Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 31 references

Invariant Stability Conditions on Certain Calabi-Yau Threefolds

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read On the local Calabi-Yau threefold $X=\omega_{\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1}$, the paper proves that a $\mathbb{Z}_2$-invariant locus in the stability space has an explicitly enumerated stable spectrum, computes all nonzero…

desk verdict Solid and honest note: the invariant stability conditions are explained as a fixed locus, the full DT spectrum on that locus is computed, and the stress-test worry about a nontrivial deck transformation on Stab0(Y) does not survive a careful reading. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.08531 v1 pith:QPV6NYVB submitted 2024-12-11 math.AG hep-thmath-phmath.MP

Tom Bridgeland , Fabrizio Del Monte , Luca Giovenzana This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGhep-thmath-phmath.MP MSC 14J3214F0514N3516G20
keywords stabilityconditionsDonaldson-ThomasinvariantsBPSspectrumlocalCalabi-Yauthreefoldsquiverswithpotentialresolvedconifoldanalyticwall-crossingstructuresbranetilings
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 addresses a question raised by physics computations: why do some local Calabi-Yau threefolds admit stability conditions with an unexpectedly simple BPS spectrum? For the total space of the canonical bundle over $\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1$, it answers by showing that these special stability conditions are exactly the ones fixed by a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry of the derived category, and that the fixed locus is isomorphic to the well-understood stability space of the resolved conifold. On this invariant locus every stable object is explicit, and the paper computes the complete set of nonzero Donaldson-Thomas invariants, which fill just four families of rays (Theorem 4.3). The boundedness of these invariants lets the paper conclude that the Donaldson-Thomas theory on the whole connected component defines an analytic wall-crossing structure, which it presents as the first such structure for a local Calabi-Yau threefold with compact divisors. The same induction is applied to the $Y^{N,0}$ family of toric threefolds, where analogous explicit formulas hold.

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the induction of stability conditions along a quotient, packaged as an isomorphism of fixed loci: given a finite abelian group $H$ acting on a threefold $Y$ with locally trivial canonical bundle, the crepant resolution $X\to Y/H$ and the associated derived equivalence $D_c(X)\cong D_c^H(Y)$ produce an isomorphism $\mathrm{Stab}(X)^G\cong \mathrm{Stab}(Y)^H$, where $G$ is the character group of $H$, and an object is semistable on the $X$-side exactly when its image under the forgetful functor is semistable on the $Y$-side. In the main example $Y$ is the resolved conifold $\mathcal{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(-1)^{\oplus 2}$, $H=\mathbb{Z}_2$ acts by $-1$ on the fibres, and $X=\omega_{\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1}$ is the crepant resolution of the quotient. Because $H$ acts trivially on the standard connected component $\mathrm{Stab}_0(Y)$, the invariant locus in $\mathrm{Stab}(X)$ is identified with the entire conifold component. The same induction is also realized algebraically by a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry of the four-vertex quiver with potential whose quotient is the two-vertex conifold quiver, giving a second route to the same invariant stability conditions and connecting the construction to brane tilings.

