Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 40 references

Drinfeld super Yangian of the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · 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 the Drinfeld super Yangian for the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$ and proves it has a PBW basis and a Hopf superalgebra structure.

desk verdict First Drinfeld super Yangian for an exceptional Lie superalgebra, built by degeneration from the quantum loop superalgebra; the central injectivity step leans on an imported PBW basis and the antipode axioms are asserted, but both look fixable. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.21255 v1 pith:WIQTKG56 submitted 2025-04-30 math.QA math-phmath.MPmath.RA

Hongda Lin , Honglian Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.QAmath-phmath.MPmath.RA MSC 17B3717B6717B70
keywords DrinfeldsuperYangianexceptionalLiesuperalgebraD(21λ)PBWbasisHopfquantumloopdegenerationpresentation
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

The paper sets out to build the Drinfeld presentation of the super Yangian $Y_{\hbar}(D(2,1;\lambda))$ for the exceptional 17-dimensional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$, a one-parameter family with no classical Lie algebra counterpart. It defines current generators and relations, then proves that this algebra is isomorphic to the associated graded algebra of the quantum loop superalgebra under a suitable filtration, so that ordered monomials in the currents form a PBW basis. It also exhibits a coproduct, counit, and antipode, making $Y_{\hbar}(D(2,1;\lambda))$ a Hopf superalgebra. A sympathetic reader would care because this is the first systematic framework for super Yangians of an exceptional Lie superalgebra, and the degeneration method connects it to the known orthosymplectic case when $\lambda \in \{1,-2,-1/2\}$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the degeneration of the quantum loop superalgebra $U_{\hbar}(L\mathfrak{g})$ to the associated graded algebra $\mathrm{gr}^W U_{\hbar}(L\mathfrak{g})$, where $W$ is the filtration generated by the ideals $(t-1)^m$ in the loop variable. The isomorphism of Theorem 4.4 transfers this degeneration to the new generator set $\{x^{\pm}_{i,m}, h_{i,m}\}$, giving the PBW basis of Corollary 4.12. The Hopf structure is carried by the half Casimir element $\Omega_+$ of $\mathfrak{g}$, whose commutators with the degree-zero currents force the coproduct corrections, together with the minimalistic presentation that reduces the infinite defining relations to relations among degree 0 and 1 currents.

