Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

For every strongly smooth ordinary Gushel–Mukai surface, the associated double dual EPW sextic is a moduli space of semistable objects in the surface's derived category.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

For every strongly smooth ordinary Gushel–Mukai surface, the double dual EPW sextic is the Bridgeland moduli space of semistable objects with Mukai vector (1,0,−1), and analogous identifications hold for double EPW sextics and EPW surfaces on special GM threefolds.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-03 challenge →

load-bearing objection Section 5 gives a real, self-contained extension: M_{σ_S}(v1) ≅ Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥} for every strongly smooth ordinary GM surface; the rest of the paper leans on an unproved equivariant descent step and should be revised with that spelled out. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2512.13269 v4 pith:67ZMZYBP submitted 2025-12-15 math.AG

EPW varieties as moduli spaces on ordinary GM surfaces and special GM threefolds

Ziqi Liu , Shizhuo Zhang This is my paper
classification math.AG MSC 18G8014J2814J45
keywords Gushel–Mukai surfacesEPW sexticsBridgeland stability conditionsmoduli spaces of semistable objectsKuznetsov componentscategorical Torelli theoremwall-crossingK3 surfaces
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

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 claims that the auxiliary hyperkähler (holomorphic symplectic) varieties known as double dual EPW sextics—attached to a degree-10 K3 surface of Gushel–Mukai type—are in fact moduli spaces of Bridgeland-stable objects in the surface's derived category. The identification is uniform: the Mukai vector (1,0,-1) with a natural stability condition produces exactly the double dual EPW sextic, for every strongly smooth ordinary Gushel–Mukai surface, not just a general one. By passing through the natural double cover, the paper also realizes double EPW surfaces as moduli spaces on the derived subcategory—the Kuznetsov component—of a special Gushel–Mukai threefold. The payoff is a categorical criterion: two special threefolds have isomorphic or dually related EPW data exactly when their Kuznetsov components are equivalent and the equivalence permutes the two distinguished classes in the prescribed way. If correct, this places EPW varieties inside the general machine of wall-crossing and moduli, allowing their geometry to be studied by derived-categorical methods.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the birational model of a double dual EPW sextic obtained from the Hilbert scheme of two points on S by a Mukai flop is the same birational model that wall-crossing produces for the moduli space M_{σ_S}(v1). The moduli space itself, at the stability condition σ_S = σ_{H/5,-2H/5}, is therefore isomorphic to the double dual EPW sextic Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥}. The same mechanism identifies M_{σ_S}(v2) with the double EPW sextic and identifies the double covers over EPW surfaces with moduli spaces M_{σ_X}(-κ1) and M_{σ_X}(-κ2) on the Kuznetsov component of the special threefold. As a corollary, the paper refines the categorical Torelli statement: equality of EPW data, up to

What carries the argument

The engine of the proof is wall-crossing in the space of Bridgeland stability conditions on the K3 surface S, combined with a known birational description of the double dual EPW sextic (a sextic hypersurface in a five-dimensional projective space defined from a Lagrangian subspace of Λ^3V6): it is the target of a Mukai flop from the Hilbert square S[2], followed by a symplectic resolution. Comparing, for a one-parameter family of stability conditions σ_t, the possible flopping walls with the contractions present in that birational model, the authors show that the endpoint σ_S produces the same target. Conics in S give walls whose contracted planes match the dual planes contracted by the EPW

Load-bearing premise

The part of the story involving the non-dual EPW sextic depends on an unproved-in-this-text descent step, imported from earlier work: a derived equivalence between period-dual special threefolds must restrict to an equivalence of the covering K3 surfaces that commutes with the double-cover involutions and carries the chosen stability condition to its counterpart. If this step fails, the moduli space for the Mukai vector (2,-H,2) need not be the double EPW sextic, and the cate

