Proto-Exact Categories of Matroids over Idylls and Tropical Toric Reflexive Sheaves

Alex Sistko; Cameron Wright; Jaiung Jun

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 32 references

Proto-Exact Categories of Matroids over Idylls and Tropical Toric Reflexive Sheaves

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Matroids over any perfect idyll form a proto-exact category, and the same structure organizes tropical toric reflexive sheaves.

desk verdict Solid categorical treatment of matroids over idylls and tropical toric reflexive sheaves, but a load-bearing pointed version of Prop 3.3 is omitted and Section 6 defines the slope backwards. read the letter →

arxiv 2509.08144 v1 pith:VRGOQ645 submitted 2025-09-09 math.CT math.AGmath.CO

Jaiung Jun , Alex Sistko , Cameron Wright This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CTmath.AGmath.CO MSC 18E1005B3514T05

keywords proto-exactcategorymatroidsoveridyllssubmonomialmatricesproto-abeliantropicaltoricreflexivesheavesHarder–NarasimhanfiltrationslopestabilityHallalgebras

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 proves that the pointed matroids over any perfect idyll — one algebraic structure covering classical matroids, valuated matroids, oriented matroids, and linear subspaces over fields — form a proto-exact category, a non-additive analogue of an exact category. The admissible monomorphisms are matroid restrictions up to isomorphism, the admissible epimorphisms are matroid contractions up to isomorphism, and the whole structure rests on a matrix description of matroid morphisms by submonomial matrices. The paper then lifts this structure to the category of tropical toric reflexive sheaves, showing it too is proto-exact and proto-abelian. In the modular case, the Harder–Narasimhan filtration previously constructed by Khan and Maclagan is exactly the categorical slope filtration produced by Li's general theory. If correct, this means stability and filtration phenomena in tropical geometry are organized by the same proto-exact axioms that govern matroids.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the submonomial matrix: a morphism f:M→N of F-matroids is exactly a matrix with at most one nonzero entry per row and column whose action sends vectors of M into vectors of N. From this description, restriction maps rA:M|A→M and contraction maps cA:M→M/A are morphisms, and the paper declares admissible monomorphisms to be restrictions up to isomorphism and admissible epimorphisms to be contractions up to isomorphism. The proto-exact axioms then reduce to a single geometric fact about these matrices: any square N|A→N→N/B with B⊆A is biCartesian, proved by deleting rows/columns and applying duality. For tropical toric reflexive sheaves the same squares are shown biCa

What would settle it

Test the omitted pointed case of Proposition 3.3 directly: find a perfect idyll F and a pointed F-matroid M together with a submonomial matrix f that maps vectors of M into vectors of another pointed F-matroid N but fails the explicit Grassmann–Plücker summation criterion (or conversely). Since Lemma 3.16 and Proposition 3.17 invoke Proposition 3.3 as their verification step, one such counterexample would collapse the proof that restriction–contraction squares are biCartesian, and with it Theorem 3.11.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The category F-Mat• of pointed F-matroids over a perfect idyll F, with morphisms given by submonomial matrices that send vectors to vectors, is a combinatorial proto-exact category with duality and exact direct sum: admissible monomorphisms are matroid restrictions up to isomorphism and admissible epimorphisms are matroid contractions. It is therefore proto-abelian in the sense of André. The same structure transfers to pointed tropical toric reflexive sheaves: TRSΣ• is proto-exact and proto-abelian, and within the modular subcategory MTRSΣ• the Khan–Maclagan slope function satisfies Li's strong slope inequality, making the Harder–Narasimhan filtration precisely the categorical slope filtrati

Load-bearing premise

The paper invokes Proposition 3.3 — the equivalence between submonomial matrices defining matroid morphisms and a Grassmann–Plücker summation test — in the pointed setting, saying the adaptation is 'immediate and has been omitted' (Remark 3.4); if that pointed adaptation fails, the biCartesian-square proofs establishing proto-exactness of F-Mat• break, and with them the tropical sheaf applications.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every perfect idyll F produces a finitary proto-exact category F-Mat• whose Hall algebra is the graded Hopf dual of the F-matroid-minor Hopf algebra when F is finite.
Since K0(F-Mat•) ≅ Z⊕Z for every perfect idyll, any coefficient-sensitive information must live in higher K-theory — a concrete place to look next.
The tropical toric reflexive sheaf category TRSΣ• and its modular subcategory inherit kernels, cokernels, and well-behaved sums and intersections of strict subobjects at flats — a package unavailable before.
The modular Harder–Narasimhan filtration of Khan–Maclagan is unique and agrees with the categorical slope filtration; the obstruction to uniqueness for non-modular sheaves is precisely the failure of the strong slope inequality.

