Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 109 references

Cohomology of symmetric stacks

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For a broad class of moduli stacks satisfying a pointwise orthogonality condition, the stack's cohomology decomposes canonically into finite-dimensional BPS summands indexed by special faces of a component lattice.

desk verdict Generalizes cohomological integrality to symmetric stacks; core is solid, but the 3-manifold character-stack application remains conditional on a missing orthogonality check. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04253 v2 pith:H7A4W23X submitted 2025-02-06 math.AG math.GTmath.RT

Chenjing Bu , Ben Davison , Andrés Ibáñez Núñez , Tasuki Kinjo , Tudor Pădurariu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.GTmath.RT MSC 14D2314F0814J3214C3055N33
keywords cohomologicalintegralityBPSsheavesshiftedsymplecticstacksmonodromicmixedHodgemodulesgoodmodulispacesHallalgebra3-Calabi-Yaucategoriesintersectioncohomology
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 a single mechanism governs the cohomology of many moduli stacks: smooth stacks, 0-shifted symplectic stacks, and (-1)-shifted symplectic stacks, provided the stack has a good moduli space and its tangent spaces are pointwise almost orthogonal. Under these hypotheses the infinite-dimensional cohomology (or vanishing-cycle cohomology) of the whole stack splits as a direct sum of finite-dimensional BPS cohomologies attached to smaller 'special face' stacks, with Weyl-group-like invariants. A sympathetic reader should care because the decomposition is explicit enough to serve as a universal cohomological integrality theorem: for 3-Calabi-Yau categories it yields a PBW-type theorem for cohomological Hall algebras and recovers the usual BPS invariants, and for smooth stacks it identifies BPS cohomology with intersection cohomology of the good moduli space.

What carries the argument

The central object is the cohomological Hall induction (CoHI): for each face $(F,\alpha)$ of the component lattice, the stack of filtered points $U^+_\sigma$ gives a correspondence $U_\alpha \leftarrow U^+_\sigma \to U$, and pushing the intersection complex (or DT sheaf) along this correspondence defines a multiplication map from the $\alpha$-summand to $p_* \mathrm{IC}_U$. The almost-orthogonal hypothesis makes the relevant map small (Proposition 7.2.1), so the perverse degeneration of CoHI is supercommutative, the cotangent sign representation $\mathrm{sgn}_\alpha$ can be extracted, and the map becomes an isomorphism.

What would settle it

Compute both sides of the point-level formula (1.2.12.2) for a concrete stack satisfying all four assumptions, for instance the moduli stack of semistable sheaves on a smooth projective Calabi-Yau threefold with generic polarization, using known Donaldson-Thomas invariants; the theorem predicts the multiple-cover identity relating each BPS invariant to the generalized DT invariant, so a single violation of that identity would falsify it. Conversely, no counterexample can be drawn from stacks that fail almost orthogonality, since the theorem is conditional on it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.2.12: for an almost orthogonal oriented $(-1)$-shifted symplectic stack $X$ satisfying assumptions (i)-(iv), there is an isomorphism of monodromic mixed Hodge complexes on the good moduli space $\underline{X}$, $$\bigoplus_{(F,\$\alpha$)\in \mathrm{Faces}^{\mathrm{sp}}(X)} \left(g_{\$\alpha$,*} \mathrm{BPS}_{X_\$\alpha$} \otimes H^*(B\mathbb{G}$_m^{{\dim F}}$)^{\mathrm{vir}}\right)^{\mathrm{Aut}(\$\alpha$)} \simeq p_* \phi_X,$$ where $\phi_X$ is the Donaldson-Thomas vanishing-cycle sheaf, $\mathrm{BPS}_{X_\alpha}$ is the zeroth perverse cohomology of the localized DT sheaf (the BPS sheaf), and the sum runs over special faces of the component lattice. The smooth-stack analogue replaces BPS sheaves by intersection complexes, expressing $p_* \mathrm{IC}_U$ as the same kind of direct sum. The paper argues that this decomposition is induced by the cohomological Hall induction, and that the almost-orthogonal condition makes the relevant pushforwards small, so the perverse-degenerate CoHI is symmetric and an isomorphism.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's central claim collapses if a stack satisfying all other hypotheses but failing almost orthogonality is found: the smallness estimate (Proposition 7.2.1) and the sign identities that make CoHI well-defined both rely on the tangent space being orthogonal for the neutral component of every closed-point stabilizer.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For smooth stacks, the theorem gives a closed formula for the cohomology of the stack in terms of intersection cohomology of special-face stacks, generalizing the classical quiver formula to arbitrary reductive groups and non-coprime degrees.
  • For $(-1)$-shifted symplectic stacks such as moduli stacks of semistable sheaves on Calabi-Yau threefolds, the vanishing-cycle cohomology decomposes into finite-dimensional BPS summands; this is cohomological integrality.
  • For 3-Calabi-Yau categories with commutative orientation data, the decomposition is a PBW-type theorem for the BPS Lie algebra and cohomological Hall algebra.
  • For 0-shifted symplectic stacks, Borel-Moore homology decomposes into pure BPS sheaves, yielding purity statements and applications to K3 surfaces.
  • The finite-dimensional BPS cohomology is proposed as the correct replacement for ordinary cohomology in topological mirror symmetry and Langlands duality for character stacks of 3-manifolds.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: The almost-orthogonal hypothesis is probably stronger than needed for the decomposition itself; the paper's comparison with an algebraic approach suggests a version of cohomological integrality can hold without it, but the identification of BPS sheaves with intersection complexes in the smooth case would then be lost.
  • Editorial inference: If the theorem extends to all compact oriented 3-manifold character stacks, Langlands duality for the full vanishing-cycle cohomology reduces to a finite-dimensional statement about BPS cohomology, which is a more tractable check.
  • Editorial inference: A testable extension is to compute the BPS sheaves explicitly for 0-shifted symplectic stacks beyond 2-Calabi-Yau categories, for example for moduli of G-Higgs bundles, and compare with symplectic-duality predictions.
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

