Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Classification of Minimal Abelian Coulomb Branches

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper classifies all Abelian 3d N=4 quiver gauge theories whose Coulomb branch is an isolated conical symplectic singularity, and identifies each resulting geometry as a quotient of flat quaternionic space.

desk verdict Chain classification is solid and the cokernel mirror construction is a real asset; the cycle proof has a load-bearing gap in Appendix B that needs fixing. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19766 v1 pith:ZW452GBC submitted 2024-12-27 hep-th

Antoine Bourget , Quentin Lamouret , Sinan Moura Soysüren , Marcus Sperling This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords 3dN=4gaugetheoriesCoulombbranchisolatedconicalsymplecticsingularitymagneticquiversAbelianquiverchargesmirrorsymmetrydecayandfissionalgorithmquotientsingularities
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

Three-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=4$ quiver gauge theories possess a distinguished branch of vacua, the Coulomb branch, which forms a conical symplectic singularity; the minimal case, with exactly two symplectic leaves, is the elementary building block out of which every such moduli space is stratified. This paper determines, for Abelian quivers — all gauge nodes $\mathrm{U}(1)$, with arbitrary hypermultiplet charges — exactly which quivers have a minimal Coulomb branch and what the branch is. The answer is a short list: a chain of nodes with $\gcd(\ell_1, k_n) > 1$ and all other cross-gcds equal to $1$, or a cycle whose charges balance ($\prod_i k_i = \prod_j \ell_j$) and whose non-adjacent charge pairs are coprime. Every geometry obtained is a quotient of flat quaternionic space $\mathbb{H}^n$ by a finite cyclic group or by $\mathrm{U}(1)$, the spaces written $h_{n,k,\sigma}$ and $h_{n,\sigma}$. The classification is proven twice, once through the decay-and-fission stratification algorithm and once through explicit 3d mirror symmetry; the mirror computation is itself a methodological step, because it correctly captures discrete gauge factors in the mirror theory.

What carries the argument

The object carrying the whole argument is the charge matrix $\rho : \mathbb{Z}^{n_G} \to \mathbb{Z}^{n_H}$ of the quiver together with its cokernel: the Pontryagin dual of $\mathbb{Z}^{n_H}/\mathrm{Im}(\rho)$ is the gauge group of the 3d mirror theory, including discrete factors that earlier kernel-based mirror constructions missed. Minimality then becomes a number-theoretic condition on this matrix: every embedded sub-chain must have a trivial mirror, which occurs precisely when the relevant gcds of edge charges are $1$, while at least one distinguished gcd — $\gcd(\ell_1, k_n)$ for a chain — must exceed $1$ to keep the leaf structure non-trivial. The proofs implement this through Smith normal form (with Bézout coefficients reducing the chain to its framed 'reduced' form, where $\delta_i = \gcd(k_i, \prod_{j \le i} \ell_j)$, and a Smith decomposition for the cycle whose diagonal entries yield the mirror charges $\sigma_i = \gcd(\ell_{i+2}, k_i)$) and through the decay-and-fission algorithm, which builds the stratification whose collapse to two leaves defines stability.

