Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 42 references

HOMFLYPT homology for links in handlebodies via type A Soergel bimodules

T0 review · 2 major / 5 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 This paper constructs a triply-graded homology invariant for links in any genus-g handlebody, extending colored HOMFLYPT homology from the 3-sphere.

desk verdict A real new invariant, but the key sensitivity example is asserted rather than shown; deserves a serious referee. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06878 v1 pith:U37AFKNN submitted 2019-08-19 math.QA math.GT

David E.V. Rose , Daniel Tubbenhauer This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.QAmath.GT MSC 57K1820F3616E40
keywords HOMFLYPThomologyhandlebodySoergelbimodulestriply-gradedbraidgroupsHochschildcohomologyMarkovmovescategorification
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 constructs a triply-graded homology theory for links in a genus-g handlebody, the compact three-manifold obtained by attaching g handles to a ball. For a braid in the handlebody braid group with a balanced coloring, the assignment produces a triply-graded vector space that is invariant under the handlebody analogues of Markov moves, and this invariant is sensitive to the handlebody structure: it can distinguish links whose closures inside the handlebody are not isotopic even though their ordinary closures in the three-sphere would agree. This extends the colored HOMFLYPT homology of links in the three-sphere, recovered at genus zero, and gives the first triply-graded link homology in a three-manifold other than the three-sphere. The construction matters because existing doubly-graded annular invariants did not lift to the triply-graded setting, and the handlebody braid group is not generally an Artin-Tits group, so a new categorical mechanism is needed.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the 2-category of singular Soergel bimodules, a categorification of the Hecke/Schur algebroid built from bimodules over rings of symmetric polynomials. Braid complexes of these bimodules give a categorical action of the classical braid group, and hence of its handlebody subgroup; the handlebody braid is first sent to a complex of bimodules by forgetting the special role of core strands. To make the invariant invariant under handlebody stabilization but not under full classical conjugation, the authors glue merge and split bimodules onto the complex, then apply the partial Hochschild trace functors I_M and T_M, which close one strand at a time. Lemma 4.12 supplies the exact degree shifts for the merge-split stabilization isomorphisms, and the normalization factor x(b,M) in equation (4-45) cancels these shifts using half-integer powers of a and t and integer powers of q. That combination of partial trace and normalization is what converts a homotopy-equivalence-up-to-shift into a genuine invariant of handlebody links.

What would settle it

Compute the normalized invariant HHH_Hg for the genus-two braids t2t1 and t1t2 with one strand color 1; if the two triply-graded vector spaces coincide up to degree shift, Corollary 4.13's non-invariance statement fails. Alternatively, verify Lemma 4.12's degree shifts by a direct k=2 calculation and see whether the stabilization isomorphism preserves the claimed shifted gradings.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for any balanced, colored handlebody braid (b,M) in Br(g,n), the triply-graded vector space HHH_Hg(b,M) is an invariant of the handlebody link obtained by closing b inside H_g, and in general it is not invariant under the classical closure of the non-core strands in $S^{3}$. Invariance is established under the conjugation and stabilization moves of the handlebody Markov theorem (Theorem 4.7), and the non-invariance under ordinary braid conjugation is demonstrated explicitly in Proposition 4.8 by braids t2t1 and t1t2 in genus two, whose classical HOMFLYPT polynomials differ. The authors achieve this by embedding the handlebody braid group into the classical braid group, realizing braids by complexes of singular Soergel bimodules, then modifying the closure procedure with merge and split bimodules before applying Hochschild cohomology; the key technical step is a stabilization lemma with explicit q-, t-, and a-degree shifts, and a normalization factor x(b,M) that compensates those shifts. The upshot is a well-defined triply-graded invariant that is finer than the invariant obtained by ignoring the handlebody embedding.

