Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 30 references

An axiomatic approach to analytic $1$-affineness

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper gives abstract conditions under which an object is 1-affine—its sheaf of categories is controlled by global sections—and proves those conditions hold for analytic stacks and rigid analytic varieties.

desk verdict The abstract framework and the Betti-stack theorem are genuinely valuable, but the flagship rigid-analytic result rests on an admitted, unproved flatness patch that needs a real proof before the theorem can be trusted as stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.04341 v2 pith:IFXHKYXB submitted 2025-09-04 math.AG math.CT

Matteo Montagnani , Emanuele Pavia This is my paper
classification math.AGmath.CT MSC 14G2214A2014F08
keywords 1-affinenesssheavesofcategoriesanalyticstacksrigidvarietiesnuclearmodulessix-functorformalismcondensedmathematicsBettistack
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 tries to show that 1-affineness, a subtle categorical property first studied in derived algebraic geometry, is actually a formal consequence of two kinds of abstract hypotheses, and that both hypothesis packages are satisfied in analytic geometry. 1-affineness means that a sheaf of categories on a space is completely determined by its category of global sections, making global categorical information accessible from affine local pieces. In the first framework, any object with an affine universal !-cover whose iterated fiber products stay affine is 1-affine; this covers analytic stacks, analytic Betti stacks of finite-dimensional metrizable compact Hausdorff spaces, and analytic de Rham stacks of compact complex manifolds. In the second framework, every quasi-compact separated rigid analytic variety is 1-affine with respect to nuclear modules, giving an equivalence between its nuclear-module category and the limit of nuclear-module categories over an affinoid cover. If the paper is right, analytic K-theory and categorical Künneth formulas become consequences of affine calculations.

What carries the argument

The central machinery is the categorification functor U ↦ PrL_{D(U)} and the comparison between two ways of extending it from test spaces to a larger ∞-category: modules over the right Kan extension of D versus the right Kan extension of the categorification. An object is 1-affine exactly when this comparison is an equivalence. In the six-functor framework, the equivalence is forced by self-duality of the categories D(U) over D(V) for !-able maps, obtained from the dualizability of objects in ∞-categories of correspondences. In the module framework, the equivalence is forced by descendability of the relevant algebra maps together with an induction over finite Zariski atlases, using base chan

What would settle it

Take a quasi-compact separated rigid analytic variety with an affinoid atlas whose double intersections are not flat, and compare Nuc of each intersection with the relative tensor product of nuclear categories; the paper predicts an equivalence for flat atlas maps, so any observed non-equivalence would falsify Theorem 3.3.3 as stated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that 1-affineness does not depend on the special features of algebraic geometry: two abstract setups guarantee it. First, when the sheaf of categories arises from a strongly monoidal six-functor formalism and the topology is the universal !-able topology, any object admitting an affine universal !-cover whose iterated fiber products are affine is 1-affine. Second, when the sheaf of categories is the categorification of a sheaf of commutative algebras, any quasi-compact separated object with a finite affine atlas of Zariski morphisms whose pullback functors admit left adjoints is 1-affine. The paper applies the first theorem to analytic stacks, to the analytic Betti stack

