Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 108 references

Supersymmetry, differential operators of infinite order and theta functions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 The Riemann theta function is the unique solution of a supersymmetric differential system.

desk verdict A serious, conceptually valuable paper that finally explains Sato's order-1/2 operators as supersymmetry generators, but the advertised general-n uniqueness theorem rests on an absent section and unflagged sign errors. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.12846 v1 pith:5IKT7MP3 submitted 2026-08-13 math.AG

Mikhail Kapranov This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AG MSC 14K2511F2717B7058A50
keywords supersymmetrythetafunctionsThetanullwertdifferentialoperatorsofinfiniteorderOSp(1|2n)super-SiegelplaneR-holonomicsystemsBGGresolution
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 claims that the Riemann Thetanullwert θ(T) is not merely a special function but the unique solution of a local system of differential equations on a super-thickened Siegel upper half-plane. The equations are the super-Laplacian Dθ = 0 together with exponential equations $e^{{√(−4πi)D_{p_i}}$}θ = θ and $e^{{√(−4πi)D_{q_i}}$}θ = θ, built from odd supersymmetry generators of OSp(1|2n). If true, this recasts modularity of θ as a corollary of local invariance and unique solvability rather than as an external transformation law. The paper further argues that the system is R-holonomic, so its solution sheaf is constructible, and identifies θ as the super-Gaussian transform of a sum of delta functions in the super-Weil representation.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is the action of osp(1|2n) on the super-Siegel plane SH_n, in which the odd generators D_{p_i}, D_{q_i} have effective order 1/2, so their naive exponentials are differential operators of infinite order acting locally on holomorphic super-functions. On the kernel of the super-Laplacian D these odd generators obey Heisenberg-style relations [D_{p_i}, D_{q_i}] = (1/2)δ_{ij}, which makes the exponential operators A_i and B_i mutually commuting and turns them into the differentials of a Koszul complex. The load-bearing identity is that the super-Gaussians θ_x(T, ξ) = $e^{{πi x^tTx + √(−πi) ξ·x}}$ are eigenfunctions and shift vectors for these exponential operators, so summing θ_n over n ∈ Z^n yields the Thetanullwert. This machinery converts modularity of θ from an external invariance property into the statement that the solution sheaf of a manifestly invariant local system is one-dimensional.

What would settle it

In genus 1, compute the total symbol matrix of the operator $e^{{√(−4πi)D_p}}$ − 1 at a codirection λ with λ not in iR_{≤0} and check whether σ(λ) = exp(√(−4πi) [[0,1],[−λ,0]]) − 1 has nonzero kernel; any such kernel would contradict Proposition 2.4.2. More directly, find a local holomorphic solution Φ of the system (0.2) on SH_n that is not a constant multiple of θ(T); the one-dimensionality of $H^{0}$ of the Koszul complex is exactly the claim to be tested.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the genus-n Riemann Thetanullwert, viewed as a weight-1/2 super-form on the super-Siegel plane SH_n depending only on the even variables, is characterized up to a constant factor by three families of equations: annihilation by the OSp(1|2n)-invariant super-Laplacian D, and invariance under the exponential operators A_i = $e^{{√(−4πi)D_{p_i}}$} and B_i = $e^{{√(−4πi)D_{q_i}}$} for i = 1,...,n. On the space of harmonic weight-1/2 super-forms the odd generators satisfy the even Heisenberg relations [D_{p_i}, D_{q_j}] = (1/2)δ_{ij}, so A_i and B_i commute there and generate a Koszul complex. The proof controls the characteristic variety of this complex by showing that the non-invertibility locus of each exponential operator lies on a half-line of codirections, then computes the stalk at a point via the super-Gaussian transform; the same mechanism specializes to the Jacobi $\theta$ function in genus 1 and to the free massless N = 1 scalar supermultiplet in the 3-dimensional superconformal picture for genus 2.