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. Bu–Davison–Ibáñez Núñez–Kinjo–Pădurariu prove cohomological integrality and decomposition theorems for three classes of stacks—smooth stacks, 0-shifted symplectic stacks, and oriented (−1)-shifted symplectic stacks—under explicit hypotheses: existence of a good moduli space, affine diagonal, quasi-compact graded points, a global equivariant parameter for special faces, and an (almost) orthogonal tangent-space structure. For a smooth stack U, Theorem 1.2.7 decomposes p_*IC_U into Aut(α)-invariants of terms g_{α,*}IC_{Uα} ⊗ H^*(BG_m^{dim F})^{vir} ⊗ sgn_α; for an oriented (−1)-shifted symplectic stack X, Theorem 1.2.12 gives the analogous decomposition of p_*φ_X into BPS-sheaf summands. The BPS sheaf is defined as the lowest perverse cohomology of the same pushforward, so the theorem is a structural decomposition rather than a definitional tautology. Applications include moduli of G-bundles, twisted Higgs bundles, character stacks of surfaces and certain 3-manifolds, coherent sheaves on Calabi–Yau 3-folds and K3 surfaces, a PBW-type theorem for cohomological Hall algebras of 3-Calabi–Yau categories with commutative orientation data, and conjectural Langlands duality and topological mirror symmetry formulated through BPS cohomology.

Significance. This is a substantial contribution that unifies and generalizes the Meinhardt–Reineke and Davison–Meinhardt theorems and provides a common framework for cohomological integrality across a wide range of moduli stacks. The component-lattice formalism, the notion of special faces, and the cohomological Hall induction are used coherently, and the main theorem is genuinely parameter-free. The paper is also commendably explicit about its hypotheses: almost orthogonality is isolated as an assumption, verified in many examples, and the authors state plainly in §4.3.11 and §1.2.19 that the general character stack of a compact oriented 3-manifold is not known to be almost orthogonal, so the Langlands-duality consequences are conjectural. The proof strategy—reduction to local models via component lattices, purity via Theorem 5.1.3, and the integral isomorphism from [67]—is coherent, and the claimed decompositions are concrete and testable in examples.

