Cluster tori over $\mathbb{F}_2$, hexagonal moves on triangulations, and minimal coverings of cluster manifolds

Daniel P\'erez Melesio; Jos\'e Simental

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 15 references

Cluster tori over $\mathbb{F}_2$, hexagonal moves on triangulations, and minimal coverings of cluster manifolds

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For type-A cluster algebras over $\mathbb{F}_2$, two seeds determine the same point of the cluster manifold if and only if their triangulations are related by hexagonal moves.

desk verdict A useful new result on F2 fibers and minimal coverings in type A, but the core of Theorem 3.6 is not yet a proof: the key reduction is delegated to Figure 6. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.04614 v2 pith:IHUUXZRQ submitted 2025-09-04 math.CO

Daniel Pérez Melesio , José Simental This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CO MSC 13F6005C15

keywords clusteralgebrastypeAF2-pointstriangulationshexagonalmovestoriminimalcoveringsuniversalpolytope

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 works with cluster algebras over the two-element field $\mathbb{F}_2$, where the Laurent phenomenon—every cluster variable is a Laurent polynomial in any cluster—turns each seed into a point of the corresponding cluster variety. In type A, seeds correspond to triangulations of a polygon, and the central theorem says that two seeds give the same point if and only if their triangulations can be connected by local "hexagonal moves": the zig-zag and inscribed-triangle moves of Figure 1. The paper also proves that in type A there is a minimal collection of cluster tori that covers the whole cluster manifold over every field, while in type A11 there is a collection that covers over $\mathbb{F}_2$ but fails to cover over any other field. This matters because it shows that the covering problem for cluster manifolds has a definite combinatorial answer in type A and that the answer genuinely depends on the ground field.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the map $c$ that sends a triangulation of a polygon to the unique proper coloring of its vertices by the three elements of $\mathbb{F}_2\mathbb{P}^1=\{0,1,\infty\}$; because a cluster torus consists exactly of the colorings for which every diagonal of the triangulation joins distinct colors, fibers of the seed-to-point map are governed by which triangulations share a coloring. The hexagonal moves are the two local moves preserving $c$: the zig-zag move and the inscribed-triangle move. They appear as certain edges of the universal polytope of triangulations, alongside the usual quadrilateral flips. The supporting machinery includes the invalid-diagonal criterion from [6, Proposition 5.1] that decides when a point of the geometric model $X_{\mathbb{F}}(m)$ lies in a cluster torus, and Algorithm A/B that canonically selects a triangulation for every point of the cluster manifold, giving the universal minimal covering.

What would settle it

Enumerate all triangulations of a 9-gon or 10-gon, compute their unique $\mathbb{F}_2$-colorings, and search whether every pair of triangulations with the same coloring lies in the same component of the graph whose edges are the two hexagonal moves; a same-color pair not connected by such moves would disprove Theorem 3.6. The same finite search on the 12-gon can settle the 'proved similarly' claims used in the A11 covering counterexample.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is a complete description of the fibers of the map $\mathrm{Seeds}(\mathcal{A})\to \mathcal{M}_{\mathbb{F}_2}(\mathcal{A})$ in cluster type A. Over $\mathbb{F}_2$, the projective line has three elements, so each triangulation of the $(n+2)$-gon admits a unique proper coloring by the colors $0,1,\infty$ with the base vertices fixed; this is the coloring map $c$. Theorem 1.2 (Theorem 3.6 in the paper) states that $c(T_1)=c(T_2)$ if and only if $T_2$ is obtained from $T_1$ by a sequence of hexagonal moves, where a hexagonal move is either a zig-zag move (replacing one zig-zag triangulation of a hexagon joining antipodal vertices by the other) or an inscribed-triangle move. A second pair of results governs coverings: Algorithm A produces a set of triangulations, depending only on the polygon, whose cluster tori form a minimal covering of the cluster manifold over every field, and an explicit point in type A11 shows that some $\mathbb{F}_2$-minimal coverings are not coverings over any field $\mathbb{F}\not\cong\mathbb{F}_2$. Along the way the paper proves a recursive point count for acyclic cluster varieties over $\mathbb{F}_2$ by deleting a sink.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on an unproved reduction in Case 2.1.2 of the main induction, where a crossing pair of diagonals is assumed to leave only one vertex on one side and is verified only by a figure; if this reduction is not valid, the theorem that same-color triangulations are hexagonally connected does not go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

