In the second, the tensor factors are each isomorphic to the CoHAs of the corresponding Dynkin subquivers. When the quiver is already an orientation of a simply-laced Dynkin diagram, our results interpolate between isomorphisms proved by Rimanyi. Such CoHA decompositions appear in prior work of Davison--Meinhardt and Franzen--Reineke, but our proof gives an explicit topological realization of these results. As a consequence of our method, we deduce that certain structure constants in the CoHA naturally arise as CoHA products of classes of Dynkin quiver polynomials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.00567 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. An admissible Dynkin subquiver partition which becomes ordered by the assignments: Q1 = A1, Q2 an orientation of A3, and Q3 an orientation of D4. Observe that the underlying non-oriented graph associated to Q has a cycle, but that the quiver Q is acyclic. 2.3. Equivariant cohomology algebras and their elements. Fix the dimension vector γ ∈ D. In this paper, a central object we study is the equivariant cohomology alg… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott, The moment map and equivariant cohomology, Topology 23 (1984), no. 1, 1--28. 721448

    work page 1984

  2. [2]

    Abeasis and A

    S. Abeasis and A. Del Fra, Degenerations for the representations of a quiver of type A _m , J. Algebra 93 (1985), no. 2, 376--412. 786760

    work page 1985

  3. [3]

    Allman, Grothendieck classes of quiver cycles as iterated residues, Michigan Math

    J. Allman, Grothendieck classes of quiver cycles as iterated residues, Michigan Math. J. 63 (2014), no. 4, 865--888. 3286674

    work page 2014

  4. [4]

    , Interpolating factorizations for acyclic D onaldson-- T homas invariants , preprint, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Allman and R

    J. Allman and R. Rim\' a nyi, Quantum dilogarithm identities for the square product of A -type D ynkin quivers , Math. Res. Lett. 25 (2018), no. 4, 1037--1087. 3882154

    work page 2018

  6. [6]

    A. S. Buch and W. Fulton, Chern class formulas for quiver varieties, Invent. Math. 135 (1999), no. 3, 665--687. 1669280 (2000f:14087)

    work page 1999

  7. [7]

    A. S. Buch, A. Kresch, H. Tamvakis, and A. Yong, Schubert polynomials and quiver formulas, Duke Math. J. 122 (2004), no. 1, 125--143. 2046809 (2005b:05218)

    work page 2004

  8. [8]

    , Grothendieck polynomials and quiver formulas, Amer. J. Math. 127 (2005), no. 3, 551--567. 2141644 (2007d:14018)

    work page 2005

Show all 37 references
  1. [9]

    A. S. Buch, F. Sottile, and A. Yong, Quiver coefficients are S chubert structure constants , Math. Res. Lett. 12 (2005), no. 4, 567--574. 2155232 (2006g:14082)

    2005

  2. [10]

    A. S. Buch, Grothendieck classes of quiver varieties, Duke Math. J. 115 (2002), no. 1, 75--103. 1932326 (2003m:14018)

    2002

  3. [11]

    , Alternating signs of quiver coefficients, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 18 (2005), no. 1, 217--237 (electronic). 2114821 (2006d:14052)

    2005

  4. [12]

    , Quiver coefficients of D ynkin type , Michigan Math. J. 57 (2008), 93--120, Special volume in honor of Melvin Hochster. 2492443 (2009m:16032)

    2008

  5. [13]

    Berline and M

    N. Berline and M. Vergne, Classes caract\' e ristiques \' e quivariantes. F ormule de localisation en cohomologie \' e quivariante , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris S\' e r. I Math. 295 (1982), no. 9, 539--541. 685019

    1982

  6. [14]

    Bobi\' n ski and G

    G. Bobi\' n ski and G. Zwara, Normality of orbit closures for D ynkin quivers of type A_n , Manuscripta Math. 105 (2001), no. 1, 103--109. 1885816

    2001

  7. [15]

    , Schubert varieties and representations of D ynkin quivers , Colloq. Math. 94 (2002), no. 2, 285--309. 1967381

    2002

  8. [16]

    Zongbin Chen, Geometric construction of generators of C o HA of doubled quiver , C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 352 (2014), no. 12, 1039--1044. 3276816

    2014

  9. [17]

    Davison, The critical C o HA of a quiver with potential , Q

    B. Davison, The critical C o HA of a quiver with potential , Q. J. Math. 68 (2017), no. 2, 635--703. 3667216

    2017

  10. [18]

    Davison and S

    B. Davison and S. Meinhardt, Cohomological D onaldson- T homas theory of a quiver with potential and quantum enveloping algebras , preprint, 2016

