Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Nonabelian shift operators and shifted Yangians

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Nonabelian shift operators identify the quantized Coulomb branch of pure GL_n gauge theory with a quotient of a shifted Yangian.

desk verdict Genuinely new framework and a mostly sound proof, but the key wall-crossing theorem needs a rigorous boundedness argument. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.17906 v1 pith:NC3V7PMY submitted 2024-12-23 math.AG hep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.RT

Spencer Tamagni This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGhep-thmath-phmath.MPmath.RT MSC 14N3514M1517B37
keywords nonabelianshiftoperatorsquasimapsvertexfunctionsquantizedCoulombbranchesshiftedYangiansaffineGrassmannianwall-crossinggeometricSatakeequivalence
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

Enumerative geometry counts rational curves in a variety by generating functions called vertex functions. This paper introduces nonabelian shift operators: counts of curves in bundles modified by Hecke operations, with the modification varying over an orbit in the affine Grassmannian. It proves that these operators diagonalize the vertex function of the cotangent bundle of the complete flag variety, with eigenvalues given by characters of the Langlands dual group. In the cohomological limit the same setup yields a matrix identity that identifies the quantized Coulomb branch algebra of pure $GL_n$ gauge theory, defined as equivariant convolution homology of the affine Grassmannian, with a quotient of the shifted Yangian $Y_{-n\alpha}(sl_2)$; the paper also shows the commuting Hamiltonians are those of the open Toda chain. This matters because it gives a short geometric route to a Yangian symmetry previously reached through generator-and-relation presentations, and it connects curve counting to the quantum inverse scattering method.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the nonabelian shift operator: instead of counting sections of a trivial target bundle, one counts sections of the $X$-bundle associated to a $GL_n$-bundle that varies over a minuscule $G(O)$-orbit in the affine Grassmannian, i.e. a Hecke modification. The identity that does the work is Theorem 4.1's matrix equation, in which the vertex function intertwines a product of $2\times2$ matrices $$S(x)=\begin{pmatrix} x-\varepsilon z_n\partial_{z_n} & $z_n^{{-1}}$\\ -z_n & 0\end{pmatrix}\cdots\begin{pmatrix} x-\varepsilon z_1\partial_{z_1} & $z_1^{{-1}}$\\ -z_1 & 0\end{pmatrix}$$ with the matrix of Coulomb-branch generators $Q_n(x),\hat U_n^\pm(x),\tilde Q_n(x)$ acting by difference operators in the equivariant variables. This $S(x)$ satisfies the RTT relation with the sl2 Yangian R-matrix and has Gauss decomposition $g_1(x)=x+\cdots$, $g_2(x)=x^{-1}+\cdots$, with quantum determinant 1, so it realizes the shifted Yangian $Y_{-\alpha}(sl_2)$; the wall-crossing and flop formulas of Theorems 2.1 and 2.2 provide the inductive comparison of twisted and untwisted vertex functions that makes the product identity true.

