Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 51 references

Towards small quantum Chern character

T0 review · 2 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 This paper constructs a quantum Chern character: explicit ring homomorphisms from small quantum K-theory to small quantum cohomology for projective spaces and incidence flag varieties whose classical limit is the Chern character.

desk verdict A solid new construction of small quantum Chern characters for P^n and incidence varieties, with a genuine but fillable gap in the injectivity proof that backs the incidence-variety theorem. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.12333 v1 pith:YEDACBGZ submitted 2025-07-16 math.AG

Hua-Zhong Ke , Changzheng Li , Jiayu Song This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AG MSC 14N3514M1553D4519L10
keywords quantumCherncharactersmallK-theorycohomologyincidencevarietyMilnorhypersurfaceToddclassflag
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 aims to establish a small quantum Chern character: for $\mathbb{P}^n$ and $F\ell_{1,n-1;n}$, it defines an explicit ring homomorphism $qch:QK(X)\to QH(X)$ that sends each line-bundle inverse $L_i^{-1}$ to the quantum exponential $e^{-c_1(L_i)}$ and adjusts the Novikov variables $Q_i$ by a quantum Todd factor so that the map is compatible with the quantum relations. Setting all quantum parameters to zero recovers the classical Chern character $ch:K(X)\to H^{ev}(X)$. If the construction is correct, these are the first explicit small-locus quantum Chern characters for these varieties, making the quantum analogue of the classical Chern character commute with the natural projections to the classical rings. The paper also derives a two-generator two-relation presentation of the small quantum K-theory of Milnor hypersurfaces $H_{n-1,m-1}$, from which the incidence-variety presentation is read off.

What carries the argument

The engine is a quantum version of Taylor evaluation: for $f(x)=e^{-x}$, $(1-e^{-x})/x$, or $x/(1-e^{-x})$, the power series $f(\alpha)$ is interpreted with all powers taken in the quantum product $\ast$, so $f(h)$ is an element of the completed small quantum cohomology. The quantum Todd class $\mathrm{Td}_q(TP^n)=((1-e^{-h})/h)^{n+1}$, and for the incidence variety the analogous factors $(\mathrm{Td}_q(L_i^{\oplus n}))^{-1}\mathrm{Td}_q(L_1\otimes L_2)$ with $(1-e^{-(h_1+h_2)})/(h_1+h_2)$, provide the correction that multiplies the image of each Novikov variable. This correction is exactly what converts the classical K-theoretic relation $(1-L_i^{-1})^n-\cdots$ into the quantum cohomology relation $h_i^n=q_i(h_1+h_2)$ after the substitution $L_i^{-1}=e^{-h_i}$. The proof that the substitution respects the second relation relies on writing the polynomial $F_2$ in terms of $1-e^{-h_i}$ and on the fact that $h_1+h_2$ is not a zero divisor in $QH(F\ell_{1,n-1;n})$, established through an injective mirror map into the Jacobi ring of a toric Laurent superpotential.

