Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Crystals and quantum twist automorphisms

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The quantum twist automorphism of a quantum unipotent coordinate ring is shown to be computable from crystal data: on the localized crystal it is exactly the composition of the PBW-to-string bijection with two fixed triangular matrices…

desk verdict Genuine new formula for the right dual functor on localized crystals, but the advertised translation to η_w depends on an unpublished bridge and a sketched lattice-path lemma. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.01306 v1 pith:SDIBCU3P submitted 2025-07-02 math.RT math.CO

Woo-Seok Jung , Euiyong Park This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RTmath.CO MSC 16T2017B3705E10
keywords crystalsquantumtwistautomorphismsunipotentcoordinateringslocalizedPBWparametrizationsstringminusculeYoungdiagrams
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 the quantum twist automorphism on a localized quantum unipotent coordinate ring can be described entirely through crystal bases, turning an abstract algebra automorphism into explicit combinatorial data. The authors prove that the permutation induced by the twist on the localized crystal is the composition of the PBW-to-string bijection with two fixed upper-triangular matrices, so computing the twist becomes a linear-algebra-plus-tableaux exercise. In the classical finite types, they specialize this to the *-twisted minuscule crystals and give rules in terms of (shifted) Young diagrams, and in type A they derive a closed formula for the periodicity of the twist up to frozen variables. A sympathetic reader would care because this answers a known problem about the right dual functor in crystal terms and makes the twist's behavior computable in concrete cases, with periodicity results matching prior cluster-category phenomena.

What carries the argument

The localized crystal $\widetilde{B}(w)$ — obtained from the crystal $B(w)$ by inverting the frozen elements $c_i$ — carries two parametrizations: the PBW parametrization $\widetilde{P}_{\mathbf{i}}(w)$ and the string parametrization $\widetilde{S}_{\mathbf{i}}(w)$, linked by the (generally non-linear) bijection $\psi_{\mathbf{i}}$. The two triangular matrices $M_{\mathbf{i}} = (\langle h_{i_p}, s_{i_{p+1}}\cdots s_{i_q}\Lambda_{i_q}\rangle)$ and $N_{\mathbf{i}}$ (with $1$ on the diagonal and $-1$ at positions $(p, p_+)$) mediate between $g$-vectors and these parametrizations. The proof that the twist matches $D_w$ rests on identifying $\eta_w$ with $[D_w^{-1}\circ \sigma]$ (Proposition 1.4), converting the twist into the right dual functor's action on simple modules, and then comparing $g$-vectors via the bijections $M_{\mathbf{i}}$ and $N_{\mathbf{i}}$.

