Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 38 references

Protected corners and a trichotomy for Han's conjecture

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A protected corner in a quiver algebra forces self-extensions in every degree, and on three strongly connected vertices it leaves only two possible Gap-A failure shapes for Han's conjecture.

desk verdict The Peirce-convention worry in the stress-test is a false alarm; the protected corner theorem and the v=3 trichotomy are real contributions, the abstract overclaims a bit, but this paper deserves serious refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.20849 v1 pith:N4R2MX7O submitted 2026-07-23 math.RT math.KTmath.RA

Marco Armenta This is my paper
classification math.RTmath.KTmath.RA MSC 16E4016E1016G20
keywords Han'sconjectureHochschildhomologyglobaldimensiontau-Hochschildextensionsyzygyquiveralgebrasprotectedcorner
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 attacks Han's conjecture, which predicts that a finite-dimensional algebra with eventually vanishing Hochschild homology must have finite global dimension. Its target is the persistence half of the conjecture (Gap A): the claim that infinite global dimension forces infinite τ-Hochschild homology. The paper proves a protected corner theorem: at a vertex whose corner algebra is nontrivial and whose external in-neighbours have no surviving return paths to it, the simple module has self-extensions in every positive degree, so the extension conjecture holds there and the algebra is of infinite+ global dimension. From this it derives a trichotomy for three strongly connected vertices: a Gap-A failure has one or two simples of infinite projective dimension, never three, and the two-infinite case is a specific 'mutual dumbbell' that glues two two-vertex algebras at a finite-dimensional hub. If correct, this pins down the minimal anatomy of every potential counterexample and shows unconditionally that Gap-A failures satisfy the full Han conclusion with Euler characteristic equal to the number of vertices.

What carries the argument

The central identity is the K_0 relation S_n + S_{n+1} = C^{(n)}C between syzygy-dimension matrices and Ext matrices of a bound quiver algebra; its trace gives b_n = tr S_n + tr S_{n+1}, the dimension of the chain spaces of the minimal bimodule resolution. This turns 'infinite τ-Hochschild homology' into a syzygy-return criterion (Theorem 3.1): Λ is of infinite+ global dimension iff some diagonal entry e_xΩ^n(S_x) is nonzero infinitely often. The protected corner theorem (9.12) forces such diagonal return by embedding the corner's minimal resolution into Λ's; the one-way law (8.1) states that a Gap-A failure must eventually send every syzygy top only into vertices from which no surviving pat

What would settle it

One concrete falsifier: build a bound quiver algebra on a strongly connected three-vertex quiver whose three simple modules all have infinite projective dimension, with HH_n = 0 for n > N and b_n = 0 for n ≥ N — i.e., realize the Gap-A template of Definition 9.5 with at least two loops per vertex and non-uniserial corners. Theorem 9.14(1) asserts no such algebra exists. The reverse test: compute the mixed-necklace homology of the mutual dumbbell; if it does not vanish in high degrees, the dumbbell is a live Han counterexample.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 9.12: if a vertex x of a bound quiver algebra Λ has a nontrivial corner algebra Γ = e_xΛe_x ≠ k, and every external in-neighbour y of x satisfies yΛx = 0 (no surviving path from x back to any vertex pointing at x), then the trivial module k over Γ embeds as a 'protected thread' in the minimal resolution of the simple S_x. The quantitative consequence is dim_k Ext^n_Λ(S_x,S_x) ≥ dim_k Ext^n_Γ(k,k) ≥ 1 for every n ≥ 1. Thus an algebra with a protected corner is automatically of infinite+ global dimension, and the extension conjecture holds there. From this, with the one-way law and the strong no-loop theorem, the paper derives Theorem 9.14: a three-vertex s

