Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalence

Taeuk Nam

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 20 references

Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalence

T0 review · 4 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 This paper proves that the Arkhipov–Bezukravnikov, Bezrukavnikov, and Fundamental Local Equivalences of geometric Langlands can each be upgraded to an equivalence of factorization module categories with Iwahori ramification at a fixed…

desk verdict The three factorization-module equivalences are a real step for tamely ramified geometric Langlands, but right now their proofs hinge on unpublished [BCG26] and [CF], so the paper reads as conditional rather than self-contained. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.04207 v1 pith:L42CXJS2 submitted 2026-08-04 math.AG math.RT

Taeuk Nam This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AGmath.RT MSC 14D2414F1017B67

keywords geometricLanglandsIwahoriramificationfactorizationmodulecategoriesArkhipov–BezukravnikovequivalenceBezrukavnikovFundamentalLocalaffineHeckecategoryKazhdan–Lusztig

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's central claim is that three local equivalences at the heart of geometric Langlands—the Arkhipov–Bezukravnikov, Bezrukavnikov, and Fundamental Local Equivalences—survive in factorized form when $G$ is tamely ramified at a fixed point $x_0$. Each is upgraded from a pointwise equivalence at $x_0$ to an equivalence of factorization module categories, a structure that keeps the equivalences compatible as the other points move, collide, and vary in families. The paper constructs these as equivalences of pairs $(\mathcal{C},\mathcal{M})$ in $\mathrm{FactModCat}_{x_0}$: the first component is the unramified factorization category and the second is a factorization module category encoding Iwahori level structure at $x_0$. If the construction is correct, it supplies the local spectral descriptions needed for a tamely ramified, Iwahori-level geometric Langlands correspondence.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the category $\mathrm{FactModCat}_{x_0}$ of pairs $(\mathcal{C},\mathcal{M})$: $\mathcal{C}$ a factorization category living over the Ran space, and $\mathcal{M}$ a factorization $\mathcal{C}$-module category over the Ran space $\mathrm{Ran}_{x_0}$ of finite subsets that must contain the fixed point $x_0$. The Iwahori subgroup is not factorizable, so $x_0$ is held fixed while other points move and collide with it; factorization module categories are exactly the device that encodes this. The argument runs on three mechanisms: fusability, a condition on factorization $\mathrm{Rep}(\check{G})$-module categories that lets a functor be shown an equivalence by checking its fiber at $x_0$; conservativity of factorization restriction along $\mathrm{Rep}(\check{G}) \to \mathrm{Sph}^{\mathrm{spec}}_{\check{G}}$; and Iwahori–Hecke temperedness, a condition on $\mathrm{Aff}^{\mathrm{spec}}_{\check{G},x_0}$-module categories that makes tensoring with the Whittaker affine-flag category conservative. These three levers reduce each theorem to a pointwise equivalence that can be proven by adapted classical arguments.