What would settle it

Take the five-node cycle with edge charges $(\ell_1,\ell_2,\ell_3,\ell_4,\ell_5) = (2,3,5,7,11)$ and $k_j = \ell_{j+2}$ (indices mod 5), so $k = (5,7,11,2,3)$; it satisfies the cycle hypotheses $\prod k_i = \prod \ell_j$ and $\gcd(\ell_i, k_j) = 1$ except for the allowed adjacent and next-to-adjacent pairs, and the paper's claim predicts a mirror $\mathrm{U}(1)$ theory with charges $(5,7,11,2,3) = (\gcd(\ell_3,k_1), \gcd(\ell_4,k_2), \gcd(\ell_5,k_3), \gcd(\ell_1,k_4), \gcd(\ell_2,k_5))$. Computing the full Smith normal form, i.e. the cokernel of this explicit $5 \times 5$ charge matrix, settles the cycle half of the classification: if any mirror charge differs from these, the asserted $\mathbb{Z}_n$ shift-invariance of the appendix fails. A separate check for the tree half: a connected tree-like Abelian quiver with a vertex of degree at least three whose Coulomb branch has exactly two symplectic leaves would disprove the claim that only chains are stable.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Proposition 1: a unitary 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ Abelian quiver gauge theory with well-defined length has an $n$-dimensional isolated conical symplectic singularity as its Coulomb branch if and only if it is a chain with $\gcd(\ell_1, k_n) > 1$ and $\gcd(\ell_i, k_j) = 1$ for every other pair $i \le j$, or a cycle with $\prod_i k_i = \prod_j \ell_j$ and $\gcd(\ell_i, k_j) = 1$ for every pair of charges that are not adjacent or next-to-adjacent around the cycle. Proposition 2 then identifies the geometries: chain branches are precisely the quotients $h_{n,\delta,\sigma} = (\mathbb{H}^n/\mathbb{Z}_\delta)[\sigma]$ with $\delta = \gcd(\ell_1, k_n)$ and $\sigma$ fixed by the charge ratios, while cycle branches are the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ quotients $h_{n,\sigma}$ whose charges $\sigma_i = \gcd(\ell_{i+2}, k_i)$ are pairwise coprime — matching, as a consistency check, the known isolated symplectic singularities built from $\mathrm{U}(1)$ quotients with pairwise coprime charges. The classification is established twice: the decay-and-fission stratification of a generic quiver collapses to two leaves exactly under these gcd conditions, and, independently, the 3d mirror computed from the cokernel of the charge matrix is a $\mathbb{Z}_{\gcd(\ell_1,k_n)}$ orbifold for chains and a $\mathrm{U}(1)$ theory with $n$ hypermultiplets of charges $\sigma_i$ for cycles. The same arguments show that no non-chain tree-like Abelian quiver is stable and that cyclic structures without a well-defined length reduce to the chain class.