Reading between the lines

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

If the omitted pointed case of Proposition 3.3 holds, the same submonomial-matrix argument should give proto-exact structures for matroids over any band whose morphisms are tracked by such matrices, not only perfect idylls.
The paper's observation that non-modular sheaves can fail the desired slope inequality suggests a modified categorical slope (valued elsewhere than R) could restore unique HN filtrations for all TRSΣ•.
Knowing K0 is Z⊕Z for all idylls focuses attention on K1 and K2 as the true coefficient detectors; computing K1(Mat•) would show whether the sphere-stable inclusion from pointed sets is proper.
Because proto-exact categories carry 2-Segal structures, Theorem A positions matroids over idylls inside Hall-algebra and K-theory machinery, connecting directly to the moduli space of matroids the paper aims to clarify.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear colleague — the short version: this is a real contribution that deserves referee time, but it should not pass as-is because a load-bearing proof is left out.

What's genuinely new: the category TRS^Σ_• of tropical toric reflexive sheaves, with a morphism notion defined for the first time, and the proof that it and its modular subcategory are proto-exact and proto-abelian. The recasting of Khan–Maclagan's Harder–Narasimhan filtrations as Li's categorical slope filtration is a clean payoff, and the proto-exactness of F-Mat• over every perfect idyll genuinely extends EJS20b. The paper is clearly written and honest: it flags the places where proofs are omitted.

The soft spots are real. Remark 3.4 says the pointed version of Prop 3.3 is 'immediate and has been omitted.' That proposition is used in Lemma 3.16 to show the constructed γ is a morphism, and Lemma 3.16 is the engine for proto-exactness. The pointed case isn't literally the same: morphisms can send non-loops to the basepoint, and the non-pointed orthogonality condition doesn't obviously cover that. The stress-test is right that this is load-bearing. Section 4 then asserts the simple-matroid version of Lemma 3.16 without proof, and Section 6 uses it for TRS. So Theorems A, B, and C all depend on an unproved adaptation. Cokernel proofs in Props 3.10 and 6.7 are also omitted, though those look routine. Section 6.1 defines the slope as rk/deg, which is backwards relative to the deg/rk definition in Section 2.8—surely a typo, but it should be fixed. The stability part imports the strong slope inequality from [KM24b, Lemma 7.24], so Theorem D is only as solid as that lemma.

None of this makes me think the main results are false. The strategy is sound and the omissions are flagged, not hidden. A referee should ask for the pointed Prop 3.3 to be written out, the simple version to be proven, and the cokernel proofs supplied. The paper is for people in matroid categories, proto-exact structures, or tropical toric geometry. I'd take it seriously, but not without revision.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper defines the category F-Mat• of pointed matroids over a perfect idyll F, with morphisms given by submonomial matrices, and proves that it is a combinatorial proto-exact category with duality and exact direct sum (Theorem A, Theorems 3.11 and 3.22). It further shows that F-Mat• is proto-abelian (Corollary 3.12) and that the full subcategory F-SMat• of simple F-matroids is proto-abelian (Theorem B, Corollary 4.5). It then defines a category TRSΣ• of tropical toric reflexive sheaves, proves it is proto-exact and proto-abelian, and obtains the same for the full subcategory MTRSΣ• of modular sheaves (Theorem C, Theorem 6.16, Corollaries 6.17 and 6.18). Finally, it shows that the Harder–Narasimhan filtrations of Khan–Maclagan for modular tropical toric reflexive sheaves coincide with the categorical slope filtration of Li (Theorem D, Corollary 6.25). The paper also constructs Hall algebras and computes K0(F-Mat•) ≅ Z⊕Z.