What would settle it

A decisive check would be to compute the fiber of $\mathrm{IFLE}$ on a Verma module $M_{\check{\lambda}}$: the proof identifies its image with the structure sheaf $O_{\mathrm{Op}^{\check{\lambda}-\mathrm{nilp}}_{\check{G},x_0}}$ and its character with $\prod_{n>0}(1-q)^{-\ell}$; any mismatch in these characters would falsify Theorem 0.2.11. More broadly, once the cited fusability theory appears, testing its reduction principle on a category in the essential image of $\mathrm{Fact}^{\mathrm{restr}}$ whose fiber at $x_0$ is an equivalence but which is not an equivalence on a stratum with extra moving points would falsify the common promotion argument.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that ramification does not break the factorization pattern: the three equivalences hold not only fiberwise but as equivalences of pairs in $\mathrm{FactModCat}_{x_0}$. Concretely, $\mathrm{AB}$ identifies the Whittaker-invariant $D$-modules on the affine flag variety, $\mathrm{Whit}^!(\mathrm{Fl}_G)$, with quasi-coherent sheaves on the stack $\check{\mathfrak{n}}/\check{B}$; $\mathrm{B}$ identifies the affine Hecke category $\mathrm{Aff}_G$ with its spectral counterpart $\mathrm{Aff}^{\mathrm{spec}}_{\check{G}}$; and $\mathrm{IFLE}$ identifies the Iwahori Kazhdan–Lusztig category at critical level, $\mathrm{IKL}(G)_{\mathrm{crit}}$, with $\mathrm{IndCoh}_*$ of the meromorphic-opers stack fibered over $\check{\mathfrak{n}}/\check{B}$. Theorems 0.2.5, 0.2.8, and 0.2.11 state that these morphisms of pairs are equivalences in $\mathrm{FactModCat}_{x_0}$, with $\mathrm{B}$ monoidal and with $\mathrm{IFLE}$ equivariant with respect to $\mathrm{B}$. The pointwise fibers at $x_0$ are the classical Arkhipov–Bezukravnikov, Bezrukavnikov, and Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalences, and the additional content is that these fibers can be promoted to statements about all of $\mathrm{Ran}_{x_0}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is an unpublished 'fusability' criterion—that an equivalence of the relevant factorization module categories can be checked at the single fixed point $x_0$—and if this criterion fails, or demands conditions not proven here, the three theorems do not follow from the paper's arguments.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the three equivalences hold, the local Iwahori-ramified spectral description at a fixed point $x_0$ is fixed: $\mathrm{IKL}(G)_{\mathrm{crit},x_0}$ is equivalent to $\mathrm{IndCoh}_*(\mathrm{Op}^{\mathrm{mer}}_{\check{G}} \times_{\mathrm{LS}^{\mathrm{mer}}_{\check{G}}} \check{\mathfrak{n}}/\check{B})$, in agreement with the expected right-hand side for Iwahori level structure.
The equivalence $\mathrm{B}$ transfers every module category over the geometric affine Hecke category $\mathrm{Aff}_G$ to a module category over its spectral counterpart, so actions used in local geometric Langlands become interchangeable.
Because each statement is an equivalence of pairs in $\mathrm{FactModCat}_{x_0}$, the equivalences remain compatible as mobile points collide with the fixed point $x_0$, not merely at a single fiber; this is the structure needed to globalize to an Iwahori-level Langlands functor.
The compatibility between $\mathrm{B}$ and $\mathrm{IFLE}$ supplies the Iwahori-level counterpart of the standard compatibility between Bezrukavnikov's equivalence and the Fundamental Local Equivalence in the unramified setting.

Reading between the lines

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

The same 'check at $x_0$ and invoke fusability' strategy would plausibly extend to other parahoric level structures at a fixed point, provided the relevant module categories can be shown fusable and tempered; the paper itself confines the argument to Iwahori level.
A natural next step, which the paper does not take, is to feed these local equivalences into the compact-generation result for $D$-modules on $\mathrm{Bun}^I_G$ to construct the global tamely ramified Langlands functor; the paper stops at the local statements.
Because the fusability theory is cited as forthcoming, the most direct stress test of the arguments is to isolate the pointwise-to-global promotion step: if the unpublished criterion required hypotheses not verified for $\mathrm{Whit}^!(\mathrm{Fl}_G)$ or $\mathrm{Aff}_G$, the reductions in all three theorems would need repair.

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

Taeuk Nam's paper does something genuinely new: it lifts the three known pointwise Iwahori-ramified equivalences (Arkhipov-Bezrukavnikov, Bezrukavnikov, Fundamental Local Equivalence) to equivalences of factorization module categories at a fixed point x0. That is exactly the local input the tamely ramified global program needs after the unramified five-paper proof, and I do not see these module-category statements in the cited literature. The six pairs are constructed carefully, and the overall architecture—use fusability to reduce an equivalence of factorization modules to the fiber at x0, then invoke pointwise results—is coherent. I also want to credit the author for not hiding the dependencies: sections point explicitly to [BCG26] and [CF], and there are no fitted parameters or circular arguments that I can see.

