Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Cluster algebras and quantum cohomology rings: A-type

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The $A_n$ cluster algebra embeds injectively into the equivariant quantum cohomology ring of a partial flag variety, and all-genus Seiberg duality holds for A-type quiver mutations.

desk verdict Strong, plausible results, but the omitted proof of Lemma 2.16 makes the all-genus Seiberg duality theorem conditional. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.00394 v2 pith:HVTUIRHR submitted 2024-12-31 math.AG math.RT

Weiqiang He , Yingchun Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.RT MSC 13F6014N3514M15
keywords clusteralgebrasquantumcohomologyquivervarietiesGromov-WitteninvariantsSeibergdualityflagmutationsequivariantlocalization
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 two things about A-type quivers. The first is that the $A_n$ cluster algebra embeds into the equivariant quantum cohomology ring of the partial flag variety $Fl(N_1,\dots,N_{n+1})$, extended by a formal variable $t$: each initial cluster variable is sent to a Chern polynomial of a tautological bundle, and each non-initial cluster variable to a Chern polynomial of a quotient bundle $S_j/S_i$, with signs and $\xi$-factors chosen so that the cluster exchange relations become quantum product relations. The second is the all-genus Seiberg duality conjecture for every quiver with potential mutation-equivalent to an $A_n$ quiver: the Gromov–Witten invariants of the critical locus of the mutated potential coincide with those of the flag variety once insertions and curve classes are matched. A sympathetic reading is that cluster variables are not formal symbols but actual cohomology classes, and that quiver mutation is an invariance symmetry of all genera, not just genus zero. The paper also proposes a general conjecture extending this cluster-algebra-in-quantum-cohomology construction to arbitrary quivers with potential.

What carries the argument

Two mechanisms carry the paper. The first is the comparison of Gromov–Witten invariants by torus localization: after Lemma 2.16 identifies the critical locus $Z$ of the potential as a complete intersection defined by equations $A_{v_1}A_{v_2}=0$ inside a binary-tree quiver variety, Lemma 4.7 gives a canonical bijection $\varphi: Z^S \to (Z')^S$ between finite torus-fixed sets, Proposition 4.15 extends it to one-dimensional orbit closures, and Proposition 4.16 shows flag weights are exactly preserved; the decorated-graph localization formula then forces the all-genus invariants to agree term by term. The second is the abelian/nonabelian correspondence for quantum cohomology, which reduces the needed identities on the flag variety to explicit relations in the abelianized toric variety; the output is the quantum cohomological cluster exchange relation above, which matches the cluster exchange relation after the sign and $\xi$-factors are absorbed.

