Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 39 references

Quantum periods, toric degenerations and intrinsic mirror symmetry

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For Fano varieties with a log Calabi-Yau anticanonical complement, the regularized quantum periods are classical periods of a single canonical theta-function sum in the intrinsic mirror algebra.

desk verdict A substantial and internally coherent mirror theorem, but the abstract sells a scope the hypotheses do not support. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01408 v3 pith:YNCFGOUY submitted 2025-01-02 math.AG

Sam Johnston This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AG MSC 14J3314N3514N10
keywords FanovarietiesquantumperiodsintrinsicmirroralgebrathetafunctionslogGromov-WitteninvariantsCalabi-Yaupairsclustertoricdegenerations
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper proves that the regularized quantum periods of a smooth Fano variety are not just an arbitrary collection of Gromov-Witten numbers: under a natural log Calabi-Yau hypothesis, they are the classical periods of a single canonical element $W_D$ in the intrinsic mirror algebra. Given a Fano variety $X$ and a reduced anticanonical divisor $D$ whose complement $U=X\setminus D$ is log Calabi-Yau, the theorem constructs $W_D$ inside the intrinsic mirror algebra of any normal-crossings compactification of $U$ dominating $(X,D)$; $W_D$ is simply the sum of the $\theta$ functions of the components of $D$. The equality $\pi_{W_D}=\widehat G_X$ is proved by degenerating $X$ to a normal-crossings special fiber and reducing each quantum period to naive counts of rational curves. A sympathetic reader should care because this gives Fano mirror symmetry a canonical, choice-free mirror potential in many cases where none was previously known, and the paper draws out concrete consequences: integrality of quantum periods, Laurent polynomial mirrors for cluster compactifications, and the known determinantal-coordinate superpotential for Grassmannians. In the smooth anticanonical case it also shows the quantum period sequence determines all $\theta$-function structure constants of the mirror algebra.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the intrinsic mirror algebra $R_{(X',D')}$: a $k$-algebra over the monoid ring of effective curve classes, freely generated by a $\theta$ basis $\vartheta_p$ indexed by integral points of the essential skeleton of the log Calabi-Yau pair, with product structure constants $N^{r,A}_{p,q}$ given by logarithmic Gromov-Witten invariants. The superpotential $W_D$ is the finite sum of the $\theta$ functions attached to the divisorial valuations of the components of the anticanonical divisor $D$. The argument that $\pi_{W_D}=\widehat G_X$ is carried by a degeneration of $X$ to a normal-crossings special fiber, together with a decomposition theorem for log Gromov-Witten invariants that expresses each degree-$d$ period as a sum over rigid decorated tropical types; the point constraint forces the relevant types to have a distinguished vertex on the main component with $d+1$ legs of contact order $1$, and all other vertices contribute fiber classes of projective bundles over components of $D$. A second mechanism, used in the smooth-divisor section, is the identity $\vartheta_{p_1}\cdots\vartheta_{p_d}[\vartheta_0]=\eta(p_1,\ldots,p_d,A)$ equating $\theta$ products with naive curve counts.

What would settle it

Take $X=\mathbb P^2$ and $D$ a smooth cubic, so the hypotheses of Theorem 1.1 hold. The theorem asserts $\pi_{W_D}=\widehat G_X$, with $W_D=\vartheta_D$ the $\theta$ function of the divisor in the intrinsic mirror algebra. The coefficient of $t^3$ on the right is a finite ordinary Gromov-Witten count of rational cubics through eight points in $\mathbb P^2$, and the coefficient of $t^3$ on the left is computed by iterated $\theta$ products in $R_{(X,D)}$; comparing these two finite enumerative numbers would settle the equality, and any disagreement would falsify the theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central statement is Theorem 1.1: for $(X,D)$ with $X$ smooth Fano and $D\in |-K_X|$ reduced, whenever $U=X\setminus D$ admits some log Calabi-Yau compactification, every dominating snc compactification $(X',D')$ of $(X,D)$ carries an element $W_D=\sum_i \vartheta_{D_i}$ in the intrinsic mirror algebra $R_{(X',D')}$ whose classical periods $\pi_{W_D}=\sum_{d\ge0} W_D^d[\vartheta_0]$ equal the regularized quantum periods $\widehat G_X$ after the natural base change to the curve-class monoid of $X$. The equality is independent of the chosen compactification, so the mirror potential is intrinsic to the pair $(X,D)$. The proof works by degenerating $X$ to a normal-crossings central fiber whose main component is $X'$ and whose extra components are projective bundles over the components of $D$, then applying the decomposition of degenerate log Gromov-Witten invariants; the only contributing tropical types have all quantum data concentrated in the main component, so the full period becomes a product of naive curve counts. From this the paper derives integrality of regularized quantum periods, Laurent mirrors for cluster-type compactifications, the Grassmannian superpotential, and, for smooth $D$, the equivalence of the quantum period sequence with all $\theta$-function structure constants of $R_{(X,D)}$.

