Folded Gentle Algebras

Drew Damien Duffield

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 40 references

Folded Gentle Algebras

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

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

Pith's one-line read This paper defines folded gentle algebras—gentle-like algebras whose crease loops satisfy irreducible quadratic relations—and proves that their indecomposable modules are exactly the symmetric and asymmetric string and band modules, with…

desk verdict New class with a genuinely useful unfolding approach, but the symmetric band classification has a real existence gap and the finiteness claim in Theorem 7.7 is false over fields like Q. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.05655 v2 pith:ZR632G6G submitted 2025-02-08 math.RT math.COmath.RA

Drew Damien Duffield This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RTmath.COmath.RA MSC 16G2016G7016E3516G60

keywords foldedgentlealgebrasstringmodulesbandderivedequivalencefoldingclannishbiserialAuslander-Reitensequences

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 introduces a new class of finite-dimensional algebras, called folded gentle algebras, built from gentle algebras by a folding construction that adds loops satisfying irreducible quadratic equations at special 'crease' vertices. These algebras generalize the iterated tilted algebras of Dynkin types C and ~C, filling a gap left by gentle and skewed-gentle algebras for the non-simply-laced infinite families. The main theorem classifies all indecomposable modules: they are exactly the string modules together with symmetric and asymmetric band modules, with no repetitions. The paper also classifies the Auslander-Reiten sequences and proves the class is closed under derived equivalence, with only finitely many Morita classes in each derived equivalence class.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the unfolding procedure: to a folded gentle triple one associates a gentle pair by doubling ordinary vertices and arrows while leaving crease vertices fixed, on which Z2 acts by swapping the two copies. The crease loops at fixed vertices are governed by an irreducible quadratic $x^{2}$ − λ1 x − λ2, so the local endomorphism ring at a crease vertex is a degree-2 field extension rather than a split algebra; this irreducibility is what makes the folded algebra behave like a genuine quotient of a gentle algebra. The unfolding functor U from mod A to mod Â is exact and faithful, sending string modules to sums of two string modules (or one, for symmetric strings) and band modules to corresponding pairs, with the correspondence controlled by the maps ρ and θ between folded and unfolded words. The derived-equivalence closure is obtained by applying the same folding argument to the known gentle-algebra result via the repetitive algebra and tilting complexes.

What would settle it

Take the quiver of Example 2.7 with one crease loop η and one ordinary arrow α, but over the field R replace the relation $η^{2}$ + 1 = 0 by the reducible relation $η^{2}$ − η = 0. Then the local algebra at the crease vertex becomes K × K rather than a field extension, the simple module there is 1-dimensional, and the unfolding functor no longer identifies mod A with the Z2-fixed part of a gentle module category; checking whether Theorem 6.21 still holds in this example would settle whether irreducibility of the crease quadratics is necessary.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that folded gentle algebras, defined by the usual gentle axioms on ordinary arrows plus crease loops whose quadratic relations are irreducible over the ground field, have a module category completely described by combinatorial words. Theorem 6.21 states that every indecomposable module is, up to isomorphism, exactly one of a string module, an asymmetric band module, or a symmetric band module, with the three collections disjoint and exhaustive. The proof proceeds by unfolding: every folded gentle algebra arises as a Z2-quotient of a gentle algebra, and the unfolding functor matches each folded string or band to a pair of gentle strings or bands swapped by the folding action, with symmetric bands arising from Z2-invariant bands of even parity. A second theorem asserts that any algebra derived equivalent to a folded gentle algebra is again folded gentle, and that only finitely many Morita equivalence classes arise in each derived equivalence class.