What would settle it

Compute, for the $A_3$-mutation-equivalent quiver of Example 2.17 with decorations $N_1<N_2<N_3<N_4$, the torus-fixed locus from the equations $A_1A_2=0$, $A_2B=0$, $BA_1=0$ under the stability condition $\sigma_1>0$, $\sigma_2<0$, $\sigma_3+\sigma_2>0$, and verify Lemma 4.6's description of fixed points and Lemma 4.7's bijection under the mutation $\mu_2$; if any fixed set fails to match the predicted subset rules, or if a genus-one invariant computed on both sides differs, the claimed all-genus Seiberg duality fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the cluster algebra and the enumerative geometry of A-type quivers are the same structure viewed from two sides. On the algebraic side, Theorem 5.1 constructs a map $\psi: A_n \to QH_S^*(Fl)[t]$ with $\psi(x_i)=(-1)^{N_i}\xi_i c_t^S(S_i)$ on initial variables and $\psi(x'_v)=(-1)^{N_j-N_i}\xi_j\xi_i^{-1}c_t^S(S_j/S_i)$ on a non-initial variable whose associated decoration is $N_j-N_i$; with Kähler variables set to $q_i=(-1)^{N_i+N_{i+1}}\xi_{i-1}\xi_{i+1}^{-1}$, the map is a well-defined injective $\mathbb{Q}$-algebra homomorphism. The proof is reduced to the quantum cohomological cluster exchange relation $c_t^S(S_m/S_{p+1}) * c_t^S(S_k/S_l) = c_t^S(S_m/S_l) * c_t^S(S_k/S_{p+1}) + \prod_{a=p+1}^k (-1)^{N_a+N_{a-1}}q_a\, c_t^S(S_m/S_{k+1}) * c_t^S(S_p/S_l)$. On the geometric side, Theorem 4.1 proves all-genus Seiberg duality for any two quivers with potential in $\Omega_n$ related by a quiver mutation: torus localization gives a bijection of fixed loci and of one-dimensional orbits, the weights of every flag and the combinatorics of every decorated graph are preserved, so the genus-$g$, $m$-marked, curve-class-$\beta$ invariants agree after applying the canonical cohomology isomorphism and curve class transformation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Lemma 2.16's classification of the valid stability conditions and of the critical loci as complete intersections defined by $A_{v_1}A_{v_2}=0$ in a binary-tree quiver variety, and the paper explicitly says it omits the proof of that lemma; if this description is wrong or incomplete, the fixed-point bijections, orbit classifications, and the all-genus Seiberg duality comparison built on it do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every $A_n$-mutation-equivalent quiver with potential, the all-genus Gromov–Witten invariants of the critical locus are equal to those of the partial flag variety under an explicit matching of insertions and curve classes; in particular, the equivariant quantum cohomology rings are isomorphic after the Kähler variable change of Corollary 4.2.
  • The cluster algebra $A_n$ sits inside $QH_S^*(Fl)[t]$ as a subalgebra, so every cluster variable has a geometric meaning as a signed, $\xi$-scaled Chern polynomial of a quotient bundle of tautological bundles.
  • Because $\psi$ is injective, relations among cluster variables are governed by relations among these Chern polynomials, and any relation in the cluster algebra must already be a consequence of the quantum cohomological cluster exchange relations.
  • The general conjecture of the paper, if proved, would extend the same dictionary to arbitrary quivers with potential, making cluster exchange relations into quantum product relations for quiver varieties.
  • The localization comparison gives a canonical correspondence between torus-fixed points and one-dimensional orbits across mutation, so the full Gromov–Witten invariant, not just the genus-zero part, is invariant under A-type quiver mutation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One consequence the paper leaves implicit is that the injectivity of $\psi$ gives a new faithful representation of the cluster algebra: distinct Laurent expressions in the initial variables cannot coincide after passing to quantum cohomology, so quantum products detect cluster-algebraic nontriviality.
  • If a stability classification analogous to Lemma 2.16 can be supplied for other mutation classes, the same localization mechanism should yield all-genus Seiberg duality for D-type and other quivers, with the cluster exchange relation playing the role of the quantum product relation.
  • Because $\psi$ is not surjective, the cluster algebra is a proper subalgebra; one could ask whether its saturation or localization in $QH_S^*(Fl)[t]$ recovers the full quantum cohomology ring, linking cluster exchange relations to known presentations of flag-variety quantum cohomology.
  • A testable extension is to specialize the formal variable $t$ and compare the induced map on ordinary cohomology; this would produce ordinary-cohomology cluster representations and might expose the role of the $q_i$ factors more directly.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims two main results. First, Theorem 4.1 asserts all-genus Seiberg duality for quiver varieties associated to decorated quivers with potential that are mutation-equivalent to the A_n-type quiver; the proof uses virtual localization and a comparison of decorated graphs after a canonical bijection of torus fixed points. Second, Theorem 5.1 asserts an injective Q-algebra homomorphism from the A_n cluster algebra into the equivariant quantum cohomology ring of the partial flag variety, with cluster variables mapped to equivariant Chern polynomials; the proof reduces the homomorphism statement to quantum cohomological exchange relations, which are established through the abelian/nonabelian correspondence.

