Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 3 minor 37 references

Preorders on maximal chains: hyperplane arrangements, Cambrian lattices, and maximal green sequences

T0 review · 1 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Lattice quotients of polygonal lattices induce contractions on preordered sets of maximal chains, unifying higher Bruhat orders, Cambrian lattices, and maximal green sequences.

desk verdict Substantial contraction framework for maximal-chain preorders, but Lemma 2.11's proof has a real gap in the connected-fibres step that needs fixing before acceptance. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.08858 v1 pith:2WC3WNSB submitted 2025-06-10 math.CO math.RT

Mikhail Gorsky , Nicholas J. Williams This is my paper
classification math.COmath.RT MSC 06A0716G2017B2213F60
keywords preorderspolygonallatticesedgelabellingslatticequotientsCambrianhigherBruhatordersStasheff-Tamarimaximalgreensequences
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 builds one general construction behind several familiar orders on maximal chains: given a finite polygonal lattice with a forcing-consistent polygonal edge labelling, it defines a preorder on square-equivalence classes of maximal chains. It proves that every lattice quotient induces an order-preserving surjection between these preordered sets, and that when the labelling is polygon-complete the induced map is a contraction of preordered sets, meaning it is surjective, has connected fibres, and lifts covering relations. In Coxeter arrangements the construction recovers the weak Bruhat order and produces a distinct partial order for each Coxeter element $c$; the Cambrian quotient is then a contraction of posets. In simply-laced types a covering relation is contracted exactly when its root label is not $c$-stable, so the quotient chain is labelled by the sequence of $c$-stable roots. The same framework shows that the classical map from the two-dimensional higher Bruhat order to the three-dimensional higher Stasheff--Tamari order is a contraction, and gives new partial orders on maximal green sequences of preprojective algebras.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing objects are finite polygonal lattices---lattices whose Hasse diagrams are glued from polygons with exactly two maximal chains---equipped with a forcing-consistent polygonal polygon-complete edge labelling $\lambda$ valued in a poset; polygon-complete means that increasing polygon moves are covering relations of the preorder. A maximal chain is a sequence of covering relations; two chains are square-equivalent when related by moves across square facets, and $\operatorname{gMC}_\lambda(L)$ is the resulting preorder whose comparabilities come from replacing the ascending chain of a non-square polygon by the descending chain. The quotient edge labelling $\lambda_\theta$ is defined on the quotient lattice using forcing-equivalence classes of covering relations, and the induced map $\operatorname{gMC}(q)$ is shown to be order-preserving, surjective, fibre-connected, and surjective on covering relations---exactly the defining properties of a contraction of preordered sets. In the Coxeter case the edge labels are positive roots ordered by the heap poset $\operatorname{Heap}(w_0(c))$, and $c$-stability of a root $\beta$---that every rank-two subsystem containing $\beta$ is ordered along the chain as it is in that heap---governs which labels survive Cambrian contraction.

What would settle it

A concrete check is to look for a finite polygonal lattice $L$, a lattice congruence $\theta$, and a maximal chain $C$ of $L/\theta$ such that the fibre of $\operatorname{MC}(q)$ above $C$ contains two maximal chains not connected by any sequence of polygon moves, or an interval in which the common lower bound used in Lemma 2.11 lies on no maximal chain. Finding either would disprove Lemma 2.11 and remove the connected-fibres conclusion, and with it the contraction conclusion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is Theorem 3.8 (Theorem A): if $L$ is a finite polygonal lattice with a forcing-consistent polygon-complete polygonal edge labelling $\lambda$, then for every lattice quotient $q\colon L\to L/\theta$ the induced map $\operatorname{gMC}(q)\colon \operatorname{gMC}_\lambda(L)\to \operatorname{gMC}_{\lambda_\theta}(L/\theta)$ is a contraction of preordered sets. The quotient edge labelling $\lambda_\theta$ is inherited from $\lambda$ through forcing-equivalence, and the map is order-preserving, surjective, connected in fibres, and surjective on covering relations. In the Coxeter special case this yields Theorem 6.15: the Cambrian quotient $\operatorname{gMC}(q_c)\colon \operatorname{gMC}_{\lambda_{w_0(c)}}(W)\to \operatorname{gMC}_{\lambda_{\theta_c}}(W_c)$ is a contraction of posets. In simply-laced types, Theorem 6.3 and Corollary 6.11 identify the non-contracted covering relations exactly as those whose edge label is $c$-stable, so the image of a chain is its sequence of $c$-stable roots. The paper also obtains Theorem 7.14: for each Coxeter element $c$, there is a partial order on equivalence classes of maximal green sequences of the preprojective algebra $\Pi$ for which the map to the maximal-green-sequence poset of the hereditary algebra $\Lambda_c$ is a contraction of posets.