What would settle it

To test the central claim, compute $h_1+h_2$ in the presentation of Proposition 4.1 and look for a nonzero class $y$ with $(h_1+h_2)\ast y=0$ in $QH(F\ell_{1,n-1;n})$; any such zero divisor would contradict Lemma 4.5 and break the proof of Theorem 4.4. Equivalently, verify or refute the asserted injectivity of the mirror map $\Phi$ for $n=3$ or $n=4$ by direct comparison of the two rings.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4.4: for the incidence variety $F\ell_{1,n-1;n}$, the map $qch:QK(F\ell_{1,n-1;n})\to QH(F\ell_{1,n-1;n})$ given by $L_i^{-1}\mapsto e^{-c_1(L_i)}$ and $Q_i\mapsto q_i(\mathrm{Td}_q(L_i^{\oplus n}))^{-1}\mathrm{Td}_q(L_1\otimes L_2)$ is a well-defined ring homomorphism whose reduction modulo the quantum parameters is the classical Chern character. The analogous statement for $\mathbb{P}^n$ is Theorem 3.1, with $L^{-1}\mapsto e^{-h}$ and $Q\mapsto q((1-e^{-h})/h)^{n+1}$. The quantum Todd factors are precisely what converts the classical K-theoretic relations, such as $(1-L^{-1})^{n+1}-Q$, into the cohomological relations $h^{n+1}=q$ or $h_i^n=q_i(h_1+h_2)$ after substituting $e^{-h_i}$ for $L_i^{-1}$. A supplementary theorem (5.7) presents $QK(H_{n-1,m-1})$ for $n\ge m\ge 3$ by two explicit relations obtained from the K-theoretic $J$-function via the quantum Lefschetz principle.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the mirror map $\Phi:QH(F\ell_{1,n-1;n})\to \mathrm{Jac}(f_{tor})\otimes \mathbb{Q}[[q_1,q_2]]$ from the small quantum cohomology of the incidence variety into the Jacobi ring of the toric superpotential is injective; Proposition 6.1 states this without a complete proof, and it is used to conclude that $h_1+h_2$ is not a zero divisor, which the theorem's relation check needs.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $\mathbb{P}^n$ and $F\ell_{1,n-1;n}$, the quantum Chern character makes the classical diagram commute: setting the Novikov variables $Q_i$ and $q_i$ to zero recovers the classical Chern character, and the map is a ring homomorphism, so quantum corrections respect products.
  • The images of the Novikov variables are forced: in both examples, once $L_i^{-1}$ is sent to $e^{-h_i}$, the requirement that $qch$ be a ring homomorphism uniquely determines $qch(Q_i)$.
  • The Milnor hypersurface presentation gives a new infinite family where the small quantum K-ring is finitely generated by two line-bundle classes with two explicit relations, with the incidence variety as the special case $m=n$.
  • The same Todd-corrected assignment is announced to work for all Milnor hypersurfaces $H_{n-1,m-1}$ once the cohomological presentation is written down.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The construction suggests a general recipe for other Fano complete intersections in products of projective spaces: send each $L_i^{-1}$ to $e^{-h_i}$ and each $Q_i$ to $q_i$ times a ratio of quantum Todd classes encoding the normal-bundle twist; testing it would require only a presentation of $QK(X)$ and a non-zero-divisor statement like Lemma 4.5.
  • The role of the non-zero-divisor lemma points to a bottleneck: the mirror-map injectivity asserted in Proposition 6.1, stated without a complete proof, is what carries the incidence-variety case, and for other varieties the analogous statement may need a direct proof or a different argument.
  • The uniqueness of $qch(Q_i)$ suggests that any lift of the Chern character to the small locus, if it exists, is canonical; therefore the main open question for a given Fano variety is existence, not choice of lift.
  • One could test the formula numerically in low degree by expanding both sides of the quantum relations after substituting $e^{-h_i}$ and the Todd-adjusted $Q_i$; equality order by order in the quantum parameters would give a concrete check of the quantum Grothendieck-Riemann-Roch interpretation.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a small-locus quantum Chern character homomorphism qch : QK(X) -> QH(X) for X = P^n and X = Fℓ_{1,n-1;n}, lifting the classical Chern character in the sense of the commutative diagram (1.1). For P^n the map is qch(L^{-1}) = e^{-h} and qch(Q) = q((1-e^{-h})/h)^{n+1}; for the incidence variety it is qch(L_i^{-1}) = e^{-h_i} and qch(Q_i) = q_i((1-e^{-h_i})/h_i)^n (h_1+h_2)/(1-e^{-(h_1+h_2)}). The incidence-variety proof uses Lemmas 4.5 and 4.6 on non-zero-divisors; Lemma 4.5 is deferred to an appendix whose key input is an injective mirror map Φ into the Jacobi ring of a toric superpotential (Proposition 6.1). Section 5 independently derives a presentation of the small quantum K-theory of Milnor hypersurfaces from the K-theoretic J-function via the quantum Lefschetz principle and a Nakayama-type argument.