The soft spots are real, though, and they are load-bearing. The fusability theory from [BCG26] is not a decoration. It is what defines 'fusable' (Definition 2.1.5), supports the conservativity reduction (Propositions 2.1.3, 3.1.8), and is used to prove Whit!(FlG) and Aff_G are fusable (Propositions 2.1.9, 3.1.10, both sketches). Theorem 0.2.8's spectral target Aff^spec_G is itself defined in 3.1.9 via Fact_inertia, whose essential image is characterized in the unpublished Proposition 3.1.8. So a change of hypotheses there changes the statement, not just the argument. Similarly, Proposition 3.1.3 uses the unpublished factorization restriction functor of [CF]. And Theorem 1.5.6, which is used to construct B and IFLE, is only sketched: the proof says the general case follows from H={e} and pullbacks, without giving the higher-categorical details. I would not call any of these fatal—they are consistent with the program and likely fixable—but as submitted, Theorems 0.2.5, 0.2.8, and 0.2.11 are conditional on sources the reader cannot check.

One smaller point: Section 2.3.2 admits that ABx0 may not identify with ABclassical. That does not threaten Theorem 0.2.5 since both are equivalences, but it could matter for compatibilities later and should be resolved before publication.

Who is this for? Geometric Langlands people working on the tamely ramified case. A serious referee should engage with it—the strategy deserves referee time—but the report should insist that the author either quote the needed statements from [BCG26] and [CF], or make the paper explicitly conditional and give the exact hypotheses. I would not accept the current arXiv version as final.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs three tamely ramified local equivalences of factorization module categories at a fixed point x0 of a smooth projective curve X. The first, AB, is claimed to be a factorization version of the Arkhipov–Bezukravnikov equivalence between (Whit!(G), Whit!(FlG)) and (Rep(Ǧ), QCoh(ň/B̌)). The second, B, is claimed to be a monoidal equivalence between (SphG, AffG) and (Sph^{spec}_{Ǧ}, Aff^{spec}_{Ǧ}). The third, IFLE, is claimed to be an Iwahori-ramified factorization version of the Fundamental Local Equivalence between (KL(G)_crit, IKL(G)_crit) and (IndCoh*(Op^{mon-free}_{Ǧ}), IndCoh*(Op^{mer}_{Ǧ} ×_{LS^{mer}_{Ǧ}} ň/B̌)). The central technical strategy is to reduce each equivalence of factorization module categories to a pointwise equivalence at the single point x0, using the theory of fusability for factorization Rep(Ǧ)-module categories and a factorization restriction 2-functor. The paper also proves an approximation theorem for pairs of factorization categories and module categories, used in constructing B and IFLE.

Significance. If all three theorems are established, the paper would provide the expected spectral descriptions for the Iwahori-ramified local categories that appear in the tamely ramified geometric Langlands program, and would yield compatibility with the relevant Hecke actions. The paper is well-structured and the overall strategy is natural and ambitious: it upgrades known pointwise equivalences to factorization module categorical ones, and it gives explicit constructions of the six pair objects involved. Credit is due for the detailed setup of the factorization module categories, for the explicit reduction strategy, and for engaging with the recent literature on the geometric Langlands conjecture. However, the central claims are currently conditional on substantial unpublished work: the fusability theory of [BCG26] and the factorization restriction functor of [CF]. Because these inputs are used not merely as citations but as load-bearing components in the definitions and reduction steps, the theorems are not presently established as self-contained statements.

major comments (4)

