Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

The linkage class of a grade three complete intersection

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Grade-three licci ideals over a characteristic-zero field are completely classified up to deformation by a single Weyl-group double coset, with explicit free resolutions for every class.

desk verdict Genuine advance on grade three licci ideals, but the v1 proof of the key 'licci iff NL(I)=1' step is deferred to an unnamed theorem in the authors' companion work, so treat the classification as conditional. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00399 v2 pith:636QAA34 submitted 2024-11-30 math.AC

Lorenzo Guerrieri , Xianglong Ni , Jerzy Weyman This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AC MSC 13D0213C4014M0617B6714M15
keywords licciideallinkagegradethreeperfecthigherstructuremapsgenericfreeresolutionHerzogclassKac-MoodyLiealgebraSchubertvariety
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

Over fields of characteristic zero, this paper proves that every grade three perfect ideal in the linkage class of a complete intersection—a licci ideal—is, up to deformation, one of an explicit countable family. Each member $I_\sigma$ is indexed by an element $\sigma$ of a double coset in the Weyl group of a T-shaped Dynkin diagram, and comes with an explicit minimal free resolution $F_\sigma$ built from the representation theory of the associated Kac-Moody algebra. The classification says that two licci ideals share a common deformation exactly when they have the same index $\sigma$; this is the grade three analogue of the Hilbert-Burch description for grade two, and it makes the previously abstract Herzog classes concrete. The engine is a theory of higher structure maps attached to any length-three resolution, which transform predictably under linkage and detect the index $\sigma$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the generic ring $\hat{R}_{\mathrm{gen}}$ for free resolutions of length three, together with the higher structure maps obtained by specializing it to a given resolution. If $w:\hat{R}_{\mathrm{gen}}\to R$ specializes the generic resolution to a minimal free resolution $F$ of $R/I$, then the restrictions $w^{(i)}$ are maps from certain fundamental representations of the Kac-Moody algebra attached to the format; their bottom graded pieces are the differentials of $F$, and the higher pieces encode multiplicative structure. These maps transform under linkage through a $(y_1,z_1)$-bigrading decomposition, which yields ideals $\mathrm{HSI}_\sigma(R/I)$ that are independent of the chosen specialization and invariant under deformation. Their sum $\mathrm{NL}(I)=\sum_\sigma \mathrm{HSI}_\sigma(R/I)$ is invariant under linkage and, by the paper's criterion, equals the unit ideal exactly when $I$ is licci. The minimal $\sigma$ with $\mathrm{HSI}_\sigma=(1)$ then picks out the Schubert cell $C_\sigma$ whose coordinate ring $R_\sigma$ carries the generic ideal $I_\sigma$.

What would settle it

Take a grade-three perfect ideal that is known not to be licci, for instance the ideal of $2\times 2$ minors of a generic $2\times 4$ matrix. Compute a specialization $w$ of the generic ring to a minimal resolution and evaluate $\mathrm{NL}(I)=\sum_\sigma \mathrm{HSI}_\sigma(R/I)$; the paper's equivalence predicts a proper ideal, so finding $\mathrm{NL}(I)=(1)$ would disprove the licci criterion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central assertion is Theorem 7.3. For licci ideals in a power series ring over $\mathbb{C}$ with deviation at most $d$ and type at most $t$, the map sending an ideal $I$ to the minimal $\sigma$ with $\mathrm{HSI}_\sigma(R/I)=(1)$ is surjective onto the set of double cosets $W_{P_{z_1}}\backslash W/W_{P_{x_1}}$ minus the identity coset, and two ideals have the same $\sigma$ if and only if their quotient rings admit a common deformation. The ideals $I_\sigma$ resolved by the complexes $F_\sigma$ of Section 3 are therefore the generic examples of the Herzog classes, and each $F_\sigma$ is an explicit free resolution whose differentials are built from the action of $\exp(Y)\sigma$ on fundamental representations. In particular, earlier structure theorems for codimension-three Gorenstein ideals and for ideals linked to almost complete intersections are recovered as special cases.