Load-bearing premise

Every crease loop must satisfy an irreducible quadratic relation over the ground field; if any such quadratic splits, the folded gentle structure collapses into the different reducible clannish case and the string/band classification and the Z2-quotient description no longer apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The module category of a folded gentle algebra is completely described by strings and bands, with symmetric bands indexed by orbits of irreducible polynomials under a Z2-action.
The class of folded gentle algebras is closed under derived equivalence, and there are only finitely many algebras up to Morita equivalence in each derived equivalence class.
Auslander-Reiten sequences are classified combinatorially: string modules follow the hook/cohook rules, band modules sit in homogeneous tubes, and symmetric strings give valued arrows of type (1,2) and (2,1).
Folded gentle algebras are biserial over fields that need not be algebraically closed, extending the structural theory of gentle algebras to the C and ~C Dynkin/Euclidean families.
The unfolding functor provides a constructive bridge: every folded gentle module corresponds to a pair of gentle modules permuted by the Z2 folding action, so existing gentle-algebra computations can be lifted and then folded back.

Reading between the lines

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

The same folding construction may extend to the other non-simply-laced infinite families, B and ~B, by choosing crease loops with appropriate irreducible quadratics; the paper treats only C and ~C.
The irreducibility of the crease quadratics means the classification is sensitive to the arithmetic of the ground field; testing whether the symmetric band indexing changes when the field is changed (e.g., from R to Q) could reveal field-dependent phenomena not visible over algebraically closed fields.
Since folded gentle algebras are clannish algebras with irreducible clans, the results suggest that many techniques developed for gentle algebras, such as geometric models via surface triangulations, might have folded analogues where the Z2-symmetry becomes an orbifold structure.
The finiteness of derived equivalence classes mirrors the gentle case and suggests that folded gentle algebras form a natural testbed for derived-tame classification beyond the simply-laced setting.

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,

Here is my read on Duffield's folded gentle algebras paper.

The genuinely new thing is the class itself: gentle algebras with crease loops satisfying irreducible quadratic relations, obtained by folding ordinary gentle algebras. That is a natural and useful construction, and the unfolding functor gives a clean route to the main theorems. The biseriality result (Theorem 3.4) is solid, the string module correspondence (Proposition 6.3) is carefully worked out, and the Auslander–Reiten classification is a real contribution. If the module classification is right, this is a valuable paper.

The soft spots are real, though. The M3 part of Theorem 6.21 is not proven as written. Definition 6.19 and Remark 6.18 assert that for each orbit p in Π_w there is exactly one ψ, so |Ψ_{w,p}| = 1. But Remark 6.14, immediately before, says it is "not at all obvious" whether the necessary condition for the image of a symmetric band module to be indecomposable is sufficient; the proof of Proposition 6.12(e)⇒(f) only shows indecomposability assuming the relevant direct summand already exists. Nothing constructs the ψ needed for completeness. The stress-test note is right: if for some band and field both Ψ^{(1)} and Ψ^{(2)} are empty, the classification misses an indecomposable. That is a load-bearing gap, not a cosmetic one.

The finiteness claim in Theorem 7.7 is false over fields such as Q. There are infinitely many irreducible quadratics over Q, so infinitely many non-Morita-equivalent folded gentle algebras on a single crease vertex. The closure under derived equivalence may survive, but the "finitely many" statement needs to be dropped or repaired.

Minor issue: Corollary 6.4 invokes "special biserial" for algebras that are not special biserial in the usual sense; the biseriality theorem should be the justification instead.

Overall: the paper deserves a serious referee. The unfolding framework is sound, and most of the arguments are careful. The M3 gap needs fixing—either by proving existence or by restricting the classification—and the finiteness claim needs correction. I would send it to review, expecting heavy revision.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces folded gentle algebras, a class of finite-dimensional algebras defined by gentle quiver data together with crease loops satisfying irreducible quadratic relations. The main results are: folded gentle algebras are biserial (Theorem 3.4); a classification of their indecomposable modules as string modules and as asymmetric and symmetric band modules (Theorem 6.21); a classification of Auslander-Reiten sequences (Theorem 6.26); and closure of the class under derived equivalence, with a finiteness statement for the number of derived-equivalent algebras (Theorem 7.7). The proofs are built on an unfolding functor U : mod A → mod Â to a gentle algebra Â with a Z2-action, and on folding arguments that reduce statements to known results for gentle algebras.