What would settle it

In type $A_2$ with $w = w_\circ$, take the element $b$ with $\mathrm{PBW}_{\mathbf{i}}(b) = (1,0,0)$ and compute $\mathrm{STR}_{\mathbf{i}}(D_{w}(b))$ from Theorem 3.3 using Example 3.5's explicit $\psi_{\mathbf{i}}$, $M_{\mathbf{i}}$, $N_{\mathbf{i}}$. Compare this with the value obtained by directly applying the defining formula $\eta_w(D(v\Lambda,\Lambda)) \equiv_q D(w\Lambda,\Lambda)^{-1}D(w\Lambda,v\Lambda)$ to the corresponding upper-global-basis element and reading off its string data; any mismatch between the two outcomes would show the crystal description is not the twist.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 3.3: for every element $b$ of the localized crystal $\widetilde{B}(w)$, the twist-induced permutation $D_w$ satisfies $g_i^L(D_w(b)) = -N_i \circ \psi_i^{-1} \circ M_i(g_i^L(b))$ and $\mathrm{PBW}_i(D_w(b)) = \psi_i^{-1} \circ M_i \circ N_i(-\mathrm{PBW}_i(b))$, where $\psi_i$ is the bijection between the PBW and string parametrizations of $\widetilde{B}(w)$ and $M_i, N_i$ are fixed upper-triangular matrices built from the reduced expression $\mathbf{i}$. The proof uses the fact that the two kinds of $g$-vectors (from the upper global basis and from simple quiver-Hecke modules) coincide, and the result makes $D_w$ explicitly computable from the parametrization data. In the finite classical types, when $b$ lies in the $*$-twisted minuscule crystal and $w$ is the longest minimal coset representative for a minuscule index, the paper proves explicit formulas (Propositions 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, 4.14) expressing $\mathrm{PBW}_{\mathbf{i}}(b)$ and $\mathrm{STR}_{\mathbf{i}}(b)$ through (shifted) Young diagrams and their hook or row decompositions, and consequently computes $D_w(b)$ through the matrices $M_i, N_i$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole argument depends on the quoted identification of the twist automorphism with the crystal permutation induced by the right dual functor; that identification comes from an appendix of an earlier preprint that the published version omits, so if that bridge fails the formulas describe a different map.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any symmetrizable Kac-Moody type, the quantum twist automorphism can be computed from the PBW and string parametrizations of the localized crystal without invoking the cluster-algebra definition of the twist.
  • The periodicity $\varrho(w)$ of the twist (up to frozen variables) equals the least common multiple of the periods of the initial quantum minors in any reduced seed, so it can be obtained from the seed alone (Proposition 5.1).
  • In type $A_n$, for $w = x_t$ the longest minimal coset representative of $W_t\backslash W$, the paper gives the closed formula $\varrho(x_t) = 1$, $2$, $n+1$, or $2(n+1)/\gcd(n+1,t)$ depending on $t$ and $n$, recovering the finite periodicity known for Grassmannian cluster categories.
  • For the Young-diagram models of types $B_n$, $C_n$, $D_n$, and the minuscule indices of $E_6$ and $E_7$, the paper's formulas reduce the action of $D_{x_t}$ to finite linear algebra, with the stated periodicity values verified by computer for rank up to 10.
  • The rectangular-vector description (Proposition 5.10) gives a direct recipe for how the twist moves rectangles attached to the top or left edge of the minuscule diagram, which is the seed for the type-A periodicity proof.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same mechanism — expressing a twist as a product of a coordinate-change bijection and two fixed triangular matrices — is likely to work in any setting where both PBW-type and string-type parametrizations coexist with linear $g$-vector bijections, such as other cluster algebras with quantum unipotent cells.
  • The lattice-path model introduced for type A suggests that the twist's orbit on cluster variables can be read off geometrically from diagonal steps in a torus-like grid; generalizing that model to other minuscule indices may give uniform periodicity proofs and extend the rank-10 conjectures to all ranks.
  • The connection between the twist's period and $2(n+1)/\gcd(n+1,t)$ hints that the order of the induced permutation on the crystal is controlled by the same arithmetic that governs Coxeter element powers; one could test whether similar formulas hold for any Coxeter element in other finite types.
  • If the conjectured values for $\varrho(x_t)$ in types $B,C,D,E_6,E_7$ hold beyond rank 10, they would imply that finiteness of the twist's period selects exactly the minuscule/cominuscule indices, a purely representation-theoretic characterization that could be checked independently by direct cluster computations.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper develops a crystal-theoretic description of the quantum twist automorphism η_w on localized quantum unipotent coordinate rings and of the associated right dual functor D_w. After constructing a localized crystal eB(w) with PBW and string parametrizations, the authors prove in Theorem 3.3 that D_w is described by the PBW-to-string bijection ψ_i together with two fixed upper-triangular matrices M_i and N_i. In finite classical types they use homogeneous representations of quiver Hecke algebras to give explicit Young-diagram rules for D_w on ∗-twisted minuscule crystals (Propositions 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, and 4.14). For type A_n they derive a periodicity formula ϱ(x_t) for the longest minimal coset representative x_t (Theorem 5.18) by introducing a lattice-path model and a family of rectangular vectors preserved by D_w. The paper closes with SageMath-supported conjectures on periodicity for other finite types. The identification of η_w with [D_w^{-1}∘σ] and, on basis elements, with [D_w^{-1}], is made through Proposition 1.4, quoted from an appendix of [16] that is not contained in the published version [17].