Load-bearing premise

The whole classification rests on a criterion asserting that an ideal is in the linkage class of a complete intersection exactly when a certain explicit ideal built from its resolution, called the non-licci locus ideal, is the whole ring; the 'if' half of that criterion is not proved here and is deferred to the authors' companion work.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every grade three licci ideal has a generic deformation $I_\sigma$ whose minimal free resolution is explicitly known, so Herzog classes in codimension three are no longer merely existence statements.
  • The deviation and type of a grade three licci ideal determine its Betti numbers, and the resolutions of earlier structure theorems are included as special cases of the family $F_\sigma$.
  • Two grade three licci ideals are deformation-equivalent if and only if they carry the same invariant $\sigma$, giving a complete answer to the common-deformation question for this class.
  • The criterion $\mathrm{NL}(I)=(1)$ detects licci-ness by an explicit ideal built from higher structure maps, so the non-licci locus inside a family is cut out by a concrete ideal.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct test of the machinery would be to implement $\sigma \mapsto I_\sigma$ in a computer algebra system for small $d,t$ and check that ideals with different $\sigma$ have, for instance, different Betti numbers or non-isomorphic completions; the paper does not carry out such a census.
  • The same higher-structure-map calculus may give new numerical invariants for non-licci grade three perfect ideals, since the ranks of $w^{(3)}\otimes k$ and $w^{(2)}\otimes k$ are linkage-invariant up to interchange even when $\mathrm{NL}(I)\neq(1)$.
  • If the deferred 'if' direction of the licci criterion requires extra hypotheses, the classification would still yield a one-to-one correspondence between deformations and the image of $\Psi$, but the image might be a proper subset of the double-coset space; identifying that image would then become the open problem.
  • The paper's own conclusion suggests that extending to grade $c\geq 4$ would need a substitute for the $(y_1,z_1)$-bigrading argument, since higher structure maps of the kind used here are specific to length-three resolutions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a representation-theoretic framework, based on Kac-Moody Lie algebras and Weyman's generic ring for length-three free resolutions, to study grade three perfect ideals in characteristic zero. It constructs a family of explicit free resolutions F_σ over coordinate rings of Schubert cells (Section 3), proves their acyclicity via the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud criterion (Theorem 3.13), and uses higher structure maps to define invariants HSI_σ(R/I) and the non-licci locus NL(I). The main result (Theorem 7.3) asserts that grade three licci ideals of bounded deviation and type are classified up to common deformation by an element σ in a double coset W_{P_{z1}}\W/W_{P_{x1}} (excluding the trivial coset), with the ideals I_σ serving as generic examples. The classification is presented as a surjective map Ψ with a uniqueness statement for the minimal σ such that HSI_σ(R/I)=(1).

Significance. If the central claims are correct, this is a significant contribution: it would give the first complete deformation classification of grade three licci ideals, with explicit generic resolutions extending the classical theorems of Buchsbaum-Eisenbud, Brown, and Sánchez. The construction and acyclicity of the complexes F_σ in Section 3 are self-contained, detailed, and credible; the proof of Theorem 3.13 using extremal Plücker coordinates and the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud criterion is a genuine strength. The higher structure maps and the ideals HSI_σ are new invariants with clear intuitive content (e.g., detecting the non-complete-intersection and non-licci loci). However, the classification itself is not established within this manuscript: the 'if' direction of Theorem 6.4(2) (NL(I)=(1) implies licci) and the uniqueness statement of Proposition 4.37 are deferred to unnamed external results from the authors' companion work [10] and the in-preparation item [20]. Since Proposition 7.1 and Theorem 7.2 use these results essentially, the main theorem is currently conditional on unstated external dependencies.