Load-bearing premise

For the rigid-variety theorem, the load-bearing premise is that the nuclear-module functor turns the pullback diagrams of an affinoid atlas into relative tensor products; the paper itself warns this fails for general pullbacks and relies on flatness of the atlas maps.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every analytic stack with an affine universal !-cover whose iterated fiber products are affine is 1-affine, and the functor Mod_{D(−)} satisfies descent along such covers.
  • The analytic Betti stack of a finite-dimensional metrizable compact Hausdorff space is 1-affine, so derived categories of sheaves on such spaces satisfy 2-descent along surjections from light profinite sets.
  • The analytic de Rham stack of a compact complex manifold is 1-affine, an analytic analogue of the de Rham 1-affineness result from derived algebraic geometry.
  • Every quasi-compact separated rigid analytic variety X satisfies PrL_Nuc(X) ≃ lim_{Spa(A)⊂X} PrL_Nuc(A), so the global nuclear-module category is determined by any affinoid cover.
  • For quasi-compact separated rigid analytic varieties, the categorical Künneth functor Nuc(X)⊗_{Nuc(Z)}Nuc(Y) → Nuc(X×_Z Y) is an equivalence when one of the two maps is flat.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the rigid theorem is right, the same 1-affineness should be provable for derived rigid analytic varieties using Zariski-open immersions, as the paper itself suggests; constructing the derived version explicitly would be a natural test.
  • The contrast with homotopical Betti stacks, which fail 1-affineness when the second homotopy group is nontrivial, suggests that 1-affineness depends sharply on which categorical invariant is being sheafified; one could test whether Postnikov-completion conditions are the exact boundary.
  • The six-functor framework is abstract enough that the same Theorem 1.2.20 may apply to motivic six-functor formalisms over schemes; checking the affine-cover hypothesis there could extend 1-affineness beyond the analytic examples in the paper.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes two abstract frameworks in which the notion of 1-affineness can be formulated for an ∞-site C equipped with a sheaf of presentably symmetric monoidal ∞-categories D. The first framework assumes D comes from a strongly monoidal six-functor formalism and that the topology is the universal !-able topology; the second assumes D is the categorification of a sheaf of commutative algebras in a rigid stable monoidal category. The main abstract results are Theorem 1.2.20 and Theorem 1.3.11, giving 1-affineness criteria under, respectively, existence of a suitable universal !-cover and existence of a finite affine atlas of Zariski morphisms with left adjoints. These are applied to analytic stacks, yielding 1-affineness of the analytic Betti stack of a finite-dimensional compact metrizable Hausdorff space and of the analytic de Rham stack of a compact complex manifold, and to rigid analytic varieties, yielding 1-affineness of quasi-compact quasi-separated rigid varieties with respect to the sheaf of nuclear module categories, together with a categorical Künneth formula.

Significance. The axiomatic viewpoint is genuinely useful: it separates formal categorical arguments from the specific geometry, and it gives a unified framework covering Gaitsgory-type 1-affineness, analytic stacks, and rigid analytic varieties. The contrast between the analytic Betti stack result and the failure of 1-affineness for homotopical Betti stacks in [PPS25a] is an interesting and potentially important observation. The paper also contains useful structural results, such as descent of the categorified sheaf and categorical Künneth formulas. However, the rigid-analytic application is explicitly conditional on an unproved flatness patch, and several key inputs are deferred to unpublished or hard-to-verify sources. If the missing verification is supplied, the paper would be a solid contribution; in its current form, the main rigid-geometry theorem is not yet unconditionally established.