What would settle it

A direct check would be to compute the induced $\mathbb{Z}_2$ action on the covering $\varpi:\mathrm{Stab}_0(Y)\to\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathbb{Z}}(\Gamma,\mathbb{C})$ and on the Hom-spaces among the line bundles $\mathcal{O}_C(n)$ on the resolved conifold; if any deck transformation is nontrivial, or if the action sends the standard heart to a different heart, then the fixed locus is a proper subset of $\mathrm{Stab}_0(Y)$ and the identification used for Theorem 4.3 fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 4.3. For an invariant stability condition $\sigma$ on $D_c(X)$, $X=\omega_{\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1}$ (equivalently, on the Jacobi algebra of the four-vertex quiver with potential shown in Figure 1(a)), the complete list of nonzero Donaldson-Thomas invariants is $\Omega((n+1)\gamma_1+n\gamma_2)=\Omega(n\gamma_1+(n+1)\gamma_2)=1$, $\Omega((n+1)\gamma_3+n\gamma_4)=\Omega(n\gamma_3+(n+1)\gamma_4)=1$ for all $n\in\mathbb{Z}$, $\Omega((\gamma_1+\gamma_2)+n\delta)=\Omega((\gamma_3+\gamma_4)+n\delta)=-2$ for all $n\in\mathbb{Z}$, and $\Omega(n\delta)=-4$ for all $n\in\mathbb{Z}\setminus\{0\}$, with $\delta=\gamma_1+\gamma_2+\gamma_3+\gamma_4$. The non-central rays each contain two spherical stable objects with no extensions between them, giving the $+1$ values; the central ray consists of zero-dimensional equivariant sheaves on the resolved conifold orbifold, and the $-2$ and $-4$ values are read from the orbifold vertex expansion [11]. From this explicit bounded spectrum, the paper concludes that the Donaldson-Thomas theory on the whole connected component containing these points defines an analytic wall-crossing structure in the sense of [25], and that the associated DT Riemann-Hilbert problem has the trivial solution $X(\gamma)=\exp(Z(\gamma)/\epsilon)$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the paper's assertion that the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ symmetry fixes every stability condition in the standard component of the resolved-conifold stability space, making the invariant locus equal to that entire component; if the symmetry instead swapped some stability conditions, the invariant locus would be smaller and the computed list of Donaldson-Thomas invariants might be incomplete or incorrect.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $X=\omega_{\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1}$, the DT invariants of every stability condition in the connected component containing the invariant locus are determined in principle by Theorem 4.3 together with the wall-crossing formula, so the whole BPS spectrum of that component is under control.
  • Every invariant stability condition yields a convergent, integral BPS structure, and its DT Riemann-Hilbert problem has the trivial explicit solution $X(\gamma)=\exp(Z(\gamma)/\epsilon)$.
  • The connected component carries an analytic wall-crossing structure, which the paper states is the first known instance for a local Calabi-Yau threefold with compact divisors.
  • The same method produces explicit DT invariants for the infinite family $Y^{N,0}$: $\Omega(\gamma_{2j-1}+nv_j)=\Omega(\gamma_{2j}+nv_j)=1$, $\Omega(\pm\sum_{j=a}^b v_j+n\delta)=-2$, and $\Omega(n\delta)=-2N$.
  • The dP3 and pseudo-dP5 examples give further invariant loci whose quotient quivers are explicitly described, so their semistable objects and DT invariants can in principle be computed by the same mechanism.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same induction should apply to any local Calabi-Yau threefold that is a crepant resolution of a finite quotient of the resolved conifold; the $Y^{N,0}$ and pseudo-$dP_5$ examples then look like members of a general pattern rather than isolated coincidences.
  • The trivial Riemann-Hilbert solution at the invariant points, combined with the paper's observation that nontrivial solutions appear on a nearby codimension-one locus, suggests reading the invariant stratum as the 'algebraic' locus of a cluster integrable system; the paper does not explicitly draw this conclusion.
  • A testable extension is to deform the surface away from $\mathbb{P}^1\times\mathbb{P}^1$ while preserving the quotient-quiver symmetry and check whether the fixed-locus identification with the conifold component persists; if it does, the phenomenon is robust under deformation.
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.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs invariant stability conditions on the derived category of the local Calabi-Yau threefold X = ω_{P^1×P^1} by exploiting an action of H = Z/2 on the resolved conifold Y = O_{P^1}(-1)^{⊕2}. Using the derived McKay correspondence and Dell's inducing theorem, it identifies a connected component of the fixed locus Stab(X)^G with the standard component Stab_0(Y) of the conifold stability space. The authors then describe all semistable objects on this locus, compute the associated Donaldson-Thomas invariants (Theorem 4.3), and conclude that the resulting DT theory defines analytic wall-crossing structures in the sense of Kontsevich-Soibelman (Theorem 1.2). An algebraic parallel via quivers with potentials is developed, and further examples (pseudo-dP_5, dP_3, and Y^{N,0} geometries) are discussed.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper gives a complete and explicit description of the BPS spectrum on the invariant stratum of stability conditions for a local Calabi-Yau threefold containing compact divisors, and provides the first known instances of analytic wall-crossing structures in this setting. The main theorems are reductions to established results—Dell's inducing theorem, Toda's description of the conifold, and Bryan-Cadman-Young's orbifold vertex—so the proofs are mostly reliable. The paper also clarifies the origin of the 'fine-tuned' stability conditions previously found in the physics and mathematics literature. The presentation is clear, and the explicit DT invariants are concrete, falsifiable statements. The main weaknesses are a terse proof of a load-bearing identification and a likely index-range typo in the Y^{N,0} theorem.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 5.3, Theorem 5.1] The condition "0 < a ≤ b < N−1" in the statement of Theorem 5.1 excludes the single-variable terms needed for N=2. As written, for N=2 the middle line is empty, so the theorem omits the invariants Ω((γ1+γ2)+nδ) = −2 and Ω((γ3+γ4)+nδ) = −2 that appear in Theorem 4.3; this contradicts the claim in the text that "for N=2 it reproduces the DT invariants for the Z2-invariant stability conditions on ω_{P1×P1}". The generating function (26) uses the range 0 < a ≤ b < N, which is the correct condition. The theorem should be corrected to 0 < a ≤ b < N (equivalently b ≤ N−1).