Significance. If the external bridge in Proposition 1.4 is supplied, the paper would give an explicit, computable description of the quantum twist automorphism and the right dual functor, answering a problem of Nakashima in finite type and providing new periodicity results. The minuscule Young-diagram rules are concrete and checkable, and the conjectures are accompanied by substantial SageMath verification, which is a strength. The internal derivation of the formulas for D_w appears coherent and uses established g-vector and categorification results. However, the advertised central claim about η_w is conditional on an unpublished external appendix, because Theorem 3.3 and the later propositions compute D_w rather than η_w directly; without an independent proof of Proposition 1.4 the main title/abstract claim is not fully established within the manuscript.

major comments (3)
  1. [§1.2, Proposition 1.4 and §3, Theorem 3.3] The identification of η_w with [D_w^{-1}∘σ] and, on basis elements, with [D_w^{-1}], is quoted from [16, Theorem B.22], and the authors explicitly note that Appendix B of [16] is not included in the published version [17]. This proposition is load-bearing: it converts the crystal formulas for D_w in Theorem 3.3 into statements about the quantum twist automorphism η_w, which is the advertised object of the paper. Please include a self-contained proof of Proposition 1.4 (or at least a verification of its hypotheses in this setting), or alternatively reframe the abstract and introduction so that the main results are stated for D_w and the connection to η_w is marked as conditional on an external result.
  2. [§5.1.2, Lemma 5.15 and the proof of Theorem 5.18] Lemma 5.15 asserts D^{-1}(S(p_k)) = S(p_{k+1}) for every point p_k of the lattice path, with the proof dismissed as "a straightforward case-by-case verification using Proposition 5.10." This lemma is essential for the argument in Theorem 5.18, since it identifies the orbit of the initial-seed variables under D^{-1} and hence determines ϱ(x_t). Please provide the actual case analysis or a more systematic proof. In the same theorem, the characterization (5.9) of when (x(u),y(u)) satisfies condition (5.8) is stated as obtained "by inspecting" the formulas; since this characterization underlies the lcm computation, it should be made explicit and proved.
  3. [§5.1.2, proof of Theorem 5.18] The proof of Theorem 5.18 relies on Lemma 5.17(i)-(iii), whose proofs are largely asserted rather than derived in detail. In particular, the formula for x(u) in terms of D(u) and the count e of crossed lines are central to obtaining the periodicity ϱ(x_t). Please expand these arguments so that a reader can verify the arithmetic without reconstructing the lattice-path geometry from scratch.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.4.1 and §4.4.2] The phrase "quiver Heck algebra" appears in Section 4.4.1 and Section 4.4.2; it should read "quiver Hecke algebra."
  2. [Introduction] In the second paragraph, "corresponding the the quantum unipotent minor" has a duplicated "the"; please correct.
  3. [Abstract] The phrase "crystal bases theory" should be "crystal base theory" or "theory of crystal bases."
  4. [References] The references [26] and [27] appear to be the same paper: both list "Localizations for quiver Hecke algebras," Pure Appl. Math. Q., 17(4):1465–1548, 2021. Please merge or distinguish them.
  5. [§5.2] The statement in Remark 5.11(2) reads "both rule gives the same element"; it should be "both rules give the same element."

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper's D_w formulas are derived from established g-vector, PBW, and string bijections; the eta_w-to-D_w bridge is an external dependency, not a self-referential input.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. D_w is introduced via the commuting diagram (2.7), and Proposition 1.4—quoted from the external preprint [16, Theorem B.22]—provides the only bridge from eta_w to D_w. Once that identification is granted, Theorem 3.3 is proved from previously established identities, specifically g^R_i(b) + g^L_i(D_w(b)) = 0 from [24, Lemma 3.13] and [29, Corollary 4.6], together with the bijections in (3.5). No parameter is fitted and then renamed as a prediction, and no target statement is assumed in the definitions. The Young-diagram rules in Propositions 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, and 4.14 follow from Specht-module isomorphisms and Theorem 3.3, and the periodicity results are derived from Proposition 5.1 and explicit orbit computations, with the SageMath-based periodicity statements explicitly labeled as conjectures. The authors cite their own prior work [24, 25, 29] for proven lemmas about g-vectors and string parametrizations, but these are independent published results, not self-referential assumptions of the conclusions. The reliance on the unpublished appendix [16, Theorem B.22] is a genuine external-dependency and correctness risk, since the paper computes D_w rather than eta_w directly, but that is not circularity: the argument does not assume what it purports to prove. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