Load-bearing premise

For cycle quivers, the mirror-symmetry proof computes only two of the $n$ Smith-normal-form charges explicitly — $\gcd(\ell_1, k_{n-1})$ and $\gcd(\ell_n, k_{n-2})$ — and obtains the remaining charges from an asserted invariance of the whole computation under a global $\mathbb{Z}_n$ shift of the cycle; if that shift-invariance step is wrong, the identification of cycle geometries as $h_{n,\sigma}$ and the sufficiency half of the cycle classification would fail.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For Abelian quivers, a minimal Coulomb branch exists only for the chain and cycle families: the paper proves that every other tree-like quiver, and every quiver containing a well-defined-length cycle as a substructure, has a non-minimal or trivial Coulomb branch.
  • All geometries so realized belong to the two quotient families $h_{n,k,\sigma}$ and $h_{n,\sigma}$, so the classification of Abelian minimal Coulomb branches and of their geometries coincide: the isolated conical symplectic singularities of this class are quotients of $\mathbb{H}^n$ by $\mathbb{Z}_k$ or $\mathrm{U}(1)$.
  • The agreement of the decay-and-fission proof with the mirror-symmetry proof supports decay and fission as a reliable way to recognise minimal degenerations in magnetic quivers.
  • The cokernel method computes the 3d mirror of any $\mathrm{U}(1)^r$ gauge theory and correctly produces discrete gauge factors, removing a longstanding mismatch between kernel-based mirror duals and the actual branch geometry.
  • Cycles without a well-defined length, and other quivers with cyclic substructure, are argued to be equivalent — when minimal — to chain quivers, so the two families close the classification under gauge-reparametrisation equivalence.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One testable consequence of the cycle half: because only two of the mirror charges are worked out explicitly in the Smith-normal-form computation, carrying out the full diagonalisation for a five-node cycle (say charges $(\ell_1,\dots,\ell_5) = (2,3,5,7,11)$ with $k_j = \ell_{j+2}$) converts the cyclic-shift step from an asserted invariance into a verified computation.
  • The gcd-only character of the classification suggests a purely arithmetic normal form: the redundancy analysis (permuting hypermultiplets, flipping charge signs, and the harmless $\gcd(\ell_{i+1}, k_i)$ data in cycles) indicates that each geometry $h_{n,\sigma}$ or $h_{n,k,\sigma}$ has a canonical reduced quiver, which would turn the classification into an effective enumeration of minimal transver
  • If, as the authors expect, non-Abelian gauge nodes are more restrictive, then the quotient-type conclusion drawn here for Abelian theories may bound what any unitary magnetic quiver can produce; conversely, the exotic isolated symplectic singularities mentioned in the introduction would have to require non-Abelian or non-quiver constructions, since the Abelian class cannot reach them.
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. This paper studies 3d N=4 unitary Abelian quiver gauge theories whose Coulomb branch is an isolated conical symplectic singularity. The main result, Proposition 1, classifies such 'stable' quivers as either chains with gcd(ell_1,k_n)>1 and all other relevant gcds equal to 1, or cycles with well-defined length and gcd(ell_i,k_j)=1 for all pairs that are not adjacent or next-to-adjacent. Proposition 2 identifies the resulting geometries as quotients of H^n by U(1) or a finite cyclic group, namely h_{n,k,sigma} and h_{n,sigma}. The proof is carried out in two ways: one using the decay and fission algorithm, and another using an explicit 3d mirror-symmetry computation via the cokernel and Smith normal form of the charge matrix. The paper also develops a cokernel-based method for computing mirror theories that captures discrete gauge factors in the mirror.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a complete classification of minimal Abelian Coulomb branches and a substantial step toward understanding isolated conical symplectic singularities realized by quiver gauge theories. The chain half is supported by detailed gcd arguments, an induction based on decay and fission, and an independent reduced-representation proof, which is a genuine strength. The cokernel mirror construction, including discrete gauge factors, is a concrete and useful computational tool. The cycle half is more fragile: the sufficiency proof in Appendix B rests on an unverified shift-invariance assertion, and the necessity direction is only sketched. The paper is therefore a valuable contribution whose central cycle claims need additional proof before they can be fully relied upon.

