Varieties of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of dimension $\leq 5$

Ma Isabel Hern\'andez; Mar\'ia Alejandra Alvarez

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 34 references

Varieties of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of dimension $\leq 5$

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 All nilpotent Lie superalgebras of total dimension at most five are classified, with the irreducible components of each variety identified as orbit closures of rigid algebras.

desk verdict A credible and useful classification paper that fixes prior errors and adds a clean infinite family of rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras, but with several proof gaps that a careful referee should push on. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09039 v1 pith:R7M663YV submitted 2019-08-23 math.RA

María Alejandra Alvarez , Ma Isabel Hernández This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RA MSC 17B3017B5617B99

keywords nilpotentLiesuperalgebrasgeometricclassificationalgebraicdegenerationsirreduciblecomponentsrigidvarietiesofsymmetricmatrixpairs

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

This paper completes the algebraic and geometric classification of nilpotent Lie superalgebras whose total dimension is at most five. It lists every isomorphism class in each dimension (m|n), determines which classes degenerate to which, and identifies the irreducible components of each variety N(m|n) as closures of the orbits of the rigid algebras. The hardest case, dimension (2|3), reduces to classifying pairs of 3×3 symmetric matrices under a simultaneous change of basis; the paper finds exactly 25 isomorphism classes and corrects earlier lists that omitted five algebras and misread three parametric families. As a byproduct, it constructs rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras of dimension (1|n) for every n, showing that rigid nilpotent superalgebras exist in arbitrarily many dimensions, in contrast to the classical nilpotent Lie algebra setting.

What carries the argument

The paper's working object is a Lie superalgebra encoded as a triple ([·,·], ρ, Γ), where [·,·] is the even-even bracket, ρ is the even action on the odd part, and Γ is the symmetric odd-odd map g1×g1→g0 satisfying the identities (J1) and (J2). When g0 is abelian and acts trivially, classification becomes orbit classification of m-tuples of n×n symmetric matrices under the action (T,S)·(Γ1,...,Γm)=(Σ_k T_{1k} S^t Γ_k S, ...). The decisive (2|3) case is handled by first separating off simultaneously diagonalizable pairs (Proposition 5.7 gives seven orbits) and then using the symmetric normal form for non-diagonalizable 3×3 complex symmetric matrices to reduce all remaining pairs to five orbits, (2|3)7 through (2|3)11. Degenerations are controlled by invariants—center dimensions, derived dimensions, (α,β,γ)-derivation dimensions, the ab(g) and F(g) truncations, and the maximal dimension t(g) of a trivial subalgebra—whose monotonicity under degeneration is proved using lower-triangular-stable closed subsets; these invariants rule out all non-degenerations and yield Hasse diagrams whose maximal orbits are the irreducible components.

What would settle it

Take a random pair of 3×3 complex symmetric matrices that is not simultaneously diagonalizable and whose span avoids invertible matrices, such as (diag(1,0,0), N) with N a non-diagonalizable symmetric matrix with zero third row and column, and solve the action equations against each of the five orbit representatives (2|3)7 through (2|3)11. If any such pair is equivalent to none of them, then an isomorphism class is missing from Theorem 5.13 and the component list in Theorem 5.16 changes.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that nilpotent Lie superalgebras of dimension m+n≤5 are completely classified by the lists in Theorems 4.1, 4.4, 4.7, 5.1, 5.4 and 5.13, and that in every variety N(m|n) the irreducible components are precisely the orbit closures listed in Theorems 4.3, 4.6, 4.9, 5.3, 5.6 and 5.16. For dimension (2|3) there are exactly 25 isomorphism classes: five of them are missing from the classification in [19], and the three apparent parametric families in [27] are shown to be finite, with explicit isomorphisms collapsing them to the classes (2|3)6, (2|3)9, (2|3)10 and (2|3)11. Rigidity is detected through vanishing of the even part of the second cohomology $H^{2}$(g,g), and rigid nilpotent superalgebras are found in every dimension up to five; moreover, the Heisenberg-type superalgebra of dimension (1|n) with brackets [f_i,f_i]=e1 is rigid and nilpotent for every n.