Load-bearing premise

The entire theorem rests on the assumption that the open variety $U=X\setminus D$ admits at least one log Calabi-Yau compactification; if no such compactification exists, the intrinsic mirror algebra construction and the equality of periods are not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every Fano pair $(X,D)$ satisfying the log Calabi-Yau hypothesis receives a canonical Landau-Ginzburg mirror potential $W_D$ inside the intrinsic mirror algebra, so mirror symmetry for such varieties no longer requires an ad hoc choice of Laurent polynomial.
  • The regularized quantum periods of such a Fano variety are non-negative integers, since each classical period of $W_D$ is a naive curve count of rational curves in an open Calabi-Yau.
  • For Fano compactifications of affine cluster varieties with optimized seeds for the divisorial valuations, the mirror potential restricts to a genuine Laurent polynomial on every seed torus, and the polar dual of its Newton polytope produces a Newton-Okounkov body and a toric degeneration of $X$.
  • For Grassmannians $Gr(n-k,n)$, the construction recovers the known determinantal-coordinate superpotential on the dual Grassmannian, whose coefficients are counts of non-archimedean cylinders.
  • When $D$ is a smooth anticanonical divisor, the regularized quantum periods determine the entire theta-function structure of $R_{(X,D)}$, equivalently all two-pointed logarithmic Gromov-Witten invariants of the pair.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the independence of the quantum period on the chosen snc compactification holds beyond the torus case (the paper proves it in the torus case and expects it generally), Theorem 1.1 would provide a canonical mirror object for every Fano variety with a log Calabi-Yau anticanonical complement, independent of charts or compactification choices.
  • The degeneration proof suggests that regularized quantum periods can be defined for singular Fano varieties or log pairs, and one could test whether the ordinary quantum periods of a Fano degeneration are recovered from generalized periods of a singular toric special fiber, a direction the author raises as future work.
  • The equality between flow-polynomial coefficients and non-archimedean cylinder counts indicates that the combinatorial counts of perfect matchings on plabic graphs admit a geometric bijection with non-archimedean disks; constructing such a bijection explicitly would be a natural test of the enumerative content.
  • The Frobenius-structure result for smooth anticanonical divisors suggests that for broader classes of log Calabi-Yau pairs the full mirror algebra might be determined by a single period series; checking this beyond the smooth case would be a direct extension of the paper's methods.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves a conditional mirror-symmetry theorem for a smooth Fano variety X equipped with a reduced anticanonical divisor D, assuming that the open Calabi-Yau U = X \ D admits a log Calabi-Yau compactification in the sense of Definition 4.1. For any dominating simple normal crossings compactification (X', D') of U, the author constructs an element W_D in the intrinsic mirror algebra R_{(X',D')} as a sum of theta functions associated with the divisor components, and proves that its classical periods equal the regularized quantum periods of X. The main proof proceeds by log Gromov-Witten degeneration: it reduces the ordinary invariants on the general fiber to logarithmic invariants on a specially built central fiber, then identifies these with naive curve counts via the author's earlier comparison results. The paper derives corollaries on integrality of quantum periods, Laurent mirrors for cluster-type Fano compactifications, Newton-Okounkov bodies and toric degenerations, an explicit Grassmannian mirror recovering the Marsh-Rietsch Plücker superpotential, and a Frobenius-structure equivalence for smooth anticanonical divisors.

