Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 29 references

Combinatorial geometry of the 2D Toda lattice and Davey Stewartson equation

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper extends the contour-plot algorithm for KP solitons to the 2D Toda lattice and Davey–Stewartson II, claiming that L-diagrams and reduced pipedreams encode the asymptotic wave patterns in all three cases.

desk verdict The 2D Toda half of the paper is a genuine and mostly solid extension of Kodama–Williams; the DSII half is currently a well-tested conjecture because the two load-bearing proofs are explicitly omitted. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.20109 v1 pith:MJYLZDIZ submitted 2026-07-22 nlin.SI hep-thmath-phmath.AGmath.COmath.MP

Rodrigo Navarro Betancourt , Marvin Anas Hahn , Vera Posch , Vincenzo Reda This is my paper · ORCID
classification nlin.SIhep-thmath-phmath.AGmath.COmath.MP MSC 37K4035Q5114M1505E10
keywords 2DTodalatticeDavey–StewartsonIIsolitoncontourplotstotallynonnegativeGrassmannianL-diagramsreducedpipedreamsKPcontour-plotalgorithm
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 extends the contour-plot method originally developed for KP solitons to two further integrable systems: the 2D Toda lattice and the defocusing Davey–Stewartson II equation. It claims that for any element of the totally nonnegative Grassmannian, with generic parameters, the asymptotic wave pattern (contour plot) of the 2DTL and DSII solution is encoded in the same L-diagram and reduced pipedream that determine KP soliton webs. The paper provides explicit algorithms that draw these plots and shows that, in the totally positive case, the soliton plot uniquely determines the original Grassmannian point. If correct, this gives a unified combinatorial picture for three (2+1)-dimensional integrable equations and turns soliton plots into readable data for the underlying linear-algebraic parameter.

What carries the argument

The central object is the L-diagram and its reduced pipedream: an L-diagram is a Young-diagram filling with black/white stones satisfying the L-property that indexes the Deodhar components of the totally nonnegative Grassmannian; the reduced pipedream is the associated wiring diagram whose pipes are labeled [i,j] and whose vertices encode the resonant interaction points v[a,b,c]. The algorithmic content is the identification of vertices of the pipedream with trivalent vertices of the asymptotic contour plot, with the analytic visibility of each vertex decided by the sign of the height functions F_{a,b,c}(φ_d) = z_d − z_[a,b,c] (Toda) or F_{a,b,c}(ψ_d) (DS). The duality matrix B_A (Section 3)

What would settle it

Numerically compute the exact asymptotic contour plot (the corner locus of max_I (Θ_I) with Δ_I(A) S_I(ψ)) for a small irreducible matrix in a Deodhar component of Gr(3,6) using generic parameters, and compare the order and coordinates of its trivalent vertices with the pipedream-predicted vertices; deliberately approach a parameter boundary where some F_{a,b,c}(ψ_d) changes sign — if a pipedream vertex ceases to be visible or appears in a different order, the algorithm is falsified. A more targeted test: the DS case with a parameter set where ψ_i + ψ_j + ψ_k approaches π/2 from below, the bou

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for every irreducible matrix A in the totally nonnegative Grassmannian Gr(N,M) and generic real parameters, the asymptotic contour plot of the 2DTL solution V_n,A and of the DSII solution Q_t,A is determined by the same combinatorial data that governs KP solitons: the L-diagram (equivalently the Deodhar component P_{v,w}) and its reduced pipedream. Concretely, trivalent vertices of the contour plot correspond to visible vertices v[a,b,c] of the pipedream — with white/black coloring encoding which two of the three incident [a,b], [a,c], [b,c] segments continue above the vertex — and the paper's algorithms 4.19, 4.31, 5.11 draw the entire asymptotic graph from these d