In type A, the $\mathbb{F}_2$-points of the cluster manifold are exactly the possible proper 3-colorings of the polygon vertices, and the fiber over a point is the connected component of the triangulation graph under the two hexagonal moves.
There exists a minimal covering of every type-A cluster manifold by as many tori as there are $\mathbb{F}_2$-points, and the same explicit set of triangulations covers the manifold over every field.
Covering sets are field-sensitive: in type A11 there is a set of seeds whose tori cover the cluster manifold over $\mathbb{F}_2$ but not over any other field, so a minimal covering computed over one field cannot be transferred blindly to another.
The sink-deletion recurrence gives exact numbers of $\mathbb{F}_2$-points for all finite-type acyclic cluster varieties, and these numbers are strictly smaller than the number of seeds in all but the smallest type-A cases.
The geometric model identifies the type-A cluster manifold over any field with $X_{\mathbb{F}}(m)$ minus a single alternating point, so the deep locus is empty exactly when the polygon has an odd number of sides.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper leaves open whether A11 is special; a natural extension is to check the same construction for all $A_n$ with $n\ge 11$ and to search for analogous field-sensitive coverings in types D and E, where polygon triangulations are replaced by more general combinatorial models.
The hexagonal moves are edges of the universal polytope of triangulations, and the paper notes it would be interesting to find cluster meanings for other edges; one testable path is to look for additional local moves that preserve the $\mathbb{F}_2$-coloring on larger carrier polygons.
Algorithm A is a deterministic rule choosing one triangulation per point of the cluster manifold; reading it as a normal form would give an explicit finite list of seeds for the universal minimal covering, which could be precomputed and used to test coverings computationally.
Because over $\mathbb{F}_2$ every triangulation has exactly one coloring, the quotient of the triangulation graph by hexagonal moves is a finite set of size equal to the point count; enumerating these orbits combinatorially would give an independent proof of the point-count formula without the recurrence.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Two things to know. First, the paper has a genuinely new result: in type A, the fibers of the seed-to-point map over F2 are governed by the hexagonal moves on triangulations (Theorem 3.6), and the minimal covering results (Theorem 1.3) show this behavior can be universal or field-dependent. Second, the converse direction of Theorem 3.6 is not proven to the paper's own standard: the critical Case 2.1.2 says 'We can assume that both ij and kl leave only one vertex on one of the triangulations in which they divide the polygon. We verify this on Figure 6,' and that verification is not actually written out. This is a real gap in the heart of the main theorem.

What the paper does well: Lemma 2.4 gives a clean recursive point count for acyclic cluster varieties over F2, and Table 1 follows from it. The covering construction in Proposition 4.1 (Algorithms A and B, the idempotence claim (4.1)) is explicit and mostly convincing. Framing hexagonal moves as edges of the universal polytope of triangulations is a nice touch. The shared-author dependency [6, Proposition 5.1] is an established external characterization of cluster tori and the deep locus; there is no circularity, no fitted parameters, no invented data.

Where the soft spots are. In Case 2.1.2, the figure caption replaces kl by an adjacent diagonal kl' without analyzing the polygon delimited by ijl'k when it has exactly two or three colors, without showing the new diagonal is still absent from T and still invalid for T1, and without giving the symmetric argument for ij. If that reduction fails, the hexagonal-move fiber characterization is unsupported. Case 2.2's verification that ab is valid on T'' gives a real argument in the prose (three colors above ab, bs forces three colors below), so it may be repairable with moderate effort, but it still leans on Figure 9. In Section 4.3, Claims 1 and 2 are worked out and Claims 3-6 are 'proved similarly'; that is a finite, checkable case analysis in a 12-gon, so I would not bank on a flaw there, but the pattern of omitted verification is consistent. None of this looks fatal. I am not claiming a counterexample. But the central theorem is not settled as written.

The audience is cluster algebra people, especially those working on deep loci and cluster varieties over finite fields. A serious referee should engage with this and ask for the figure verifications to be turned into written arguments. My recommendation: conditional acceptance, and the gaps look repairable.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the map from seeds of a cluster algebra over F_2 to F_2-points of the associated cluster variety. For type A, using the polygon model, it identifies the fibers of this map with equivalence classes of triangulations under two local 'hexagonal moves' (Theorem 1.2/3.6). It then addresses minimal coverings of cluster manifolds: Theorem 1.3(a) (Proposition 4.1) gives a minimal covering set that works over every field, while Theorem 1.3(b) (Section 4.3) exhibits, in type A_11, an F_2-covering that is not a covering over any other field. The paper also contains a general point-count recursion for acyclic cluster varieties over F_2 (Lemma 2.4). The exposition is largely self-contained, with the main external input being a characterization of the union of cluster tori from [6, Proposition 5.1].