major comments (2)
  1. [Appendix B, Eq. (B.6)] The proof of the Lemma in Section 4.1 is incomplete at the decisive step. After the Smith reduction (B.6), only the two entries delta = gcd(ell_1,k_{n-1}) and epsilon = gcd(ell_n,k_{n-2}) of the last row of W are computed; the remaining n-2 entries are left as uncomputed stars. The statement that 'the whole computation made here is invariant under a global shift by Z_n' is asserted without proof, and this assertion is exactly what identifies all mirror charges as sigma_i = gcd(ell_{i+2}, k_i). Since Proposition 2(ii) and the sufficiency half of the cycle classification depend on this identification, please provide an explicit computation of the remaining entries of W, or an independent argument that the Smith reduction can be chosen with the claimed cyclic symmetry. A symbolic computation for general n would settle this point.
  2. [Section 4.1, paragraph after the Lemma] The necessity of conditions (4.2) is dismissed with 'Using similar arguments, one can also show...' and no argument is given. This is load-bearing for the 'only if' direction of Proposition 1 for cycles: one must show that a violation of any gcd condition forces the mirror gauge group to become a product and the Coulomb branch to be non-minimal. Please spell out this converse, either by exhibiting the required higgsing or by reducing to the chain case.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Proposition 1 and Section 3.1] The indexing convention is inconsistent: Proposition 1 labels chain and cycle quivers with n+1 vertices, while Section 3.1 and Figure 5 use n vertices with n-1 edges and conditions such as gcd(ell_1,k_{n-1}). Aligning the notation would make the classification easier to check against the proofs.
  2. [Introduction] There is a typo in the first paragraph: 'the the minimal degenerations' should read 'the minimal degenerations'.
  3. [Equation (3.28b)] In the relation delta_i X_i = -q_{i+1} X_{i+1}, the range '1 <= q <= n-2' should read '1 <= i <= n-2'.
  4. [Section 4.2] The phrase 'irregardless of having a minimal Coulomb branch' should be 'regardless of having a minimal Coulomb branch'.
  5. [Section 4.2] The discussion of cycle quivers without well-defined length concludes that they are either trivial or described by stable chain quivers, but this is only supported by examples and a kernel analysis, not by a proof. Since the classification in Proposition 1 is restricted to well-defined length, this is not load-bearing, but the conclusion in Section 5 states it as a result; please mark it as conjectural or provide a proof.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No substantive circularity: the classification is derived by explicit cokernel/mirror computations, with only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation of the decay-fission algorithm; Appendix B's unproved Z_n shift-invariance is a proof gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The central claims of the paper are not equivalent to their inputs by construction. The chain classification in Proposition 1(i) is given two derivations: Section 3.1.1 uses the decay-fission algorithm, but Section 3.1.2 derives the gcd constraints directly from the cokernel of the reduced charge matrix (3.27) and shows that violating any constraint leaves a residual mirror gauge group, so the constraints are outputs rather than fitted assumptions. The geometry identification h_{n,k,sigma} follows from the computed mirror orbifold, not from the proposition being proved. For cycle quivers, the Lemma in Section 4.1 is supported by the Smith-normal-form computation in Appendix B, and the claimed mirror charges sigma_i = gcd(ell_{i+2}, k_i) are derived quantities, not parameters tuned to reproduce the classification. The only self-citation with any role is the decay-fission algorithm of [25,26], used to organize Hasse diagrams and motivate the gcd constraints; because an independent mirror-symmetry computation is provided for the main classification, this self-citation is not load-bearing. I also examined the step highlighted by the skeptic: Appendix B states that only two entries of the last row of W have been computed and then invokes invariance under a global Z_n shift to fix the remaining charges. That is an unproved inference and, if false, would leave the cycle sufficiency proof incomplete. However, it is a proof gap, not circularity: the uncomputed charges are the very quantities being derived, and they are not set equal to the classification's conclusion as an input. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors' prior work is invoked to forbid alternatives. The paper also appeals to external mathematical results, such as Namikawa's isolated-singularity criterion, for the geometry identification. I therefore find no constructional circularity and assign score 2 only for the minor, non-load-bearing reliance on the authors' own decay-fission algorithm in part of the proof structure.

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

No fitted numbers appear in the classification; the charge pairs (l_i, k_i) are the input data classified by gcd conditions, and the Bezout coefficients used in reductions are non-canonical auxiliary choices that do not affect the result. No new physical entities are posited: discrete gauge factors in mirrors emerge from the cokernel computation rather than being added by hand.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption 3d N=4 mirror symmetry exchanges the Coulomb branch of a theory with the Higgs branch of its mirror dual.
    Used throughout Sections 2.2, 3, and 4: the Coulomb branch geometry is identified by computing the Higgs branch of the mirror theory obtained from the cokernel of the charge matrix.
  • domain assumption Good 3d N=4 quiver theories have conical Coulomb branches with no decoupled free fields; the paper uses the unitarity-bound definition of good rather than the balance condition.
    Section 2.1 restricts to good theories and later uses this to argue that trivial mirror hypermultiplets signal a non-minimal branch.
  • domain assumption The decay and fission algorithm of Bourget, Sperling, and Zhong correctly computes all possible decay and fission products and hence the full stratification.
    Used in one of the two proofs in Sections 3.1.1 and 4.1 to trivialize embedded chains; the paper treats the mirror proof as an independent check.
  • domain assumption Namikawa's theorem states that the U(1) hyper-Kahler quotient with n hypermultiplets of pairwise coprime charges is an isolated symplectic singularity.
    Invoked in Section 4.1 to identify the geometry h_{n,sigma} and to connect the classification to existing isolated singularity results.
  • standard math Integer matrices admit Smith normal form, and Pontryagin duality of the cokernel computes the mirror gauge group including discrete factors.
    Used in Section 2.2 and Appendix B; the physical interpretation that this is the exact mirror is part of the paper's method.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Classification of Minimal Abelian Coulomb Branches." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZW452GBC

