Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Set of independencies and Tutte polynomial of matroids over a domain

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 For matroids realized over an integral domain, the paper defines a Tutte polynomial with torsion-module coefficients, proves a Hilbert-series specialization, and identifies the elliptic Tutte polynomial as one of its evaluations.

desk verdict Solid domain-matroid core with a genuine Hilbert-series theorem, but the advertised elliptic-curve application is not supported by the written proofs and needs major revision. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.00332 v1 pith:FE6JSTPG submitted 2019-09-01 math.CO math.ACmath.AG

Alessio Borzì , Ivan Martino This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.COmath.ACmath.AG MSC 05B3505E4013D4014H52
keywords matroidsoveradomainGrothendieck-TuttepolynomialposetoftorsionsfacemoduleHilbertseriesellipticarrangementscomplexmultiplicationarithmetic
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

Matroids are usually defined over fields, where independence means linear independence. This paper treats matroids over an integral domain R: a family of finitely generated R-modules indexed by subsets, realizable by columns of a matrix over R. The central claim is that such objects have a Tutte polynomial whose coefficients are isomorphism classes of torsion-dual modules, and that this polynomial satisfies deletion–contraction exactly as the classical one does. For realizable matroids, the paper builds a 'poset of torsions' that plays the role of the independence complex, and it shows that when this poset is finite the Hilbert series of its face module is a specialization of the Tutte polynomial. The payoff is one framework containing classical matroids, arithmetic matroids over the integers, and elliptic arrangements with complex multiplication, where the elliptic multiplicity gains an algebraic reading.

What carries the argument

The central object is the set of torsions $\operatorname{Gr}_{\mathcal{M}}=\{(A,\ell): A\in\Delta_{\mathcal{M}},\ \ell\in\operatorname{tor}(A)^{\vee}\}$, ordered by the covering relation $(A,\ell)\vartriangleleft (A\cup\{b\},h)$ whenever the dual restriction map sends $h$ to $\ell$. Theorem 4.8 shows this poset is a disjoint union of simplicial posets, each isomorphic to the link of the minimum element, so it replaces the independence complex of a classical matroid while retaining torsion data. The Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial is the algebraic counterpart of this poset, and the specialization in Theorem 5.4 is the identity that transfers the poset's face-module Hilbert series into Tutte-polynomial form. For elliptic arrangements, the load-bearing step is Proposition 6.1, which identifies the geometric multiplicity $m(S)$ with $|\operatorname{tor}(S)|$ when the elliptic curve has complex multiplication.