Load-bearing premise

The entire classification imports the τ-Hochschild equivalences of a companion paper: infinite+ global dimension is identified with infinite τ-Hochschild homology, and vanishing τ-Hochschild homology with eventual vanishing of the minimal-resolution chain spaces; these are cited, not reproved, so if they fail, the notion of Gap-A failure and the trichotomy shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The extension conjecture holds at every protected vertex; in particular, a Gap-A failure cannot contain a protected vertex, so any three-vertex all-infinite configuration is impossible.
  • On three strongly connected vertices, a Gap-A failure has exactly one or two infinite simples; the two-infinite case is the mutual dumbbell, a fibre product of two two-vertex algebras glued at a finite-dimensional hub.
  • Every Gap-A failure has HH_n(Λ) = 0 for all n ≫ 0 and the alternating-dimension sum of its Hochschild homology equals the number of vertices, in every characteristic.
  • The dumbbell's linking bimodules are non-projective over the nontrivial corners, placing the configuration outside the null-square projective and bounded-extension classes for which Han's conjecture is known to propagate.
  • The Cartan determinant of the dumbbell is nonzero and divides five explicit products, giving rigid numerical constraints that any realization must satisfy.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A practical prefilter for the counterexample search emerges: on any strongly connected bound quiver algebra, scan for protected vertices; if one exists, the algebra is certified infinite+ and cannot be a Gap-A failure. The exponential lower bound at a radical-square-zero corner with ℓ loops (≥ ℓ^n in every degree) makes this check numerically effective even when full resolutions are out of reach.
  • The trichotomy funnels the entire three-vertex search into the dumbbell: the paper reduces its fate to the vanishing of 'mixed-necklace' homology built from Tor of the two sides against the hub. If that homology dies in high degrees, the dumbbell is eliminated and Gap A at three vertices collapses to the single-infinite configuration.
  • The χ-law and the no-go theorem suggest that no dimension-level invariant can expose a Gap-B failure: any counterexample is numerically indistinguishable from a smooth algebra at the level of Hochschild homology dimensions. The remaining hope for Gap B lies in rank-theoretic or operator-level invariants, where differentials rather than spaces decide survival.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies Han's conjecture through the τ-Hochschild framework of Cibils–Lanzilotta–Marcos–Solotar. It proves a K0 identity relating syzygy dimension matrices to Ext and Cartan data, a syzygy-return criterion (Theorem 3.1) equivalent to infinite+ global dimension, a reduction of Gap A to strongly connected quivers, and a χ-law for Hochschild Euler characteristics under eventual vanishing. The main new results are: the protected corner theorem (Theorem 9.12), giving dim_k Ext^n_Λ(S_x,S_x) ≥ dim_k Ext^n_Γ(k,k) ≥ 1 for all n whenever Γ_x=e_xΛe_x≠k and yΛx=0 for every external in-neighbour y of x; the exclusion of the all-infinite three-vertex Gap-A failure (Theorem 9.14(1)); the classification of the two-infinite three-vertex failure as a mutual dumbbell (Theorem 9.14(2)); and a Hattori–Stallings/Cartan analysis of the dumbbell, including eventual vanishing of Hochschild homology for any Gap-A failure with Euler characteristic pinned at v (Proposition 10.2).

Significance. If the proofs are correct, this is a significant step on a hard open problem. The paper gives an explicit, checkable algebraic engine (K0 identity, syzygy-return criterion, χ-law), produces genuine unconditional instances of the Liu–Morin extension conjecture beyond monomial and special biserial algebras, and sharply constrains hypothetical three-vertex counterexamples. The author is also commendably explicit about an earlier gap in the proof of Theorem 9.7 and patches it via Lemma 9.11. The main caveat is that the entire notion of Gap-A failure and the equivalences in Theorem 3.1 are imported from the external paper [9], which is still 'to appear'; the internal chain from those hypotheses to the trichotomy is then what needs careful verification.