What would settle it

Compute the associated graded algebra $\mathrm{gr}\, Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ in low degrees directly from relations (4.1)--(4.8) and check that its dimension in each degree matches that of $U(\mathfrak{g}[u])[\hbar]$; any mismatch, such as a linear relation among ordered monomials of total degree 3, would refute the PBW basis of Corollary 4.12 and hence Theorem 4.4.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the associative superalgebra $Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ generated by $x^{\pm}_{i,m}$, $h_{i,m}$ with relations (4.1)--(4.8) is the correct Drinfeld super Yangian for $\mathfrak{g}=D(2,1;\lambda)$. The paper proves an isomorphism $\varphi: Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g}) \to \mathrm{gr}^W U_{\hbar}(L\mathfrak{g})$ sending $h_{i,m}$ to the leading term of $H_{i,0;m}$ and $x^{\pm}_{i,m}$ to the leading term of $X^{\pm}_{i,0;m}$, which identifies the defining relations with the leading-order commutation laws of the quantum loop superalgebra currents. From this, ordered monomials in $x^{\pm}_{\alpha,m_0}$ and $h_{i,m}$ form a PBW basis, the associated graded algebra is $U(\mathfrak{g}[u])[\hbar]$, and the center is trivial. Using a minimalistic presentation with a finite generating set, the paper defines a coproduct, counit, and antipode and proves that $Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ is a Hopf superalgebra.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the PBW basis of the quantum loop superalgebra $U_{\hbar}(L\mathfrak{g})$ stated in Corollary 3.10 and imported from the Drinfeld presentation of [18] is correct; if that basis or the underlying presentation isomorphism fails, the injectivity of Theorem 4.4 and the PBW basis of the super Yangian no longer follow, and the paper also assumes $q^{kn} \neq 1$ for $n \in \{1,\lambda,\lambda+1\}$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • $Y_{\hbar}(D(2,1;\lambda))$ has a PBW basis built from ordered monomials in $x^{\pm}_{\alpha,m_0}$ and $h_{i,m}$ over $\mathbb{C}[\hbar]$.
  • The classical limit $\mathrm{gr}\, Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ is isomorphic to the enveloping algebra $U(\mathfrak{g}[u])[\hbar]$ of the polynomial current superalgebra.
  • The center of $Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ is trivial.
  • $Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{g})$ is a Hopf superalgebra with explicit coproduct, counit, and antipode, so tensor products of representations can be formed.
  • At $\lambda = 1, -2, -1/2$, the new super Yangian is isomorphic to the orthosymplectic super Yangian $Y_{\hbar}(\mathfrak{osp}_{4|2})$, matching earlier constructions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the degeneration isomorphism extends to an equivalence of tensor categories, finite-dimensional representations of $Y(D(2,1;\lambda))$ would correspond to those of the quantum loop superalgebra, giving a practical route to classify them.
  • The same $W$-filtration degeneration is likely to transplant to the other exceptional basic classical Lie superalgebras $F(4)$ and $G(3)$, which also lack classical analogues, once a Drinfeld presentation for their quantum affine superalgebras is available.
  • Proving Conjecture 4.17 on odd reflection would imply that the two Dynkin diagram choices of $D(2,1;\lambda)$ give isomorphic super Yangians, matching the quantum affine situation; this could be tested by writing the odd reflection explicitly in terms of current generators.
  • The trivial center and Hopf structure make $Y(D(2,1;\lambda))$ a plausible source of new solutions of the super Yang--Baxter equation via evaluation homomorphisms, though the paper does not construct such homomorphisms.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a Drinfeld-type presentation of a super Yangian Y_h(g) for the exceptional Lie superalgebra g = D(2,1;lambda), with generators x^\pm_{i,m}, h_{i,m} and relations (4.1)--(4.8). Its central result, Theorem 4.4, asserts an isomorphism between this algebra and the associated graded algebra gr^W U_h(Lg) of the quantum loop superalgebra, sending generators to finite-difference current classes. From this theorem the paper derives a PBW basis (Corollary 4.12), a classical limit statement (Corollary 4.13), triviality of the center (Corollary 4.14), an isomorphism with the orthosymplectic Yangian at special values of lambda (Proposition 4.15), a minimalistic presentation (Proposition 5.1), and a Hopf superalgebra structure with explicit coproduct, counit and antipode (Theorem 5.4 and Corollary 5.5). The degeneration strategy follows Guay--Ma, and the paper imports the Drinfeld--Jimbo/Drinfeld isomorphism and the PBW basis of U_h(Lg) from the prior work [18].

