Line Bundle Resolutions via the Coherent-Constructible Correspondence

David Favero; Mykola Sapronov

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 17 references

Line Bundle Resolutions via the Coherent-Constructible Correspondence

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A finite toric morphism's pushforward of the structure sheaf admits a minimal line bundle resolution of length equal to the codimension, with every Betti number given by compactly supported cohomology of a cube stratum intersected with…

desk verdict A genuinely useful toric geometry paper: minimal resolutions with explicit topological Betti numbers, but the proof rests on a chain of imported equivalences where Proposition 4.9 deserves close scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.17873 v1 pith:NAGBFFA3 submitted 2024-11-26 math.AG

David Favero , Mykola Sapronov This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AG MSC 14M2514F0813D0216G2055N30

keywords toricvarietieslinebundleresolutionsCoherent-ConstructibleCorrespondencehomologicalmirrorsymmetryconstructiblesheavesentrancepathalgebrasBettinumbersfinitemorphisms

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 establishes that minimal resolutions of coherent sheaves on smooth projective toric varieties can be read off from the topology of a mirror real torus. For any coherent sheaf, it produces a minimal resolution by sums of line bundles from a finite collection introduced by Bondal, up to a common twist, with length at most the dimension of the variety. For a structure sheaf pushed forward along a finite toric morphism of codimension $k$, the resolution has length exactly $k$, and each Betti number is the dimension of a compactly supported cohomology group of one cube-stratum of the mirror torus intersected with the zero fiber of the dual map on tori. The upshot is that syzygies of toric subvarieties become topological counts, and the earlier cellular resolutions of [HHL23] appear as the non-minimal cellular version of the same construction.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the commuting triangle of Theorem 3.14, which identifies the derived category of coherent sheaves on $X_\Sigma$, the category of constructible sheaves on the mirror torus with singular support in the cube skeleton $\Lambda^c$, and the derived category of modules over the entrance path algebra $A_{\mathrm{Ent}}$ of the cube stratification. Under this equivalence, line bundles $O(-a)$ correspond to indecomposable projectives $P_{[a]}$, the left and right wrapping functors move between the smaller singular-support category of the Coherent–Constructible Correspondence and the larger stratified category, and right wrapping preserves co-probe sheaves. For pushforwards, the mirror of $u_*O$ is $v_!\mathbb{C}_{\{0\}}$; Proposition 4.11 shows this object is represented, after a Serre twist and exodromy, by a pure module over $A_{\mathrm{Ent}}$, so its minimal projective resolution exists and transfers back to a minimal line bundle resolution. The Betti numbers are then Ext groups, computed as compactly supported cohomology of the strata intersections.

What would settle it

Compute the minimal resolution of the normalization module $N=\mathbb{C}[x_0,x_1,x_2,t]/(tx_1-x_0x_2,\,tx_0-x_1^2,\,t^2-x_1x_2)$ as a module over the Cox ring of $\mathbb{P}^2$, arising from the finite toric morphism $u:\mathbb{P}^1\to\mathbb{P}^2$ with lattice map $(a)\mapsto(2a,3a)$. Since $\dim\mathbb{P}^2-\dim\mathbb{P}^1=1$, the theorem predicts exactly the two-term complex $O(-2)^{\oplus 2}\to O(-1)\oplus O\to u_*O_{\mathbb{P}^1}$; any extra term, any missing summand, or a minimal resolution of length different from $1$ would refute Theorem 4.13.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is a mirror-symmetry formula for minimal resolutions. Theorem 4.13 states that for a finite toric morphism $u:X_{\Sigma_1}\to X_{\Sigma_2}$ of smooth projective toric varieties, the pushforward $u_*O_{X_{\Sigma_1}}$ admits a minimal resolution by sums of line bundles of length $k=\dim X_{\Sigma_2}-\dim X_{\Sigma_1}$, and the multiplicity of $O(-a)$ in the $i$-th term is $\beta_{i,-a}=\dim H^i_c(S^c_{[a]}\cap V)$, where $V$ is the zero fiber of the dual map on tori and $S^c_{[a]}$ are the strata of the cube stratification of the mirror torus. The same mechanism gives, for an arbitrary coherent sheaf, a minimal line bundle resolution of length at most $n$ after a twist by a sufficiently high power of an ample line bundle. The proof transfers the sheaf across the non-equivariant Coherent–Constructible Correspondence, views it as a module over the entrance path algebra of the stratified torus, and resolves that module; minimality and the length bound come from the finite-dimensional algebra's homological dimension.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the mirror-symmetry bridge is lossless: the non-equivariant Coherent–Constructible Correspondence and the exodromy identification with entrance-path-algebra modules are imported as black boxes, so if either equivalence fails for the toric varieties considered, the topological Betti formula would not transfer back to resolutions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any coherent sheaf on a smooth projective $n$-dimensional toric variety admits a minimal resolution by sums of line bundles from the finite collection, after a sufficiently high twist, with length at most $n$.
For a finite toric morphism of smooth projective toric varieties, the pushforward of the structure sheaf admits a minimal line bundle resolution of length exactly the codimension $k$.
The multiplicities in that resolution are topological invariants: $\beta_{i,-a}=\dim H^i_c(S^c_{[a]}\cap V)$, so Betti numbers can be computed from compactly supported cohomology on the mirror torus.
Whenever the singular-support skeleton equals the cube skeleton, for example on projective space and products of projective spaces, the minimal resolution is unique and hence irreducible.
The cellular resolutions of [HHL23] are recovered as the non-minimal CW version of this construction, and Frobenius pushforwards decompose as direct sums of line bundles.