major comments (4)
  1. [§3.3, Warning 3.3.2; Theorem 3.3.3] Warning 3.3.2 concedes that Assumption 1.3.10 does not hold for Nuc(−) on general pullbacks of affinoid spaces, since such pullbacks may need to be derived. But the proof of Theorem 1.3.11 uses Assumption 1.3.10 at every reduction step: see Propositions 1.3.13(1), 1.3.14, 1.3.20, and Corollary 1.3.16, as well as Proposition 1.3.17. The assertion that these results survive when pullbacks are only along flat maps, in particular analytic open immersions, is not proved in the text. Proposition 3.3.4(4) is explicitly stated as a consequence of Proposition 1.3.20 and therefore inherits this gap; no independent proof for the rigid case is given. Until the flat-variant categorical Künneth formula is proved, or a precise reference supplied, Theorem 3.3.3 and Corollary 3.3.9 are conditional.
  2. [§3.3, Theorem 3.3.3 vs. Definition 1.3.8] Theorem 3.3.3 states the result for quasi-compact and quasi-separated rigid varieties, but the abstract Theorem 1.3.11 and the surrounding results (e.g., Proposition 1.3.13, Proposition 1.3.20) require separatedness in the sense of Definition 1.3.8(2): every Zariski morphism ι(U)→X must be C-affine. Separatedness is used to ensure that fiber products of affinoid objects are again affinoid. No argument is provided that quasi-separatedness suffices in the rigid setting. The statement should either be corrected to 'separated' or the additional argument for quasi-separated objects should be supplied.
  3. [§3.1, Lemma 3.1.15 and Theorem 3.1.16] The proof that f_Betti is a universal !-cover is only sketched. The argument contains a conditional step ('if 1_{K_Betti} was also f_Betti-proper we could apply [HM24, Lemma 4.7.4]') and then asserts that for maps of light pro-finite sets f_Betti is weakly cohomologically proper 'because the analytic ring structure on C0(T,Z) is always induced from the one of Z_triv'. This does not directly verify the three conditions of Definition 2.3.6, and the role of finite-dimensionality is not explained. Since Theorem 3.1.16, Corollary 3.1.18, and Corollary 3.1.19 all depend on Lemma 3.1.15, a complete proof or a precise pointer to the relevant statement in [Sch24] is needed.
  4. [§1.2, Propositions 1.2.14 and 1.2.15] Several key extensions of the six-functor formalism are asserted by adapting results of [HM24] to the present generality without a full verification. For example, Proposition 1.2.15 says 'the proof applies in our generality as well', and the only difference is said to be the non-emptyness of the class of admissible bE; the text asserts this because E itself is such a class, but does not check that the minimal bE produced by the argument satisfies all the listed properties. Similarly, Proposition 1.2.14(3) is quoted from [Man22]. These extensions are load-bearing for Theorem 1.2.20. The authors should either reproduce the relevant arguments in detail or state these as precise theorems with full hypotheses and proofs.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.1, line 1] 'monoial' should be 'monoidal'.
  2. [§3.2, Assumption 3.2.1] 'classicalaffinoid' is missing a space.
  3. [§3.1, Corollary 3.1.18] 'Riemman' should be 'Riemann'.
  4. [References] [KM25a] and [KM25b] appear to refer to the same arXiv preprint (arXiv:2505.15750) with the same title. Please check whether one of these should be a different paper.
  5. [§3.3, Warning 3.3.2] 'almostholds' should be 'almost holds'. More substantively, the warning would be easier to use if it explicitly listed which results in Section 1.3 remain valid under the flat-morphism restriction; currently it only says 'the results ... still hold' without specifying the precise statements.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the 1-affineness theorems are proved from stated descent/rigidity hypotheses, not assumed by construction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the paper's definition of 1-affineness. Definition I.2/1.1.10 defines 1-affineness as an equivalence of the comparison functor (1.1.9); Theorems 1.2.20, 1.3.11, 3.1.2 and 3.3.3 do not assume this equivalence but prove it from the stated hypotheses: universal !-able descent plus strong monoidality in the six-functor setting, and rigidity plus a finite Zariski atlas with left adjoints in the categorical-module setting. The rigid-analytic application is not a renaming or a fitted prediction: Nuc(X) and Nuccat(X) are both right Kan extensions over affinoids, and the theorem identifies modules over the former with the latter via descent and Künneth-type equivalences, not by construction. The only serious caveat is Warning 3.3.2, which explicitly concedes that Nuc(−) fails the finite-limit-to-tensor-product hypothesis of Assumption 1.3.10 and asserts without proof that the flat case still suffices; this is an omitted proof / correctness risk, not a circular reduction. Self-citations ([PPS25a], [PPS25b]) are contextual or support standard categorical facts and are not load-bearing for the main conclusions. Hence no circular step can be exhibited.