Significance. If the main theorem is fully established, this is the first Drinfeld presentation for a super Yangian of exceptional type, and the explicit PBW basis and Hopf structure would be substantial contributions to the quantum supergroup literature. The degeneration method is natural and the paper contains many nontrivial computational lemmas, especially Lemmas 4.5--4.11 and the coproduct verification in Section 5.3. The paper is generally well organized and the special-lambda comparison with Y(osp_{4|2}) is a useful consistency check. However, the central isomorphism rests on a PBW statement imported without proof from [18], the linear-independence step in Theorem 4.4 is compressed to a single sentence, and the antipode axioms are asserted rather than verified. These gaps are load-bearing for the paper's main claims, although they appear fixable within the manuscript's scope.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.2, proof of Theorem 4.4] The injectivity of phi is not established. The proof says only: "Due to Corollary 3.10, phi(B_Y(g)) is also linearly independent." Corollary 3.10 gives a PBW basis of U_h(Lg) in ordered monomials in X^\pm_{\alpha,r0} and H_{i,r} with r in Z, whereas phi(B_Y(g)) consists of classes of finite-difference elements \bar X^\pm_{\alpha,0;m} and \bar H_{i,0;m}. The passage from the Corollary 3.10 basis to a basis of gr^W U_h(Lg) in these finite-difference generators is not proved; the paper does not show that the transformation is invertible in each graded component W_p/W_{p+1}, and it does not explain what happens to the negative loop indices r < 0 appearing in Corollary 3.10. Since Corollary 4.12 and Corollary 4.13 depend on this injectivity, this is a load-bearing gap.
  2. [§3, Corollary 3.10] Corollary 3.10, which supplies the PBW basis of U_h(Lg), is stated without proof and is described only as a consequence of the reformulation of [18, Theorem 6.6]. This result is the only source of linear independence for the degeneration construction: without it, Theorem 4.4 is at best an epimorphism and the PBW basis of Y_h(g) collapses. The manuscript should either prove Corollary 3.10 or give a precise reference with the exact statement, and it should verify that the hypotheses used here, including q^{kn} \neq 1 for n in {1, lambda, lambda+1}, are sufficient for the degeneration limit to be well behaved.
  3. [§4.2, Lemmas 4.8--4.11 and Theorem 4.4] The proof that phi is a homomorphism is only sketched. Lemmas 4.8--4.11 establish congruences involving shifted indices, for example X^\pm_{j,s+1;n} in (4.13) and X^\pm_{i,r+1;m}, X^\pm_{j,s+1;n} in (4.16). The paper does not explain why these index shifts disappear when one applies phi, which identifies only the classes with r = s = 0. This requires an additional degree-counting argument or further lemmas to show that the shifted terms lie in the appropriate W_{m+n+2} pieces; as written, the verification of relations (4.3)--(4.5) under phi is incomplete.
  4. [§5.2, Corollary 5.5] The Hopf superalgebra structure is not fully proved. The antipode is specified only on h_{i,0}, x^\pm_{i,0} and h_{i,1}, and the identity mu \circ (S \otimes 1) \circ \Delta = mu \circ (1 \otimes S) \circ \Delta = nu \circ \varepsilon is asserted without verification. In particular S(x^\pm_{i,1}) is never defined, so the claim that S is an anti-automorphism of Y(g) is unsupported. Corollary 5.5 therefore needs a complete check of the antipode axioms on the minimal generators of Proposition 5.1, including explicit formulas for S(x^\pm_{i,1}) and compatibility with the relations (5.5)--(5.8).
minor comments (6)
  1. [Definition 4.1] In relations (4.7) and (4.8), the symbols "Dx" and "D^\circ x" should presumably be "D_\lambda" and "D^\circ_\lambda"; please correct this typo.
  2. [Equation (2.10)] The displayed formula for z^{(r,m)} appears to have a typo: the summand should be z^{(r+k)} (equivalently z \otimes t^{r+k}), not z^{(r)}, to be consistent with the preceding recursive definition and with the claimed equality z \otimes t^r (t-1)^m.
  3. [Proposition 3.6] In the g = D_\lambda case, the displayed images of E_0 and F_0 both use X^-_{1,1}; one of them should use X^+_{1,1}, as suggested by Remark 3.7 and by the bracket [X^-_\theta, X^+_\theta]. This is likely a typo, but it should be corrected because Proposition 3.6 is quoted as the basis for later results.
  4. [§4.2, definition of U] The base ring of the span defining U is not specified. If U is a C[[h]]-span, then h W_0 is contained in W_1 and the associated graded algebra would have h acting as zero, making the C[h]-isomorphism in Theorem 4.4 impossible. The authors should state explicitly that U is the C-span of the displayed generators, not the C[[h]]-span.
  5. [Proposition 4.15] The proof says only that the isomorphism with Y(osp_{4|2}) follows by comparing defining relations. Given the nontrivial scalings such as h_{3,m} \mapsto (1/2) h_{3,m} or 2 h_{3,m}, a short verification that relations (4.3) and (4.5) are preserved under these rescalings would be helpful.
  6. [Abstract and Introduction] The text uses "central" where "center" is meant (for example, "whose central is trivial"), and there are a few typographical errors such as "centain" and the garbled sentence in the introduction about the connection with the superconformal algebra; these should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the super Yangian is defined by its own presentation, and the degeneration isomorphism is proved rather than assumed from the definition.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.4, asserts an isomorphism between the Drinfeld super Yangian Y_h(g), defined by the explicit presentation (4.1)-(4.8), and the graded degeneration gr^W U_h(Lg). This is not circular: the defining relations are not introduced as the conclusion of the degeneration theorem; they are an independent presentation, and the theorem is then proved by checking that the leading-term classes of the quantum loop superalgebra satisfy these relations (Lemmas 4.5-4.11), which yields an epimorphism. Injectivity uses two independent ingredients: Proposition 4.3, a spanning set for Y_h(g) proved inside the paper from the relations and the PBW theorem for U(g[u]), and Corollary 3.10, a PBW basis for U_h(Lg). Corollary 3.10 is imported from the independent prior work [18] (Heckenberger, Spill, Torrielli, Yamane) via Proposition 3.6; it is not a result of the present authors and is not derived from the target statement. The dependency on Corollary 3.10 is a genuine external-support dependency: if that PBW statement failed, the injectivity proof and Corollary 4.12 would not follow, but that is a correctness risk, not circularity. The self-citation [24] is method-level, supplying the degeneration technique, not the load-bearing isomorphism or PBW conclusion, and the paper re-proves the necessary degeneration relations rather than quoting the super Yangian result itself. The Hopf structure proof also checks the coproduct on generators and invokes independent minimalistic-presentation results [17,30]. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work, and the claimed exceptional Yangian is not a re-labelling of a known result. The analysis therefore finds no step in which a claimed derivation reduces by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; λ is the parameter of the Lie superalgebra and ℏ is a formal deformation parameter. The super Yangian Yℏ(g) is the constructed object, not an invented entity used as an explanation. All nonstandard inputs are imported prior results (the Drinfeld presentation of Uq(ĝ) and its PBW basis).

