pith. sign in

arxiv: 2509.18456 · v4 · submitted 2025-09-22 · 🧮 math.GT · math.QA

A Fast, Strong, Topologically Meaningful and Fun Knot Invariant

Dror Bar-Natan , Roland van der Veen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-18 13:49 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.GT math.QA
keywords knot invariantsAlexander polynomialSeifert genuspolynomial timeknot theoryOhtsuki invariantKhovanov homologyhyperbolic volume
0
0 comments X

The pith

The knot invariant pair Θ pairs the Alexander polynomial with a new θ that separates more knots up to 15 crossings than hyperbolic volume, HOMFLY-PT, and Khovanov homology combined, while computing in polynomial time on knots with hundreds.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a pair of knot invariants called Θ made from the Alexander polynomial Δ and a new component θ. This pair can be evaluated in polynomial time, allowing complete computation on random knots with more than 300 crossings and quick evaluation on even larger ones. On all knots with at most 15 crossings, Θ distinguishes more pairs than the combined use of hyperbolic volume, the HOMFLY-PT polynomial, and Khovanov homology. The invariant also supplies a bound on Seifert genus and is expected to carry additional topological content.

Core claim

We define Θ as the pair (Δ, θ) where Δ is the Alexander polynomial and θ is given by simple explicit formulas that run in polynomial time. This combination separates substantially more knots with up to 15 crossings than hyperbolic volume together with the HOMFLY-PT polynomial and Khovanov homology, remains computable on random knots beyond 300 crossings, supplies a genus bound, and is almost certainly the same as an invariant previously studied by Ohtsuki following Rozansky, Kricker, and Garoufalidis but now accessible through far simpler means.

What carries the argument

The pair Θ = (Δ, θ) where Δ is the Alexander polynomial and θ is the fast-computable invariant obtained from the paper's explicit formulas.

If this is right

  • Knots with up to 15 crossings become distinguishable in greater numbers using only this single efficient pair.
  • Random knots with over 300 crossings can be fully evaluated, opening study of large populations.
  • The genus bound gives a concrete lower estimate for the Seifert genus directly from the invariant values.
  • The simpler formulas make the underlying Ohtsuki-type invariant practical for routine use on big diagrams.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The method could serve as a practical first filter before applying heavier invariants to undecided knot pairs.
  • Equivalence with the Ohtsuki invariant may allow transfer of known properties from quantum topology into this simpler setting.
  • Patterns visible in the paper's figures for large knots might suggest new diagrammatic rules for θ.
  • Extending the separation comparison to all 16-crossing knots would provide a direct test of whether the strength advantage persists.

Load-bearing premise

The reported greater separation power on knots up to 15 crossings assumes the comparison used no post-hoc choices that favor Θ and that the polynomial-time procedures correctly compute the stated θ on knots larger than those checked in detail.

What would settle it

Two distinct knots with at most 15 crossings that share the same value of Θ yet differ in hyperbolic volume or in Khovanov homology would show that the separation power is not greater in every case.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.18456 by Dror Bar-Natan, Roland van der Veen.

Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. Figure 1.1: Θ as a bar code and a QR code, for all the knots in the Rolfsen table [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. Figure 1.2: Θ of some square weave knots, as computed by [BV3, WeaveKnots.nb] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.3. Figure 1.3: Θ of a randomized weave knot, as computed by [BV3, WeaveKnots.nb]. Crossings were chosen to be positive or negative with equal probabilities. 2. The Main Theorem 1 2 3 4 6 7 5 D φ4 “ ´1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: An example upright knot diagram. We start with the definition of Θ. Given an oriented n￾crossing knot K, we draw it in the plane as a long knot di￾agram D in such a way that the two strands intersecting at each crossing are pointing up (that’s always possible because we can always rotate crossings as needed), and so that at its beginning and at its end the knot is oriented upward. We call such a diagram … view at source ↗
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.4. Figure 1.4: θ (hexagonal QR code only) of the 15 largest knots that we have com￾puted by September 16, 2024. They are all “generic” in as much as we know, and they all have ě 300 crossings. The knots come from [DHOEBL]. Warning: Some screens/printers may introduce spurious Moir´e interference patterns [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: The 132-crossing torus knot T22{7 and a plot of its Θ invariant i ` (these are i ` 1 and i ` 2 if the labelling is by consecutive integers). Also, by convention “1” will always refer to the label of the first edge, and “2n ` 1” will always refer to the label of the last. With this in mind, we have that A “ I ` ř c Ac, with Ac given by s “ ´1 j i ` j ` i i s “ `1 j ` i ` j ÝÑ Ac column i ` column j ` row … view at source ↗
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: The modified Green function g˜ab is invariant under Reidemeister moves performed away from where it is measured. Lemma 7. Inserting a null vertex does not change g˜ab provided it is inserted away from the points a and b. 4 Proof. Let D be an upright knot diagram having an edge labelled i and let D1 be obtained from it by adding a null vertex within edge i, naming the two resulting half-edges j and k (in … view at source ↗
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: A generating set of oriented Reidemeister moves as in [Po2, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_4_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: The upright Reidemeister moves: The R1 and R3 moves are already upright and remain the same as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_4_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: The two sides Dl and Dr of the R3b move. The left side Dl consists of 3 distinguished crossings c l 1 “ p1, j, kq, c l 2 “ p1, i, k`q, c l 3 “ p1, i`, j`q and a collection of further crossings cy “ ps, m, nq P Y , where Y is the set of crossings not participating in the R3b move. The right side Dr consists of c r 1 “ p1, i, jq, c r 2 “ p1, i`, kq, c r 3 “ p1, j`, k`q and the same set Y of further crossin… view at source ↗
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Figure 5.1: The three pairs responsible for the deficit of 3 in the column n ď 11 of line 13 of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_5_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5.2
Figure 5.2. Figure 5.2: The 48-crossing Gompf-Scharlemann-Thompson GST 48 knot [GST]. Lines 16 through 18 show that at crossing number ď 15 and in the presence of Θ, and especially in the presence of both Θ and ρ2, it is pointless to also consider H or Kh, and only mildly useful to also consider Vol. Line 19 shows that once Vol has been added to Θ, the other invariants contribute almost nothing. We note that of all the invarian… view at source ↗
Figure 5.3
Figure 5.3. Figure 5.3: The invariant Θ of the fibered knot 12n242, also known as the p´2, 3, 7q pretzel knot, and of the fibered knot 77. For the first, spKq ą 0 and the bar code visibly matches with the top row of the QR code (though our screens and printers and eyes may not be good enough to detect minor shading differences, so a visual inspection may not be enough). For the second, twice the degree of ∆ is visibly greater t… view at source ↗
Figure 6.1
Figure 6.1. Figure 6.1: A long version of the rotational virtual knot KS from [Kau3]. It has X “ tp´1, 1, 6q,p´1, 2, 4q,p1, 9, 3q,p´1, 7, 5q,p1, 10, 8qu and φ “ p´1, 0, 0, 1, 0, ´1, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0q. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ` ` ´ ´ ´ φ9 “ 1 φ4 “ 1 φ6 “ ´1 11 of the first few sections of this paper “the middle”, we are quite unsure about the beginning and the end. The “beginning” can be construed to mean “the thought process that lea… view at source ↗
Figure 6.2
Figure 6.2. Figure 6.2: Θ for all the prime links with up to 9 crossings, up to reflections and with arbitrary choices of strand orientations. Empty boxes correspond to links for which ∆ “ 0. We note that the loop expansion of Conjecture 25 does not predict that Θ should extend to links. We also note that the solvable approximation technique of Discussion 27 does predict such an extension, and in fact, it predicts more: that mu… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In this paper we discuss a pair of polynomial knot invariants $\Theta=(\Delta,\theta)$ which is: * Theoretically and practically fast: $\Theta$ can be computed in polynomial time. We can compute it in full on random knots with over 300 crossings, and its evaluation at simple rational numbers on random knots with over 600 crossings. * Strong: Its separation power is much greater than the hyperbolic volume, the HOMFLY-PT polynomial and Khovanov homology (taken together) on knots with up to 15 crossings (while being computable on much larger knots). * Topologically meaningful: It gives a genus bound, and there are reasons to hope that it would do more. * Fun: Scroll to Figures 1.1-1.4, 3.1, and 6.2. $\Delta$ is merely the Alexander polynomial. $\theta$ is almost certainly equal to an invariant that was studied extensively by Ohtsuki, continuing Rozansky, Kricker, and Garoufalidis. Yet our formulas, proofs, and programs are much simpler and enable its computation even on very large knots.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the pair of polynomial knot invariants Θ = (Δ, θ), where Δ is the Alexander polynomial and θ is presented via new formulas claimed to be simpler than prior work by Ohtsuki, Rozansky, Kricker, and Garoufalidis. It asserts that Θ is computable in polynomial time (with explicit evaluations on random knots exceeding 300 crossings and evaluations at rationals beyond 600 crossings), possesses substantially greater separation power than the combination of hyperbolic volume, HOMFLY-PT polynomial, and Khovanov homology on the complete set of knots with at most 15 crossings, supplies a genus bound, and includes illustrative figures demonstrating its properties.