Significance. If the main results hold, the paper provides a useful categorical framework for matroids over idylls and for tropical toric reflexive sheaves, unifying and extending earlier work of Eppolito–Jun–Szczesny and connecting it with the Harder–Narasimhan theory of Khan–Maclagan. The explicit use of submonomial matrices to describe morphisms is a strength, as is the careful formulation of admissible classes in terms of restrictions and contractions. The paper is honest about its deferred proofs: several load-bearing statements are explicitly left to the reader or cited from preprints. These gaps are likely fillable, but they currently prevent the paper from being fully self-contained at key technical points.

major comments (4)

[Remark 3.4; Lemma 3.16] The pointed version of Proposition 3.3 is asserted to be immediate and is omitted (Remark 3.4). This adaptation is load-bearing: Lemma 3.16, which is the core of Theorem 3.11, uses Proposition 3.3 to verify that the constructed morphism γ is an F-matroid morphism, and its proof uses the pointed relation β(B)=∗_R to deduce that certain matrix coefficients vanish. The non-pointed statement of Proposition 3.3 quantifies only over tuples in \tilde E_M and \tilde E_N and does not directly address the case where a morphism sends a nonzero element to the basepoint. Please provide a complete statement and proof of the pointed adaptation, or a detailed explanation of why the non-pointed proof carries over verbatim.
[Section 4, after Remark 4.4] It is asserted without proof that Lemma 3.16 holds in F-SMat• with A and B flats, and that this implies Propositions 3.17 and 3.19 in the simple setting. This assertion is used to prove Corollary 4.5 (Theorem B) and is later invoked in Lemma 6.12 to establish proto-exactness of TRSΣ• (Theorem C). The sentence 'Lemma 3.16 is true on the nose...' is not a proof. Please give a proof of the flat version of Lemma 3.16 in F-SMat• or a precise reduction to the pointed version, and explain why the simple conditions preserve the biCartesian property.
[Proposition 3.10; Proposition 6.7] The existence of cokernels is essential for the proto-abelian conclusions (Corollary 3.12 and Corollary 6.17). For Proposition 3.10, the proof that N/C is a cokernel is omitted ('completely analogous and so has been omitted'), and for Proposition 6.7 the cokernel part is similarly omitted. Since these are load-bearing for the main claims, the full cokernel proofs should be supplied, or at least the dual argument should be written out explicitly.
[Section 6.1, Proposition 6.24] The strong slope inequality on MTRSΣ• is reduced to [KM24b, Lemma 7.24] in a single sentence. Since Theorem D (Corollary 6.25) depends on this, the reduction should be made fully explicit: state the relevant lemma, verify that its hypotheses (modularity of flats) are satisfied by the subobjects (E|F)/(F∧G) and (E|F∨G)/F, and show how the inequality proved there translates exactly to inequality (12) in the categorical framework. As written, the reader cannot check whether the cited lemma covers precisely this situation. Also, the slope function is defined on p. 37 as µ(E)=rk(E)/deg(E), which contradicts the definition µ=deg/rk used elsewhere; this should be corrected.

minor comments (6)

[Section 6.1, p. 37] The displayed definition 'µ(E)=rk(E)/deg(E)' should read 'µ(E)=deg(E)/rk(E)' to match the rest of the paper and the standard convention.
[Proposition 5.4 proof] In the final displayed equation, 'null(M)(M)[L]' appears to contain a typo; it should probably be 'null(M)[L]'.
[Proposition 2.21] The proof that PE4 and PE5 imply axiom (PA2) is a single sentence. A short explanation of how the biCartesian square axioms yield the required pullback/pushout properties would improve readability.
[Lemma 6.23] The equality ∑ρ a_ρ = 0 for a principal divisor should reference explicitly the standard fact that the sum of coefficients of a principal divisor on a complete toric variety is zero; this is used critically in the degree computation.
[Section 5.1, Corollary 5.3] The argument using the 'algebra anti-automorphism' to identify the Hall algebra product with the dual of the matroid-minor Hopf algebra product is terse. A short explicit verification of the anti-automorphism property would be helpful.
[Section 2.2.3, Remark 2.5] The convention for restriction and contraction on pointed matroids is stated informally. It would be clearer to define the pointed restriction and contraction explicitly in terms of the distinguished loop.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main theorems are proved from definitions and external results; the unproved pointed adaptation of Proposition 3.3 is a proof gap, not a circular reduction, and self-citations are not load-bearing for the central claims.