Load-bearing premise

The whole (2|3) classification depends on the claim that any two 3-by-3 symmetric matrices that cannot be diagonalized together can be transformed into exactly one of five standard pairs by a simultaneous change of basis; the proof of that claim leaves several orbit checks described only as straightforward computation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The lists in Theorems 4.1, 4.4, 4.7, 5.1, 5.4 and 5.13 give the complete set of isomorphism classes of nilpotent Lie superalgebras of total dimension at most five; in particular there are exactly 25 classes of dimension (2|3).
For every variety N(m|n) with m+n≤5, the irreducible components are exactly the orbit closures listed in Theorems 4.3, 4.6, 4.9, 5.3, 5.6 and 5.16, so every other nilpotent superalgebra in that dimension degenerates into one of those components.
The earlier classifications in [19] and [27] are corrected: five (2|3) algebras missing from [19] are supplied, and the three apparent parametric families in [27] are shown to be finite via explicit isomorphisms given in Remark 5.14.
The Heisenberg-type superalgebra of dimension (1|n) with brackets [f_i,f_i]=e1 has (H^2(g,g))_0=0 and is therefore rigid and nilpotent for every n, so rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras exist in arbitrarily many dimensions.

Reading between the lines

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

The finite (2|3) list suggests that the nilpotency identities (J1)–(J2) cut the wild classification problem for pairs of symmetric matrices down to finite type in low dimension; testing whether finiteness persists for (2|4) or (3|3) is a natural next step.
The monotone invariant t(g), proved using lower-triangular-stable closed subsets, is not specific to nilpotent superalgebras and should also rule out degenerations in larger varieties LS(m|n) without cohomology computations.
A direct extension of Lemma 6.1 may build rigid nilpotent superalgebras of dimension (m|n) for m>1 by adding even basis vectors whose Γ-components are chosen so that all even 2-cocycles remain coboundaries; the difficulty is controlling the new cocycles that involve the extra even directions.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The paper completes the algebraic and geometric classification of nilpotent Lie superalgebras up to dimension 5, corrects two earlier classifications, and proves there are rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras of dimension (1|n) for all n. That last piece is genuinely new and clean: the H^2 computation in Lemma 6.1 is short and convincing, and it settles the super analog of the Vergne conjecture in the negative. The (2|3) case is the core of the paper, and the orbit analysis via the GL2 × GL3 action on pairs of symmetric matrices is systematic; the corrections to [19] and [27] are explicit and believable.

Where the paper is soft is in verification, not in conception. The classification lists in Theorems 5.4 and 5.13 are mostly asserted; the reader gets the orbit classification for the [·,·]=0, ρ=0 part of (2|3), but the algebras with nontrivial g0-action appear without derivation. Proposition 5.10 is load-bearing, and its proof rests on several "straightforward computation" steps in Lemmas 5.11 and 5.12. The stress-test note is right that Lemma 5.11 omits the case λ=μ and c=0; the conclusion still holds because the pair is already in the first orbit, but the proof as written doesn't cover it. Several degenerations in Tables 4 and 10 use t^(1/4) or t^(1/2), which do not lie in C(t) as Lemma 2.1 requires; you can reparametrize with u = t^(1/4) and repair this, but the paper should say so. The rigidity claims for (2|3)18, (2|3)19, (2|3)23, and (2|3)24 are justified by "it is not difficult to see" that every deformation exits the nilpotent variety; for a proof of rigidity in N, that deserves at least a sketch or a supplementary computation.

None of these look fatal. The central claims — the corrected lists, the component theorems, and the infinite rigid family — are credible and checkable. The paper deserves a serious referee, but it needs revision before it is publishable: the omitted subcase in Lemma 5.11 should be stated, the parametrized degenerations should use a parameter in C(t) or an explicit reparametrization, and the classification enumerations for (3|2) and (2|3) should be supported either by more detail in the text or by an accessible companion file. If a referee confirms the orbit lists, this will be a useful reference for anyone working on degenerations or superalgebra classifications.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies the varieties N(m|n) of nilpotent complex Lie superalgebras with total dimension at most 5. It provides algebraic classifications for each dimension pair, lists primary degenerations and non-degenerations using algebraic invariants, determines the irreducible components of each variety, identifies rigid objects via H^2 computations, and constructs rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras in dimension (1|n) for every n. The authors state that their lists correct incompleteness in the earlier classifications of [19] and [27], and they give explicit orbit representatives for the difficult (2|3) case.