What would settle it

Check the identity (2.28) directly for $k=1$, $n=2$: if the rational function given by the difference of the two sides has a pole at $y_i = qx_\ell$ that is not cancelled, or grows at a boundary of the toric compactification, then Theorem 2.1 is false and the surjection $Y_{-n\alpha}(sl_2)\twoheadrightarrow \hat M_C$ does not follow.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is Theorem 4.2: the quantized Coulomb branch algebra $\hat M_C = H^{C^\times_\varepsilon \ltimes G(O)}_*(Gr_{GL_n})$ of pure gauge theory with gauge group $GL_n$ is a quotient of the antidominantly shifted Yangian $Y_{-n\alpha}(sl_2)$, where $\alpha=(1,-1)$ is the simple coroot. The proof runs through the cohomological vertex function $Vertex_\theta(z,a)$ of quasimaps to $GL_n/B$: Theorem 4.1 characterizes this function by a matrix identity in which a product of elementary $2\times2$ matrices $S(x)$ acts on the left and the matrix of Coulomb-branch generators $\begin{pmatrix} Q_n(x) & \hat U_n^+(x)\\ \hat U_n^-(x) & \tilde Q_n(x)\end{pmatrix}$ acts on the right. Because those generators span the Coulomb branch algebra and the same matrix $S(x)$ satisfies the RTT relations with the sl2 Yangian R-matrix, the assignment sends the generator matrix $T(x)$ of the shifted Yangian onto $S(x)$, and the matrix coefficients generate the image; the kernel is described as the kernel of the resulting differential-operator representation. The paper also establishes the K-theoretic counterpart: the vertex function of $T^*(GL_n/B)$ is an eigenfunction of nonabelian shift operators with eigenvalue a character of the Langlands dual group.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the claim, used in the proof of Theorem 2.1, that a certain difference of two counting formulas is free of unwanted poles and stays bounded at every infinity of the parameter torus, so it must be a constant and therefore zero; if that boundedness failed, the wall-crossing identity, the difference equations, and the final surjection would all collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The representation theory of the quantized Coulomb branch algebra $\hat M_C$ for pure $GL_n$ gauge theory is governed by the shifted Yangian $Y_{-n\alpha}(sl_2)$, with the kernel of the surjection equal to the kernel of the differential-operator representation.
  • The K-theoretic vertex function of $T^*(GL_n/B)$ is an eigenfunction of the nonabelian shift operators; this fixes the $q$-difference equations in the equivariant variables by characters of $\Lambda^k(\mathbb{C}^n)$ without Mellin-Barnes integral formulas.
  • The matrix coefficients of $S(x)$ provide the quantum Hamiltonians of the open Toda chain, so the paper gives a direct geometric proof of the quantum inverse scattering method for this system.
  • The same intertwiner construction is announced to hold for all shifted Yangians $Y_{-\mu}(sl_2)$ with dominant $\mu$, i.e. for A1 quivers with rank $n$ gauge node and rank $m \le 2n$ framing node.
  • The wall-crossing formulas of Section 2 yield nontrivial difference equations for products of quantum dilogarithms; these are the building blocks for the vertex-function equations for all partial flag varieties $GL_n/P$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same transfer-matrix presentation should give explicit Yangian representations for antidominantly shifted sl2 Yangians beyond the cases computed here, parameterized by the vertex-function kernel.
  • Because the eigenfunction statement is local on the base curve, one can test whether the vertex function remains a Hecke eigenfunction after adding ramification or moving the base curve, which would connect the construction to automorphic-type spectra.
  • Replacing minuscule $G(O)$-orbits with non-minuscule ones in the flop wall-crossing argument should yield difference equations for vertex functions of more general Nakajima quiver varieties, not just flag varieties.
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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'nonabelian shift operators' for quasimap counts, obtained by letting the framing bundle vary over minuscule strata of the affine Grassmannian of GL_n. It proves wall-crossing formulas for Hirzebruch genera under flops (Theorem 2.1, Theorem 2.2), derives a Hecke eigenvalue property for the K-theoretic vertex function of T*(GL_n/B) (Theorem 3.1), and, in the cohomological limit, characterizes the vertex function of GL_n/B by a matrix product of 2x2 differential operators satisfying RTT relations (Theorem 4.1). From this it concludes that the quantized Coulomb branch algebra H^{C^×_ε ⋉ G(O)}_*(Gr_{GL_n}) is a quotient of the shifted Yangian Y_{-nα}(sl2) (Theorem 4.2). The proof strategy is an induction on rank built on explicit localization formulas and wall-crossing identities.

