The singularity category as a stable module category

Xiao-Wu Chen; Zhengfang Wang

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 37 references

The singularity category as a stable module category

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that the singularity category of any left artinian ring is triangle equivalent to the stable module category over the degree-zero part of a Leavitt ring, and that this part is an FC ring.

desk verdict Solid, genuinely new structural result; the main theorem holds up, with only minor presentation gaps. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.01056 v1 pith:2D3MMWPU submitted 2025-09-01 math.RT math.ACmath.CTmath.RA

Xiao-Wu Chen , Zhengfang Wang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RTmath.ACmath.CTmath.RA MSC 16S8818G8013D02

keywords singularitycategorystablemoduleLeavittringFCFrobeniusabelianstabilizationnoncommutativedifferentialformsartinian

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 proves a structural theorem about singularity categories, the derived-category quotients that vanish precisely for rings of finite global dimension and therefore measure homological singularity. For any left artinian ring Λ with a suitable semisimple subring E, the paper forms the bimodule Ω_nc of E-relative noncommutative differential 1-forms, whose tensor functor acts as a syzygy functor on Λ-mod. Stabilizing the module category by formally inverting this functor yields a Frobenius abelian category S, which the paper identifies with the category of finitely presented modules over the zeroth component L_0 of a Leavitt ring. The payoff is a triangle equivalence between the singularity category of Λ and the stable module category over L_0, and the corollary that L_0 is an FC ring—usually not quasi-Frobenius—whose von Neumann regularity is exactly equivalent to Λ having finite global dimension. This recasts a subtle triangulated invariant as an ordinary module category over an explicitly constructed ring.

What carries the argument

Central object: the stabilization S(Λ-mod, Ω_nc ⊗_Λ −), formed by formally inverting the tensor endofunctor of the relative 1-form bimodule. The load-bearing identity is Proposition 4.3: the Leavitt ring L_R(M) is isomorphic to the orbit ring Γ(S(R);Σ) built from the Σ-progenerator S(R)=(R,0) in the stabilization. Strong gradedness of this orbit ring — equivalent to add(R)=add(ΣR), forced by artinian stabilization of add(Ω_nc^{⊗n}⊗Λ) — collapses the graded Leavitt module category to L_0-mod. The Frobenius property of the stabilization then yields the triangulated structure and the FC property of L_0.

What would settle it

Take R = K a field and M = K^2, so the Leavitt ring is the Leavitt path algebra of the one-vertex two-loop quiver. Compute the degree-zero component directly on both sides of Proposition 4.3: the colimit of M_{2^p}(K) on the orbit-ring side, and the degree-zero part of the Leavitt path algebra on the other. If the two rings are not isomorphic, the identification of the Leavitt ring with the orbit ring fails, and the main equivalence of Theorem 5.7 cannot hold.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The main result (Theorem 5.7): for a left artinian ring Λ with a semisimple subring E over which Λ is finitely generated, with Ω_nc the bimodule of E-relative noncommutative 1-forms, the Leavitt ring L_Λ(Ω_nc) is strongly graded; its zeroth component L_0 is an FC ring; and D_sg(Λ) is triangle equivalent to the stable module category L_0-mod. The key identity is Proposition 4.3: the Leavitt ring of any bimodule M over a ring R is isomorphic to the orbit ring of the stabilization of R-mod by M ⊗_R −, taken at the generator R. The stabilization using Ω_nc is Frobenius abelian, which transfers a Frobenius module-category structure to L_0-mod and forces L_0 to be FC. Corollary 5.9: Λ has finite g

Load-bearing premise

The chain of equivalences rests on the cited theorem that the Leavitt ring is the colimit of the tensor powers of the dual bimodule; if that colimit presentation were false, the identification in Proposition 4.3 would break and the main equivalence would not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The singularity category D_sg(Λ) of every artinian ring is triangle equivalent to the stable module category of the explicitly constructed FC ring L_0.
L_0 is an FC ring that is usually not noetherian, hence not quasi-Frobenius; the construction yields a new family of FC rings.
Λ has finite global dimension if and only if L_0 is von Neumann regular; the failure of regularity of L_0 is exactly the homological singularity of Λ.
The stabilization S is a Frobenius abelian category, giving an explicit Frobenius enhancement of D_sg(Λ).
For radical-square-zero algebras, L_0 is isomorphic to a trivial extension of a von Neumann regular ring, making the FC ring in that case concrete.