Significance. If the classifications and component lists are correct, this is a valuable reference for the geometric classification of low-dimensional nilpotent Lie superalgebras. The paper supplies explicit parametrized degenerations, systematic invariant-based non-degeneration arguments, and a construction of rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras in arbitrary dimension, the latter being a notable phenomenon absent from the purely Lie-algebraic setting. However, the central (2|3) classification rests on an orbit classification whose proof is incomplete as written, and several classification theorems are asserted without derivation, so the current manuscript does not yet certify its main claims.

major comments (3)

[§5.3, Proposition 5.10 and Lemmas 5.11–5.12] The proof of Proposition 5.10 is incomplete in a load-bearing way. Lemma 5.11 splits into the cases λ−μ≠0 and c≠0, but the case λ−μ=0 and c=0, which is allowed by Lemma 5.9 for a non-diagonalizable Γ₃, is not treated explicitly. Lemma 5.12 defers essential steps to 'straightforward computation', including the determinant conditions governing the intersection with GL₃(C) and the final normalization to the listed orbits. Since Theorem 5.13 and Theorem 5.16 depend directly on exactly this orbit list, the omitted subcase and the deferred computations must be supplied or verified by a reproducible computation.
[§5.2 and §5.3, Theorems 5.4 and 5.13] The algebraic classifications for (3|2) and (2|3) are asserted without derivation. The three-step strategy described in Section 3 is not carried out in the text for these dimensions: there is no argument showing that the listed algebras exhaust all triples ([·,·], ρ, Γ) satisfying (J1)–(J2). In particular, algebras (2|3)12 through (2|3)24 involve nonzero ρ and are not covered by the orbit classification of Section 5.3, which treats only the case [·,·]=0 and ρ=0. Completeness of these lists is a precondition for the irreducible-component theorems.
[Table 10 and Lemma 2.1] Several degenerations in Table 10 use basis coefficients that are not elements of C(t), although Lemma 2.1 requires g_t ∈ GL_m(C(t)) ⊕ GL_n(C(t)). Examples include (2|3)23 → (2|3)13, which uses t^{1/4} and t^{5/4}, and (2|3)6 → (2|3)10, which uses √t; similar fractional powers appear in (2|3)23 → (2|3)16 and (2|3)5 → (2|3)9. These degenerations become valid after reparametrizing t = s^k, but the paper does not state this, so as written the table is not fully justified by Lemma 2.1.

minor comments (3)

[§6, Lemma 6.1] In the proof of Lemma 6.1, the displayed formula for d²(φ) contains the term Σᵢ fᵢ*∧fᵢ*∧fⱼ*⊗fₗ, which vanishes in the exterior algebra of the odd dual because fᵢ*∧fᵢ* = 0. The argument that no other cocycles contribute should be reworked.
[Theorem 4.9(5)] The irreducible component of N(0|4) is listed as O((0|4)₂), but Theorem 4.7 defines only (0|4)₀ in dimension (0|4); presumably O((0|4)₀) is intended.
[Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'barckets' in the text before Table 2, 'byproduct' vs. 'by product' in the abstract, and 'asertion' in Lemma 5.12; these do not affect the mathematics but should be corrected.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the classification is obtained by solving the orbit problem that defines isomorphism, with prior results used only as independent tools.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are classifications of nilpotent Lie superalgebras and of irreducible components of the varieties N(m|n). These are produced by direct orbit classification under the explicit change-of-basis action (3.1), by explicit degeneration computations, and by direct cohomology computations of H^2(g,g)_0. The same-author citations, [2] for the degeneration invariants and [20] for the simultaneously diagonalizable pair orbits, cite published prior results with their own proofs; they are used as general tools, not as assumptions of the present classification. The rigid superalgebras are verified by explicit cocycle computations from the definition of the bracket, for example Proposition 4.5 and Lemma 6.1, so the rigidity conclusions are not fitted inputs renamed as predictions. The comparison with [19] and [27] is an external consistency check, not a renaming of a known result. The weakest point identified by the reader, Proposition 5.10 and the 'straightforward computation' steps in Lemmas 5.11 and 5.12, is a possible completeness gap in the orbit proof; it is not circular because the claimed orbit list is not assumed as an input in its own derivation. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited with the required precision, and the appropriate score is at the no-significant-circularity level.

