Infinite dimensional families of Calabi-Yau threefolds and moduli of vector bundles

Bruno Suzuki; Edoardo Ballico; Elizabeth Gasparim

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Infinite dimensional families of Calabi-Yau threefolds and moduli of vector bundles

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 This paper constructs explicit gluing families showing that the noncompact Calabi-Yau threefold W_k has infinitely many pairwise non-isomorphic deformations for every k>1, and that some of these deformations retain nontrivial moduli…

desk verdict The infinite-deformation claim is solid and the key cohomology computation survives close inspection; the moduli half is real but under-proved. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.01842 v3 pith:AYIH6KXW submitted 2019-09-04 math.AG

Edoardo Ballico , Elizabeth Gasparim , Bruno Suzuki This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AG MSC 32G0532G0832Q25

keywords Calabi-Yauthreefoldsdeformationtheorynoncompactcomplexmanifoldsmoduliofvectorbundlestangentbundlecohomologytotalspacesholomorphicprojectiveline

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 studies noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds built as total spaces of rank-two bundles on the projective line, specifically $W_k=\operatorname{Tot}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(-k)\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(k-2))$. It aims to show that, unlike the surface case where commutative deformations destroy moduli of vector bundles, these threefolds admit infinitely many distinct deformation types, and some of those deformations still carry positive-dimensional moduli spaces of holomorphic vector bundles. The central construction is an explicit family $W_2(y)$ given by a gluing formula with an integer parameter $y$, and the paper proves $W_2(y_1)\cong W_2(y_2)$ only when $y_1=y_2$, yielding infinitely many non-isomorphic deformations of $W_2$. A vector-bundle extension trick then transfers this infinitude to every $W_k$ with $k>1$. If correct, the paper establishes that noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds can have very large deformation spaces, in contrast to the formally rigid case $W_1$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the family of threefolds $W_k$ with canonical gluing of two copies of $\mathbb{C}^3$ by $(\xi,v_1,v_2)=(z^{-1}, z^k u_1, z^{-k+2}u_2)$, together with deformations obtained by modifying the middle coordinate. For $W_2$, the family $W_2(y)$ is defined by the gluing $v_1 = z^2u_1 + z u_2^y$; the argument rests on a direct Čech computation of $H^1(W_2(y), T W_2(y))$, whose generators are cocycles $\sigma_s = (0, z^{-1}u_2^s,0)^T$ and whose dimension $y-1$ is shown by analyzing which monomials can appear as coboundaries. For general $k$, the key mechanism is an extension family of rank-two bundles on $\mathbb{P}^1$ with transition matrix $\begin{pmatrix} z^k & z^q \\ 0 & z^{-k+2}\end{pmatrix}$, whose total-space deformation is isomorphic to $W_q$; this transfers deformations from lower to higher $k$.

What would settle it

Exhibit explicit holomorphic functions $\alpha$ on $U=\mathbb{C}^3$ and $\beta$ on $V=\mathbb{C}^3$ solving $\sigma_s = \alpha + T^{-1}\beta$ for some $0\le s\le y-2$, where $\sigma_s=(0,z^{-1}u_2^s,0)^T$; even one such solution would reduce $h^1(W_2(y),T W_2(y))$ below $y-1$, invalidating the claimed infinitude of deformations.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is that the threefold $W_k=\operatorname{Tot}(\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(-k)\oplus\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(k-2))$ has infinitely many pairwise non-isomorphic deformations whenever $k>1$. For $k=2$, the paper writes deformations $W_2(y)$ by the gluing $(\xi,v_1,v_2)=(z^{-1}, z^2u_1 + z u_2^y, u_2)$ and computes $h^1(W_2(y), T W_2(y)) = y-1$ for $y\ge2$; since this cohomology dimension is an isomorphism invariant, the $W_2(y)$ give infinitely many distinct complex structures. A family of rank-two bundles over $\mathbb{P}^1$ interpolating between $W_k$ and $W_q$ then shows that the deformation of $W_k$ given by $(z^{-1}, z^k u_1 + z^q u_2, z^{-k+2}u_2)$ is isomorphic to $W_q$, so the infinite family for $W_2$ induces infinitely many deformations for every $k>1$. The paper also shows that some of these deformations preserve nontrivial moduli of vector bundles, with dimension decreasing but not collapsing to a point.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that a Laurent-series analysis of the coboundary equation is exhaustive: no holomorphic functions on the two charts can combine to cancel into the monomials $z^{-1}u_2^s$ for $s<y-1$. If such cancellation existed, the dimension count $h^1(W_2(y),T W_2(y))=y-1$ and the pairwise non-isomorphism of the $W_2(y)$ would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For $y\ge2$, the threefolds $W_2(y)$ are pairwise non-isomorphic and non-affine, so a single noncompact Calabi-Yau threefold $W_2$ has infinitely many deformation classes.
For every $k>1$, $W_k$ admits infinitely many non-isomorphic deformations; in particular, the deformation with middle coordinate $z^k u_1 + z^q u_2$ is isomorphic to $W_q$ for $0<q<k$.
The threefold results invert the surface pattern: nontrivial deformations of $W_k$ need not be affine, and they are not obtained by deforming the compactification.
Some deformations of $W_2$ lower the dimension of the moduli space $M_2(W_2)$ from $3$ to at most $2$ without collapsing it, so positive-dimensional moduli of vector bundles can survive deformation.
Since $h^1(W_2(y),T W_2(y))=y-1$, the isomorphism classes in this family can be separated by an integer invariant, making the family a countably infinite set of distinct complex structures.