  2. [Section 4.2] The identification Stab0(X)^G ≅ Stab0(Y) is load-bearing for the description of semistable objects and for the DT invariant computation of Theorem 4.3. The proof is compressed into the sentence: "The group H acts trivially on Γ = H*(Y,Z) and preserves the class of semistable objects listed in Theorem 4.1. This implies that the induced action of H on Stab0(Y) is trivial." This implication is not fully justified: one must show that the autoequivalence h_* induced by the H-action fixes each stability condition σ ∈ Stab0(Y), not merely that it preserves the set of isomorphism classes of stable objects. Since h_* acts trivially on Γ, the central charge is fixed, and because h_* preserves the torsion pair generated by the OC(n) and the zero-dimensional sheaves, it preserves the heart and the slicing. Please expand this argument to make the triviality of the H-action explicit.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Theorem 2.2 proof] The proof refers to equation (13) when checking that the bijection preserves quasi-numerical stability conditions, but no equation (13) is displayed; the reference should be to the continuity bijection obtained a few lines above.
  2. [Section 4.3, proof of Theorem 4.3] The conversion from the orbifold vertex formula to the stated DT invariants is delegated to [24, Sections 7.5.2–7.5.4]. A few lines spelling out how the exponents -2m and -4m translate into the invariants Ω((γ1+γ2)+nδ)=-2 and Ω(nδ)=-4 would improve readability and verifiability.
  3. [Section 5.1, equation (17)] The displayed computation of W_{PdP5/Z2} contains an intermediate term with a duplicated factor "-X(2)1,3 X(2)3,5 X(2)5,7 X(2)7,1" appearing twice; the final expression is correct, but the intermediate line should be cleaned up.
  4. [Section 5.2] The sentence "The stable objects for the corresponding invariant stability conditions on Dc(ωdP3)." is incomplete; it appears to be a leftover fragment and should be completed or removed.
  5. [Figure 2] The ray labels use an integer k that is not defined in the caption; relating k to the integer n in Theorem 4.3 would help the reader connect the figure to the theorem.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the DT invariants are imported from external orbifold-vertex computations, and the main fixed-locus theorem is Dell/Polishchuk's external result; self-citations are contextual. One proof gap in the asserted triviality of the H-action on Stab0(Y) is a correctness concern, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external results. Invariant stability conditions are constructed using Dell's inducing theorem (external, [17], with the geometric form credited to Polishchuk [28]) via Stab(X)^G ≅ Stab(Y)^H. The semistable objects are identified in Theorem 4.2 as images of H-equivariant sheaves listed in Theorem 4.1, which is Toda's external classification [29]. The DT invariants in Theorem 4.3 are not fitted: on non-central rays they are computed from two spherical objects with no extensions (giving +1), and on the central ray they are read off from the external Bryan-Cadman-Young orbifold vertex formula [11]. No parameter is adjusted to match the stated invariants, and the theorem is not used to define the stability conditions or the charges. The self-citations [14,15,16] appear as background, terminology, and applications; they are not load-bearing for Theorem 4.3. The only notable weakness is the assertion in Section 4.2: 'The group H acts trivially on Γ = H*(Y,Z) and preserves the class of semistable objects listed in Theorem 4.1. This implies that the induced action of H on Stab0(Y) is trivial.' Acting trivially on Γ alone does not obviously rule out deck transformations of the covering ϖ, so this is a proof gap that could affect the identification Stab0(X)^G ≅ Stab0(Y). However, a gap or potentially false premise is not circularity: the claim does not reduce to its own conclusion by definition, and the DT invariants are not used as inputs. Accordingly, the paper is nearly self-contained, with no circular steps; score 1 reflects the minor unproven premise rather than any circular reduction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central results depend on no fitted numerical parameters. It relies on a small set of substantial external theorems (McKay correspondence, Dell's inducing result, Toda's classification of the conifold stability space, Bryan-Cadman-Young orbifold vertex, Broomhead's dimer theorem) and on the asserted geometric consistency of several brane tilings. No new entities are postulated.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard axioms of Bridgeland stability conditions (locally finite, support property implicitly via quasi-numerical)
    Throughout, e.g. Section 2.1, the paper uses Bridgeland's axioms without proof.
  • domain assumption Derived McKay correspondence (Bridgeland-King-Reid): Φ: D(X) → D^H(Y) is an equivalence for crepant resolutions of Gorenstein quotients.
    Invoked as Theorem 2.1 in Section 2.2 to transfer group actions and identify categories.
  • domain assumption Dell's inducing theorem [17, Lemma 2.23]: the forgetful functor from H-equivariant to ordinary derived category induces an isomorphism of fixed loci of stability spaces.
    Core ingredient in Theorem 2.2 (Section 2.2) and Theorem 3.1 (Section 3.2); paper relies on this arXiv result rather than proving it.
  • domain assumption Toda's classification of Stab0(Y) for the resolved conifold (Theorem 4.1), including the description of stable objects and the covering property of the central charge map.
    Used in Section 4.1 as the starting point for the invariant stability conditions and ray structure.
  • domain assumption Bryan-Cadman-Young orbifold vertex computation of degree zero DT invariants for [Y/H].
    Used in Section 4.3 and 5.3 to read off the central-ray DT invariants.
  • domain assumption Broomhead's geometric consistency theorem for brane tilings (Theorem 3.3) and the claimed geometric consistency of all tilings in the paper.
    Invoked in Section 3.3 for the algebraic approach to examples; the geometric consistency checks are asserted, not shown.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Invariant Stability Conditions on Certain Calabi-Yau Threefolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QPV6NYVB