Load-bearing premise

The uniqueness theorem relies on an imported microlocal invertibility criterion: an operator e^C − 1 is invertible except along directions where an eigenvalue of the leading block symbol lies on the imaginary axis, and the verification that the odd-generator exponentials have no larger non-invertibility locus is done by hand; if that locus were wider than the claimed half-line, the intersection of characteristic loci would not lie in the zero section and the unique-solution conclusion would collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the uniqueness theorem holds, the modular transformation behavior of the Riemann Thetanullwert follows from the local invariance of the system and the fact that the odd generators are exchanged up to sign by the adjoint action of the modular element S.
  • The R-holonomicity statement implies that the solution complex of the system is constructible with finite-dimensional stalks, so the infinite-order equations behave like a well-posed local system rather than a formal series.
  • The construction identifies the Thetanullwert as the image of the distribution u(x) = Σ_{m∈Z^n} δ(x−m) under the super-Gaussian transform, giving a direct bridge between the local differential equations and the classical algebraic-difference equations of the Weil representation.
  • The same supersymmetric mechanism, specialized to genus 2, shows that the free massless scalar supermultiplet (Laplace equation for the boson, Dirac equation for the fermion, vanishing auxiliary field) is the natural physical realization of the Siegel Thetanullwert system.
  • The genus-n Koszul complex is shown to be exact away from its degree-zero cohomology, which is spanned by the Thetanullwert; this is the precise sense in which the system has a unique solution up to scalars.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural testable extension is to write down the analogous super-differential system for theta functions with characteristics; the paper notes that such systems should be R-holonomic and invariant under congruence subgroups, but does not prove uniqueness for them.
  • The on-shell even Heisenberg relations suggest that the super-Weil representation is a small, minimal-orbit-type representation in the super setting; if so, one could attach a geometric coadjoint orbit to the space of harmonic superforms and look for other theta-like functions from other small super-representations.
  • One could numerically probe the characteristic-variety estimate by computing the total symbol of A_i at codirections just outside the claimed half-line locus; a failure of invertibility there would show up as a nonzero kernel of the symbol matrix and would contradict the stated containment of the characteristic variety.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a supersymmetric reformulation of Sato's differential-operator-of-infinite-order (DOI) approach to the modularity of theta functions. It introduces a super-thickening SH_n of the Siegel upper half-plane, the ortho-metaplectic supergroup OMp(1|2n), and a super-Weil representation of osp(1|2n). The central claim, stated in §0.D(5), Eq. (0.2), is that the Riemann Thetanullwert θ(T), viewed as a weight-1/2 super-form independent of the odd variables, is characterized up to a scalar by the system Dθ=0, A_iθ=θ, B_iθ=θ, where D is the super-Laplacian and A_i=e^{√(-4πi)D_{p_i}}, B_i=e^{√(-4πi)D_{q_i}} are exponentials of odd supersymmetry generators; the system is asserted to be modular invariant and R-holonomic. Detailed proofs are given for genus 1 (Chapter 2) and genus 2 (Chapter 3), including component computations, Koszul complexes, and characteristic-variety estimates. For higher genus the text announces a proof via a BGG-type resolution of the super-Weil representation and refers to a projected Section 4.5, which is not present in the supplied manuscript.