Significance. The P^n theorem is clean and self-contained, and the Milnor hypersurface ring presentation is a genuinely new example obtained by a rigorous finite-difference-operator method. If the incidence-variety theorem is completed, it would be the first explicit small-locus quantum Chern character beyond projective space. The paper is honest about the deferred generalization in Remark 1.6. However, as it stands the advertised Fℓ result is conditional on an unproved injectivity statement and on a final 'one can check' identity, so the significance is real but not yet fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6 (Proposition 6.1, Lemma 4.5)] The injectivity of Φ in Proposition 6.1 is not proved. The text derives the relations (6.4)–(6.6), shows that f_1^q and f_2^q lie in the Jacobi ideal, and then asserts, after Eq. (6.8), that the ideals (R_{n-2}, R_{n-1}, R_n) and (x_{n-1}-(x_1^{n-1}-q_2), f_1^q, f_2^q) are equal. What is explicitly established is the containment needed for a well-defined map from QH(Fℓ_{1,n-1;n}) into the Jacobi ring; the reverse containment, which would preclude extra relations in the quotient and hence give injectivity of Φ, is not demonstrated. Since Lemma 4.5 is proved by applying Φ and concluding h_1+h_2 is not a zero divisor, and Lemma 4.5 is used in Lemma 4.6 to justify cancellation by 1-e^{-(h_1+h_2)} in Theorem 4.4, the incidence-variety quantum Chern character is conditional on this missing computation. Please supply a complete proof of the ideal equality (or an alternative direct proof of injectivity), and provide the n=3 verification instead of 'similar but easier'.
  2. [Section 4 (proof of Theorem 4.4)] The verification of the second relation F_2^Q vanishing under qch ends with 'Now one can check that LHS = RHS' after an unexpanded algebraic expression. This is the final step proving that qch is a well-defined ring homomorphism for Fℓ_{1,n-1;n}, so it is load-bearing. Please write out the cancellation in detail: after substituting RHS = (1-e^{-h_2})^n * (e^{-h_1})^{*(n-1)} + (-1)^{n-1}(1-e^{-h_1})^n * e^{-h_2}, show how the geometric-sum expression for (1-e^{-(h_1+h_2)}) * F_2(e^{-h_1}, e^{-h_2}) simplifies to the same two terms, using e^{-h_1} * e^{-h_2} = e^{-(h_1+h_2)}. Alternatively, state the corresponding polynomial identity in formal variables x,y and prove it.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] There are several typos ('homormorphism', 'homomorhism', 'Degline-Mumford', 'Amongest', 'cannonically') that should be fixed.
  2. [Remark 1.3] The notation QH(P^n) \ Q[[q]] is ambiguous; clarify that qch(Q) lies in QH(P^n) but not in the subring Q[[q]].
  3. [Eq. (5.7)] The displayed J-function is typeset awkwardly with the denominator split across lines; add parentheses or rewrite the fraction for readability.
  4. [Theorem 5.7 proof] The assertion that the ℏ=∞ conditions follow directly from the expression of J_H is terse; a short pole-order count (numerator vs denominator degree in ℏ) would improve the argument.
  5. [Section 4 and Eq. (1.3)] Consistently write the rational functions as (1-e^{-h_i})/h_i and (h_1+h_2)/(1-e^{-(h_1+h_2)}); the inline text is easy to misread.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the qch maps are constructed and verified against independent ring presentations; the appendix's unfinished injectivity proof is a correctness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained rather than circular. In Theorem 3.1 the P^n map is checked against the standard presentations QK(P^n)=Q[L^{-1}][[Q]]/((1-L^{-1})^{n+1}-Q) and QH(P^n)=Q[h][[q]]/(h^{n+1}-q), using only 1-e^{-h}=h*(1-e^{-h})/h in the quantum product; the image of Q is not fitted to data but is forced by the ring relation once L^{-1} maps to e^{-h}. In Theorem 4.4 the same pattern holds: the Fℓ_{1,n-1;n} verification uses the external presentation [CP11, Proposition 7.2] for QH and the presentation of QK obtained in Theorem 5.7 from the K-theoretic J-function, quantum Lefschetz, and the Nakayama-type criterion [GMSZ22, Proposition A.3]. The Todd factors in qch(Q_a) are introduced as a construction and then shown to cancel via Lemma 4.7 and Corollary 4.2; they are not adjusted to make the target relation true. The Milnor hypersurface presentation is independently derived from the projective-bundle formula, the Taipale/Lee J-function of P^{n-1}×P^{m-1}, and quantum Lefschetz. Self-citations such as [LL17] and [LLSY25] appear only in the introduction as background and are not load-bearing. The one flagged omission is Proposition 6.1 (Section 6): the injectivity of Φ is reduced to an ideal equality that is asserted to follow from the computation rather than fully displayed; that is a proof gap or correctness risk, but not a circular step, since it does not assume the target lemma and no quantity is fitted or renamed.