major comments (3)
  1. [§6.2, Theorem 6.4(2)] The 'if' direction of the equivalence 'I is licci iff NL(I)=(1)' is load-bearing for the classification: it is used in Proposition 7.1 to prove that each non-unit I_σ is licci, and in Theorem 7.2 to produce a specialization from R_σ. The proof line 'can be proved in the same fashion as Theorem ??' provides no theorem number and no statement of the referenced result. This is not a cosmetic gap: the equivalence is the bridge from the algebraic construction of F_σ to the conclusion that Ψ is surjective. Please supply a complete proof in this paper, or a precise statement and citation of the exact theorem in [10] or [20] that is being invoked, and remove the placeholder.
  2. [§4.2, Proposition 4.37] Proposition 4.37 is the source of the uniqueness of σ in the classification: it asserts that if w(a_2)⊗k≠0 then there is a unique σ with HSI_ρ(B)=(1) iff ρ≥σ, and that w(a_2) can be adjusted to map Spec R into the Schubert cell C_σ. The proof is dismissed as 'a restatement of Proposition ??' with the remaining argument 'continues almost verbatim the same as Proposition ??, so we omit it.' This proposition is used in Theorem 7.2 to define Ψ and in Theorem 7.3(2) to compare deformations. Without a self-contained proof or an explicit reference to a numbered statement in the companion work, the uniqueness claim is unverified. Please include the argument here, at least for the specific setup with r_1=1 used in Section 6.
  3. [§4.2, Lemma 4.20] Lemma 4.20 states the existence and rigidity of X solving (hπ+γ)=hπ expX, and its proof says only 'One can solve for X explicitly ... we omit the details.' This lemma underlies Proposition 4.21 (that the comparison element X in Theorem 4.10 is determined by the restricted maps), which in turn is used to prove that the ideals HSI_σ(B) are independent of the choice of higher structure maps (Proposition 4.34). The well-definedness of the invariants that appear in the main theorem therefore depends on an omitted proof. Please provide the explicit recursive construction of X, or at minimum a complete proof following the indicated method of Theorem 4.10.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] Several unresolved cross-references remain: 'Theorem ??' appears in the proof of Theorem 6.4(2), 'Proposition ??' appears in Proposition 4.37 and Proposition 6.5, '§??' appears in Example 2.3, and 'Chapter ??' appears in Section 4.1.3. These placeholders must be resolved before the manuscript is publishable.
  2. [§5] The proof of Proposition 7.1 says that HSI_σ(R_σ/I_σ)=(1) 'follows from §5,' but §5 does not state this explicitly; it only describes the map w(a_2) and its reduction modulo the irrelevant ideal. Please add a short explicit verification in §5.
  3. [§6.2] The proof of Theorem 6.2 contains the informal phrase 'By a miracle we have reconstructed the complex,' which is out of place in a formal paper; please rephrase.
  4. [Theorem 7.3] The statement of Theorem 7.3 is formulated for ideals in C[[X]], while the body works with local Noetherian C-algebras. Please clarify how the power-series framework is obtained from the local statement (e.g., by completion) so that the deformation-classification claim is unambiguous.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Licci-direction of Theorem 6.4(2) and uniqueness in Proposition 4.37 are deferred to unresolved self-cited 'Theorem ??'/'Proposition ??', so the classification's surjectivity and uniqueness hinge on companion work.

  1. self citation load bearing [§6.2, proof of Theorem 6.4(2)]
    "The “if” implication can be proved in the same fashion as Theorem ?? replacing γ by w(1): since w(1)⊗k≠ 0, there exist elements g1,g′1,...,gN,g′N, where gi∈ GL(F1⊗k) and g′i∈ GL(F′1⊗k), such that (w(1)⊗k)g1g′1··· gNg′N is nonzero on the lowest weight space of L(ωx1)∨. ... so that sequentially acting on w(1) by these elements realizes a sequence of links from I to the unit ideal."

    This is the 'if' direction of the central equivalence 'I is licci iff NL(I)=(1)'. It is exactly the implication used in Proposition 7.1 to conclude that every non-unit Iσ is licci and in Theorem 7.2 to obtain the specialization Rσ→R; these give surjectivity of Ψ in Theorem 7.3(1). The proof is not given: it defers to an unresolved 'Theorem ??', which appears to be the authors' own companion or in-preparation work [10]/[20]. Thus the classification rests on an unstated self-cited result rather than on a derivation in this manuscript.