Significance. The conceptual framework is attractive and, for genus 2, connects the theta system to the 3d N=1 free massless scalar supermultiplet, combining the Laplace and Dirac equations. The genus-1 and genus-2 computations are concrete and largely credible: the super-Gaussian eigen-equations (Prop. 2.3.10), the matrix forms of the odd generators (Prop. 2.2.6), the two-term BGG resolution (Prop. 3.7.5), and the diagonal Cauchy-data argument (Props. 3.6.12 and 3.6.4) are checkable. If the general-n uniqueness theorem were completed, the paper would provide a uniform local explanation of theta modularity and a new bridge between supersymmetry and DOI theory. However, the supplied text does not prove the n>2 case, and the sign conventions in the characteristic-variety estimates are internally inconsistent. The achievement that is actually verified in the manuscript is the genus-1 and genus-2 characterization; the advertised higher-genus theorem remains unproved in this version.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.4 / §4.5 / §0.D(5)] The uniqueness statement (0.2) for arbitrary n is not proved in the supplied manuscript. The table of contents lists Section 4.5, 'The Koszul complex for the general Riemann theta,' but the text breaks off inside Section 4.2 I in the middle of the Kostant-homology computation for Theorem 4.2.7(b), and Sections 4.3–4.5 are absent. Consequently, no higher-genus analogue of Lemma 3.6.11 is given: the paper never establishes that the intersection of the non-invertibility loci ∩_i Z_{A_i} ∩_j Z_{B_j} meets the characteristic variety Z of D only in the zero section of T^*H_n. Without that intersection the Koszul complex is not known to be locally constant, and the 'unique up to scalars' claim for n>2 does not follow from anything in the text. This is a load-bearing gap for the central claim of the paper.
  2. [§2.4B and §3.6C] There is an internal inconsistency in the square-root conventions used for the characteristic-variety estimates. Proposition 2.3.10 and Theorem 2.3.7 fix the branch of √(-4πi), yet §2.4B applies Proposition 1.2.15 to C=√(-4πi)D_p^{(1/2)} and concludes Z_A⊂H×iR_{≤0}. With the principal branch of √(-4πi), the eigenvalues of the leading block-symbol are ±√(-4πi)√(-λ); for λ=ir with r>0 these lie on iR, while for λ=-ir with r>0 they are real. Thus the half-line should be iR_{>0}, not iR_{≤0}. In §3.6C the text instead applies Proposition 1.2.15 to C=√(4πi)D_i even though A_i was defined in §3.6B with √(-4πi); this switch flips the half-line. The two sections must be reconciled under a single branch convention, and the half-line estimates in §3.6C and any higher-genus extension must be recomputed accordingly. The final zero-section conclusions in genus 1 and 2 may survive the correction, but the present text is internally inconsistent.
  3. [§4.1C, Eq. (4.1.6)] The isotropic condition for the open super-cell is stated with a sign that is inconsistent with the genus-2 case: Eq. (3.3.6) gives σ(T,ξ)=t_{12}-t_{21}+ξ_1ξ_2=0, while Eq. (4.1.6) gives σ_{ij}=t_{ij}-t_{ji}-ξ_iξ_j=0, which for i=1,j=2 is t_{12}-t_{21}-ξ_1ξ_2=0. Since Sections 3.3 and 4.1 use the same symplectic form and the same coordinate conventions, this sign difference cannot be correct for both. This is particularly relevant because Section 4.5, which would depend on the correct isotropic condition, is missing.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and title page] The abstract contains the typo 'irredicuble' for 'irreducible'.
  2. [§2.4C, Proof of Proposition 2.4.3] The word 'sirjective' in condition (K2) should be 'surjective'.
  3. [§3.5C, Eq. (3.5.8)] The embedding is written as Sδ:SH×Sh→SH_2; the second factor should be SH, not Sh.
  4. [§4.2I] The supplied text ends mid-sentence with 'Here each S p(L) in the first appearance on ...' — the Kostant-homology computation and the proof of Proposition 4.2.14 are incomplete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the characterizing system is verified from the classical theta identities and the uniqueness proof is an independent microlocal/Koszul argument; the missing higher-genus Section 4.5 is an incompleteness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central system (0.2) is not circular. The forward direction that the Thetanullwert satisfies the system is a direct verification against the classical definition: theta is written as a sum of super-Gaussians and the equations e^{sqrt(-4 pi i) D_{p_i}} theta_n = theta_n and e^{sqrt(-4 pi i) D_{q_i}} theta_n = theta_{n-e_i} reproduce the integer periodicity of the theta series (Eqs. (2.3.11)-(2.3.12) and (3.5.7) with the surrounding argument). This uses the elliptic periodicity of the sum as an input, but that is an explicit, acknowledged derivation rather than an assumed conclusion. The uniqueness direction is independent: it invokes the external invertibility criterion in Proposition 1.2.15 (cited to [108,58]), computes the characteristic variety via the block-symbol eigenvalues of the odd generators (Section 2.4B; Lemma 3.6.11 for genus 2), and then determines the solution space by the stalk computation at tau = i (Proposition 2.4.3) or by diagonal Cauchy data (Proposition 3.6.4). None of these steps redefines the target as the input, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The self-referential material is limited to a 'forthcoming paper with V. Serganova', which is offered only as an alternative proof and is not load-bearing for the stated theorem. The main defect is that the promised Section 4.5, 'The Koszul complex for the general Riemann theta', is absent from the supplied text: the general-n local-constancy estimate (the higher-genus analogue of Lemma 3.6.11) is not proved here. That makes the n>2 uniqueness claim unproven in the provided manuscript, but it is a completeness/correctness gap rather than an equation-level circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 5 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted anywhere: the constants √(−4πi), πi, the weight 1/2 and the lattice Z^n are fixed by the classical normalization of the Riemann theta function and by the uniqueness of the Heisenberg relation at r = 1/2 (Cor. 2.2.7 states the value, irrespective of its sign quirk). The paper's load-bearing inputs are imported theorems: the microlocal invertibility criterion ([108, 58]), R-holonomicity ([96]), the Kashiwara-Kawai analysis ([63]), the Enright-Shelton equivalence ([27, 26]) and the Gorelik equivalence ([43]). The invented geometric objects (SH_n, OMp(1|2n), super-Weil representation, super-Gaussian transform) are constructions whose properties are verified by computation rather than free postulates; none of them is a parameter fitted to the target result.