    2016

  11. [19]

    Derksen and J

    H. Derksen and J. Weyman, An introduction to quiver representations, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 184, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2017. 3727119

    2017

  12. [20]

    A. I. Efimov, Cohomological H all algebra of a symmetric quiver , Compos. Math. 148 (2012), no. 4, 1133--1146. 2956038

    2012

  13. [21]

    L. D. Faddeev and R. M. Kashaev, Quantum dilogarithm, Modern Phys. Lett. A 9 (1994), no. 5, 427--434. 1264393

    1994

  14. [22]

    Feh \'e r and R

    L. Feh \'e r and R. Rim \'a nyi, Classes of degeneracy loci for quivers: the T hom polynomial point of view , Duke Math. J. 114 (2002), no. 2, 193--213. 1920187 (2003j:14005)

    2002

  15. [23]

    Franzen and M

    H. Franzen and M. Reineke, Semistable C how- H all algebras of quivers and quantized D onaldson- T homas invariants , Algebra Number Theory 12 (2018), no. 5, 1001--1025. 3840869

    2018

  16. [24]

    , On the cohomological H all algebra of the K ronecker quiver , preprint, 2019

    2019

  17. [25]

    Franzen, On cohomology rings of non-commutative H ilbert schemes and C o H a-modules , Math

    H. Franzen, On cohomology rings of non-commutative H ilbert schemes and C o H a-modules , Math. Res. Lett. 23 (2016), no. 3, 805--840. 3533197

    2016

  18. [26]

    Algebra 503 (2018), 121--145

    , On the semi-stable C o H a and its modules arising from smooth models , J. Algebra 503 (2018), 121--145. 3779991

    2018

  19. [27]

    Gabriel, Unzerlegbare D arstellungen

    P. Gabriel, Unzerlegbare D arstellungen. I , Manuscripta Math. 6 (1972), 71--103; correction, ibid. 6 (1972), 309. 0332887 (48 \#11212)

    1972

  20. [28]

    Kinser, A

    R. Kinser, A. Knutson, and J. Rajchgot, Three combinatorial formulas for type A quiver polynomials and K -polynomials , Duke Math. J. 168 (2019), no. 4, 505--551. 3916063

    2019

  21. [29]

    Knutson, E

    A. Knutson, E. Miller, and M. Shimozono, Four positive formulae for type A quiver polynomials , Invent. Math. 166 (2006), no. 2, 229--325. 2249801 (2007k:14098)

    2006

  22. [30]

    Kontsevich and Y

    M. Kontsevich and Y. Soibelman, Cohomological H all algebra, exponential H odge structures and motivic D onaldson- T homas invariants , Commun. Number Theory Phys. 5 (2011), no. 2, 231--352. 2851153 (2012k:14079)

    2011

  23. [31]

    Miller, Alternating formulas for K -theoretic quiver polynomials , Duke Math

    E. Miller, Alternating formulas for K -theoretic quiver polynomials , Duke Math. J. 128 (2005), no. 1, 1--17. 2137947 (2006e:05181)

    2005

  24. [32]

    Reineke, Quivers, desingularizations and canonical bases, Studies in memory of I ssai S chur ( C hevaleret/ R ehovot, 2000), Progr

    M. Reineke, Quivers, desingularizations and canonical bases, Studies in memory of I ssai S chur ( C hevaleret/ R ehovot, 2000), Progr. Math., vol. 210, Birkh\"auser Boston, Boston, MA, 2003, pp. 325--344. 1985731

    2000

  25. [33]

    , Poisson automorphisms and quiver moduli, J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 9 (2010), no. 3, 653--667. 2650811

    2010

  26. [34]

    Rim\' a nyi, On the cohomological H all algebra of D ynkin quivers , preprint, 2013

    R. Rim\' a nyi, On the cohomological H all algebra of D ynkin quivers , preprint, 2013

    2013

  27. [35]

    Rim \'a nyi, Quiver polynomials in iterated residue form, J

    R. Rim \'a nyi, Quiver polynomials in iterated residue form, J. Algebraic Combin. 40 (2014), no. 2, 527--542. 3239295

    2014

  28. [36]

    Rim\' a nyi, Motivic characteristic classes in cohomological H all algebras , preprint, 2018

    R. Rim\' a nyi, Motivic characteristic classes in cohomological H all algebras , preprint, 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    Sutar, Orbit closures of source-sink D ynkin quivers , Int

    K. Sutar, Orbit closures of source-sink D ynkin quivers , Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2015), no. 11, 3423--3444. 3373055

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.