Load-bearing premise

All maximal chains mapping to one chain in a quotient can be linked by polygon moves; the proof of that claim contains a step where a chosen maximal chain is assumed to contain the common lower bound of two elements, but a maximal chain need not contain that common lower bound.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The classical map from the two-dimensional higher Bruhat order $B(n,2)$ to the three-dimensional higher Stasheff--Tamari order $S(n+2,3)$ is a contraction of posets, so its fibres are connected even though they are not always intervals.
  • For every Coxeter element $c$ of a finite Coxeter group, the Cambrian quotient $W\to W_c$ induces a contraction of posets $\operatorname{gMC}(q_c)\colon \operatorname{gMC}_{\lambda_{w_0(c)}}(W)\to \operatorname{gMC}_{\lambda_{\theta_c}}(W_c)$.
  • In simply-laced types, a covering relation of a chain survives the Cambrian contraction if and only if its label is a $c$-stable root, so the quotient chain is the ordered list of $c$-stable roots of the original chain.
  • For each Coxeter element $c$, the equivalence classes of maximal green sequences of the preprojective algebra $\Pi$ carry a partial order for which the canonical quotient map to the hereditary algebra $\Lambda_c$ is a contraction of posets.
  • The categorical interpretation of Cambrian congruences through torsion-free classes of preprojective and path algebras holds in non-simply-laced crystallographic types as well.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The dimension-two contraction result makes the paper's higher-dimensional conjecture---that the maps $B(n,d)\to S(n+2,d+1)$ are contractions for all $d$---directly testable: the first obstruction would be a disconnected fibre in some higher dimension.
  • The $c$-stability criterion is deliberately analogous to the stable objects of a Rudakov stability condition; one could try to prove that the $c$-stable roots of a chain are exactly the stable objects of an explicit stability condition on the module category, which would explain why the quotient is a contraction and not merely a map.
  • Because the fibres are connected but not always intervals, the quotient of maximal-chain posets is genuinely weaker than an order congruence; this suggests that connected fibres, rather than interval fibres, is the natural quotient notion for many representation-theoretic and combinatorial maps.
  • If the flawed step in Lemma 2.11 cannot be repaired, the theorem may still be true in the hyperplane-arrangement and Coxeter settings where extra geometry supplies the needed connectivity; identifying exactly which inputs replace the order-theoretic step would delineate the true scope of Theorem A.
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

1 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a general order-theoretic framework for preorders on square-equivalence classes of maximal chains in finite polygonal lattices, using forcing-consistent polygonal edge labellings. It proves that such labellings descend to lattice quotients and that the induced map on classes is an order-preserving surjection; with an additional polygon-completeness condition it is a contraction of preordered sets (Theorem 3.8). The framework is applied to lattices of regions of simplicial hyperplane arrangements and to finite Coxeter groups, where it yields partial orders on commutation classes of reduced expressions of the longest element. In the Cambrian setting the contraction is described in terms of c-stable roots, and the authors connect the construction to maximal green sequences of preprojective and hereditary algebras and to the Kapranov–Voevodsky maps from higher Bruhat to higher Stasheff–Tamari orders. The paper also claims connectedness of the fibres of the latter map and gives a non-simply-laced version of a categorical interpretation of Cambrian congruences.