What would settle it

On a complex-multiplication elliptic curve, take two isogenies, count the connected components of the intersection of their kernels, and compare that number with the cardinality of the torsion module of $R^2$ modulo the two corresponding columns; any mismatch would refute Proposition 6.1 and with it the elliptic Tutte interpretation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For an R-matroid $\mathcal{M}$ of rank $r$, the paper defines the Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial $T_{\mathcal{M}}(x,y)=\sum_{A\subseteq[n]}[\operatorname{tor}(A)^{\vee}](x-1)^{r-\operatorname{rk}(A)}(y-1)^{|A|-\operatorname{rk}(A)}$ with coefficients in the Grothendieck-style ring generated by isomorphism classes of finitely generated R-modules, and proves that it satisfies deletion–contraction. For realizable matroids it constructs the set of torsions $\operatorname{Gr}_{\mathcal{M}}$ and shows it is a disjoint union of simplicial posets; when the poset is finite, the face module $N_{\mathcal{M}}$ carries a Hilbert series. The main identity, Theorem 5.4, states that for a realizable matroid over the ring of integers of a number field with finite poset of torsions, $N_{\mathcal{M}}(t)=\frac{t^r}{(1-t)^r}\widetilde{T}_{\mathcal{M}}(1/t,1)$, where $\widetilde{T}_{\mathcal{M}}$ is the integer evaluation that sends projective modules to $1$ and torsion modules to their cardinalities. This unifies the classical Hilbert-series/Tutte identity and the earlier arithmetic case, and Proposition 6.1 applies the same machinery to elliptic arrangements with complex multiplication by identifying the elliptic multiplicity with a torsion-module cardinality.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that for elliptic arrangements on curves with complex multiplication, the number of connected components of an intersection of elliptic hyperplanes equals the size of the corresponding torsion module; the paper verifies this for the kernel of a single isogeny and states that the rest of the non-broken-circuit argument follows as in the previous case.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Deletion–contraction holds for the Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial, so recursive matroid computations over any domain can be carried out at the level of torsion-module classes.
  • For every realizable matroid over a domain, the set of torsions is a disjoint union of identical simplicial posets, giving a uniform combinatorial shape with torsion data attached to each face.
  • When the poset of torsions is finite, the Hilbert series of the face module equals $\frac{t^r}{(1-t)^r}\widetilde{T}_{\mathcal{M}}(1/t,1)$, recovering the classical and integer-coefficient cases as special instances.
  • The elliptic Tutte polynomial of an arrangement on a complex-multiplication elliptic curve is an evaluation of the Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial, so the geometric multiplicity $m(S)$ has an algebraic interpretation.
  • The Hilbert-series formula for the cohomology model of an elliptic arrangement extends to the complex-multiplication case, once the multiplicity identification is accepted.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural test is whether the Hilbert-series identity survives outside the PID case: rings of integers of number fields are the cases treated, but Dedekind domains with finite quotients and nontrivial class groups are the next plausible setting.
  • If the elliptic multiplicity identification holds, the elliptic Tutte polynomial becomes computable by deletion–contraction at the level of torsion modules, replacing a geometric count of intersection components with purely algebraic data.
  • The infinite-torsion examples suggest that face modules of domain matroids need not be Noetherian; a generalized Hilbert-series notion for such modules could connect this combinatorics to non-Noetherian commutative algebra.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies matroids over a domain R, defining a Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial T_M(x,y) with coefficients in the Grothendieck-style ring L0(R-mod), and proving its deletion–contraction property. It generalizes the poset of torsions Gr_M from Z-matroids to realizable matroids over a domain, defines the associated face module N_M, and proves a Hilbert-series specialization identity relating N_M(t) to the evaluated Tutte polynomial, under the hypothesis that R is the ring of integers of a number field and a PID. The final section applies these constructions to elliptic arrangements on CM elliptic curves, claiming that the elliptic Tutte polynomial is an evaluation of the Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial and that Bibby's cohomology theorem extends to all elliptic arrangements.