Reading between the lines

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

The identification in Proposition 4.3 is not restricted to the 1-form setting, so the same orbit-ring machinery could be applied to other loop functors whose descending chains stabilize; for non-artinian rings the chain need not stabilize, and the method would then yield only a graded equivalence, not one against an ungraded module category.
The construction depends on a choice of the semisimple subring E; different choices may give different FC rings L_0, and whether those rings are Morita equivalent is not discussed in the paper and would clarify how canonical the output is.
Section 6's description of L_0 as a trivial extension of a von Neumann regular ring suggests that a better understanding of the bimodule V_0 in that presentation would make the FC-ring structure computable in wider classes of examples, such as monomial or gentle algebras.
Because FC rings are coherent analogues of quasi-Frobenius rings, the theorem indicates that every singularity category of an artinian ring sits inside the world of coherent rings; testing whether invariants of L_0 such as its flat or coherent dimensions match known invariants of Λ could give new derived invariants.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper does what the title says: for a left artinian ring Λ containing a semisimple subring E with Λ finitely generated over E, it proves that the singularity category D_sg(Λ) is triangle equivalent to the stable module category over the zeroth component L0 of the Leavitt ring L_Λ(Ω^nc). That is a genuine structural result, and it yields new FC rings that are not quasi-Frobenius. I did not find a load-bearing flaw.

The genuinely new piece is Proposition 4.3, which identifies the Leavitt ring with an orbit ring coming from the stabilization of the module category, and the resulting Theorem 5.7. The proof chain is sound: Lemma 3.8 gives strong gradedness from the descending chain condition, Prop 4.3 transfers it to L, and Prop 5.5 plus the Buchweitz–Keller–Vossieck equivalence yield the stable-category identification. The authors also honestly flag where the restriction to finitely presented modules matters (Remarks 4.6, 4.7).

The main thing the stress-test flags is that Prop 4.3 cites [14, Thm 2.6] for the colimit presentation of the Leavitt ring. This is a self-citation, but it is to a published Advances in Mathematics paper, and the hypotheses match the stated setting (R-R-bimodule with RM finitely generated projective). The stress-test worry does not land: a published theorem does not need to be reproved here, and the rest of Prop 4.3 checks the ring/composition compatibility directly. If that theorem later turned out to be false, the paper would break, but that is a generic dependency, not a gap.

The genuine soft spots are minor. Proposition 6.1's proof is basically omitted ("We omit the details"), and Example 5.3's infinite ascending chain is asserted rather than demonstrated. The radical-square-zero example depends on a case-by-case description that is a bit too terse. None of this affects the main equivalence.

Who should read this: anyone working on singularity categories, Leavitt path algebras, or FC rings. It connects two active areas and produces a new family of non-QF FC rings. It should go to peer review, and I would expect acceptance after minor revisions. I would bring it to a reading group and would likely cite it.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies, for a left artinian ring Λ with a semisimple subring E such that _EΛ is finitely generated, the stabilization S of Λ-mod by formally inverting the tensor endofunctor Ω^{nc}⊗_Λ−, where Ω^{nc}=Ω^{nc}_{Λ/E} is the bimodule of E-relative noncommutative 1-forms. Building on the authors' earlier Leavitt-ring machinery, the paper proves that S is Frobenius abelian and equivalent to L_0-mod, where L_0 is the degree-zero component of the Leavitt ring L_Λ(Ω^{nc}); it follows that L_0 is an FC ring. The main theorem (Theorem 5.7) then gives a triangle equivalence D_sg(Λ) ≃ L_0-mod. The route is: general stabilization results yielding an orbit-ring description (Sections 2–3), an identification of the Leavitt ring with the orbit ring (Prop. 4.3), and a combination with the Buchweitz–Keller–Vossieck description of the singularity category (Thm. 5.4).