@misc{pith2026241219766,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Classification of Minimal Abelian Coulomb Branches},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZW452GBC}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19766}
}
abstract

Obtaining the classification of 3d $\mathcal{N}=4$ quivers whose Coulomb branches have an isolated singularity is an essential step in understanding moduli spaces of vacua of supersymmetric field theories with 8 supercharges in any dimension. In this work, we derive a full classification for such Abelian quivers with arbitrary charges, and identify all possible Coulomb branch geometries as quotients of $\mathbb{H}^n$ by $\mathrm{U}(1)$ or a finite cyclic group. We give two proofs, one which uses the decay and fission algorithm, and another one relying only on explicit computations involving 3d mirror symmetry. In the process, we put forward a method for computing the 3d mirror of any $\mathrm{U}(1)^r$ gauge theory, which is sensitive to discrete gauge factors in the mirror theory. This constitutes a confirmation for the decay and fission algorithm.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.19766 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A 3d N = 4 cycle quiver theory and its mirror dual theory. a: In the cycle quiver with 6 vertices, each gauge vertex carries two descriptors; its rank 1 and its label in brackets. Each non-simply laced edge denotes the higher gauge charge with respect to the U(1) gauge factor positioned at the gauge vertex to which the higher charge is orientated away from. The two charges K and L are defined to be: K = k4 and L = ℓ… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A 3d N = 4 Abelian unitary quiver with six vertices (Figure a) and its mirror dual theory. The mirror dual theory in Figure b is equipped with the gauge group U(1)×Z2 and six pairs of N = 2 chiral multiplets. Two of them carry charge with respect to both gauge factors in the product group The cokernel Z 6/Im (ρ) for this charge matrix is generated by elements {Xi} 6 i=1 subject to the following relations: ℓ1X1 = X6 … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. a: Example of a 3d N = 4 quiver whose mirror theory is, in general, not a quiver and only contains discrete gauge groups. b: In the special case of ℓi = 1 for all i ̸= k, n−1, the mirror admits a quiver description. We find that the cokernel of ρ is isomorphic to Z × Z2, and therefore the gauge group of the mirror is U(1) × Z2. We can read how charges are assigned to the six hypermultiplets from (2.7a): [Xi ]U(1) = … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (13 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: An Abelian extended cyclic quiver (Figure a) and an Abelian chain quiver (Figure b) that are related to each other by reparametrization. minimal set of linearly independent relations, and a change of basis on the generators which diago￾nalizes these relations. Concrete…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Generic 3d N = 4 Abelian unitary n-vertices chain quiver theory with (ℓ, −k)-edges. Each vertex carries two descriptors: 1 denoting the rank of the associated U(1) gauge group and in brackets the vertex label. The (n − 1)-many edges are equipped with the integers ℓi, o…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Two-vertices chain quiver (a) and its 3d N = 4 mirror dual (b). The mirror dual has a discrete gauge group Zgcd(ℓ1,k1) and matter content composed of one N = 2 chiral-pair (A, Ae). For the induction step, one assumes the constraints extended to a chain quiver with (n −…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Three-vertices chain quiver (a) and its generic Coulomb branch Hasse diagram (b), derived using the decay and fission algorithm. In case the constraints gcd (ℓi , ki) = 1 for i ∈ {1, 2} are fulfilled, Figure c displays the 3d N = 4 mirror theory to Figure a, equipped w…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The first and last layer of the generic Hasse diagram for the generic n-vertices chain quiver. The red-colored and blue-colored arrows denote fission and decay-channels; of which the n-vertices chain has (n − 3) and 2-many, respectively, at the first layer of the strat…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The mirror dual theory to the n-vertices chain ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Figure a showcases the reduced representation of the Abelian n-vertices chain with (ℓ, −k)-edges in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The 3d N = 4 mirror theory to the n-vertices chain (Figure 10a), provided (3.31) holds. Cokernel for reduced quiver. Before starting the proof, first determine the (schematic) 3d N = 4 mirror theory of the reduced form in Figure 10a. The charge matrix ρ : Z n−1 → Z n−…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Example of a tree-like extension of an Abelian chain quiver theory. gcd (mi , p1) = 1 ∧ gcd (ni , p2) = 1 ∀ i : 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 . (3.34) This implies gcd (mi , δn−1) = 1 ∧ gcd (ni , δiδn−1) = 1 ∀ i : 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 . (3.35) However, in (3.32e) included is the relation Xi…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Schematic section of a connected tree-like Abelian quiver that does not contain cyclic substructure. where i counts the generating elements Xi associated with these outer vertices and qi denotes the out￾going charge from the point of view of that vertex. In order to s…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: a: generic n-vertex Abelian cycle quiver. The vertex labeled (1) is in the lower left corner; the remaining vertices and edges are labeled with respect to moving from this vertex through the entire cycle, i.e. the charges ℓi are always orientated away from the vertex …
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Mirror cycle quiver for the SQED theories considered by Namikawa. It is apparent that all condi￾tions (4.2) are satisfied. theories yields the following charge matrix   σn−1 −σ1 0 0 · · · 0 0 0 0 0 σn −σ2 0 · · · 0 0 0 0 0 0 σ1 −σ3 · · · 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 …
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: An Abelian chain quiver (Figure a) and an extended cycle quiver (Figure b) that have the same 3d N = 4 mirror dual (Figure c). (iii) In particular, for Qn i=1 ℓi = Qn j=1 kj ± 1, the kernel is trivial. Based on this, one can now motivate the restriction to cycle quive…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. A new addition to the zoo of isolated symplectic singularities

