Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 55 references

Real Lagrangians in Calabi-Yau Threefolds

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves the unknown connecting homomorphism in the Castaño-Bernard–Matessi sequence is the mirror squaring map, making real Lagrangian Betti numbers computable from the mirror's intersection form.

desk verdict The main theorem is the right answer to a real open problem, but the proof has a load-bearing gap in the Leray-cover assumption. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06685 v2 pith:OEM5UH5K submitted 2019-08-19 math.AG math.SG

Hülya Argüz , Thomas Prince This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.SG MSC 14J3214J3353D1214P2555N30
keywords realLagrangiansCalabi-YauthreefoldsSYZmirrorsymmetrytorusfibrationsconnectinghomomorphismsquaringmapmod2cohomologyquinticthreefold
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 studies real Lagrangian submanifolds $L_R$ that arise as fixed loci of the canonical anti-symplectic involution on torus-fibred Calabi–Yau threefolds. It resolves the open problem of identifying the connecting homomorphism $\beta$ in the Castaño-Bernard–Matessi long exact sequence: under the natural dualities between a fibration and its mirror, $\beta$ is the squaring map $D\mapsto D^2$ on cohomology of the mirror. Because $\ker(Sq)$ is read off from the triple intersection form, this turns the rank computation for $H^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ into linear algebra. The paper works out the quintic threefold, giving $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=29$, and its mirror, giving $h^1=101$.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Castaño-Bernard–Matessi sheaf sequence $0\to R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}_2\oplus\mathbb{Z}_2^2\to\pi_*\mathbb{Z}_2\to R^2f_*\mathbb{Z}_2\to 0$, whose long exact sequence (4.4) relates cohomology of the real Lagrangian $L_R$ to cohomology of the fibration. The proof identifies $\beta$ by a Čech snake-lemma computation (Lemma 4.5) on a Leray cover whose triple intersections avoid the discriminant locus, so that $R^2f_*\mathbb{Z}_2$ is constant there; the resulting cocycle is the annihilator of the span of three classes, which is exactly the product $e_1e_2$ in the exterior algebra of $H^*(T^3,\mathbb{Z}_2)$. This is matched with the squaring map $D\mapsto D^2$ in the mirror using the duality isomorphisms $\mu_1,\mu_2$ coming from $\mathbb{Z}_2$-simplicity of the fibrations.