Significance. If the main results hold, the paper makes a substantial contribution: it identifies and analyzes a natural gentle-like class corresponding to Dynkin/Euclidean types C and ∼C, extending the analogy between gentle algebras and type A, and skewed-gentle algebras and type D. The unfolding method is well motivated, the explicit examples are useful, and the reduction to known gentle-algebra theorems (Butler–Ringel, Schröer–Zimmermann, Rickard) is a clear strategy. The paper does not rely on circular reasoning, and its central construction is original. However, the completeness of the module classification and the finiteness clause of the derived-equivalence theorem currently require additional support.

major comments (2)

[§6.4 (Definition 6.19 and Remark 6.18)] The assertion |Ψ_{w,p}| = 1 is load-bearing for the completeness of M3 in Theorem 6.21, but it is not proved. Remark 6.14 explicitly states that the condition for U(M(w,m,ψ)) to be indecomposable is not known to be sufficient in general, and the existence claim in that remark produces only a symmetric quasi-band module whose image contains a given band module as a direct summand. Proposition 6.12 is conditional: it constructs a symmetric band module only when a band module M(ŵ,m̂,φ̂) is already a direct summand of U(M), and it does not show that for every p ∈ Π_w there exists ψ with H_{w,deg p}ψ similar to φ_p or H_{w,2deg p}ψ similar to φ_p ⊕ φ_{gp}. Since the proof of Theorem 6.21 uses Remark 6.18 to lift every even-parity Z2-invariant summand of U(M) to a unique object of M3, the completeness and no-repetition clauses of Theorem 6.21 are not established as written.
[§7.3 (Theorem 7.7, final paragraph)] The proof of the finiteness assertion relies on the statement that for any n there are only finitely many folded gentle algebras up to Morita equivalence with n vertices. This is false for a general field K admitting a degree-2 extension. For example, take K = Q and, for each squarefree integer a, the folded gentle triple with one crease vertex and crease relation η² − a = 0; the corresponding algebras are the fields Q(√a), which are pairwise non-isomorphic and hence not Morita equivalent, so there are infinitely many Morita classes with one vertex. The finiteness clause therefore needs either a restriction on K (for example K finite or a fixed quadratic extension) or a more careful counting argument.

minor comments (4)

[Lemma 6.15] The statement 'Then U(M) ∼= U(M) only if M ∼= N' should read 'U(M) ∼= U(N) only if M ∼= N'.
[Definition 6.19] The line 'Ψ_{w,p} = Φ^{(1)}_{w,p} ∪ Φ^{(2)}_{w,p}' should use Ψ on the right-hand side, and the convention Φ(2m+1)_w = ∅ should be stated before Φ(deg p) is used for odd p.
[Example 2.8] The symbol Q is used both for the quiver and for the field of rational numbers; consider renaming one of them to avoid confusion.
[Abstract] The phrase 'in terms symmetric and asymmetric string and band modules' is missing 'of' before 'symmetric'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central classification is reduced to external gentle-algebra results via the unfolding functor, with no fitted inputs or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained in the required sense: folded gentle algebras are unfolded to gentle algebras in Section 5, and Theorem 6.21 is obtained by transporting the external Butler–Ringel and Wald–Waschbüsch classification of modules over gentle/special biserial algebras through the exact, faithful unfolding functor U. The M1 and M2 parts are explicit reductions to known classifications, and the M3 symmetric band part is defined from the Z2-orbit combinatorics and Proposition 6.12 rather than assumed from the target theorem. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then renamed a prediction. Theorem 7.7 invokes Schröer–Zimmermann [33] and Rickard's theorem as external support, and the paper contains no self-citation chain or author-imported uniqueness theorem. The skeptical concern that Remark 6.18's assertion that |Ψ_{w,p}| = 1 is not fully justified by Remark 6.14 is a genuine completeness gap in the written proof, not a circularity: an unproved existence claim does not make the classification equivalent to its inputs. No circular step can be exhibited by quoting equations that reduce a claimed result to its own assumptions. The honest finding is therefore no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard representation theory of gentle and special biserial algebras (module classification, AR sequences), the structure of repetitive algebras, and derived equivalence criteria; these are external classical results. The paper's novel input is the folding and unfolding framework and the crease-loop definition. No free parameters are fitted to data; the lambda coefficients in crease relations are structural inputs. No new physical or speculative entities are postulated.