Significance. If the results are correct, Theorem 4.2 gives a new, geometric proof of a known structural fact (the quantized Coulomb branch of pure gauge theory for GL_n as a shifted Yangian quotient) via explicitly computed difference equations, and Theorem 3.1 provides a geometric incarnation of Hecke eigenfunctions for quasimap vertex functions, strengthening the enumerative/automorphic analogy. The paper's method is honest and largely self-contained: the main theorems are proved from explicit localization formulas and an induction on rank, and the eigenvalue characters in Theorem 3.1 come from the independent representation theory of GL_n rather than being fitted to the conclusion. The main weakness is a missing asymptotic justification in the proof of Theorem 2.1, on which the subsequent chain of results depends; this gap is repairable but currently makes the self-contained proof incomplete.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 2.3.3] Proof of Theorem 2.1: The assertion that D_{k,n} = F_{k,n} - F^∨_{k,n} is 'bounded at all infinities of T' is not justified. A regular function on a torus is a Laurent polynomial, and boundedness at all infinities requires cancellation of all positive and negative monomials. The localization sums in (2.28) contain factors such as (1 - t y_j/y_i)/(1 - y_j/y_i) and (1 - t q^{-1} y_i/x_ℓ)/(1 - q^{-1} y_i/x_ℓ), which grow in limits such as y_i → ∞ or y_i → 0 with other variables fixed. No computation is given showing that the leading terms cancel in every direction. Since Theorem 2.1 feeds into Theorem 2.2, Theorem 3.1, and the recursion for Theorem 4.1, this is a load-bearing gap in the self-contained proof. The statement likely follows from the cited flop invariance of elliptic genera, and the gap is repairable, but as written the proof is incomplete.
  2. [Section 4.2.8] Proof of Theorem 4.1: The derivation of the recursion (4.42) uses several non-expanded steps: the contour integral manipulation in (4.36)–(4.37), the identity (4.39), and the corresponding exchange identity after (4.40), plus the claim that a variant of (4.35) holds with arbitrary insertions to the left. These identities are the mechanism by which Hecke modifications are moved through the vertex function and are therefore load-bearing for the matrix equation (4.27) and for Theorem 4.2. I recommend writing out these verifications or giving precise references, since a sign or ordering error at this stage would change the quotient statement.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.3.3] The phrase 'bounded at all infinities of T' should be replaced by a precise statement on a toric compactification; this will also make the constant-evaluation step clearer.
  2. [Section 3.2.7] There is a typo: 'propostion 3.3' should be 'Proposition 3.3'.
  3. [Section 4.2.4] There is a typo: 'minusucle' should be 'minuscule'.
  4. [Section 4.3.4] Proposition 4.3 states that the matrix S(x) satisfies the RTT relation, but the proof is only described as 'a short computation'; since this RTT property is foundational for the Yangian map in Theorem 4.2, the computation should be included or a precise reference supplied.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the central claims rest on independent geometric, localization, and representation-theoretic inputs, not on the target conclusions.

full rationale

I find no circular step in the derivation chain. Theorem 2.1 is a concrete rational-function identity (2.28) obtained by flop invariance/localization; although the proof asserts boundedness at all infinities without full justification, that is a correctness gap, not a reduction of the theorem to its own input. Theorem 3.1 derives the Hecke eigenvalue from an induction whose scalar recursion is matched to the independent GL_n character recursion (3.36), so the eigenvalue is not fitted or assumed. Theorem 4.1 is proved by induction using localization and the already-established wall-crossing identities, and its matrix equation is checked entry-by-entry rather than assumed. Theorem 4.2 uses Proposition 4.2, whose generation statement is cited from the external BFN work [7], together with the RTT verification in Proposition 4.3 and the intertwining statement of Theorem 4.1; the surjection does not reduce to a self-citation or to the definition of the shifted Yangian. The paper's self-references ([42], [46], [47]) concern future work, context, and announcements; they are not load-bearing for the proofs. I additionally flag, as an omitted-proof concern rather than a circularity, the assertion in Section 2.3.3 that F_{k,n} - F^\vee_{k,n} is bounded at all infinities of T; this missing analytic control would need to be supplied for the self-contained proof of Theorem 2.1, but it does not make the derivation circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities are introduced. The equivariant variables q, t, z, a are geometric inputs, not fitted constants. The nonabelian shift operators are geometrically defined operators, not new physical entities. The axioms are standard domain results plus one internal boundedness claim.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Geometric Satake equivalence Perv_{G(O)}(Gr_G) ≃ Rep(G∨)
    Invoked in Section 2.4.3 and throughout to identify orbit contributions with characters of GL_n representations; cited to [24], [39].
  • domain assumption Stable quasimaps and vertex function framework of [13], [44]
    The moduli spaces QM^◦(X), their virtual tangent bundles, and the vertex function normalizations are taken from [13], [44]; see Sections 3.1 and 3.2.
  • domain assumption Coulomb branch definition and presentation of \hat M_C via convolution in H^{C^×_ε ⋉ G(O)}_*(Gr_G)
    From [8], [7]; used in Section 4.1 as the object of study.
  • domain assumption RTT formalism and Gauss decomposition for shifted Yangians Y_{-μ}(gl2)
    Used in Section 4.3 to recognize the matrix S(x) as a representation of Y_{-nα}(sl2); cited to [19], [40].
  • ad hoc to paper Regularity and boundedness of the difference of genera in the proof of Theorem 2.1
    In Section 2.3.3, the proof concludes F_{k,n} - F^∨_{k,n} is constant because it has no poles and is bounded at all infinities; this is asserted from the localization formulas and is the main internal premise that could fail.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Nonabelian shift operators and shifted Yangians." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NC3V7PMY