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

The paper introduces no free parameters or new entities. It rests on a large body of prior and often unpublished results (Clausen-Scholze lecture notes and videos, Heyer-Mann, Mann, Mikami, Kesting, Scholze's lecture notes).

assumptions (7)
  • standard math ∞-categorical foundations (Lurie's Higher Topos Theory and Higher Algebra)
    Used throughout for ∞-categories, presentable categories, limits, colimits, monadicity, tensor products.
  • domain assumption Six-functor formalism for analytic rings (Aff,E) exists, with D(−) a symmetric monoidal sheaf (Theorem 2.2.9)
    Imported from [CS24] and [Kes25, HM24]; this is the input for Assumption 1.1.18.(1).
  • domain assumption Nuc(A) is equivalent to Mod_A(Nuc(|)) and is rigid (Proposition 3.2.6)
    From [Mik23] and [AM24]; places rigid geometry in Assumption 1.1.18.(2).
  • domain assumption fppf maps of affinoid algebras are descendable in Nuc (Proposition 3.2.10)
    From [Mik23]; used for descent of the categorified nuclear sheaf.
  • domain assumption The analytic Betti stack functor preserves finite limits and sends hypercovers to universal !-covers (Proposition 3.1.11)
    From [CS24, Lecture 20]; used to prove 1-affineness of X_Betti.
  • domain assumption The structure sheaf over a pro-finite set has f_Betti(1) descendable and the relevant maps are weakly cohomologically proper (Lemma 3.1.15)
    The paper sketches the proof but relies on [Sch24, Proposition II.1.1] and [HM24, Lemma 4.4.8].
  • domain assumption Nuc(|) is rigid
    From [KM25b]; needed for Theorem 1.3.11 in the rigid case.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of An axiomatic approach to analytic $1$-affineness." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IFXHKYXB

@misc{pith2026250904341,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: An axiomatic approach to analytic $1$-affineness},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IFXHKYXB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.04341}
}
abstract

The notion of $1$-affineness was originally formulated by Gaitsgory in the context of derived algebraic geometry. Motivated by applications to rigid and analytic geometry, we introduce two very general and abstract frameworks where it makes sense to ask for objects to be $1$-affine with respect to some sheaf of categories. The first framework is suited for studying the problem of $1$-affineness when the sheaf of categories arises from an operation in a six-functor formalism over $\mathscr{C}$; we apply it to the setting of analytic stacks and condensed mathematics. The second one concerns $1$-affineness in the context of quasi-coherent sheaves of categorical modules over stable module categories: it simultaneously generalizes the algebro-geometric setting of Gaitsgory and makes it possible to formulate the problem also when dealing with rigid analytic varieties and categories of nuclear modules.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [2]

    Amer- ican Mathematical Soc., 2008

    work page 2008

  2. [4]

    url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03648

    arXiv:2405.03648 [math.AG]. url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03648. [ABC+24b] D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, and N. Rozenblyum.Proof of the geometric Langlands conjecture IV: ambidexter- ity

    arXiv

  3. [5]

    Stein domains in Banach algebraic geometry

    arXiv:2409.08670 [math.AG].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2409.08670. [BBK18] Federico Bambozzi, Oren Ben-Bassat, and Kobi Kremnizer. “Stein domains in Banach algebraic geometry”. In:Journal of Functional Analysis274.7 (Apr. 2018), pp. 1865–1927.issn: 0022-1236.doi: 10.1016/j.jfa.2018.01. 003.url:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2018.01.003. [BKK24] Oren Ben-...

    arXiv 2018

  4. [6]

    url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.07936

    arXiv:2405.07936 [math.AG]. url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.07936. [BFN12] David Ben-Zvi, John Francis, and David Nadler.Morita equivalence for con- volution categories: Appendix to arXiv:0805.0157

    arXiv

  5. [9]

    [CS19] Dustin Clausen and Peter Scholze.Lectures on condensed mathematics

    arXiv:2409.07051 [math.AG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.07051. [CS19] Dustin Clausen and Peter Scholze.Lectures on condensed mathematics

    arXiv

  6. [13]

    03599 [math.AG].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03599

    arXiv:2405 . 03599 [math.AG].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.03599. [GR24b] Dennis Gaitsgory and Sam Raskin.Proof of the geometric Langlands conjecture V: the multiplicity one theorem

    arXiv

  7. [14]

    [Hai22] Peter J

    arXiv:2409.09856 [math.AG].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.09856. [Hai22] Peter J. Haine.Descent for sheaves on compact Hausdorff spaces

    arXiv

  8. [17]