Significance. If the central results are fully established, the paper would unify the arithmetic Tutte polynomial story with a new algebraic interpretation of multiplicities in elliptic arrangements, and would extend the classical Björner appendix identity and Martino's face-module result to matroids over general domains. The core Hilbert-series result (Theorem 5.4) rests on a clean reduction to the torsion-free case and on Stanley's theorem for simplicial posets, and it appears sound under the stated PID assumption. The paper also provides useful definitions and worked examples, including a Macaulay2 computation in Example 5.6. However, the advertised elliptic application is not yet rigorously supported: the proof of Proposition 6.1 is a single sentence, the PID hypothesis of Section 5 is not satisfied by general CM endomorphism rings, and Theorem 6.2 is asserted without a real argument for the CM case. Because the elliptic extension is a load-bearing part of the abstract's claims, the manuscript needs substantial revision before the full set of claims can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§6, Proposition 6.1] The proof of Proposition 6.1 asserts that 'all results in Section 5 still hold' and that the multiplicity m(S) equals the cardinality of tor(S), but neither assertion is justified. Section 5 explicitly assumes R is a PID (page 20), while Proposition 6.1 sets R = End(E(Λ)), which for a general CM elliptic curve is an order in an imaginary quadratic field and need not be a PID; for example, for Λ = Z + Z√-3, the order Z[√-3] is not a PID. Consequently Lemma 5.1, whose proof writes an ideal as I = (d), and Corollary 5.2, which uses this isomorphism, do not apply without modification. Moreover, the equality m(S) = |tor(S)| for an arbitrary intersection S requires more than the kernel computation for a single isogeny C/Λ → C/Λ; one must show that the component group of the intersection of several kernels is computed by the torsion of the saturation quotient of the associated lattice map, using a duality or snake-lemma argument. This is a load-bearing gap in the claimed algebraic interpretation of the elliptic Tutte polynomial.
  2. [§6, Theorem 6.2] Theorem 6.2 is the paper's advertised extension of Bibby's theorem to all elliptic arrangements, but its proof in the CM case consists of the sentence 'the proof follows as in the previous case, by using the non-broken circuits of the classical matroid M ⊗ Q(w).' No construction of the model A(E) is given for CM elliptic arrangements, and no explanation is supplied for how the non-broken-circuit argument over Q(w) interacts with the torsion modules that appear in the Grothendieck–Tutte polynomial. Since Proposition 6.1, on which this argument depends, is itself not established, the extension to CM arrangements is not proven and should be either proved in detail or stated as a conjecture.
  3. [§4, Proposition 4.6] The proof of Proposition 4.6, which is used in Theorem 4.8 to show that Gr_M is a disjoint union of isomorphic simplicial posets, constructs the isomorphism link(A,e) ≃ link(A,t) by choosing elements m_b in the fibers of the maps π∨_{A,b}. The proof says 'we only need to take care that the choices of m_b are coherent all along the construction. This comes from the fact that M is realizable,' but it does not actually justify the existence of a coherent choice for all ranks. Without an explicit verification of the compatibility of the chosen elements across the commutative squares displayed at the end of the proof, the claimed isomorphism is not fully established. Since Theorem 4.8 underlies the simplicial-poset structure used in Theorem 5.4, this gap should be repaired.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains a typo: 'abelian subvarities' should read 'abelian subvarieties.'
  2. [Section 4.2, Example 4.11] The text refers to 'the Z[x]-matroid M of Example 4.9,' but Example 4.9 is the Z[i] example; the Z[x]-matroid with infinite torsion was introduced in Example 4.3. The cross-reference should be corrected.
  3. [Section 1.2] The face-ring definition requires the set M(a,b) of minimal upper bounds to be finite for every pair a,b; in Example 4.11 the poset is infinite and the face ring is described as non-Noetherian, but it is not discussed whether the finiteness condition on M(a,b) is satisfied in that example. A brief remark would avoid ambiguity.
  4. [Section 5, Lemma 5.1] The proof of Lemma 5.1 writes 'Let I = (d)', which is valid only because the section assumes R is a PID. Since the lemma is invoked later in Proposition 6.1 for rings that may not be PIDs, the hypothesis should be explicitly stated at each use, and the limitation should be acknowledged in Section 6.
  5. [Section 6, Proposition 6.1] The notation 'tor S' in the proof should be 'tor(S)' for consistency with the rest of the paper, and the statement 'the matroid M is made by R-modules with finite (dual) torsion modules' needs a proof or a citation when R is a non-maximal order.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main Tutte/Hilbert-series identity is derived from independent definitions and Stanley's theorem; elliptic-section gaps are correctness issues, not circular reductions.

full rationale

The paper's central results are not obtained by assuming their conclusions. Theorem 2.8 and Theorem 3.2 are direct algebraic consequences of Definition 2.1 and the ranks of the generic matroid; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Theorem 5.4 reduces, via Lemma 5.3 and additivity of Hilbert series, to the torsion-free case, where Gr(M) is a simplicial poset, its f-vector is identified with the coefficients |tor(A)^∨|, and Stanley's theorem (Theorem 1.3) supplies the Hilbert series of the face ring; none of these steps quotes the desired equality. The citation of the second author's [Mar18] is motivational and gives the Z-analogue, but the proof of the domain generalization is self-contained and does not rely on [Mar18] as a black box. Proposition 6.1 is not circular: the elliptic Tutte polynomial is defined by Bibby through the geometric multiplicity m(S), while the evaluated Grothendieck-Tutte polynomial uses |tor(S)^∨|, so the asserted equality is a substantive identification. The passage 'We only need to prove, now, that m(S) is tor S' shows the authors themselves distinguish the geometric and algebraic quantities. The brevity of that proof, and the use of Section 5 outside its stated PID hypothesis, are omitted-justification or correctness concerns rather than reductions of the conclusion to its input. No circular step is exhibited in the paper's derivation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Pure mathematics paper with no fitted parameters. The new objects, the Grothendieck-Tutte polynomial, the poset of torsions, and the face module, are defined from the input matroid data. The structural assumptions are the domain hypothesis, the Dedekind structure theorem, and the two unproved bridges used in the elliptic application.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption R is a domain with field of fractions Q(R); matroid of modules over R is taken in the sense of Fink-Moci (Definition 1.4).
    The entire paper works with matroids of modules over a domain and uses the Fink-Moci definition of R-matroid and realization.
  • standard math Structure theorem for finitely generated modules over a Dedekind domain: every module is the direct sum of a torsion module and a torsion-free module.
    Invoked in Section 5 to define the evaluation homomorphism phi and in Lemma 1.6.1; the theorem is cited from [FM16, Proposition 3.3].
  • ad hoc to paper In the complex multiplication elliptic case, the multiplicity m(S), the number of connected components of an intersection of elliptic hyperplanes, equals the cardinality of the torsion module tor(S).
    Proposition 6.1 rests on this identification, justified in the text by a single well-known fact about the kernel of one isogeny, without a detailed derivation for arbitrary intersections S.
  • ad hoc to paper The cohomology model A(E) in the complex multiplication case follows the non-CM argument via non-broken circuits of the classical matroid M ⊗ Q(w).
    The proof of Theorem 6.2 says 'the proof follows as in the previous case, by using the non-broken circuits of the classical matroid' and does not supply the details for the CM case.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Set of independencies and Tutte polynomial of matroids over a domain." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FE6JSTPG