Significance. If correct, the main theorem provides a broad and conceptually unified description: the singularity category of any artinian ring (under the stated hypotheses) is a stable module category over an FC ring. This goes beyond the previously known encounters with Leavitt path algebras and gives a new source of non-quasi-Frobenius FC rings. The orbit-ring/stabilization formalism is elegant and likely to be useful beyond the present application. The paper is well organized and the deductions after the key identifications are mostly transparent. The central risk is the reliance on the colimit presentation of the Leavitt ring cited from the authors' earlier work [14, Thm. 2.6]; that step is load-bearing and is not independently verified in the present text.

major comments (2)

[Section 4, Proposition 4.3] The proof of Proposition 4.3 is the key bridge: it identifies L_R(M) with the orbit ring Γ(S(R);Σ), and Theorem 5.7 builds strong gradedness, FC-ness, and the triangle equivalence on this identification. However, the proof does not establish this identification directly from the defining relations of the Leavitt ring. It cites [14, Theorem 2.6] for the assertion that L_R(M) is isomorphic to colim_p (M^*)⊗p ⊗_R T_R(M) with transitions id⊗c⊗id, and then shows the multiplication matches. The present text neither states the precise hypotheses of [14, Thm. 2.6] nor verifies that they hold for an arbitrary R-R-bimodule M with only _RM finitely generated projective. Since [14] is self-cited and this theorem is load-bearing for the main claim, I ask the authors to either prove the colimit presentation from the defining relations of the Leavitt ring, or state [14, Thm. 2.6] explicitly and check i
[Section 5, Lemma 5.1] The proof of (2)⇒(3) invokes 'the dual of Lemma 2.3 and its proof', but Lemma 2.3 concerns the equivalence C(P,−) for orbit rings and does not directly yield the contravariant equivalence Hom_R(−,R): R-mod → (R^op-mod)^op. Since Lemma 5.1 is used in Theorem 5.7 to pass from 'L_0-mod is Frobenius abelian' to 'L_0 is an FC ring', this step needs a correct proof or a precise standard reference. The statement is standard, but the proof as written is not sufficient.

minor comments (4)

[Section 2, Proposition 2.2] The proof says 'The same argument in Lemma 2.3 shows...' but Lemma 2.3 appears later; it should presumably refer to Lemma 2.1.
[Section 6, Proposition 6.1] The proof of Proposition 6.1 is omitted ('We omit the details'). Since this is a nontrivial explicit description of the Leavitt ring, please include at least a sketch of the isomorphism, or state the computation as a known/straightforward consequence with a reference.
[Section 5, Example 5.3] The choice of E is not specified. Since the paper's setup allows any semisimple subring E, please clarify that E is taken to be the field K (or state the intended choice). Also, the claimed infinite strictly ascending chain of subobjects of (Λ,0) is asserted without construction; a few sentences indicating the inductive step would make the non-noetherian claim convincing.
[Throughout] Please fix typographical issues: 'calld' for 'called' (Section 5), the double colon in the proof of Proposition 4.3, the missing exponent 'for some l ≥.' in Lemma 3.8, the garbled title of reference [10] (appears as 'catˇ sˇSgories dˇ sˇSrivˇ sˇSes'), and the header typo 'CA TEGORY' / 'ST ABLE'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the central equivalence is derived, with the only load-bearing self-citation being an independent prior colimit theorem.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The paper constructs the stabilization S = S(Λ-mod, Ω^nc ⊗_Λ −), shows it has cokernels and a Σ-progenerator (Prop. 3.7), and then uses the general orbit-ring equivalence (Prop. 2.2) to compare S with graded modules over the orbit ring Γ(S(Λ);Σ). The key bridge, Prop. 4.3, identifies Γ(S(R);Σ) with the Leavitt ring L_R(M). This is not an identity by construction: L_R(M) is defined by generators and relations, whereas Γ is defined from Hom-spaces of the stabilization. The identification goes through the colimit presentation (4.3), and the step 'By [14, Theorem 2.6] these homomorphisms induce an isomorphism' is the one place where a same-author prior result is load-bearing. However, [14, Thm. 2.6] is a general ring-theoretic colimit presentation for Leavitt rings, not the paper's target equivalence D_sg(Λ) ≃ L_0-mod; it has no fitted parameters and does not assume the target result. The subsequent steps derive strong gradedness from the stabilization of the chain add(Λ) ⊇ add(Ω^nc ⊗_Λ Λ) ⊇ ... (Lemma 3.8), derive the FC property from the Frobenius property of S via Lemma 5.1, and connect to D_sg(Λ) using the external Buchweitz–Keller–Vossieck theorem (Thm. 5.4). No prediction is a renamed fit, no definitional circularity is present, and no uniqueness claim is imported from the authors' prior work. The reliance on [14, Thm. 2.6] is a correctness dependence on an external theorem, not a circular reduction; minor self-citations such as [13] and [15] are contextual and not load-bearing for the main equivalence.