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

The central claims rest on established results in quantum K-theory and mirror symmetry. The most fragile input is the asserted injectivity in Proposition 6.1. No free parameters are fitted to data; the quantum Todd factors are forced by the ring relations.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption K-theoretic quantum Lefschetz principle for J-functions of hypersurfaces (Givental)
    Used in Eq. (5.7) to write the J-function of H_{n-1,m-1} as a quotient of the J-function of P^{n-1} x P^{m-1}.
  • domain assumption Reconstruction of quantum K-relations from difference operators (IMT15 Prop 2.10, HK24a Thm 4.12)
    Proposition 2.3 converts annihilation of the J-function into relations in QK(X).
  • standard math Nakayama-type lemma for complete rings (GMSZ22 Prop A.3)
    Used in Theorem 5.7 to conclude that the two explicit relations generate the full ideal.
  • domain assumption Ring presentation of QH(Fℓ_{1,n-1;n}) from Chaput-Perrin (CP11 Prop 7.2)
    Proposition 4.1 provides the target ring for the incidence-variety quantum Chern character.
  • ad hoc to paper Injectivity of the mirror map Φ into the Jacobi ring of the toric superpotential (Proposition 6.1)
    Asserted without full proof; needed for Lemma 4.5, which is essential for Theorem 4.4. This is the paper's own statement rather than a cited theorem.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards small quantum Chern character." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YEDACBGZ

@misc{pith2026250712333,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards small quantum Chern character},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YEDACBGZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.12333}
}
read the original abstract

We show a quantum version of Chern character homomorphism from the small quantum K-theory to the small quantum cohomology in the cases of projective spaces and incidence varieties, whose classical limit gives the classical Chern character homomorphism. We also provide a ring presentation of the small quantum K-theory of Milnor hypersurfaces.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Amini, I

    K. Amini, I. Huq-Kuruvilla, L. C. Mihalcea, D. Orr and W. Xu, Toda-type presentations for the quantum K theory of partial flag varieties, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2504.07412 (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    D Anderson, L Chen and H. H. Tseng, On the finiteness of quantum K-theory of a homogeneous space, Int Math Res Not, 2022, 1313--1349. With Appendix B by H. Iritani

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Atiyah, F

    M.F. Atiyah, F. Hirzebruch, Vector bundles and homogeneous spaces, Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Vol. III, pp. 7--38, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1961

    work page 1961

  4. [4]

    Behrend and B

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

    1997

  5. [5]

    Batyrev, I

    V. Batyrev, I. Ciocan-Fontanine, B. Kim and D. van Straten,\, Mirror symmetry and toric degenerations of partial flag manifolds , Acta Math. 184 (2000), no. 1, 1-39

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    Braverman and M

    A. Braverman and M. Finkelberg, Semi-infinite Schubert varieties and quantum K -theory of flag manifolds, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 27 (2014), no. 4, 1147--1168

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    A. S. Buch, P.-E. Chaput, L. C. Mihalcea and N. Perrin, Finiteness of cominuscule quantum K -theory, Ann. Sci. \'Ec. Norm. Sup\'er. (4) 46 (2013), no. 3, 477--494

    work page 2013

  8. [8]

    A. S. Buch, P.-E. Chaput, L. C. Mihalcea and N. Perrin, Rational connectedness implies finiteness of quantum K -theory, Asian J. Math. 20 (2016), no. 1, 117--122

    work page 2016

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    A. S. Buch, P.-E. Chaput, L. C. Mihalcea and N. Perrin, A Chevalley formula for the equivariant quantum K -theory of cominuscule varieties, Algebr. Geom. 5 (2018), no. 5, 568--595

    2018

  2. [10]

    A. S. Buch, P.-E. Chaput and N. Perrin, \, Seidel and Pieri products in cominuscule quantum K-theory , preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2308.05307 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    A. S. Buch and L. C. Mihalcea, Quantum K -theory of Grassmannians, Duke Math. J. 156 (2011), no. 3, 501--538

    2011

  4. [12]

    Chaput and N

    P.E. Chaput and N. Perrin, On the quantum cohomology of adjoint varieties , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 103 (2011), no. 2, 294--330