Significance. If Theorem 1.1 is correct, this is a substantial advance: it gives a canonical, parameter-free construction of Landau-Ginzburg mirrors for a large class of Fano pairs, using intrinsic mirror symmetry and logarithmic Gromov-Witten theory, and it connects the resulting mirrors to cluster theory, polytopes, and toric degenerations. The recovery of the Marsh-Rietsch Plücker mirror and the new enumerative interpretation of flow-polynomial coefficients are appealing concrete payoffs. The paper is honest about its main hypothesis, and the proof is internally coherent, but it relies heavily on external results, including the author's preprints [Joh] and [Joh24], and on a degeneration argument that is only sketched in places. The breadth promised in the abstract is somewhat wider than the proved theorems.

major comments (4)
  1. [§1, Theorem 1.1 and Remark 1.2(1); abstract] Theorem 1.1 is stated only under the hypothesis that U = X \ D admits a log Calabi-Yau compactification (X'', D'') in the sense of Definition 4.1. This hypothesis is not automatic for X smooth Fano and D in |-K_X| reduced; Remark 1.2(1) itself notes that X = P^2 with D three concurrent lines fails it. The abstract, however, announces 'integrality of regularized quantum periods in large generality' and 'Laurent mirrors to all Fano varieties whose mirrors contain a dense torus' without this restriction. Since every corollary in Sections 5 and 6 inherits the log Calabi-Yau compactification hypothesis, and Corollary 6.1 also inherits the optimized-seed condition, the summary statements should be reworded to match the proved scope.
  2. [§5, Lemma 5.1] Lemma 5.1 is the bridge that converts logarithmic Gromov-Witten invariants into the naive curve counts η, and hence into the period coefficients. Its proof says that 'the desired equality would then follow as in the final section of the proof of [Joh, Theorem 1.1]' after showing that no component maps into the boundary. But the hypotheses of [Joh, Theorem 1.1], as quoted in Theorem 4.5, require that D is the support of a nef divisor and contains a zero stratum; the setting of Lemma 5.1 does not assume a zero stratum, and the point constraint is a general point of U rather than a boundary point. The manuscript should either identify the precise statement in [Joh] that applies after the boundary-exclusion argument, or include the missing argument, because this identification is the only place where the equality between the two independently defined period series is actually established.
  3. [§5, Eq. (5.3) and the degeneration analysis] The degeneration formula is written with ψ_{x_out}^{d-2}, where d = -K_X · A. For curve classes with d = 0 or d = 1 this is a negative power of a ψ class, which is not defined in Equation (1.1), yet the inner sum in (1.1) ranges over all d ≥ 0. The paper does not state a convention (for example, that such terms vanish or are handled separately), so the displayed equality π_W = \hat G_X is not literally meaningful for the low-degree terms. Since the proof of Theorem 1.1 computes the d-th coefficient via d! times a trace, the low-degree cases should be checked explicitly or a standard convention should be stated.
  4. [§5, proof of Theorem 1.1, first paragraph] The proof claims that π_{W_D} is independent of the chosen dominating compactification because the contributing invariants are naive curve counts and are 'independent of the choice of compactification by definition'. This independence is not immediate: the maps entering η(p_1, ..., p_m, A) are maps to a chosen compactification with specified contact orders, and different compactifications have different boundary divisors. The proof of Lemma 5.1 prevents boundary components only after passing through the log Gromov-Witten identification; the independence of η itself should be spelled out rather than asserted by definition.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Throughout] The numbering is inconsistent: the Frobenius structure statement is Theorem 1.5 in the introduction but is later called Corollary 1.5, and the statement labelled 'Proof of Theorem 8.4' is actually a Proposition 8.4. Please unify the numbering.
  2. [Abstract] The phrase 'Laurent mirrors to all Fano varieties whose mirrors contain a dense torus' is ambiguous; it should specify whether the condition is on X \ D containing a dense torus, on the mirror family, or on the existence of an optimized seed as in Corollary 6.1.
  3. [§6, proof of Corollary 6.1] The proof relies on [AB23, Theorem D] but does not state the precise compatibility of the base changes between the canonical wall structure and the cluster scattering diagram, nor how the pullback of W_D to a formal torus preserves the trace form after setting z^A = 1. A precise statement would help the reader verify the formal Laurent polynomial claim.
  4. [Title of §7] The section title contains the typo 'Grassmanian'; it should read 'Grassmannian'.
  5. [§5, Definition 5.2] The notation 'D = \sum_i D_i' is used both for the original anticanonical divisor on X and for the divisor on X' after pullback; the proof identifies a piecewise linear function also denoted D. Please clarify the notation, especially in the paragraph after Definition 5.2.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No circularity: the period equality is a nontrivial comparison of two independently defined generating functions; the main proof's reliance on the author's earlier theorems is a dependency, not a definitional reduction.