Reading between the lines

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

One consequence the paper leaves implicit is that the deformation space of a noncompact Calabi-Yau threefold can have at least countably many distinct components, in contrast to the finite-dimensional and usually connected deformation spaces of compact Calabi-Yau threefolds.
The extension-family argument suggests a hierarchy among the $W_k$: each $W_k$ can be deformed down to any $W_q$ with $0<q<k$, so deformation defines a partial order that could be visualised as a directed chain of threefolds.
A natural independent test of the non-isomorphism claim would be to compute higher cohomological or Hodge-theoretic invariants of $W_2(y)$; any such invariant depending on $y$ would corroborate Theorem 1.13 without relying solely on the tangent-cohomology calculation.
The paper's restriction to first-order extension classes when defining moduli spaces leaves open the behaviour of higher-order terms; understanding them could connect this construction to BPS-state counting on toric Calabi-Yau threefolds, a motivation the paper mentions but does not develop.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague,

Quick take: the paper does what it says on the deformation side. The W2(y) family really gives infinitely many pairwise non-isomorphic noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds, and Cor 1.29 follows from Theorems 1.13 and 1.28. I checked the key step in Theorem 1.12 because that is the load-bearing computation, and the stress-test note is right: monomials z^{-1}u2^s cannot appear on the coboundary side for s < y-1. The alpha term is holomorphic, the beta1 term needs nonnegative z-power, the beta2 term has u2-degree at least y, and the beta3 term has degree at least y-1. No hidden cancellation produces the missing monomials. So the main invariant h^1(W2(y), TW2(y)) = y-1 is credible, and the pairwise non-isomorphism is established.

What is genuinely new: the h^1 computation as an isomorphism invariant, the affine-bundle classification for W3(j), and the transfer of infinite deformation families from W2 to all W_k with k > 1. The framework and the base family come from GKRS18, but the non-isomorphism results are new and are not circular. The citation pattern is fine; prior work is credited appropriately.

The soft spots are mostly in Section 2.2, and they are real but not fatal to the main theorem. The passage from quotients of Ext^1 to a coarse moduli space is informal. The text says a small disk around each extension class implies the naive quotient satisfies the definition of coarse moduli, but that is not a proof, and upper semicontinuity does not do the work by itself. Theorem 2.21 also assumes that the deformed Ext^1 is generated by the same four cocycles with only the relations exhibited; Example 2.18 sketches this but does not fully check whether additional generators vanish or extra relations appear. Lemma 2.20 is a solid concrete computation, but it only shows two classes are distinct, which supports nontriviality without giving a full moduli-space construction. Corollary 2.22 is stated without proof; it probably follows by combining Theorem 2.21 with Theorem 1.28, but it needs an explicit argument.

There are also minor typos in Lemmas 1.9 and 1.10 and a few rough edges in the exposition, but none of these threaten the central deformation result. The Laurent-series argument in Theorem 1.12 is terse, and the authors should expand it for the referee, but it is correct as written.

Who is this for? People working on local Calabi-Yau threefolds, deformation theory of noncompact manifolds, or moduli of bundles on local spaces will get real use out of it. It deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send it to peer review, with the expectation of revision. The deformation half should be accepted; the moduli half needs tightening before publication.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper studies noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds W_k = Tot(O_{P^1}(-k) ⊕ O_{P^1}(k-2)), k ≥ 1. The first half constructs explicit deformations W2(y) of W2 by transition functions v1 = z^2 u1 + z u2^y, v2 = u2, and computes H^1(W2(y), T W2(y)), proving that h^1 = y-1 for y ≥ 2 and hence that the W2(y) are pairwise non-isomorphic (Thm. 1.13). It then records a deformation family for W3, proves non-isomorphism of affine-bundle deformations W3(j), constructs holomorphic maps between W2 and W3, and states Cor. 1.29 that W_k has infinitely many distinct deformations for every k > 1. The second half studies rank-2 vector bundles on W_k, describes a 'generic part' of the moduli of extensions, and proves Theorem 2.21 that a deformation of W2 lowers the dimension of M2(W2) while keeping the moduli nontrivial, with Cor. 2.22 asserting that the W_k admit infinitely many deformations, some with nontrivial moduli.