@misc{pith2026241217906,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Nonabelian shift operators and shifted Yangians},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NC3V7PMY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.17906}
}
abstract

We introduce nonabelian analogs of shift operators in the enumerative theory of quasimaps. We apply them on the one hand to strengthen the emerging analogy between enumerative geometry and the geometric theory of automorphic forms, and on the other hand to obtain results about quantized Coulomb branch algebras. In particular, we find a short and direct proof that the equivariant convolution homology of the affine Grassmannian of $GL_n$ is a quotient of a shifted Yangian.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Spiralling branes, affine qq-characters and elliptic integrable systems

    hep-th 2024-12 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Quantum toroidal algebra intertwiners reproduce Ruijsenaars-Schneider and Koroteev-Shakirov Hamiltonians, Shiraishi functions, and a new proof of the noncommutative Jacobi identity for affine qq-characters.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Aganagic

    M. Aganagic. private communication. 2024

    work page 2024

  2. [2]

    Aganagic, E

    M. Aganagic, E. Frenkel, and A. Okounkov. Quantum q-Langlands Correspondence . 2018. arXiv: 1701.03146 [hep-th] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.03146

    arXiv 2018

  3. [3]

    Beilinson and V

    A. Beilinson and V. Drinfeld. Quantization of Hitchin’s integrable system and Hecke eige nsheaves. https://web.ma.utexas.edu/users/benzvi/BD/hitchin.pdf?. 1991

    work page 1991

  4. [4]

    Bezrukavnikov, M

    R. Bezrukavnikov, M. Finkelberg, and I. Mirković. Equivariant ( K-)homology of affine Grassmannian and Toda lattice . 2014. arXiv: math/0306413 [math.AG]

    arXiv 2014

  5. [5]

    Elliptic Genera of Singular Varieties

    L. Borisov and A. Libgober. Elliptic Genera of Singular Varieties . 2001. arXiv: math/0007108 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0007108

    work page Pith review arXiv 2001

  6. [6]

    Braverman

    A. Braverman. Instanton counting via affine Lie algebras I: Equivariant J-func tions of (affine) flag manifolds and Whittaker vectors . 2004. arXiv: math/0401409 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0401409

    arXiv 2004

  7. [7]

    Braverman, M

    A. Braverman, M. Finkelberg, and H. Nakajima. Coulomb branches of 3d N = 4 quiver gauge theories and slices in the affine Grassmannian (with appendices by Alex ander Braverman, Michael Finkelberg, Joel Kamnitzer, Ryosuke Kodera, Hiraku Nakajima, Ben Webste r, and Alex Weekes) . 2018. arXiv: 1604.03625 [math.RT]

    arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Braverman, M

    A. Braverman, M. Finkelberg, and H. Nakajima. Towards a mathematical definition of Coulomb branches of 3-dimensional N = 4 gauge theories, II . 2019. arXiv: 1601.03586 [math.RT]

    arXiv 2019

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    Braverman and D

    A. Braverman and D. Gaitsgory. Geometric Eisenstein series . 2000. arXiv: math/9912097 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9912097

    2000 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Defects and q uantum Seiberg-Witten geometry

    M. Bullimore, H.-C. Kim, and P. Koroteev. “Defects and q uantum Seiberg-Witten geometry”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics 2015.5 (May 2015). issn: 1029-8479. doi: 10.1007/jhep05(2015)095. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2015)095

    2015 doi

  3. [11]

    Boundaries, mirror symmetry, and s ymplectic duality in 3d N = 4 gauge the- ory

    M. Bullimore et al. “Boundaries, mirror symmetry, and s ymplectic duality in 3d N = 4 gauge the- ory”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics 2016.10 (Oct. 2016). doi: 10.1007/jhep10(2016)108. url: https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fjhep10%282016%29108

    2016 doi

  4. [12]

    tt * geometry in 3 an d 4 dimensions

    S. Cecotti, D. Gaiotto, and C. Vafa. “tt * geometry in 3 an d 4 dimensions”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics 2014.5 (May 2014). issn: 1029-8479. doi: 10.1007/jhep05(2014)055. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP0

    2014 doi

  5. [13]

    Ciocan-Fontanine, B

    I. Ciocan-Fontanine, B. Kim, and D. Maulik. Stable quasimaps to GIT quotients . 2011. arXiv: 1106.3724 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1106.3724