What would settle it

For a strongly smooth ordinary GM surface S, compute the period and the rank of the quadratic form on H^2 of the moduli space M_{σ_S}(1,0,-1) and compare them with the known invariants of the double dual EPW sextic Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥}; any mismatch would falsify Theorem 1.1. A cheaper check: choose S with no lines or conics. Then M_{σ_S}(v1) should be a smooth hyperkähler fourfold with the same Hodge numbers as a double EPW sextic, and its Hilbert-square birational model S[2] should undergo exactly one Mukai flop before reaching it.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Theorem 1.1 applies to every strongly smooth ordinary Gushel–Mukai surface, so the double dual EPW sextic is no longer a period-construction-only object: it carries a universal family and can be studied as a moduli space.
  • By Proposition 1.2, the double EPW sextic is also a moduli space, for the Mukai vector (2,-H,2); together the two sextics are parameterized by semistable objects in the same derived category.
  • For special Gushel–Mukai threefolds, the moduli spaces M_{σ_X}(-κ1) and M_{σ_X}(-κ2) are the double dual and double EPW surfaces, so the branched covers over EPW surfaces are the natural forgetful covers.
  • Corollary 1.5 gives a precise categorical Torelli statement: an isomorphism of EPW data, or of its annihilator, is equivalent to a Kuznetsov-component equivalence acting on the basis {κ1,κ2} by the identity or the transposition, up to signs.
  • The Brill–Noether-locus description in the last section identifies each nontrivial period partner of a special threefold as an explicit subvariety of another moduli space, giving a geometric construction of period partners.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The modular interpretation suggests that birational models of double EPW sextics—their movable cones, flops, and Lagrangian fibrations—can be recovered from wall-crossing in the stability space of the K3 surface, where the classification of walls is already well developed; the paper does not draw this conclusion explicitly.
  • The equivariant bridge between the surface category and the Kuznetsov component looks like a general mechanism: double covers of EPW-type varieties attached to a Gushel–Mukai variety in any dimension might all be realized as moduli spaces on the appropriate Kuznetsov component. This is a natural test for fourfolds.
  • One could test the main theorem computationally on a concrete surface with many conics: the singular locus of M_{σ_S}(v1) should consist of one point per conic plus the distinguished point from the Grassmannian hull, and the contraction fibres should be projective planes.
  • The refined categorical Torelli criterion may allow period partners to be computed from the action on κ1 and κ2 alone, bypassing the transcendental period; this would make Fourier–Mukai partner computations for special threefolds more accessible.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies moduli spaces of Bridgeland semistable objects on the bounded derived categories of strongly smooth ordinary Gushel–Mukai (GM) surfaces and on the Kuznetsov components of special GM threefolds. Theorem 1.1 asserts that, for every strongly smooth ordinary GM surface S, the moduli space M_{σ_S}(v_1) with v_1=(1,0,-1) is isomorphic to the double dual EPW sextic Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥}. This is proved in Section 5 by a detailed wall-crossing analysis of the family σ_t, excluding totally semistable and divisorial walls, identifying the flopping walls at t=11 (lines in S) and at t=1 (conics in S and lines in the hull), and matching the resulting contractions with the Debarre–Kuznetsov birational model of Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥}. The remaining claims—Proposition 1.2 (M_{σ_S}(v_2) ≅ Ỹ^{≥1}_{A(S)}), the double EPW surface statements in Sections 6.2–6.3, and Corollaries 1.5, 6.4, 6.8—are derived from Theorem 1.1 together with external results [32], [33], and [28].

Significance. If the main theorem and its corollaries hold, the paper gives a complete realization of double EPW sextics and surfaces as moduli spaces of Bridgeland semistable objects on GM varieties and refines the Bayer–Perry categorical Torelli statement for special GM threefolds. The wall-crossing proof of Theorem 1.1 is a genuine contribution: it is explicit, self-contained, and includes concrete verification that the relevant walls are exactly the expected ones. The main caveat is that several headline claims—especially Proposition 1.2 and its corollaries—depend on an equivariant descent step that is asserted but not proved in the text; this step upgrades the generic identification from [33] to every strongly smooth S.