  2. uniqueness imported from authors [§4.2.2, Proposition 4.37]
    "Both statements are purely representation-theoretic. In fact, this is really just a restatement of Proposition ??. The first statement follows from knowing that w(a2) determines a ring homomorphism ... Just as in Proposition ??, the desired σ corresponds to the lowest g(z1)-representation on which w(a2)⊗k≠ 0, which is necessarily an extremal representation. The remainder of the proof continues almost verbatim the same as Proposition ??, so we omit it."

    Proposition 4.37 is the source of the unique minimal σ with HSIρ(R/I)=(1) ⇔ ρ≥σ. This uniqueness makes Ψ well-defined and is used in Theorem 7.3(2) to prove that Ψ(I)=Ψ(J) implies R/I and S/J admit a common deformation. The proof is not contained in the paper; it is declared a 'restatement of Proposition ??' and 'continues almost verbatim the same as Proposition ??', with the unnamed proposition presumably from the authors' own prior work. The uniqueness half of the classification is therefore imported from the authors' own results rather than established here.

full rationale

The paper contains a substantial and apparently self-contained construction: Section 3 builds explicit complexes Fσ and proves their acyclicity via the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud criterion and Schubert varieties, and Sections 4–5 develop higher structure maps internally. The final classification, however, is not self-contained. Theorem 6.4(2) asserts 'I is licci if and only if NL(I)=(1)'; the 'if' direction is the step that turns HSIσ=(1) into the existence of links and hence into the specialization theorem (Proposition 7.1 and Theorem 7.2), but its proof says only 'can be proved in the same fashion as Theorem ??'. The uniqueness of the minimal σ, used in Theorem 7.3(2), comes from Proposition 4.37, whose proof is a 'restatement of Proposition ??' with details omitted. Both unresolved targets appear to belong to the authors' own companion work [10] and in-preparation [20]; no independent, machine-checked, or externally falsifiable proof is supplied in this manuscript. Lemma 4.20 also states 'we omit the details' and Proposition 6.5 refers to 'Proposition ??' for minimal links, reinforcing the external dependency. This is not a case of a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, nor of the output being equal to the input by definition: the complexes and higher structure maps have independent content. But the central claim—every grade three licci ideal is a deformation of exactly one Iσ—does reduce, with respect to both surjectivity and uniqueness, to unstated self-cited results. Accordingly the circularity score is 6 rather than 0–2.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No empirical free parameters are fitted to data; the parameters r1, r2, r3, d, t specify the format of the resolution and the bounds in the classification. The axioms listed are the external results the central claim rests on, including standard commutative algebra theorems, representation theory facts, and the authors' own unpublished companion work. The final two axioms are the most fragile: key proof steps are missing from the text.