assumptions (7)
  • standard math Invertibility criterion for exponentials of finite-order operators in the microlocal sheaf E^R: e^C − 1 is invertible when no eigenvalue of the leading block-symbol of C lies in iR.
    Imported as Proposition 1.2.15 from [108, Lem.2.4] and [58, Lem.2.2]; it underpins the characteristic-variety estimates in Sections 2.4B and 3.6C that give local constancy of the solution sheaves of the characterizing system.
  • standard math R-holonomicity machinery: a strictly perfect complex with characteristic variety in a real subanalytic Lagrangian set has an R-constructible solution complex.
    Cited as [96, Th.1.3] and stated as Theorem 1.2.11; it converts characteristic-variety bounds into local constancy of the cohomology of the Koszul complexes.
  • domain assumption The genus-1 Koszul complex analysis of the characterizing system: the cohomology is constant, spanned by θ, with higher cohomology vanishing.
    Theorem 2.4.1 is announced as a more precise form of results of [63], and the proof outline in Section 2.4 adapts the Kashiwara-Kawai argument; the genus-1 uniqueness result is not derived from scratch.
  • domain assumption Enright-Shelton equivalence: the singular block of parabolic category O for sp(2n) at weight −(1/2)^n is equivalent to two copies of a regular block for so(2n).
    Theorem 4.2.12, imported from [27, 26]; it is the backbone of Theorem 4.2.7(a) for the even Weil representation.
  • domain assumption Gorelik equivalence between the weakly atypical block of osp(1|2n) and the corresponding block of sp(2n).
    Theorem 4.2.13, imported from [43, Th.4.3]; it is used to lift the even BGG resolution to the super-Weil representation.
  • domain assumption Malgrange-type approximation: local solutions of DΦ = 0 are dense, in the jet topology, in finite linear combinations of super-Gaussians.
    Proposition 3.4.10(c), adapted from [72, Section 2.2] to the present constant-coefficient super-Laplacian; it allows finite super-Gaussian combinations to realize arbitrary Cauchy data on the diagonal embedding.
  • standard math Existence of exponentials e^{zφ} for endomorphisms of effective order < 1 with respect to a good filtration.
    Proposition 1.3.2, an adaptation of [95, Lemma 1.2]; it formalizes why e^{D_v} for an odd vector field v is a differential operator of infinite order.
invented entities (5)
  • Super-Siegel half-plane SH_n (super-thickening of H_n) independent evidence
    purpose: The stage on which the osp(1|2n) action and the characterizing system for θ live; its open cell is the Lagrangian super-Grassmannian parametrizing isotropic n|0-dimensional subspaces.
    A concrete geometric object, the open part of SLG(E) ⊂ C^{n(n+1)/2 | n} cut out by the equations σ_{ij} = t_{ij} − t_{ji} − ξ_iξ_j = 0, with a computable structure; not a free tuning device.
  • Ortho-metaplectic supergroup OMp(1|2n) independent evidence
    purpose: Central extension of OSp(1|2n,R) acting on super-forms of half-integer weight; it replaces the metaplectic group Mp(2n) in the super setting.
    Defined by square roots of the automorphy factor det(δξ + CT + D)^{1/2} on SH_n; its even part restricts to the classical metaplectic group.
  • Super-Weil representation of osp(1|2n) and OMp(1|2n) independent evidence
    purpose: Unifies the even and odd parts W^0 ⊕ W^1 of the classical Weil representation into one irreducible super-representation.
    Its even part restricts to the standard Weil representation (Eqs. 4.2.1-4.2.2); the odd generators act by p_ν ↦ (1/√(−4πi))∂_{x_ν}, q_ν ↦ √(−πi)x_ν, so the structure is fixed by the classical model.
  • Super-Gaussian transform SG independent evidence
    purpose: Integration against the super-Gaussians θ_x; it combines the Gaussian transform (even functions) with its odd counterpart and sends the delta-lattice distribution to θ.
    A defined integral transform whose formal properties (eigen-equations, multiplicativity under the diagonal embedding) are verified by computation, not hypothesized.
  • Super-Laplacian D = [D_1, D_2]_+ (genus 2) and its higher-genus analog independent evidence
    purpose: Equations-of-motion operator imposing the on-shell condition; its kernel is the space of harmonic superforms carrying the even Heisenberg relations.
    Its component form (Eq. 3.4.3) explicitly identifies D with the Laplace and Dirac operators, so the characteristic variety is computable and the object is not a free postulate.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Supersymmetry, differential operators of infinite order and theta functions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/5IKT7MP3

@misc{pith2026260812846,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Supersymmetry, differential operators of infinite order and theta functions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/5IKT7MP3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.12846}
}
read the original abstract

In 1972, M. Sato proposed an approach to proving modularity of forms like Thetanullwerte by characterizing them via certain differential operators of infinite order (DOI) in the modular variable(s) alone. A DOI is an infinite series in derivatives decreasing so fast that it acts on holomorphic functions by a sheaf morphism. This approach was developed by several authors including Kashiwara, Kawai, Takei and Yoshida. We give an interpretation of this approach using supersymmetry which provides a natural source of DOIs: the naive exponential of any odd supersymmetry generator is a DOI. The case of the Riemann theta function of genus n is governed by the supergroup OSp(1|2n) (and its metaplectic cover) acting on a natural super-thickening of the Siegel plane. For n=2 this is the 3-dimensional N=1 superconformal group and the structure at hand is precisely the free massless scalar supermultiplet (combining the Laplace and Dirac equations). For n>2 we get a super-extension of the generalized conformal structure existing on the Lagrangian Grassmannian as on any Hermitian symmetric space. An additional interesting feature here is that the odd supersymmetry generators acting ``on-shell'' (i.e., in the space of solutions of the equations of motion) satisfy even-style Heisenberg commutation relations. These equations of motion upgrade to a complex of differential operators corresponding to a natural BGG-type resolution of the super-Weil representation of osp(1|2n).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.12846 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Durfee square and the remainder diagrams of a self-dual diagram. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p091_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

108 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages

  1. [63]

    T. Kawai. An example of a complex of linear differential operators of infinite order. Proc. Japan. Acad. Ser. A59(1983) 113-115

    work page 1983

  2. [58]

    Proceedings of Geometrical and Algebraic Aspects in Several Complex Variables

    M. Kashiwara, T. Kawai, Y. Takei. The structure of cohomology groups associated with the theta-zerovalue. In: “Proceedings of Geometrical and Algebraic Aspects in Several Complex Variables” (C. Berenstein, C. Struppa, Eds.) Cetraro (1989) p. 169-189; Preprint RIMS-674, Kyoto Univ. 1989

    work page 1989

  3. [1]

    Differential Geome- try and Complex Analysis

    L. Ahlfors. M¨ obius transformations and Clifford numbers. In: “Differential Geome- try and Complex Analysis”, H.E. Rauch memorial Volume’ (I. Chavel, H. M. Farkas Eds.) p. 65-73, Springer-Verlag, 1985