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

No free parameters are fitted in this paper; the matrices M_i and N_i are defined, not estimated. The dominant axioms are standard results in crystal theory, quiver Hecke algebra categorification, and g-vector theory, cited from the literature. The paper additionally relies on an external appendix result (Proposition 1.4) and on an unproved internal lemma (Lemma 5.15). No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Localized category eC_w is rigid and admits a right dual functor D_w (from [26, 28])
    Used in Section 1.2 and Proposition 1.4 to define D_w on the localized crystal eB(w).
  • domain assumption η_w equals [D_w^{-1}∘σ] and η_w(x) ≡_q [D_w^{-1}](x) for x in eG^up(w) and eG(w) (Proposition 1.4, citing [16, Theorem B.22])
    This is the bridge connecting the quantum twist automorphism to the right dual functor; it is cited from an appendix not included in the published version [17].
  • standard math The g-vector equalities g^L_i(x)=g^L_i(L(x)) and g^R_i(x)=g^R_i(L(x)) from [24, 29] hold for all x in eB(w)
    Used in Proposition 3.1(i) and in the proof of Theorem 3.3.
  • domain assumption The Specht modules S_λ realize the simple objects L(b_λ) for minuscule representations, with character Σ_{T∈ST(λ)} res(T) (from [36, 42, 2])
    Used in Propositions 4.3, 4.7, 4.10, and 4.14 to compute string data of minuscule crystals.
  • ad hoc to paper Lemma 5.15: D^{-1}(S(p_k)) = S(p_{k+1}) for the lattice path construction
    Asserted without proof ('straightforward case-by-case verification'); this is load-bearing for the periodicity theorem (Theorem 5.18).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Crystals and quantum twist automorphisms." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SDIBCU3P

@misc{pith2026250701306,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Crystals and quantum twist automorphisms},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SDIBCU3P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.01306}
}
abstract

Let $\eta_w$ be the quantum twist automorphism for the quantum unipotent coordinate ring $\mathrm{A}_q(\mathfrak{n}(w))$ introduced by Kimura and Oya. In this paper, we study the quantum twist automorphism $\eta_w$ in the viewpoint of the crystal bases theory and provide a crystal-theoretic description of $\eta_w$. In the case of the $*$-twisted minuscule crystals of classical finite types, we provide a combinatorial description of $\eta_w$ in terms of (shifted) Young diagrams. We further investigate the periodicity of $\eta_w$ up to a multiple of frozen variables in various setting.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.01306 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The points p0, . . . , p4 and path L4 associated to n = 5, t = 3, and (i, j) = (1, 2) Lemma 5.17. Let u ⩾ 1, and denote by D(u) the number of (1, 1)-moves in L(u). (i) The value x(u) is determined by D(u), and is explicitly given by x(u) = 2  D(u) t  t +    i + D(u) if D(u) < ic , t + D(u) if D(u) ⩾ i c , where D(u) ∈ [0, t − 1] such that D(u) = D(u) mod t. (ii) Let e ∈ Z>0 such that pe = (x(u), y(u)). Then e =… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [16]

    Wilson lines and their Laurent positivity

    T. Ishibashi and H. Oya. Wilson lines and their Laurent positivity. arXiv preprint arXiv:2011.14260v2, 2021

    work page Pith review arXiv 2011

  2. [17]

    Ishibashi and H

    T. Ishibashi and H. Oya. Wilson lines and their Laurent positivity. Math. Z., 305(2):Paper No. 34, 60, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [1]