assumptions (7)

domain assumption The ground field K admits a field extension of degree 2, so irreducible quadratics exist.
Definition 2.1 (FG5) and Section 2 require this for crease loops and for simple modules of dimension 2; without it the class is empty.
standard math Classification of indecomposable modules of gentle algebras by string and band modules (Butler-Ringel, Wald-Waschbüsch).
Invoked throughout Section 6 to classify indecomposables of the unfolded gentle algebra, for example in the proof of Theorem 6.21.
standard math Auslander-Reiten sequences of string algebras are given by hooks and cohooks (Butler-Ringel).
Used in the proof of Theorem 6.26 to transfer the AR structure from the unfolded gentle algebra.
standard math Schröer-Zimmermann theorem: stable endomorphism algebras of modules over special biserial algebras with vanishing self-extension are gentle.
Foundational input for Proposition 7.6, the key step in proving closure under derived equivalence.
standard math Rickard's derived equivalence criterion via tilting complexes.
Used in Theorem 7.7 to translate derived equivalence into a statement about stable endomorphism algebras in the repetitive algebra module category.
standard math Schröer's quiver-with-relations description of the repetitive algebra of a gentle algebra.
Used in Section 7.1 to compare the repetitive algebras of the folded and unfolded gentle algebras.
standard math Dlab-Ringel theory of K-species and their representation categories.
Provides the interpretation of folded gentle algebras as tensor algebras of species and the homogeneous representations relevant to symmetric band modules (Section 4.3.3, Definition 6.19).

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Folded Gentle Algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZR632G6G

@misc{pith2026250205655,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Folded Gentle Algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZR632G6G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.05655}
}

abstract

We use folding techniques to define a new class of gentle-like algebras that generalise the iterated tilted algebras of type $C$ and $\widetilde{C}$, which we call folded gentle algebras. We then show that folded gentle algebras satisfy many of the same remarkable properties of gentle algebras, and that the proof of these properties follows directly from folding arguments. In particular, we classify the indecomposable modules of folded gentle algebras in terms symmetric and asymmetric string and band modules. We classify the Auslander-Reiten sequences over these algebras, showing that irreducible morphisms between string modules are given by adding/deleting hooks and cohooks to/from strings. Finally, we show that the class of folded gentle algebras are closed under derived equivalence.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages

[1]

K. K. Arnesen, R. Laking, and D. Pauksztello. Morphisms betwee n indecomposable complexes in the bounded derived category of a gentle algebra. Journal of Algebra , 467:1–46, 2016

work page 2016
[2]

I. Assem. Tilted algebras of type An. Communications in Algebra , 10(19):2121–2139, 1982, https://doi.org/10.1080/00927878208822826

work page doi:10.1080/00927878208822826 1982
[3]

I. Assem. Iterated tilted algebras of types Bn and Cn. Journal of Algebra , 84(2):361–390, 1983

work page 1983
[4]

Assem, T

I. Assem, T. Br¨ ustle, G. Charbonneau-Jodoin, and P.-G. Plamo ndon. Gentle algebras arising from surface triangulations. Algebra & Number Theory , 4(2):201 – 229, 2010

work page 2010
[5]

Assem and D

I. Assem and D. Happel. Generalized tilted algebras of type An. Communications in Algebra , 9(20):2101– 2125, 1981, https://doi.org/10.1080/00927878108822697

doi:10.1080/00927878108822697 1981
[6]

Assem and A

I. Assem and A. Skowro´ nski. Iterated tilted algebras of type ˜An. Math. Z. , 195(2):269–290, 1987

work page 1987
[7]