major comments (2)
  1. [§6.1, Corollary 6.2] The proof of the non-generic case of Proposition 1.2 contains the load-bearing assertion: 'This equivalence descends to an equivalence D^b(S) ≅ D^b(S′) ... which is equivariant with the S₂^∨-group actions on both side. So the stability condition σ_S is sent to σ_S′.' None of these three claims—descent, equivariance with respect to the dual group actions, and preservation of the specific stability condition—is proved in the paper, nor is a precise theorem from [32] or [33] cited for them. Since this is the only step that extends the generic identification of M_{σ_S}(v_2) with the double EPW sextic to all strongly smooth S, Proposition 1.2, Corollary 1.5, Corollary 6.4, Corollary 6.7, and the non-generic part of Corollary 6.8 do not follow as written.
  2. [§6.3, Corollary 6.8 and §1.3, Proposition 1.4] The proof of Corollary 6.8 says the generic case follows from Proposition 6.6 'by modifying the argument for Proposition 6.2', and the proof of Proposition 1.4 is only 'Similar to our identification...'. Proposition 6.6 concerns ordinary GM threefolds, not special ones, so the modification is not immediate and would require precisely the same equivariant descent and stability-condition compatibility that is missing in Corollary 6.2. As written, this is an incomplete proof of Proposition 1.4 and of the generic case of Corollary 6.8.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§6.1, Corollary 6.4] The second condition contains a typo: 'sending κ₁ to κ′₂ and κ₁ to κ′₂' should read 'sending κ₁ to κ′₂ and κ₂ to κ′₁'.
  2. [§2.2, Theorem 2.11(b)] The phrase 'the singular locus of is the finite set' is missing the subject 'Ỹ^{≥2}_A'.
  3. [Keywords] 'Guehsl–Mukai' is a typo for 'Gushel–Mukai'.
  4. [§5.4, Proposition 5.13] The reference 'According to Theorem 3.14' should be 'Proposition 3.14'.
  5. [§5.3, Proposition 5.11] The equality M_{σ_t}(−2,H,−3)=M_H(2,−H,3)[1] uses the shift convention M_σ(−v) ≅ M_σ(v)[1]; a one-line clarification would help the reader.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Theorem 1.1 is independently proved by wall-crossing; the v2/EPW-sextic and corollary claims import the generic case from the first author's preprint [33] and an unproved equivariant descent, a load-bearing self-citation rather than a derivation.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Section 6.1, proof of Corollary 6.2 (and Proposition 1.2)]
    "The generic case has been verified in [33, Section 6.6], so it remains to prove the statement when Y^{≥3}_{A(S)} ≠ 0. In this case ... it follows from [32] that there exists an equivalence Ku(X) ∼= Ku(X′). This equivalence descends to an equivalence D^b(S) ∼= D^b(S′) ... which is equivariant with the S₂∨-group actions on both side. So the stability condition σ_S is sent to σ_S′ ..."

    The claimed isomorphism M_{σ_S}(v2) ≅ ~Y^{≥1}_{A(S)} is not derived in this paper: the generic case is delegated to the first author's unpublished preprint [33], and the non-generic extension rests on the assertion that the [32] equivalence descends equivariantly and preserves σ_S. That descent is exactly the step needed to compare the v2-moduli spaces; no proof is supplied. Thus the proposition's support is a self-citation plus an unproved transport, not an independent derivation.

full rationale

The central theorem, Theorem 1.1 (M_{σ_S}(v1) ≅ ~Y^{≥1}_{A(S)^⊥}), is proved in Section 5 by a concrete wall-crossing analysis whose inputs are the external birational model of Debarre–Kuznetsov [18] and standard K3 wall-crossing results. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no definition of the EPW variety is built from the moduli space, so this part is not circular. The circularity score is raised only by the secondary chain: Proposition 1.2/Corollary 6.2 delegates the generic case to the first author's preprint [33] and then extends it via an asserted equivariant descent from [32] (with no proof that the descent preserves σ_S). This is a load-bearing self-citation/unproved reduction, but it is not a definitional identity, so score 4 rather than 6. Corollaries 1.5/6.4 inherit this reliance; the double EPW surface statements also invoke [28] and [29] with overlapping authors, but these are published/documented inputs rather than reduction by construction. Overall, the main result is self-contained; the secondary results are partly imported.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 9 axioms · 0 invented entities

No numerical parameters are fitted: the path σ_t is a one-parameter family of stability conditions used for wall-crossing, and v1, v2 are fixed Mukai vectors. No new geometric objects are postulated; all moduli objects and EPW varieties come from prior literature. The main external burden is the set of domain theorems about GM varieties, EPW varieties, stability conditions, and the equivariant transport of equivalences.