    math.AG 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A new 4-dimensional isolated locally simply-connected symplectic singularity is constructed, with non-reduced projective tangent cone, together with all 12 of its Q-factorial terminalisations.

  2. Bootstrapping mirror pairs: The beginning of the end

    hep-th 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A growth-and-fusion algorithm completes a quartet of quiver operations that bootstrap 3d mirror pairs, demonstrated on a new family of circular 'sunshine' quivers.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

41 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Kaledin, Symplectic singularities from the poisson point of view , J

    D. Kaledin, Symplectic singularities from the poisson point of view , J. Reine Angew. Math. 2006 (2006) 135 [ math/0310186]

    arXiv 2006

  2. [2]

    Kraft and C

    H. Kraft and C. Procesi, Minimal singularities in GLn, Invent. Math. 62 (1980) 503

    work page 1980

  3. [3]

    Kraft and C

    H. Kraft and C. Procesi, On the geometry of conjugacy classes in classical groups , Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici 57 (1982) 539

    work page 1982

  4. [4]

    B. Fu, D. Juteau, P. Levy and E. Sommers, Generic singularities of nilpotent orbit closures , Adv. Math. 305 (2017) 1

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    A new family of isolated symplectic singularities with trivial local fundamental group

    G. Bellamy, C. Bonnaf´ e, B. Fu, D. Juteau, P. Levy and E. Sommers, A new family of isolated symplectic singularities with trivial local fundamental group , Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society 126 (2023) 1496 [ 2112.15494]. 34

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Bourget, J

    A. Bourget, J. F. Grimminger, A. Hanany, M. Sperling and Z. Zhong, Branes, Quivers, and the Affine Grassmannian, Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 88 (2023) 331 [ 2102.06190]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    Bourget and J