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

The central claim rests on standard homological algebra and on two external theorems: the Buchweitz-Keller-Vossieck stabilization theorem and the colimit description of Leavitt rings from the authors' prior work. No free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The stabilization S(Λ-mod, Ω^nc⊗-) is triangle equivalent to the singularity category D_sg(Λ).
This is the Buchweitz, Keller-Vossieck theorem [9,31,6], cited as Theorem 5.4; it connects the paper's new stabilization to the established singularity category.
domain assumption The Leavitt ring L_R(M) is isomorphic to the colimit colim_p (M*)⊗p ⊗_R T_R(M) ([14, Theorem 2.6]).
Used in Proposition 4.3 to realize the Leavitt ring as an orbit ring; the proof is not reproduced.
standard math For a Z-graded strongly graded ring Γ, the functor M ↦ M_0 gives an equivalence Γ-grmod ≃ Γ_0-mod.
Standard result (Dade, Nastasescu-van Oystaeyen), cited as (2.4).
standard math A ring R is FC if and only if R-mod is a Frobenius abelian category.
Damiano's theorem, Lemma 5.1; used to infer that L_0 is FC from the Frobenius property of S.
domain assumption Ω^nc = Λ ⊗_E Λ̄ is projective as a left and right Λ-module ([17, Proposition 2.5]).
Ensures the tensor functor is exact and the stabilization S is abelian; cited from Cuntz-Quillen.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The singularity category as a stable module category." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2D3MMWPU

@misc{pith2026250901056,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The singularity category as a stable module category},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2D3MMWPU}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.01056}
}

abstract

We investigate the stabilization $\mathcal{S}$ of the module category over an artinian ring $\Lambda$ by formally inverting the tensor endofunctor given by the bimodule of relative noncommutative differential $1$-forms. It turns out that $\mathcal{S}$ is a Frobenius abelian category, which is equivalent to the category of finitely presented modules over the zeroth component $L_0$ of the Leavitt ring $L$. It follows that $L_0$ is an FC ring in the sense of Damiano, which is usually not quasi-Frobenius. Moreover, the singularity category of $\Lambda$ is triangle equivalent to the stable module category over $L_0$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 36 canonical work pages

[14]

Chen, and Z

X.W. Chen, and Z. W ang , The dg Leavitt algebras, singular Yoneda category and sin- gularity category , with an appendix by Bernhard Keller and Yu W ang, Adv. Math. 440 (2024), 109541. 2, 8, 10, 11, 17

work page 2024
[1]

Abrams, and G

G. Abrams, and G. Aranda Pino , The Leavitt path algebra of a graph , J. Algebra 293 (2) (2005), 319–334. 2

work page 2005
[2]

Ara, M.A

P. Ara, M.A. Moreno, and E. Pardo , Nonstable K-theory for graph algebras , Algebr. Represent. Theory 10 (2) (2007), 157–178. 2

work page 2007
[3]

Ara, and E

P. Ara, and E. Pardo , K-Theoretic characterization of graded isomorphisms betw een Leavitt path algebras , J. K-Theory 14 (2014), no. 2, 203–245.] 11

work page 2014
[4]

Auslander , Representation Dimension of Artin Algebras, Math

M. Auslander , Representation Dimension of Artin Algebras, Math. Notes Q ueen Mary College, London, 1971. 3

work page 1971
[5]

Auslander, I

M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S.O. Smalo , Representation Theory of Artin Algebras, Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math. 36, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995. 3, 6, 17

work page 1995
[6]

Beligiannis, The homological theory of contravariantly ﬁnite subcatego ries: Auslander- Buchweitz contexts, Gorenstein categories and (co-)stabi lization, Comm

A. Beligiannis, The homological theory of contravariantly ﬁnite subcatego ries: Auslander- Buchweitz contexts, Gorenstein categories and (co-)stabi lization, Comm. Algebra 28 (10) (2000), 4547–4596. 1, 5, 14 18 XIAO-WU CHEN, ZHENGF ANG W ANG

work page 2000
[7]

Beligiannis, and M

A. Beligiannis, and M. Marmaridis , Left triangulated categories arising from contravari- antly ﬁnite subcategories , Comm. Algebra 22 (12) (1994), 5021–5036. 14

work page 1994

Show all 37 references

[8]

Bergh , Orbit algebras and periodicity , Colloq

P.A. Bergh , Orbit algebras and periodicity , Colloq. Math. 114 (2009), 245–252. 2, 4