Significance. If Theorem 3.8 and its applications are correct, the paper provides a substantial unifying framework with several new results: the Kapranov–Voevodsky map from B(n,2) to S(n+2,3) is a contraction (Corollary 8.7), Cambrian contractions admit a stability-theoretic description (Corollary 6.11), and there is a new proof of a categorical interpretation of Cambrian congruences beyond the simply-laced case (Proposition 7.15). The paper is carefully organised and relies on established external results rather than on curve-fitting or self-generated predictions, and its conjectures are clearly separated from theorems. However, the central contraction theorem depends on Lemma 2.11, whose proof currently has a gap; since Theorem 3.8(2), Theorem 6.15, Corollary 8.7, and Proposition 7.15 all invoke that lemma, the main results are not yet established as written.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 2.2, Lemma 2.11] The proof of connectedness of the fibres of MC(q) contains an unjustified step. After redefining x := x ∧ x' and y := y ∧ y', the text asserts that 'C_L also passes through ˇx and y' and then defines bC_L := (C_L \ [ˇx,y]) ∪ bC. But C_L contains min_{j+1}(C_L), not necessarily the meet y = min_{j+1}(C_L) ∧ min_{j+1}(C'_L); a maximal chain in a lattice interval need not contain the meet of two of its elements, as illustrated by the Boolean chain ∅ < {1} < {1,2} < {1,2,3}, which does not contain {2}, the meet of {1,2} and {2,3}. The proof gives no property of the fibre that would force this meet to lie on C_L, so bC_L may fail to be a chain and the induction step does not go through. This lemma is the only place where connectedness of fibres of MC(q) is established, and it is explicitly invoked in the proof of Theorem 3.8(2); consequently the contraction conclusions in Theorem 6.15, Corollary 8.7, and Proposition 7.15 are affected. The lemma may be true, but the proof as written needs a repair or a different argument.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 2.1.2] The definition of contraction congruence would be clearer if it stated explicitly that the relation R in 'the transitive closure −→R of the quotient relation R' is the quotient relation defined in the preceding paragraph, since the notation R is reused.
  2. [Section 5.1.2 / Proposition 7.15] Reduced words are set in bold in Section 5.1.2, but in Proposition 7.15 the same symbol w0 is used both for the longest element and for a reduced expression of it; this overloading should be disambiguated.
  3. [Lemma 2.9] The sentence 'One can use the technique of Lemma 2.6 to extend C and C′' is very terse; spelling out the extension step would improve readability and make the proof easier to verify.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central contraction theorem derives from definitions and external cited results, not from its conclusion; one local proof gap in Lemma 2.11 is a correctness issue, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The main derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 3.8 is proved from the definitions of forcing-consistent polygonal edge labellings, polygon moves, the quotient edge labelling, and Lemma 2.11; the contraction conclusion in Theorem 3.8(2) uses connected fibres plus lifting of covering relations via Lemma 2.9 and polygon-completeness. No fitted parameter is relabelled as a prediction, and no asserted theorem is identical to an input by construction. The Coxeter and Cambrian specializations are established from root-system facts cited to Reading, Dyer, Papi, and Reading-Speyer, together with the paper's own framework; the c-stable criterion is derived rather than assumed. The maximal-green-sequence applications use the authors' earlier paper [GW23], but those cited results are prior independent theorems, not assumptions of the present conclusions; Proposition 7.15 extends Fact 7.1(3) to non-simply-laced types using earlier results of this paper and [Dem+23] without presupposing the desired equality of congruences. No circularity pattern is exhibited. However, there is a genuine missing-support issue in the proof of Lemma 2.11: after setting y := min_{j+1}(C_L) ∧ min_{j+1}(C'_L), the proof asserts that C_L also passes through ˇx and y, but a maximal chain in an interval need not contain the meet of two minimal elements of the next fibre, so the replacement chain may not be a chain. This gap affects the connected-fibres lemma and therefore Theorem 3.8(2) and Corollary 8.7 as written. This is a correctness concern, not a circular reduction, so the circularity score stays low. Self-citations to [GW23] are present and support auxiliary statements in Section 7, but they do not make the central derivation equivalent to its own inputs. The paper is otherwise self-contained against external benchmarks. Accordingly, the appropriate finding is no significant circularity with a low score, while noting the local proof gap for the authors to repair.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The proofs depend on established theorems: Reading's polygonal lattice theory (Fact 2.2, Fact 4.1), Dyer/Papi characterization of root sequences (Fact 5.5), Reading-Speyer sortability results (Lemma 6.1, Theorem 6.3), and representation-theoretic facts on torsion-free classes (Fact 7.1) and lattice quotients from Demonet et al. These are imported as axioms from the literature; the paper's contribution is the new framework built on top.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Reading: finite polygonal lattices have all maximal chains related by polygon moves, and quotient lattices of polygonal lattices are polygonal.
    Imported from [Rea16b, Lemma 9-6.3, Proposition 9-6.9]; used in Lemmas 2.9, 2.10, 2.11 and Theorem 3.8.
  • domain assumption Reading: the lattice of regions L(H,B) of a simplicial hyperplane arrangement is a polygonal lattice.
    Imported from [Rea16b, Cor 9-3.4, Theorem 9-6.10]; used in Section 4 and Theorem 4.10.
  • domain assumption Dyer-Papi characterization: a total order on positive roots is a root sequence iff it satisfies the two-term convexity condition.
    Imported from [Dye93, (2.2), Prop (2.13)] and [Pap94]; used in Fact 5.5 and Proposition 5.8.
  • domain assumption Reading-Speyer: c-sortability is equivalent to c-alignment; skew-symmetrized Euler form signs determine the heap order on rank-two subsystems.
    Imported from [RS11, Lemma 3.8, Lemma 3.9, Theorem 4.3]; used in Lemma 6.1, Theorem 6.3, and Lemma 6.5.
  • domain assumption Mizuno, Ingalls-Thomas, Mizuno-Thomas, Demonet et al.: W is isomorphic to torf Π and W_c to torf Λ_c; in simply-laced types the Cambrian quotient is induced by the algebra quotient Π to Λ_c.
    Imported from [Miz14, Theorem 2.30], [IT09, Theorem 4.3], [MT20, Theorem 1.3], and [Dem+23, Theorem 7.2]; used in Section 7; Prop 7.15 extends the last statement to non-simply-laced types.
  • domain assumption Demonet et al.: the algebra quotient Π to Λ_c induces a lattice quotient of torsion-free classes and contracts exactly edges labelled by bricks outside mod Λ_c.
    Imported from [Dem+23, Theorem 5.12(a) and Theorem 5.15(a)]; used in Proposition 7.15 and Corollary 7.16.
  • standard math Kac root decomposition and Humphreys bounds in simply-laced type: for β - α_s = sum γ_i, B(γ_i, β) ≤ 1 and B(γ_i, α_s) ≥ -1.
    Imported from [Kac82, Proposition 3(b)] and [Hum78, Section 9.4]; used in Lemma 6.5.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Preorders on maximal chains: hyperplane arrangements, Cambrian lattices, and maximal green sequences." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2WC3WNSB