Reading between the lines

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

The Betti formula suggests a practical algorithm that avoids constructing differentials first: triangulate the stratified torus, intersect with $V$, compute $H^i_c$ of each stratum intersection, and assemble the terms of the minimal resolution; this could be benchmarked against direct computer algebra computations of syzygies.
Because a generically finite toric morphism factors as a birational map followed by a finite one, the same mirror mechanism may yield minimal resolutions for birational pushforwards, with a length bound that adds a correction to the codimension; the paper does not work out this case.
The uniqueness that holds when $\Lambda_\Sigma=\Lambda^c$ suggests that on projective space and products of projective spaces, minimal line bundle resolutions are canonical invariants of coherent sheaves; comparing them across toric embeddings may yield a toric analogue of multigraded Betti tables.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

Punchline: this is a solid paper with genuine new results, but the topological Betti formula depends on a chain of imported equivalences where the weakest link is Proposition 4.9. I'd send it to a careful referee.

The genuinely new content is not Theorem 1.1—the paper itself says that length-at-most-n resolutions were already accessible from Hanlon–Hicks–Lazarev. The new content is minimality, the exact formula β_{i,-a} = dim H^i_c(S^c_[a] ∩ V), the uniqueness when the skeleton equality holds, and the recovery of the HHL resolutions as a cellular refinement. They also give worked examples, including an independent Macaulay2 check for the cubic, which is real evidence. The writing is clear and honest about what is imported.

The soft spot is the bridge. The main theorem converts a topological computation on the mirror torus into an algebraic resolution via four imported equivalences: Zhou's non-equivariant CCC, the exodromy identification with modules over the entrance path algebra, the wrapping adjunction, and the functoriality statement for finite toric morphisms (Proposition 4.9). The paper does not reprove these; it uses them as black boxes. The least locally justified step is Proposition 4.9, which asserts κ₂ ∘ u_* = v_! ∘ κ₁ and is proven by bootstrapping from Treumann's functoriality after two duality twists. The proof does not display the sign and shift bookkeeping; an error there would shift or permute the Betti numbers rather than merely lengthen the resolution. That is a load-bearing assumption, and the examples do not remove it. The cellular resolution of §4.5 also has a somewhat sketchy argument about the number of adjacent cells, though the examples check out.

None of this is an internal inconsistency. The paper is not circular: the topological formula is derived from established equivalences, not assumed. The self-citations to Favero–Huang are to published, independently proven theorems, so that alone is not a concern.