What would settle it

Compute $\beta$ directly for a $\mathbb{Z}$-simple Calabi–Yau compactification by an independent method (for example, by triangulating the base and evaluating the Čech cocycle of Lemma 4.5) and compare it with the squaring map on the mirror. A simpler check: run the same rank-of-$Sq$ calculation on a second maximal projective triangulation of the quintic base; Theorem A.5 predicts the same value $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=29$, so a triangulation giving a different value would refute the invariance claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4.7: in the long exact sequence (4.4) associated to the short exact sequence $0\to R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}_2\oplus\mathbb{Z}_2^2\to\pi_*\mathbb{Z}_2\to R^2f_*\mathbb{Z}_2\to 0$, the connecting homomorphism $\beta:H^1(B,R^2f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)\to H^2(B,R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)$ coincides, via the dualities of Lemma 4.3, with the mirror squaring map $Sq:H^1(B,R^1\check f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)\to H^2(B,R^2\check f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)$, $D\mapsto D^2$. When $H^1(\check X,\mathbb{Z}_2)=0$, $Sq$ is the ordinary cup product, and Corollary 4.9 gives $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=h^1(B,R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)+\dim\ker(Sq)$; under extra torsion hypotheses this becomes $h^1=h^1(B,R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}_2)+\delta$, where $\delta=1$ exactly when the cube $D^3$ of a generator of $H^2(\check X,\mathbb{Z})$ is divisible by $2$. Explicitly, the quintic threefold gives $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=29$ and the mirror gives $h^1(\check L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=101$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole proof rests on the assumption that the base manifold can be covered by open sets whose triple overlaps avoid the singular fibres, so that the connecting map can be computed on a fixed torus; if no such cover exists, the identification with the squaring map is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The mod 2 first Betti number of a real Lagrangian is computable from the mirror's triple intersection form via $\dim\ker(Sq)$, without constructing the Lagrangian explicitly.
  • For the quintic threefold the formula yields $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=h^2(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=29$; for the mirror it yields $h^1(\check L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=h^2(\check L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)=101$.
  • Flipping the triangulation of the base induces a Dehn surgery on the real Lagrangian in the mirror, with coefficient $2$, and leaves $\dim H^1(\check L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ invariant.
  • The method applies to any $\mathbb{Z}$-simple Calabi–Yau compactification, including Batyrev–Borisov mirror pairs, not just the quintic.
  • The open problem posed in the Castaño-Bernard–Matessi paper on computing $\beta$ is settled in full generality.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The formula suggests that for any Calabi–Yau complete intersection whose mirror has known intersection form, $h^1(L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ can be obtained by the same linear-algebra recipe, so the paper's documented computer code is directly reusable.
  • Because flips preserve $h^1(\check L_R,\mathbb{Z}_2)$ while changing the ambient mirror by birational transformations, the real Lagrangian's first Betti number may be an invariant of the chosen large-complex-structure-limit chamber rather than of a single mirror model.
  • The paper's expectation that its numbers match known bounds in toric examples could be tested directly on a three-dimensional toric Calabi–Yau hypersurface where the real locus can also be computed independently.
  • Invariance under Dehn surgery with coefficient $2$ suggests a mod-2-stable phenomenon: replacing a solid-torus piece by Dehn surgery changes the topology of the real Lagrangian in a controlled way, so coarse invariants like the parity of $h^1$ may survive conifold transitions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 studies the mod 2 cohomology of the real Lagrangian fixed locus L_R of the canonical anti-symplectic involution on three-dimensional torus fibrations over integral affine manifolds with simple singularities, in the Gross and Castaño-Bernard–Matessi setting. It recalls the short exact sequence relating π_*Z2 to R^1f_*Z2 and R^2f_*Z2, and its main theorem (Theorem 4.7) identifies the connecting homomorphism β with the squaring map D↦D^2 on the cohomology of the mirror fibration. From this it derives formulas for h^1(L_R,Z2), computes h^1=29 for the quintic and h^1=101 for the mirror quintic, and proves invariance of h^1 under flips via a Dehn-surgery argument.