@misc{pith2026250608858,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Preorders on maximal chains: hyperplane arrangements, Cambrian lattices, and maximal green sequences},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2WC3WNSB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.08858}
}
read the original abstract

We study preorders on (equivalence classes of) maximal chains in the general context of polygonal lattices endowed with suitably nice edge labellings. We show that, given a quotient of polygonal lattices, such edge labellings descend to the quotient, and that there is an induced order-preserving surjective map on the preordered sets of equivalence classes of maximal chains. Under a natural condition ensuring that the domain is a poset, the map is a contraction of preordered sets. We apply this to lattices of regions of simplicial hyperplane arrangements, where the preorders are partial orders, in particular to finite Coxeter arrangements. For the latter, each choice of Coxeter element gives us a different partial order on the set of equivalence classes of maximal chains; these generalise certain reoriented higher Bruhat orders in dimension two. The maps of posets of maximal chains induced by Cambrian congruences generalise the map of Kapranov and Voevodsky from the higher Bruhat orders to the higher Stasheff--Tamari orders in dimension two. While the fibres of this map are known not always to be intervals, our results show that they are always connected. We show that, in the case of Cambrian lattices, the induced maps on maximal chains have nice descriptions in terms of orientations of rank-two root subsystems, in a way which resembles taking the stable objects of a Rudakov stability condition. We finally consider the algebraic realisation of the weak order and Cambrian lattices via torsion-free classes of preprojective and path algebras, relating the posets of maximal chains to our earlier work on maximal green sequences.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    τ -tilting theory

    [AIR14] T. Adachi, O. Iyama, and I. Reiten. “ τ -tilting theory”. Compos. Math. 150.3 (2014), pp. 415–452. [Ami+12] C. Amiot, O. Iyama, I. Reiten, and G. Todorov. “Preprojective algebras and c-sortable words”. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 104.3 (2012), pp. 513–539. [Aok+24] T. Aoki, A. Higashitani, O. Iyama, R. Kase, and Y. Mizuno. Fans and polytopes in til...

    work page 2014

  2. [2]