@misc{pith2026241208531,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Invariant Stability Conditions on Certain Calabi-Yau Threefolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QPV6NYVB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.08531}
}
abstract

We apply results on inducing stability conditions to local Calabi-Yau threefolds and obtain applications to Donaldson-Thomas (DT) theory. A basic example is the total space of the canonical bundle of $Z=\mathbb{P}^1\times \mathbb{P}^1$. We use a result of Dell to construct stability conditions on the derived category of $X$ for which all stable objects can be explicitly described. We relate them to stability conditions on the resolved conifold $Y=\mathscr{O}_{\mathbb{P}^1}(-1)^{\oplus 2}$ in two ways: geometrically via the McKay correspondence, and algebraically via a quotienting operation on quivers with potential. These stability conditions were first discussed in the physics literature by Closset and del Zotto, and were constructed mathematically by Xiong by a different method. We obtain a complete description of the corresponding DT invariants, from which we can conclude that they define analytic wall-crossing structures in the sense of Kontsevich and Soibelman. In the last section we discuss several other examples of a similar flavour.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.08531 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Quivers for X = ωP1×P1 and Y = OP1 (−1)⊕2 The potentials are respectively W = −X (1) 1,2X (1) 2,3X (1) 3,4X (1) 4,1 − X (2) 1,2X (2) 2,3X (2) 3,4X (2) 4,1 + X (2) 1,2X (1) 2,3X (2) 3,4X (1) 4,1 + X (1) 1,2X (2) 2,3X (1) 3,4X (2) 4,1 , (2) and W′ = −X (1) 1,2X (1) 2,1X (2) 1,2X (2) 2,1 + X (2) 1,2X (1) 2,1X (1) 1,2X (2) 2,1 , (3) where X (k) i,j denotes the k-th arrow from the vertex i to the vertex j. Rotation by a … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Ray diagram for the invariant stability condition on ωP1×P1 . 1.3. Further applications. One interesting application of Theorem 1.1 uses a deep result of Kontsevich and Soibelman, who showed [25, Section 3.5] that a certain property relating to growth rates of DT invariants depends only on the connected component containing a given stability condition. Since it is immediate from Theorem 1.1 that this property holds … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Quivers for Example 3.2 3.3. Brane tilings. Brane tilings are a useful tool for constructing quivers with potential whose Jacobi algebras are noncommutative crepant resolutions of toric varieties. Their significance in this context was first recognized in the physics literature [21, 19]. These developments, together with later advances, were subsequently formalised mathematically in [10]. A brane tiling is a biparti… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fans arising from orbifolding P dP5. arises for the generic local del Pezzo 5 threefold, obtained from the blowup of P 2 at five general points (see Section C.7 in [2]), although with a different potential. The potential for ωP dP5 is WP dP5 = −X1,3X3,5X5,7X7,1 + X1,4X…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Quotient quivers for ωP dP5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Dimer models and periodic quivers for ωP dP5 (red fundamental domain), ωP1×P1 (green fundamental domain), and the resolved conifold (purple fundamental domain). The quotient operation described in this example are best described in terms of dimer models. We define a ch…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Quiver for ωdP3 and its quotients [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Toric diagram of the Y N,0 singularity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Examples of quivers of Y N,0 geometries they are resolutions of ZN orbifolds of the conifold, so that the case N = 2 is the ωP1×P1 geometry, while the case N = 1 is the resolved conifold. We can construct vectors γi of Chern characters from those of the conifold by te…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    Dell, Stability conditions on free abelian quotients , 2307.00815