full rationale

The central derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 3.11 (proto-exactness of F-Mat•) is proved directly in Section 3: the biCartesian lemma (Lemma 3.16) is checked using Proposition 3.3 from [JLV24] (an external paper), Proposition 2.6 (proved in the text), and duality; the remaining proto-exact axioms are verified from the definitions of the admissible classes M and E. No step in this chain reinvokes Theorem 3.11 or an equivalent formulation. The self-citations to [EJS20b] supply the proof strategy (Lemma 3.16 is modeled on [EJS20b, Lemma 4.9]) and a comparison object (Example 2.15(3)), but they do not force the F-matroid conclusion; the F-proof is written out. Corollary 5.3 does invoke [EJS20b, Theorem 7.1] for the classical matroid case and extends it by the same argument; this is a load-bearing citation for that corollary, but it is an external published theorem, not a re-import of the present paper's conclusion. The slope part (Corollary 6.25) is a reformulation: the strong slope inequality is verified by citing [KM24b, Lemma 7.24], and the categorical slope filtration comes from [Li23, Theorem 2.24]; uniqueness then identifies the two filtrations. This is a translation of Khan–Maclagan's Harder–Narasimhan filtration into Li's categorical framework, not a derivation of that filtration from the categorical machinery alone. The genuine weakness is flagged explicitly: Remark 3.4 asserts without proof that the pointed version of [JLV24, Proposition 3.3] is 'immediate and has been omitted', and Section 4 similarly asserts that Lemma 3.16 holds in F-SMat• with A,B flats. These assertions are load-bearing for Lemma 3.16, Lemma 6.12, and hence for Theorems 3.11, 4.5, and 6.16. However, an unproved adaptation is a proof gap, not a circularity: it does not make the conclusion equal to the input, and no fitted parameter or self-citation chain replaces the proof. Therefore the circularity score is low.

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

No free numerical parameters or invented physical entities. The paper's assumptions are all structural: perfect idylls, pointed matroid conventions, the unproved pointed adaptation of [JLV24, Thm 2.8], and reliance on the external works [DK19], [And09], [Li23], and [KM24b].

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The pointed version of [JLV24, Theorem 2.8] holds (characterization of F-matroid morphisms by submonomial matrices for pointed matroids)
Used repeatedly in Sections 3 and 6 to check that a submonomial matrix is a morphism; the paper notes in Remark 3.4 that the adaptation is immediate and omitted, making it an unproved assumption.
standard math Dyckerhoff-Kapranov proto-exact category axioms and Andre/Li slope filtration theorems
The framework of proto-exact and proto-abelian categories is imported from [DK19], [And09], [Li23]; Theorem 2.24 (Li) is stated and used as a black box.
domain assumption Khan-Maclagan results on tropical toric reflexive sheaves: degree additivity (Prop 6.22 from [KM24b, Rem 7.19, Lem 7.20]) and the slope inequality (Prop 6.24 from [KM24b, Lem 7.24])
The stability part of the paper does not derive these from scratch but cites [KM24b]; the correctness of Corollary 6.25 depends on them.
domain assumption Perfectness of the idyll F
Theorem A and Corollary 3.12 are stated for perfect idylls only; the orthogonality between vectors and covectors is used in defining morphisms via f·V_M ⊆ V_N.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Proto-Exact Categories of Matroids over Idylls and Tropical Toric Reflexive Sheaves." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VRGOQ645

@misc{pith2026250908144,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Proto-Exact Categories of Matroids over Idylls and Tropical Toric Reflexive Sheaves},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VRGOQ645}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.08144}
}

abstract

We study the category $F$-$\textbf{Mat}_\bullet$ of matroids over an idyll $F$. We show that $F$-$\textbf{Mat}_\bullet$ is a proto-exact category, a non-additive generalization of an exact category by Dyckerhoff and Kapranov. We further show that $F$-$\textbf{Mat}_\bullet$ is proto-abelian in the sense of Andr\'e. As an application, we establish that the category $\textbf{TRS}_\bullet^\Sigma$ of tropical toric reflexive sheaves associated to a fan $\Sigma$, introduced by Khan and Maclagan, is also proto-exact and proto-abelian. We then investigate the stability of modular tropical toric reflexive sheaves within the framework of proto-abelian categories and reformulate Harder-Narasimhan filtrations in this setting.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