    1985

  4. [2]

    L. Ahlfors. M¨ obius transformations inR n expresses throught 2×2 matrices of Clifford numbers.Complex Variables5(1986) 215-224

    1986

  5. [3]

    T. Aoki. Invertibility for microdifferential operators of infinite order.Publ. RIMS, Kyoto Univ.18(1982) 1-29

    1982

  6. [4]

    T. Aoki. Calcul exponential des op´ erateurs microdifferentiuels d’ordre infini, II. Ann. Inst. Fourier36(1986) 143-165

    1986

  7. [5]

    T. Aoki, M. Kashiwara, T. Kawai. On a class of linear differential operators of infinite order with finite index.Advances in Math.62(1986) 155-168

    1986

  8. [6]

    Arbarello, C

    E. Arbarello, C. De Concini, V. Kac. The infinite wedge representation and the reciprocity law for algebraic curves, Proceedings of Symposia in Pure Mathematics 49 (1989), 171-190

    1989

Show all 108 references
  1. [7]

    Arnaudon, M

    D. Arnaudon, M. Bauer, L. Frappat. On Casimir’s ghost.Comm. Math. Phys.187 (1997) 429-439, arXiv:q-alg/9605021

    1997 arXiv

  2. [8]

    M. A. Baranov, I. V. Frolov, A. S. Schwarz. Geometry of the superconformal moduli space.Theoret. and Math. Phys.79(1989) 509-517

    1989

  3. [9]

    R. J. Baston, M. G Eastwood. The Penrose Transform. Its Interactions with Rep- resentation Theory. Oxford Univ. Press, 1989

    1989

  4. [10]

    Advances in Soviet Mathematics

    A. Beilinson, J. Bernstein. A Proof of Jantzen conjectures, in: “Advances in Soviet Mathematics”16pt. I, p. 1-50, Amer. Math. Soc. Publ. 1993

    1993

  5. [11]

    Structure of Solutions of Differential Equations

    C. A. Berenstein, T. Kawai, D. C. Struppa. Exponential representation of a holo- morphic solution of a system of differential equations associated with the theta- zerovalue. In: “ Structure of Solutions of Differential Equations” (M. Morimoto, T. Kawai Eds.) 89-102, Worlld Sci...

    1996

  6. [12]

    Lie Groups and their Representations

    I. N. Bernstein, I. M. Gelfand, S. I. Gelfand. Differential operators on the base affine space and a study ofg-modules. In: “Lie Groups and their Representations” (I. M. Gelfand Ed.) 21-64, Adam Hilger Publ. 1975

    1975

  7. [13]

    J.-E. Bj¨ ork. AnalyticD-modules and Applications. Kluwer Acad. Publ. 1993

    1993

  8. [14]

    L. Breen. On the Classification of 2-Gerbes and 2-Stacks.Ast´ erisque225, Soc. Math. France Publ. 1994

    1994

  9. [15]

    Bryant, P

    R. Bryant, P. Griffiths, D. Grossman. Exterior Differential Systems and Euler- Lagrange Partial Differential Equations. Univ. of Chicago Press, 2003

    2003

  10. [16]

    Borho, J.-L

    W. Borho, J.-L. Brylinski. Differential operators on homogeneous spaces I.Invent. Math.69(1982) 437-476

    1982

  11. [17]

    Brylinski

    J.-L. Brylinski. Loop Spaces, Characteristic Classes abd Geometric Quantization. Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1993. 121

    1993

  12. [18]

    Carmeli, G

    C. Carmeli, G. Cassinelli, A. Toigo, V.S. Varadarajan. Unitary representations of super Lie groups and applications to the classification and multiplet structure of super particles.Comm. Math. Phys.263(2006) 217-258

    2006

  13. [19]

    Cheng, J.-H Kwon, W

    S.-J. Cheng, J.-H Kwon, W. Wang. Kostant homology formulas for oscillator mod- ules of Lie superalgebras.Adv. Math.224(2010) 1548-1588

    2010

  14. [20]

    Cheng, N

    S.-J. Cheng, N. Lam, W. Wang. Super duality and irreducible characters of ortho- symplectic Lie superalgebras.Invent. Math.183(2011) 189-224

    2011

  15. [21]

    Quantum Fields and Strings: A Course for Mathematicians

    P. Deligne, D. Freed. Supersolutions. In: “Quantum Fields and Strings: A Course for Mathematicians” (P. Deligne et a. Eds.) Vol. 1, p. 227-355

  16. [22]

    P. A. M. Dirac. The electron wave equation in de-Sitter space.Ann. Math.36(1935) 657-669

    1935

  17. [23]

    Eastwood

    M. Eastwood. Higher symmetries of the Laplacian.Ann. Math.161(2005) 1645- 1665

    2005

  18. [24]

    T. J. Enright. Analogues of Kostant’su-cohomology formula for unitary highest weight modules.J. reine und angew. Math.392(1988) 27-36

    1988

  19. [25]

    T. J. Enright, M. Hunziker. Resolutions and Hilbert series of determinantal varieties and unitary highest weight modules.J. Algebra273(2004) 608-639

    2004

  20. [26]