[§2.1 and Theorem 0.2.5] The proof of Theorem 0.2.5 depends at a load-bearing point on the unpublished theory of fusability in [BCG26]. Definition 2.1.5 defines a fusable factorization Rep(Ǧ)-module category as one in the essential image of Fact^{restr}, whose full faithfulness is only asserted in Proposition 2.1.3 as a result of [BCG26]. The reduction in §2.3.1 uses the claim from §2.1.7 that an equivalence between fusable categories can be checked at x0, and Proposition 2.1.9 asserting that Whit!(FlG) is fusable is proven only by a two-sentence sketch. If any hypothesis in the unpublished theory fails or requires modification, the equivalence AB may not follow from the pointwise result. This is a correctness risk, not a presentation issue, because the statement of Theorem 0.2.5 itself is conditional on a not-yet-available classification result.
[§3.1, Proposition 3.1.3, Definition 3.1.9, Theorem 0.2.8] Theorem 0.2.8 relies on two pieces of unpublished work. First, the conservativity of factorization restriction FactRes along Rep(Ǧ)→Sph^{spec}_{Ǧ} (Proposition 3.1.3) is asserted for the 2-functor FactRes of [CF], which is not available to the reader; the proof's cube diagram uses implicit generation claims that are not fully justified. Second, the target object Aff^{spec}_{Ǧ} is defined in Definition 3.1.9 as Fact_{inertia}(IndCoh((ň/B̌)_{x0} ×_{ǧ/Ǧ} (ň/B̌)_{x0})), where Fact_{inertia} is a fully faithful 2-functor whose essential image is characterized only in Proposition 3.1.8, a result deferred to [BCG26]. Thus a change of hypotheses in the unpublished theory would change the statement of Theorem 0.2.8, not just its proof. The reduction to the pointwise equivalence B_{x0} in §3.3.1 inherits this dependence.
[§1.5, Theorem 1.5.6] Theorem 1.5.6 is an approximation result that is used to construct the morphisms B in §3.2.3 and IFLE in §4.1.2, yet its proof is only a sketch. The H={e} case is declared "obvious" without argument, and the general case is reduced to it via a Cech nerve and an identification of totalization categories that is stated without proof. Since Theorem 1.5.6 is load-bearing for the existence of the central morphisms, the proof needs to be written out in detail, at least for the base case H={e} and for the compatibility of the totalization identifications with pullbacks.
[§4.2.2 and §4.4.3] The pointwise Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalence is proven in §4.4, but the proof contains a step that is only sketched: in Proposition 4.4.3, the map from O_{Op^{λ-nilp}} to the cohomology H^∞/2(n((t)),n[[t]], M_λ⊗Ψ_0) is said to be injective "because O is irreducible as a module over N*", and the character computation is said to follow from [FG10] "essentially verbatim" with the finite Weyl module replaced by the finite Verma module. Since the comparison of characters is the core of the essential surjectivity argument, this step should be either proven in detail or accompanied by a precise reference to a result that covers the Verma case.

minor comments (5)

[Acknowledgements] The text contains a typo: "greatful" should be "grateful".
[§2.3.2] The word "automorphsim" is a typo for "automorphism".
[Proposition 3.1.10] In the proof, "we agian use" should be "we again use".
[§1.1.4] The remark about unital versus non-unital Ran space is useful, but the terminology "Ran without any decorations" is informal; a fixed notation such as Ran^un would be clearer in later sections where unitality is important.
[References] The reference [Ras] is cited as an available PDF without a publication year; if there is a published or arXiv version, it should be cited accordingly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the equivalences are conditional on unpublished [BCG26]/[CF] foundations, but they are not derived from their own conclusions.