    H. Dell, Stability conditions on free abelian quotients , 2307.00815

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    Bayer and E

    A. Bayer and E. Macr ` ı,The space of stability conditions on the local projective plane , Duke Math. J. 160 (2011) 263

    work page 2011

  3. [2]

    Beaujard, J

    G. Beaujard, J. Manschot and B. Pioline, Vafa–Witten Invariants from Exceptional Collections , Commun. Math. Phys. 385 (2021) 101 [ 2004.14466]

    arXiv 2021

  4. [3]

    Benvenuti, S

    S. Benvenuti, S. Franco, A. Hanany, D. Martelli and J. Sparks, An Infinite family of superconformal quiver gauge theories with Sasaki-Einstein duals , JHEP 06 (2005) 064 [ hep-th/0411264]

    arXiv 2005

  5. [4]

    Bershtein, P

    M. Bershtein, P. Gavrylenko and A. Marshakov, Cluster integrable systems, q-Painlev´ e equations and their quantization, JHEP 02 (2018) 077 [ 1711.02063]

    arXiv 2018

  6. [5]

    Bershtein, P

    M. Bershtein, P. Gavrylenko and A. Marshakov, Cluster Toda chains and Nekrasov functions , Theor. Math. Phys. 198 (2019) 157 [ 1804.10145]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [6]

    Bridgeland, Stability conditions on a non-compact Calabi-Yau threefold , Comm

    T. Bridgeland, Stability conditions on a non-compact Calabi-Yau threefold , Comm. Math. Phys. 266 (2006) 715

    work page 2006

  8. [7]

    Bridgeland, Stability conditions on triangulated categories , Annals of Mathematics (2007) 317

    T. Bridgeland, Stability conditions on triangulated categories , Annals of Mathematics (2007) 317

    work page 2007

Show all 31 references
  1. [8]

    Bridgeland, Riemann-Hilbert problems from Donaldson-Thomas theory , Invent

    T. Bridgeland, Riemann-Hilbert problems from Donaldson-Thomas theory , Invent. Math. 216 (2019) 69 [1611.03697]

    2019 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Bridgeland, A

    T. Bridgeland, A. King and M. Reid, The McKay correspondence as an equivalence of derived categories , Journal of the American Mathematical Society 14 (2001) 535

    2001

  3. [10]

    Broomhead, Dimer models and Calabi-Yau algebras , vol

    N. Broomhead, Dimer models and Calabi-Yau algebras , vol. 215. American Mathematical Society, 2012

    2012

  4. [11]

    Bryan, C

    J. Bryan, C. Cadman and B. Young, The orbifold topological vertex , Advances in Mathematics 229 (2012) 531

    2012

  5. [12]