axioms (9)
  • standard math Bridgeland stability conditions on K3 surfaces exist and are proper, and the wall-crossing classification of fake/flopping/divisorial/totally semistable walls applies.
    Used throughout Sections 3 and 5 to prove that only specified walls occur for M_{σ_t}(v_1).
  • domain assumption Strongly smooth ordinary GM surfaces are exactly degree-10 K3 surfaces with no divisor E satisfying E^2=0 and E·H=4 (Proposition 2.4, [20]).
    Used in Propositions 5.3–5.5 and 5.14 to exclude many wall vectors by contradiction.
  • domain assumption O'Grady's structure theorems for EPW sextics, double EPW sextics, and double EPW surfaces (Theorems 2.8–2.11).
    Provides the objects Ỹ^{≥1}_A and Ỹ^{≥2}_A and their birational and covering properties.
  • domain assumption Debarre–Kuznetsov classification: GM threefolds correspond bijectively to smooth Lagrangian data (V6,V5,A) with dim(A∩Λ³V5)∈{2,3}.
    Used to interchange A(S) and A(X) and to formulate period partners and period duals.
  • domain assumption Bayer–Perry [7, Theorem 5.12]: two special GM threefolds have equivalent Kuznetsov components iff A(X)≅A(X′) or A(X)≅A(X′)^⊥; and [31, Lemma 3.8]: period duals exist.
    Basis for Corollary 1.5 and for the reduction in Corollary 6.2.
  • domain assumption The equivalence Ku(X)≅Ku(X′) from [32] descends to an S₂∨-equivariant equivalence D^b(S)≅D^b(S′) sending σ_S to σ_S′.
    This is the load-bearing transport step that extends the generic identification of M_{σ_S}(v_2); cited to [32] and [33] but not proved in the text.
  • domain assumption Debarre–Kuznetsov [18, Theorem 7.7 and Remark 7.9] describe the double dual EPW sextic from S^[2] via a Mukai flop and a symplectic resolution.
    Provides the birational model that the wall-crossing contractions are matched to in Section 5.
  • domain assumption Jacovskis–Lin–Liu–Zhang [28, Theorem 7.12] identify M_{σ_X}(−κ1) as a contraction of the conic Hilbert scheme; [29, Theorem 1.1] identifies Brill–Noether loci with X.
    Used in Sections 6.2–6.4 to identify double dual EPW surfaces and period partners.
  • domain assumption Perry–Pertusi–Zhao [43] and Kuznetsov–Perry [30]: equivariant stability conditions on Ku(X)^{S_2} ≅ D^b(S) can be induced and compared.
    Foundation for the passage between D^b(S) and Ku(X) throughout the paper.

reviewed 2026-08-03 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of EPW varieties as moduli spaces on ordinary GM surfaces and special GM threefolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/67ZMZYBP

@misc{pith2026251213269,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: EPW varieties as moduli spaces on ordinary GM surfaces and special GM threefolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/67ZMZYBP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2512.13269}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We show that the double dual EPW sextic associated with a strongly smooth Gushel-Mukai surface can be realized as a moduli space of semistable objects on its bounded derived category. Also, we observe that the double dual EPW surface associated with a special Gushel--Mukai threefold can be realized as a moduli space of semistable objects on its Kuznetsov component. Then we discuss extensions of our main results to double EPW sextics and double EPW surfaces and a refinement of a statement of Bayer and Perry about Gushel-Mukai threefolds with equivalent Kuznetsov components, under a mild assumption.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Bridgeland-Enriques general K3 surfaces

    math.AG 2026-07 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Introduces Bridgeland-Enriques general K3 surfaces whose degree-10 family detects categorical degeneration of special Gushel-Mukai threefolds and whose higher-degree families relate to Hodge-special Gushel-Mukai fourf...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 5 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks.Annales de l’institut Fourier (Grenoble), 63(6): 2349–2402, 2013

    Jarod Alper. Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks.Annales de l’institut Fourier (Grenoble), 63(6): 2349–2402, 2013

    2013

  2. [2]