Load-bearing premise

The invariant is well-defined only if the chain of quasi-isomorphisms in Lemma 4.12 carries exactly the stated q-, t- and a-degree shifts; if any of those shifts is off, the normalization factor x(b,M) cannot repair the stabilization invariance and the construction collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At genus zero the construction recovers the classical colored HOMFLYPT homology of links in S^3, so the known structural properties of that invariant restrict to the new invariant.
  • At genus one it yields a triply-graded invariant of annular links, lifting the doubly-graded annular theories and carrying information about winding around the core strand.
  • Because the invariant is not invariant under ordinary conjugation, it distinguishes handlebody links whose classical closures are isotopic, giving a genuinely stronger invariant in the handlebody category.
  • The invariant is unchanged under exactly the handlebody Markov moves, so it factors through the Markov quotient of the handlebody braid group.
  • The construction works uniformly for all genera, including g at least 2, where the handlebody braid group is not known to be an Artin-Tits group.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The half-integer shifts in the normalization x(b,M) suggest that the invariant may admit a natural square-root grading or a relation to spin structures on the handlebody, a direction the paper does not pursue.
  • The partial-trace mechanism could be iterated to compute the invariant recursively strand by strand, in the style of annular evaluation, potentially making explicit computations practical for small braid index.
  • If the conjectured connection between genus-two braid groups and affine type C structures is realized, the invariant may match a yet-to-be-built type C homology, allowing a cross-check on examples.
  • One can test sensitivity by computing the invariant on the explicit pair in Proposition 4.8 with larger colors; if the difference persists for all colorings, the invariant sees the full handlebody Markov quotient.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a triply-graded homology invariant for links in a genus g handlebody, generalizing the colored HOMFLYPT (Khovanov–Rozansky) homology of links in the 3-sphere. The construction embeds the handlebody braid group Br(g,n) into the classical braid group Br(g+n), assigns complexes of singular Soergel bimodules via Rouquier complexes, and then applies partial Hochschild trace functors to achieve invariance under the handlebody Markov moves. The main results are Theorem 4.7, stating invariance of HH_Hg under handlebody conjugation and stabilization (up to grading normalization) and non-invariance under classical conjugation, and Corollary 4.13, which defines the normalized invariant HHH_Hg(b,M) of handlebody links and asserts that it is not in general an invariant of the S^3 closure of the non-core strands. The key example for handlebody sensitivity is Proposition 4.8, where the braids t2t1 and t1t2 are conjugate in Br(g+n) but are claimed to have non-homotopy-equivalent invariants, with the verification reduced to an unstated HOMFLYPT polynomial computation.