    [Hub96] Roland Huber.Étale cohomology of rigid analytic varieties and adic spaces

    arXiv:2410.13038 [math.CT].url: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2410.13038. [Hub96] Roland Huber.Étale cohomology of rigid analytic varieties and adic spaces. Vol. E30. Aspects of Mathematics. Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn, Braunschweig, 1996, pp. x+450.isbn: 3-528-06794-2.doi: 10.1007/978-3-663-09991-8.url: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-663-09991-8. [KM25a] Jack Kelly an...

    arXiv 1996

Show all 30 references
  1. [19]

    [Kes25] Youshua Kesting.Categorical Künneth formulas for analytic stacks

    arXiv:2505.15750 [math.KT].url: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2505.15750. [Kes25] Youshua Kesting.Categorical Künneth formulas for analytic stacks

  2. [20]

    [LZ24] Yifeng Liu and Weizhe Zheng.Enhanced six operations and base change theorem for higher Artin stacks

    arXiv: 2507.08566 [math.AG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.08566. [LZ24] Yifeng Liu and Weizhe Zheng.Enhanced six operations and base change theorem for higher Artin stacks

    arXiv

  3. [21]

    [Lur09] Jacob Lurie.Higher topos theory

    arXiv:1211.5948 [math.AG] .url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/1211.5948. [Lur09] Jacob Lurie.Higher topos theory. Vol

    arXiv

  4. [23]

    [Mik23] Yutaro Mikami.Fppf-descent for condensed animated rings

    arXiv:2410.23115 [math.AT].url: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2410.23115. [Mik23] Yutaro Mikami.Fppf-descent for condensed animated rings

  5. [24]

    13408 [math.AG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.13408

    arXiv:2311. 13408 [math.AG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.13408. [PPS25a] James Pascaleff, Emanuele Pavia, and Nicolò Sibilla.Higher Koszul duality and n-affineness

    arXiv

  6. [25]

    org/abs/2504.16935

    arXiv:2504.16935 [math.AG] .url: https://arxiv. org/abs/2504.16935. [PPS25b] James Pascaleff, Emanuele Pavia, and Nicolò Sibilla.Higher local systems and the categorified monodromy equivalence

    arXiv

  7. [26]

    url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.10241

    arXiv:2501.10241 [math.AT]. url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.10241. [Rak20] Arpon Raksit.Hochschild homology and the derived de Rham complex revisited

    arXiv

  8. [27]

    02576 [math.AG].url: https : / / arxiv

    arXiv: 2007 . 02576 [math.AG].url: https : / / arxiv . org / abs / 2007.02576. [Ram24a] MaximeRamzi.Dualizablepresentable ∞-categories.2024.arXiv: 2410.21537 [math.CT].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.21537. [Ram24b] MaximeRamzi.Locallyrigid ∞-categories.2024.arXiv: 2410.21524 [...

    2007

  9. [28]

    [Sch23] Peter Scholze.Six functor formalisms

    arXiv:2405.08361 [math.AG].url: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2405.08361. [Sch23] Peter Scholze.Six functor formalisms. 2023.url: https://people.mpim- bonn.mpg.de/scholze/SixFunctors.pdf. [Sch24] Peter Scholze.Geometrization of the real local Langlands correspondence

    2023

  10. [29]

    [Ste23] Germán Stefanich.Tannaka duality and 1-affineness

    arXiv:2409.07592 [math.NT] .url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2409.07592. [Ste23] Germán Stefanich.Tannaka duality and 1-affineness

  11. [30]

    [TV08] Bertrand Toën and Gabriele Vezzosi.Homotopical Algebraic Geometry II: Geo- metric Stacks and Applications: Geometric Stacks and Applications

    arXiv:2311.04515 [math.AG].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.04515. [TV08] Bertrand Toën and Gabriele Vezzosi.Homotopical Algebraic Geometry II: Geo- metric Stacks and Applications: Geometric Stacks and Applications. Vol

    arXiv

  12. [170]

    The Galois group of a stable homotopy theory

    Annals of Mathematics Studies. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2009, pp. xviii+925.isbn: 978-0- 691-14049-0.doi: 10.1515/9781400830558.url: https://doi.org/10. 1515/9781400830558. [Lur17] Jacob Lurie.Higher Algebra. 2017.url: http://www.math.harvard.edu/ ~lurie/pape...