    Stability conditions in families.Publications math´ ematiques de l’IH ´ES, 133: 157-325, 2021

    Arend Bayer, Mart ´ ı Lahoz, Emanuele Macr ` ı, Howard Nuer, Alexander Perry, Paolo Stellari. Stability conditions in families.Publications math´ ematiques de l’IH ´ES, 133: 157-325, 2021

    2021

  3. [3]

    Stability conditions on Kuznetsov components

    Arend Bayer, Mart ´ ı Lahoz, Emanuele Macr ` ı, Paolo Stellari. Stability conditions on Kuznetsov components. Annales scientifiques de l’ ´ENS, 56(2): 517-570, 2023

    2023

  4. [4]

    Projectivity and birational geometry of Bridgeland moduli spaces.Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 27(3): 707-752, 2014

    Arend Bayer, Emanuele Macr ` ı. Projectivity and birational geometry of Bridgeland moduli spaces.Journal of the American Mathematical Society, 27(3): 707-752, 2014

    2014

  5. [5]

    MMP for moduli of sheaves on K3s via wall-crossing: nef and movable cones, Lagrangian fibrations.Inventiones mathematicae, 198(3): 505-590, 2014

    Arend Bayer, Emanuele Macr ` ı. MMP for moduli of sheaves on K3s via wall-crossing: nef and movable cones, Lagrangian fibrations.Inventiones mathematicae, 198(3): 505-590, 2014

    2014

  6. [6]

    The space of stability conditions on abelian threefolds, and on some Calabi-Yau threefolds.Inventiones mathematicae, 206(3): 869–933, 2016

    Arend Bayer, Emanuele Macr ` ı, Paolo Stellari. The space of stability conditions on abelian threefolds, and on some Calabi-Yau threefolds.Inventiones mathematicae, 206(3): 869–933, 2016

    2016

  7. [7]

    Kuznetsov’s Fano threefold conjecture via K3 categories and enhanced group actions.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 800: 107-153, 2023

    Arend Bayer, Alexander Perry. Kuznetsov’s Fano threefold conjecture via K3 categories and enhanced group actions.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 800: 107-153, 2023

    2023

  8. [8]

    Double EPW sextics associated with Gushel–Mukai surfaces

    Pietro Beri. Double EPW sextics associated with Gushel–Mukai surfaces. To appear inProceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh: Section A Mathematics, 2025

    2025

  9. [9]

    Stable sheaves on K3 surfaces via wall-crossing.Kyoto Journal of Mathematics, 64(2): 459-499, 2024

    Alessio Bottini. Stable sheaves on K3 surfaces via wall-crossing.Kyoto Journal of Mathematics, 64(2): 459-499, 2024

    2024

  10. [10]

    Stability conditions on triangulated categories.Annals of Mathematics, 166(2): 317-345, 2007

    Tom Bridgeland. Stability conditions on triangulated categories.Annals of Mathematics, 166(2): 317-345, 2007

    2007

  11. [11]

    Stability conditions onK3 surfaces.Duke Mathematical Journal, 141(2): 241-291, 2008

    Tom Bridgeland. Stability conditions onK3 surfaces.Duke Mathematical Journal, 141(2): 241-291, 2008

    2008

  12. [12]

    On the period map for prime Fano threefolds of degree 10.Journal of Algebraic Geometry, 21:21-59, 2012

    Olivier Debarre, Atanas Iliev, Laurent Manivel. On the period map for prime Fano threefolds of degree 10.Journal of Algebraic Geometry, 21:21-59, 2012

    2012

  13. [13]

    Gushel–Mukai varieties: classification and birationalities.Algebraic Geometry, 5(1): 15-76, 2018

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Gushel–Mukai varieties: classification and birationalities.Algebraic Geometry, 5(1): 15-76, 2018

    2018

  14. [14]

    Gushel–Mukai varieties: Linear spaces and periods.Kyoto Journal of Mathematics, 59(4): 897-953, 2019

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Gushel–Mukai varieties: Linear spaces and periods.Kyoto Journal of Mathematics, 59(4): 897-953, 2019

    2019

  15. [15]