Significance. If the separation-power comparison is confirmed to rest on an exact implementation of the mathematical definition of θ (without approximation or post-hoc tuning) and on exhaustive use of the standard knot tables without selection bias, the result would supply a practical, scalable invariant that distinguishes more knots than established ones while remaining computable far beyond current limits. The explicit provision of simpler formulas, proofs, and programs enabling large-knot computation constitutes a clear strength for reproducibility and further use in computational topology.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5] §5 (Computational Results and Comparisons): The headline claim that Θ separates more knots than vol + HOMFLY-PT + Khovanov on all knots ≤15 crossings is load-bearing for the 'strong' descriptor. The manuscript must explicitly state the precise metric used for separation power (e.g., cardinality of the image of Θ versus total knots, or size of the induced partition), confirm that every knot in the standard enumeration was included without post-hoc exclusion, and verify that the polynomial-time algorithm for θ implements the exact definition given in §3 rather than an approximated or fitted version.
  2. [§3] §3 (Definition and Equivalence of θ): The assertion that θ is 'almost certainly equal' to the Ohtsuki invariant is used to support topological meaningfulness, yet the manuscript provides no rigorous proof of equivalence or even a systematic computational check on a representative sample of knots; this leaves the interpretation of the separation results and the genus bound dependent on an unproven identification.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Figure 1.1] Figure 1.1 caption: clarify the meaning of the color coding and whether the diagrams illustrate the action of θ or merely the underlying knot.
  2. [Introduction] Introduction: add an explicit reference to Ohtsuki's original papers when first mentioning the connection to prior invariants.
  3. Notation: ensure that the pair Θ is consistently typeset and that the distinction between the full invariant and its θ component is maintained in all tables and statements.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful and constructive report. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly to improve clarity and reproducibility.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [§5] §5 (Computational Results and Comparisons): The headline claim that Θ separates more knots than vol + HOMFLY-PT + Khovanov on all knots ≤15 crossings is load-bearing for the 'strong' descriptor. The manuscript must explicitly state the precise metric used for separation power (e.g., cardinality of the image of Θ versus total knots, or size of the induced partition), confirm that every knot in the standard enumeration was included without post-hoc exclusion, and verify that the polynomial-time algorithm for θ implements the exact definition given in §3 rather than an approximated or fitted version.

    Authors: We agree that these details must be stated explicitly. The separation power is measured by the cardinality of the image of Θ (number of distinct values) together with the number of parts in the induced partition of the knot set. In the revision we will add a precise definition of this metric in §5. All knots with at most 15 crossings were taken from the complete standard tables (KnotInfo/SnapPy enumeration) with no post-hoc exclusions or selection. The implementation of θ follows the exact recursive definition and formulas of §3; the code contains no approximations or fitting and was validated by direct comparison with the mathematical definition on all knots up to 10 crossings. We will insert a short verification paragraph confirming these points. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [§3] §3 (Definition and Equivalence of θ): The assertion that θ is 'almost certainly equal' to the Ohtsuki invariant is used to support topological meaningfulness, yet the manuscript provides no rigorous proof of equivalence or even a systematic computational check on a representative sample of knots; this leaves the interpretation of the separation results and the genus bound dependent on an unproven identification.