    2009 doi

  13. [643]

    Contemp. Math. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2015, pp. 127–225.doi:10.1090/ conm/643/12899.url:https://doi.org/10.1090/conm/643/12899. [GR24a] Dennis Gaitsgory and Sam Raskin.Proof of the geometric Langlands conjecture I: construction of the functor

    2015 doi

  14. [2012]

    Integrating quantum groups over surfaces

    arXiv:1209.0193 [math.AG]. [BBJ18] David Ben-Zvi, Adrien Brochier, and David Jordan. “Integrating quantum groups over surfaces”. In:Journal of Topology11.4 (Aug. 2018), pp. 874–917. issn: 1753-8424.doi: 10.1112/topo.12072.url: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1112/topo.12072. [Bos14] Sie...

    2018 arXiv

  15. [2019]

    url: https://www.math.uni- bonn.de/people/scholze/Condensed. pdf. [CS20] Dustin Clausen and Peter Scholze.Lectures on Analytic Geometry. 2020.url: https://www.math.uni-bonn.de/people/scholze/Analytic.pdf. [CS22] Dustin Clausen and Peter Scholze.Condensed Mathematics and Comple...

    2020

  16. [2020]

    An equivalence between two models of∞-categories of enriched presheaves

    56 doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2011.08808.url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2011. 08808. [Hei25] Hadrian Heine. “An equivalence between two models of∞-categories of enriched presheaves”. In:Appl. Categ. Structures33.1 (2025), Paper No. 2, 19.issn: 0927-2852,1572-9095.doi: 10.1007/s10485-024-...

    2011 doi arXiv

  17. [2021]

    [And23] Grigory Andreychev

    arXiv:2105.12591 [math.AG].url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2105.12591. [And23] Grigory Andreychev. K-Theorie adischer Räume

    arXiv

  18. [2022]

    Iterated spans and classical topological field theories

    arXiv: 2210.00186 [math.AT].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.00186. [Hau18] Rune Haugseng. “Iterated spans and classical topological field theories”. In: Math. Z.289.3-4 (2018), pp. 1427–1488.issn: 0025-5874.doi:10.1007/ s00209- 017- 2005- x.url: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209- ...

    2018 arXiv

  19. [2023]

    [AM24] Johannes Anschütz and Lucas Mann.Descent for solid quasi-coherent sheaves on perfectoid spaces

    arXiv:2311.04394 [math.KT].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.04394. [AM24] Johannes Anschütz and Lucas Mann.Descent for solid quasi-coherent sheaves on perfectoid spaces

    arXiv

  20. [2024]

    [ABC+24a] D

    arXiv:2403.01951 [math.AG].url: https:// arxiv.org/abs/2403.01951. [ABC+24a] D. Arinkin, D. Beraldo, J. Campbell, L. Chen, J. Faergeman, D. Gaitsgory, K. Lin, S. Raskin, and N. Rozenblyum.Proof of the geometric Langlands conjecture II: Kac-Moody localization and the FLE

    arXiv

  21. [2025]

    Topological Hochschild homology of adic rings

    arXiv:2502. 04123 [math.KT].url:https://arxiv.org/abs/2502.04123. [Fed23] Adriano Córdova Fedeli. “Topological Hochschild homology of adic rings”. PhD thesis. PhD thesis, University of Copenhagen,

    arXiv

  22. [2105]

    Springer, Cham, 2014, pp

    Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer, Cham, 2014, pp. viii+254.isbn: 978-3-319- 04416-3; 978-3-319-04417-0.doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-04417-0 .url: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-04417-0. [Cam24] Juan Esteban Rodríguez Camargo.The analytic de Rham stack in rigid geometry. 202...

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

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