Significance. If correct, this is a substantive advance: it provides the first triply-graded homological link invariant for handlebodies of arbitrary genus, going beyond the doubly-graded annular theories in the literature. The paper uses established published machinery (singular Soergel bimodules, Rouquier complexes, partial Hochschild traces) rather than introducing ad hoc axioms, and it gives explicit statements of the new topological sensitivity. The main construction is clearly laid out, and the proof of stabilization invariance is largely explicit. However, the claimed novelty of handlebody sensitivity hinges on a single omitted computation in Proposition 4.8, and the proof of Lemma 4.12, which underpins stabilization invariance, is somewhat compressed. These points are fixable within the scope of the manuscript, so the appropriate outcome is major revision rather than rejection.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4, Proposition 4.8] The proof that HH_Hg(t2t1) and HH_Hg(t1t2) are not homotopy equivalent is the only evidence for the handlebody-sensitivity claim in Corollary 4.13, but the key computation is omitted: the text says 'a computation shows' that the difference of the reduced HOMFLYPT polynomials of the closures in (4-12) is (a-a^{-1})^2-(q-q^{-1})^2. Please display this computation, including the closures and the coloring conventions, and explain the reduction from Euler characteristics of HH_Hg to HOMFLYPT polynomials, especially how the decategorification of Example 3.10 and the Jones–Ocneanu trace identification are applied. Without this, the second sentence of Corollary 4.13 and the claimed improvement over S^3 closure invariants rely on an unverifiable calculation.
  2. [§4, Lemma 4.12 and equations (4-40)–(4-42)] Stabilization invariance of the normalized invariant depends on the exact degree shifts in (4-39), and the proof of Lemma 4.12 uses an induction in which the base case cites [Hog18, Proposition 3.10] to identify differentials and then performs 'Gaussian elimination' of terms with coinciding aq-degrees. Please spell out the cancellation leading to (4-41) and justify the use of the Krull–Schmidt property of the relevant derived category, or give a precise statement of [Wu14, Lemma 4.20] and explain why it applies to the bounded derived category of finitely generated graded singular Soergel bimodules over a polynomial ring. A small error in these shifts would invalidate the normalization factor x(b,M) in (4-45).
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2, equation (2-2)] In the relation 'bjbi = bibj if |i-j] > 2', the bracket should be '|i-j| > 2'.
  2. [§4, equation (4-45)] The passage to 'half-integral values of the at-gradings' is not fully explained; please clarify when the exponents in x(b,M) are half-integers and how the resulting homology is an object of KVec_{atq}.
  3. [§4, equation (4-42)] The first expression in the chain of isomorphisms is ambiguous: '(q^k-q^{-k})/(q-q^{-1}) k' should be written as [k]_q times the diagram, or parenthesized, to avoid confusion with the diagram itself.
  4. [§2, Definition 2.7 and Figure (2-10)] In the stabilization move (2-10), the braids b and c are drawn in a way that is hard to disambiguate at a glance; labeling the strands or enlarging the figure would improve readability, especially because the move is used later in the paper.
  5. [§1, Convention 1.1] The statement that integral versions are not currently available for Section 4 is useful for honesty, but it would be helpful to indicate whether the missing input is the singular Soergel diagrammatics over Z or something else, so that readers can assess the obstruction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the invariant is built from independent published categorical machinery; the only flagged weakness is an undisplayed HOMFLYPT computation in Prop. 4.8, which is a support gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation is self-contained in the relevant sense. Definition 4.4 builds JbK_Hg from the singular Soergel bimodule complex JbK_M, whose existence and braid-group functoriality rest on published, independent results [QRS18, Wil11, Hog18]; none of these encode the handlebody invariant HHH_Hg by definition. The stabilization invariance in Theorem 4.7 is proven from Lemma 4.12, which is itself derived from the partial Hochschild trace of [Hog18] and standard Koszul-resolution arguments, not from the target statement. The normalization x(b,M) in (4-45) is a grading correction chosen after invariance is established; it is not a parameter fitted to force the theorem. The only passage that warrants a support flag is Proposition 4.8, where the difference of HOMFLYPT polynomials is asserted by 'a computation shows' with no computation displayed. That is an omitted proof and a correctness risk for the handlebody-sensitivity half of Corollary 4.13, but it is not circular: the HOMFLYPT polynomials of the closures (4-12) are external decategorified data, not inputs to the definition of HHH_Hg, and the proof does not assume the non-invariance it is trying to establish. Self-citations [QR18] and [QRS18] appear, but they are used for annular evaluation and complex-independence results that are independent of the handlebody invariant; under the review rules, such citations are real evidence and do not raise the circularity score.