Significance. If the results are correct, Theorem 1.2 gives a clean combinatorial description of the fibers of the F_2 seed-to-point map in type A and connects these fibers to edges of the universal polytope of triangulations. Theorem 1.3 is notable because it shows that the property of being a minimal covering can depend on the field, while nevertheless a universal minimal covering exists. The paper is honest and explicit: Lemma 2.4 has a detailed point-count proof, Proposition 4.1 gives a concrete algorithm, and the A_11 counterexample is a specific, checkable configuration. There are no fitted parameters or numerical predictions, and the main external dependency [6, Proposition 5.1] is used as a tool rather than as an input equivalent to the target results. The main weaknesses are local gaps in the proof of the converse direction of Theorem 3.6 and compressed case analyses in Section 4.3.

major comments (3)

[Theorem 3.6, Case 2.1.2 (pp. 10-11)] The reduction 'We can assume that both ij and kl leave only one vertex on one of the triangulations in which they divide the polygon. We verify this on Figure 6' is load-bearing for the converse direction but is not proved. The caption of Figure 6 does not analyze the subcase in which the polygon delimited by i,j,l',k has exactly two or three colors, and it does not establish that the replacement kl' preserves the required properties: kl' not shared with T, kl' invalid for T1, and kl' valid for the full triangulation. The symmetric reduction for ij is also asserted rather than proved. This step must be written out before the characterization of fibers is fully established.
[Theorem 3.6, Case 2.2 (pp. 11-12)] The assertion that the diagonal ab is valid for the subpolygon P'' is verified only by a reference to Figure 9 and the sentence 'This follows by noting that bs is a valid diagonal T',' which does not account for the possible relative positions of a,b,r,s and the boundary of P''. Since this validity is what allows the induction hypothesis to be applied, a formal argument or a complete case check is needed.
[Section 4.3, Claims 3-6] Claims 3-6 are each justified as 'proved similarly' to Claims 1 and 2. These claims are essential: they force the values z3, z5, z7, z9, and z10 and lead to the final contradiction with the thick diagonal. Given the case-by-case nature of Claims 1 and 2, the reader cannot verify these without a written argument or a uniform lemma covering all six claims.

minor comments (5)

[Introduction, Theorem 1.3] The phrase 'covering ets' appears to be a typo for 'covering sets'; please correct it.
[Remark 3.8] The sentence 'Note, however, that edges this polytope also include...' is missing a word; it should read 'edges of this polytope'.
[Lemma 2.4, proof] In the case φ(x_i)=0, the conclusion that every neighbor x_k satisfies φ(x_k)=1 follows because a product of F_2-elements equals 1 only if each factor is 1; adding this one-line explanation would improve clarity.
[Proposition 4.1, proof of (4.1)] The argument that (4.1) implies #image(Υ) ≤ #image(c∘Υ) is compressed; it would be helpful to state explicitly that image(Υ) is contained in the image of Υ restricted to the image of c∘Υ.
[Theorem 4.2, proof] The set C = Υ(X_F(m)) is claimed not to depend on the field F, but this is implicit. Since Algorithm A only uses the predicates '= 0' and '= ∞', the field-independence should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central theorems are proved by induction and explicit algorithms, and the only shared-author citation ([6, Prop. 5.1]) is a parameter-free external input rather than an equivalent of the target results.

full rationale

The paper contains no fitted parameters, no numerical predictions, and no derivation step that reduces to its own inputs by definition. The central statement (Theorem 1.2 / Theorem 3.6) is proved directly by induction on the polygon size, with the base case computed explicitly in Figure 3. The converse direction uses Lemma 3.3, whose existence claim for triangulations is imported from [6, Proposition 5.1]. This is a theorem of Castronovo, Gorsky, Simental and Speyer, so it is a self-citation in the narrow sense because one of the present authors is also an author of [6]. However, it is a parameter-free external characterization of the union of cluster tori, it does not state the hexagonal-move equivalence or the covering results, and it is not obtained by fitting anything in the present paper. Under the review rules, such a citation is real independent evidence and does not make the argument circular. The unexpanded Figure 6 reduction in Case 2.1.2 and the steps marked 'proved similarly' in Section 4.3 are potential correctness/completeness gaps, but a proof gap is not a circular dependency: those steps do not use the theorem they are trying to prove as an assumption. Section 4 is equally self-contained: the covering sets are constructed by explicit Algorithms A and B, and the identity Υ = Υ ∘ c ∘ Υ is proved directly. The counterexample in Section 4.3 is verified by explicit case analysis on the possible F2-point z. I therefore find no circular step and assign score 1 solely to acknowledge the minor shared-author citation, which is not load-bearing as a circularity.