Significance. The result resolves an explicit open question raised in [15] and gives a concrete, falsifiable computational tool: the Betti numbers 29 and 101 are numerical predictions in a well-studied example. The proof is largely self-contained and elementary, using explicit Čech cocycles, the snake lemma, and exterior algebra on H^*(T^3,Z2), with the numerical computation supported by MAGMA code in [44]. If the cover-theoretic gap identified below is repaired, the paper would be a valuable contribution to the symplectic topology of real Lagrangians and to mirror symmetry computations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4, before Lemma 4.5] The proof fixes an open cover U of B that is simultaneously a Leray cover for the sheaves in (4.6), has every nonempty intersection contractible, and has no triple intersection meeting Δ. The existence of such a cover is asserted without proof, and the natural local model gives a concrete obstruction: if v is a trivalent vertex of Δ and U is a sufficiently small contractible neighbourhood of v, then U\Δ is homotopy equivalent to S^2 with three points removed, so π1(U\Δ)≅F_2. By Z2-simplicity, R^2f_*Z2|_U is the pushforward j_*L of the local system L on U\Δ carrying the transvection monodromies of Appendix A. The exact sequence for j:U\Δ→U then gives H^1(U,j_*L)≅coker(H^0(U\Δ,L)→H^1(U\Δ,L)); for the two independent transvections, H^1(U\Δ,L) has dimension 4 while H^0(U\Δ,L) is the common invariant line, so this cokernel is nonzero. Thus the standard contractible neighbourhood of a vertex is not acyclic for R^2f_*Z2. Since the snake-lemma computation in Lemma 4.5 and the identification Γ(U_{i,j,k},R^2f_*Z2)≅V in (4.9) depend crucially on the Leray and triple-intersection conditions, Theorem 4.7 is not justified as written. The authors need either to prove a cover lemma for the specific affine structures of [26] or to replace the Leray-cover argument with a different computation (for example, a hypercover or a local-cohomology calculation around Δ) that does not require vertex neighbourhoods to be acyclic.
  2. [Lemma 4.5, proof] Even if a Leray cover avoiding Δ on triple intersections existed, the proof of Lemma 4.5 silently passes between the sheaf F on B and its sections over U_{i,j,k} using the identification Γ(U_{i,j,k},F)≅Z_V^2/⟨1_{0},1_V⟩. This identification uses both the contractibility of U_{i,j,k} and the fact that U_{i,j,k} avoids Δ, but the same hypotheses are also used to ensure that the Čech complex computes the derived cohomology of F. The paper does not discuss what happens when an open set or a pair intersection meets Δ, even though such intersections are unavoidable for a cover of B. A sentence explaining why the higher Čech cohomology of the chosen cover still computes the relevant Ext groups, or a precise reference, would be needed.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Lemma 4.5, statement] The cocycle ξ is defined for all i,j,k∈I, but Čech coboundary conventions usually apply to ordered distinct tuples; please clarify the indexing convention and the behavior of repeated indices.
  2. [Example 4.10] The assertion that H^3 of the mirror quintic contains no 2-torsion is used to apply Corollary 4.9, but no reference or computation is provided for this fact; please add a citation or a brief justification.
  3. [Lemma 3.2, proof] The step from 'the origin is fixed under every monodromy action' to the conclusion that L_R is a 23-to-1 covering branched along Δ is very terse; a sentence explaining how the monodromy orbits in Figure 3.2 give the branching would improve readability.
  4. [References] Reference [1] is listed as 'In preperation'; this is a typo for 'In preparation'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the connecting homomorphism is identified with the squaring map by an explicit snake-lemma computation, not by construction; the paper's self-citations are contextual.

full rationale

The central claim (Theorem 4.7 / Theorem 1.1) is not circular. The paper begins with the Castaño-Bernard–Matessi exact sequence (4.2), stated as an input from [15], and then computes the connecting homomorphism beta directly in Lemma 4.5 via the snake lemma on the Čech complexes of the sheaves in (4.6). The result is an explicit cocycle xi_{i,j,k}: it is the unique generator of the annihilator of the span of three pairwise distinct H^2(T^3,Z2) classes, and zero otherwise. The squaring map is then derived on the mirror side: in Theorem 4.7 the Čech cup product of a cocycle ~D is evaluated explicitly, yielding e1 e2 + e2(e1+e2) + e1(e1+e2) = e1 e2 in the exterior algebra of H^*(T^3,Z2), which is exactly the annihilator cocycle of Lemma 4.5. Thus Sq is matched to beta by an equation-by-equation local computation, not by defining beta to be Sq. The dualities of Lemma 4.3 are imported from Gross [25], an external prior result, and are used only to translate between f and the mirror fibration; they do not already contain the equality beta = Sq. The only self-citations are to Argüz–Siebert [2], used in Remark 3.3 and Appendix B for the Kato–Nakayama description and gluing-data discussion; this material is not needed in the proof of Theorem 4.7 and therefore is not load-bearing. The numerical examples are computed from the intersection form (quintic h^1 = 29 and mirror h^1 = 101), with an independent MAGMA calculation in Example 4.11, so no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The unproved Leray-cover hypothesis in Section 4 (no triple intersection meeting Delta) is a possible correctness gap: if such a cover does not exist, the proof of Lemma 4.5 may fail. But that would make the proof incomplete, not circular, because the conclusion beta = Sq is not an input to the construction of the cover. Overall, the derivation is self-contained given the cited exact sequence and dualities, so the circularity score is minimal.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters and no invented entities. The central computation rests on the established Gross fibration machinery and the Castaño-Bernard-Matessi exact sequence, which are imported as background. The proof itself is a direct sheaf computation.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Gross's construction yields Z2-simple topological Calabi-Yau compactifications f: X to B and dual f-breve: X-breve to B over integral affine 3-manifolds with simple singularities, with B a Z2-homology sphere.
    The paper restricts throughout to this class (Sections 2 and 3); the sheaf identifications in Lemma 4.3 and the exact sequence (4.2) depend on Z2-simplicity.
  • domain assumption The canonical anti-holomorphic and anti-symplectic involution iota on X has fixed locus L_R that is a 2^3-to-1 branched cover of B ramified over Delta, with a global section given by the monodromy-invariant point u0.
    Lemma 3.2 and Remark 3.3; the global origin section identifies the stalk pi^{-1}(p) with the group H^2(T^3,Z2) and is needed for the splitting in Lemma 4.4.
  • standard math The exact sequence 0 to G^vee plus C to G' to G to 0 on B0 (Proposition 4.2) pushes forward to the exact sequence (4.2) using Z2-simplicity; the constant factors split off (Lemma 4.4).
    The proof is given, but it relies on the identification of set-theoretic functions on Z2^3 and on Z2-simplicity. Included as an axiom because it is the starting point of the computation.
  • standard math The Leray spectral sequence for pi: L_R to B degenerates to H^i(B,pi_* Z2) isomorphic to H^i(L_R,Z2) since R^i pi_* Z2 = 0 for i>0.
    Used in (4.5) to convert sheaf cohomology to cohomology of L_R.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Real Lagrangians in Calabi-Yau Threefolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/OEM5UH5K