minor comments (5)
  1. [§1.2.21] In the global-section display following Theorem 1.2.21, the direct sum is indexed by Facesp(X), but the stack being decomposed is Y; the right-hand side H^BM_{-*}(Yα) should presumably be H^BM_{-*}(Y). Please correct the index set and the right-hand side.
  2. [§1.2.19] Equation (1.2.19.2) and the surrounding Langlands-duality discussion are conditional on almost orthogonality of Loc_G(M), which is verified only in the cases of Corollaries 4.3.17 and 4.3.19. The authors do state this, but I recommend moving the caveat into the abstract so that 'a version of Langlands duality' is not misread as a theorem for all compact oriented 3-manifolds.
  3. [§8.2.2] The opening sentence says 'let V be an almost symmetric representation of V'; this should read 'of G'.
  4. [Theorem 1.2.7] In the displayed isomorphism (1.2.7.1), an opening parenthesis is missing before 'g_{α,*}IC^◦_{Uα}', making the scope of the Aut(α)-invariants ambiguous.
  5. [General] Given the heavy use of X_α, X_σ^+, g_α, p_α, and the cotangent arrangement throughout §§7–9, a short table or index of the principal maps and their domains would substantially improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main decomposition is proven, not assumed; self-citations are to independent prior results, and the unverified 3-manifold assumption is an acknowledged scope limitation.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. In Theorem 1.2.12, the BPS sheaf is defined as the lowest perverse cohomology of the same pushforward p_*phi_X that the theorem decomposes, but the theorem's content is precisely that the whole monodromic mixed Hodge complex p_*phi_X is isomorphic to the Aut(alpha)-invariant direct sum of face contributions. That is a nontrivial statement, established via smallness (Propositions 7.2.1 and 7.2.9), cohomological Hall induction (Section 8), and reduction to local models, and it is not an identity by construction. The almost orthogonal hypothesis is an input condition, not an output: it is verified for many moduli stacks and explicitly left open for general 3-manifold character stacks in §4.3.11 ('We do not know whether Loc_G(M) for a general 3-manifold M is almost orthogonal or not'). The Langlands-duality application is correspondingly stated conditionally, so this is a scope limitation rather than a hidden circular presupposition. The component-lattice formalism ([17]), weight-preserving pushforward ([65]), and the integral isomorphism ([67]) are imported from papers with overlapping authorship, but they are independent prior theorems about special faces, decomposition-theoretic weight properties, and local vanishing-cycle identities; they are not restatements of the cohomological integrality theorem, and no quoted reduction shows the present theorem is equivalent to them. Under the hard rule requiring a specific reduction by construction, no circular step meets that threshold.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on structural assumptions (good moduli space, quasi-compact graded points, almost orthogonality, global equivariant parameters, orientations, and commutative orientation data) rather than on fitted numerical parameters or speculative new entities. The BPS sheaf and BPS cohomology are mathematical constructions defined inside the paper, not hypotheses pulled from a hat. The most fragile axiom is the almost orthogonal condition, which is verified for the main examples but not for arbitrary 3-manifold character stacks.

assumptions (8)
  • domain assumption X has affine diagonal and admits a good moduli space p: X to Xbar.
    Assumptions (i) in §1.2.5; needed to define BPS sheaves as perverse cohomology of p_* of a mixed Hodge module, and for the pushforward weight preservation theorem (Theorem 5.1.3).
  • domain assumption X has quasi-compact connected components and quasi-compact graded points.
    Assumptions (ii) in §1.2.5; used for finiteness of special faces ([17, Theorem 6.2.3]) and for the properness of cohomological Hall induction evaluation maps.
  • domain assumption X is almost orthogonal: the tangent space at each closed point is orthogonal as a representation of the neutral component of the stabilizer.
    Definition 4.2.2 and Assumptions (iii) in §1.2.5; this is the main structural hypothesis, driving the smallness result (Proposition 7.2.1), the cotangent sign representation, and the vanishing of vdim X^+_sigma in the (-1)-shifted symplectic case.
  • domain assumption For each special face (F,alpha), the stack X_alpha admits a global equivariant parameter.
    Assumptions (iv) in §1.2.5; used to construct the map from BPS cohomology into p_alpha,* IC or phi_X. Corollary 9.1.4 shows this condition is automatic for smooth stacks.
  • domain assumption For (-1)-shifted symplectic stacks, an orientation is chosen, i.e. a square root of the canonical bundle.
    Assumed in §1.2.11 and §6.1.3; without an orientation the Donaldson-Thomas mixed Hodge module phi_X is not defined.
  • domain assumption For the 3-Calabi-Yau category statement, the moduli stack M admits commutative orientation data compatible with the direct sum map.
    Condition (vi) in §1.2.15 and §10.2.8; needed for the symmetric product formula (1.2.16.1) and for the BPS Lie algebra and PBW theorem.
  • domain assumption The constancy and finiteness theorems for component lattices hold for derived algebraic stacks.
    Invoked in §2.3.1 and used throughout; these are proved in the companion paper [17] by three of the authors and are essential for the reduction to local models.
  • standard math Background theory of monodromic mixed Hodge modules on algebraic stacks, including the six functor formalism, is available as stated in Section 5.
    The paper relies on Saito's mixed Hodge module theory and Tubach's extension to stacks, cited without proof. This is standard background for the intended audience.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cohomology of symmetric stacks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H7A4W23X

@misc{pith2026250204253,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cohomology of symmetric stacks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H7A4W23X}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04253}
}
abstract