    2011 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Costello, D

    K. Costello, D. Gaiotto, and J. Yagi. Q-operators are ’t Hooft lines. 2021. arXiv: 2103.01835 [hep-th] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.01835

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Unification of integrability i n supersymmetric gauge theories

    K. Costello and J. Yagi. “Unification of integrability i n supersymmetric gauge theories”. In: Ad- vances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 24.8 (2020), pp. 1931–2041. issn: 1095-0753. doi: 10.4310/atmp.2020.v24.n8.a1. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.4310/ATMP.2020.v24.n8.a1

    2020 doi

  8. [16]

    Quantization of Lie Groups and Lie Alge- bras

    L. D. Faddeev, N. Yu. Reshetikhin, and L. A. Takhtajan. “ Quantization of Lie Groups and Lie Alge- bras”. In: Alg. Anal. 1.1 (1989), pp. 178–206

    1989

  9. [17]

    A. E. V. Ferrari and D. Zhang. Difference Equations: from Berry Connections to the Coulomb Br anch

  10. [18]

    Finkelberg et al

    M. Finkelberg et al. Comultiplication for shifted Yangians and quantum open Tod a lattice. 2017. arXiv: 1608.03331 [math.RT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.03331

    2017 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Lax matrices from antidominantly shifted Yangians and quantum affine algebras: A-type

    R. Frassek, V. Pestun, and A. Tsymbaliuk. “Lax matrices from antidominantly shifted Yangians and quantum affine algebras: A-type”. In: Advances in Mathematics 401 (June 2022), p. 108283. issn: 0001-

    2022

  12. [20]

    On three dimensional quive r gauge theories and integrability

    D. Gaiotto and P. Koroteev. “On three dimensional quive r gauge theories and integrability”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics 2013.5 (May 2013). issn: 1029-8479. doi: 10.1007/jhep05(2013)126. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP05(2013)126

    2013 doi

  13. [21]

    Gammage and J

    B. Gammage and J. Hilburn. Hypertoric 2-categories O and symplectic duality. 2023. arXiv: 2310.06172 [math.RT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.06172

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Gammage, J

    B. Gammage, J. Hilburn, and A. Mazel-Gee. Perverse schobers and 3d mirror symmetry . 2023. arXiv: 2202.06833 [math.RT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2202.06833

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Gerasimov, S

    A. Gerasimov, S. Kharchev, and D. Lebedev. Representation Theory and the Quantum Inverse Scatter- ing Method: The Open Toda Chain and the Hyperbolic Sutherland M odel. 2003. arXiv: math/0204206 [math.QA] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0204206

    2003 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ginzburg

    V. Ginzburg. Perverse sheaves on a Loop group and Langlands’ duality . 2000. arXiv: alg-geom/9511007 [alg-geom] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9511007

    2000 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Quantum cohomology of flag manif olds and Toda lattices

    A. Givental and B. Kim. “Quantum cohomology of flag manif olds and Toda lattices”. In: Communica- tions in Mathematical Physics 168.3 (Apr. 1995), pp. 609–641. issn: 1432-0916. doi: 10.1007/bf02101846. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02101846

    1995 doi

  18. [26]

    Gonzalez, C

    E. Gonzalez, C. Y. Mak, and D. Pomerleano. Coulomb branch algebras via symplectic cohomology

  19. [27]

    An integral structure in quantum cohomolo gy and mirror symmetry for toric orbifolds

    H. Iritani. “An integral structure in quantum cohomolo gy and mirror symmetry for toric orbifolds”. In: Advances in Mathematics 222.3 (Oct. 2009), pp. 1016–1079. issn: 0001-8708. doi: 10.1016/j.aim.2009.05.016. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2009.05.016

    2009 doi

  20. [28]

    Kapustin

    A. Kapustin. Holomorphic reduction of N=2 gauge theories, Wilson-’t Hooft operators, and S-duality

  21. [29]

    Kapustin and E

    A. Kapustin and E. Witten. Electric-Magnetic Duality And The Geometric Langlands Progr am. 2007. arXiv: hep-th/0604151 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Kazhdan and A

    D. Kazhdan and A. Okounkov. L-function genera and applications. 2024. arXiv: 2311.17747 [math.NT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.17747

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kazhdan and A

    D. Kazhdan and A. Okounkov. On the unramified Eisenstein spectrum . 2022. arXiv: 2203.03486 [math.NT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.03486

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    qKZ/tRS duality via quan tum K-theoretic counts