    A. Bourget and J. F. Grimminger, Fibrations and Hasse diagrams for 6d SCFTs , JHEP 12 (2022) 159 [ 2209.15016]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    N. J. Hitchin, A. Karlhede, U. Lindstrom and M. Rocek, Hyperkahler Metrics and Supersymmetry, Commun. Math. Phys. 108 (1987) 535

    work page 1987

Show all 41 references
  1. [9]

    Nakajima, Instantons on ALE spaces, quiver varieties, and Kac-Moody algebras , Duke Math

    H. Nakajima, Instantons on ALE spaces, quiver varieties, and Kac-Moody algebras , Duke Math. J. 76 (1994) 365

    1994

  2. [10]

    K. A. Intriligator and N. Seiberg, Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional gauge theories , Phys. Lett. B 387 (1996) 513 [ hep-th/9607207]

    1996 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Bullimore, T

    M. Bullimore, T. Dimofte and D. Gaiotto, The Coulomb Branch of 3d N = 4 Theories, Commun. Math. Phys. 354 (2017) 671 [ 1503.04817]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Dedushenko, Y

    M. Dedushenko, Y. Fan, S. S. Pufu and R. Yacoby, Coulomb Branch Quantization and Abelianized Monopole Bubbling, JHEP 10 (2019) 179 [ 1812.08788]

    2019 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Cremonesi, A

    S. Cremonesi, A. Hanany and A. Zaffaroni, Monopole operators and Hilbert series of Coulomb branches of 3d N = 4 gauge theories, JHEP 01 (2014) 005 [ 1309.2657]

    2014 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Braverman, M

    A. Braverman, M. Finkelberg and H. Nakajima, Towards a mathematical definition of Coulomb branches of 3-dimensional N = 4 gauge theories, II , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 22 (2018) 1071 [1601.03586]

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Cremonesi, G

    S. Cremonesi, G. Ferlito, A. Hanany and N. Mekareeya, Instanton Operators and the Higgs Branch at Infinite Coupling , JHEP 04 (2017) 042 [ 1505.06302]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ferlito, A

    G. Ferlito, A. Hanany, N. Mekareeya and G. Zafrir, 3d Coulomb branch and 5d Higgs branch at infinite coupling, JHEP 07 (2018) 061 [ 1712.06604]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Cabrera, A

    S. Cabrera, A. Hanany and F. Yagi, Tropical Geometry and Five Dimensional Higgs Branches at Infinite Coupling , JHEP 01 (2019) 068 [ 1810.01379]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Cabrera, A

    S. Cabrera, A. Hanany and M. Sperling, Magnetic quivers, Higgs branches, and 6d N =(1,0) theories, JHEP 06 (2019) 071 [ 1904.12293]

    2019 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Bourget, S

    A. Bourget, S. Cabrera, J. F. Grimminger, A. Hanany and Z. Zhong, Brane Webs and Magnetic Quivers for SQCD , JHEP 03 (2020) 176 [ 1909.00667]

    2020 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Cabrera, A

    S. Cabrera, A. Hanany and M. Sperling, Magnetic quivers, Higgs branches, and 6d N = (1, 0) theories — orthogonal and symplectic gauge groups , JHEP 02 (2020) 184 [ 1912.02773]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Cremonesi, G

    S. Cremonesi, G. Ferlito, A. Hanany and N. Mekareeya, Coulomb Branch and The Moduli Space of Instantons , JHEP 12 (2014) 103 [ 1408.6835]

    2014 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Bourget, S

    A. Bourget, S. Cabrera, J. F. Grimminger, A. Hanany, M. Sperling, A. Zajac et al., The Higgs mechanism — Hasse diagrams for symplectic singularities , JHEP 01 (2020) 157 [ 1908.04245]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Bourget, S

    A. Bourget, S. Giacomelli, J. F. Grimminger, A. Hanany, M. Sperling and Z. Zhong, S-fold magnetic quivers , JHEP 02 (2021) 054 [ 2010.05889]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Bourget, J