We construct decompositions of: (1) the cohomology of smooth stacks, (2) the Borel--Moore homology of $0$-shifted symplectic stacks, and (3) the vanishing cycle cohomology of $(-1)$-shifted symplectic stacks, assuming a good moduli space exists and the tangent space has a pointwise orthogonal structure. These conditions are satisfied by many stacks of interest, including moduli stacks of semistable $G$-bundles and (twisted) $G$-Higgs bundles on curves, $G$-character stacks of oriented closed 2-manifolds and various 3-manifolds, and moduli stacks of semistable coherent sheaves on Calabi--Yau threefolds and K3 surfaces with generic polarization. As a special case, we prove a PBW-type theorem for cohomological Hall algebras of $3$-Calabi--Yau categories with commutative orientation data, a strong form of the cohomological integrality conjecture for such categories. We define the BPS cohomology as the primary summand of the decomposition. When the stack is smooth, the BPS cohomology coincides with the intersection cohomology of the good moduli space, generalizing a theorem of Meinhardt--Reineke. Using the BPS cohomology for singular spaces, we propose a formulation of the topological mirror symmetry conjecture for the stack of $G$-Higgs bundles generalizing the work of Hausel and Thaddeus for type A groups, and a version of Langlands duality for character stacks of compact oriented 3-manifolds, following Ben-Zvi--Gunningham--Jordan--Safronov.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

109 extracted references · 48 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    C. Bu, D. Halpern-Leistner, A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez and T. K injo. Intrinsic Donaldson–Thomas theory I. Component lattices of stacks, 2025. arXiv: 2502.13892

    arXiv 2025

  2. [67]

    Kinjo, H

    T. Kinjo, H. Park and P. Safronov. Cohomological Hall al gebras for 3-Calabi–Yau categor- ies, 2024. arXiv: 2406.12838

    arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Ahlqvist, J

    E. Ahlqvist, J. Hekking, M. Pernice and M. Savvas. Good mo duli spaces in derived algeb- raic geometry, 2023. arXiv: 2309.16574

    arXiv 2023

  4. [2]

    J. Alper. Good moduli spaces for Artin stacks. Annales de l’Institut Fourier , 63 (6): 2349– 2402, 2013. doi: 10.5802/aif.2833

    doi:10.5802/aif.2833 2013

  5. [3]

    Alper, J

    J. Alper, J. Hall and D. Rydh. A Luna ´ etale slice theorem f or algebraic stacks. Annals of Mathematics, 191 (3): 675, 2020. doi: 10.4007/annals.2020.191.3.1

    doi:10.4007/annals.2020.191.3.1 2020

  6. [4]

    Alper, D

    J. Alper, D. Halpern-Leistner and J. Heinloth. Existenc e of moduli spaces for algebraic stacks. Inventiones Mathematicae, Aug. 2023. doi: 10.1007/s00222-023-01214-4

    doi:10.1007/s00222-023-01214-4 2023

  7. [5]

    Arinkin, D

    D. Arinkin, D. Gaitsgory, D. Kazhdan, S. Raskin, N. Rozen blyum and Y. Varshavsky. The stack of local systems with restricted variation and geo metric Langlands theory with nilpotent singular support, 2020. arXiv: 2010.01906

    arXiv 2020

  8. [6]

    Artin and J

    M. Artin and J. J. Zhang. Abstract Hilbert schemes. Algebr. Represent. Theory , 4 (4): 305–394, 2001. doi: 10.1023/a:1012006112261

    doi:10.1023/a:1012006112261 2001

Show all 109 references
  1. [7]

    M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott. The Yang–Mills equations over Ri emann surfaces. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathe matical and physical sciences , 308 (1505): 523–615, 1983

    1983

  2. [8]

    Y. Bae, M. Kool and H. Park. Counting surfaces on Calabi-Y au 4-folds I: foundations. arXiv preprint arXiv:2208.09474 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Beilinson, J

    A. Beilinson, J. Bernstein, P. Deligne and O. Gabber. Faisceaux pervers, volume 4. Soci´ et´ e math´ ematique de France Paris, 2018

    2018

  4. [10]

    Bellamy and T

    G. Bellamy and T. Schedler. Symplectic resolutions of q uiver varieties. Selecta Mathemat- ica. New Series , 27:36 (3), 2021

    2021

  5. [11]

    Ben-Bassat, C

    O. Ben-Bassat, C. Brav, V. Bussi and D. Joyce. A ‘Darboux theorem’ for shifted symplectic structures on derived Artin stacks, with applications. Geometry & Topology, 19 (3): 1287– 1359, 2015

    2015

  6. [12]

    T. M. Botta and B. Davison. Okounkov’s conjecture via BP S Lie algebras, 2023. arXiv: 2312.14008

    2023

  7. [13]