assumptions (5)
  • standard math PBW theorem for universal enveloping algebras and current Lie superalgebras U(g[u])
    Used implicitly in Section 2.3 and Section 4.1 to identify the associated graded algebra gr Yℏ(g) with U(g[u])[ℏ] and to prove Corollary 4.13.
  • domain assumption The isomorphism between the Drinfeld-Jimbo and Drinfeld presentations of the quantum affine superalgebra Uq(ĝ) of type D(2,1;λ) established in [18, Theorem 6.6] is valid
    Imported in Proposition 3.6 and used to derive the classical limit and PBW basis of Uℏ(Lg) in Corollary 3.10, which are load-bearing for Theorem 4.4.
  • domain assumption q = exp(ℏ) is not a root of unity; specifically q^{kn} ≠ 1 for n ∈ {1, λ, λ+1}, k ∈ N
    Assumed in Section 3 before Definition 3.5 to ensure the Drinfeld presentation and classical limit are well defined.
  • domain assumption D(2,1;λ) admits a nondegenerate invariant supersymmetric bilinear form with the properties in Section 2.2
    Used to define the Casimir element Ω+ and the dual bases in Section 2.2, which are needed for the Hopf structure in Section 5.
  • domain assumption The PBW basis for the quantum loop superalgebra Uℏ(Lg) in Corollary 3.10
    This is the key imported result from [18] used for the injectivity of the degeneration isomorphism.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Drinfeld super Yangian of the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WIQTKG56

@misc{pith2026250421255,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Drinfeld super Yangian of the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WIQTKG56}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.21255}
}
abstract

In this paper, we establish the first rigorous framework for the Drinfeld super Yangian associated with an exceptional Lie superalgebra, which lacks a classical Lie algebraic counterpart. Specifically, we systematically investigate the Drinfeld presentation and structural properties of the super Yangian associated with the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$. First, we introduce a Drinfeld presentation for the super Yangian associated with the exceptional Lie superalgebra $D(2,1;\lambda)$, explicitly constructing its current generators and defining relations. A key innovation is the construction of a Poincar\'e-Birkhoff-Witt (PBW) basis using degeneration techniques from the corresponding quantum loop superalgebra. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the super Yangian possesses a Hopf superalgebra structure, explicitly providing the coproduct, counit, and antipode.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [18]

    Heckenberger, F

    I. Heckenberger, F. Spill, A. Torrielli, H. Yamane, Drinfeld secon d realization of the quantum affine superalgebras of D(1)(2, 1; x) via the Weyl groupoid, RIMS Kˆ okyˆ uroku Bessatsu 8 (2008) 171 – 216

    work page 2008

  2. [1]

    Beck, Braid group action and quantum affine algebras, Comm

    J. Beck, Braid group action and quantum affine algebras, Comm. M ath. Phys. 165 (3) (1994) 555 – 568. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02099423

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02099423 1994

  3. [2]

    Benkart, A

    G. Benkart, A. Elduque, The Tits construction and the exceptio nal simple classical Lie su- peralgebras, Q. J. Math. 54 (2) (2003) 123 – 137. https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/hag014

    work page doi:10.1093/qmath/hag014 2003

  4. [3]

    Bracken, M.D

    A.J. Bracken, M.D. Gould, R.B. Zhang, Quantum supergroups and solutions of the Yang-Baxter equation, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 5 (11) (1990) 8 31 – 840. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217732390000925

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217732390000925 1990

  5. [4]

    Chang, Y

    Z. Chang, Y. Wang, A Drinfeld Presentation of the Queer Super- Yangian, Preprint, 2025. arXiv:2503.03181

    work page arXiv 2025

  6. [5]

    Chari, A

    V. Chari, A. Pressley, A guide to quantum groups, Cambridge Univ ersity Press, Cambridge, 1995

    work page 1995

  7. [6]