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

No free parameters or new physical or algebraic entities are introduced. The central derivations rest on the stated axioms from standard cluster algebra theory and on three cited results, one of which ([6]) has overlapping authors and is used as an external tool rather than as an input equivalent to the target theorems.

assumptions (6)

standard math The Laurent phenomenon: every cluster variable is a Laurent polynomial in the variables of any seed.
Used to define cluster tori and the seed-to-point map (1.1); cited from [10].
domain assumption For a locally acyclic cluster algebra, A_F(Q) equals F tensor Z A(Q), the cluster algebra over F.
Needed to justify working over an arbitrary field F; cited from [1, Lemma 4.7].
domain assumption The union of all cluster tori in X_F(m) equals X_F(m) minus the point (0, infinity, 0, infinity, ...).
Used in Lemma 3.3 and Proposition 4.1; cited from [6, Proposition 5.1], a paper with overlapping authors.
domain assumption Every really full rank type Am cluster variety is, up to products with tori, the variety X_F(m) with one frozen variable.
Used in Theorem 4.2 to extend the geometric-model covering to arbitrary type A quivers; cited from [13, Proposition 5.11].
standard math Type A seeds are in bijection with triangulations of a polygon, with the standard cluster structure on X_F(m).
The basis for all combinatorial arguments involving triangulations; established in Section 3.1.
ad hoc to paper Isolated mutable vertices are excluded; isolated vertices are frozen.
Remark 2.2: in characteristic 2 the exchange relation x x' = 2 forces one variable to be zero, breaking mutation involution. This convention keeps mutation well-defined.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cluster tori over $\mathbb{F}_2$, hexagonal moves on triangulations, and minimal coverings of cluster manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IHUUXZRQ

@misc{pith2026250904614,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cluster tori over $\mathbbF_2$, hexagonal moves on triangulations, and minimal coverings of cluster manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IHUUXZRQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04614}
}

abstract

We study cluster algebras over $\mathbb{F}_2$. By the Laurent phenomenon there is a map from the set of seeds of the cluster algebra to the corresponding cluster variety. We show that in type $A$, fibers of this map can be described in terms of certain edges of the universal polytope of triangulations of a polygon. Moreover, we show that there is a section of this map giving seeds whose corresponding cluster tori cover the cluster manifold over any field $\mathbb{F}$, but there are also sections giving seeds whose cluster tori do not cover the cluster manifold over any field $\mathbb{F} \not\cong \mathbb{F}_2$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.04614 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Local hexagonal moves on triangulations. The figure on the left-hand side relates the two ‘zig-zag’ triangulations joining the same pair of antipodal points, and the figure on the right-hand side relates the two inscribed triangles in the hexagon. Theorem 1.2. Let Σ1, Σ2 be two seeds of a cluster algebra of type An, corresponding to the triangulations T1 and T2, respectively. Then, Σ1 and Σ2 determine the same point… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Two seeds of the variety XF(5), that are related by mutation at the red vertex. Note that the cluster torus associated to the seed on the left-hand side is {y0 ̸= y4} ∩ {y4 ̸= y1} ∩ {y1 ̸= y3}, while the torus associated to the seed on the right-hand side is {y0 ̸= y4} ∩ {y0 ̸= y3} ∩ {y3 ̸= y1}. By [6, Proposition 5.1], the union of all cluster tori consists of XF(m)\{(0,∞, 0, ∞, . . . , 0, ∞)}. In particular, X(m) … view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** All 14 triangulations of the hexagon together with their images in XF2 (5) under the map (3.1). The red boxes indicate the triangulations that map to the same point in XF2 (5) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (13 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Hexagonal moves. We refer to the move on the left-hand side as a zig-zag move. It exchanges the zig-zag triangulation of a hexagon joining two antipodal points, with the other zig-zag joining the same antipodal points. We refer to the move on the right-hand side as a …