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction rests on the assumption that the order of the resonant vertices in the reduced pipedream coincides with the order of the interaction points in the actual contour plot — for the DS case this is asserted without proof (Proposition 5.10), and it relies on the ad hoc genericity of Definitions 4.1 and 5.1, which exclude V- and L-shaped solitons; if this matching fails for any cell, the algorithm would output a graph that is not the solution's contour plot.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same L-diagram/pipedream combinatorics that organizes KP soliton webs organizes the asymptotic 2DTL and DSII soliton webs, giving a unified dictionary between Grassmannian cells and three integrable systems.
  • For large lattice index n or large negative time t, the algorithms reproduce and refine previously known asymptotic descriptions of the 2DTL and DSII solitons, adding a new identification of the permutation π = v w^{-1} with the Deodhar component.
  • The contour plots of 2DTL and DSII solutions admit parallel line solitons, a configuration that cannot occur for generic KP solitons.
  • If A lies in the totally positive Grassmannian and the plot has no X-crossings, the contour plot together with the fixed n (or t) and the known parameters determines A uniquely (Theorem 6.4); one recovers ratios of Plücker coordinates from line offsets and then reconstructs all of A.
  • Contour plots for n ≪ 0 or t ≫ 0 are obtained from the dual matrix B_A by reflection, so one algorithm covers all four asymptotic regimes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The visibility lemmas are written specifically for the three equations studied; a natural test is whether the same pipedream-to-plot recipe survives for other rational/hyperbolic dispersion relations in the KP family, since only the slope formulas and visibility functions would need replacing.
  • The genericity conditions exclude exactly the V-shaped and L-shaped DS solitons described in earlier work; one could investigate whether those shapes arise as limits of the algorithm's vertices as a sum of phases approaches the excluded boundary, extending the algorithm's reach.
  • Because X-crossings in the contour plot correspond to vanishing Plücker coordinates, the inverse problem on the full totally nonnegative Grassmannian likely requires matroid-basis data rather than a single cluster seed; the matroid phrasing at the end of the proof of Theorem 6.4 hints at this path.
  • If the combinatorial–analytic vertex-order match assumed in Proposition 5.10 holds universally, the DS algorithm inherits the Toda proof; finding a direct analytic proof of that order for DS would remove the main gap before the algorithm can be certified for all Deodhar cells.
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

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper extends the Kodama–Williams framework for KP solitons to the 2D Toda lattice (2DTL) and the defocusing Davey–Stewartson II (DSII) equation. For a point A in the totally nonnegative Grassmannian Gr(N,M)≥0 with generic spectral parameters, the authors give algorithms (Algorithm 4.19 for 2DTL in the (x1,x−1)-plane, Algorithm 4.31 for 2DTL in the (x1,n)-plane, and Algorithm 5.11 for DSII in the (x,y)-plane) that produce asymptotic contour plots from the reduced pipedream associated to the Deodhar component of A. They also prove that adjacent dominant regions are separated by lines whose labels transpose one index (Propositions 4.3 and 5.2), describe the asymptotics of the unbounded soliton lines (Theorems 4.8 and 5.5), discuss duality (Section 3), and solve the inverse problem for totally positive A by recovering the Plücker coordinates from the contour plot (Theorem 6.4). The paper contains four worked examples comparing the algorithm output with direct contour plots of the τ-functions.