    Conner, N

    P. Conner, N. Guay, 2015. From twisted quantum loop algebras t o twisted Yangians. SIGMA 11, 040. https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2015.040

    work page doi:10.3842/sigma.2015.040 2015

  8. [7]

    Damiani, Drinfeld realization of affine quantum algebras: the rela tions, Publ

    I. Damiani, Drinfeld realization of affine quantum algebras: the rela tions, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 48 (3) (2012) 661 – 733. https://doi.org/10.2977/PRIMS/86

    work page doi:10.2977/prims/86 2012

Show all 40 references
  1. [8]

    D’Hoker, D.Z

    E. D’Hoker, D.Z. Freedman, Supersymmetric gauge theories and the AdS/CFT correspon- dence, In: Strings, branes and extra Dimensions, TASI, 2001, pp . 3 – 159

    2001

  2. [9]

    Drinfeld, Hopf algebras and the quantum Yang-Baxter equa tion, Dokl

    V.G. Drinfeld, Hopf algebras and the quantum Yang-Baxter equa tion, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 283 (5) (1985) 1060 – 1064

    1985

  3. [10]

    Drinfeld, Quantum groups, in: Proceedings of the Interna tional Congress of Mathemati- cians, Vol

    V.G. Drinfeld, Quantum groups, in: Proceedings of the Interna tional Congress of Mathemati- cians, Vol. 1, 2, Berkeley, Calif., 1986, Amer. Math. Soc., Providenc e, RI, 1987, pp. 798 – 820

    1986

  4. [11]

    Drinfeld, A new realization of Yangians and of quantum affine a lgebras, Dokl

    V.G. Drinfeld, A new realization of Yangians and of quantum affine a lgebras, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 296 (1) (1987) 13 – 17

    1987

  5. [12]

    Frassek, A

    R. Frassek, A. Tsymbaliuk, Orthosymplectic Yangians, Preprin t, 2023. arXiv:2311.18818

    2023 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Gautam, V

    S. Gautam, V. Toledano Laredo, Yangians and quantum loop alge bras, Sel. Math. New Ser. 19 (2) (2013) 271 – 336. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00029-012-0114-2. 25

    2013 doi

  7. [14]

    Gautam, V

    S. Gautam, V. Toledano Laredo, Yangians, quantum loop algebr as, and abelian difference equations, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 29 (3) (2016) 775 – 824. https://doi.org/10.1090/jams/851

    2016 doi

  8. [15]

    Gow, Gauss decomposition of the Yangian Y (glm|n), Comm

    L. Gow, Gauss decomposition of the Yangian Y (glm|n), Comm. Math. Phys. 276 (3) (2007) 799 – 825. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-007-0349-5

    2007 doi

  9. [16]

    N. Guay, X. Ma, From quantum loop algebras to Yangians, J. Lon d. Math. Soc. 86 (3) (2012) 683 – 700. https://doi.org/10.1112/jlms/jds021

    2012 doi

  10. [17]

    N. Guay, H. Nakajima, C. Wendlandt, Coproduct for Yangians o f affine Kac-Moody algebras, Adv. Math. 338 (2018) 865 – 911. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2018.09.013

    2018 doi

  11. [19]

    Jimbo, A q-difference analogue of U (g) and the Yang-Baxter equation, Lett

    M. Jimbo, A q-difference analogue of U (g) and the Yang-Baxter equation, Lett. Math. Phys. 10 (1) (1985), 63 – 69. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00704588

    1985 doi

  12. [20]

    N. Jing, H. Zhang, 2016. Drinfeld realization of quantum twisted affine algebras via braid group. Adv. Math. Phys. 4843075. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4843075

    2016 doi

  13. [21]

    Kac, Lie superalgebras, Adv

    V.G. Kac, Lie superalgebras, Adv. Math. 26 (1) (1977) 8 – 96. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-8708(77)90017-2

    1977 doi

  14. [22]

    Kac, Infinite-dimensional Lie algebras, Cambridge Universit y Press, Cambridge, 1990

    V.G. Kac, Infinite-dimensional Lie algebras, Cambridge Universit y Press, Cambridge, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511626234

    1990 doi

  15. [23]

    Levendorski ˘ ı, On generators and defining relations of Ya ngians, J

    S.Z. Levendorski ˘ ı, On generators and defining relations of Ya ngians, J. Geom. Phys. 12 (1) (1993) 1 – 11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0393-0440(93)90084-R

    1993 doi

  16. [24]

    H. Lin, Y. Wang, H. Zhang, From quantum loop superalgebras to super Yangians, J. Algebra 650 (2024) 299 – 334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2024.03.028