    Symmetry, Representa- tion Theory and Its Applications

    T. J. Enright, M. Hunziker, W. A. Pruett. Diagrams of hermitian type, highest weight modules and syzygies of determinantal varieties. In: “Symmetry, Representa- tion Theory and Its Applications” (R. Howe et al. Eds.) p. 121-184, Springer-Verlag, 2014

    2014

  21. [27]

    T. J. Enright, B. Shelton. Categories of highest weight modules: applications to classical Hermitian symmetric pairs.Mem. Amer. Math. Soc.67(1987)

    1987

  22. [28]

    Faltings, C.-L

    G. Faltings, C.-L. Chai. Degenerations of Abelian Varieties. Springer-Verlag, 1990

    1990

  23. [29]

    ´Elie Cartan and les Math´ ematiques d’ajourd’hui

    C. Fefferman, R. Graham. Conformal invariants, in: “ ´Elie Cartan and les Math´ ematiques d’ajourd’hui”,Ast´ erisquehors s´ erie (1985) 95-116

    1985

  24. [30]

    Felder, D

    G. Felder, D. Kazhdan, A. Polishchuk. Regularity of the superstring supermeasure and the superperiod map.Selecta Math.28(2022), Art. # 17

    2022

  25. [31]

    Fioresi, M

    R. Fioresi, M. A. Lledo, V. S. Varadarajan. The Minkowski and conformal super- spaces. arXiv:math/060981

  26. [32]

    Fioresi, E

    R. Fioresi, E. Latini. The symplectic origin of conformal and Minsowski superspaces. arXiv:1506.09086

    arXiv

  27. [33]

    Fioresi, B

    R. Fioresi, B. Shu. Basic quasi-reductive root data and supergroups. arXiv:2303.18065

    arXiv

  28. [34]

    E. Freitag. Holomorphe Differentialformen zu Kongruenzgruppen der Siegelschen Modulgruppe.Invent. Math.30(1975) 181-196

    1975

  29. [35]

    E. Freitag. Holomorphe Differentialformen zu Kongruenzgruppen der Siegelschen Modulgruppe zweiten Grades.Math. Ann.216(1975) 155-164. 122

    1975

  30. [36]

    E. Freitag. Singular Modular Forms and Theta Relations.Lecture Notes in Math. 1487, Springer-Verlag 1991

    1991

  31. [37]

    S. J. Gates, Jr., M. T. Grisaru, M. Roˇ cek, W. Siegel. Superspace, or One Thousand and One Lessons in Supersymmetry. Benjamin Cummings Publ. Co. Reading MA, 1983

    1983

  32. [38]

    A. B. Goncharov. Infinitesimal structures related to Hermitian symmetric spaces. Funct. Anal. Appl.15(1981) 221-223

    1981

  33. [39]

    A. B. Goncharov. Constructions of Weil representations of certain simple Lie alge- bras.Funct. Anal. Appl.16(1982) 133-135

    1982

  34. [40]

    A. B. Goncharov. Generalized conformal structures on manifolds.Selecta Math. Soviet.6(1987) 307-340

    1987

  35. [41]

    A. B. Goncharov. Weil representation and hypergeometric functions related to the Lagrangian Grssmannian.Soviet Math. Dokl.41(1990) 395-399

    1990

  36. [42]

    M. Gorelik. On the ghost center of Lie superalgebras.Ann. Inst. Fourier50(2000) 1745-1764

    2000

  37. [43]

    M. Gorelik. Strongly typical representations of the basic classical Lie superalgebras. Journal of the AMS,15(2002) 167-184. arXiv:math/0009186

    2002 arXiv

  38. [44]

    Guillemin, S

    V. Guillemin, S. Sternberg. The metaplectic representation, Weyl operators and spectral theory.J. Funct. Anal.42(1981) 128-225

    1981

  39. [45]

    Hennion, M

    B. Hennion, M. Kapranov. Gelfand-Fuchs cohomology in algebraic geometry and factorization algebras.J. Amer. Math. Soc.36(2023) 311–396

    2023

  40. [46]

    N. Hitchin. Harmonic spinors. Adv. Math.14(1974) 1-55

    1974

  41. [47]

    P. S. Howe, U. Lindstr¨ om. Super-Laplacians and their symmetries.J. High Energy Phys.2017, no. 5, paper # 119, front matter+26 pp. arXiv:1612.06787

    2017 arXiv

  42. [48]

    J. E. Humphreys. Representations of Semisimple Lie Algebras and the BGG cate- goryO. Amer. Math. Soc. Publ. Providence RI, 2008

    2008

  43. [49]

    Huybrechts

    D. Huybrechts. Lecture on K3 Surfaces. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2016

    2016

  44. [50]

    H. P. Jacobsen, M. Vergne. Wave and Dirac operators and representations of the conformal group.J. Funct. Anal.24(1977) 52-106

    1977

  45. [51]

    A. Joseph. The minimal orbit in a simple Lie algebra and its associated maximal ideal.Ann. Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er.9(1976) 1-29

    1976

  46. [52]