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

The central claim rests on standard algebraic-geometry facts about orbit closures and on previously established invariants. The most paper-specific load is the completeness of the orbit lists in Section 5.3, which is asserted rather than fully demonstrated.

assumptions (5)

standard math Lemma 2.1: if g_t in GL_m(C(t)) plus GL_n(C(t)) has limit h as t tends to 0, then g degenerates to h.
Used throughout to prove degenerations; relies on Zariski and Euclidean closure equivalence from Mumford [28].
standard math Proposition 2.6: for reductive G with Borel subgroup B, G dot x equals G dot B dot x.
Used in the proof of Lemma 2.7(8) to transfer the trivial subalgebra dimension; cited from [18], Proposition 1.17.
domain assumption The invariant monotonicity lemmas (1) through (7) of Lemma 2.7 are valid for Lie superalgebras.
Cited from the authors' previous paper [2]; not proved in this text.
standard math Symmetric normal form for complex symmetric matrices, Lemma 5.9, from [14].
Used in the orbit classification of pairs (Gamma_1, Gamma_2).
domain assumption A Lie superalgebra is nilpotent if and only if its even part is a nilpotent Lie algebra and the action of the even part on the odd part is nilpotent.
Stated in Section 3 without proof; underlies the three-step classification strategy.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Varieties of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of dimension $\leq 5$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/R7M663YV

@misc{pith2026190809039,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Varieties of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of dimension $\leq 5$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/R7M663YV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09039}
}

abstract

In this paper we study the varieties of nilpotent Lie superalgebras of dimension $\leq 5$. We provide the algebraic classification of these superalgebras and obtain the irreducible components in every variety. As a by product we construct rigid nilpotent Lie superalgebras of arbitrary dimension.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

[19]

Hegazi Classiﬁcation of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of Dimension Five I, International Journal of Theoretical Physics , 38 (1999), Issue 6, 1735–1739

A. Hegazi Classiﬁcation of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of Dimension Five I, International Journal of Theoretical Physics , 38 (1999), Issue 6, 1735–1739

work page 1999
[27]

Matiadou, A

N.L. Matiadou, A. Fellouris, A classiﬁcation of the ﬁve dimensional Lie superalgebras, over the complex numbers, Mathematica Balkanica, 19, (2005), 143–154. 28 MARÍA ALEJANDRA AL V AREZ AND ISABEL HERNÁNDEZ

work page 2005
[1]

Alvarez, The variety of 7-dimensional 2-step nilpotent Lie algebras

M.A. Alvarez, The variety of 7-dimensional 2-step nilpotent Lie algebras. Symmetry (2018) 10(1) 26

work page 2018
[2]

Alvarez, I

M.A. Alvarez, I. Hernández, On degenerations of Lie superalgebras. Linear Multilinear Al- gebra, (2018), https://doi.org/10.1080/03081087.2018.1498060

arXiv 2018
[3]

Alvarez, I

M.A. Alvarez, I. Hernández, I. Kaygorodov, Degenerations of Jordan superalgebras, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (2018), https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40840-018-0664-3

work page 2018
[4]

Ancochea Bermúdez, R

J.M. Ancochea Bermúdez, R. Campoamor-Stursberg, L. Gar cía V ergnolle, J. Sánchez Hernández, Contractions d´algebres de Jordan en dimension 2, Journal of Algebra, 319 (6) (2008), 2395–2409

work page 2008
[5]

Ancochea Bermúdez, J

J.M. Ancochea Bermúdez, J. Fresán, J. Margalef Bentabol , Contractions of low-dimensional nilpotent Jordan algebras, Communications in Algebra, 39 (3), (2011), 1139–1151

work page 2011
[6]

Armour, Y

A. Armour, Y . Zhang, Geometric Classiﬁcation of 4-Dimensional Superalgebras, Chapter Algebra, Geometry and Mathematical Physics, Springer Proc eedings in Mathematics & Sta- tistics, 85, (2014), 291–323

work page 2014

Show all 34 references

[7]