    A. Bourget, J. F. Grimminger, A. Hanany and Z. Zhong, The Hasse diagram of the moduli space of instantons , JHEP 08 (2022) 283 [ 2202.01218]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Bourget, M

    A. Bourget, M. Sperling and Z. Zhong, Decay and Fission of Magnetic Quivers , Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 221603 [ 2312.05304]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Bourget, M

    A. Bourget, M. Sperling and Z. Zhong, Higgs branch RG flows via decay and fission , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024) 126013 [ 2401.08757]. 35

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    J. F. Grimminger, W. Harding and N. Mekareeya, Generalised-Edged Quivers and Global Forms, 2410.16353

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Beauville, Symplectic singularities, Invent

    A. Beauville, Symplectic singularities, Invent. Math. 139 (2000) 541 [ math/9903070]

    2000 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Hanany and J

    A. Hanany and J. Troost, Orientifold planes, affine algebras and magnetic monopoles , JHEP 08 (2001) 021 [ hep-th/0107153]

    2001 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Gaiotto and E

    D. Gaiotto and E. Witten, S-Duality of Boundary Conditions In N=4 Super Yang-Mills Theory , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 13 (2009) 721 [ 0807.3720]

    2009 arXiv

  23. [31]

    de Boer, K

    J. de Boer, K. Hori, H. Ooguri, Y. Oz and Z. Yin, Mirror symmetry in three-dimensional theories, SL(2,Z) and D-brane moduli spaces , Nucl. Phys. B 493 (1997) 148 [ hep-th/9612131]

    1997 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Kapustin and M

    A. Kapustin and M. J. Strassler, On mirror symmetry in three-dimensional Abelian gauge theories, JHEP 04 (1999) 021 [ hep-th/9902033]

    1999 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Tong, Dynamics of N=2 supersymmetric Chern-Simons theories , JHEP 07 (2000) 019 [hep-th/0005186]

    D. Tong, Dynamics of N=2 supersymmetric Chern-Simons theories , JHEP 07 (2000) 019 [hep-th/0005186]

    2000 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Nawata, M

    S. Nawata, M. Sperling, H. E. Wang and Z. Zhong, 3d N = 4 mirror symmetry with 1-form symmetry, SciPost Phys. 15 (2023) 033 [ 2301.02409]

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Bhardwaj, M

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Bullimore, A. E. V. Ferrari and S. Schafer-Nameki, Generalized Symmetries and Anomalies of 3d N=4 SCFTs , SciPost Phys. 16 (2024) 080 [ 2301.02249]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Gaiotto, A

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg and B. Willett, Generalized Global Symmetries, JHEP 02 (2015) 172 [ 1412.5148]

    2015 arXiv

  29. [37]

    P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam and N. Seiberg, Comments on One-Form Global Symmetries and Their Gauging in 3d and 4d , SciPost Phys. 6 (2019) 039 [ 1812.04716]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Beratto, N

    E. Beratto, N. Mekareeya and M. Sacchi, Zero-form and one-form symmetries of the ABJ and related theories, JHEP 04 (2022) 126 [ 2112.09531]

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Mekareeya and M

    N. Mekareeya and M. Sacchi, Mixed anomalies, two-groups, non-invertible symmetries, and 3d superconformal indices, JHEP 01 (2023) 115 [ 2210.02466]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Nakajima, Towards a mathematical definition of Coulomb branches of 3-dimensional N = 4 gauge theories, I , Adv

    H. Nakajima, Towards a mathematical definition of Coulomb branches of 3-dimensional N = 4 gauge theories, I , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 20 (2016) 595 [ 1503.03676]

    2016 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Namikawa, A remark on isolated symplectic singularities with trivial local fundamental group , 2309.13877

    Y. Namikawa, A remark on isolated symplectic singularities with trivial local fundamental group , 2309.13877. 36

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.