Auslander, I

M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S. O. Smalø. Representation theory of Artin algebras , volume 36 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. Corrected reprin t of the 1995 original

work page 1997
[8]

Bekkert and H

V. Bekkert and H. A. Merklen. Indecomposables in derived categ ories of gentle algebras. Algebras and Representation Theory, 6(3):285–302, 2003

work page 2003

Show all 40 references

[9]

Broomhead

N. Broomhead. Dimer models and Calabi-Yau algebras . Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 2012

2012
[10]

M. C. R. Butler and C. M. Ringel. Auslander-Reiten sequences wit h few middle terms and applications to string algebras. Comm. Algebra, 15(1-2):145–179, 1987

1987
[11]

C ¸ anak¸ ci, D

I. C ¸ anak¸ ci, D. Pauksztello, and S. Schroll. Mapping cones in th e bounded derived category of a gentle algebra. Journal of Algebra , 530:163–194, 2019

2019
[12]

W. W. Crawley-Boevey. Functorial ﬁltrations. II. Clans and th e Gelfand problem. J. London Math. Soc. (2), 40(1):9–30, 1989

1989
[13]

B. Deng. On a problem of nazarova and roiter. Comment. Math. Helv. , 75(3):368–409, 2000

2000
[14]

Deng and J

B. Deng and J. Du. Frobenius morphisms and representations o f algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 358(8):3591–3622, 2006

2006
[15]

Deng and J

B. Deng and J. Du. Folding derived categories with Frobenius fun ctors. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 208(3):1023– 1050, 2007

2007
[16]

Dlab and C

V. Dlab and C. M. Ringel. Indecomposable representations of gr aphs and algebras. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc., 6(173):v+57, 1976

1976
[17]

J. A. Drozd. Tame and wild matrix problems. In V. Dlab and P. Gabr iel, editors, Representation Theory II, pages 242–258, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1980. Springer Berlin Heidelber g

1980
[18]

A. G. Elsener. Gentle m-calabi-yau tilted algebras. Algebra and Discrete Mathematics , 30(1):44–62, 2020

2020
[19]

V. V. Fock and A. B. Goncharov. Cluster X -varieties, amalgamation, and Poisson-Lie groups. In Algebraic geometry and number theory , volume 253 of Progr. Math., pages 27–68. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Boston, MA, 2006. 58 DREW DAMIEN DUFFIELD

2006
[20]

P. Gabriel. Indecomposable representations. II. In Symposia Mathematica, Vol. XI (Convegno di Algebra Commutativa, INDAM, Rome, 1971 & Convegno di Geometria, IND AM, Rome, 1972) , pages 81–104. Academic Press, London-New York, 1973

1971
[21]

C. Geiß. Maps between representations of clans. J. Algebra, 218(1):131–164, 1999

1999
[22]

Geißand J

C. Geißand J. A. de la Pe˜ na. Auslander-Reiten components for clans. Bol. Soc. Mat. Mexicana (3) , 5(2):307– 326, 1999

1999
[23]

E. L. Green and S. Schroll. Multiserial and special multiserial alge bras and their representations. Adv. Math., 302:1111–1136, 2016

2016
[24]

D. Happel. Triangulated Categories in the Representation of Finite Di mensional Algebras. London Mathe- matical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, 1988

1988
[25]

R. S. Huerfano and M. Khovanov. Categoriﬁcation of some leve l two representations of quantum sln. Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramiﬁcations , 15(06):695–713, 2006, https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218216506 004713

2006 doi
[26]

Hughes and J

D. Hughes and J. Waschb¨ usch. Trivial extensions of tilted algebras. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, s3-46(2):347–364, 1983, https://londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley .com/doi/pdf/10.1112/plms/s3- 46.2.347

1983 doi
[27]

K¨ onig and A

S. K¨ onig and A. Zimmermann. Derived Equivalences for Group Rings , volume 1685 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 1998

1998
[28]