@misc{pith2026190806685,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Real Lagrangians in Calabi-Yau Threefolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/OEM5UH5K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06685}
}
abstract

We compute the mod $2$ cohomology groups of real Lagrangians in Calabi-Yau threefolds using well-behaved torus fibrations constructed by Gross. To do this we study a long exact sequence introduced by Casta\~{n}o-Bernard and Matessi, which relates the cohomology of the Lagrangians to the cohomology of the Calabi-Yau. We show that the connecting homomorphism in this sequence is given by the map squaring divisor classes in the mirror Calabi-Yau.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.06685 by the authors.

Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Cross sections of the real Lagrangian LR in the quintic threefold over a part of ∆. inverse transpose of the linear part Tγ of the standard monodromy representation around a loop γ in B0, see [30, Definition 1.4]. The points in π −1 (p) exchanged under the monodromy action are illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. The action of monodromy around a single branch, and the branches adjacent to a positive and negative vertex of ∆, respectively. Lemma 3.2. Let X → B be a T 3 fibration as constructed as in [17, 26]. The fixed point locus LR ⊂ X of the anti-symplectic involution ι on X, is a 2 3 -to-1 covering of B branched along the discriminant locus ∆ ⊂ B. Moreover, at least one connected component of LR maps homeomorphically onto… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [15]

    Casta˜ no Bernard and D

    R. Casta˜ no Bernard and D. Matessi. The fixed point set of anti-symplectic involutions of Lagrangian fibrations. Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Politec. Torino , 68(3):235–250, 2010

    work page 2010

  2. [44]

    T. Prince. Project’s github page. https://github.com/T-Prince/Real-Lagrangian/blob/master/triple intersection.m

    work page

  3. [26]

    Topological mirror symmetry

    Mark Gross. Topological mirror symmetry. Invent. Math., 144(1):75–137, 2001

    2001

  4. [1]

    Arg¨ uz and T

    H. Arg¨ uz and T. Prince. Tropical cycles for real Lagrangians and Hodge numbers. In preperation

    work page

  5. [2]

    Arg¨ uz and B

    H. Arg¨ uz and B. Siebert. On the real locus in the Kato–Nakayama space of logarithmic spaces with a view towards toric degenerations. arXiv:1610.07195v2 [math.AG] , 2016. REAL LAGRANGIAN 29

    arXiv 2016

  6. [3]