    Authors: The separation-power results and the genus bound are proved directly for the invariant θ as defined in §3 and do not rely on any identification with the Ohtsuki invariant. The phrase “almost certainly equal” is an informal observation based on matching values and properties; we do not claim a proof. We will add an explicit statement decoupling the main theorems from the conjectural identification and will include a table or paragraph summarizing the computational checks already performed on all knots up to 15 crossings plus additional random samples. This addresses the concern while preserving the manuscript’s claims. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: definitions and empirical claims are self-contained

full rationale

The paper introduces Θ = (Δ, θ) by explicit formulas, with Δ identified as the standard Alexander polynomial and θ defined via new polynomial-time expressions whose equivalence to the Ohtsuki invariant is asserted only as 'almost certainly equal' without using that equivalence to derive any properties or separation power. The headline separation-power comparison is obtained by direct computation on the complete set of knots with ≤15 crossings rather than by fitting parameters or renaming inputs; no equation or claim reduces by construction to a prior result from the same authors or to a self-referential definition. The algorithms are presented as faithful implementations of the given mathematical definitions, rendering the reported distinctions independent of the paper's own fitted values or internal citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The abstract introduces no free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms; the claims rest on standard knot-theory background and the existence of polynomial-time algorithms whose correctness is asserted but not derived here.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard algebraic and topological properties of knot polynomials and invariants hold.
    The work builds directly on established results in knot theory without stating new foundational assumptions.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5738 in / 1227 out tokens · 48114 ms · 2026-05-18T13:49:24.183703+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · 13 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    [Al] J. W. Alexander,Topological invariants of knots and link,Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.30(1928) 275–

    work page 1928

  2. [2]

    Bai,Alexander Polynomials of Ribbon Knots and Virtual Knots,arXiv:2103.07128

    [Ba] S. Bai,Alexander Polynomials of Ribbon Knots and Virtual Knots,arXiv:2103.07128. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv

  3. [3]

    Bar-Natan,On Khovanov’s Categorification of the Jones Polynomial,Algebraic and Geometric Topology2-16(2002) 337–370, arXiv:math.GT/0201043

    [BN1] D. Bar-Natan,On Khovanov’s Categorification of the Jones Polynomial,Algebraic and Geometric Topology2-16(2002) 337–370, arXiv:math.GT/0201043. See pp

    work page arXiv 2002

  4. [4]

    [BN6] D. Bar-Natan,Knot Invariants from Finite Dimensional Integration,talks in Beijing (July 2024, http://drorbn.net/icbs24), Geneva (August 2024,http://drorbn.net/ge24) and Bonn (May 2025,http://drorbn.net/bo25). See pp. 6, 7,

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Bar-Natan,The Strongest Genuinely Computable Knot Invariant in 2024,talk given in Toronto (October 2024,http://drorbn.net/to24)

    [BN7] D. Bar-Natan,The Strongest Genuinely Computable Knot Invariant in 2024,talk given in Toronto (October 2024,http://drorbn.net/to24). See pp. 6,

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Bar-Natan, Z

    [BDV] D. Bar-Natan, Z. Dancso and R. van der Veen,Over then Under Tangles,J. of Knot Theory and its Ramifications32-8(2023), arXiv:2007.09828. See pp

    work page arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    The Aarhus integral of rational homology 3-spheres I: A highly non trivial flat connection on S^3

    [BGRT] D. Bar-Natan, S. Garoufalidis, L. Rozansky, and D. P. Thurston,The ˚Arhus integral of rational homology 3-spheres I–III,Selecta Math., New Series8(2002) 315–339, arXiv:q-alg/9706004,8(2002) 341–371, arXiv:math.QA/9801049,10(2004) 305–324, arXiv:math.QA/9808013. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  8. [8]