    2011

  5. [13]

    Coates, Riemann-Roch theorems in Gromov-Witten theory, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2003, 147 pp

    T. Coates, Riemann-Roch theorems in Gromov-Witten theory, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2003, 147 pp

    2003

  6. [14]

    Coates and A

    T. Coates and A. Givental, Quantum cobordisms and formal group laws, Progr. Math., 244, Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2006, 155–171

    2006

  7. [15]

    C. H. Chow and N. C. Leung, Quantum K -theory of G/P and K -homology of affine Grassmannian, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2201.12951 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Costello and S

    K. Costello and S. Li, Anomaly cancellation in the topological string, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 24 (2020), no. 7, 1723--1771

    2020

  9. [17]

    Eisenbud and J

    D. Eisenbud and J. Harris, 3264 and all that—a second course in algebraic geometry, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016

    2016

  10. [18]

    Fulton, R

    W. Fulton, R. Pandharipande, Notes on stable maps and quantum cohomology. Algebraic geometry-Santa Cruz , Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., 62, Part 2, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1997

    1997

  11. [19]

    Arnold conjecture and Gromov-Witten invariant

    Kenji Fukaya, Kaoru Ono. Arnold conjecture and Gromov-Witten invariant. Topology 38 (1999), no. 5, 933–1048

    1999

  12. [20]

    Givental, On the WDVV equation in quantum K-theory, Michigan Math

    A. Givental, On the WDVV equation in quantum K-theory, Michigan Math. J. 48 (2000), 295--304

    2000

  13. [21]

    Givental, Symplectic geometry of Frobenius structures, Aspects Math., E36, Friedr

    A. Givental, Symplectic geometry of Frobenius structures, Aspects Math., E36, Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Wiesbaden, 2004, 91--112

    2004

  14. [22]

    Givental, Permutation-equivariant quantum K -theory V

    A. Givental, Permutation-equivariant quantum K -theory V. Toric q -hypergeometric functions, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/1509.03903 (2015)

    2015 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Givental, Permutation-equivariant quantum K -theory X

    A. Givental, Permutation-equivariant quantum K -theory X. Quantum Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch in genus 0, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 16 (2020), Paper No. 031, 16 pp

    2020

  16. [24]

    Givental and Y.-P

    A. Givental and Y.-P. Lee, Quantum K -theory on flag manifolds, finite-difference Toda lattices and quantum groups, Invent. Math. 151 (2003), no. 1, 193--219

    2003

  17. [25]

    Givental and V

    A. Givental and V. Tonita, The Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch theorem in true genus-0 quantum K -theory, Math. Sci. Res. Inst. Publ., 62, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2014, 43--91

    2014

  18. [26]

    Grothendieck, La th\'eorie des classes de Chern, Bull

    A. Grothendieck, La th\'eorie des classes de Chern, Bull. Soc. Math. France 86 (1958), 137--154

    1958

  19. [27]

    W. Gu, L. C. Mihalcea, E. Sharpe, W. Xu, H. Zhang and H. Zou, Quantum K Whitney relations for partial flag varieties, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2310.03826 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    W. Gu, L. C. Mihalcea, E. Sharpe, W. Xu, H. Zhang and H. Zou, Quantum K theory rings of partial flag manifolds, J. Geom. Phys. 198 (2024), Paper No. 105127, 30pp

    2024

  21. [29]

    W. Gu, L. C. Mihalcea, E. Sharpe and H. Zou, Quantum K theory of Grassmannians, Wilson line operators, and Schur bundles, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2208.01091 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Huq-Kuruvilla, Relations in Twisted Quantum K -Rings, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2406.00916 (2024)

    I. Huq-Kuruvilla, Relations in Twisted Quantum K -Rings, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2406.00916 (2024)

    2024

  23. [31]

    Huq-Kuruvilla, Quantum K -rings of partial flag varieties, Coulomb branches, and the Bethe ansatz, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2409.15575 (2024)

    I. Huq-Kuruvilla, Quantum K -rings of partial flag varieties, Coulomb branches, and the Bethe ansatz, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2409.15575 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Ikeda, S

    T. Ikeda, S. Iwao and T. Maeno, Peterson isomorphism in K-theory and relativistic Toda lattice, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 19 (2020), 6421--6462

    2020

  25. [33]