    C. Brav, V. Bussi, D. Dupont, D. Joyce and B. Szendr˝ oi. S ymmetries and stabilization for sheaves of vanishing cycles. Journal of Singularities , 11: 85–151, 2015

    2015

  8. [14]

    C. Brav, V. Bussi and D. Joyce. A Darboux theorem for deri ved schemes with shifted symplectic structure. Journal of the American Mathematical Society , 32 (2): 399–443, 2019

    2019

  9. [15]

    Brav and T

    C. Brav and T. Dyckerhoff. Relative Calabi–Yau structur es. Compositio Mathematica , 155 (2): 372–412, 2019

    2019

  10. [16]

    Brav and T

    C. Brav and T. Dyckerhoff. Relative Calabi–Yau structur es II: shifted Lagrangians in the moduli of objects. Selecta Mathematica. New Series , 27 (4): 63, 2021

    2021

  11. [18]

    C. Bu, A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez and T. Kinjo. Intrinsic Donal dson–Thomas theory II. Stability measures and invariants, 2025. arXiv: 2502.20515. 126

    2025 arXiv

  12. [19]

    C. Bu, A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez and T. Kinjo. Intrinsic Donal dson–Thomas theory III. Wall- crossing and applications. To appear

  13. [20]

    D. Calaque. Shifted cotangent stacks are shifted sympl ectic. In Annales de la Facult´ e des sciences de Toulouse: Math´ ematiques, volume 28, 1, pages 67–90, 2019

    2019

  14. [21]

    Calaque, T

    D. Calaque, T. Pantev, B. To¨ en, M. Vaqui´ e and G. Vezzos i. Shifted Poisson structures and deformation quantization. Journal of topology , 10 (2): 483–584, 2017

    2017

  15. [22]

    Davison and M

    B. Davison and M. McBreen. The Tutte polynomial and symp lectic duality, To appear

  16. [23]

    B. Davison. The critical CoHA of a quiver with potential . Quarterly Journal of Mathem- atics, 68 (2): 635–703, 2017

    2017

  17. [24]

    B. Davison. Nonabelian Hodge theory for stacks and a sta cky P=W conjecture. Advances in Mathematics , 415: 108889, 2023

    2023

  18. [25]

    B. Davison. The integrality conjecture and the cohomol ogy of preprojective stacks. Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal) , 2023 (804): 105–154, 2023

    2023

  19. [26]

    B. Davison. Purity and 2-Calabi–Yau categories. Inventiones Mathematicae, 238 (1): 69– 173, 2024

    2024

  20. [27]

    Davison, L

    B. Davison, L. Hennecart and S. Schlegel Mejia. BPS alge bras and generalised Kac–Moody algebras from 2-Calabi–Yau categories, 2023. arXiv: 2303.12592

    2023

  21. [28]

    Davison and S

    B. Davison and S. Meinhardt. Donaldson–Thomas theory f or categories of homological dimension one with potential, 2015. arXiv: 1512.08898

    2015 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Davison and S

    B. Davison and S. Meinhardt. Cohomological Donaldson– Thomas theory of a quiver with potential and quantum enveloping algebras. Inventiones Mathematicae, 221 (3): 777–871,

  23. [30]

    M. A. A. de Cataldo, T. Hausel and L. Migliorini. Topolog y of Hitchin systems and Hodge theory of character varieties: the case A1. Annals of Mathematics , 175 (3): 1329–1407, 2012

    2012

  24. [31]

    M. A. A. de Cataldo and L. Migliorini. The decomposition theorem, perverse sheaves and the topology of algebraic maps. Bull. Am. Math. Soc., New Ser. , 46 (4): 535–633, 2009. doi: 10.1090/S0273-0979-09-01260-9

    2009 doi

  25. [32]

    A. Dimca. Sheaves in topology . Universitext. Berlin: Springer, 2004. isbn: 3-540-20665-5

    2004

  26. [33]

    A. I. Efimov. Cohomological Hall algebra of a symmetric q uiver. Compositio Mathematica, 148 (4): 1133–1146, 2012

    2012

  27. [34]

    Felisetti, A

    C. Felisetti, A. Szenes and O. Trapeznikova. Parabolic bundles and the intersection co- homology of moduli spaces of vector bundles on curves. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.20327 , 2025

    2025 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Fernandez Herrero and A

    A. Fernandez Herrero and A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez. Stability and disconnected groups, 2025. To appear

    2025

  29. [36]

    D. Fratila. On the stack of semistable G-bundles over an elliptic curve. Mathematische Annalen, 365 (1): 401–421, 2016

    2016

  30. [37]