Significance. If both theorems are correct, the paper would connect cluster algebras and quantum cohomology in a new and explicit way, and would extend Seiberg duality for A-type quivers from genus zero to all genera. The computational strategy is coherent and uses well-established tools: the localization formulae of Graber–Pandharipande and Liu, and the abelian/nonabelian correspondence in the form proved by Ciocan-Fontanine–Kim–Sabbah and Webb. The explicit quantum exchange relations in Sections 5.3–5.5 are checkable and are a strength of the manuscript. However, the current text does not establish one of the central structural inputs, and the definition and injectivity of the cluster-to-quantum map have gaps; for these reasons the main theorems are not yet fully supported.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.6, Lemma 2.16] The classification of valid stability conditions for every decorated QP in Ω_n, together with the description of the critical locus Z as a complete intersection in a binary-tree quiver variety, is stated in Lemma 2.16, but its proof is explicitly omitted: "This proof of this Lemma is overly intricate, so we prefer to omit it." This lemma is not a peripheral technicality: Lemma 4.6 describes the torus fixed locus using this description, Lemma 4.7 constructs the fixed-point bijection under mutation from it, Proposition 4.14 classifies one-dimensional torus orbits by an induction that presupposes it, and the graph and weight comparisons in Sections 4.4–4.6 rely on Proposition 4.14. If the stability-chamber classification is incomplete or incorrect, the fixed locus, the orbit structure, and therefore the localization comparison underlying Theorem 4.1 are not established. This is a load-bearing gap and must be fixed by a complete proof or a precise reference.
  2. [§5, Theorem 5.1] The stated codomain of ψ is QH_S^*(Fl)[t], but the images ψ(x_i)=(-1)^{N_i}ξ_i c_t^S(S_i) contain formal variables ξ_i. The relation qi = (-1)^{N_i+N_{i+1}} ξ_{i-1}ξ_{i+1}^{-1} expresses Kähler variables in terms of ξ_i, so the target ring must be described precisely—for example as an extension or localization in which the ξ_i are adjoined and the q_i are subsequently identified—before ψ can be regarded as a map into QH_S^*(Fl)[t]. In addition, part (2) of Theorem 5.1 defines ψ on a non-initial cluster variable by choosing an arbitrary non-initial seed containing that variable; the paper gives no argument that this image is independent of the choice of seed and of the mutation path. The injectivity statement is also stated in Theorem 5.1 but its proof is addressed only later; see the next comment. The codomain issue and the well-definedness proof must be supplied.
  3. [§5.5, Theorem 5.2(2)] The proof of injectivity of ψ is not rigorous as written. After invoking the Laurent phenomenon, the argument asserts that if ψ(α)=0 then a minimal exponent i0 has coefficient a_{i0}=0, because "this term will not be affected by the quantum reduction." But ψ(α) is an element of a quantum cohomology ring, where the product is deformed by quantum corrections and the ring has nontrivial relations; a coefficient comparison in ξ^i and t-power is not automatically valid unless a filtration or basis making the claimed leading term well-defined is established. The partial order on exponent vectors does not, by itself, control quantum corrections involving sums of products of initial variables. Since "injective" is part of the central claim of Theorem 5.1, this argument needs to be replaced by a genuine proof, for instance by specializing q to zero and using the classical equivariant cohomology basis.
  4. [§5.5.3, Lemma 5.16] Equations (70) and (71), which are the exchange relations for the three-adjacent-node cases, are not proved in the manuscript: the text states, "The proof is similar with that of (69). One can prove by induction on m... We leave the detail to readers." Since these identities are part of Theorem 5.2 and hence of the proof that ψ is a ring homomorphism, the paper should include the complete induction or give a precise reduction to the already proved cases. Leaving the details to the reader is not sufficient for a central claim of this kind.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, Conjecture 3.8] In item 2 of Conjecture 3.8, the two displayed cases both state the condition N_f(k)>N_a(k); the second case should presumably be N_f(k)<N_a(k). Please correct this typo, which currently makes the formula ambiguous.
  2. [§2.6, Lemma 2.16] The sentence preceding Example 2.17 reads "This proof of this Lemma is overly intricate, so we prefer to omit it", which contains a grammatical error; more importantly, it should be removed once a proof is supplied, since an explicit admission of an omitted proof is incompatible with a research article's claims.
  3. [§4.2, Lemma 4.7] The proof of Lemma 4.7 states "I′_v2 ⊂ I′_v since I′_v2 ∩ I_v = ∅"; the implication is not immediate from the displayed definitions and should be expanded or corrected, since Lemma 4.7 is used to construct the fixed-point bijection in the Seiberg duality theorem.
  4. [§5, Theorem 5.1] The Kähler parameters q_i are treated both as formal variables and as elements of the quantum cohomology ring. Please clarify the ring in which the relation qi = (-1)^{N_i+N_{i+1}} ξ_{i-1}ξ_{i+1}^{-1} is imposed, and distinguish these parameters from the equivariant parameters λ_1,...,λ_{N_{n+1}}.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction: the central homomorphism and Seiberg-duality theorems are checked against independently proved quantum-product and localization identities; the main caveats are an unproved stability-chamber lemma and an imprecise codomain, neither of which is a self-referential derivation.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, I find no step in which a stated 'prediction' or 'first-principles result' is equivalent by construction to its input. Theorem 5.1 defines the map ψ and reduces its well-definedness to the quantum cohomological cluster exchange relations (Theorem 5.2(1), Eq. (35)); those relations are then proved in Section 5.5 using Proposition 5.10, whose proof invokes the abelian/nonabelian correspondence of [10, Theorem 4.1.1] and [43,42] for flag varieties, an external mathematical input. The ξ_i variables are introduced and q_i is defined as a monomial in them precisely to cancel the monomial factor ∏ q_a; this is a legitimate specialization of Kähler parameters, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. Theorem 4.1 is proved by virtual localization: torus fixed points (Lemma 4.6), the mutation bijection (Lemma 4.7), one-dimensional orbits (Proposition 4.14), and graph contributions (Section 4.6) are compared rather than assumed equal. Self-citations [45,26] report prior genus-zero results and are not load-bearing. Two genuine caveats do not amount to circularity. First, Lemma 2.16, describing the 'only valid stability condition' and the critical locus as a complete intersection, has its proof omitted: 'This proof of this Lemma is overly intricate, so we prefer to omit it.' All subsequent fixed-point and orbit classifications depend on it, so Theorem 4.1 inherits an unverified structural input. Second, in Theorem 5.1, ψ(x_i)=(-1)^{N_i}ξ_i c^S_t(S_i) lies in the stated codomain QH^*_S(Fl)[t] only after adjoining or specializing the ξ_i; as written the ring needs this clarification. Neither caveat is a reduction of the conclusion to the hypothesis.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on several external theorems and on one unproved lemma. The external inputs (localization, abelian/nonabelian correspondence, Laurent phenomenon) are standard or cited with proofs. The main internal assumption is Lemma 2.16, whose proof is omitted; it is categorized as ad_hoc_to_paper because it is specific to this manuscript and directly supports the geometry used in Section 4. The formal variables ξ_i are auxiliary normalizations rather than fitted physical parameters, so they are listed as free_parameters. No new geometric entities are introduced.