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Hexagonal moves on triangulations of a 9-gon. The hexagon where the move is happening is shaded. Theorem 3.6. Let T and T ′ be triangulations of the polygon Pm+1. Then, c(T) = c(T ′ ) if and only if T and T ′ are related through a sequence of hexagonal moves, where c i…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The diagonal ij belongs to T, and the diagonal kl belongs to T ′ . If the diagonal kl does not leave only one vertex at one of its sides, we can pick a diagonal adjacent to k or l as in the left-hand side of the figure. We can then take the diagonal kl′ instead of the …

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: In Case 2.1.2, after reductions we may assume the triangulations T and T ′ have shapes as indicated in the figure. Note that the vertices left outside of the polygon ijlk must be of the same color, which is precisely the color missing in the polygon ijlk. Now, we do a…

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: From [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_8.png]

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: The colored diagonals ab and ij belong to T, while the diagonals ar and bs belong to T ′ . The diagonal ab is valid on the shaded P ′′ since ab is valid for T and bs for T ′′ . bs of T ′ adjacent to a and b. Note that the polygon P ′′ delimited by the diagonal ar that…

**Figure 10.** Figure 10: Examples of Algorithm A that inputs a point y in X′ (m) and outputs a triangulation of T of the m + 1-gon, in such a way that y is in the cluster torus defined by T. Here, a ̸= b and neither are 0,∞, In the top example, we do not have to backtrack. In the middle examp…

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: Examples of the procedure that inputs a point y in X′ (m) and outputs an element z ∈ X′ F2 (m), compare with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png]

**Figure 12.** Figure 12: The element y = (0, a,∞, a, b, 0,∞, b, a, 0, b,∞) and its invalid diagonals. Note that a diagonal is invalid if and only if it joins two of the same labels, and we have color-coded the diagonals depending on the labels they join. a proper coloring of T. Thus, there m…

**Figure 13.** Figure 13: Assuming z6 = 0, since the red diagonal joining 0 with ∞ is invalid, we obtain one of the two colorings of the right. Since one of the labels must be 1, this will imply that one of the drawn diagonals is actually valid for z, a contradiction. ∞ 0 z1 z2 z3 z4 z5 1 z7 z…

**Figure 14.** Figure 14: If we assume z6 = 1, then we must have the configuration on the right. But this implies that the thick diagonal is valid for z, a contradiction. (2) z6 = 1. Once again the diagonal 6, 11 is an incompatible diagonal drawn between vertices of different colors, so zi ∈ {…

**Figure 15.** Figure 15: If z2 = 1 then we must have z1 = ∞. For the thick diagonal to be invalid, we must have that z3, . . . , z11 alternate between 1 and ∞: But since z2 = 1 we must have z3 = ∞, z4 = 1, z5 = ∞, a contradiction with z6 = ∞. Claim 4: z5 = 0. This implies that z4 = ∞. Claim 5…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

[1]

Ang´ elica Benito, Greg Muller, Jenna Rajchgot, and Karen E. Smith. Singularities of locally acyclic cluster algebras. Algebra Number Theory, 9(4):913–936, 2015

work page 2015
[2]

Cluster algebras

Arkady Berenstein, Sergey Fomin, and Andrei Zelevinsky. Cluster algebras. III: Upper bounds and double Bruhat cells. Duke Math. J. , 126(1):1–52, 2005

work page 2005
[3]

Deep points of cluster algebras

James Beyer and Greg Muller. Deep points of cluster algebras. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (4):Paper No. rnaf027, 39, 2025

work page 2025
[4]

Billera, Paul Filliman, and Bernd Sturmfels

Louis J. Billera, Paul Filliman, and Bernd Sturmfels. Constructions and complexity of secondary polytopes. Adv. Math., 83(2):155–179, 1990

work page 1990
[5]

Cluster structures on braid varieties

Roger Casals, Eugene Gorsky, Mikhail Gorsky, Ian Le, Linhui Shen, and Jos´ e Simental. Cluster structures on braid varieties. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 38(2):369–479, 2025

work page 2025
[6]

Cluster deep loci and mirror symmetry

Marco Castronovo, Mikhail Gorsky, Jos´ e Simental, and David E Speyer. Cluster deep loci and mirror symmetry. Preprint, arXiv:2402.16970 [math.AG] (2024), 2024

arXiv 2024
[7]