@misc{pith2026190900332,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Set of independencies and Tutte polynomial of matroids over a domain},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FE6JSTPG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.00332}
}
abstract

In this work, we study matroids over a domain and several classical combinatorial and algebraic invariants related. We define their Grothendieck-Tutte polynomial $T_{\mathcal{M}}(x,y)$, extending the definition given by Fink and Moci in 2016, and we show that such polynomial has the classical deletion-contraction property. Moreover, we study the set of independencies for a realizable matroid over a domain, generalizing the definition of \emph{poset of torsions} $Gr(\mathcal{M})$ given by the second author in 2017. This is a union of identical simplicial posets as for (quasi-)arithmetic matroids. The new notions harmonize naturally through the face module $N_\mathcal{M}$ of the matroid over a domain. Whenever $Gr(\mathcal{M})$ is a finite poset, the Hilbert series $N_\mathcal{M}(t)$ of its face module is a specialization of the Tutte polynomial $T_{\mathcal{M}}(x,y)$. Further, for arrangements of codimension-one abelian subvarities of an elliptic curve admitting complex multiplication, we extend certain results of Bibby and we provide an algebraic interpretation of the elliptic Tutte polynomial.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Foundations for a theory of complex matroids

    Laura Anderson and Emanuele Delucchi. Foundations for a theory of complex matroids. Discrete Comput. Geom. , 48(4):807--846, 2012

    work page 2012

  2. [2]

    M. F. Atiyah and I. G. Macdonald. Introduction to commutative algebra . Addison-Wesley Series in Mathematics. Westview Press, Boulder, CO, economy edition, 2016. For the 1969 original see [ MR0242802]

    2016

  3. [3]

    Vectors of matroids over tracts

    Laura Anderson. Vectors of matroids over tracts. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 161:236--270, 2019

    2019

  4. [4]

    Williams

    S aban Alaca and Kenneth S. Williams. Introductory algebraic number theory . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004

    work page 2004

  5. [5]

    Matroids over partial hyperstructures

    Matthew Baker and Nathan Bowler. Matroids over partial hyperstructures. Adv. Math. , 343:821--863, 2019

    2019

  6. [6]

    Equivariant counts of points of the moduli spaces of pointed hyperelliptic curves

    Jonas Bergstr\" o m. Equivariant counts of points of the moduli spaces of pointed hyperelliptic curves. Doc. Math. , 14:259--296, 2009

    work page 2009

  7. [7]

    Combinatorics of orbit configuration spaces

    Christin Bibby and Nir Gadish. Combinatorics of orbit configuration spaces. 2018. arXiv:1804.06863

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Cohomology of abelian arrangements

    Christin Bibby. Cohomology of abelian arrangements. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 144(7):3093--3104, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Bland and Michel Las Vergnas

    Robert G. Bland and Michel Las Vergnas. Orientability of matroids. J. Combinatorial Theory Ser. B. , 24(1):94--123, 1978

    1978

  2. [10]

    The multivariate arithmetic T utte polynomial

    Petter Br\" a nd\' e n and Luca Moci. The multivariate arithmetic T utte polynomial. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 366(10):5523--5540, 2014

    2014

  3. [11]

    T. H. Brylawski. The T utte- G rothendieck ring. Algebra Universalis , 2:375--388, 1972

    1972

  4. [12]