major comments (3)
  1. [Lemma 9.11 / Theorem 9.12] I specifically checked the objection that the protection hypothesis yΛx=0 is vacuous for an external in-neighbour y. Under the paper's convention C_{ab}=dim bΛa, the space yΛx=e_yΛe_x consists of paths x→y, while an arrow y→x lies in xΛy. Thus yΛx=0 is exactly the intended no-return condition, and the factorization in Lemma 9.11 is consistent: p'q lies in e_{y0}Λe_x=y0Λx, which is killed by the hypothesis applied to the external in-neighbour y0. The stress-test concern does not land. Nevertheless, because this convention is easy to misread and the central theorem depends on it, an explicit notation warning after Definition 2.1 would materially improve the paper.
  2. [Theorem 9.12, proof] The induction in Theorem 9.12 is the load-bearing step for the whole trichotomy, and in its present form it is not fully verifiable. In the induction step, after defining τ'_j as lifts of minimal generators of Z_{n+1}, the proof asserts that one can 'normalize the remaining generators as in the base to secure (b)' without proving that this operation preserves (i) the defining s-tuple property (c) for all elements of Ω^{n+1}, (ii) the fact that the normalized elements remain in Ω^{n+1}, and (iii) the independence of the K_{n+1} classes modulo rΩ^{n+1}. The base case does not automatically cover the general step because off-diagonal Peirce contributions are controlled by clause (b) in a way that changes after replacement. Please expand this into a complete induction, or replace it by an explicit construction of a partial Λ-resolution of S_x embedding the minimal Γ-resolution of k.
  3. [Theorem 9.14(2), proof] In the case z=u, the phrase 'Γ_x=Γ_{σ(u)}' uses an undefined symbol σ; from the context it should state 'Γ_x≠k by Theorem 9.1(4) applied at u, whose dead zone is x'. Also, after ruling out an arrow x→u, the text does not explicitly rule out an arrow x→w; without that, there is a surviving path x→w→u, which would give uΛx≠0 and contradict the conclusion Z(u)={x}. These are easy repairs, but the case analysis is currently incomplete as written.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Definition 2.1] Add a warning that yΛx=e_yΛe_x is the space of paths x→y, so an arrow y→x lies in xΛy. This would prevent the most natural misreading of the protection hypothesis.
  2. [Theorem 9.14(2)] Fix the undefined σ in 'Γ_x=Γ_{σ(u)}' and spell out the contradiction from a hypothetical arrow x→w in the z=u case.
  3. [Proposition 10.5] The notation 'Λ_w \bar{e}_w' is left undefined; it should be the image of the vertex idempotent e_w in Λ_w=Λ/J_x.
  4. [Theorem 10.6] In (1), the exact sequence should be written as 0→e_xP_{N−1}→...→e_xP_0→k→0, with the explicit remark that e_xΩ^N(S_x)=0; the current text could be misread as including a missing first term.
  5. [Definition 2.1(ii)] Clarify the orientation of the 'arrow-count matrix': C^{(1)}_{xy} counts arrows y→x, not x→y. The convention is clear from the preceding definitions but deserves an explicit sentence.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No load-bearing circularity; central claims are conditional structural theorems derived from explicit hypotheses and external results.

full rationale

No step of the claimed derivation reduces a prediction to a fitted input by the paper's own equations. Theorem 9.12 is a conditional lower-bound theorem: under the protection hypothesis it constructs generators of Omega^n(S_x) and compares Ext^n_Lambda with Ext^n_Gamma; it does not assume its conclusion. Theorem 9.14 applies Theorem 9.12 to configurations whose vanishing Peirce components are derived (Theorem 9.4), so the trichotomy is a derivation, not a report of the hypothesis. The key equivalences in Theorem 3.1 are quoted from the external tau-Hochschild framework [9] (Cibils-Lanzilotta-Marcos-Solotar, not the present author), and [30] is an external no-loop theorem. The author's own references [1],[2] appear only in Remark 5.7 and are not load-bearing. The paper itself flags an incomplete proof step in Remark 9.10 and patches it via Lemma 9.11; the Peirce-convention ambiguity around the protection hypothesis noted by the reviewer could affect checkability, but it is a correctness risk, not a circular reduction. No fitted parameters are renamed as predictions, no uniqueness claim is imported from the authors' own prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in through self-citation. Score 2 reflects the peripheral self-citations and the admitted/possible proof gap, not any circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 10 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No empirical fitting occurs in this pure mathematics paper. The only parameters are structural parameters of examples and search templates, which do not enter the derivations of the main theorems. The axioms are standard external theorems plus the domain restriction to elementary algebras and the conditional-existence setting of a hypothetical Gap-A failure. The invented entities are hypothetical shapes, not posited physical objects, and carry no independent evidence outside the paper.