    Closset and M

    C. Closset and M. Del Zotto, On 5D SCFTs and their BPS quivers. Part I: B-branes and brane tilings , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 26 (2022) 37 [ 1912.13502]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [13]

    D. A. Cox, J. B. Little and H. K. Schenck, Toric varieties, vol. 124 of Graduate Studies in Mathematics . American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2011, 10.1090/gsm/124

    2011 doi

  7. [14]

    Del Monte, BPS Spectra and Algebraic Solutions of Discrete Integrable Systems , Commun

    F. Del Monte, BPS Spectra and Algebraic Solutions of Discrete Integrable Systems , Commun. Math. Phys. 405 (2024) 147 [ 2306.01626]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Del Monte and P

    F. Del Monte and P. Longhi, Quiver Symmetries and Wall-Crossing Invariance , Commun. Math. Phys. 398 (2023) 89 [ 2107.14255]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Del Monte and P

    F. Del Monte and P. Longhi, The threefold way to quantum periods: WKB, TBA equations and q-Painlev´ e , SciPost Phys. 15 (2023) 112 [ 2207.07135]

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Elagin, On equivariant triangulated categories , 1403.7027

    A. Elagin, On equivariant triangulated categories , 1403.7027. INV ARIANT STABILITY CONDITIONS 25

    arXiv

  11. [19]

    Franco, A

    S. Franco, A. Hanany, K. D. Kennaway, D. Vegh and B. Wecht, Brane dimers and quiver gauge theories , JHEP 01 (2006) 096 [ hep-th/0504110]

    2006 arXiv

  12. [20]

    J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J. Sparks and D. Waldram, Sasaki-Einstein metrics on S2 × S3, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8 (2004) 711 [ hep-th/0403002]

    2004 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Hanany and K

    A. Hanany and K. D. Kennaway, Dimer models and toric diagrams , hep-th/0503149

    arXiv

  14. [22]

    Hanany and R.-K

    A. Hanany and R.-K. Seong, Brane Tilings and Reflexive Polygons , Fortsch. Phys. 60 (2012) 695 [ 1201.2614]

    2012 arXiv

  15. [23]

    V. A. Hiniˇ c,When is a ring of invariants of a Gorenstein ring also a Gorenstein ring? , Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ser. Mat. 40 (1976) 50

    1976

  16. [24]

    Joyce and Y

    D. Joyce and Y. Song, A theory of generalized Donaldson-Thomas invariants , Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 217 (2012) iv+199

    2012

  17. [25]

    Kontsevich and Y

    M. Kontsevich and Y. Soibelman, Analyticity and resurgence in wall-crossing formulas , Letters in Mathematical Physics 112 (2022) 32

    2022

  18. [26]

    Li, On stability conditions for the quintic threefold , Invent

    C. Li, On stability conditions for the quintic threefold , Invent. Math. 218 (2019) 301

    2019

  19. [27]

    Macr ` ı, S

    E. Macr ` ı, S. Mehrotra and P. Stellari,Inducing stability conditions , J. Algebraic Geom. 18 (2009) 605

    2009

  20. [28]

    Polishchuk, Constant families of t-structures on derived categories of coherent sheaves , Mosc

    A. Polishchuk, Constant families of t-structures on derived categories of coherent sheaves , Mosc. Math. J. 7 (2007) 109

    2007

  21. [29]

    Toda, Stability conditions and crepant small resolutions , Trans

    Y. Toda, Stability conditions and crepant small resolutions , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 360 (2008) 6149

    2008

  22. [30]

    Watanabe, Certain invariant subrings are Gorenstein

    K. Watanabe, Certain invariant subrings are Gorenstein. I, II , Osaka Math. J. 11 (1974) 1

    1974

  23. [31]

    Xiong, Invariant stability conditions on local P1 × P1 (after Del Monte-Longhi) , 2404.05232

    Y. Xiong, Invariant stability conditions on local P1 × P1 (after Del Monte-Longhi) , 2404.05232. (T. Bridgeland) Department of Pure Mathematics, University of Sheffield, Hicks Building, Hounsfield Road, Sheffield, S3 7RH, UK Email address : t.bridgeland@sheffield.ac.uk (Fabriz...

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.