    Bar-Natan and R

    [BV1] D. Bar-Natan and R. van der Veen,A Perturbed-Alexander Invariant,Quantum Topology15(2024) 449–472, arXiv:2206.12298. See pp. 6, 7, 11, 12, 14, 15, 24, 28,

    work page arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Bar-Natan and R

    [BV2] D. Bar-Natan and R. van der Veen,Perturbed Gaussian Generating Functions for Universal Knot Invariants,arXiv:2109.02057. See pp. 28,

    work page arXiv

  10. [10]

    A Fast, Strong, Topologically Meaningful and Fun Knot Invariant

    [BV3] D. Bar-Natan and R. van der Veen,A Fast, Strong, Topologically Meaningful, and Fun Knot Invari- ant,(self-reference), paper and related files athttp://drorbn.net/Theta. The arXiv:2509.18456 edition may be older. See pp. 4, 8, 11, 22, 23, 25, 26,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  11. [11]

    Becerra and K

    [BVH] J. Becerra and K. van Helden,Minimal Generating Sets of Rotational Reidemeister Moves,arXiv: 2506.15628. See pp

    work page arXiv

  12. [12]

    The Levine-Tristram signature: a survey

    [Co] A. Conway,The Levine-Tristram Signature: A Survey,in 2019–20 MATRIX Annals, Springer 2021, arXiv:1903.04477. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  13. [13]

    [CF] R. H. Crowell and R. H. Fox,Introduction to Knot Theory,Springer-Verlag GTM57(1963). See pp

    work page 1963

  14. [14]

    34 [FM] R. H. Fox and J. W. Milnor,Singularities of 2-Spheres in 4-Space and Cobordism of Knots,Osaka J. Math.3-2(1966) 257–267. See pp

    work page 1966

  15. [15]

    Garoufalidis and R

    [GK] S. Garoufalidis and R. Kashaev,Multivariable Knot Polynomials from Braided Hopf Algebras with Automorphisms,arXiv:2311.11528. See pp

    work page arXiv

  16. [16]

    Garoufalidis and S

    [GL] S. Garoufalidis and S. Y. Li,Patterns of theV 2-Polynomial of Knots,arXiv:2409.03557. See pp

    work page arXiv

  17. [17]

    Garoufalidis and L

    [GR] S. Garoufalidis and L. Rozansky,The Loop Expansion of the Kontsevich Integral, the Null-Move, and S-Equivalence,arXiv:math.GT/0003187. See pp. 1,

    work page arXiv

  18. [18]

    [GST] R. E. Gompf, M. Scharlemann, and A. Thompson,Fibered Knots and Potential Counterexamples to the Property 2R and Slice-Ribbon Conjectures,Geom. and Top.14(2010) 2305–2347, arXiv: 1103.1601. See pp. 25,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  19. [19]

    Juh´ asz,A Survey of Heegaard Floer Homology,in New Ideas in Low Dimensional Topology, Series on Knots and Everything56(2015) 237–296

    [Ju] A. Juh´ asz,A Survey of Heegaard Floer Homology,in New Ideas in Low Dimensional Topology, Series on Knots and Everything56(2015) 237–296. See pp

    work page 2015

  20. [20]

    [Kau2] L. H. Kauffman,Virtual Knot Theory,European J. Comb.20(1999) 663–690, arXiv: math.GT/9811028. See pp

    work page arXiv 1999

  21. [21]

    [Kau3] L. H. Kauffman,Rotational Virtual Knots and Quantum Link Invariants,J. of Knot Theory and its Ramifications24-13(2015), arXiv:1509.00578. See pp. 27,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  22. [22]

    Khovanov,A Categorification of the Jones Polynomial,Duke Mathematical Journal101-3(2000) 359–426, arXiv:math.QA/9908171

    [Kh] M. Khovanov,A Categorification of the Jones Polynomial,Duke Mathematical Journal101-3(2000) 359–426, arXiv:math.QA/9908171. See pp

    work page arXiv 2000

  23. [23]

    The lines of the Kontsevich integral and Rozansky's rationality conjecture

    [Kr] A. Kricker,The Lines of the Kontsevich Integral and Rozansky’s Rationality Conjecture,arXiv: math/0005284. See pp. 1,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  24. [24]

    World Scientific (1989) 55–63. See pp

    work page 1989

  25. [25]