Binegar, Cohomology and Deformations of Lie superalgebras , Letters in Mathematical Physics, 12, (1986), 301–308

B. Binegar, Cohomology and Deformations of Lie superalgebras , Letters in Mathematical Physics, 12, (1986), 301–308

1986
[8]

Borel, Linear Algebraic Groups, Second Edition, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer - V erlag, 1991

A. Borel, Linear Algebraic Groups, Second Edition, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer - V erlag, 1991

1991
[9]

Burde, Degenerations of nilpotent Lie algebras, Journal of Lie Theory, 9, (1999), 193– 202

D. Burde, Degenerations of nilpotent Lie algebras, Journal of Lie Theory, 9, (1999), 193– 202

1999
[10]

Burde, Degenerations of 7-Dimensional Nilpotent Lie Algebras, Communications in Al- gebra, 33, (2005), 1259–1277

D. Burde, Degenerations of 7-Dimensional Nilpotent Lie Algebras, Communications in Al- gebra, 33, (2005), 1259–1277

2005
[11]

Burde, C

D. Burde, C. Steinhoff, Classiﬁcation of Orbit Closures of 4-Dimensional Complex Lie Algebras, Journal of Algebra, 214, (1999), 729–739

1999
[12]

Carles, Y

R. Carles, Y . Diakité, Sur les variétés d’algèbres de Lie de dimension ≤ 7, Journal of Alge- bra, 91, (1984), 53–63

1984
[13]

Couture, J

M. Couture, J. Patera, R.T. Sharp, P . Winternitz, Graded contractions of sl(3, C), J. Math. Phys., 32, (1991), 2310–2318

1991
[14]

Craven Complex Symmetric matrices, Journal of Australian Mathematical Society, 10, (1969), 341–354

B.D. Craven Complex Symmetric matrices, Journal of Australian Mathematical Society, 10, (1969), 341–354

1969
[15]

Fialowski, M

A. Fialowski, M. Penkava, Moduli spaces of low dimensional Lie superalgebras , arXiv:1709.00764

arXiv
[16]

Gómez, Y u

J.R. Gómez, Y u. Khakimdjanov, R.M. Navarro, Some problems concerning to nilpotent lie superalgebras, Journal of Geometry and Physics 51, (2004), 473–486

2004
[17]

Gorshkov, I

I. Gorshkov, I. Kaygorodov, Y . Popov,Degenerations of Jordan algebras, arXiv:1707.08836

arXiv
[18]

Grunewald, J

F. Grunewald, J. O’Hallloran, V arietiesof Nilpotent Lie Algebras of Dimension Less Than Six, Journal of Algebra, 112, (1988), 315–325

1988
[20]

Hernández, G

I. Hernández, G. Salgado, and O. A. Sánchez-V alenzuela . Lie Superalgebras Based on a 3-Dimensional Real or Complex Lie Algebra, Journal of Lie Theory, 16, (2006), 539–560

2006
[21]

Herrera-Granada, P

J.F. Herrera-Granada, P . Tirao, The Grunewald-O’Halloran conjecture for nilpotent Lie algebras of rank ≥ 1, Communications in Algebra, 44 (2016), Issue 5, 2180–2192

2016
[22]

Hrivnak, P

J. Hrivnak, P . Novotny, J. Patera, J. Tolar, Graded contractions of the Pauli graded sl(3, C), Linear Algebra Appl., 418, (2006), 498–550

2006
[23]

Kashuba, M.E

I. Kashuba, M.E. Martin, Deformations of Jordan algebras of dimension four , Journal of Algebra, 399, (2014), 277–289

2014
[24]

Kashuba, J

I. Kashuba, J. Patera, Graded contractions of Jordan algebras and of their representations, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 36 (50), (2003), 12453

2003
[25]

Kirillov, Y .A

A.A. Kirillov, Y .A. Neretin, The V ariety An of n-Dimensional Lie Algebra Structures, American Mathematical Society Translations, 137 (2), (1987), 21–30

1987
[26]

Lauret, Degenerations of Lie algebras and geometry of Lie groups, Differential Geom

J. Lauret, Degenerations of Lie algebras and geometry of Lie groups, Differential Geom. Appl., 18 (2), (2003), 177–194

2003
[28]