    De Concini and C

    C. De Concini and C. Procesi. On the geometry of toric arrangements. Transform. Groups , 10(3-4):387--422, 2005

    2005

  5. [13]

    De Concini and C

    C. De Concini and C. Procesi. Hyperplane arrangements and box splines. Michigan Math. J. , 57:201--225, 2008. With an appendix by A. Bj\"orner, Special volume in honor of Melvin Hochster

    2008

  6. [14]

    De Concini and C

    C. De Concini and C. Procesi. Hyperplane arrangements and box splines. Michigan Math. J. , 57:201--225, 2008. With an appendix by A. Bj\" o rner, Special volume in honor of Melvin Hochster

    2008

  7. [15]

    Stanley-reisner rings for symmetric simplicial complexes, g-semimatroids and abelian arrangements

    Alessio D'ali and Emanuele Delucchi. Stanley-reisner rings for symmetric simplicial complexes, g-semimatroids and abelian arrangements. 2018. arXiv:1804.07366

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Arithmetic matroids, the T utte polynomial and toric arrangements

    Michele D'Adderio and Luca Moci. Arithmetic matroids, the T utte polynomial and toric arrangements. Adv. Math. , 232:335--367, 2013

    2013

  9. [17]

    Suciu, and Sergey Yuzvinsky

    Graham Denham, Alexander I. Suciu, and Sergey Yuzvinsky. Combinatorial covers and vanishing of cohomology. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 22(2):561--594, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Andreas W. M. Dress and Walter Wenzel. Valuated matroids. Adv. Math. , 93(2):214--250, 1992

    1992

  11. [19]

    Commutative Algebra: with a view toward algebraic geometry , volume 150

    David Eisenbud. Commutative Algebra: with a view toward algebraic geometry , volume 150. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  12. [20]

    Matroids over a ring

    Alex Fink and Luca Moci. Matroids over a ring. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) , 18(4):681--731, 2016

    2016

  13. [21]

    Polyhedra and parameter spaces for matroids over valuation rings

    Alex Fink and Luca Moci. Polyhedra and parameter spaces for matroids over valuation rings. Adv. Math. , 343:448--494, 2019

    2019

  14. [22]

    Tropical varieties, maps, and gossip

    Bart Frenk. Tropical varieties, maps, and gossip . PhD thesis, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, 2013. 167 pages, ISBN: 978-90-386-3343-5

    2013

  15. [23]

    Galbraith

    Steven D. Galbraith. Mathematics of public key cryptography . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012

    2012

  16. [24]

    A G rassmann algebra for matroids

    Jeffrey Giansiracusa and Noah Giansiracusa. A G rassmann algebra for matroids. Manuscripta Math. , 156(1-2):187--213, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    On the relation between hyperrings and fuzzy rings

    Jeffrey Giansiracusa, Jaiung Jun, and Oliver Lorscheid. On the relation between hyperrings and fuzzy rings. Beitr. Algebra Geom. , 58(4):735--764, 2017

    2017

  18. [26]

    Grayson and Michael E

    Daniel R. Grayson and Michael E. Stillman. Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry. Available at http://www.math.uiuc.edu/Macaulay2/

  19. [27]

    Uniform semimodular lattices and valuated matroids

    Hiroshi Hirai. Uniform semimodular lattices and valuated matroids. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 165:325--359, 2019

    2019

  20. [28]

    Algebraic geometry over hyperrings

    Jaiung Jun. Algebraic geometry over hyperrings. Adv. Math. , 323:142--192, 2018

    2018

  21. [29]

    Valuations of semirings

    Jaiung Jun. Valuations of semirings. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 222(8):2063--2088, 2018

    2018

  22. [30]

    Anthony W. Knapp. Elliptic curves , volume 40 of Mathematical Notes . Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1992

    1992

  23. [31]

    On the rational homotopy type of configuration spaces

    Igor K r \' z . On the rational homotopy type of configuration spaces. Ann. of Math. (2) , 139(2):227--237, 1994

    1994

  24. [32]

    G - T utte polynomials and abelian L ie group arrangements

    Ye Liu, Tan Nhat Tran, and Masahiko Yoshinaga. G - T utte polynomials and abelian L ie group arrangements. IMRN , 2019

    2019

  25. [33]