full rationale

The central identity (1.2) compares the classical periods of W_D = sum of theta functions of divisor components in the intrinsic mirror algebra with the regularized quantum periods of X. These two objects are defined independently: the classical periods are structure constants of R_{(X',D')} (Definitions 4.3 and 5.2), while the regularized quantum periods are genus-zero one-pointed Gromov-Witten invariants (Equation 1.1). No parameter is fitted to the target sequence, and W_D has no unknown coefficients. The proof proceeds by degenerating X to a simple normal crossings special fiber, using [ACGS20a] to express n_A as log Gromov-Witten invariants, identifying the contributing tropical vertex with log maps to (X',D') via [Gro23], and then invoking Lemma 5.1 (built on [Joh, Theorem 1.1] and [Joh24, Theorem 1.3]) to identify those invariants with naive curve counts. The final comparison is an algebraic expansion of (sum ϑ_Di)^d. The author's earlier theorems are load-bearing, but they are prior parameter-free statements with their own hypotheses and are not restatements of the present theorem; citing them is a normal dependency rather than a circular reduction. The genuine limitation is the log Calabi-Yau existence hypothesis: Remark 1.2(1) explicitly notes the theorem does not apply to P^2 with three concurrent lines, and Remark 8.9 notes the Fano assumption is only used at a specific step. These are scope restrictions, not circularity. The abstract's phrases 'in large generality' and 'all Fano varieties whose mirrors contain a dense torus' are stronger than the conditional theorem, but that is an overstatement concern, not a circularity concern.

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

No free parameters are fitted and no new entities are invented; the paper is parameter-free. It rests on the log Calabi-Yau hypothesis and on substantial external machinery, including log Gromov-Witten theory, Gross-Siebert intrinsic mirror symmetry, and cluster theory, with two prior papers of the author playing central supporting roles.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption U = X\D admits a log Calabi-Yau compactification (X'', D'')
    Theorem 1.1 condition; Remark 1.2(1) shows the theorem fails without it, e.g. the P2 triple point example.
  • standard math Weak factorization holds for birational maps of snc pairs
    Used in Lemma 4.2, citing [AKMWo02, Theorem 0.3.1].
  • domain assumption Log Gromov-Witten theory provides virtual fundamental classes, deformation invariance, and degeneration formulas
    Throughout Sections 3, 5, and 8, citing [Che14], [AC14], [GS13], [ACGS20a], and [ACGS20b].
  • domain assumption Theta structure constants of the intrinsic mirror algebra are identified with log Gromov-Witten invariants via [Joh] and [Joh24]
    Theorem 4.5 and Proposition 4.6 underpin Lemma 5.1 and hence Theorem 1.1.
  • domain assumption Fock-Goncharov duality and the canonical wall structure identification of [AB23, Theorem D] and [GHKK18]
    Used in Corollary 6.1 and Section 6 for cluster mirrors, theta bases, positive polytopes, and toric degenerations.
  • domain assumption Gross's gluing formulas for punctured log maps, [Gro23, Theorems 5.7, 5.9, 6.1]
    Used in Theorem 1.1 and Lemma 8.5 to decompose virtual classes along tropical edges.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum periods, toric degenerations and intrinsic mirror symmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YNCFGOUY

@misc{pith2026250101408,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum periods, toric degenerations and intrinsic mirror symmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YNCFGOUY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01408}
}
abstract

Given a Fano variety $X$, and $U$ an affine log Calabi-Yau variety given as the complement of an anticanonical divisor $D \subset X$, we prove that for any snc compactification $Y$ of $U$ dominating $X$ with $D' = Y\setminus U$, there exists an element $W_D \in R_{(Y,D')}$ of the intrinsic mirror algebra whose classical periods give the regularized quantum periods of $X$. Using this result, we deduce various corollaries regarding Fano mirror symmetry, in particular integrality of regularized quantum periods in large generality and the existence of Laurent mirrors to all Fano varieties whose mirrors contain a dense torus. When $U$ is an affine cluster variety satisfying the Fock-Goncharov conjecture, we use this result to produce a family of polytopes indexed by seeds of $U$ determined by enumerative invariants of the pair $(X,D)$ which give a family of Newton-Okounkov bodies and toric degenerations of $X$. Moreover, we give an explicit description of the superpotential in the Grassmanian setting, in particular recovering the Pl\"ucker coordinate mirror discovered by Marsh and Rietsch. Finally, we use the main result to show that the quantum period sequence is equivalent to all theta function structure constants for $R_{(X,D)}$ when $D$ is a smooth anticanonical divisor.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01408 by the authors.

Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. The dual complex of the special fiber for the degeneration in the case (X, D) = (P 2 , V (xyz)), with a contributing tropical type depicted. The unique vertex mapping to the main component is colored red, while the components mapping to projective bundles over components of D are colored green. Vertices colored blue correspond to irrelevant components with respect to a contributing type τ . replacing M(X0, τ ) with … view at source ↗
Figure 8.1
Figure 8.1. An example of a tropical type τ contributing to N B p1,...,p4 . Remark 8.7. We note that Theorem 8.4 follows from [You24, Section 3.3], who argues that assignment of the series Np gives a ring homomorphism with N0 = 1 using the log/orbifold correspondence of [BNR24], and the TRR result of Theorem 4.6. We prove the result above [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_8_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    u lya Arg\

    H\" u lya Arg\" u z and Pierrick Bousseau, Fock-- G oncharov dual cluster varieties and G ross-- S iebert mirrors , J. Reine Angew. Math. 802 (2023), 125--171. 4635344

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Dan Abramovich and Qile Chen, Stable logarithmic maps to D eligne- F altings pairs II , Asian J. Math. 18 (2014), no. 3, 465--488. 3257836

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Dan Abramovich, Qile Chen, Mark Gross, and Bernd Siebert, Decomposition of degenerate G romov- W itten invariants , Compos. Math. 156 (2020), no. 10, 2020--2075. 4177284

    work page 2020

  4. [4]

    Dan Abramovich, Qile Chen, Mark Gross, and Bernd Siebert, Punctured logarithmic maps, arXiv:2009.07720 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.07720.pdf (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  5. [5]

    Dan Abramovich, Kalle Karu, Kenji Matsuki, and Jaros aw W odarczyk, Torification and factorization of birational maps, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 15 (2002), no. 3, 531--572. 1896232

    work page 2002

  6. [6]

    Lara Bossinger, Man-Wai Cheung, Timothy Magee, and Alfredo N\' a jera Ch\' a vez, Newton- O kounkov bodies and minimal models for cluster varieties , Adv. Math. 447 (2024), Paper No. 109680, 72. 4739250

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Luca Battistella, Navid Nabijou, and Dhruv Ranganathan, Logarithmic negative tangency and root stacks, arXiv:2402.08014 https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.08014 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    Younghan Bae and Johannes Schmitt, Chow rings of stacks of prestable curves i, Forum of Mathematics, Sigma, 10 (2022)

    work page 2022

Show all 39 references
  1. [9]

    Marco Castronovo, Fukaya category of G rassmannians: rectangles , Adv. Math. 372 (2020), 107287, 40. 4125515

    2020

  2. [10]

    Tom Coates, Alessio Corti, Sergey Galkin, Vasily Golyshev, and Alexander Kasprzyk, Mirror symmetry and F ano manifolds , European C ongress of M athematics, Eur. Math. Soc., Z\" u rich, 2013, pp. 285--300. 3469127

    2013

  3. [11]

    Renzo Cavalieri, Melody Chan, Martin Ulirsch, and Jonathan Wise, A moduli stack of tropical curves, Forum of Mathematics, Sigma 8 (2020)

    2020

  4. [12]

    Roger Casals, Eugene Gorsky, Mikhail Gorsky, Ian Le, Linhui Shen, and Jos\' e Simental, Cluster structures on braid varieties, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 38 (2025), no. 2, 369--479. 4868947

    2025

  5. [13]

    Qile Chen, Stable logarithmic maps to D eligne- F altings pairs I , Ann. of Math. (2) 180 (2014), no. 2, 455--521. 3224717

    2014

  6. [14]

    Kevin Costello, Higher genus G romov- W itten invariants as genus zero invariants of symmetric products , Ann. of Math. (2) 164 (2006), no. 2, 561--601. 2247968

    2006

  7. [15]

    Mark Gross, Paul Hacking, Sean Keel, and Maxim Kontsevich, Canonical bases for cluster algebras, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 31 (2018), no. 2, 497--608. 3758151

    2018

  8. [16]

    Pavel Galashin and Thomas Lam, Positroid varieties and cluster algebras, Ann. Sci. \' E c. Norm. Sup\' e r. (4) 56 (2023), no. 3, 859--884. 4650160

    2023

  9. [17]