    K. Baur. Grassmannians and cluster structures. Bull. Iranian Math. Soc. , 47:S5–S33, 2021

    work page 2021

  4. [2]

    Benkart, S.-J

    G. Benkart, S.-J. Kang, S.-j. Oh, and E. Park. Construction of irreducible representations over Khovanov- Lauda-Rouquier algebras of finite classical type. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (5):1312–1366, 2014

    work page 2014

  5. [3]

    Berenstein, S

    A. Berenstein, S. Fomin, and A. Zelevinsky. Parametrizations of canonical bases and totally positive matrices. Adv. Math., 122(1):49–149, 1996

    work page 1996

  6. [4]

    Berenstein and D

    A. Berenstein and D. Rupel. Quantum cluster characters of Hall algebras. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 21(4):1121– 1176, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [5]

    Berenstein and A

    A. Berenstein and A. Zelevinsky. Total positivity in Schubert varieties.Comment. Math. Helv., 72(1):128–166, 1997

    work page 1997

  8. [6]

    Berenstein and A

    A. Berenstein and A. Zelevinsky. Quantum cluster algebras. Adv. Math., 195(2):405–455, 2005

    work page 2005

Show all 47 references
  1. [7]

    Bump and A

    D. Bump and A. Schilling. Crystal bases. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2017. Representations and combinatorics

    2017

  2. [8]

    Fomin and A

    S. Fomin and A. Zelevinsky. Cluster algebras. I. Foundations. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 15(2):497–529, 2002

    2002

  3. [9]

    Fujita and H

    N. Fujita and H. Oya. Newton-okounkov polytopes of schubert varieties arising from cluster structures. Preprint, arXiv:2002.09912v2, 2020

    2002 arXiv

  4. [10]

    Geiss, B

    C. Geiss, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. Partial flag varieties and preprojective algebras. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble), 58(3):825–876, 2008

    2008

  5. [11]

    C. Geiß, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. Kac-Moody groups and cluster algebras. Adv. Math. , 228(1):329–433, 2011

    2011

  6. [12]

    Geiss, B

    C. Geiss, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. Generic bases for cluster algebras and the Chamber ansatz. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 25(1):21–76, 2012

    2012

  7. [13]

    C. Geiß, B. Leclerc, and J. Schr¨ oer. Cluster structures on quantum coordinate rings. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 19(2):337–397, 2013

    2013

  8. [14]

    K. R. Goodearl and M. T. Yakimov. Quantum cluster algebra structures on quantum nilpotent algebras. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. , 247(1169):vii+119, 2017

    2017

  9. [15]

    Hong and S.-J

    J. Hong and S.-J. Kang. Introduction to quantum groups and crystal bases , volume 42 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2002. 50 W.-S. JUNG AND E. PARK

    2002

  10. [18]

    V. G. Kac. Infinite-dimensional Lie algebras . Cambridge university press, 1990

    1990

  11. [19]

    S.-J. Kang, M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, and S.-j. Oh. Monoidal categorification of cluster algebras. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 31(2):349–426, 2018

    2018

  12. [20]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. On crystal bases of the q-analogue of universal enveloping algebras. Duke Mathematical Journal, 63(2):465–516, 1991

    1991

  13. [21]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. Global crystal bases of quantum groups. Duke Math. J. , 69(2):455–485, 1993

    1993

  14. [22]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. On crystal bases. Representations of groups (Banff, AB, 1994) , 16:155–197, 1995

    1994

  15. [23]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. Bases cristallines des groupes quantiques , volume 9 of Cours Sp´ ecialis´ es [Specialized Courses]. Soci´ et´ e Math´ ematique de France, Paris, 2002

    2002

  16. [24]

    Kashiwara and M

    M. Kashiwara and M. Kim. Laurent phenomenon and simple modules of quiver Hecke algebras. Compos. Math., 155(12):2263–2295, 2019

    2019

  17. [25]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, S.-j. Oh, and E. Park. Monoidal categories associated with strata of flag manifolds. Advances in Mathematics , 328:959–1009, 2018