    P. Koroteev and A. M. Zeitlin. “qKZ/tRS duality via quan tum K-theoretic counts”. In: Mathematical Research Letters 28.2 (2021), pp. 435–470. issn: 1945-001X. doi: 10.4310/mrl.2021.v28.n2.a5. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.4310/MRL.2021.v28.n2.a5

    2021 doi

  25. [33]

    Quantum K-theory of quiver varietie s and many-body systems

    P. Koroteev et al. “Quantum K-theory of quiver varietie s and many-body systems”. In: Selecta Mathe- matica 27.5 (Aug. 2021). issn: 1420-9020. doi: 10.1007/s00029-021-00698-3 . url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s000

    2021 doi

  26. [34]

    Krylov and I

    V. Krylov and I. Perunov. Almost dominant generalized slices and convolution diagra ms over them

  27. [35]

    Faisceaux automorphes li/acute.ts1es aux s/acute.ts1eries d’Eisenstein

    G. Laumon. “Faisceaux automorphes li/acute.ts1es aux s/acute.ts1eries d’Eisenstein”. In: Automorphic forms, Shimura varieties, and L-functions . 1990

    1990

  28. [36]

    Quantum spin systems and supers ymmetric gauge theories. Part I

    N. Lee and N. Nekrasov. “Quantum spin systems and supers ymmetric gauge theories. Part I”. In: Journal of High Energy Physics 2021.3 (Mar. 2021). issn: 1029-8479. doi: 10.1007/jhep03(2021)093. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/JHEP03(2021)093

    2021 doi

  29. [37]

    H. Liu. Invariance of elliptic genus under wall-crossing . 2024. arXiv: 2405.12587 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.12587

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Maulik and A

    D. Maulik and A. Okounkov. Quantum Groups and Quantum Cohomology. 2018. arXiv: 1211.1287 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1211.1287

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Mirkovic and K

    I. Mirkovic and K. Vilonen. Geometric Langlands duality and representations of algebra ic groups over commutative rings. 2018. arXiv: math/0401222 [math.RT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0401222

    2018 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Molev, M

    A. Molev, M. Nazarov, and G. Olshanskii. Yangians and Classical Lie Algebras. 1994. arXiv: hep-th/9409025 [hep-th] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9409025

    1994 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Integratin g over Higgs Branches

    G. Moore, N. Nekrasov, and S. Shatashvili. “Integratin g over Higgs Branches”. In: Communications in Mathematical Physics 209.1 (Jan. 2000), pp. 97–121. issn: 0010-3616. doi: 10.1007/pl00005525. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/PL00005525

    doi

  34. [42]

    Nair and S

    S. Nair and S. Tamagni. In preparation

  35. [43]

    Nakajima

    H. Nakajima. Handsaw quiver varieties and finite W-algebras . 2011. arXiv: 1107.5073 [math.QA] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1107.5073

    2011 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Okounkov

    A. Okounkov. Lectures on K-theoretic computations in enumerative geometry. 2017. arXiv: 1512.07363 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.07363

    2017 arXiv

  37. [45]

    E. K. Sklyanin. Baecklund transformations and Baxter’s Q-operator. 2000. arXiv: nlin/0009009 [nlin.SI] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/nlin/0009009

    2000 arXiv

  38. [46]

    S. Tamagni. Coulomb branches in 3d N = 4 revisited. 2024

    2024

  39. [47]

    S. Tamagni. Quasimaps with monopoles and nonabelian shift operators . https://youtu.be/HdM4TBvTv44?si=8yqCRUctXk 2024

    2024

  40. [48]

    C. Teleman. Gauge theory and mirror symmetry . 2014. arXiv: 1404.6305 [math-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  41. [49]

    C-L. Wang. K-equivalence in Birational Geometry. 2002. arXiv: math/0204160 [math.AG] . url: https://arxiv.org/ab 44

    2002 arXiv

  42. [2006]

    url: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0612119

    arXiv: hep-th/0612119 [hep-th] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0612119

    arXiv

  43. [2021]

    url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08277

    arXiv: 1903.08277 [math.RT] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1903.08277. 43

    1903 arXiv

  44. [2023]

    url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.04387

    arXiv: 2305.04387 [math.SG] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.04387

  45. [2024]

    url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00173

    arXiv: 2409.00173 [hep-th] . url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.00173. 42

    arXiv

  46. [8708]

    url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2022.108283

    doi: 10.1016/j.aim.2022.108283. url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2022.108283

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.