    Aspinwall, Tom Bridgeland, Alastair Craw, Michael R

    Paul S. Aspinwall, Tom Bridgeland, Alastair Craw, Michael R. Douglas, Anton Kapustin, Gregory W. Moore, Mark Gross, Graeme Segal, Bal´ azs Szendr¨ oi, and P. M. H. Wilson.Dirichlet branes and mirror symmetry, volume 4 of Clay Mathematics Monographs. AMS, Providence, RI, 2009

    2009

  7. [4]

    Equivariant cohomology and localization, lecture notes, 1965

    MF Atiyah and G Segal. Equivariant cohomology and localization, lecture notes, 1965

    work page 1965

  8. [5]

    Auslander and L

    L. Auslander and L. Markus. Holonomy of flat affinely connected manifolds. Ann. of Math. (2) , 62:139–151, 1955

    work page 1955

Show all 55 references
  1. [6]

    The structure of complete locally affine manifolds

    Louis Auslander. The structure of complete locally affine manifolds. Topology, 3(suppl. 1):131–139, 1964

    1964

  2. [7]

    Victor V. Batyrev. Dual polyhedra and mirror symmetry for Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces in toric vari- eties. J. Algebraic Geom., 3(3):493–535, 1994

    1994

  3. [8]

    Batyrev and Lev A

    Victor V. Batyrev and Lev A. Borisov. Mirror duality and string-theoretic Hodge numbers. Invent. Math., 126(1):183–203, 1996

    1996

  4. [9]

    Batyrev and Lev A

    Victor V. Batyrev and Lev A. Borisov. On Calabi-Yau complete intersections in toric varieties. In Higher-dimensional complex varieties (Trento, 1994) , pages 39–65. de Gruyter, Berlin, 1996

    1994

  5. [10]

    F. Bihan. Asymptotic behaviour of Betti numbers of real algebraic surfaces. Comment. Math. Helv. , 78(2):227–244, 2003

    2003

  6. [11]

    The mod 2 cohomology of fixed point sets of anti-symplectic involutions

    Daniel Biss, Victor W Guillemin, and Tara S Holm. The mod 2 cohomology of fixed point sets of anti-symplectic involutions. Advances in mathematics, 185(2):370–399, 2004

    2004

  7. [12]

    Seminar on Transformation Groups.(AM-46), volume 46

    Armand Borel. Seminar on Transformation Groups.(AM-46), volume 46. Princeton University Press, 2016

    2016

  8. [13]

    The Magma algebra system

    Wieb Bosma, John Cannon, and Catherine Playoust. The Magma algebra system. I. The user lan- guage. J. Symbolic Comput., 24(3-4):235–265, 1997. Computational algebra and number theory (Lon- don, 1993)

    1997

  9. [14]

    Glen E. Bredon. Sheaf Theory. Springer-Verlag, 1997

    1997

  10. [16]

    Lagrangian 3-torus fibrations

    Ricardo Casta˜ no Bernard and Diego Matessi. Lagrangian 3-torus fibrations. J. Differential Geom. , 81(3):483–573, 2009

    2009

  11. [17]

    Conifold transitions via affine geometry and mirror symmetry

    Ricardo Casta˜ no Bernard and Diego Matessi. Conifold transitions via affine geometry and mirror symmetry. Geom. Topol., 18(3):1769–1863, 2014

    2014

  12. [18]

    Ricardo Casta˜ no Bernard, Diego Matessi, and Jake P. Solomon. Symmetries of Lagrangian fibrations. Adv. Math., 225(3):1341–1386, 2010

    2010

  13. [19]

    Global aspects of classical integrable systems , volume 94

    Richard H Cushman and Larry M Bates. Global aspects of classical integrable systems , volume 94. Springer, 1997

    1997

  14. [20]

    J. J. Duistermaat. On global action-angle coordinates. Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 33(6):687–706, 1980

    1980

  15. [21]

    Antisymplectic involution and Floer cohomology

    Kenji Fukaya, Yong-Geun Oh, Hiroshi Ohta, and Kaoru Ono. Antisymplectic involution and Floer cohomology. Geom. Topol., 21(1):1–106, 2017