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

The paper does not fit any empirical constants. The only numerical inputs are the user-chosen colors M and l_i, which are not fitted. No new physical or mathematical entities are postulated; the invariant is a constructed object built from cited categorical machinery. The central claim rests on the listed background theorems and on the characteristic-0 and balanced-coloring restrictions.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math Handlebody Alexander and Markov theorems (Theorems 2.3 and 2.9) from HOL02.
    Used to pass from links in H_g to handlebody braids and to describe isotopy by conjugation and stabilization moves. If these theorems were false, HHH_Hg would not be a well-defined invariant.
  • standard math Presentation of Br(g,n) by braid generators b_i and twist generators t_i with relations (2-2)-(2-4), from Proposition 2.5 (Vershinin, Lambropoulou).
    The group generators are used throughout to define complexes; the relations are needed for well-definedness of the braid action.
  • standard math Singular Soergel bimodules categorify the Hecke/Schur algebroid and Rouquier/Rickard complexes give braid group actions, with braid-word independence from QRS18, Section 5.2.
    This is the algebraic machinery that assigns complexes to braids; the paper cites rather than reproves it.
  • domain assumption Field K of characteristic 0 for all Section 4 results (Convention 1.1).
    Integral and positive-characteristic versions of the singular Soergel diagrammatics needed for Section 4 are not available, so the invariant is defined only over characteristic-0 fields.
  • domain assumption Balanced colorings with uniformly colored core strands (Remark 4.3).
    The invariant is only defined for balanced colorings where all core strands share the same color M; this restriction is necessary because core strands are not topologically distinguishable.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of HOMFLYPT homology for links in handlebodies via type A Soergel bimodules." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U37AFKNN

@misc{pith2026190806878,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: HOMFLYPT homology for links in handlebodies via type A Soergel bimodules},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U37AFKNN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06878}
}
read the original abstract

We define a triply-graded invariant of links in a genus g handlebody, generalizing the colored HOMFLYPT (co)homology of links in the 3-ball. Our main tools are the description of these links in terms of a subgroup of the classical braid group, and a family of categorical actions built from complexes of (singular) Soergel bimodules.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    D. Allcock. Braid pictures for A rtin groups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 354(9):3455--3474, 2002. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9907194, http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-02-02944-6 doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-02-02944-6

    work page Pith review arXiv 2002

  2. [2]

    Categorification of the Kauffman bracket skein module of I-bundles over surfaces

    M.M. Asaeda, J.H. Przytycki, and A.S. Sikora. Categorification of the K auffman bracket skein module of I -bundles over surfaces. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 4:1177--1210, 2004. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0409414, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/agt.2004.4.1177 doi:10.2140/agt.2004.4.1177

    work page Pith review arXiv 2004

  3. [3]

    Brieskorn

    E. Brieskorn. Sur les groupes de tresses [d'apr \`e s V . I . A rnol'd] . Springer, Berlin, 1973

    work page 1973

  4. [4]

    S. Cautis. Remarks on coloured triply graded link invariants. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 17(6):3811--3836, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1611.09924, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/agt.2017.17.3811 doi:10.2140/agt.2017.17.3811

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    Two boundary Hecke Algebras and combinatorics of type C

    Z. Daugherty and A. Ram. Two boundary H ecke A lgebras and combinatorics of type C . 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.10296

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    B. Elias. Gaitsgory's central sheaves via the diagrammatic H ecke category. 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.06188

    arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    Diagrammatics for Soergel categories

    B. Elias and M. Khovanov. Diagrammatics for S oergel categories. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. , pages Art. ID 978635, 58, 2010. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0902.4700, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2010/978635 doi:10.1155/2010/978635

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

  8. [8]

    Modular representation theory in type A via Soergel bimodules

    B. Elias and I. Losev. Modular representation theory in type A via S oergel bimodules. 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1701.00560

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    Elias, N

    B. Elias, N. Snyder, and G. Williamson. On cubes of F robenius extensions. In Representation theory---current trends and perspectives , EMS Ser. Congr. Rep., pages 171--186. Eur. Math. Soc., Z \"u rich, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.5994

    2017 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Elias and G

    B. Elias and G. Williamson. The H odge theory of S oergel bimodules. Ann. of Math. (2) , 180(3):1089--1136, 2014. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1212.0791, http://dx.doi.org/10.4007/annals.2014.180.3.6 doi:10.4007/annals.2014.180.3.6

    2014 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Geck and S

    M. Geck and S. Lambropoulou. Markov traces and knot invariants related to I wahori-- H ecke algebras of type B . J. Reine Angew. Math. , 482:191--213, 1997. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0405508