full rationale

The paper's three theorems are factorization-module upgrades of known pointwise equivalences, and the proof strategy is to construct the global morphism and then reduce to the fiber at x0. The pointwise equivalences are imported from [CCF+24], [Ras16], [DT25], and [FG10]; they are not assumed from Theorems 0.2.5, 0.2.8, or 0.2.11. The 'fusability' reduction (Section 2.1, specifically Definition 2.1.5 and Propositions 2.1.9, 3.1.8, and 3.1.10) is an external framework announced in the unpublished [BCG26]; it is used to promote an equivalence at x0 to an equivalence of pairs and to justify handling of QLisse subcategories. Similarly, conservativity of factorization restriction (Proposition 3.1.3) relies on the unpublished [CF]. These are load-bearing dependencies and make the theorems conditional, but they are not circular: no theorem is used to prove itself, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The target category Aff^spec_G is defined in Definition 3.1.9 through Fact_inertia from [BCG26], so if that unpublished classification changed, the target itself would change; this is a correctness and reproducibility risk rather than circularity. Accordingly, the paper does not exhibit an equation of the form 'Eq. X = Eq. Y by construction' at the level of the main claims, and the circularity score is low.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted constants. Its central claims rest on standard geometric Langlands infrastructure, on cited pointwise equivalences, and on two unpublished bodies of work ([BCG26] and [CF]) that supply the fusability and factorization-restriction machinery. Two new mathematical notions (fusability and Iwahori-Hecke temperedness) appear, but their validity is not independently evidenced outside the unpublished sources and the paper's own arguments.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Fix a smooth projective connected curve X over an algebraically closed field k of characteristic zero and a closed point x0 (Section 1.1.1).
Standard setting for geometric Langlands; the entire paper operates in this regime.
domain assumption The unramified factorization category equivalences CS_G, Sat_G, and FLE from [ABC+24a] hold as stated.
Used as the first components of the pairs AB, B, and IFLE; cited to the five-paper proof.
domain assumption The pointwise equivalences AB_classical ([AB09]), Bezrukavnikov's pointwise equivalence (adapted from [DT25]), and the character computation of [FG10] hold in the de Rham, unipotent monodromy setting.
The paper reduces to these pointwise statements, sometimes adapting arguments 'mutatis mutandis' from the Betti or classical setting.
ad hoc to paper Fusability of factorization Rep(Ĝ)-module categories and the characterization of fusable categories via Fact^restr, including full faithfulness results, are valid as stated in the in-preparation [BCG26].
Definition 2.1.5, Propositions 2.1.3 and 3.1.8, and the reductions in Sections 2-4 depend on this unpublished theory.
ad hoc to paper The factorization restriction 2-functor FactRes of [CF] exists and has the conservativity properties used in Proposition 3.1.3.
[CF] is listed as unpublished; Proposition 3.1.3 is proven using its definitions, and Remark 3.1.4 states that a more general conservativity is not recorded anywhere.

invented entities (2)

Fusable factorization Rep(Ĝ)-module categories (Definition 2.1.5)
purpose: Tool for reducing an equivalence of factorization module categories to a check at the point x0; used in the proofs of Theorems 0.2.5, 0.2.8, and 0.2.11.
The notion and its key properties are attributed to the unpublished [BCG26] and are not independently verifiable from this paper alone.
Iwahori-Hecke temperedness (Definition 4.3.3)
purpose: A condition on Aff^spec_{Ĝ,x0}-module categories used to prove that IFLE_{x0} is an equivalence.
Introduced in Section 4.3 as a paper-internal definition; no external evidence beyond the arguments in Section 4.4.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalence." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L42CXJS2

@misc{pith2026260804207,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Iwahori Fundamental Local Equivalence},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L42CXJS2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.04207}
}

read the original abstract

We construct three tamely ramified local equivalences of factorization module categories. The first is a factorization version of the Arkhipov-Bezrukavnikov equivalence at a point. The second is a factorization version of the Bezrukavnikov equivalence at a point. The third is an Iwahori-ramified version of the factorizable Fundamental Local Equivalence.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

[1]

Gaitsgory and S

D. Gaitsgory and S. Raskin. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture I: Construction of the Functor. arXiv:2405.03599, 2024

arXiv 2024
[2]

Arinkin, D

D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture II: Kac-Moody Localization and the FLE. arXiv:2405.03648, 2024

arXiv 2024
[3]

Campbell, L

J. Campbell, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture III: Compatibility with Parabolic Induction. arXiv:2409.07051, 2024

arXiv 2024
[4]

Arinkin, D

D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture IV: Ambidexterity. arXiv:2409.08670, 2024

arXiv 2024
[5]