    Lattice theory of the poset of regions

    Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, 2016, pp. 489–561. [Rea16b] N. Reading. “Lattice theory of the poset of regions”. Lattice theory: special topics and applications . Springer, 2016, pp. 399–487. [RS11] N. Reading and D. E. Speyer. “Sortable elements in infinite Coxeter groups”. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 363.2 (2011), pp. 699–761. [Rud97] A. Rudakov. “Stability f...

    work page 2011

  3. [9]

    Maximal green sequences for cluster-tilted algebras of finite representation type

    Graduate Texts in Mathe- matics. Second printing, revised. Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1978, pp. xii+171. [Igu19] K. Igusa. “Maximal green sequences for cluster-tilted algebras of finite representation type”. Algebr. Comb. 2.5 (2019). With an appendix written jointly with Gordana Todorov, pp. 753–780. [IT09] C. Ingalls and H. Thomas. “Noncrossing pa...

    work page 2019

  4. [10]

    Higher Bruhat orders of types B and C

    arXiv: 2107.09462 [math.CO]. [DM12] A. Dimakis and F. M¨ uller-Hoissen. “KP solitons, higher Bruhat and Tamari orders”. Associahedra, Tamari lattices and related structures . Ed. by F. M¨ uller-Hoissen, J. M. Pallo, and J. Stasheff. Vol

    work page Pith review arXiv

  5. [13]

    Shard modules

    arXiv: 2303.16332 [math.RT]. [Dye93] M. J. Dyer. “Hecke algebras and shellings of Bruhat intervals”. Compositio Math. 89.1 (1993), pp. 91–115. [Eli16] B. Elias. “Thicker Soergel calculus in type A”. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 112.5 (2016), pp. 924–978. [Eli22] B. Elias. “A diamond lemma for Hecke-type algebras”. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 375.3 (2022), pp. 1...

    work page Pith review arXiv 1993

  6. [17]

    Lattice structure in cluster algebra of finite type and non-simply-laced Ingalls–Thomas bijection

    arXiv: 2301 . 08681 [math.RT]. [Gyo24] Y. Gyoda. “Lattice structure in cluster algebra of finite type and non-simply-laced Ingalls–Thomas bijection” (2024). arXiv: 2211.08935 [math.RT]. [Hot21a] D. Hothem. Extending Higher Bruhat Orders to Non-Longest Words in Sn. Thesis (Ph.D.)–University of Oregon. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2021, p

    arXiv 2024

  7. [26]

    Adv. Stud. Pure Math. Academic Press, Boston, MA, 1989, pp. 289–

    work page 1989

  8. [27]

    On the module categories of generalized preprojective algebras of Dynkin type

    [Mur22] K. Murakami. “On the module categories of generalized preprojective algebras of Dynkin type”. Osaka J. Math. 59.2 (2022), pp. 387–402. [Nag13] K. Nagao. “Donaldson–Thomas theory and cluster algebras”. Duke Math. J. 162.7 (2013), pp. 1313–1367. [OS19] S.-j. Oh and U. R. Suh. “Combinatorial Auslander-Reiten quivers and reduced expressions”. J. Korea...

    work page 2022

Show all 37 references
  1. [31]

    Higher Bruhat orders in type B

    [SV16] S. Shelley-Abrahamson and S. Vijaykumar. “Higher Bruhat orders in type B”. Electron. J. Combin. 23.3 (2016), Paper 3.13,

    2016

  2. [32]

    Classifying τ -tilting modules over preprojective algebras of Dynkin type

    [Miz14] Y. Mizuno. “Classifying τ -tilting modules over preprojective algebras of Dynkin type”. Math. Z. 277.3-4 (2014), pp. 665–690. [MS89] Y. I. Manin and V. V. Schechtman. “Arrangements of hyperplanes, higher braid groups and higher Bruhat orders”. Algebraic number theory. Vol

    2014

  3. [45]

    Pro-species of algebras I: Basic properties

    [K¨ ul17] J. K¨ ulshammer. “Pro-species of algebras I: Basic properties”. Algebr. Represent. Theory 20.5 (2017), pp. 1215–

    2017

  4. [49]

    A survey of congruences and quotients of partially ordered sets

    34 REFERENCES [Wil24a] N. J. Williams. “A survey of congruences and quotients of partially ordered sets”. EMS Surv. Math. Sci. 11.1 (2024), pp. 153–203. [Wil24b] N. J. Williams. “The two higher Stasheff–Tamari orders are equal”. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2024). [Zie93] G. M. Ziegler...