free parameters (1)
  • ξ_i (i=1,...,n+1)
    Formal variables introduced to define the map ψ and to absorb signs and Kähler factors so that cluster exchange relations match the quantum product identities. They are auxiliary normalization parameters, not fitted to data. The paper sets q_i = (-1)^{N_i+N_{i+1}} ξ_{i-1} ξ_{i+1}^{-1} but does not show ξ_i live in the target ring.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Abelian/nonabelian correspondence for quantum cohomology (Conjecture 5.4, [10, Conjecture 3.7.1])
    Used as a theorem for flag varieties via [10, Theorem 4.1.1] and [43,42]; it is a cited external result, not proved in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper Lemma 2.16: classification of valid stability conditions and description of Z as a complete intersection in a binary-tree quiver variety
    Stated in Section 2.6 with proof omitted ('This proof of this Lemma is overly intricate'); Section 4 fixed point and orbit analysis depends on it.
  • standard math Localization formula for equivariant Gromov-Witten invariants ([23,34])
    Used in Theorem 4.5 to compare contributions of decorated graphs.
  • standard math Laurent phenomenon for cluster algebras ([19, Theorem 3.1])
    Used in the injectivity proof of Theorem 5.2(2) to express cluster variables as Laurent polynomials.
  • domain assumption Semistable equals stable and smoothness of the GIT quotients Z
    Assumed in Definition 2.12 ('we always assume that V^ss_θ(G)=V^s_θ(G) and Z^ss_θ(G)=Z^s_θ(G)') and used implicitly for the existence of Gromov-Witten theory.
  • domain assumption The specialization q_{k,i} -> (-1)^{N_k-1} q_k of Novikov variables in the abelian/nonabelian correspondence
    Taken from [24] in Proposition 5.5 and used in Proposition 5.10 to compute quantum corrections.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cluster algebras and quantum cohomology rings: A-type." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HVTUIRHR