Who is this for? Researchers in toric geometry, syzygies, and homological mirror symmetry. It gives an explicit formula for Betti numbers that was not available before. I would bring it to a reading group and would cite it if I worked in the area.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. Ask a referee with real expertise in stratified sheaves and toric geometry to check Proposition 4.9, and ask the authors to expand the sign/shift bookkeeping there. The paper deserves referee time.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies minimal resolutions of coherent sheaves on smooth projective toric varieties by sums of line bundles from Bondal's finite collection Φ. The main results are Theorem 4.4, which gives a minimal resolution of length at most n for any coherent sheaf, and Theorem 4.13, which for a finite toric morphism u:XΣ1→XΣ2 gives a minimal resolution of u_*O_{XΣ1} of length k=dim XΣ2−dim XΣ1 with multiplicities β_{i,-a}=dim H^i_c(S^c_[a]∩V), where V is the zero fiber of the dual map on tori. The proof passes through Zhou's non-equivariant Coherent-Constructible Correspondence, the Favero–Huang exodromy identification with entrance path algebras, and wrapping functors between singular-support categories. A secondary result recovers the cellular resolutions of Hanlon–Hicks–Lazarev from a non-minimal injective resolution of the constant sheaf on V.

Significance. If correct, the paper gives a striking and useful bridge from topology to explicit minimal resolutions: the Betti numbers of the resolution of u_*O_{XΣ1} are computed by compactly supported cohomology of the cube stratification intersected with a subtorus. This generalizes and improves the Hanlon–Hicks–Lazarev resolutions, and Theorem 4.4 strengthens known bounds via the pdim bound of Favero–Huang. The main formulas are concrete and falsifiable, and the examples, including the Macaulay2 check for the normalization of the cubic, support the claimed terms. The chief weaknesses are the heavy reliance on imported equivalences and the terse, notationally inconsistent treatment of the functoriality of the mirror functor, which is load-bearing for the transfer of the topological Betti numbers.

major comments (4)

[§4.3, Proposition 4.9 and equation (13)] The functoriality statement for finite toric morphisms is not written in a mathematically well-formed way. The map v is defined as v:M2,R/M2→M1,R/M1, so v_! is a pushforward from T^{n2} to T^{n1}. The expression v_!j_{0*}C_0 applies v_! to a sheaf on T^{n1}, which is not a valid composition. The proof also asserts that the right adjoint of v_! is ρR∘v_!, which is not a standard adjunction and is not justified. The intended statement is presumably that the mirror of u_*O_{XΣ1} is the pullback (up to the appropriate shift) of the skyscraper at 0 along v, i.e., the constant sheaf on V. Because this step transfers the topological computation into the algebraic resolution, the direction and the sign/shift bookkeeping must be corrected and proved explicitly.
[§4.3, proof of Proposition 4.11] The purity argument for MΣ1 uses the equality t! = t* 'since t is proper by Proposition 2.21', but Proposition 2.21 only asserts that exit spaces are closed and contractible; it does not state compactness or properness. For the cube stratification the exit spaces are in fact compact polytopes under the strong convexity assumption, but this needs to be stated and proved. If an exit space were unbounded, the compactly supported cohomology computation that proves concentration in degree 0 would fail. This is a load-bearing step because it is how the paper concludes that MΣ1 is quasi-isomorphic to a pure module.
[§4.3, proof of Theorem 4.13, equations (17)-(18)] The Betti-number computation conflates Hom in the derived category with the graded Hom complex. Equation (17) correctly asks for Ext^i(MΣ1,S[a]), but the following chain computes Hom_{D(mod-A)}(MΣ1,S[a]) and then concludes β_{i,-a}=dim H^i_c(S^c_[a]∩V). To make this valid, the chain should be an isomorphism of graded vector spaces, with the Serre-functor step accompanied by the appropriate shift. The final formula may be correct, but the homological-degree bookkeeping needs to be written out precisely; as it stands, the displayed equalities do not directly imply the claimed Ext computation.
[§4.5, Proposition 4.25] The proof of acyclicity of the cellular injective complex relies on the assertion that every (k−1)-cell in the induced CW structure on V is contained in the closure of exactly two k-cells. This is true for a regular CW decomposition of a closed manifold, but the induced stratification of a subtorus is only introduced in §2.3; Proposition 2.8 establishes the CW properties for the torus T^n, not for the induced stratification of V. Since Example 2.11 shows that strata of a subtorus can have multiple connected components, the frontier axiom and regularity for S^V_cw should be proved before this assertion is used. This affects both the length bound in Theorem 4.13 and the recovery of the Hanlon–Hicks–Lazarev resolutions.