free parameters (1)
  • Gap-A template structure constants (Definition 9.5) and family parameters m_i, d_i in Λ(m;d)
    These parameterize the hypothetical counterexample search space and example families; they are not fitted to data and do not enter the derivations of Theorems 9.12 and 9.14 except as illustrative constructs.
assumptions (10)
  • standard math τ-Hochschild framework of Cibils–Lanzilotta–Marcos–Solotar: Λ is infinite+ iff HH^τ_*(Λ) is infinite ([9, Thm. 5.5]); HH^τ_i=0 for i≥N iff B_i(Λ)=0 for i>N ([9, Thm. 5.3]); natural surjections HH^τ_n→HH_n ([9, Lem. 2.6]).
    Invoked in Theorem 3.1 and Proposition 10.2; not reproved here, so the whole Gap-A/Gap-B decomposition rests on these external results.
  • standard math Happel's description of the minimal projective bimodule resolution, as made explicit in [9, Thm. 3.2]: P_n ≅ Λ⊗_E Tor_n^Λ(E,E)⊗_E Λ and b_n = tr(C^{(n)}C) ([9, (4.7)]).
    Foundational for the K0 identity (Lemma 2.2) and the syzygy-return criterion (Theorem 3.1) used throughout.
  • standard math Connes' periodicity exact sequence for cyclic homology over any field, with finite-dimensional HC_n for finite-dimensional algebras ([38, 2.2.1]).
    Used in Section 5 to derive the χ-law (Theorem 5.2).
  • standard math Goodwillie's theorem: in characteristic zero, periodic cyclic homology is invariant under nilpotent extensions ([15], [38, Thm. 4.1.15]).
    Used in Theorem 5.2(2) to replace Λ by E=Λ/r for the χ-law in characteristic zero.
  • standard math Strong no loop theorem of Igusa–Liu–Paquette: a loop at a vertex forces the simple module to have infinite projective dimension ([30]).
    Used in Theorem 9.14(2) to forbid loops at the hub u when pd S_u<∞, and in Remark 7.1.
  • standard math Fossum–Griffith–Reiten bound for triangular matrix algebras: gl.dim Λ ≤ gl.dim A + gl.dim B + 1 ([14, Ch. 4]).
    Used in Lemma 4.2 for the reduction to strongly connected quivers (Theorem 4.5).
  • standard math Han–Keller theorem: HH_n(Λ)=0 for n≥1 whenever gl.dim Λ<∞ (as cited in [9, §3]).
    Used in Corollary 2.3 and Remark 5.3 for Euler-characteristic identities.
  • standard math Hattori–Stallings trace formalism with Igusa's extensions ([27,34,28,30]), used in Lemma 10.9's transfer-trace lemma.
    Relies on standard trace identities tr_HS(AB)=tr_HS(BA) and vanishing of alternating traces of null-homotopic chain maps.
  • domain assumption Setup restriction: Λ = kQ/I is elementary (bound quiver algebra) with E=Λ/r separable.
    The Peirce decompositions and vertex-indexed matrices require the elementary setting; the paper says the separable case is treated 'where it costs nothing', but the main classification theorems are proven for elementary algebras.
  • domain assumption Conditional setting of Section 9: existence of a hypothetical Gap-A failure on a strongly connected 3-vertex quiver.
    The trichotomy and dumbbell theorems are conditional structural statements about a hypothetical counterexample; the paper does not assert that such a failure exists.
invented entities (2)
  • Mutual dumbbell (two-infinite v=3 Gap-A failure shape)
    purpose: Theorem 9.14(2) classifies the two-infinite configuration as this specific arrow pattern (u⇄x, u⇄w, xΛw=wΛx=0) with a finite-projective-dimension hub u.
    The shape is uniquely determined if the configuration exists, but no construction or existence proof is given; there is no falsifiable handle outside the paper.
  • Gap-A template (Definition 9.5)
    purpose: A triple of local corner algebras with bimodules and structure constants whose realizability would be a Han counterexample and whose inconsistency would prove Gap A at v=3.
    A search object introduced by the paper; neither realized nor refuted within the paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Protected corners and a trichotomy for Han's conjecture." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/N4R2MX7O

@misc{pith2026260720849,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Protected corners and a trichotomy for Han's conjecture},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/N4R2MX7O}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.20849}
}
read the original abstract