Significance. If the results are correct, the paper is a significant contribution: it substantiates Kodama's conjecture that the KP/pipedream technology applies to the 2DTL and DSII equations, and it refines earlier asymptotic analyses by Biondini–Wang and Biondini–Kireyev–Maruno by connecting the soliton fan to the Deodhar decomposition. The worked examples (Figures 4–8) are valuable and support the internal consistency of the algorithms. The inverse problem result for the totally positive Grassmannian is also a meaningful extension of the KP story. However, the DSII half of the central claim currently rests on two explicitly omitted proofs — Proposition 5.10 and the faithfulness of Algorithm 5.11 — and Proposition 5.9 contains a sign inconsistency. These are load-bearing gaps, not mere presentation issues.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 5.2, Proposition 5.10] This proposition states that every trivalent vertex in the reduced pipedream is visible for DSII, and it is the combinatorial-analytic matching on which Algorithm 5.11 depends. The proof is omitted: 'The proof of this result is identical to the one of Proposition 4.17 and for this reason it is omitted.' This is not a routine transfer: the DSII visibility function F_{a,b,c}(ψ_d) has a different analytic form, the relevant signs are governed by t<0, and the only locally supplied sign computation (Proposition 5.9) is internally inconsistent. The global ordering of vertices along a trip — which was the nontrivial content of KW14's Theorem 8.5 in the KP case — must be proved for DSII rather than asserted by analogy.
  2. [Section 5.2, Algorithm 5.11] The proof that Algorithm 5.11 faithfully reproduces C^-(M(A)) is explicitly omitted: 'The proof of the faithfulness of the previous algorithm is analogous to that Algorithm 4.19, and is also omitted.' This is a central claim of the paper: the algorithm is supposed to construct the asymptotic DSII contour plot from any irreducible A∈Gr(N,M)≥0. The analogous proof for Algorithm 4.19 is itself only a sketch that invokes KW14's Theorem 8.5 for the vertex-order matching. For DSII, local visibility of vertices does not by itself determine their global order along trips, and no derivation of that order is supplied. Without this proof, the DSII algorithm remains a conjecture supported by examples.
  3. [Section 5.2, Proposition 5.9] The statement of Proposition 5.9 assumes t<0, but the proof says 'Since t>0' at the start of the case analysis. With t<0 the displayed formula for F_{a,b,c}(ψ_d) has the opposite overall sign, and the quoted inequalities do not follow from the written argument. The proposition may be true — the reader's check indicates the inequalities do hold for t<0 — but as printed the proof is invalid. This matters because Proposition 5.9 is the only local sign computation supplied for the DSII visibility argument.
  4. [Section 1 and Remark 5.3] The abstract and conclusion state algorithms for 'elements in the totally nonnegative Grassmannian' without stating the parameter restrictions used. Remark 5.3 explicitly excludes V-shaped and L-shaped DSII solitons, which occur when sin ψ_a = sin ψ_b; these are real phenomena in the DSII system. If the algorithms and theorems are intended only under Definition 5.1's genericity assumptions, the scope should be stated prominently in the abstract and conclusion. This does not invalidate the results, but the current wording overstates the domain of applicability.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Title/Abstract] The title contains typographical errors: 'DA VEY STEW ARTSON' should be 'DAVEY–STEWARTSON'.
  2. [Section 1.1] The structure paragraph for Section 5 says 'obtaining an algorithm in the general case in Algorithm 4.31', but Algorithm 4.31 is the 2DTL (x1,n)-plane algorithm. The DSII algorithm is Algorithm 5.11.
  3. [Remark 3.4] There is a duplication: 'asymptotic contour plots of of the Davey–Stewartson system' should read 'of the Davey–Stewartson system'.
  4. [Section 3, Proposition 3.3] The proof of Proposition 3.3 is given only for the 2DTL case, with the DS case dismissed as 'analogous'. Given that the DS τ-function has a different structure (trigonometric S_I factors and the reality constraint), a brief indication of the DS computation would improve readability.
  5. [Section 4.2, remark before Definition 4.20] The sentence 'We will show that C+(M(A^(k))) can be combinatorially recovered...' promises a proof, but the subsequent text gives a heuristic inductive description and refers to KW14. Please make clear which parts are proved in this paper and which are quoted.
  6. [Remark 4.18] The final sentence — 'Here is the point in which the shape of the equation arises in the proof' — is vague. The reader should be told explicitly why n>0 gives the needed sign, as is done for the analogous KP statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circular derivation found; the DSII half rests on omitted analogy-based proofs (a rigor gap, not circularity), and all external anchors are prior works by other authors.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain: τ-functions (Eq. 2/6; Lemma 2.8/2.9) define the models; asymptotic contour plots are independently defined as corner loci of g = max Θ_I over I ∈ M(A) (Def 2.14, 2.18); line equations and vertex coordinates are derived algebraically from the same θ_i (Eq. 19/21/24/25); the pipedream algorithms (4.19, 5.11) then assert a nontrivial identification of the combinatorial pipedream arrangement with this analytic corner locus. No step is self-definitional: the contour plot is not defined as the algorithm's output, and the theorem that the pipedream vertices are exactly the visible resonant vertices (Prop 4.17/5.10) is a real combinatorial-analytic claim, not a tautology. No parameters are fitted and nothing statistically 'predicted' is a renamed fitted input; the examples verify the algorithms against exact τ-function plots computed from stated formulas, which is internal consistency checking rather than circular derivation. The paper contains no self-citations at all: the reference list (KW14, Kod17, Pos06, BKM22, BW10, MR04, TW13, Tal11, Sco06, etc.) contains no work by the present four authors, so no load-bearing self-citation chain, uniqueness-imported-from-authors, or ansatz-smuggled-via-citation pattern arises. Flagging per the reviewing rule, the DS half carries explicit omitted-proof gaps that affect correctness, not circularity: Sec. 5.2, Prop 5.10 says 'The proof of this result is identical to the one of Proposition 4.17 and for this reason it is omitted,' and after Algorithm 5.11, 'The proof of the faithfulness of the previous algorithm is analogous to that Algorithm 4.19, and is also omitted.' These are exactly the steps linking the reduced pipedream's vertex order to the analytic order of resonant vertices; the 2DTL analogue is not literally identical (different vertex coordinates, t<0 vs n>0 regimes), and the proof of Prop 5.9 contains a sign slip ('Since t > 0' contradicts the stated t<0 hypothesis, though the stated inequalities are in fact correct for t<0). These are unproven-transfer concerns, not reductions of the claim to its own input: the analytic lemmas (Lemma 5.4, Prop 5.9) are stated independently of the pipedream combinatorics and are externally checkable, and the imported KW14 Theorem 8.5 ordering result is independent prior published work. Verdict: no significant circularity; the derivation is self-contained in its analytic inputs even where the DS presentation is incomplete.