@misc{pith2026250100394,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cluster algebras and quantum cohomology rings: A-type},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HVTUIRHR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.00394}
}
abstract

We construct a cluster algebra structure within the quantum cohomology ring of a quiver variety associated with an $A$-type quiver. Specifically, let $Fl:=Fl(N_1,\ldots,N_{n+1})$ denote a partial flag variety of length $n$, and $QH_S^*(Fl)[t]:=QH_S^*(Fl)\otimes \mathbb C[t]$ be its equivariant quantum cohomology ring extended by a formal variable $t$, regarded as a $\mathbb Q$-algebra. We establish an injective $\mathbb Q$-algebra homomorphism from the $A_n$-type cluster algebra to the algebra $QH_S^*(Fl)[t]$. Furthermore, for a general quiver with potential, we propose a framework for constructing a homomorphism from the associated cluster algebra to the quantum cohomology ring of the corresponding quiver variety. The second main result addresses the conjecture of all-genus Seiberg duality for $A_n$-type quivers. For any quiver with potential mutation-equivalent to an $A_n$-type quiver, we consider the associated variety defined as the critical locus of the potential function. We prove that all-genus Gromov-Witten invariants of such a variety coincide with those of the flag variety.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.00394 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The two quiver with potentials are related by a quiver mutation at the center node. The dashed arrows in the left QP are canceled. The right one has a potential function W = bac. 2.2 Cluster algebras We introduce the definition of cluster algebras of geometric type. We refer readers to the original works for the theory of cluster algebras [19, 20, 6, 21, 13, 12] and the introductory book [17, 18, 15, 16]. Definition… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. An A2 quiver with one frozen node. 3 is frozen, we only perform mutations at nodes 1 and 2. Let the initial variables be x = (x1, x2, x3). Then under seed mutations, cluster variables change as follows. (x1, x2, x3) µ1 −→ ( x2 + 1 x1 , x2, x3) µ2 −→ ( x2 + 1 x1 , x1 + x3 + x2x3 x1x2 , x3) µ1 −→ ( x1 + x3 x2 , x1 + x3 + x2x3 x1x2 , x3) µ2 −→ ( x1 + x3 x2 , x1, x3) µ1 −→ (x2, x1, x3). Notice that there are 6 distinct … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. An An-type quiver with one frozen node. Lemma 2.8. All orientations of An-type quivers in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: A decorated An-type quiver with one frozen node. The input data for the QP includes V = ⊕n i=1CNi×Ni+1 , G = ∏ n i=1 GL(Ni), and G acts on V as (3). Choose the character θ = ∏ n i=1 det(gi) σi for σi > 0. Then V ss θ (G) = {each As(a)→t(a) is nondegenerate}. Hence V θ …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The local picture near a gauge node v and its quiver mutation. There exist integers m > k > p ≥ l ≥ 0 such that rv = Nk − Nl ,rv1 = Nm − Nl ,rv3 = Np − Nl ,rv2 = Nm − Nk+1 ,rv4 = Nk − Np+1, r ′ v = Nm − Np+1 if we assume that Nf (v) > Na(v). 2.6 Varieties of QPs mutati…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: rv2 = N3 − N2. The only valid stability condition θ(g) = ∏ 3 i=1 det(gi) σi is σ1 > 0, σ2 < 0, σ3 + σ2 > 0 . Let Z := {dW = 0} = {A1A2 = 0, A2B = 0, BA1 = 0} be the critical locus of the potential. The semistable locus under the stability condition is Z ss θ (G) = {B =…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Atiyah and R

    M. Atiyah and R. Bott, The moment map and equivariant cohomology, Topology, 23(1984), 1–28

    work page 1984

  2. [2]

    V . V . Batyrev. Quantum cohomology rings of toric manifolds. In: 218. Journées de Géométrie Algébrique d’Orsay (Orsay, 1992). 1993, 9–34

    work page 1992

  3. [3]

    Behrend, Gromov-Witten invariants in algebraic geometry, Invent

    K. Behrend, Gromov-Witten invariants in algebraic geometry, Invent. Math. 127(1997), 601–617

    work page 1997

  4. [4]