    2017

  16. [22]

    Open Gromov-Witten disk invariants in the presence of an anti-symplectic involu- tion

    Penka Georgieva. Open Gromov-Witten disk invariants in the presence of an anti-symplectic involu- tion. Adv. Math., 301:116–160, 2016

    2016

  17. [23]

    B. R. Greene and M. R. Plesser. Duality in Calabi-Yau moduli space. Nuclear Phys. B, 338(1):15–37, 1990

    1990

  18. [24]

    Gross, D

    M. Gross, D. Huybrechts, and D. Joyce. Calabi-Yau manifolds and related geometries . Universitext. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003. Lectures from the Summer School held in Nordfjordeid, June 2001. 30 H ¨ULYA ARG¨UZ AND THOMAS PRINCE

    2003

  19. [25]

    Special Lagrangian fibrations

    Mark Gross. Special Lagrangian fibrations. I. Topology [ MR1672120 (2000e:14066)]. In Winter School on Mirror Symmetry, Vector Bundles and Lagrangian Submanifolds (Cambridge, MA, 1999) , vol- ume 23 of AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math. , pages 65–93. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2001

    1999

  20. [27]

    Toric degenerations and Batyrev-Borisov duality

    Mark Gross. Toric degenerations and Batyrev-Borisov duality. Math. Ann., 333(3):645–688, 2005

    2005

  21. [28]

    Theta functions on varieties with effective anti- canonical class

    Mark Gross, Paul Hacking, and Bernd Siebert. Theta functions on varieties with effective anti- canonical class

  22. [29]

    Affine manifolds, log structures, and mirror symmetry

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert. Affine manifolds, log structures, and mirror symmetry. Turkish J. Math., 27(1):33–60, 2003

    2003

  23. [30]

    Mirror symmetry via logarithmic degeneration data

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert. Mirror symmetry via logarithmic degeneration data. I. J. Differential Geom., 72(2):169–338, 2006

    2006

  24. [31]

    From real affine geometry to complex geometry

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert. From real affine geometry to complex geometry. Ann. of Math. (2) , 174(3):1301–1428, 2011

    2011

  25. [32]

    An invitation to toric degenerations

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert. An invitation to toric degenerations. In Surveys in differential geome- try. Volume XVI. Geometry of special holonomy and related topics , volume 16 of Surv. Differ. Geom., pages 43–78. Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2011

    2011

  26. [33]

    Integral affine structures on spheres: complete intersections

    Christian Haase and Ilia Zharkov. Integral affine structures on spheres: complete intersections. Int. Math. Res. Not. , (51):3153–3167, 2005

    2005

  27. [34]

    Hodge spaces of real toric varieties

    Valerie Hower. Hodge spaces of real toric varieties. Collect. Math., 59(2):215–237, 2008

    2008

  28. [35]

    Cohomology theory of topological transformation groups , volume 85

    Wu Yi Hsiang. Cohomology theory of topological transformation groups , volume 85. Springer Science & Business Media, 2012

    2012

  29. [36]

    A. V. I. M Gelfand, A.V Zelevinski and M.M Kapranov. Equations of hypergeometric type and Newton polyhedra. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR , 300(3):529–534, 1988

    1988

  30. [37]

    Topology of real algebraic T -surfaces

    Ilia Itenberg. Topology of real algebraic T -surfaces. volume 10, pages 131–152. 1997. Revista Matem´ atica de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    1997

  31. [38]

    Tropical homology

    Ilia Itenberg, Ludmil Katzarkov, Grigory Mikhalkin, and Ilia Zharkov. Tropical homology. Mathema- tische Annalen, 374(1-2):963–1006, 2019

    2019

  32. [39]

    Asymptotically maximal real algebraic hypersurfaces of projective space

    Ilia Itenberg and Oleg Viro. Asymptotically maximal real algebraic hypersurfaces of projective space. In Proceedings of G¨ okova Geometry/Topology conference, pages 91–105. Citeseer, 2006