    1997 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Gorsky, S

    E. Gorsky, S. Gukov, and M. Sto s i \'c . Quadruply-graded colored homology of knots. Fund. Math. , 243(3):209--299, 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.3481, http://dx.doi.org/10.4064/fm30-11-2017 doi:10.4064/fm30-11-2017

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Gorsky, A

    E. Gorsky, A. Negut, and J. Rasmussen. Flag H ilbert schemes, colored projectors and K hovanov- R ozansky homology 2016. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.07308

    2016 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Grigsby, A.M

    J.E. Grigsby, A.M. Licata, and S.M. Wehrli. Annular K hovanov homology and knotted S chur-- W eyl representations. Compos. Math. , 154(3):459--502, 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.04386, http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/S0010437X17007540 doi:10.1112/S0010437X17007540

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Grigsby and S.M

    J.E. Grigsby and S.M. Wehrli. K hovanov homology, sutured F loer homology, and annular links. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 10:2009--2039, 2010. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0907.4375, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/agt.2010.10.2009 doi:10.2140/agt.2010.10.2009

    2009 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gukov and M

    S. Gukov and M. Sto s i \'c . Homological algebra of knots and BPS states. In Proceedings of the F reedman F est , volume 18 of Geom. Topol. Monogr. , pages 309--367. Geom. Topol. Publ., Coventry, 2012. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1112.0030, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gtm.2012.1...

    2012 arXiv

  9. [17]

    H \"a ring-Oldenburg and S

    R. H \"a ring-Oldenburg and S. Lambropoulou. Knot theory in handlebodies. J. Knot Theory Ramifications , 11(6):921--943, 2002. Knots 2000 Korea, Vol. 3 (Yongpyong). URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0405502, http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0218216502002050 doi:10.1142/S0218216502002050

    2002 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Hogancamp

    M. Hogancamp. Categorified Y oung symmetrizers and stable homology of torus links. Geom. Topol. , 22(5):2943--3002, 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1505.08148, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gt.2018.22.2943 doi:10.2140/gt.2018.22.2943

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Iohara, G

    K. Iohara, G. Lehrer, and R. Zhang. S chur-- W eyl duality for certain infinite dimensional U_ q ( sl _ 2 ) -modules. 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1811.01325

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    V.F.R. Jones. Hecke algebra representations of braid groups and link polynomials. Ann. of Math. (2) , 126(2):335--388, 1987. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1971403 doi:10.2307/1971403

    1987 doi

  13. [21]

    Khovanov

    M. Khovanov. A categorification of the J ones polynomial. Duke Math. J. , 101(3):359--426, 2000. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/math/9908171, http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/S0012-7094-00-10131-7 doi:10.1215/S0012-7094-00-10131-7

    2000 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Khovanov

    M. Khovanov. Triply-graded link homology and H ochschild homology of S oergel bimodules. Internat. J. Math. , 18(8):869--885, 2007. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0510265, http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/S0129167X07004400 doi:10.1142/S0129167X07004400

    2007 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Khovanov and L

    M. Khovanov and L. Rozansky. Matrix factorizations and link homology. Fund. Math. , 199(1):1--91, 2008. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0401268, http://dx.doi.org/10.4064/fm199-1-1 doi:10.4064/fm199-1-1

    2008 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Khovanov and L

    M. Khovanov and L. Rozansky. Matrix factorizations and link homology. II . Geom. Topol. , 12(3):1387--1425, 2008. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0505056, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gt.2008.12.1387 doi:10.2140/gt.2008.12.1387

    2008 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Lambropoulou

    S. Lambropoulou. A study of braids in 3 -manifolds. 1993. Ph.D. thesis, University of Warwick. URL: http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/73390/

    1993

  18. [26]

    Lambropoulou

    S. Lambropoulou. Braid structures in knot complements, handlebodies and 3 -manifolds. In Knots in H ellas '98 ( D elphi) , volume 24 of Ser. Knots Everything , pages 274--289. World Sci. Publ., River Edge, NJ, 2000. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0008235, http://dx.doi.org/10...