assumptions (9)
  • domain assumption All rings are C-algebras; the results are asserted to extend to any characteristic zero field by simple base change (Assumption 1.2).
    Sets the representation-theoretic framework; the extension claim is not proved.
  • domain assumption T is assumed not of affine type for exposition; affine cases are handled by enlarging the diagram (Assumption 2.1, Remark 3.4).
    Used to make the Cartan matrix invertible; authors argue no loss of generality.
  • standard math Kazhdan-Lusztig variety N_w^sigma, with w=s_{z1}s_u s_{x1}, has codimension 3 in C_sigma (Kumar [15, Lemma 7.3.10]).
    Used in Theorem 3.13 to prove grade I_{r_i}(d_i)=3.
  • standard math Buchsbaum-Eisenbud acyclicity criterion with Northcott's 'true grade' extension (Theorem 3.10).
    Core tool for proving F is a resolution.
  • standard math Ferrand-Golod mapping cone construction yields a resolution of the linked ideal (Theorem 1.1, from [22] and [9]).
    Basis for the linkage arguments in Theorem 6.2.
  • domain assumption Weyman's generic ring and resolution (R_gen, F_gen) exist, are acyclic, and decompose into the critical representations; every resolution of format f is a specialization (from [27] and [26]).
    The entire higher structure map theory imports this external construction.
  • domain assumption Theorem 4.10, parametrizing all specializations w of F_gen by exp(L tensor R), is attributed to [20], a paper listed as 'in preparation'.
    The paper relies on an unpublished result for the bijection between higher structure maps and choices of w; no proof is included here.
  • ad hoc to paper Unspecified 'Theorem ??' and 'Proposition ??' used in Theorem 6.4(2), Proposition 4.37, and Section 6.2 are load-bearing and not present in the manuscript.
    The proof of 'I licci iff NL(I)=(1)' and of the uniqueness of sigma is deferred to these missing statements.
  • standard math Schubert varieties are set-theoretically cut out by extremal Plucker coordinates, and the homogeneous coordinate ring of G/P is generated in degree one (Corollary 4.27).
    Used to build HSI_sigma and relate w(a2) to points of G/P.
invented entities (2)
  • Higher structure maps w(i) for i=1,2,3 and w(ai)
    purpose: Extra data attached to a length-three free resolution, encoding multiplicative structure and transforming predictably under linkage; the main technical tool of the paper.
    Defined via the generic ring and shown internally consistent (Theorem 4.10, Theorem 6.2), but no independent computational characterization is supplied beyond small examples, and key properties rely on unpublished companion work.
  • Higher structure ideals HSI_sigma(B) and non-licci locus NL(I)=sum_sigma HSI_sigma(R/I)
    purpose: Invariants of a module that detect whether it is licci and which Herzog class it belongs to.
    Well-definedness is proven (Lemma 4.29, Proposition 4.34), but the decisive criterion 'NL(I)=(1) iff licci' (Theorem 6.4) is deferred to a missing theorem reference, so the invariant has no fully self-contained certification in this manuscript.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The linkage class of a grade three complete intersection." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/636QAA34

@misc{pith2026241200399,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The linkage class of a grade three complete intersection},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/636QAA34}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00399}
}
read the original abstract

Working over a field of characteristic zero, we give structure theorems for all grade three licci ideals and their minimal free resolutions. In particular, we completely classify such ideals up to deformation. The descriptions of their resolutions extend earlier results by Buchsbaum-Eisenbud, Brown, and Sanchez. Our primary tool is the theory of higher structure maps originating from the study of generic free resolutions of length three.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Restrictions on the Betti tables of licci ideals

    math.AC 2026-08 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For several large classes of licci ideals, the number of generators is bounded by the largest shift in the last step of the graded free resolution, confirming part of three new conjectures.

  2. Generic models of licci ideals parametrized by Schur functors

    math.AC 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Herzog classes of codimension-3 licci ideals are parametrized by pairs of partitions via a graph of direct links, with applications to Tor algebra structures.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [10]

    Higher structure maps for free resolutions of length 3 and linkage

    Lorenzo Guerrieri, Xianglong Ni, and Jerzy Weyman. Higher structure maps for free resolutions of length 3 and linkage . 2023. arXiv: 2208.05934 [math.AC]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [20]

    Parametrizing higher structure maps for resolutions of len gth three

    Xianglong Ni. Parametrizing higher structure maps for resolutions of len gth three. 2023. (in preparation, available on https://math.berkeley.edu/~xlni/)

    work page 2023

  3. [1]

    Po incar´ e series of mod- ules over local rings of small embedding codepth or small linking numbe r

    Luchezar L. Avramov, Andrew R. Kustin, and Matthew Miller. “Po incar´ e series of mod- ules over local rings of small embedding codepth or small linking numbe r”. In: J. Alge- bra 118.1 (1988), pp. 162–204. issn: 0021-8693. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(88)90056-7 . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(88)90056-7

    doi:10.1016/0021-8693(88)90056-7 1988

  4. [2]