2009
[9]

Buchweitz , Maximal Cohen-Macaulay Modules and Tate-cohomology over Goren- stein Rings, with appendices by L.L

R.O. Buchweitz , Maximal Cohen-Macaulay Modules and Tate-cohomology over Goren- stein Rings, with appendices by L.L. Avramov, B. Briggs, S.B . Iyengar, and J.C. Letz, Math. Surveys and Monographs 262, Amer. Math. Soc., 2021. 1, 14

2021
[10]

Carlsen, and E

T.M. Carlsen, and E. Ortega , Algebraic Cuntz-Pimsner rings , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 103 (3) (2011), 601–653. 2, 10

2011
[11]

Canonaco, and P

A. Canonaco, and P. Stellari , A tour about existence and uniqueness of dg enhance- ments and lifts , J. Geom. Phys. 122 (2017), 28–52. 15

2017
[12]

Chen , Relative singularity categories and Gorenstein-projecti ve modules , Math

X.W. Chen , Relative singularity categories and Gorenstein-projecti ve modules , Math. Nachr. 284 (2-3) (2011), 199–212. 15

2011
[13]

Chen, and Z

X.W. Chen, and Z. W ang , Diﬀerential graded enhancements of singularity categorie s, Proc. IRCA 2022, to appear, arXiv:2312.12138v1, 2023. 15

2022
[15]

Chen, and D

X.W. Chen, and D. Yang , Homotopy categories, Leavitt path algebras and Gorenstein projective modules, Int. Math. Res. Not. 10 (2015), 2597–2633. 2, 17

2015
[16]

Clark, J

L.O. Clark, J. Fletcher, R. Hazrat, and H. Li , Z-graded rings as Cuntz-Pimsner rings , J. Algebra 536 (2019), 82–101. 2, 10

2019
[17]

Cuntz, and D

J. Cuntz, and D. Quillen , Algebra extensions and nonsingularity , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 8 (2) (1995), 251–289. 1, 12

1995
[18]

Dade , Group-graded rings and modules , Math

E.C. Dade , Group-graded rings and modules , Math. Z. 174 (3) (1980), 241–262. 4, 5

1980
[19]

Damiano , Coﬂat rings and modules , Paciﬁc J

R.F. Damiano , Coﬂat rings and modules , Paciﬁc J. Math. 81 (1979), 349–369. 2, 12, 13

1979
[20]

Drinfeld , DG quotients of DG categories , J

V. Drinfeld , DG quotients of DG categories , J. Algebra 272 (2) (2004), 643–691. 15

2004
[21]

Ebeling , Homological mirror symmetry for singularities , in: Representation Theory– Current Trends and Perspectives, EMS Series Congress Repor ts, 75–107, European Math

W. Ebeling , Homological mirror symmetry for singularities , in: Representation Theory– Current Trends and Perspectives, EMS Series Congress Repor ts, 75–107, European Math. Soc., Zurich, 2017. 1

2017
[22]

Happel , Triangulated Categories in the Representation Theory of F inite Dimensional Algebras, London Math

D. Happel , Triangulated Categories in the Representation Theory of F inite Dimensional Algebras, London Math. Soc. Lect. Note Ser. 119, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge,
[23]

Hazrat , The dynamics of Leavitt path algebras , J

R. Hazrat , The dynamics of Leavitt path algebras , J. Algebra 384 (2013), 242–266. 11

2013
[24]

Hazrat , Graded Rings and Graded Grothendieck Groups, London Math

R. Hazrat , Graded Rings and Graded Grothendieck Groups, London Math. Soc. Lect. Note Set. 435, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2016. 4

2016
[25]

Heller , The loop-space functor in homological algebra , Trans

A. Heller , The loop-space functor in homological algebra , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 96 (1960), 382–394. 2, 12

1960
[26]

Heller , Stable homotopy categories , Bull

A. Heller , Stable homotopy categories , Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 74 (1968), 28–63. 1, 5

1968
[27]

Kalck, A new equivalence between singularity categories of commut ative algebras, Adv

M. Kalck, A new equivalence between singularity categories of commut ative algebras, Adv. Math. 390 (2021), 107913. 1

2021
[28]

Kalck, and J

M. Kalck, and J. Karmazyn , Noncommutative Kn¨ orrer type equivalences via noncom- mutative resolutions of singularities , arXiv:1707.02836v1, 2017. 1