    Iritani, T

    H. Iritani, T. Milanov and V. Tonita, Reconstruction and convergence in quantum K -theory via difference equations, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2015, no. 11, 2887--2937

    2015

  26. [34]

    Karoubi, K -theory

    M. Karoubi, K -theory. An introduction, Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 226, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1978

    1978

  27. [35]

    Kato, Loop structure on equivariant K -theory of semi-infinite flag manifolds, to appear in Ann

    S. Kato, Loop structure on equivariant K -theory of semi-infinite flag manifolds, to appear in Ann. Math.; preprint at arXiv: math.AG/1805.01718

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    Kato, On quantum K -groups of partial flag manifolds, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/1906.09343 (2019)

    S. Kato, On quantum K -groups of partial flag manifolds, preprint at arXiv: math.AG/1906.09343 (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Koroteev, P

    P. Koroteev, P. P. Pushkar, A. V. Smirnov and A. M. Zeitlin, Quantum K -theory of quiver varieties and many-body systems, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 27 (2021), no. 5, Paper No. 87, 40pp

    2021

  30. [38]

    Kouno and S

    T. Kouno and S. Naito, Borel-type presentation of the torus-equivariant quantum K ring of flag manifolds of type C , preprint at arXiv: math.AG/2410.10575 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Kouno, C

    T. Kouno, C. Lenart, S. Naito and D. Sagaki, Quantum K -theory Chevalley formulas in the parabolic case, J. Algebra 645 (2024), 1--53. With Appendix B joint with W. Xu

    2024

  32. [40]

    T. Lam, C. Li, L. C. Mihalcea and M. Shimozono, A conjectural Peterson isomorphism in K -theory, J. Algebra 513 (2018), 326--343

    2018

  33. [41]

    Lenart, S

    C. Lenart, S. Naito and D. Sagaki, A general Chevalley formula for semi-infinite flag manifolds and quantum K -theory, Selecta Math. (N.S.) 30 (2024), no. 3, Paper No. 39, 44 pp

    2024

  34. [42]

    Lee, Quantum K -theory, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 1999, 58 pp

    Y.-P. Lee, Quantum K -theory, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 1999, 58 pp

    1999

  35. [43]

    Lee, Quantum K-theory

    Y.-P. Lee, Quantum K-theory. I. Foundations, Duke Math. J. 121 (2004), no. 3, 389--424

    2004

  36. [44]

    Leung and C

    N.C. Leung and C. Li, An update of quantum cohomology of homogeneous varieties, Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Chinese Mathematicians. Vol. II, 211–235, Adv. Lect. Math. (ALM), 37, Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2017

    2017

  37. [45]

    C. Li, Z. Liu, J. Song and M. Yang, On Seidel representation in quantum K -theory of Grassmannians, Sci. China Math. 68 (2025), no. 7, 1523–1548

    2025

  38. [46]

    Li and G

    J. Li and G. Tian, Virtual moduli cycles and Gromov-Witten invariants of algebraic varieties , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 11 (1998), no. 1, 119--174

    1998

  39. [47]

    Maeno, S

    T. Maeno, S. Naito, and D. Sagaki, A presentation of the torus-equivariant quantum K -theory ring of flag manifolds of type A , Part I: The defining ideal, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 111 (2025), no. 3, Paper No. e70095, 43pp

    2025

  40. [48]

    Maeno, S

    T. Maeno, S. Naito, and D. Sagaki, A presentation of the torus-equivariant quantum K -theory ring of flag manifolds of type A , Part II: quantum double Grothendieck polynomials, Forum Math. Sigma 13 (2025), Paper No. e19, 26pp

    2025

  41. [49]

    Ruan and G

    Y. Ruan and G. Tian, A mathematical theory of quantum cohomology, J. Differential Geom. 42 (1995), no. 2, 259--367

    1995

  42. [50]

    Taipale, K -theoretic J -functions of type A flag varieties, Int

    K. Taipale, K -theoretic J -functions of type A flag varieties, Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2013, no. 16, 3647--3677

    2013

  43. [51]

    Xu, Quantum K -theory of incidence varieties, Eur

    W. Xu, Quantum K -theory of incidence varieties, Eur. J. Math. 10 (2024), no. 2, Paper No. 22, 47 pp

    2024

Pith tools

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