    Groechenig, D

    M. Groechenig, D. Wyss and P. Ziegler. Mirror symmetry f or moduli spaces of Higgs bundles via p-adic integration. Inventiones Mathematicae, 221 (2): 505–596, 2020. 127

    2020

  31. [38]

    Gunningham and P

    S. Gunningham and P. Safronov. Deformation quantizati on and perverse sheaves, 2023. arXiv: 2312.07595

    2023

  32. [39]

    Halpern-Leistner

    D. Halpern-Leistner. On the structure of instability i n moduli theory. arXiv: 1411.0627

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    Halpern-Leistner

    D. Halpern-Leistner. Θ-stratifications, Θ-reductive stacks, and applications. Algebraic Geo- metry: Salt Lake City , 2018: 97–349, 2015

    2018

  34. [41]

    Halpern-Leistner

    D. Halpern-Leistner. Derived Θ-stratifications and th e D-equivalence conjecture, 2020. arXiv: 2010.01127

    2020 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Harder and M

    G. Harder and M. S. Narasimhan. On the cohomology groups of moduli spaces of vector bundles on curves. Mathematische Annalen , 212 (3): 215–248, 1975. doi: 10.1007/bf01357141

    1975 doi

  36. [43]

    Hausel, A

    T. Hausel, A. Mellit, A. Minets and O. Schiffmann. P = W Via H2, 2022. arXiv: 2209.05429

    2022 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Hausel and M

    T. Hausel and M. Thaddeus. Mirror symmetry, Langlands d uality, and the Hitchin system. Inventiones Mathematicae, 153: 197–229, 2003

    2003

  38. [45]

    Hennecart

    L. Hennecart. Cohomological integrality for symmetri c representations of reductive groups,

  39. [46]

    Hennecart

    L. Hennecart. BPS sheaf for commuting varieties, 2025. url: https://hennlu.github.io/BPS-commuting-varietyv2.pd f (visited on 11/02/2025). A vailable at: https://hennlu.github.io/BPS-commuting-varietyv2.pd f (Accessed: 11 February 2025)

    2025

  40. [47]

    Hennecart

    L. Hennecart. Cohomological integrality for symmetri c quotient stacks, 2024. arXiv: 2408.15786

    2024 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Hennecart and T

    L. Hennecart and T. Kinjo. Cohomological Langlands dua lity for commuting stacks and G-Higgs bundles in genus one. To appear

  42. [49]

    A. F. Herrero. On automorphisms of semistable G-bundles with decorations. Advances in Geometry, 23 (3): 389–400, 2023

    2023

  43. [50]

    V. Hoskins. Moduli problems and geometric invariant th eory, 2016. Lecture notes

    2016

  44. [51]

    Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez

    A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez. Refined Harder–Narasimhan filtrat ions in moduli theory, 2023. arXiv: 2311.18050

    2023 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez

    A. Ib´ a˜ nez N´ u˜ nez. Finiteness of good moduli spaces o f graded points, 2025. https://www.math.columbia.edu/˜ ibaneznunez/documents/finiteness-gms-graded.pdf

    2025

  46. [53]

    D. Jordan. Langlands duality for skein modules of 3-man ifolds. String-Math 2022 , 107: 127, 2024

    2022

  47. [54]

    D. Joyce. Configurations in abelian categories. IV. Inv ariants and changing stability con- ditions. Advances in Mathematics , 217 (1): 125–204, 2008

    2008

  48. [55]

    Joyce and Y

    D. Joyce and Y. Song. A theory of generalized Donaldson–Thomas invariants . Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, 1020. 2012

    2012

  49. [56]

    Joyce and M

    D. Joyce and M. Upmeier. Orientation data for moduli spa ces of coherent sheaves over Calabi–Yau 3-folds. Advances in Mathematics , 381: 107627, 2021

    2021

  50. [57]

    Kapranov and E

    M. Kapranov and E. Vasserot. The cohomological Hall alg ebra of a surface and factoriz- ation cohomology. Journal of the European Mathematical Society (JEMS) , 25 (11): 4221– 4289, 2023. doi: 10.4171/JEMS/1264. 128

    2023 doi

  51. [58]

    Kapustin and E

    A. Kapustin and E. Witten. Electric-magnetic duality a nd the geometric Langlands pro- gram. Communications in Number Theory and Physics , 1 (1): 1–236, 2007

    2007

  52. [59]

    Kashiwara and P

    M. Kashiwara and P. Schapira. Sheaves on manifolds , volume 292. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  53. [60]

    S. Kaubrys. Cohomological Donaldson–Thomas theory fo r local systems on the 3-torus,

  54. [61]