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

No free parameters are fitted: the λ_i, ψ_i, n, and t are inputs of the soliton solution, not quantities tuned to make an external dataset match. The axioms are either classical facts or explicitly imposed domain restrictions; the most ad hoc is the genericity axiom because it excludes physically meaningful V/L solitons in the DS case.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Sato Grassmannian parametrization of 2DTL and DSII soliton solutions
    Invoked in Section 2.1 via Kod17 and BKM22; the paper starts from Wronskian-type solutions of this form and does not derive the parametrization from first principles.
  • standard math Wronskian τ-function with Plücker relations solves the Hirota bilinear equations
    Theorem 2.5 and Lemma 2.8 reduce to classical Plücker relations; these are standard identities in soliton theory.
  • standard math Postnikov's positroid stratification / Deodhar decomposition, L-diagram and reduced pipedream correspondence
    Used throughout Sections 2.3, 4, and 5 to index Grassmannian cells by combinatorial data; cited to Pos06, TW13, and KW14.
  • domain assumption Regular real solitons require A ∈ Gr≥0, ordered positive λ_i (or ψ_i in (−π/2, π/2)), and irreducible A
    Imposed in Section 2.1 and Section 4.1 to guarantee positivity of the τ-function and non-redundancy of the matrix parameter.
  • ad hoc to paper Genericity conditions in Definitions 4.1 and 5.1 exclude degeneracies including V/L-shaped DS solitons
    These conditions are chosen so that adjacent region labels differ by one index and all trivalent vertices are visible; Remark 5.3 explicitly notes that they exclude V/L-shaped solitons.
  • domain assumption Asymptotic contour plot is the corner locus of max of linear phases, with stable topology for large parameters
    Defined in Section 2.2 and Remark 4.11; the algorithms draw only these asymptotic plots, not finite-time contour plots.
  • standard math For totally positive A, resonance-satisfying plabic graphs are reduced and their Plücker coordinates form a cluster
    Used in the inverse-problem proof, Theorem 6.4, via KW14, Sco06, and Tal11.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Combinatorial geometry of the 2D Toda lattice and Davey Stewartson equation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MJYLZDIZ