[1]

Slope filtrations

Yves Andr \'e . Slope filtrations. Confluentes Mathematici , 1(01):1--85, 2009

work page 2009
[2]

Vectors of matroids over tracts

Laura Anderson. Vectors of matroids over tracts. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A , 161:236--270, 2019

work page 2019
[3]

Matroids over partial hyperstructures

Matthew Baker and Nathan Bowler. Matroids over partial hyperstructures. Advances in Mathematics , 343:821--863, 2019

work page 2019
[4]

Axioms for infinite matroids

Henning Bruhn, Reinhard Diestel, Matthias Kriesell, Rudi Pendavingh, and Paul Wollan. Axioms for infinite matroids. Advances in Mathematics , 239:18--46, 2013

work page 2013
[5]

New building blocks for F _1 -geometry: B ands and band schemes

Matthew Baker, Tong Jin, and Oliver Lorscheid. New building blocks for F _1 -geometry: B ands and band schemes. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , 111(4):e70125, 2025

work page 2025
[6]

The moduli space of matroids

Matthew Baker and Oliver Lorscheid. The moduli space of matroids. Advances in Mathematics , 390:107883, 2021

work page 2021
[7]

Higher Segal Spaces , volume 2244

Tobias Dyckerhoff and Mikhail Kapranov. Higher Segal Spaces , volume 2244. Springer Nature, 2019

work page 2019
[8]

Grassmann- P l \"u cker relations and matroids with coefficients

Andreas Dress and Walter Wenzel. Grassmann- P l \"u cker relations and matroids with coefficients. Advances in Mathematics , 86(1):68--110, 1991

work page 1991

Show all 32 references

[9]

On infinite matroids with strong maps: Proto-exactness and finiteness conditions

Chris Eppolito and Jaiung Jun. On infinite matroids with strong maps: Proto-exactness and finiteness conditions. Theory and Applications of Categories , 38(11):319--327, 2022

2022
[10]

Hopf algebras for matroids over hyperfields

Chris Eppolito, Jaiung Jun, and Matt Szczesny. Hopf algebras for matroids over hyperfields. Journal of Algebra , 556:806--835, 2020

2020
[11]

Proto-exact categories of matroids, H all algebras, and K -theory

Chris Eppolito, Jaiung Jun, and Matt Szczesny. Proto-exact categories of matroids, H all algebras, and K -theory. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 296(1):147--167, 2020

2020
[12]

Group completion in the K -theory and G rothendieck-- W itt theory of proto-exact categories

Jens Niklas Eberhardt, Oliver Lorscheid, and Matthew B Young. Group completion in the K -theory and G rothendieck-- W itt theory of proto-exact categories. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 226(8):107018, 2022

2022
[13]

The category of matroids

Chris Heunen and Vaia Patta. The category of matroids. Applied Categorical Structures , pages 1--33, 2017

2017
[14]

Tropical quiver G rassmannians

Giulia Iezzi and Victoria Schleis. Tropical quiver G rassmannians. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.18648 , 2023

2023 arXiv
[15]

Quiver matroids--matroid morphisms, quiver G rassmannians, their E uler characteristics and F _1 -points

Manoel Jarra, Oliver Lorscheid, and Eduardo Vital. Quiver matroids--matroid morphisms, quiver G rassmannians, their E uler characteristics and F _1 -points. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.09255 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[16]

On quiver representations over F _1

Jaiung Jun and Alexander Sistko. On quiver representations over F _1 . Algebras and Representation Theory , 26(1):207--240, 2023

2023
[17]

Coefficient quivers, F _1 -representations, and E uler characteristics of quiver G rassmannians

Jaiung Jun and Alexander Sistko. Coefficient quivers, F _1 -representations, and E uler characteristics of quiver G rassmannians. Nagoya Mathematical Journal , 255:561--617, 2024

2024
[18]

Hall L ie algebras of toric monoid schemes

Jaiung Jun and Matt Szczesny. Hall L ie algebras of toric monoid schemes. Selecta Mathematica , 30(2):22, 2024