    2024 doi

  17. [25]

    H. Lin, H. Yamane, H. Zhang, 2024. On generators and defining relations of quantum affine superalgebra Uq(ˆslm|n). J. Algebra Appl. 23 (1), 2450021. https://doi.org/10.1142/S021949882450021X

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    K. Lu, W. Wang, W. Zhang, Affine ıquantum groups and twisted Yangians in Drinfeld presen- tations. Comm. Math. Phys. 406 (5), (2025) 98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00220-025-05263-z

    2025 doi

  19. [27]

    K. Lu, W. Zhang, A Drinfeld type presentation of twisted Yangia ns of quasi-split type, Preprint, 2024. arXiv:2408.06981

    2024

  20. [28]

    Maldacena, The large- N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Int

    J. Maldacena, The large- N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (4), (1999), 1113 – 1133. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026654312961

    1999 doi

  21. [29]

    Mazurenko, Hopf superalgebra structure for Drinfeld sup er Yangian of Lie superalgebra B(m, n), Preprint, 2023

    A. Mazurenko, Hopf superalgebra structure for Drinfeld sup er Yangian of Lie superalgebra B(m, n), Preprint, 2023. arXiv:2309.09735

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Mazurenko, V.A

    A. Mazurenko, V.A. Stukopin, Classification of Hopf superalgeb ra structures on Drinfeld super Yangians, Preprint, 2022. arXiv:2210.08365

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Molev, A Drinfeld-type presentation of the orthosymplect ic Yangians, Algebr

    A.I. Molev, A Drinfeld-type presentation of the orthosymplect ic Yangians, Algebr. Represent. Theory 27 (1) (2024) 469 – 494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10468-023-10227-9

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    Musson, Lie superalgebras and enveloping algebras

    I. Musson, Lie superalgebras and enveloping algebras. Grad. S tud. Math., vol. 131, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1090/gsm/131

    2012 doi

  25. [33]

    Nazarov, Quantum Berezinian and the classical Capelli identit y, Lett

    M. Nazarov, Quantum Berezinian and the classical Capelli identit y, Lett. Math. Phys. 21 (2) (1991) 123 – 131. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00401646. 26

    1991 doi

  26. [34]

    Nazarov, 2020

    M. Nazarov, 2020. Yangian of the general linear Lie superalgeb ra. SIGMA 16, 112. https://doi.org/10.3842/SIGMA.2020.112

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    Serganova, Kac-Moody superalgebras and integrability, in: Developments and Trends in Infinite Dimensional Lie Theory, in: Progr

    V. Serganova, Kac-Moody superalgebras and integrability, in: Developments and Trends in Infinite Dimensional Lie Theory, in: Progr. Math., vol. 288, Birkh¨ au ser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2011, pp. 169 – 218

    2011

  28. [36]

    Stukopin, Yangians of Lie superalgebras of type A(m, n), Funct

    V.A. Stukopin, Yangians of Lie superalgebras of type A(m, n), Funct. Anal. Appl. 28 (3) (1994) 217 – 219. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01078460

    1994 doi

  29. [37]

    Van De Leur, A classification of contragredient Lie superalg ebras of finite growth, Comm

    J.W. Van De Leur, A classification of contragredient Lie superalg ebras of finite growth, Comm. Algebra 17 (8)(1989) 1815 – 1841. https://doi.org/10.1080/00927878908823823

    1989 doi

  30. [38]

    Yamane, A Serre type theorem for affine Lie superalgebras a nd their quantized en- veloping superalgebras, Proc

    H. Yamane, A Serre type theorem for affine Lie superalgebras a nd their quantized en- veloping superalgebras, Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci. 70 (1 ) (1994) 31 – 36. https://doi.org/10.3792/pjaa.70.31

    1994 doi

  31. [39]

    Yamane, On defining relations of affine Lie superalgebras and a ffine quantized uni- versal enveloping superalgebras, Publ

    H. Yamane, On defining relations of affine Lie superalgebras and a ffine quantized uni- versal enveloping superalgebras, Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ. 35 (3) (1 999) 321 – 390. https://doi.org/10.2977/PRIMS/1195143607

  32. [40]

    Zhang, M.D

    R.B. Zhang, M.D. Gould, A.J. Bracken, Solutions of the graded cla ssical Yang- Baxter equation and integrable models, J. Phys. A 24 (6) (1991), 1 185 – 1197. https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/24/6/012. 27

    1991 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.