2017 arXiv
[29]

Keller , Derived categories and universal problems , Comm

B. Keller , Derived categories and universal problems , Comm. Algebra 19 (1991), 699–

1991
[30]

Keller , On the cyclic homology of exact categorues , J

B. Keller , On the cyclic homology of exact categorues , J. Pure Appl. Algebra 136 (1) (1999), 1–56. 15

1999
[31]

Keller, and D

B. Keller, and D. Vossieck , Sous les catˇ sˇSgories dˇ sˇSrivˇ sˇSes, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris 305 (1987), 225–228. 1, 14

1987
[32]

Leavitt, The module type of a ring , Trans

W.G. Leavitt, The module type of a ring , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 103 (1962), 113–130. 2

1962
[33]

Lenzing , Wild canonical algebras and rings of automorphic forms , in: Finite- Dimensional Algebras and Related Topics, NATO ASI Ser

H. Lenzing , Wild canonical algebras and rings of automorphic forms , in: Finite- Dimensional Algebras and Related Topics, NATO ASI Ser. 424, 191–212, Kluwer, Dor- drecht, 1994. 2, 4

1994
[34]

Nastasescu, and F

C. Nastasescu, and F. V an Oystaeyen , Methods of Graded Rings, Lecture Notes in Math. 1836, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2004. 4

2004
[35]

Orlov, Triangulated categories of singularities and D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg mod- els, Proc

D. Orlov, Triangulated categories of singularities and D-branes in Landau-Ginzburg mod- els, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 246 (3) (2004), 227–248. 1, 14

2004
[36]

Smith , Category equivalences involving graded modules over path a lgebras of quivers , Adv

S.P. Smith , Category equivalences involving graded modules over path a lgebras of quivers , Adv. Math. 230 (2012), 1780–1810. 2

2012
[37]

Tierney , Categorical Constructions in Stable Homotopy Theory, Lec ture Notes in Math

M. Tierney , Categorical Constructions in Stable Homotopy Theory, Lec ture Notes in Math. 87, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1969. 1, 5 THE SINGULARITY CATEGORY AS A STABLE MODULE CATEGORY 19 Xiao-W u Chen School of Mathematical Sciences, University of Science ...

1969

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

Chen, and Z

X.W. Chen, and Z. W ang , The dg Leavitt algebras, singular Yoneda category and sin- gularity category , with an appendix by Bernhard Keller and Yu W ang, Adv. Math. 440 (2024), 109541. 2, 8, 10, 11, 17

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Abrams, and G

G. Abrams, and G. Aranda Pino , The Leavitt path algebra of a graph , J. Algebra 293 (2) (2005), 319–334. 2

work page 2005

[3] [2]

Ara, M.A

P. Ara, M.A. Moreno, and E. Pardo , Nonstable K-theory for graph algebras , Algebr. Represent. Theory 10 (2) (2007), 157–178. 2

work page 2007

[4] [3]

Ara, and E

P. Ara, and E. Pardo , K-Theoretic characterization of graded isomorphisms betw een Leavitt path algebras , J. K-Theory 14 (2014), no. 2, 203–245.] 11

work page 2014

[5] [4]

Auslander , Representation Dimension of Artin Algebras, Math

M. Auslander , Representation Dimension of Artin Algebras, Math. Notes Q ueen Mary College, London, 1971. 3

work page 1971

[6] [5]

Auslander, I

M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S.O. Smalo , Representation Theory of Artin Algebras, Cambridge Stud. Adv. Math. 36, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1995. 3, 6, 17

work page 1995

[7] [6]

Beligiannis, The homological theory of contravariantly ﬁnite subcatego ries: Auslander- Buchweitz contexts, Gorenstein categories and (co-)stabi lization, Comm

A. Beligiannis, The homological theory of contravariantly ﬁnite subcatego ries: Auslander- Buchweitz contexts, Gorenstein categories and (co-)stabi lization, Comm. Algebra 28 (10) (2000), 4547–4596. 1, 5, 14 18 XIAO-WU CHEN, ZHENGF ANG W ANG

work page 2000

[8] [7]

Beligiannis, and M

A. Beligiannis, and M. Marmaridis , Left triangulated categories arising from contravari- antly ﬁnite subcategories , Comm. Algebra 22 (12) (1994), 5021–5036. 14

work page 1994