De Loera, Serkan Hosten, Francisco Santos, and Bernd Sturmfels

Jes´ us A. De Loera, Serkan Hosten, Francisco Santos, and Bernd Sturmfels. The polytope of all triangulations of a point configuration. Doc. Math., 1:113–119, 1996

work page 1996
[8]

De Loera, J¨ org Rambau, and Francisco Santos.Triangulations

Jes´ us A. De Loera, J¨ org Rambau, and Francisco Santos.Triangulations. Structures for algorithms and applications, volume 25 of Algorithms Comput. Math. Berlin: Springer, 2010

work page 2010

Show all 15 references

[9]

Introduction to Cluster Algebras

Sergey Fomin, Lauren Williams, and Andrei Zelevinsky. Introduction to Cluster Algebras. Chap- ters 1-3, 2024. CLUSTERS, HEXAGONAL MOVES, AND COVERINGS 21

2024
[10]

The Laurent phenomenon

Sergey Fomin and Andrei Zelevinsky. The Laurent phenomenon. Adv. in Appl. Math. , 28(2):119– 144, 2002

2002
[11]

Braid variety cluster structures, II: general type

Pavel Galashin, Thomas Lam, and Melissa Sherman-Bennett. Braid variety cluster structures, II: general type. Preprint, arXiv:2301.07268 [math.AG] (2023), 2023

2023
[12]

Braid variety cluster structures, I: 3d plabic graphs

Pavel Galashin, Thomas Lam, Melissa Sherman-Bennett, and David Speyer. Braid variety cluster structures, I: 3d plabic graphs. Preprint, arXiv:2210.04778 [math.CO] (2022), 2022

2022 arXiv
[13]

Thomas Lam and David E. Speyer. Cohomology of cluster varieties. I: Locally acyclic case.Algebra Number Theory, 16(1):179–230, 2022

2022
[14]

Thomas Lam and David E. Speyer. Cohomology of cluster varieties. II: Acyclic case. J. Lond. Math. Soc., II. Ser. , 108(6):2377–2414, 2023

2023
[15]

Locally acyclic cluster algebras

Greg Muller. Locally acyclic cluster algebras. Adv. Math., 233(1):207–247, 2013. Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad Nacional Aut´onoma de M´exico. Ciudad Universi- taria, CDMX, M´exico Email address : perezmelesiod@ciencias.unam.mx Instituto de Matem´aticas, Universidad Naciona...

2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Ang´ elica Benito, Greg Muller, Jenna Rajchgot, and Karen E. Smith. Singularities of locally acyclic cluster algebras. Algebra Number Theory, 9(4):913–936, 2015

work page 2015

[2] [2]

Cluster algebras

Arkady Berenstein, Sergey Fomin, and Andrei Zelevinsky. Cluster algebras. III: Upper bounds and double Bruhat cells. Duke Math. J. , 126(1):1–52, 2005

work page 2005

[3] [3]

Deep points of cluster algebras

James Beyer and Greg Muller. Deep points of cluster algebras. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (4):Paper No. rnaf027, 39, 2025

work page 2025

[4] [4]

Billera, Paul Filliman, and Bernd Sturmfels

Louis J. Billera, Paul Filliman, and Bernd Sturmfels. Constructions and complexity of secondary polytopes. Adv. Math., 83(2):155–179, 1990

work page 1990

[5] [5]

Cluster structures on braid varieties

Roger Casals, Eugene Gorsky, Mikhail Gorsky, Ian Le, Linhui Shen, and Jos´ e Simental. Cluster structures on braid varieties. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 38(2):369–479, 2025

work page 2025

[6] [6]

Cluster deep loci and mirror symmetry

Marco Castronovo, Mikhail Gorsky, Jos´ e Simental, and David E Speyer. Cluster deep loci and mirror symmetry. Preprint, arXiv:2402.16970 [math.AG] (2024), 2024

arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

De Loera, Serkan Hosten, Francisco Santos, and Bernd Sturmfels

Jes´ us A. De Loera, Serkan Hosten, Francisco Santos, and Bernd Sturmfels. The polytope of all triangulations of a point configuration. Doc. Math., 1:113–119, 1996

work page 1996

[8] [8]

De Loera, J¨ org Rambau, and Francisco Santos.Triangulations

Jes´ us A. De Loera, J¨ org Rambau, and Francisco Santos.Triangulations. Structures for algorithms and applications, volume 25 of Algorithms Comput. Math. Berlin: Springer, 2010

work page 2010