    2018

  18. [26]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, S.-J. Oh, and E. Park. Localizations for quiver Hecke algebras. Pure Appl. Math. Q., 17(4):1465–1548, 2021

    2021

  19. [27]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, S.-j. Oh, and E. Park. Localizations for quiver Hecke algebras. Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly , 17(4):1465–1548, 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, S.-j. Oh, and E. Park. Localizations for quiver Hecke algebras II. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 127(4):1134–1184, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Kim, S.-j. Oh, and E. Park. Laurent family of simple modules over quiver Hecke algebras. Compos. Math., 160(8):1916–1940, 2024

    1916

  22. [30]

    B. Keller. The periodicity conjecture for pairs of Dynkin diagrams. Ann. of Math. (2) , 177(1):111–170, 2013

    2013

  23. [31]

    Khovanov and A

    M. Khovanov and A. D. Lauda. A diagrammatic approach to categorification of quantum groups I. Repre- sentation Theory of the American Mathematical Society , 13(14):309–347, 2009

    2009

  24. [32]

    Khovanov and A

    M. Khovanov and A. D. Lauda. A diagrammatic approach to categorification of quantum groups II . Trans- actions of the American Mathematical Society , pages 2685–2700, 2011

    2011

  25. [33]

    Y. Kimura. Quantum unipotent subgroup and dual canonical basis. Kyoto J. Math. , 52(2):277–331, 2012

    2012

  26. [34]

    Kimura and H

    Y. Kimura and H. Oya. Twist automorphisms on quantum unipotent cells and dual canonical bases. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (9):6772–6847, 2021

    2021

  27. [35]

    Kimura, F

    Y. Kimura, F. Qin, and Q. Wei. Twist automorphisms and Poisson structures.SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. , 19:Paper No. 105, 39, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Kleshchev and A

    A. Kleshchev and A. Ram. Homogeneous representations of Khovanov-Lauda algebras. J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS), 12(5):1293–1306, 2010

    2010

  29. [37]

    A. D. Lauda and M. Vazirani. Crystals from categorified quantum groups. Adv. Math., 228(2):803–861, 2011

    2011

  30. [38]

    G. Lusztig. Canonical bases arising from quantized enveloping algebras. Journal of the American Mathemat- ical Society, 3(2):447–498, 1990

    1990

  31. [39]

    G. Lusztig. Introduction to quantum groups, volume 110 of Progress in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 1993

    1993

  32. [40]

    Nakashima

    T. Nakashima. Categorified crystal structure on localized quantum coordinate rings. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.08396, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    H. Oya. The chamber ansatz for quantum unipotent cells. Transform. Groups, 24(1):193–217, 2019. CRYSTALS AND QUANTUM TWIST AUTOMORPHISMS 51

    2019

  34. [42]

    E. Park. Cyclotomic quiver Hecke algebras corresponding to minuscule representations. J. Korean Math. Soc., 57(6):1373–1388, 2020

    2020

  35. [43]

    F. Qin. Triangular bases in quantum cluster algebras and monoidal categorification conjectures. Duke Math. J., 166(12):2337–2442, 2017

    2017

  36. [44]

    F. Qin. Dual canonical bases and quantum cluster algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.13674 , 2020

    2003 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Rouquier

    R. Rouquier. 2-Kac-Moody algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:0812.5023 , 2008

    2008 arXiv

  38. [46]

    M. Tada. Relation between the weyl group orbits of fundamental weights for multiply-laced finite dimensional simple lie algebras and d-complete posets. Tsukuba Journal of Mathematics , 48(2):171–204, 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    Sage Mathematics Software (Version 10.6), 2025

    The Sage Development Team. Sage Mathematics Software (Version 10.6), 2025. https://www.sagemath.org. (W.-S. Jung) Department of Mathematics, University of Seoul, Seoul 02504, Korea Email address : jungws@uos.ac.kr (E. Park) Department of Mathematics, University of Seoul, Seoul...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.