Han's conjecture predicts that a finite-dimensional algebra with eventually vanishing Hochschild homology has finite global dimension. In the tau-Hochschild framework of Cibils, Lanzilotta, Marcos and Solotar, it splits into persistence (Gap A) and survival (Gap B), and a Gap-A failure is already a counterexample. We prove a protected corner theorem bounding Ext at a surviving vertex, settling the Liu-Morin extension conjecture beyond the monomial and special biserial cases. We then establish a trichotomy for Gap-A failures on three strongly connected vertices: the all-infinite case is impossible, and the two-infinite case is completely classified as a mutual dumbbell.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 9 linked inside Pith

  1. [9]

    Cibils, M

    C. Cibils, M. Lanzilotta, E. N. Marcos, A. Solotar,Happel’s question, Han ’s conjecture and τ-Hochschild (co)homology, to appear in Ann. K-Theory; arXiv:2509.05135

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Armenta,The Coxeter transformation as an automorphism of the Tamarkin–Tsygan calculus, arXiv:2606.15595

    M. Armenta,The Coxeter transformation as an automorphism of the Tamarkin–Tsygan calculus, arXiv:2606.15595

    arXiv

  3. [2]

    Armenta, B

    M. Armenta, B. Keller,Derived invariance of the Tamarkin–Tsygan calculus of an algebra, C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 357 (2019), 236–240

    2019

  4. [3]

    L. L. Avramov, M. Vigu´ e-Poirrier,Hochschild homology criteria for smoothness, Internat. Math. Res. Notices 1992, no. 1, 17–25

    1992

  5. [4]

    M. J. Bardzell,The alternating syzygy behavior of monomial algebras, J. Algebra 188 (1997), 69–89

    1997

  6. [5]

    P. A. Bergh, K. Erdmann,Homology and cohomology of quantum complete intersections, Algebra Number Theory 2 (2008), 501–522

    2008

  7. [6]

    P. A. Bergh, D. Madsen,Hochschild homology and global dimension, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 41 (2009), 473–482

    2009

  8. [7]

    Buchweitz, E

    R.-O. Buchweitz, E. L. Green, D. Madsen, Ø. Solberg,Finite Hochschild cohomology without finite global dimension, Math. Res. Lett. 12 (2005), 805–816

    2005

Show all 38 references
  1. [8]

    Chouhy, A

    S. Chouhy, A. Solotar,Projective resolutions of associative algebras and ambiguities, J. Algebra 432 (2015), 22–61

    2015

  2. [10]

    Cibils, M

    C. Cibils, M. J. Redondo, A. Solotar,Han ’s conjecture and Hochschild homology for null- square projective algebras, arXiv:1703.02131

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Cibils, M

    C. Cibils, M. Lanzilotta, E. N. Marcos, A. Solotar,Split bounded extension algebras and Han ’s conjecture, Pacific J. Math. 307 (2020), 63–77; arXiv:1908.11130

    2020 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Cibils, M

    C. Cibils, M. Lanzilotta, E. N. Marcos, A. Solotar,Han ’s conjecture for bounded extensions, J. Algebra 598 (2022); arXiv:2101.02597

    2022 arXiv

  5. [13]

    G. C. Cruz,A survey on Han ’s conjecture, arXiv:2301.07511

    arXiv

  6. [14]

    R. M. Fossum, P. A. Griffith, I. Reiten,Trivial Extensions of Abelian Categories, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 456, Springer, 1975

    1975

  7. [15]

    T. G. Goodwillie,Cyclic homology, derivations, and the free loopspace, Topology 24 (1985), 187–215. 29

    1985

  8. [16]

    Han,Hochschild (co)homology dimension, J

    Y. Han,Hochschild (co)homology dimension, J. London Math. Soc. 73 (2006), 657–668

    2006

  9. [17]

    Han,Hochschild homology, global dimension, and truncated oriented cycles, preprint, arXiv:1004.0748 (2010)

    Y. Han,Hochschild homology, global dimension, and truncated oriented cycles, preprint, arXiv:1004.0748 (2010)

    2010 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Han,Hirzebruch–Riemann–Roch and Lefschetz type formulas for finite dimensional al- gebras, arXiv:2008.11457