    J´ ozeffiak, P

    T. J´ ozeffiak, P. Pragacz, J. Weyman. Resolutions of determinantal varieties and tensor complexes associated with symmetric and antisymmetric matrices.Ast´ erisque 87-88(1981) 109-189

    1981

  47. [53]

    New Spaces in Physics—Formal and Conceptual Reflections

    M. Kapranov. Supergeometry in mathematcs and physics. in: “New Spaces in Physics—Formal and Conceptual Reflections” p. 114-152, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2021

    2021

  48. [54]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. Systems of Microdifferential Equations. Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1983 123

    1983

  49. [55]

    Kashiwara

    M. Kashiwara. Algebraic study of systems of partial differential equations.M´ em. Soc. Math. France,63(1995), fasc. 4

    1995

  50. [56]

    Kashiwara, P

    M. Kashiwara, P. Schapira. Sheaves on Manifolds. Springer-Verlag, 1990

    1990

  51. [57]

    Kashiwara, T

    M. Kashiwara, T. Kawai, T. Kimura. Foundations of Algebraic Analysis. Princeton Univ. Press, 1986

    1986

  52. [59]

    Kashiwara, M

    M. Kashiwara, M. Vergne. On the Segal-Shale-Weil representations and harmonic polynomials.Invent. Math.44(1978) 1-47

    1978

  53. [60]

    T. Kawai. On the theory of Fourier hyperfunctions and its applications to partial differential equations with constant coefficients.J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math.17(1970) 467-517

    1970

  54. [61]

    T. Kawai. Some remarks on microlocal analysis ofθ-functions.RIMS-Kˆ okyuroku 410(1980) 76-87, Res. Inst. Math. Sci. Kyoto (in Japanese)

    1980

  55. [62]

    T. Kawai. Systems of linear differential equations of infinite order: an aspect of infinite analysis.Proc. Symp. in Pure Math.49pt. 1 (1981) 3-17

    1981

  56. [64]

    Hyperbolic Equations and Related Topics

    T. Kawai. Systems of microdifferential equations of infinite order, in: “Hyperbolic Equations and Related Topics” (S. Mizohata Ed.) Proc. Taniguchi Symposium, Katata and Kyoto 1984, Kinokuniya Press, Tokyo, 1986

    1984

  57. [65]

    Kobayashi, B

    T. Kobayashi, B. Orsted, Analysis on the minimal representation of O(p,q). I. Re- alization via conformal geometry.Adv. Math.180(2003) 486-512

    2003

  58. [66]

    S. M. Kuzenko, J.-H. Park, G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, R. von Unge. Off-shell superconformal nonlinear sigma-models in three dimensions.J. High Energy Phys. 2011, paper No. 146, arXiv:1011.5727

    2011 arXiv

  59. [67]

    S. M. Kuzenko. Conformally compactified Minkowski superspaces revisited.J. High Energy Phys.2012, paper No. 135, arXiv:1206.3940

    2012 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Le´ sniewski

    A. Le´ sniewski. A remark on the Casimir elements of Lie superalgebras and quantized Lie superalgebras.J. Math. Phys.36(1985) 1457-1461

    1985

  61. [69]

    G. Lion, M. Vergne. The Weil Representation, Maslov index and theta series. Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1980

    1980

  62. [70]

    J. Lott. Eigenvalue estimates for the Dirac operator.Pacific J. Math.125(1986) 117-126

    1986

  63. [71]

    A. J. H. Malcom. Cuspidal modules of the Lie superalgebraosp(1|2n). Master’s thesis, U. Texas Arlington, 2010. 124

    2010

  64. [72]

    Malgrange.Existence et approximation des solutions des ´ equations aux derive´ es partielles et des ´ equations de convolution.Ann

    B. Malgrange.Existence et approximation des solutions des ´ equations aux derive´ es partielles et des ´ equations de convolution.Ann. Inst. Fourier,6(1956) 271-355

    1956

  65. [73]

    H. Maass. Automorphe Funktionen von mehreren Ver¨ anderlichen und Dirichletsche Reihen.Abh. Math. Sem. Hamburg16(1949) ???

    1949

  66. [74]

    Y. I. Manin. Gauge Fields and Complex Geometry. Springer-Verlag, 1986

    1986

  67. [75]

    Y. I. Manin. Critical dimensions of string theories and the dualizing sheaf on the moduli space of (super) curves.Funct. Anal. Appl.20(1986) 244-246

    1986

  68. [76]

    Martineau

    A. Martineau. ´Equations diff´ erentielles d’ordre infiniBull. Soc. Math. France95 (1967) 109-154

    1967

  69. [77]

    D. Mumford. Tata Lectures on Theta I -III. Birkh¨ auser, Boston, 1983-1991

    1983

  70. [78]

    I. M. Musson. On the center of the enveloping algebra of a classical simple Lie superalgebra.J. Algebra193(1997) 75-101

    1997

  71. [79]

    I. M. Musson. Lie superalgebras and enveloping algebras. Amer. Math. Soc. Publ. 2012

    2012

  72. [80]

    Nishiyama

    K. Nishiyama. Oscillator representations for orthosymplectic algebras.J. Algebra 129(1990) 231-252

    1990

  73. [81]