@misc{pith2026260720109,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Combinatorial geometry of the 2D Toda lattice and Davey Stewartson equation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MJYLZDIZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.20109}
}
abstract

The KP equation is a prototypical $(2+1)$-dimensional integrable PDE. Its soliton solutions are famously parametrized by the Sato Grassmannian. In seminal work, Kodama and Williams made the surprising discovery that the combinatorics of soliton solutions are intimately related to the combinatorics of the totally positive Grassmannian as pioneered by Postnikov. They introduced novel algorithmic methods inspired by polyhedral structures arising from tropical geometry. Soliton solutions to the 2D Toda lattice and the Davey--Stewartson equation, two closely related integrable systems with soliton solutions, are also classified by the Sato Grassmannian. Kodama suggested that the methods of his work with Williams could generalize to these two integrable equations. In this work, we show that this is indeed the case. We derive algorithms to produce contour plots from elements in the totally nonnegative Grassmannian in both cases. In the asymptotic setting, we recover and refine previous work of Biondini and Wang; as well as Biondini, Kireyev and Maruno.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.20109 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FiguRe 1. A plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FiguRe 2. A reduced pipedream with its corresponding labeling of regions. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FiguRe 3. Highlighted in red, the trip [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FiguRe 4. A comparison between the contour plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FiguRe 5. A comparison between the contour plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FiguRe 6. A comparison between the contour plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p025_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FiguRe 7. Comparison between the contour plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FiguRe 8. Comparison between the contour plot of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FiguRe 9. Example of plabic graph for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FiguRe 10. To the left (resp. right), the neighborhood of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FiguRe 11. To the left (resp. right), the neighborhood of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_11.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Advances in Mathematics , volume=

    The Deodhar decomposition of the Grassmannian and the regularity of KP solitons , author=. Advances in Mathematics , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  2. [2]

    On some geometric aspects of Bruhat orderings. I. A finer decomposition of Bruhat cells , author=. Inventiones mathematicae , volume=. 1985 , publisher=

    1985

  3. [3]

    Algebras, Quivers and Representations: The Abel Symposium 2011 , pages=

    Combinatorics of KP solitons from the real Grassmannian , author=. Algebras, Quivers and Representations: The Abel Symposium 2011 , pages=. 2011 , organization=

    2011

  4. [4]

    Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , volume=

    On the soliton solutions of the two-dimensional Toda lattice , author=. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , volume=. 2010 , publisher=

    2010

  5. [5]

    Algebra & Number Theory , volume=

    Network parametrizations for the Grassmannian , author=. Algebra & Number Theory , volume=. 2013 , publisher=

    2013

  6. [6]

    Representation Theory of the American Mathematical Society , volume=

    Parametrizations of flag varieties , author=. Representation Theory of the American Mathematical Society , volume=

  7. [7]

    Mathematica,

    Wolfram Research. Mathematica,

  8. [8]

    KP Solitons and the Grassmannians Combinatorics and Geometry of Two- Dimensional Wave Patterns

    Yuji Kodama. KP Solitons and the Grassmannians Combinatorics and Geometry of Two- Dimensional Wave Patterns. SpringerBriefs in Mathematical Physics. 2017

    2017

Show all 29 references
  1. [9]

    Inventiones mathematicae , volume=

    KP solitons and total positivity for the Grassmannian , author=. Inventiones mathematicae , volume=. 2014 , publisher=