    Gushel–Mukai varieties: intermediate Jacobians

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Gushel–Mukai varieties: intermediate Jacobians. ´Epijournal de G´ eom´ etrie Alg´ ebrique, 2020(4): Article Nr. 19, 2020

    2020

  16. [16]

    Gushel–Mukai varieties: Moduli.International Journal of Mathe- matics, 31(2): Nr

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Gushel–Mukai varieties: Moduli.International Journal of Mathe- matics, 31(2): Nr. 2050013, 2020

    2020

  17. [17]

    Double covers of quadratic degeneracy and Lagrangian intersection loci.Mathematische Annalen, 378(3-4): 1435-1469, 2020

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Double covers of quadratic degeneracy and Lagrangian intersection loci.Mathematische Annalen, 378(3-4): 1435-1469, 2020

    2020

  18. [18]

    Quadrics on Gushel–Mukai varieties

    Olivier Debarre, Alexander Kuznetsov. Quadrics on Gushel–Mukai varieties. Preprint, arXiv:2409.03528v1, 2024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    On equivariant triangulated categories

    Alexey Elagin. On equivariant triangulated categories. Preprint, arXiv:1403.7027v2, 2015

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Picard groups on moduli of K3 surfaces with Mukai models

    Francois Greer, Zhiyuan Li, Zhiyu Tian. Picard groups on moduli of K3 surfaces with Mukai models. International Mathematics Research Notices, 2015(16): 7238-7257, 2015

    2015

  21. [21]

    Conics on Gushel–Mukai fourfolds, EPW sextics and Bridgeland moduli spaces.Mathematical Research Letters, 31(4): 1061-1106, 2024

    Hanfei Guo, Zhiyu Liu, Shizhuo Zhang. Conics on Gushel–Mukai fourfolds, EPW sextics and Bridgeland moduli spaces.Mathematical Research Letters, 31(4): 1061-1106, 2024

    2024

  22. [22]

    Dieter Happel, Idun Reiten, Sverre O. Smalo. Tilting in abelian categories and quasitilted algebras.Mem- oirs of the American Mathematical Society, 120: no. 575, 1996

    1996

  23. [23]

    Oxford University Press, 2006

    Daniel Huybrechts.Fourier–Mukai transforms in Algebraic Geometry. Oxford University Press, 2006

    2006

  24. [24]

    Oxford University Press, 2016

    Daniel Huybrechts.Lectures on K3 Surfaces. Oxford University Press, 2016

    2016

  25. [25]

    On derived categories of K3 surfaces, symplectic automorphisms and the Conway group.Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics, 69: 387-405, 2016

    Daniel Huybrechts. On derived categories of K3 surfaces, symplectic automorphisms and the Conway group.Advanced Studies in Pure Mathematics, 69: 387-405, 2016

    2016

  26. [26]

    Cambridge University Press, 2010

    Daniel Huybrechts, Manfred Lehn.The Geometry of Moduli Spaces of Sheaves (2nd Edition). Cambridge University Press, 2010

    2010

  27. [27]

    Iskovskikh, Yuri G

    Vasilii A. Iskovskikh, Yuri G. Prokhorov. Fano varieties. InAlgebraic Geometry V, Springer: 1-247, 1999

    1999

  28. [28]

    Categorical Torelli theorems for Gushel-Mukai threefolds.Journal of London Mathematical Society, 109(3): No

    Augustinas Jacovskis, Xun Lin, Zhiyu Liu, Shizhuo Zhang. Categorical Torelli theorems for Gushel-Mukai threefolds.Journal of London Mathematical Society, 109(3): No. e12878, 2024

    2024

  29. [29]

    Brill–Noether theory for Kuznetsov components and refined categorical Torelli theorems for index one Fano threefolds

    Augustinas Jacovskis, Zhiyu Liu, Shizhuo Zhang. Brill–Noether theory for Kuznetsov components and refined categorical Torelli theorems for index one Fano threefolds. Preprint, 2207.01021v1, 2022

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  30. [30]

    Derived categories of cyclic covers and their branch divisors

    Alexander Kuznetsov, Alexander Perry. Derived categories of cyclic covers and their branch divisors. Selecta Mathematica, New Series, 23: 389-423, 2017

    2017

  31. [31]