minor comments (4)

[§1 and throughout] There are many typos and minor grammatical errors: 'Strumfels' should be 'Sturmfels', 'Hirzerbruch' should be 'Hirzebruch', 'verticies' should be 'vertices', 'morpshism' should be 'morphism', and 'startiﬁcation' should be 'stratiﬁcation'. A careful proofreading pass is needed.
[§1, paragraph on Bayer–Peeva–Sturmfels] The sentence about 'the pioneering work of Bayer, Strumfels, and Peeva' does not cite the correct reference; the citation [BHS21] is the Bruce–Heller–Sayrafi paper, not the monomial-ideal resolution work. The appropriate reference should be added.
[§4.3, Example 4.17] The phrase 'the zero-dimensional stratum has a trivial intersection' is ambiguous: if the intersection is a single point, the compactly supported cohomology is indeed one-dimensional in degree 0, but 'trivial' normally means empty. Please rephrase.
[§4.3, Proposition 4.11] The notation MΣ1[a] is used before the module value at a vertex is defined; a short sentence explaining that this is the stalk at the vertex [a] would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the topological Betti formula is derived from imported equivalences, not assumed.

full rationale

Theorem 4.13 does not define its Betti numbers to be the compactly supported cohomology groups; it computes them as Ext groups over the entrance-path algebra and then identifies those Ext groups topologically via the exodromy equivalence, Serre duality, and proper base change (Eq. 17–18 and the “same argument as in Proposition 4.11”). The existence of the line-bundle resolution is obtained by taking a minimal projective resolution of the module MΣ over the finite-dimensional algebra A_Ent and applying −⊗_A T, using the commuting diagram in Theorem 3.14 and Corollary 3.15. None of these steps presupposes the formula β_{i,−a} = dim H^i_c(S^c_[a] ∩ V); the formula is the output of the computation. The load-bearing inputs—Zhou’s non-equivariant CCC, Favero–Huang exodromy and homological-dimension bounds, Treumann’s functoriality, and Kuo’s wrapping adjunction—are external results with separate proofs and stated assumptions that do not include the present theorem. Although FH22/FH23 share an author, they are not consequences of this paper and are used as independent published theorems. The examples are checked against known Koszul and Macaulay2 resolutions, but the general claim is not fitted to those examples. The least-checked step, Proposition 4.9’s functoriality for finite toric morphisms, is a correctness risk rather than a circularity, since an error there would invalidate the transfer of the topological computation without making it an input. Accordingly the paper receives no circularity flags.

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

No free numerical parameters are fitted; choices such as an ample line bundle L, an integer N, and orientations of CW cells are arbitrary but do not affect the Betti numbers. The main external inputs are the CCC, exodromy, and pdim bounds, all drawn from prior published work. No new unobserved particles, forces, or unexplained entities are introduced.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Non-equivariant Coherent-Constructible Correspondence for smooth projective toric varieties (κ: Coh(XΣ) ≃ Sh(Tn,ΛΣ)).
Invoked as Theorem 3.4, cited to Zhou [Zho17, Theorem 2]. The entire transfer of resolutions from the torus to XΣ depends on this equivalence.
domain assumption Functoriality of Treumann's mirror functor under finite toric morphisms, giving u_* ↔ v_! commuting diagrams.
Used in Propositions 4.9 and 4.10 to identify κ_2(u_*O_Σ1) with ρ^R(v_!j_{0*}C_0); cited to [Tre10, Prop 2.5].
domain assumption Exodromy equivalence Sh_S(Tn) ≃ mod-A_Ent and identification of probe/co-probe sheaves with projectives/injectives.
Proposition 2.35 cites [FH22, Prop 4.14]; Proposition 3.8 uses it to identify the Λc category with derived modules over AEnt.
domain assumption Projective dimension bound pdim(A_Ent) ≤ dimension of the stratified torus.
Proposition 2.38 cites [FH23, Cor 3.6]; this gives the length bound n in Theorem 4.4 and k in Theorem 4.13.
domain assumption Generation of Sh(Tn,Λc) by pure probe sheaves.
Cited to [Zho17, Theorem 2] in the proof of Proposition 3.8; needed to turn the fully faithful inclusion into an equivalence.
standard math Standard homological algebra: Serre vanishing, Serre duality, proper base change, Verdier duality.
Used throughout §3 and §4 without proof; routine in the intended audience.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Line Bundle Resolutions via the Coherent-Constructible Correspondence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NAGBFFA3