Significance. If the main claims are correct, the paper gives explicit infinite families of non-isomorphic deformations of noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds, contrasting with the surface case, and shows that deformations need not destroy moduli of vector bundles. The cohomology computation for the W2(y) is explicit and checkable, and the deformation families are given by concrete transition functions; these are genuine strengths. The moduli results, if made rigorous, would be an interesting addition. However, the paper currently mixes rigorous computations with informal statements about moduli spaces, and the step from Theorems 1.13 and 1.28 to Cor. 1.29 is only sketched.

major comments (3)

[Section 1.5, Cor. 1.29] The proof of Corollary 1.29 is not written out, and the cited ingredients do not directly imply the statement. Theorem 1.28 shows that for k > q > 0 the particular deformation W_k^q with v1 = z^k u1 + z^q u2 is isomorphic to W_q. For a fixed k there are only finitely many q < k, so combining Theorem 1.28 with Theorem 1.13 does not by itself yield infinitely many distinct deformations of that fixed W_k. What is needed is an explicit family with central fiber W_k and with fibers W2(y) for infinitely many y; the manuscript only sketches this in Example 1.26 and in the sentence preceding Proposition 1.27. Such a family can be written down (for k > 2, for example, v1 = z^k u1 + t z^2 u2 + t^2 z u1^y, v2 = z^{-k+2}u2 + t z^{-k+1}u1^y, which for t = 1 is isomorphic to W2(y) after the coordinate change of Theorem 1.28 with q = 2), and I recommend adding this computation. As it stands, Corollary 1.29 is a claim with a missing proof.
[Section 2.2, Eq. (12) and following paragraph] The paper defines M_j(W_k) as a quotient Ext^1_{W_k}(O(j), O(-j))/~ and then asserts that this quotient satisfies the definition of a coarse moduli space. The argument given in the paragraph after Problem 2.8 ('by upper semicontinuity every element near E_p can also be represented by an element of Ext^1') only shows the existence of local families of extension classes; it does not establish the existence of a scheme or analytic variety structure on the quotient, nor its corepresentability, nor that the dimension used later is well-defined. Since Theorem 2.21 compares dimensions of M2(W2) and M2(W2(τ)), the notion of dimension of these quotients needs a rigorous definition. If the intended meaning is the dimension of the locally closed subset of Ext^1 modulo the automorphism-group action, this should be stated explicitly and proved for the specific spaces used.
[Theorem 2.21, proof] The proof of Theorem 2.21 establishes that two specific bundles, corresponding to the classes z u1 and z u2, are non-isomorphic (using Lemma 2.20). This shows that the moduli set has at least two points, but it does not show that the moduli is positive-dimensional, which is what 'keeping the moduli nontrivial' and the introductory claim T3 require. To conclude a dimension drop from 3 to a positive dimension, one needs to show that a positive-dimensional family of non-isomorphic bundles exists in the deformed moduli, e.g. by proving that a generic linear combination of the remaining generators yields a family of non-isomorphic classes. Please either provide such an argument or weaken the claim to 'contains at least two distinct isomorphism classes'.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract] The word 'explicitily' should be 'explicitly'.
[Lemma 1.9, proof] In the displayed expression for Jσ after the coordinate change, the factor should be (ξ^2 v1 − ξ v2^y)^i, not (ξ^2 v2 − ξ v2^y)^i.
[Lemma 1.10, Case 3] The displayed equality in Case 3 should be 2z u2^s(z u1 + 1) (equivalently 2u2^s(z^2 u1 + z)), not 2u2^s(z^2 u1 + 1); the final conclusion is unaffected.
[Lemma 1.18, proof] In the second entry of the coboundary matrix, the first summand should be 3β1 z u1 rather than 3β1 z^3 u1, and the sign in the third entry should be checked; the stated non-vanishing conclusion is not affected because the β1 terms contain a positive power of u1.
[Section 2.2, Notation 2.5 and Lemma 2.6] The notation M_j(W_k) is used for several different objects (the full quotient, the first-order subset, and the projectivized open part), with M(W_i; j) also appearing; please introduce distinct notation for these objects to make the dimension statements easier to follow.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity: the h^1 computation and the W_k deformation family are self-contained; only minor background self-citations appear.