    Y. Han,Hirzebruch–Riemann–Roch and Lefschetz type formulas for finite dimensional al- gebras, arXiv:2008.11457

    2008 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Happel,Hochschild cohomology of finite-dimensional algebras, in: S´ eminaire d’Alg` ebre P

    D. Happel,Hochschild cohomology of finite-dimensional algebras, in: S´ eminaire d’Alg` ebre P. Dubreil et M.-P. Malliavin, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1404, Springer, 1989, 108–126

    1989

  12. [20]

    Happel,The trace of the Coxeter matrix and Hochschild cohomology, Linear Algebra Appl

    D. Happel,The trace of the Coxeter matrix and Hochschild cohomology, Linear Algebra Appl. 258 (1997), 169–177

    1997

  13. [21]

    P. A. Bergh, Y. Han, D. Madsen,Hochschild homology and truncated cycles, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 140 (2012), 1133–1139

    2012

  14. [22]

    Buchweitz,Maximal Cohen–Macaulay Modules and Tate Cohomology, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 262, Amer

    R.-O. Buchweitz,Maximal Cohen–Macaulay Modules and Tate Cohomology, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs 262, Amer. Math. Soc., 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    Dress, H

    A. Dress, H. Kr¨ amer,Bettireihen von Faserprodukten lokaler Ringe, Math. Ann. 215 (1975), 79–82

    1975

  16. [24]

    K. R. Fuller,The Cartan determinant and global dimension of Artinian rings, Contemp. Math. 124 (1992), 51–72

    1992

  17. [25]

    E. L. Green, Ø. Solberg, D. Zacharia,Minimal projective resolutions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 353 (2001), 2915–2939

    2001

  18. [26]

    Han,A proof of extension conjecture, arXiv:1309.0304 (2013)

    Y. Han,A proof of extension conjecture, arXiv:1309.0304 (2013)

    2013 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Hattori,Rank element of a projective module, Nagoya Math

    A. Hattori,Rank element of a projective module, Nagoya Math. J. 25 (1965), 113–120

    1965

  20. [28]

    Igusa,Notes on the no loops conjecture, J

    K. Igusa,Notes on the no loops conjecture, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 69 (1990), 161–176

    1990

  21. [29]

    Igusa,Cyclic homology and the determinant of the Cartan matrix, J

    K. Igusa,Cyclic homology and the determinant of the Cartan matrix, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 83 (1992), 101–119

    1992

  22. [30]

    Igusa, S

    K. Igusa, S. Liu, C. Paquette,A proof of the strong no loop conjecture, Adv. Math. 228 (2011), no. 5, 2731–2742

    2011

  23. [31]

    Liu, J.-P

    S. Liu, J.-P. Morin,The strong no loop conjecture for special biserial algebras, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 132 (2004), 3513–3523

    2004

  24. [32]

    Nasseh, S

    S. Nasseh, S. Sather-Wagstaff,Vanishing of Ext and Tor over fiber products, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 145 (2017), 4661–4674

    2017

  25. [33]

    Orlov,Triangulated categories of singularities and D-branes in Landau–Ginzburg models, Proc

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

    2004

  26. [34]

    Stallings,Centerless groups — an algebraic formulation of Gottlieb’s theorem, Topology 4 (1965), 129–134

    J. Stallings,Centerless groups — an algebraic formulation of Gottlieb’s theorem, Topology 4 (1965), 129–134. 30

    1965

  27. [35]

    Lenzing,Nilpotente Elemente in Ringen von endlicher globaler Dimension, Math

    H. Lenzing,Nilpotente Elemente in Ringen von endlicher globaler Dimension, Math. Z. 108 (1969), 313–324

    1969

  28. [36]

    Y. Liu, Y. Shen,A counterexample to DG version of Han ’s conjecture, arXiv:2512.12460

  29. [37]

    R. Wang, X. Xu, J. Zhang, G. Zhou,A recollement approach to Han ’s conjecture, preprint, arXiv:2409.00945

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    Loday,Cyclic Homology, 2nd ed., Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 301, Springer, 1998

    J.-L. Loday,Cyclic Homology, 2nd ed., Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften 301, Springer, 1998. 31

    1998

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.