@misc{pith2026241117873,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Line Bundle Resolutions via the Coherent-Constructible Correspondence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NAGBFFA3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.17873}
}

abstract

We consider a finite collection of line bundles $\Phi$ introduced by Bondal on a smooth, projective toric variety $X$. For any coherent sheaf $F$ on $X$, we construct minimal resolutions of $F$ by line bundles in $\Phi$, up to twist, with length bounded by the dimension of $X$ and provide explicit formulae for their Betti numbers. For a toric subvariety $Y \subset X$ of codimension $k$, we give a construction of the minimal resolution of $f_{*}\mathcal{O}_{Y}$ of length $k$ by line bundles in $\Phi$ and relate their Betti numbers to the topology of a stratified real torus. Additionally, we recover a (generally non-minimal) cellular resolution of $f_{*}\mathcal{O}_{Y}$ constructed in Hanlon-Hicks-Lazarev. Aspects of our proof run through the Coherent Constructible Correspondence, a form of homological mirror symmetry for toric varieties.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

[1]

Christine Berkesch, Daniel Erman and Gregory G. Smith. Virtual Resolutions for a Product of Projective Spaces, 2017, Algebraic Geometry, 7 (2020) no. 4, 460-481; arXiv:1703.07631. DOI: 10.14231/AG-2020-013

work page Pith review arXiv 2020
[2]

A categorification of Morelli's theorem

Bohan Fang, Chiu-Chu Melissa Liu, David Treumann, Eric Zaslow. A categorification of Morelli's theorem. Invent. Math. 186 (2011), no.1, 79-114

work page 2011
[3]

3 (2006), 284-286

Alexey Bondal Derived categories of toric varieties Oberwolfach Rep. 3 (2006), 284-286

work page 2006
[4]

Characterizing Multigraded Regularity and Virtual Resolutions on Products of Projective Spaces, 2021; arXiv:2110.10705

Juliette Bruce, Lauren Cranton Heller and Mahrud Sayrafi. Characterizing Multigraded Regularity and Virtual Resolutions on Products of Projective Spaces, 2021; arXiv:2110.10705

arXiv 2021
[5]

Sheaves, Cosheaves and Applications, 2013; arXiv:1303.3255

Justin Curry. Sheaves, Cosheaves and Applications, 2013; arXiv:1303.3255

arXiv 2013
[6]

Homotopy Path Algebras, 2022; arXiv:2205.03730

David Favero and Jesse Huang. Homotopy Path Algebras, 2022; arXiv:2205.03730

arXiv 2022
[7]

Rouquier dimension is Krull dimension for normal toric varieties

David Favero and Jesse Huang. Rouquier dimension is Krull dimension for normal toric varieties, 2023, Eur. J. Math. 9, 91 (2023); arXiv:2302.09158. DOI: 10.1007/s40879-023-00686-1

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[8]

Fulton, Introduction to toric varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies 131, Princeton University Press, 1993

W. Fulton, Introduction to toric varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies 131, Princeton University Press, 1993

work page 1993

Show all 17 references

[9]

Zelevinsky Discriminants, Resultants, and Multidimensional Determinants; 1994

Izrail Moiseevich Gelfand and Mikhail Kapranov and Andrey V. Zelevinsky Discriminants, Resultants, and Multidimensional Determinants; 1994

1994
[10]

Green and Øyvind Solberg

Edward L. Green and Øyvind Solberg. An algorithmic approach to resolutions, 2005, Journal of Symbolic Computation, vol. 42, 11-12 (2007) 1012-1033, Non-commutative Grobner bases and applications; arXiv:math/0509020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsc.2007.05.002