    2014

  2. [10]

    KP solitons and the Grassmannians: Combinatronics and Geometry of Two-Dimensional Wave Patterns

    Kodama, Yuji. KP solitons and the Grassmannians: Combinatronics and Geometry of Two-Dimensional Wave Patterns. 2017

    2017

  3. [11]

    Toda hierarchies and their applications , volume=

    Takasaki, Kanehisa , year=. Toda hierarchies and their applications , volume=. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , publisher=. doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aabc14 , number=

    doi

  4. [12]

    Journal of the Physical Society of Japan , author=

    Vibration of a chain with nonlinear interaction , DOI=. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan , author=. 1967 , month=apr, pages=

    1967

  5. [13]

    Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement , volume=

    Wronskian structures of solutions for soliton equations , author=. Progress of Theoretical Physics Supplement , volume=. 1988 , publisher=

    1988

  6. [14]

    RIMS Kokyuroku , volume=

    Soliton equations as dynamical systems on a infinite dimensional Grassmann manifold , author=. RIMS Kokyuroku , volume=. 1981 , publisher=

    1981

  7. [15]

    arXiv preprint math/0609764 , year=

    Total positivity, Grassmannians, and networks , author=. arXiv preprint math/0609764 , year=

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    Flaschka

    H. Flaschka. The Toda lattice. II. Existence of integrals. Physical Review B. 1974. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.9.1924

    1974 doi

  9. [17]

    2015 , eprint=

    The Toda lattice, old and new , author=. 2015 , eprint=

    2015

  10. [18]

    The Direct Method in Soliton Theory , publisher=

    Hirota, Ryogo , editor=. The Direct Method in Soliton Theory , publisher=. 2004 , collection=

    2004

  11. [19]

    2010 , month = oct, publisher =

    Biondini, Gino and Wang, Danhua , title =. 2010 , month = oct, publisher =. doi:10.1088/1751-8113/43/43/434007 , url =

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , volume=

    Soliton resonance and web structure in the Davey--Stewartson system , author=. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , volume=. 2022 , publisher=

    2022

  13. [21]

    2015 , publisher=

    Introduction to tropical geometry , author=. 2015 , publisher=

    2015

  14. [22]

    Tau functions and homology of Spectral curves

    The Geometry of integrable systems. Tau functions and homology of Spectral curves. Perturbative definition , author=. 2019 , eprint=

    2019

  15. [23]

    Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , abstract =

    Biondini, Gino and Kireyev, Dmitri and Maruno, Ken-ichi , title =. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical , abstract =. 2022 , month =. doi:10.1088/1751-8121/ac78db , url =

    2022 doi

  16. [24]

    , title =

    Biondini, Gino and Chakravarty, S. , title =. Journal of Mathematical Physics , volume =. 2006 , month =. doi:10.1063/1.2181907 , url =

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    2011 , issn =

    Combinatorial formulas for -coordinates in a totally nonnegative Grassmannian , journal =. 2011 , issn =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2009.10.006 , author =

    2011 doi

  18. [26]

    , title =

    Scott, Joshua S. , title =. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society , volume =. doi:https://doi.org/10.1112/S0024611505015571 , eprint =

    doi

  19. [27]

    2021 , eprint=

    KP Solitons from Tropical Limits , author=. 2021 , eprint=

    2021

  20. [28]

    2025 , eprint=

    Tropical KP Theory on Banana Curves , author=. 2025 , eprint=

    2025

  21. [29]

    On a family of KP multi–line solitons associated to rational degenerations of real hyperelliptic curves and to the finite non–periodic Toda hierarchy , volume=

    Abenda, Simonetta , year=. On a family of KP multi–line solitons associated to rational degenerations of real hyperelliptic curves and to the finite non–periodic Toda hierarchy , volume=. doi:10.1016/j.geomphys.2017.04.005 , journal=

    2017 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.