    2024

  5. [65]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006, pp

    London Mathematical Society Student Texts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006, pp. x+458. [BB05] A. Bj¨ orner and F. Brenti. Combinatorics of Coxeter groups. Vol

    2006

  6. [127]

    Unzerlegbare Darstellungen. I

    [Gab72] P. Gabriel. “Unzerlegbare Darstellungen. I”. Manuscripta Math. 6 (1972), 71–103, correction, ibid. 6 (1972),

    1972

  7. [202]

    Heaps of pieces. I. Basic definitions and combinatorial lemmas

    Contemp. Math. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 33–36. [Vie86] G. X. Viennot. “Heaps of pieces. I. Basic definitions and combinatorial lemmas”. Combinatoire ´ enum´ erative (Montreal, Que., 1985/Quebec, Que., 1985). Vol

    1997

  8. [231]

    Minimal inclusions of torsion classes

    Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2005, pp. xiv+363. [BCZ19] E. Barnard, A. Carroll, and S. Zhu. “Minimal inclusions of torsion classes”. Algebr. Comb. 2.5 (2019), pp. 879–

    2019

  9. [273]

    Cambrian lattices

    [Rea06] N. Reading. “Cambrian lattices”. Adv. Math. 205.2 (2006), pp. 313–353. [Rea07a] N. Reading. “Clusters, Coxeter-sortable elements and noncrossing partitions”. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 359.12 (2007), pp. 5931–5958. [Rea07b] N. Reading. “Sortable elements and Cambrian latt...

    2006

  10. [299]

    On algebras of finite representation type

    Progress in Mathematical Physics. Tamari memorial Festschrift. Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Basel, 2012, pp. 391–423. [DR75] V. Dlab and C. M. Ringel. “On algebras of finite representation type”. J. Algebra 33 (1975), pp. 306–394. [DR80] V. Dlab and C. M. Ringel. “The preprojective ...

    1975

  11. [308]

    Torsion pairs for quivers and the Weyl groups

    [MT20] Y. Mizuno and H. Thomas. “Torsion pairs for quivers and the Weyl groups”. Selecta Math. (N.S.) 26.3 (2020), Paper No. 46,

    2020

  12. [309]

    Freely braided elements of Coxeter groups

    [GL02] R. M. Green and J. Losonczy. “Freely braided elements of Coxeter groups”. Ann. Comb. 6.3-4 (2002), pp. 337–

    2002

  13. [348]

    Quivers with relations for symmetrizable Cartan matrices I: Foundations

    [GLS17] C. Geiss, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. “Quivers with relations for symmetrizable Cartan matrices I: Foundations”. Invent. Math. 209.1 (2017), pp. 61–158. [GLS20] C. Geiß, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. “Rigid modules and Schur roots”. Mathematische Zeitschrift 295.3 (2...

    2017

  14. [350]

    Singularities of toric varieties associated with finite distributive lattices

    [Wag96] D. G. Wagner. “Singularities of toric varieties associated with finite distributive lattices”. J. Algebraic Combin. 5.2 (1996), pp. 149–165. [Wel20] J. Wellman. Higher Bruhat orders for any Weyl group. Available at https : / / math . mit . edu / research / undergraduat...

    1996

  15. [758]

    On cluster theory and quantum dilogarithm identities

    Contemp. Math. Amer. Math. Soc., [Providence], RI, 2020, pp. 267–286. [Kel11] B. Keller. “On cluster theory and quantum dilogarithm identities”. Representations of algebras and related topics. EMS Ser. Congr. Rep. Eur. Math. Soc., Z¨ urich, 2011, pp. 85–116. [Kol20] M. Koley. ...

    2020

  16. [832]

    Springer, Berlin, 1980, pp

    Lecture Notes in Math. Springer, Berlin, 1980, pp. 216–231. [DST23] W. Dana, D. E. Speyer, and H. Thomas. Shard modules

    1980

  17. [901]

    On commutation classes of reduced words in Weyl groups

    [B´ ed99] R. B´ edard. “On commutation classes of reduced words in Weyl groups”. European J. Combin. 20.6 (1999), pp. 483–505. [BGP73] J. N. Bernˇ ste ˘ ın, I. M. Gel ′fand, and V. A. Ponomarev. “Coxeter functors, and Gabriel’s theorem”. Uspekhi Mat. Nauk 28.2(170) (1973), pp....