Gaitsgory and S

D. Gaitsgory and S. Raskin. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture V: The Multiplicity One Theorem. arXiv:2409.09856, 2024

arXiv 2024
[6]

T. Nam. ( _G^ I ) is Compactly Generated. arXiv:2411.03057, 2024

work page Pith review arXiv 2024
[7]

Faergeman

J. Faergeman. Motivic Realization of Rigid G-local Systems on Curves and Tamely Ramified Geometric Langlands. arXiv:2405.18268, 2024

arXiv 2024
[8]

S. Raskin. Chiral Categories. Available at https://www.samraskin.net/chiralcats.pdf

work page

Show all 20 references

[9]

Faergeman and A

J. Faergeman and A. Hayash. Parabolic Geometric Eisenstein Series and Constant Term Functors. arXiv:2507.13930, 2025

2025 arXiv
[10]

Bogdanova

E. Bogdanova. Local Systems with Restricted Variation on the Formal Punctured Disc via Factorization. arXiv:2411.05297, 2024

2024 arXiv
[11]

Frenkel and D

E. Frenkel and D. Gaitsgory. Weyl Modules and Opers without Monodromy
[12]

Bogdanova, L

E. Bogdanova, L. Chen, and D. Gaitsgory. Fusable Factorization Module Categories. In preparation, 2026

2026
[13]

S. Raskin. Chiral Principal Series Categories I: Finite Dimensional Calculations. Adv. Math. 388 , article 107856, 2021

2021
[14]

S. Raskin. Chiral Principal Series Categories II: The factorizable Whittaker Category. Available at https://www.samraskin.net/cpsii.pdf, 2016

2016
[15]

Arkhipov and R

S. Arkhipov and R. Bezrukavnikov. Perverse Sheaves on Affine Flags and Langlands Dual Group. Isr. J. Math. 170 , 135-–183, 2009

2009
[16]

Bezrukavnikov

R. Bezrukavnikov. On Two Geometric Realizations of an Affine Hecke Algebra. Publ. Math. IHES 123 , 1–-67, 2016

2016
[17]

Chen and C

L. Chen and C. Fu. Factorization Restriction. Unpublished
[18]

Dhillon and J

G. Dhillon and J. Taylor. Tame Local Betti Geometric Langlands. arXiv:2501.14157, 2025

2025 arXiv
[19]

Gaitsgory

D. Gaitsgory. Appendix: Braiding Compatibilities. Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics 40 , 91--100, 2004

2004
[20]

Frenkel and D

E. Frenkel and D. Gaitsgory. D-modules on the Affine Flag Variety and Representations of Affine Kac-Moody Algebras. Represent. Theory 13 , 470--608, 2009

2009

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Gaitsgory and S

D. Gaitsgory and S. Raskin. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture I: Construction of the Functor. arXiv:2405.03599, 2024

arXiv 2024

[2] [2]

Arinkin, D

D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture II: Kac-Moody Localization and the FLE. arXiv:2405.03648, 2024

arXiv 2024

[3] [3]

Campbell, L

J. Campbell, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture III: Compatibility with Parabolic Induction. arXiv:2409.07051, 2024

arXiv 2024

[4] [4]

Arinkin, D

D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, N. Rozenblyum. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture IV: Ambidexterity. arXiv:2409.08670, 2024

arXiv 2024

[5] [5]

Gaitsgory and S

D. Gaitsgory and S. Raskin. Proof of the Geometric Langlands Conjecture V: The Multiplicity One Theorem. arXiv:2409.09856, 2024

arXiv 2024

[6] [6]

T. Nam. ( _G^ I ) is Compactly Generated. arXiv:2411.03057, 2024

work page Pith review arXiv 2024

[7] [7]

Faergeman

J. Faergeman. Motivic Realization of Rigid G-local Systems on Curves and Tamely Ramified Geometric Langlands. arXiv:2405.18268, 2024

arXiv 2024

[8] [8]

S. Raskin. Chiral Categories. Available at https://www.samraskin.net/chiralcats.pdf

work page