RECORD
Quantum Lefschetz theorem revisited
Algebraic Geometry · Submitted 8 May 2023
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim This confirms a prediction from Coates-Corti-Iritani-Tseng about the genus zero quantum Lefschetz theorem beyond convexity.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
Let $X$ be any smooth Deligne-Mumford stack with projective coarse moduli, and $Y$ be a smooth complete intersection in $X$ associated with a direct sum of semi-positive line bundles. We will introduce a useful and broad class known as admissible series for discussing quantum Lefschetz theorem. For any admissible series on the Givental's Lagrangian cone of $X$, we will show that a hypergeometric modification of the series lies on the Lagrangian cone of $Y$. This confirms a prediction from Coates-Corti-Iritani-Tseng about the genus zero quantum Lefschetz theorem beyond convexity. In our quantum Lefschetz theorem, we use extended variables to formulate the hypergeometric modification, which may be of self-independent interest.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | Let $X$ be any smooth Deligne-Mumford stack with projective coarse moduli, and $Y$ be a smooth complete intersection in $X$ associated with a direct sum of semi-positive line bundles. | background 0.99 | 0.10 | 0.02 | asserted 0.66 |
| s1 | We will introduce a useful and broad class known as admissible series for discussing quantum Lefschetz theorem. | contribution 0.89 | 0.86 | 0.05 | asserted 0.97 |
| s2 | For any admissible series on the Givental's Lagrangian cone of $X$, we will show that a hypergeometric modification of the series lies on the Lagrangian cone of $Y$. | result 0.91 | 0.94 | 0.72 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | This confirms a prediction from Coates-Corti-Iritani-Tseng about the genus zero quantum Lefschetz theorem beyond convexity. | interpretation 0.84 | 0.63 | 0.67 | asserted 1.00 |
| s4 | In our quantum Lefschetz theorem, we use extended variables to formulate the hypergeometric modification, which may be of self-independent interest. | method 0.64 | 0.91 | 0.04 | hedged possibility 0.94 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v3
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
Let $X$ be any smooth Deligne-Mumford stack with projective coarse moduli, and $Y$ be a smooth complete intersection in $X$ associated with a direct sum of semi-positive line bundles. We will introduce a useful and broad class known as admissible series for discussing quantum Lefschetz theorem. For any admissible series on the Givental's Lagrangian cone of $X$, we will show that a hypergeometric modification of the series lies on the Lagrangian cone of $Y$. This confirms a prediction from Coates-Corti-Iritani-Tseng about the genus zero quantum Lefschetz theorem beyond convexity. In our quantum Lefschetz theorem, we use extended variables to formulate the hypergeometric modification, which may be of self-independent interest.
Human review
How the literature uses it
1 arXiv paper cite this in 1 sentence
Papers citing it
Compares with it 1 paper
-
In a closely related independent approach, Wang [ref] also circumvents the convexity issues for complete intersections in toric stacks, showing that the a big $I$-function obtained from quasimap theory gives a slice of the Lagrangian cone in this case.
Gromov--Witten Invariants of Non-Convex Complete Intersections in Weighted Projective Stacks · Related Works · 0.89
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.