    A. A. Nizami, T. Sharmab, V. Umes. Superspace formulation and correlation func- tions of 3d superconformal field theories.J. High Energy Phys.(2014) paper No. 22, arXiv: 1308.4778

    2014 arXiv

  74. [82]

    A. Pais, V. Rittenberg. Semisimple graded Lie algebras.J. Math. Phys.16(1975) 2062-2073

    1975

  75. [83]

    V. P. Palamodov. Linear Differential Operators with Constant Coefficients. Springer-Verlag, 1970

    1970

  76. [84]

    J.-H. Park. Superconformal symmetry in three-dimensions.J. Math. Phys.41(2000) 7129-7161, arXiv:9910199

    2000

  77. [85]

    I. B. Penkov.D-modules on supermanifolds.Invent. Math.71(1983) 501-512

    1983

  78. [86]

    A. Petrov. Quantum Superfield Supersymmetry. Springer-Verlag, 2021

    2021

  79. [87]

    G. Pinczon. The enveloping algebra of the Lie superalgebraosp(1,2).Adv. Math. 91(1992) 252-268

    1992

  80. [88]

    Reiner, J

    V. Reiner, J. Roberts. Minimal resolutions and the homology of matching and chess- board complexes.J. Alg. Comb.11(2000) 135-154

    2000

  81. [89]

    H. L. Resnikoff. On a class of linear differential equations for automorphic forms in several complex variables.Amer. J. Math.95(1973) 321-332

    1973

  82. [90]

    H. L. Resnikoff. Automorphic forms of singular weight are singular forms.Math. Ann.215(1975) 173-193

    1975

  83. [91]

    Salam, J

    A. Salam, J. Strahdee. Supergauge transformations.Nucl. Phys. B76(1974) 477- 482

    1974

  84. [92]

    I. Satake. Algebraic structures of symmetric domains. Princeton Univ. Press, 1980. 125

    1980

  85. [93]

    M. Sato. Pseudo-differential equations and theta functions.Ast´ erisque2-3(1973) 286-291

    1973

  86. [94]

    M. Sato, T. Kawai, M. Kashiwara. Microfunctions and pseudo-differential equations. Lecture Notes in Math.287(1973) 265-529

    1973

  87. [95]

    M. Sato, M. Kashiwara, T. Kawai. Linear differential equations of infinite order and theta functions.Adv. Math.47(1983) 300-325

    1983

  88. [96]

    M. Sato, M. Kashiwara, T. Kawai. Microlocal analysis of theta functions.Adv. Studies in Pure Math.4(1984) (Group Representations and Systems of Differential Equations) 267-289

    1984

  89. [97]

    V. V. Serganova. Classification of real simple Lie superalgebras and symmetric su- perspaces.Funct. Anal. Appl.17(1993) 200-207

    1993

  90. [98]

    New developments in Lie theory and its applications

    V. Serganova, Quasireductive supergroups, in: “ New developments in Lie theory and its applications”, p. 141-159,Contemp. Math.544. Amer. Math. Soc., Provi- dence, RI, 2011

    2011

  91. [99]

    Ency- clopedia of Math. Sciences8. Several Complex Variables II

    A. G. Sergeev, V. S. Vladimirov. Complex analysis in the future tube, in: “Ency- clopedia of Math. Sciences8. Several Complex Variables II” (G. M. Khenkin, A. G. Vitushkin Eds.) p.179-253, Springer-Verlag, 1994

    1994

  92. [100]

    Sweedler

    M. Sweedler. Hopf Algebras. Benjamin, New York, 1969

    1969

  93. [101]

    Analysis on Homogeneous Spaces and Representation Theory of Lie groups

    T. Tanisaki, Hypergeometric systems and Radon transforms for Hermitian symmet- ric spaces. in: “ Analysis on Homogeneous Spaces and Representation Theory of Lie groups”,Adv. Studies in Pure Math26(2000) 235-263

    2000

  94. [102]

    K. Th. Vahlen. ¨Uber Bewegungen und komplexe Zahlen.Math. Ann.55(1902) 585-593

    1902

  95. [103]

    A. A. Voronov, A formula for the Mumford measure in superstring theory.Funct. Anal. Appl.22(1988) 139-140

    1988

  96. [104]

    P. L. Waterman. M¨ obius transformations in several dimensions.Adv. in Math.101 91993) 87-113

  97. [105]

    A. Weil. Sur certains groupes d’op´ erateurs unitaires.Acta Math.111(1964) 143-211

    1964

  98. [106]

    J. M. Weyman. Cohomology of Vector Bundles and Syzygies. Cambridge Univ. Press, 2003

    2003

  99. [107]

    E. Witten. Notes on super Riemann surfaces and their moduli.Pure Appl. Math. Q.15(2019) 57-211. arXiv:1209.2459

    2019 arXiv

  100. [108]

    J.-i. Yoshida. On the geometry of differential equations associated with the theta- zerovalue.Publ. RIMS Kyoto Univ.31(1995) 847-872. Kavli IPMU (WPI), UTIAS, The University of Tokyo, Kashiwa, Chiba 277-8583, Japan, email:mikhail.kapranov@protonmail.com 126

    1995

Pith tools

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