    Behrend and B

    K. Behrend and B. Fantechi, The intrinsic normal cone, Invent. Math. 128(1997), 45–88

    work page 1997

  5. [5]

    Benini, D

    F. Benini, D. S. Park, and P . Zhao, Cluster Algebras from Dualities of 2d N = (2, 2) Quiver Gauge Theories, Communications in Mathematical Physics, 340(2015), 47–104

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Berenstein, S

    A. Berenstein, S. Fomin, and A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras III: Upper bounds and double Bruhat cells, Duke Mathematical Journal, 126(2005), 1–52

    work page 2005

  7. [7]

    A. B. Buan and D. F. Vatne, Derived equivalence classification for cluster-tilted algebras of type An, J. Algebra, 319(2008), 2723–2738

    work page 2008

  8. [8]

    Ciocan-Fontanine, On quantum cohomology rings of partial flag varieties, Duke Math

    I. Ciocan-Fontanine, On quantum cohomology rings of partial flag varieties, Duke Math. J. 98(1999), 485–524

    work page 1999

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Ciocan-Fontanine, Quantum cohomology of flag varieties, Internat

    I. Ciocan-Fontanine, Quantum cohomology of flag varieties, Internat. Math. Res. Notices, (1995), 263–277

    1995

  2. [10]

    Ciocan-Fontanine, B

    I. Ciocan-Fontanine, B. Kim, and C. Sabbah, The abelian/nonabelian correspondence and Frobenius manifolds, Invent. Math. 171(2008), 301–343. 53

    2008

  3. [11]

    D. A. Cox and S. Katz. Mirror symmetry and algebraic geometry. Vol. 68. Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1999, xxii+469

    1999

  4. [12]

    Derksen, J

    H. Derksen, J. Weyman, and A. Zelevinsky, Quivers with potentials and their rep- resentations II: applications to cluster algebras, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 23(2010), 749– 790

    2010

  5. [13]

    Derksen, J

    H. Derksen, J. Weyman, and A. Zelevinsky, Quivers with potentials and their repre- sentations. I. Mutations, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 14(2008), 59–119

    2008

  6. [14]

    Ellingsrud and S

    G. Ellingsrud and S. A. Strømme, On the Chow ring of a geometric quotient, Ann. of Math. (2), 130(1989), 159–187

    1989

  7. [15]

    Fomin, L

    S. Fomin, L. Williams, and A. Zelevinsky, Introduction to Cluster Algebras. Chapter 6, (2021)

    2021

  8. [16]

    Fomin, L

    S. Fomin, L. Williams, and A. Zelevinsky, Introduction to Cluster Algebras. Chapter 7, (2021)

    2021

  9. [17]

    Fomin, L

    S. Fomin, L. Williams, and A. Zelevinsky, Introduction to Cluster Algebras. Chapters 1-3, (2021)

    2021

  10. [18]

    Fomin, L

    S. Fomin, L. Williams, and A. Zelevinsky, Introduction to Cluster Algebras. Chapters 4-5, (2021)

    2021

  11. [19]

    Fomin and A

    S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras. I. Foundations, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 15(2002), 497–529

    2002

  12. [20]

    Fomin and A

    S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras. II. Finite type classification, Invent. Math. 154(2003), 63–121

    2003

  13. [21]

    Fomin and A

    S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky, Cluster algebras. IV. Coefficients, Compos. Math.143(2007), 112–164

    2007

  14. [22]

    Gomis and B

    J. Gomis and B. Le Floch, M2-brane surface operators and gauge theory dualities in Toda, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2016(2016), 1–111

    2016

  15. [23]

    Graber and R

    T. Graber and R. Pandharipande, Localization of virtual classes, Invent. Math.135(1999), 487–518

    1999

  16. [24]

    Gu and E

    W. Gu and E. Kalashnikov, A rim-hook rule for quiver flag varieties, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 30(2024), Paper No. 51

    2024

  17. [25]

    Gu et al., Quantum K theory rings of partial flag manifolds, J

    W. Gu et al., Quantum K theory rings of partial flag manifolds, J. Geom. Phys. 198(2024), Paper No. 105127, 30

    2024

  18. [26]