2024
[19]

Proto-exact categories of modules over semirings and hyperrings

Jaiung Jun, Matt Szczesny, and Jeffrey Tolliver. Proto-exact categories of modules over semirings and hyperrings. Journal of Algebra , 631:517--557, 2023

2023
[20]

Tropical toric geometry

Takeshi Kajiwara. Tropical toric geometry. Contemporary Mathematics , 460:197--208, 2008

2008
[21]

Eisenstein series and quantum affine algebras

MM Kapranov. Eisenstein series and quantum affine algebras. Journal of Mathematical Sciences , 84(5):1311--1360, 1997

1997
[22]

Equivariant vector bundles on toral varieties

Alexander Klyachko. Equivariant vector bundles on toral varieties. Math. USSR-Izv , 35(2):337--375, 1990

1990
[23]

Tropical vector bundles and matroids

Kiumars Kaveh and Christopher Manon. Tropical vector bundles and matroids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03576 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[24]

Tropical vector bundles

Bivas Khan and Diane Maclagan. Tropical vector bundles. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.03505 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[25]

Categorification of H arder-- N arasimhan theory via slope functions valued in totally ordered sets

Yao Li. Categorification of H arder-- N arasimhan theory via slope functions valued in totally ordered sets. manuscripta mathematica , pages 1--39, 2023

2023
[26]

Proto-exact and parabelian categories

Sergey Mozgovoy. Proto-exact and parabelian categories. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.05940 , 2025

2025 arXiv
[27]

Matroid theory , volume 3

James Oxley. Matroid theory , volume 3. Oxford University Press, USA, 2006

2006
[28]

Analytification is the limit of all tropicalizations

Sam Payne. Analytification is the limit of all tropicalizations. Mathematical research letters , 16(2):543--556, 2009

2009
[29]

The H arder- N arasimhan system in quantum groups and cohomology of quiver moduli

Markus Reineke. The H arder- N arasimhan system in quantum groups and cohomology of quiver moduli. Inventiones mathematicae , 152(2):349--368, 2003

2003
[30]

Stability for an abelian category

Alexei Rudakov. Stability for an abelian category. Journal of Algebra , 197(1):231--245, 1997

1997
[31]

Lectures on H all algebras

Olivier Schiffmann. Lectures on H all algebras. arXiv preprint math/0611617 , 2006

2006 arXiv
[32]

On semisimple proto-abelian categories associated to inverse monoids

Alexander Sistko. On semisimple proto-abelian categories associated to inverse monoids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.03741 , 2025

2025 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Slope filtrations

Yves Andr \'e . Slope filtrations. Confluentes Mathematici , 1(01):1--85, 2009

work page 2009

[2] [2]

Vectors of matroids over tracts

Laura Anderson. Vectors of matroids over tracts. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A , 161:236--270, 2019

work page 2019

[3] [3]

Matroids over partial hyperstructures

Matthew Baker and Nathan Bowler. Matroids over partial hyperstructures. Advances in Mathematics , 343:821--863, 2019

work page 2019

[4] [4]

Axioms for infinite matroids

Henning Bruhn, Reinhard Diestel, Matthias Kriesell, Rudi Pendavingh, and Paul Wollan. Axioms for infinite matroids. Advances in Mathematics , 239:18--46, 2013

work page 2013

[5] [5]

New building blocks for F _1 -geometry: B ands and band schemes

Matthew Baker, Tong Jin, and Oliver Lorscheid. New building blocks for F _1 -geometry: B ands and band schemes. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , 111(4):e70125, 2025

work page 2025

[6] [6]

The moduli space of matroids

Matthew Baker and Oliver Lorscheid. The moduli space of matroids. Advances in Mathematics , 390:107883, 2021

work page 2021

[7] [7]

Higher Segal Spaces , volume 2244

Tobias Dyckerhoff and Mikhail Kapranov. Higher Segal Spaces , volume 2244. Springer Nature, 2019

work page 2019

[8] [8]

Grassmann- P l \"u cker relations and matroids with coefficients

Andreas Dress and Walter Wenzel. Grassmann- P l \"u cker relations and matroids with coefficients. Advances in Mathematics , 86(1):68--110, 1991

work page 1991