    A. A. Khan. Virtual fundamental classes of derived stac ks I, 2019. arXiv: 1909.01332

    2019 arXiv

  55. [62]

    A. A. Khan and T. Kinjo. 3d cohomological Hall algebras f or local surfaces. preprint, 2023. https://www.preschema.com/papers/dimredcoha.pdf

    2023

  56. [63]

    T. Kinjo. Dimensional reduction in cohomological Dona ldson–Thomas theory. Compositio Mathematica, 158 (1): 123–167, 2022

    2022

  57. [64]

    T. Kinjo. A very confusing sign in shifted symplectic ge ometry. url: https://drive.google.com/file/d/15nwj8vGs8tguFS3qFz1BpjgLOzvvn9YH/view

  58. [65]

    T. Kinjo. Decomposition theorem for good moduli morphi sms. arXiv: 2407.06160. To appear in Math. Res. Lett

    arXiv

  59. [66]

    Kinjo and N

    T. Kinjo and N. Koseki. Cohomological χ-independence for Higgs bundles and Gopakumar–Vafa invariants. Journal of the European Mathematical Society , 2024

    2024

  60. [68]

    F. Kirwan. On the homology of compactifications of modul i spaces of vector bundles over a Riemann surface. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) , 53 (2): 237–266, 1986. doi: 10.1112/plms/s3-53.2.237

    1986 doi

  61. [69]

    F. Kirwan. Rational intersection cohomology of quotie nt varieties. Inventiones Mathemat- icae, 86 (3): 471–505, 1986

    1986

  62. [70]

    F. C. Kirwan. Partial desingularisations of quotients of nonsingular varieties and their Betti numbers. Annals of Mathematics , 122 (1): 41–85, 1985

    1985

  63. [71]

    Det” and “Div

    F. Knudsen and D. Mumford. The projectivity of the modul i space of stable curves I: preliminaries on “Det” and “Div”. Mathematica Scandinavica, 39 (1): 19–55, 1976

    1976

  64. [72]

    Kojima and Y

    Y. Kojima and Y. Tachikawa. On homomorphisms from finite subgroups of SU (2) to Langlands dual pairs of groups, 2025. arXiv: 2505.01253

    2025 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Kontsevich and Y

    M. Kontsevich and Y. Soibelman. Stability structures, motivic Donaldson–Thomas invari- ants and cluster transformations, 2008. arXiv: 0811.2435

    2008 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Kontsevich and Y

    M. Kontsevich and Y. Soibelman. Cohomological Hall alg ebra, exponential Hodge struc- tures and motivic Donaldson–Thomas invariants. Communications in Number Theory and Physics, 5 (2): 231–352, 2011. doi: 10.4310/CNTP.2011.v5.n2.a1

    2011 doi

  67. [75]

    A. Kresch. Cycle groups for Artin stacks. Inventiones Mathematicae , 138 (3): 495–536,

  68. [76]

    Laumon and L

    G. Laumon and L. Moret-Bailly. Champs alg´ ebriques. fre. Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete ; 3 Folge, Bd. 39. Springer, Berlin ; Lond on, 2000. isbn: 9783540657613

    2000

  69. [77]

    D. Luna. Slices ´ etales. In Sur les groupes alg´ ebriques, number 33 in M´ emoires de la Soci´ et´ e Math´ ematique de France, pages 81–105. Soci´ et´ e math´ ema tique de France, 1973. doi: 10.24033/msmf.110. 129

    1973 doi

  70. [78]

    D. Luna. Adh´ erences d’orbite et invariants. Inventiones Mathematicae, 29: 231–238, 1975

    1975

  71. [79]

    J. Lurie. Spectral algebraic geometry. url: https://www.math.ias.edu/˜ lurie/papers/SAG-rootfile.pdf

  72. [80]

    Porta and F

    M. Porta and F. Sala. Two dimensional categorified Hall a lgebras. Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 25 (3): 1113–1205, 2023

    2023

  73. [81]

    D. B. Massey. The Sebastiani–Thom isomorphism in the de rived category. Compositio Mathematica, 125 (3): 353–362, 2001

    2001

  74. [82]

    Maulik and A

    D. Maulik and A. Okounkov. Quantum groups and quantum co homology. Asterisque, 408: 1–225, 2019

    2019

  75. [83]

    Maulik and J

    D. Maulik and J. Shen. Endoscopic decompositions and th e Hausel–Thaddeus conjecture. In Forum of Mathematics, Pi , volume 9, e8. Cambridge University Press, 2021

    2021

  76. [84]