    Cohomology of the complement to an elliptic arrangement

    Andrey Levin and Alexander Varchenko. Cohomology of the complement to an elliptic arrangement. In Configuration spaces , volume 14 of CRM Series , pages 373--388. Ed. Norm., Pisa, 2012

    2012

  26. [34]

    The E kedahl invariants for finite groups

    Ivan Martino. The E kedahl invariants for finite groups. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 220(4):1294--1309, 2016

    2016

  27. [35]

    Introduction to the E kedahl invariants

    Ivan Martino. Introduction to the E kedahl invariants. Math. Scand. , 120(2):211--224, 2017

    2017

  28. [36]

    Face module for realizable Z -matroids

    Ivan Martino. Face module for realizable Z -matroids. Contrib. Discrete Math. , 13(2):74--87, 2018

    2018

  29. [37]

    A tutte polynomial for toric arrangements

    Luca Moci. A tutte polynomial for toric arrangements. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 364(2):1067--1088, 2012

    2012

  30. [38]

    A T utte polynomial for toric arrangements

    Luca Moci. A T utte polynomial for toric arrangements. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 364(2):1067--1088, 2012

    2012

  31. [39]

    Combinatorial commutative algebra , volume 227 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    Ezra Miller and Bernd Sturmfels. Combinatorial commutative algebra , volume 227 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer-Verlag, New York, 2005

    2005

  32. [40]

    On exchange axioms for valuated matroids and valuated delta-matroids

    Kazuo Murota. On exchange axioms for valuated matroids and valuated delta-matroids. Combinatorica , 16(4):591--596, 1996

    1996

  33. [41]

    Matroid theory , volume 21 of Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    James Oxley. Matroid theory , volume 21 of Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Oxford University Press, Oxford, second edition, 2011

    2011

  34. [42]

    Orientable arithmetic matroids

    Roberto Pagaria. Orientable arithmetic matroids. 2018. ArXiv:1805.11888

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Poincaré polynomial of elliptic arrangements is not a specialization of the tutte polynomial

    Roberto Pagaria. Poincaré polynomial of elliptic arrangements is not a specialization of the tutte polynomial. ArXiv:1810.06248 , October 2018

    2018 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Isotropical linear spaces and valuated D elta-matroids

    Felipe Rinc\' o n. Isotropical linear spaces and valuated D elta-matroids. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 119(1):14--32, 2012

    2012

  37. [45]

    Richard P. Stanley. An introduction to combinatorial commutative algebra. In Enumeration and design ( W aterloo, O nt., 1982) , pages 3--18. Academic Press, Toronto, ON, 1984

    1982

  38. [46]

    Richard P. Stanley. f -vectors and h -vectors of simplicial posets. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 71(2-3):319--331, 1991

    1991

  39. [47]

    Richard P. Stanley. Combinatorics and commutative algebra , volume 41 of Progress in Mathematics . Birkh\" a user Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, second edition, 1996

    1996

  40. [48]

    Neighborly polytopes and oriented matroids

    Bernd Sturmfels. Neighborly polytopes and oriented matroids. European J. Combin. , 9(6):537--546, 1988

    1988

  41. [49]

    Configuration spaces of algebraic varieties

    Burt Totaro. Configuration spaces of algebraic varieties. Topology , 35(4):1057--1067, 1996

    1996

  42. [50]

    Combinatorics of certain abelian L ie group arrangements and chromatic quasi-polynomials

    Tan Nhat Tran and Masahiko Yoshinaga. Combinatorics of certain abelian L ie group arrangements and chromatic quasi-polynomials. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 165:258--272, 2019

    2019

  43. [51]

    Discriminants in the G rothendieck ring

    Ravi Vakil and Melanie Matchett Wood. Discriminants in the G rothendieck ring. Duke Math. J. , 164(6):1139--1185, 2015

    2015

  44. [52]

    Charles A. Weibel. An introduction to homological algebra , volume 38 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994

    1994

  45. [53]

    On the A bstract P roperties of L inear D ependence

    Hassler Whitney. On the A bstract P roperties of L inear D ependence. Amer. J. Math. , 57(3):509--533, 1935

    1935

  46. [54]

    G\" u nter M. Ziegler. What is a complex matroid? Discrete Comput. Geom. , 10(3):313--348, 1993

    1993

Pith tools

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