full rationale

The central non-isomorphism claim is proved by a direct Cech computation in Theorem 1.12. The paper shows that a coboundary equation for sigma_s = [0, z^{-1} u_2^s, 0]^T has, on the right-hand side, no monomials z^{-1} u_1^0 u_2^s with s < y-1: alpha contributes only nonnegative z-powers, the beta_1 term carries u_2-degree at least y, beta_2 carries degree at least y, and only the beta_3 y z^{-1} u_2^{y-1} term reaches the boundary s = y-1. Thus sigma_0, ..., sigma_{y-2} are nonzero and linearly independent, giving h^1 = y-1 without invoking any prior computation of these cohomology groups. The transition defining W2(y) is given directly in Notation 1.8, so the invariant is computed from the paper's own equations. Theorem 1.28 is an explicit matrix change of coordinates identifying the W_k deformation (9) with W_q, and the pullback of W2(y) through that isomorphism is again explicit, with fiber Jacobian exactly z^2; combining it with Theorem 1.13 does not reduce to a fit or to an imported uniqueness theorem. The self-citations that do occur, such as Definition 1.1 from [GKRS18], the deformation family (2) from [GKRS18], and Lemma 1.15 from [GKMR12], are used as background formalism or motivation, not as the load-bearing input to the non-isomorphism proof. There are minor self-citations in the setup, but no equation in the paper equates its output to its input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted parameters or new physical entities. Its main assumptions are the untested definition of deformation for noncompact manifolds and the use of H^1(T) as a source of integrable deformations, both explicitly acknowledged by the authors.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Definition 1.1 of deformation with possibly infinite-dimensional base is the correct framework for noncompact manifolds.
The authors state it is a new definition and that a solid theoretical background is not yet established; the paper's results depend on this notion.
domain assumption Cohomology H^1(W_k, T W_k) provides valid infinitesimal deformations for these noncompact manifolds.
The authors write: 'We will use H1(Wk, TWk) to find deformations of Wk even though we do not know if it will provide all deformations fitting into definition 1.1.'
standard math Grothendieck's existence theorem and Serre duality can be applied to the formal neighborhoods and the noncompact total spaces.
Used in Theorem 2.2 and the computation of gamma_1 in Lemma 2.6.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Infinite dimensional families of Calabi-Yau threefolds and moduli of vector bundles." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AYIH6KXW

@misc{pith2026190901842,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Infinite dimensional families of Calabi-Yau threefolds and moduli of vector bundles},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AYIH6KXW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.01842}
}

read the original abstract

We study noncompact Calabi-Yau threefolds, their moduli spaces of vector bundles and deformation theory. We present Calabi-Yau threefolds that have infinitely many distinct deformations, constructing them explicitily, and describe the effect that such deformations produce on moduli spaces of vector bundles.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1909.01842 by the authors.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Deformations of noncompact Calabi--Yau manifolds, families and diamonds
math.AG 2019-08 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

A survey proposing a C-infinity locally trivial definition of noncompact complex deformations, with examples and Hodge/KKP diamonds from the authors' earlier work.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

18 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Local moduli of holomorphic bundles

Eduardo Ballico, Elizabeth Gasparim, and Thomas K \"o ppe. Local moduli of holomorphic bundles. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 213(4):397--408, 2009

work page 2009
[2]

Classical deformations of noncompact surfaces and their moduli of instantons

Severin Barmeier and Elizabeth Gasparim. Classical deformations of noncompact surfaces and their moduli of instantons. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 223(6):2543--2561, 2019

work page 2019
[3]

Quantizations of local surfaces and rebel instantons

Severin Barmeier and Elizabeth Gasparim. Quantizations of local surfaces and rebel instantons. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.09455 , 2019

work page Pith review arXiv 1904
[4]

Moduli stacks of bundles on local surfaces

Oren Ben-Bassat and Elizabeth Gasparim. Moduli stacks of bundles on local surfaces. In Homological Mirror Symmetry and Tropical Geometry , pages 1--32. Springer, 2014

work page 2014
[5]

Kodaira-spencer theory of gravity

Michael Bershadsky. Kodaira-spencer theory of gravity. In Quantum Field Theory and String Theory , pages 23--38. Springer, 1995

work page 1995
[6]

Holomorphic bundles on O (-k) are algebraic

Elizabeth Gasparim. Holomorphic bundles on O (-k) are algebraic. Communications in Algebra , 25(9):3001--3009, 1997

work page 1997
[7]