    Levine,Knot cobordism groups in codimension two,Comment

    [Le] J. Levine,Knot cobordism groups in codimension two,Comment. Math. Helv.44(1969) 229—244. See pp

    work page 1969

  26. [26]

    [Li] W. B. R. Lickorish,An Introduction to Knot Theory,Springer-Verlag GTM175(1997). See pp

    work page 1997

  27. [27]

    L´ opez Neumann and R

    [LV] D. L´ opez Neumann and R. van der Veen,Non-Semisimplesl 2 Quantum Invariants of Fibred Links, Adv. in Math.480A(2025), arXiv:2407.15561. See pp

    work page arXiv 2025

  28. [28]

    [Ma] C. Manolescu,An Introduction to Knot Floer Homology,in Physics and Mathematics of Link Ho- mology, Contemporary Mathematics, Centre de Recherches Math´ ematiques Proceedings680(2016) 89–135. See pp

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    Ohtsuki,On the 2-Loop Polynomial of Knots,Geometry & Topology11(2007) 1357–1475

    [Oh2] T. Ohtsuki,On the 2-Loop Polynomial of Knots,Geometry & Topology11(2007) 1357–1475. See pp. 1, 28,

    work page 2007

  30. [30]

    A cabling formula for the 2-loop polynomial of knots

    [Oh3] T. Ohtsuki,A Cabling Formula for the 2-Loop Polynomial of Knots,Publ. RIMS, Kyoto University 40(2004) 949–971, arXiv:math/0310216. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  31. [31]

    Ozsv´ ath and Z

    [OS] P. Ozsv´ ath and Z. Szab´ o,An Introduction to Heegaard Floer Homology,Clay Mathematics Proceed- ings5(2004) 3–27. See pp

    work page 2004

  32. [32]

    Overbay,Perturbative Expansion of the Colored Jones Polynomial,Ph.D

    [Ov] A. Overbay,Perturbative Expansion of the Colored Jones Polynomial,Ph.D. thesis, University of North Carolina, August 2013,https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/concern/dissertations/hm50ts889. See pp. 24,

    work page 2013

  33. [33]

    Feynman diagrams for pedestrians and mathematicians

    [Po1] M. Polyak,Feynman Diagrams for Pedestrians and Mathematicians,arXiv:math/0406251. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    Minimal generating sets of Reidemeister moves

    [Po2] M. Polyak,Minimal Generating Sets of Reidemeister Moves,Quantum Topol.1(2010) 399–411, arXiv:0908.3127. See pp

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  35. [35]

    A Contribution of the Trivial Connection to Jones Polynomial and Witten's Invariant of 3d Manifolds I

    35 [Roz1] L. Rozansky,A Contribution of the Trivial Flat Connection to the Jones Polynomial and Witten’s Invariant of 3D Manifolds, I,Comm. Math. Phys.175-2(1996) 275–296, arXiv:hep-th/9401061. See pp. 1, 24,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  36. [36]

    The Universal R-Matrix, Burau Representaion and the Melvin-Morton Expansion of the Colored Jones Polynomial

    [Roz2] L. Rozansky,The UniversalR-Matrix, Burau Representation and the Melvin-Morton Expansion of the Colored Jones Polynomial,Adv. Math.134-1(1998) 1–31, arXiv:q-alg/9604005. See pp. 1, 24,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  37. [37]

    A universal U(1)-RCC invariant of links and rationality conjecture

    [Roz3] L. Rozansky,A UniversalUp1q-RCC Invariant of Links and Rationality Conjecture,arXiv: math/0201139. See pp. 1, 24,

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    Schaveling,Expansions of Quantum Group Invariants,Ph.D

    [Sch] S. Schaveling,Expansions of Quantum Group Invariants,Ph.D. thesis, Universiteit Leiden, Septem- ber 2020,https://scholarlypublications.universiteitleiden.nl/handle/1887/136272. See pp

    work page 2020

  39. [39]

    Tristram,Some cobordism invariants for links,Proc

    [Tr] A. Tristram,Some cobordism invariants for links,Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc.66(1969) 251—264. See pp

    work page 1969