2007 arXiv
[11]

Resolutions of toric subvarieties by line bundles and applications, 2023; arXiv:2303.03763

Andrew Hanlon, Jeff Hicks and Oleg Lazarev. Resolutions of toric subvarieties by line bundles and applications, 2023; arXiv:2303.03763

2023 arXiv
[12]

Variation of GIT and Variation of Lagrangian Skeletons II: Quasi-Symmetric Case, 2020, Adv

Jesse Huang and Peng Zhou. Variation of GIT and Variation of Lagrangian Skeletons II: Quasi-Symmetric Case, 2020, Adv. Math. (2022); arXiv:2011.06114

2022 arXiv
[13]

Wrapped sheaves, 2021, Advances in Mathematics 415 (2023): 108882; arXiv:2102.06791

Christopher Kuo. Wrapped sheaves, 2021, Advances in Mathematics 415 (2023): 108882; arXiv:2102.06791. DOI: 10.1016/j.aim.2023.108882

2023 arXiv
[14]

The nonequivariant coherent-constructible correspondence for toric stacks, 2016, Duke Math

Tatsuki Kuwagaki. The nonequivariant coherent-constructible correspondence for toric stacks, 2016, Duke Math. J. 169, no. 11 (2020), 2125-2197; arXiv:1610.03214. DOI: 10.1215/00127094-2020-0011

2020 arXiv
[15]

Frobenius direct images of line bundles on toric varieties Journal of Algebra 226.2 (2000), pp

Jesper Funch Thomsen. Frobenius direct images of line bundles on toric varieties Journal of Algebra 226.2 (2000), pp. 865–874

2000
[16]

David Treumann, Remarks on the nonequivariant coherent-constructible correspondence for toric varieties, arXiv preprint arXiv:1006.5756 (2010)

2010 arXiv
[17]

Twisted Polytope Sheaves and Coherent-Constructible Correspondence for Toric Varieties, 2017; arXiv:1701.00689

Peng Zhou. Twisted Polytope Sheaves and Coherent-Constructible Correspondence for Toric Varieties, 2017; arXiv:1701.00689

2017 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Christine Berkesch, Daniel Erman and Gregory G. Smith. Virtual Resolutions for a Product of Projective Spaces, 2017, Algebraic Geometry, 7 (2020) no. 4, 460-481; arXiv:1703.07631. DOI: 10.14231/AG-2020-013

work page Pith review arXiv 2020

[2] [2]

A categorification of Morelli's theorem

Bohan Fang, Chiu-Chu Melissa Liu, David Treumann, Eric Zaslow. A categorification of Morelli's theorem. Invent. Math. 186 (2011), no.1, 79-114

work page 2011

[3] [3]

3 (2006), 284-286

Alexey Bondal Derived categories of toric varieties Oberwolfach Rep. 3 (2006), 284-286

work page 2006

[4] [4]

Characterizing Multigraded Regularity and Virtual Resolutions on Products of Projective Spaces, 2021; arXiv:2110.10705

Juliette Bruce, Lauren Cranton Heller and Mahrud Sayrafi. Characterizing Multigraded Regularity and Virtual Resolutions on Products of Projective Spaces, 2021; arXiv:2110.10705

arXiv 2021

[5] [5]

Sheaves, Cosheaves and Applications, 2013; arXiv:1303.3255

Justin Curry. Sheaves, Cosheaves and Applications, 2013; arXiv:1303.3255

arXiv 2013

[6] [6]

Homotopy Path Algebras, 2022; arXiv:2205.03730

David Favero and Jesse Huang. Homotopy Path Algebras, 2022; arXiv:2205.03730

arXiv 2022

[7] [7]

Rouquier dimension is Krull dimension for normal toric varieties

David Favero and Jesse Huang. Rouquier dimension is Krull dimension for normal toric varieties, 2023, Eur. J. Math. 9, 91 (2023); arXiv:2302.09158. DOI: 10.1007/s40879-023-00686-1

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[8] [8]

Fulton, Introduction to toric varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies 131, Princeton University Press, 1993

W. Fulton, Introduction to toric varieties, Annals of Mathematics Studies 131, Princeton University Press, 1993

work page 1993