    2006

  33. [40]

    Logarithmic structures of Fontaine-Illusie

    Kazuya Kato. Logarithmic structures of Fontaine-Illusie. In Algebraic analysis, geometry, and number theory (Baltimore, MD, 1988) , pages 191–224. Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, Baltimore, MD, 1989

    1988

  34. [41]

    Log Betti cohomology, log ´ etale cohomology, and log de Rham cohomology of log schemes over C

    Kazuya Kato and Chikara Nakayama. Log Betti cohomology, log ´ etale cohomology, and log de Rham cohomology of log schemes over C. Kodai Math. J. , 22(2):161–186, 1999

    1999

  35. [42]

    Lectures on logarithmic algebraic geometry , volume 178

    Arthur Ogus. Lectures on logarithmic algebraic geometry , volume 178. Cambridge University Press, 2018

    2018

  36. [43]

    Pandharipande, J

    R. Pandharipande, J. Solomon, and J. Walcher. Disk enumeration on the quintic 3-fold. J. Amer. Math. Soc., 21(4):1169–1209, 2008

    2008

  37. [45]

    The spectrum of an equivariant cohomology ring: I

    Daniel Quillen. The spectrum of an equivariant cohomology ring: I. Annals of Mathematics , pages 549–572, 1971

    1971

  38. [46]

    Bounding the Betti numbers of real hypersurfaces near the tropical limit

    Arthur Renaudineau and Kristin Shaw. Bounding the Betti numbers of real hypersurfaces near the tropical limit. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.02030 , 2018. REAL LAGRANGIAN 31

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic hypersurfaces

    Wei-Dong Ruan. Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic hypersurfaces. I. Fermat quintic case. InWinter School on Mirror Symmetry, Vector Bundles and Lagrangian Submanifolds (Cambridge, MA, 1999) , volume 23 of AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math. , pages 297–332. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence,...

    1999

  40. [48]

    Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces

    Wei-Dong Ruan. Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces. II. Technical results on gradient flow construction. J. Symplectic Geom., 1(3):435–521, 2002

    2002

  41. [49]

    Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces

    Wei-Dong Ruan. Lagrangian torus fibration of quintic Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces. III. Symplectic topo- logical SYZ mirror construction for general quintics. J. Differential Geom., 63(2):171–229, 2003

    2003

  42. [50]

    Period integrals from wall structures via tropical cycles, canonical co- ordinates in mirror symmetry and analyticity of toric degenerations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.03794, 2019

    Helge Ruddat and Bernd Siebert. Period integrals from wall structures via tropical cycles, canonical co- ordinates in mirror symmetry and analyticity of toric degenerations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.03794, 2019

    1907 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Universal Lagrangian bundles

    Daniele Sepe. Universal Lagrangian bundles. Geometriae Dedicata, 165(1):53–93, 2013

    2013

  44. [52]

    Jake P. Solomon. Intersection theory on the moduli space of holomorphic curves with Lagrangian boundary conditions. ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2006. Thesis (Ph.D.)–Massachusetts Institute of Technology

    2006

  45. [53]

    Mirror symmetry is T -duality

    Andrew Strominger, Shing-Tung Yau, and Eric Zaslow. Mirror symmetry is T -duality. Nuclear Phys. B, 479(1-2):243–259, 1996

    1996

  46. [54]

    Patchworking real algebraic varieties

    Oleg Viro. Patchworking real algebraic varieties. arXiv preprint math/0611382 , 2006

    2006 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Symplectic Topology of Integrable Hamiltonian Systems, ii: Topological Clas- sification: Dedicated to Professor Charles-Michel Marle

    Nguyen Tien Zung. Symplectic Topology of Integrable Hamiltonian Systems, ii: Topological Clas- sification: Dedicated to Professor Charles-Michel Marle. Compositio Mathematica, 138(2):125–156, 2003. Laboratoire de Math´ematiques de Versailles, UVSQ–Paris Saclay, 55 Avenue de Par...

    2003

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.