    Maulik and J

    D. Maulik and J. Shen. The P =W conjecture for GL n. Annals of Mathematics , 200 (2): 529–556, 2024

    2024

  77. [85]

    Meinhardt

    S. Meinhardt. Donaldson–Thomas invariants vs. inters ection cohomology for categories of homological dimension one, 2015. arXiv: 1512.03343

    2015 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Meinhardt and M

    S. Meinhardt and M. Reineke. Donaldson–Thomas invaria nts versus intersection co- homology of quiver moduli. Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelle’s Journal), 754: 143–178, 2019. doi: 10.1515/crelle-2017-0010

    2019 doi

  79. [87]

    Mozgovoy and M

    S. Mozgovoy and M. Reineke. Intersection cohomology of moduli spaces of vector bundles over curves, 2015. arXiv: 1512.04076

    2015 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Mumford, J

    D. Mumford, J. Fogarty and F. Kirwan. Geometric Invariant Theory , volume 34. Springer Science & Business Media, 1994

    1994

  81. [89]

    Naef and P

    F. Naef and P. Safronov. Torsion volume forms, 2023. arX iv: 2308.08369

    2023 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Nakajima

    H. Nakajima. Heisenberg algebra and Hilbert schemes of points on projective surfaces. Annals of Mathematics , 145 (2): 379–388, 1997

    1997

  83. [91]

    Nakajima

    H. Nakajima. Quiver varieties and Kac-Moody algebras. Duke Math. J. , 95 (1): 515–560, 1998

    1998

  84. [92]

    Pantev, B

    T. Pantev, B. To¨ en, M. Vaqui´ e and G. Vezzosi. Shifted s ymplectic structures. Publications math´ ematiques de l’IH´ES, 117: 271–328, 2013

    2013

  85. [93]

    H. Park. Shifted symplectic pushforwards, 2024. arXiv : 2406.19192

    2024 arXiv

  86. [94]

    A. Premet. Nilpotent commuting varieties of reductive Lie algebras. Inventiones Mathem- aticae, 154 (3): 653–683, 2003

    2003

  87. [95]

    Ramanathan

    A. Ramanathan. Stable principal bundles on a compact Ri emann surface. Math. Ann., 213: 129–152, 1975. doi: 10.1007/BF01343949. url: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01343949

    1975 doi

  88. [96]

    M. Saito. Thom–Sebastiani theorem for Hodge modules, 2 010. preprint

  89. [97]

    M. Saito. Mixed Hodge modules. Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences, 26 (2): 221–333, 1990

    1990

  90. [98]

    T. Saito. A description of monodromic mixed Hodge modul es. Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelle’s Journal) , 2022 (786): 107–153, 2022

    2022

  91. [99]

    Schieder

    S. Schieder. The Harder–Narasimhan stratification of t he moduli stack of G-bundles via Drinfeld’s compactifications. Selecta Mathematica. New Series , 21 (3): 763–831, 2015. 130

    2015

  92. [100]

    A. H. Schmitt. Geometric invariant theory and decorated principal bundle s. European Mathematical Society, 2008

    2008

  93. [101]

    P. Scholze. Six-functor formalisms, 2022. url: https://people.mpim-bonn.mpg.de/scholze/SixFunctors .pdf

    2022

  94. [102]

    C. T. Simpson. Moduli of representations of the fundam ental group of a smooth projective variety I. Publications Math´ ematiques de l’IH ´ES, 79: 47–129, 1994

    1994

  95. [103]

    Steinberg, J

    R. Steinberg, J. Faulkner and R. Wilson. Lectures on Chevalley groups . American Math- ematical Society Providence, RI, 2016

    2016

  96. [104]

    Y. Toda. Gopakumar–Vafa invariants and wall-crossin g. Journal of Differential Geometry , 123 (1): 141–193, 2023

    2023

  97. [105]

    To¨ en and M

    B. To¨ en and M. Vaqui´ e. Moduli of objects in dg-catego ries. Annales Scientifiques de l’Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure, 40 (3): 387–444, 2007

    2007

  98. [106]

    S. Tubach. Mixed Hodge modules on stacks, 2024. arXiv: 2407.02256

    2024

  99. [107]

    M. B. Young. Representations of cohomological Hall al gebras and Donaldson–Thomas theory with classical structure groups. Commun. Math. Phys. , 380 (1): 273–322, 2020. doi: 10.1007/s00220-020-03877-z . Chenjing Bu bu@maths.ox.ac.uk Mathematical Institute, University of Oxford,...

    2020 doi

  100. [1999]

    doi: 10.1007/s002220050351

    doi

  101. [2020]

    doi: 10.1007/s00222-020-00961-y

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.