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Mackaay, M

    M. Mackaay, M. Sto s i \'c , and P. Vaz. The 1,2 -coloured HOMFLY -- PT link homology. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 363(4):2091--2124, 2011. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0809.0193, http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9947-2010-05155-4 doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-2010-05155-4

    2011 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Orellana and A

    R. Orellana and A. Ram. Affine braids, M arkov traces and the category O . Algebraic groups and homogeneous spaces , 423--473, Tata Inst. Fund. Res. Stud. Math., 19, Tata Inst. Fund. Res., Mumbai, 2007. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0401317

    2007 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Queffelec and D.E.V

    H. Queffelec and D.E.V. Rose. Sutured annular K hovanov-- R ozansky homology. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 370(2):1285--1319, 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.08188, http://dx.doi.org/10.1090/tran/7117 doi:10.1090/tran/7117

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Queffelec, D.E.V

    H. Queffelec, D.E.V. Rose, and A. Sartori. Annular evaluation and link homology. 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1802.04131

    2018 arXiv

  23. [31]

    L.P. Roberts. On knot F loer homology in double branched covers. Geom. Topol. , 17:413--467, 2013. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0706.0741, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gt.2013.17.413 doi:10.2140/gt.2013.17.413

    2013 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Rose and D

    D.E.V. Rose and D. Tubbenhauer. HOMFLYPT homology for links in handlebodies via type C S oergel bimodules. In preparation

  25. [33]

    Rouquier

    R. Rouquier. Categorification of sl _2 and braid groups. In Trends in representation theory of algebras and related topics , volume 406 of Contemp. Math. , pages 137--167. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0409593, http://dx.doi.org/10.109...

    2006 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Rouquier

    R. Rouquier. Khovanov-- R ozansky homology and 2 -braid groups. In Categorification in geometry, topology, and physics , volume 684 of Contemp. Math. , pages 147--157. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1203.5065

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Saunders and A

    N. Saunders and A. Wilbert. E xotic S pringer fibers for orbits corresponding to one-row bipartitions. 2018. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.03731

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    W. Soergel. The combinatorics of H arish- C handra bimodules. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 429:49--74, 1992. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/crll.1992.429.49 doi:10.1515/crll.1992.429.49

    1992 doi

  29. [37]

    Tubbenhauer, P

    D. Tubbenhauer, P. Vaz, and P. Wedrich. Super q - H owe duality and web categories. Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 17(6):3703--3749, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1504.05069, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/agt.2017.17.3703 doi:10.2140/agt.2017.17.3703

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Vershinin

    V.V. Vershinin. On braid groups in handlebodies. Sibirsk. Mat. Zh. , 39(4):755--764, i, 1998. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02673050 doi:10.1007/BF02673050

    1998 doi

  31. [39]

    Webster and G

    B. Webster and G. Williamson. The geometry of M arkov traces. Duke Math. J. , 160(2):401--419, 2011. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0911.4494, http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00127094-1444268 doi:10.1215/00127094-1444268

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Webster and G

    B. Webster and G. Williamson. A geometric construction of colored HOMFLYPT homology. Geom. Topol. , 21(5):2557--2600, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0905.0486, http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/gt.2017.21.2557 doi:10.2140/gt.2017.21.2557

    2017 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Williamson

    G. Williamson. Singular S oergel bimodules. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN , (20):4555--4632, 2011. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1010.1283, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnq263 doi:10.1093/imrn/rnq263

    2011 arXiv

  34. [42]

    H. Wu. A colored sl (N) homology for links in S^3 . Dissertationes Math. , 499:217, 2014. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0907.0695, http://dx.doi.org/10.4064/dm499-0-1 doi:10.4064/dm499-0-1

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

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