    Derived categories of Gushel–Mukai varieties.Compositio Math- ematica, 154: 1362–1406, 2018

    Alexander Kuznetsov, Alexander Perry. Derived categories of Gushel–Mukai varieties.Compositio Math- ematica, 154: 1362–1406, 2018

    2018

  32. [32]

    Categorical cones and quadratic homological projective duality

    Alexander Kuznetsov, Alexander Perry. Categorical cones and quadratic homological projective duality. Annales scientifiques de l’ENS 4e s´ erie, 56(1): 1–57, 2023

    2023

  33. [33]

    On two families of Enriques categories over K3 surfaces

    Ziqi Liu. On two families of Enriques categories over K3 surfaces. Preprint, 2412.06921v2, 2024. 20

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Inducing stability conditions.Journal of Algebraic Geometry, 18(4): 605-649, 2009

    Emanuele Macr ` ı, Sukhendu Mehrotra, Paolo Stellari. Inducing stability conditions.Journal of Algebraic Geometry, 18(4): 605-649, 2009

    2009

  35. [35]

    Birational geometry of singular moduli spaces of O’Grady type.Advances in Mathematics, 296: 210-267, 2016

    Ciaran Meachan, Ziyu Zhang. Birational geometry of singular moduli spaces of O’Grady type.Advances in Mathematics, 296: 210-267, 2016

    2016

  36. [36]

    MMP via wall-crossing for moduli spaces of stable sheaves on an Enriques surface.Advances in Mathematics, 372: No

    Howard Nuer, Kota Yoshioka. MMP via wall-crossing for moduli spaces of stable sheaves on an Enriques surface.Advances in Mathematics, 372: No. 107283, 2020

    2020

  37. [37]

    Kieran G. O’Grady. Irreducible symplectic 4-folds and Eisenbud-Popescu-Walter sextics.Duke Mathemat- ical Journal, 134(1): 99-137, 2006

    2006

  38. [38]

    Kieran G. O’Grady. Dual double EPW-sextics and their periods.Pure and Applied Mathematics Quarterly, 4(2): 427-468, 2008

    2008

  39. [39]

    Kieran G. O’Grady. Double covers of EPW-sextics.The Michigan Mathematical Journal, 62: 143-184, 2013

    2013

  40. [40]

    Kieran G. O’Grady. Periods of double EPW-sextics.Mathematische Zeitschrift, 280(1-2): 485-524, 2015

    2015

  41. [41]

    Kieran G. O’Grady. Moduli of double EPW-sextics.Memoir of American Mathematical Society, 240: no. 1136, 2016

    2016

  42. [42]

    Stability conditions and moduli spaces for Kuznetsov com- ponents of Gushel–Mukai varieties.Geometry & Topology, 26(7): 3055-3121, 2022

    Alexander Perry, Laura Pertusi, Xiaolei Zhao. Stability conditions and moduli spaces for Kuznetsov com- ponents of Gushel–Mukai varieties.Geometry & Topology, 26(7): 3055-3121, 2022

    2022

  43. [43]

    Moduli spaces of stable objects in Enriques categories

    Alexander Perry, Laura Pertusi, Xiaolei Zhao. Moduli spaces of stable objects in Enriques categories. Preprint, arXiv:2305.10702v1, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    Alexander Polishchuk, Constant families oft-structures on derived categories of coherent sheaves.Moscow Mathematical Journal, 7(1): 109-134, 2007

    2007

  45. [45]

    Moduli stacks and invariants of semistable objects on K3 surfaces.Advances in Mathe- matics, 217(6): 2736-2781, 2008

    Yukinobu Toda. Moduli stacks and invariants of semistable objects on K3 surfaces.Advances in Mathe- matics, 217(6): 2736-2781, 2008

    2008

  46. [46]

    F. Enriques

    Kota Yoshioka. Moduli spaces of stable sheaves on abelian surfaces.Mathematische Annalen, 321(4): 817- 884, 2001. Dipartimento di Matematica “F. Enriques”, Universit`a degli Studi di Milano, Via Cesare Sal- dini 50, 20133 Milano, Italy. Email address:ziqi.liu@unimi.it School of Mathematics, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China Email address:zha...

    2001

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 3, 2026.