Opper, P.-G

S. Opper, P.-G. Plamondon, and S. Schroll. A geometric model fo r the derived category of gentle algebras, 2018, arXiv:1801.09659

2018 arXiv
[29]

J. Rickard. Morita theory for derived categories. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , s2-39(3):436– 456, 1989, https://londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10 .1112/jlms/s2-39.3.436

1989
[30]

C. M. Ringel. Representations of k-species and bimodules. Journal of Algebra , 41(2):269–302, 1976

1976
[31]

C. M. Ringel. The repetitive algebra of a gentle algebra. Bolet´ ın de la Sociedad Matem´ atica Mexicana, 3(3):235–253, 1997

1997
[32]

Schr¨ oer

J. Schr¨ oer. On the quiver with relations of a repetitive algebra . Archiv der Mathematik , 72(6):426–432, 1999

1999
[33]

Schr¨ oer and A

J. Schr¨ oer and A. Zimmermann. Stable endomorphism algebras of modules over special biserial algebras. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 244(3):515–530, 2003

2003
[34]

D. Simson. Categories of representations of species. J. Pure Appl. Algebra , 14(1):101–114, 1979

1979
[35]

Steinberg

R. Steinberg. Lectures on Chevalley groups, volume 66 of University Lecture Series. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2016

2016
[36]

Tanisaki

T. Tanisaki. Foldings of root systems and Gabriel’s theorem. Tsukuba J. Math. , 4(1):89–97, 1980

1980
[37]

E. N. M. Viktor Bekkert and H. A. Merklen. Indecomposables in d erived categories of skewed-gentle algebras. Communications in Algebra , 31(6):2615–2654, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1081/AGB-120021 885

2003 doi
[38]

von H¨ ohne and J

H.-J. von H¨ ohne and J. Waschb¨ usch. Die strukturn-reihiger Algebren. Comm. Algebra, 12(9-10):1187–1206, 1984

1984
[39]

Wald and J

B. Wald and J. Waschb¨ usch. Tame biserial algebras. Journal of Algebra , 95(2):480–500, 1985

1985
[40]

Waschb¨ usch and A

J. Waschb¨ usch and A. Skowronski. Representation-ﬁnite bis erial algebras. Journal f¨ ur die reine und ange- wandte Mathematik , 1983(345):172–181, 1983

1983

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

K. K. Arnesen, R. Laking, and D. Pauksztello. Morphisms betwee n indecomposable complexes in the bounded derived category of a gentle algebra. Journal of Algebra , 467:1–46, 2016

work page 2016

[2] [2]

I. Assem. Tilted algebras of type An. Communications in Algebra , 10(19):2121–2139, 1982, https://doi.org/10.1080/00927878208822826

work page doi:10.1080/00927878208822826 1982

[3] [3]

I. Assem. Iterated tilted algebras of types Bn and Cn. Journal of Algebra , 84(2):361–390, 1983

work page 1983

[4] [4]

Assem, T

I. Assem, T. Br¨ ustle, G. Charbonneau-Jodoin, and P.-G. Plamo ndon. Gentle algebras arising from surface triangulations. Algebra & Number Theory , 4(2):201 – 229, 2010

work page 2010

[5] [5]

Assem and D

I. Assem and D. Happel. Generalized tilted algebras of type An. Communications in Algebra , 9(20):2101– 2125, 1981, https://doi.org/10.1080/00927878108822697

doi:10.1080/00927878108822697 1981

[6] [6]

Assem and A

I. Assem and A. Skowro´ nski. Iterated tilted algebras of type ˜An. Math. Z. , 195(2):269–290, 1987

work page 1987

[7] [7]

Auslander, I

M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S. O. Smalø. Representation theory of Artin algebras , volume 36 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997. Corrected reprin t of the 1995 original

work page 1997

[8] [8]

Bekkert and H

V. Bekkert and H. A. Merklen. Indecomposables in derived categ ories of gentle algebras. Algebras and Representation Theory, 6(3):285–302, 2003

work page 2003