    Tim Graefnitz, Theta functions, broken lines and 2-marked log G romov- W itten invariants , arXiv:2204.12257 https://arxiv.org/abs/2204.12257 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Mark Gross, Remarks on gluing punctured logarithmic maps, arXiv:2306.02661 https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.02661 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Tim Gr\" a fnitz, Helge Ruddat, and Eric Zaslow, The proper L andau- G inzburg potential is the open mirror map , Adv. Math. 447 (2024), Paper No. 109639, 69. 4739248

    2024

  12. [20]

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert, Logarithmic G romov- W itten invariants , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 26 (2013), no. 2, 451--510. 3011419

    2013

  13. [21]

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert, Intrinsic mirror symmetry, arXiv:1909.07649 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1909.07649v2.pdf (2021)

    2021

  14. [22]

    Mark Gross and Bernd Siebert, The canonical wall structure and intrinsic mirror symmetry, Invent. Math. 229 (2022), no. 3, 1101--1202. 4462625

    2022

  15. [23]

    Samuel Johnston, Comparison of non-archimedean and logarithmic mirror constructions via the F robenius structure theorem , arXiv:2204.00940 https://arxiv.org/pdf/2204.00940.pdf, to appear in Journal of the LMS

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    , Intrinsic mirror symmetry and F robenius structure theorem via G romov- W itten theory of root stacks , arXiv:2403.05376 https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.05376 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Elana Kalashnikov, Laurent polynomial mirrors for quiver flag zero loci, Adv. Math. 445 (2024), Paper No. 109656, 61. 4734470

    2024

  18. [26]

    Math., vol

    Maxim Kontsevich and Yan Soibelman, Affine structures and non- A rchimedean analytic spaces , The unity of mathematics, Progr. Math., vol. 244, Birkh\" a user Boston, Boston, MA, 2006, pp. 321--385. 2181810

    2006

  19. [27]

    Sean Keel and Tony Yue Yu, The F robenius structure theorem for affine log C alabi- Y au varieties containing a torus , Ann. of Math. (2) 198 (2023), no. 2, 419--536. 4635299

    2023

  20. [28]

    Algebraic Geom

    Cristina Manolache, Virtual pull-backs, J. Algebraic Geom. 21 (2012), no. 2 (2008), 201--245

    2012

  21. [29]

    Travis Mandel, Fano mirror periods from the F robenius structure conjecture , arXiv:1903.12014 https://arxiv.org/pdf/1903.12014.pdf (2019)

    2019 arXiv

  22. [30]

    R. J. Marsh and K. Rietsch, The B -model connection and mirror symmetry for G rassmannians , Adv. Math. 366 (2020), 107027, 131. 4072789

    2020

  23. [31]

    Johannes Nicaise and Chenyang Xu, The essential skeleton of a degeneration of algebraic varieties, Amer. J. Math. 138 (2016), no. 6, 1645--1667. 3595497

    2016

  24. [32]

    Olsson, Logarithmic geometry and algebraic stacks, Ann

    Martin C. Olsson, Logarithmic geometry and algebraic stacks, Ann. Sci. \' E cole Norm. Sup. (4) 36 (2003), no. 5, 747--791. 2032986

    2003

  25. [33]

    Charles Wang Peter Spacek, Canonical L andau- G inzburg models for cominuscule homogeneous spaces , arXiv:2410.05070 https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05070 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Rietsch and L

    K. Rietsch and L. Williams, Newton- O kounkov bodies, cluster duality, and mirror symmetry for G rassmannians , Duke Math. J. 168 (2019), no. 18, 3437--3527. 4034891

    2019

  27. [35]

    Scott, Grassmannians and cluster algebras, Proc

    J. Scott, Grassmannians and cluster algebras, Proc. London Math. Soc (2006)

    2006

  28. [36]

    195--285

    Michael Temkin, Metrization of differential pluriforms on B erkovich analytic spaces , Nonarchimedean and tropical geometry, Simons Symp., Springer, [Cham], 2016, pp. 195--285. 3702313

    2016

  29. [37]

    Dmitry Tonkonog, String topology with gravitational descendants, and periods of landau-ginzburg potentials, arXiv:1801.06921 https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.06921

    arXiv

  30. [38]

    Yu Wang, Gross- S iebert intrinsic mirror ring for smooth log C alabi- Y au pairs , arXiv:2209.15365 https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.15365 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Fenglong You, The proper L andau- G inzburg potential, intrinsic mirror symmetry and the relative mirror map , Comm. Math. Phys. 405 (2024), no. 3, Paper No. 79, 44. 4716739

    2024

Pith tools

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