    1999

  18. [1234]

    Springer, Berlin, 1986, pp

    Lecture Notes in Math. Springer, Berlin, 1986, pp. 321–

    1986

  19. [1238]

    Combinatorial-geometric aspects of polycategory theory: pasting schemes and higher Bruhat orders (list of results)

    [KV91] M. M. Kapranov and V. A. Voevodsky. “Combinatorial-geometric aspects of polycategory theory: pasting schemes and higher Bruhat orders (list of results)”. Cahiers Topologie G´ eom. Diff´ erentielle Cat´ eg.32.1 (1991). International Category Theory Meeting (Bangor, 1989 ...

    1991 arXiv

  20. [1763]

    Order structure on the algebra of permutations and of planar binary trees

    Lecture Notes in Math. Springer, Berlin, 2001, pp. 7–66. [LR02] J.-L. Loday and M. O. Ronco. “Order structure on the algebra of permutations and of planar binary trees”. J. Algebraic Combin. 15.3 (2002), pp. 253–270. [LR98] J.-L. Loday and M. O. Ronco. “Hopf algebra of the pla...

    2002

  21. [2002]

    Order-preserving maps from a poset to a chain, the order polytope, and the Todd class of the associated toric variety

    arXiv: math/0212097 [math.CO]. [Tho03] H. Thomas. “Order-preserving maps from a poset to a chain, the order polytope, and the Todd class of the associated toric variety”. European J. Combin. 24.7 (2003), pp. 809–814. [Ton97] A. Tonks. “Relating the associahedron and the permut...

    2003 arXiv

  22. [2011]

    [CF22] A

    arXiv: 1110.2115 [hep-th]. [CF22] A. Cebrian and W. Forero. Directed hereditary species and decomposition spaces

    arXiv

  23. [2020]

    New interpretations of the higher Stasheff–Tamari orders

    [Wil22] N. J. Williams. “New interpretations of the higher Stasheff–Tamari orders”. Adv. Math. 407 (2022), Paper No. 108552,

    2022

  24. [2021]

    The cluster complex of an hereditary Artin algebra

    arXiv: 2105.15181 [math.CO]. [Hub11] A. Hubery. “The cluster complex of an hereditary Artin algebra.” English. Algebr. Represent. Theory 14.6 (2011), pp. 1163–1185. [Hum78] J. E. Humphreys. Introduction to Lie algebras and representation theory. Vol

    2011 arXiv

  25. [2022]

    A Lagrangian filling for every cluster seed

    arXiv: 2211.07721 [math.CO]. [CG24] R. Casals and H. Gao. “A Lagrangian filling for every cluster seed”. Invent. Math. 237.2 (2024), pp. 809–868. [Cra00] W. Crawley-Boevey. “On the exceptional fibres of Kleinian singularities”. Amer. J. Math. 122.5 (2000), pp. 1027–1037. [CS98...

    2024 arXiv

  26. [2023]

    Algebraic weaves and braid varieties

    arXiv: 2308.06184 [math.CO]. [Cas+24] R. Casals, E. Gorsky, M. Gorsky, and J. Simental. “Algebraic weaves and braid varieties”. Amer. J. Math. 146.6 (2024), pp. 1469–1576. [Cas+25] R. Casals, E. Gorsky, M. Gorsky, I. Le, L. Shen, and J. Simental. “Cluster structures on braid v...

    2024 arXiv

  27. [2024]

    [ASS06] I

    arXiv: 2203.15213 [math.RT]. [ASS06] I. Assem, D. Simson, and A. Skowro´ nski. Elements of the representation theory of associative algebras. Vol- ume 1: Techniques of representation theory. Vol

    arXiv

  28. [2025]

    [Cas+23] R

    arXiv: 2505.06147 [math.RT]. [Cas+23] R. Casals, I. Le, M. Sherman-Bennett, and D. Weng. Demazure weaves for reduced plabic graphs (with a proof that Muller–Speyer twist is Donaldson–Thomas)

    arXiv

  29. [7237]

    Infinite root systems, representations of graphs and invariant theory. II

    [Kac82] V. G. Kac. “Infinite root systems, representations of graphs and invariant theory. II”. J. Algebra 78.1 (1982), pp. 141–162. [KD20] B. Keller and L. Demonet. “A survey on maximal green sequences”. Representation theory and beyond. Vol

    1982

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.