Mumford, The red book of varieties and schemes, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1358, Springer-V erlag, Berlin, 1988

D. Mumford, The red book of varieties and schemes, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1358, Springer-V erlag, Berlin, 1988

1988
[29]

Nesterenko, P

M. Nesterenko, P . Popovych, Contractions of low-dimensional Lie algebras, J. Math. Phys., 47, (2006), 123515

2006
[30]

Scheunert, The Theory of Lie Superalgebras: An Introduction, Springer-V erlag, (1979)

M. Scheunert, The Theory of Lie Superalgebras: An Introduction, Springer-V erlag, (1979)

1979
[31]

Seeley, Degenerations of 6-dimensional nilpotent lie algebras over C, Communications in Algebra, 18 (10), (1990), 3493–3505

C. Seeley, Degenerations of 6-dimensional nilpotent lie algebras over C, Communications in Algebra, 18 (10), (1990), 3493–3505

1990
[32]

Tirao, S

P . Tirao, S. V era, There are No Rigid Filiform Lie Algebras of Low Dimension, Journal of Lie Theory 29 (2019), No. 2, 391–412

2019
[33]

Weimar-Woods, The three-dimensional real Lie algebras and their contractions, J

E. Weimar-Woods, The three-dimensional real Lie algebras and their contractions, J. Math. Phys., 32, (1991), 2028–2033

1991
[34]

Zheng, Y

K. Zheng, Y . Zhang, On (α, β, γ )-derivations of Lie superalgebras, International Journal of Geometric Methods in Modern Physics, 10 No. 10, (2013), 1350050 (18 pages). DEPARTAMENTO DE MATEMÁTICAS - FACULTAD DE CIENCIAS BÁSICAS - U NIVERSIDAD DE ANTOFAGASTA - C HILE E-mail ad...

2013

Pith tools

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

[1] [19]

Hegazi Classiﬁcation of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of Dimension Five I, International Journal of Theoretical Physics , 38 (1999), Issue 6, 1735–1739

A. Hegazi Classiﬁcation of Nilpotent Lie Superalgebras of Dimension Five I, International Journal of Theoretical Physics , 38 (1999), Issue 6, 1735–1739

work page 1999

[2] [27]

Matiadou, A

N.L. Matiadou, A. Fellouris, A classiﬁcation of the ﬁve dimensional Lie superalgebras, over the complex numbers, Mathematica Balkanica, 19, (2005), 143–154. 28 MARÍA ALEJANDRA AL V AREZ AND ISABEL HERNÁNDEZ

work page 2005

[3] [1]

Alvarez, The variety of 7-dimensional 2-step nilpotent Lie algebras

M.A. Alvarez, The variety of 7-dimensional 2-step nilpotent Lie algebras. Symmetry (2018) 10(1) 26

work page 2018

[4] [2]

Alvarez, I

M.A. Alvarez, I. Hernández, On degenerations of Lie superalgebras. Linear Multilinear Al- gebra, (2018), https://doi.org/10.1080/03081087.2018.1498060

arXiv 2018

[5] [3]

Alvarez, I

M.A. Alvarez, I. Hernández, I. Kaygorodov, Degenerations of Jordan superalgebras, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. (2018), https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40840-018-0664-3

work page 2018

[6] [4]

Ancochea Bermúdez, R

J.M. Ancochea Bermúdez, R. Campoamor-Stursberg, L. Gar cía V ergnolle, J. Sánchez Hernández, Contractions d´algebres de Jordan en dimension 2, Journal of Algebra, 319 (6) (2008), 2395–2409

work page 2008

[7] [5]

Ancochea Bermúdez, J

J.M. Ancochea Bermúdez, J. Fresán, J. Margalef Bentabol , Contractions of low-dimensional nilpotent Jordan algebras, Communications in Algebra, 39 (3), (2011), 1139–1151

work page 2011

[8] [6]

Armour, Y

A. Armour, Y . Zhang, Geometric Classiﬁcation of 4-Dimensional Superalgebras, Chapter Algebra, Geometry and Mathematical Physics, Springer Proc eedings in Mathematics & Sta- tistics, 85, (2014), 291–323

work page 2014