    A structure theorem for a class of grade thre e perfect ideals

    Anne E. Brown. “A structure theorem for a class of grade thre e perfect ideals”. In: J. Al- gebra 105.2 (1987), pp. 308–327. issn: 0021-8693. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(87)90196-7. url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(87)90196-7

    doi:10.1016/0021-8693(87)90196-7 1987

  5. [3]

    The existence of generic free resolutions and r elated ob- jects

    Winfried Bruns. “The existence of generic free resolutions and r elated ob- jects”. In: Math. Scand. 55.1 (1984), pp. 33–46. issn: 0025-5521,1903-1807. doi: 10.7146/math.scand.a-12064. url: https://doi.org/10.7146/math.scand.a-12064

    work page doi:10.7146/math.scand.a-12064 1984

  6. [4]

    Algebra structures fo r finite free resolu- tions, and some structure theorems for ideals of codimension 3

    David A. Buchsbaum and David Eisenbud. “Algebra structures fo r finite free resolu- tions, and some structure theorems for ideals of codimension 3”. I n: Amer. J. Math. 99.3 (1977), pp. 447–485. issn: 0002-9327,1080-6377. doi: 10.2307/2373926. url: https://doi.org/10.2307/2373926

    doi:10.2307/2373926 1977

  7. [5]

    Some structure theor ems for finite free resolutions

    David A. Buchsbaum and David Eisenbud. “Some structure theor ems for finite free resolutions”. In: Advances in Math. 12 (1974), pp. 84–139. issn: 0001-8708. doi: 10.1016/S0001-8708(74)80019-8 . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-8708(74)80019-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0001-8708(74)80019-8 1974

  8. [6]

    What makes a complex ex act?

    David A. Buchsbaum and David Eisenbud. “What makes a complex ex act?” In: J. Al- gebra 25 (1973), pp. 259–268. issn: 0021-8693. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(73)90044-6 . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(73)90044-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-8693(73)90044-6 1973

Show all 29 references
  1. [7]

    On ideals of finite homological dimension in local ring s

    Lindsay Burch. “On ideals of finite homological dimension in local ring s”. In: Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 64 (1968), pp. 941–948. issn: 0008-1981. doi: 10.1017/s0305004100043620. url: https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305004100043620

    1968 doi

  2. [8]

    On the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud theory of fi- nite free resolutions

    J. A. Eagon and D. G. Northcott. “On the Buchsbaum-Eisenbud theory of fi- nite free resolutions”. In: J. Reine Angew. Math. 262/263 (1973), pp. 205–

    1973

  3. [9]

    A note on perfect ideals

    Evgeny S. Golod. “A note on perfect ideals”. In: Algebra. Moscow State Univ. Publish- ing House, 1980, pp. 37–39

    1980

  4. [11]

    Ueber die Theorie der algebraischen Formen

    David Hilbert. “Ueber die Theorie der algebraischen Formen”. In : Math. Ann. 36.4 (1890), pp. 473–534. issn: 0025-5831,1432-1807. doi: 10.1007/BF01208503. url: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01208503. REFERENCES 53

    doi

  5. [12]

    Topics in the homological theory of modules over commutativ e rings

    Melvin Hochster. Topics in the homological theory of modules over commutativ e rings . Vol. No. 24. Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences Regio nal Conference Series in Mathematics. Published for the Conference Board of the Mathem atical Sciences by the American Mathem...

    1975

  6. [13]

    Humphreys

    James E. Humphreys. Introduction to Lie algebras and representation theory . Vol. Vol. 9. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New Y ork-Berlin, 1972, pp. xii+169

    1972

  7. [14]

    The arithmetic perfection of Buchsbaum-Eisen bud varieties and generic modules of projective dimension two

    Craig Huneke. “The arithmetic perfection of Buchsbaum-Eisen bud varieties and generic modules of projective dimension two”. In: Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 265.1 (1981), pp. 211–233. issn: 0002-9947,1088-6850. doi: 10.2307/1998491. url: https://doi.org/10.2307/1998491

    1981 doi

  8. [15]