    He and Y

    W. He and Y. Zhang, Seiberg Duality conjecture for star-shaped quivers and finiteness of Gromov-Witten thoery for D-type quivers, arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.02402, (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Hori, Duality in two-dimensional (2, 2) supersymmetric non-Abelian gauge theories, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2013(2013), 1–76

    K. Hori, Duality in two-dimensional (2, 2) supersymmetric non-Abelian gauge theories, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2013(2013), 1–76

    2013

  20. [28]

    Hori and D

    K. Hori and D. Tong, Aspects of non-abelian gauge dynamics in two-dimensional N = (2, 2) theories, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2007(2007), 079

    2007

  21. [29]

    Kimura and F

    Y. Kimura and F. Qin, Graded quiver varieties, quantum cluster algebras and dual canonical basis, Adv. Math. 262(2014), 261–312. 54

    2014

  22. [30]

    Kirillov Jr

    A. Kirillov Jr. Quiver representations and quiver varieties. Vol. 174. Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2016, xii+295

    2016

  23. [31]

    Kontsevich and Y

    M. Kontsevich and Y. Soibelman, Stability structures, Donaldson-Thomas invariants and cluster transformations, arXiv preprint arXiv:0811.2435, 1(2008)

    2008 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Lee and R

    K. Lee and R. Schiffler, Positivity for cluster algebras, Ann. of Math. (2), 182(2015), 73–125

    2015

  25. [33]

    Li and G

    J. Li and G. Tian, Virtual moduli cycles and Gromov-Witten invariants of algebraic varieties, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 11(1998), 119–174

    1998

  26. [34]

    C.-C. M. Liu, Localization in Gromov-Witten theory and orbifold Gromov-Witten theory, arXiv preprint arXiv:1107.4712, (2011)

    2011 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Martin, Symplectic quotients by a nonabelian group and by its maximal torus, arXiv preprint math/0001002, (2000)

    S. Martin, Symplectic quotients by a nonabelian group and by its maximal torus, arXiv preprint math/0001002, (2000)

    2000 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Musiker, R

    G. Musiker, R. Schiffler, and L. Williams, Positivity for cluster algebras from surfaces, Adv. Math. 227(2011), 2241–2308

    2011

  29. [37]

    Nagao, Donaldson–Thomas theory and cluster algebras, (2013)

    K. Nagao, Donaldson–Thomas theory and cluster algebras, (2013)

    2013

  30. [38]

    Priddis, M

    N. Priddis, M. Shoemaker, and Y. Wen, Seiberg-like duality for resolutions of determi- nantal varieties, arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.05240, (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Ruan, Nonabelian gauged linear sigma model, Chin

    Y. Ruan, Nonabelian gauged linear sigma model, Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B, 38(2017), 963–984

    2017

  32. [40]

    Ruan and G

    Y. Ruan and G. Tian, A mathematical theory of quantum cohomology, J. Differential Geom. 42(1995), 259–367

    1995

  33. [41]

    Ruan and G

    Y. Ruan and G. Tian, Higher genus symplectic invariants and sigma models coupled with gravity, Invent. Math. 130(1997), 455–516

    1997

  34. [42]

    Webb, Abelianization and quantum Lefschetz for orbifold quasimap I-functions, Adv

    R. Webb, Abelianization and quantum Lefschetz for orbifold quasimap I-functions, Adv. Math. 439(2024), Paper No. 109489, 59

    2024

  35. [43]

    Webb, The abelian-nonabelian correspondence for I-functions, Int

    R. Webb, The abelian-nonabelian correspondence for I-functions, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, (2023), 2592–2648

    2023

  36. [44]

    Witten, The Verlinde algebra and the cohomology of the Grassmannian, arXiv:hep- th/9312104, (1993)

    E. Witten, The Verlinde algebra and the cohomology of the Grassmannian, arXiv:hep- th/9312104, (1993)

    1993

  37. [45]

    Zhang, Gromov-Witten Theory of A_n type quiver varieties and Seiberg Duality, arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11812, (2021)

    Y. Zhang, Gromov-Witten Theory of A_n type quiver varieties and Seiberg Duality, arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.11812, (2021). Weiqiang He, Department of Mathematics, Sun Yat-sen University, Xingang West Road No.135, Haizhu District, Guangzhou, China. Email: hewq@mail2.sysu.edu.cn....

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.