Bps state counting on singular varieties

Elizabeth Gasparim, Thomas K \"o ppe, Pushan Majumdar, and Koushik Ray. Bps state counting on singular varieties. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , 45(26):265401, 2012

work page 2012
[8]

Deformations of noncompact calabi-yau threefolds

Elizabeth Gasparim, Thomas K \"o ppe, Francisco Rubilar, and Bruno Suzuki. Deformations of noncompact calabi-yau threefolds. Revista Colombiana de Matem \'a ticas , 52(1):41--57, 2018

work page 2018

Show all 18 references

[9]

Topological string partition function on generalised conifolds

Elizabeth Gasparim, Bruno Suzuki, Alexander Torres-Gomez, and Carlos AB Varea. Topological string partition function on generalised conifolds. Journal of Mathematical Physics , 58(4):042303, 2017

2017
[10]

Affine manifolds, log structures, and mirror symmetry

Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert. Affine manifolds, log structures, and mirror symmetry. Turkish Journal of Mathematics , 27(1):33--60, 2003

2003
[11]

\'E l \'e ments de g \'e om \'e trie alg \'e brique: Iii

Alexander Grothendieck. \'E l \'e ments de g \'e om \'e trie alg \'e brique: Iii. \'e tude cohomologique des faisceaux coh \'e rents, premi \`e re partie. Publications Math \'e matiques de l'IH \'E S , 11:5--167, 1961

1961
[12]

Algebraic geometry , volume 52

Robin Hartshorne. Algebraic geometry , volume 52. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

2013
[13]

Contraction of nonsingular curves

Jes \'u s Jim \'e nez et al. Contraction of nonsingular curves. Duke Mathematical Journal , 65(2):313--332, 1992

1992
[14]

Complex manifolds and deformation of complex structures

Kunihiko Kodaira. Complex manifolds and deformation of complex structures . Springer, 2006

2006
[15]

Moduli of bundles on local surfaces and threefolds

Thomas K\"oppe. Moduli of bundles on local surfaces and threefolds . PhD thesis, The University of Edinburgh, 2010

2010
[16]

Deformations of complex orbifolds and the period maps

Kefeng Liu and Xiaobo Zhuang. Deformations of complex orbifolds and the period maps. Science China Mathematics , pages 1--18, 2018

2018
[17]

Deformaciones de estructuras complejas de 3-variedades calabi--yau

Francisco Rubilar. Deformaciones de estructuras complejas de 3-variedades calabi--yau. Master's thesis, Universidad Cat\'olica del Norte, 2017

2017
[18]

Theory of moduli

CS Seshadri. Theory of moduli. Algebraic Geometry, Arcata , pages 263--304, 1975

1975

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Local moduli of holomorphic bundles

Eduardo Ballico, Elizabeth Gasparim, and Thomas K \"o ppe. Local moduli of holomorphic bundles. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 213(4):397--408, 2009

work page 2009

[2] [2]

Classical deformations of noncompact surfaces and their moduli of instantons

Severin Barmeier and Elizabeth Gasparim. Classical deformations of noncompact surfaces and their moduli of instantons. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 223(6):2543--2561, 2019

work page 2019

[3] [3]

Quantizations of local surfaces and rebel instantons

Severin Barmeier and Elizabeth Gasparim. Quantizations of local surfaces and rebel instantons. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.09455 , 2019

work page Pith review arXiv 1904

[4] [4]

Moduli stacks of bundles on local surfaces

Oren Ben-Bassat and Elizabeth Gasparim. Moduli stacks of bundles on local surfaces. In Homological Mirror Symmetry and Tropical Geometry , pages 1--32. Springer, 2014

work page 2014

[5] [5]

Kodaira-spencer theory of gravity

Michael Bershadsky. Kodaira-spencer theory of gravity. In Quantum Field Theory and String Theory , pages 23--38. Springer, 1995

work page 1995

[6] [6]

Holomorphic bundles on O (-k) are algebraic

Elizabeth Gasparim. Holomorphic bundles on O (-k) are algebraic. Communications in Algebra , 25(9):3001--3009, 1997

work page 1997

[7] [7]

Bps state counting on singular varieties

Elizabeth Gasparim, Thomas K \"o ppe, Pushan Majumdar, and Koushik Ray. Bps state counting on singular varieties. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , 45(26):265401, 2012

work page 2012

[8] [8]

Deformations of noncompact calabi-yau threefolds

Elizabeth Gasparim, Thomas K \"o ppe, Francisco Rubilar, and Bruno Suzuki. Deformations of noncompact calabi-yau threefolds. Revista Colombiana de Matem \'a ticas , 52(1):41--57, 2018

work page 2018