    Kac-Moody groups, their flag varieties and representation t he- ory

    Shrawan Kumar. Kac-Moody groups, their flag varieties and representation t he- ory. Vol. 204. Progress in Mathematics. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Inc., Bo ston, MA, 2002, pp. xvi+606. isbn: 0-8176-4227-7. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-0105-2 . url: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0105-2

    2002 doi

  9. [16]

    The resolution of the universal ring for mod ules of rank zero and projective dimension two

    Andrew R. Kustin. “The resolution of the universal ring for mod ules of rank zero and projective dimension two”. In: J. Algebra 310.1 (2007), pp. 261–

    2007

  10. [17]

    Some branching formulas fo r Kac-Moody Lie algebras

    Kyu-Hwan Lee and Jerzy Weyman. “Some branching formulas fo r Kac-Moody Lie algebras”. In: Commun. Korean Math. Soc. 34.4 (2019), pp. 1079–1098. issn: 1225- 1763,2234-3024. doi: 10.4134/CKMS.c180373. url: https://doi.org/10.4134/CKMS.c180373

    2019 doi

  11. [18]

    ADEPerfectIdeals

    Xianglong Ni. ADEPerfectIdeals. url: https://github.com/xlni/ADEPerfectIdeals

  12. [19]

    Free resolutions, linkage, and representation th eory

    Xianglong Ni. “Free resolutions, linkage, and representation th eory”. PhD thesis. Uni- versity of California, Berkeley, 2024

    2024

  13. [21]

    D. G. Northcott. Finite free resolutions. Vol. No. 71. Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge-New York-Melbourne, 197 6, pp. xii+271

  14. [22]

    Liaison des vari´ et´ es alg´ ebriques . I

    C. Peskine and L. Szpiro. “Liaison des vari´ et´ es alg´ ebriques . I”. In: Invent. Math. 26 (1974), pp. 271–302. issn: 0020-9910,1432-1297. doi: 10.1007/BF01425554. url: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01425554

    1974 doi

  15. [23]

    On the generic free resolut ions

    Piotr Pragacz and Jerzy Weyman. “On the generic free resolut ions”. In: J. Algebra 128.1 (1990), pp. 1–44. issn: 0021-8693,1090-266X. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(90)90042-M . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(90)90042-M

    1990 doi

  16. [24]

    A structure theorem for type 3, grade 3 perfect ideals

    Rafael S´ anchez. “A structure theorem for type 3, grade 3 perfect ideals”. In: J. Algebra 123.2 (1989), pp. 263–288. issn: 0021-8693,1090-266X. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(89)90047-1 . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(89)90047-1

    1989 doi

  17. [25]

    Universal complexes and the generic structure of free resolu- tions

    Alexandre B. Tchernev. “Universal complexes and the generic structure of free resolu- tions”. In: Michigan Math. J. 49.1 (2001), pp. 65–96. issn: 0026-2285,1945-2365. doi: 10.1307/mmj/1008719036. url: https://doi.org/10.1307/mmj/1008719036

    2001

  18. [26]

    Generic free resolutions and root systems

    Jerzy Weyman. “Generic free resolutions and root systems”. In: Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 68.3 (2018), pp. 1241–1296. issn: 0373-0956,1777-5310. url: http://aif.cedram.org/item?id=AIF_2018__68_3_1241_0. 54 REFERENCES

    2018

  19. [27]

    On the structure of free resolutions of lengt h 3

    Jerzy Weyman. “On the structure of free resolutions of lengt h 3”. In: J. Algebra 126.1 (1989), pp. 1–33. issn: 0021-8693,1090-266X. doi: 10.1016/0021-8693(89)90318-9 . url: https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-8693(89)90318-9

    1989 doi

  20. [219]

    doi: 10.1515/crll.1973.262-263.205

    issn: 0075-4102,1435-5345. doi: 10.1515/crll.1973.262-263.205. url: https://doi.org/10.1515/crll.1973.262-263.205

    1973 doi

  21. [289]

    doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2006.11.013

    issn: 0021-8693,1090-266X. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2006.11.013. url: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jalgebra.2006.11.013

    2006 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.