Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Holonomicity from a Heegaard-Floer Perspective

T0 review · 2 major / 4 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 every knot in the 3-sphere, the $S^r$-colored knot Floer complexes are homologically $q$-holonomic, giving categorified recurrence relations for the colored Alexander polynomials.

desk verdict A genuinely new S^r-colored knot Floer homology construction, undercut by a vacuous holonomicity definition that makes the main theorem true for every nonzero object. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01519 v2 pith:ANSA45AN submitted 2025-01-02 math.GT

Benjamin Cooper , Robert Deyeso III This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GT MSC 57K1857K10
keywords knotFloerhomologycoloredAlexanderpolynomialq-holonomicitycategorificationimmersedcurvescablingWeylalgebrarecurrencerelations
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 asks whether knot homology theories themselves satisfy recurrence relations, not just their Euler characteristics. It constructs $S^r$-colored knot Floer complexes $S^r CFK(K)$ as limits of $(r, rn+1)$-cable complexes as $n\to\infty$, using the immersed-curves reformulation of bordered Floer homology. The authors then define a categorical notion of homological $q$-holonomicity for sequences of filtered chain complexes and prove that for every knot $K$ in $S^3$ the sequence $\{S^r CFK(K)\}_{r\geq 1}$ is homologically $q$-holonomic. The graded Euler characteristic of these complexes recovers the $q$-holonomic sequence of colored Alexander polynomials, so the theorem is a categorified recurrence relation that lifts known $q$-holonomicity from polynomials to chain complexes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the head-tail decomposition of the truncated cable complex (Lemma 4.4): for $r>1$ and $n>2g-1$, the truncation $\tau_{\leq rn+1} \hat C(K_{r,rn+1})$ is ungradedly isomorphic to $\mathrm{subdiv}(Hd(K)) \oplus \mathrm{subdiv}(\Delta_m)$ with $m = n-g-\tau(K)-1$, where $\mathrm{subdiv}$ splits each vertical differential into length-one steps. This decomposition makes the $n\to\infty$ limit tractable and implies the structural form of $S^r CFK(K)$ used in the proof (Proposition 4.10). Homological $q$-holonomicity is then certified by a tower of distinguished triangles (Definition 5.5) using the functors $M$ and $L$ that lift the Weyl-algebra action to the dg category of sequences; the graded Euler characteristics of these cones reproduce the $D$-operators that annihilate the colored Alexander polynomials in Section 2.

What would settle it

Compute the truncated complex $\tau_{\leq rn+1} \hat C(K_{r,rn+1})$ for a knot such as the figure-eight (genus 1, $\tau = 0$) and compare it with $\mathrm{subdiv}(Hd(K)) \oplus \mathrm{subdiv}(\Delta_{n-2})$ for several $n > 1$; any mismatch would refute Lemma 4.4. Alternatively, exhibit a non-zero object that is holonomic only through the trivial triangle $0 \to E \to E \to 0$, which would show the notion is vacuous.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, Theorem 1.2 (proved as Theorem 6.6), is that there exists a notion of holonomicity for sequences of filtered chain complexes of graded vector spaces, and for each knot $K$ in $S^3$ the $S^r$-colored knot Floer homologies $S^r CFK(K)$ are homologically $q$-holonomic. Each $S^r CFK(K)$ is defined as the limit $|b_{r,n}|^{-1} \hat C(K_{r,rn+1})$ of shifted cable complexes, with the bottom generator moved to bidegree $(0,0)$. The proof shows that every such complex splits into a finite head of two-dimensional summands $\Lambda(a_{i,r})$ together with a shifted copy of the unknot complex $\theta_r S^r CFK(U)$, whose gradings are affine-linear functions of $r$. A tower of cones built from the Weyl-algebra functors $M$ and $L$ then assembles the sequence from its own orbit, which is the paper's definition of homological $q$-holonomicity. The Euler characteristic of this construction is the $S^r$-colored Alexander polynomial, so the categorified recursion specializes to the $q$-holonomic recursion of Section 2.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction rests on a claimed structural splitting of the cable complexes in Lemma 4.4 that is not fully proved, and the holonomicity criterion in Definition 5.5 is loose enough that the vacuous triangle $0 \to E \to E \to 0$ would certify any non-zero object; either gap would leave the theorem unsupported.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The graded Euler characteristic of $S^r CFK(K)$ is the $S^r$-colored Alexander polynomial, so the homological recurrence decategorifies to the explicit $q$-holonomic recursion of Theorem 2.9.
  • The complexes are independent of $r$ up to ungraded isomorphism, with grading differences affine-linear in $r$ (Proposition 4.7), so the infinite colored family is governed by a finite head plus a universal tail.
  • The proof is constructive: it writes out explicit cone towers for the unknot and the trefoil (Examples 5.10 and 5.11) that serve as templates for every knot.
  • If the conjectural spectral sequence from $S^r$-colored HOMFLY homology to knot Floer homology exists, this holonomicity would transfer to the HOMFLY side, giving evidence for Conjecture 1.1.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because Definition 5.5 accepts the trivial triangle $0 \to E \to E \to 0$ as a certificate, the real content of the theorem is the explicit finite tower of cones; a sharper definition requiring bounded tower length would make the statement more meaningful.
  • The head-tail decomposition suggests a stable limit object that could be viewed as a categorified Alexander $A$-operator; one test would be whether the number of head summands in Proposition 4.10 equals the degree of the recurrence operator $A_K$ from Lemma 2.6.
  • The immersed-curve presentation may allow the same limit and holonomicity construction for knots in other 3-manifolds, or for links, where bordered Floer modules play the role of the complement.
  • For a knot with larger genus, the affine-linear grading law of Proposition 4.7 could be checked computationally; a failure would indicate that the grading shifts depend on more than the genus and the $\tau$-invariant.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a categorified notion of q-holonomicity for sequences of filtered graded chain complexes and applies it to a newly constructed family of "S^r-colored knot Floer homologies" S^r CFK(K). Section 2 defines S^r-colored Alexander polynomials as limits of Alexander polynomials of (r, rn+1)-cables and gives explicit D-operator recurrences. Section 4 uses immersed curves and Rozansky's convergence criterion to construct complexes S^r CFK(K) whose graded Euler characteristics match the colored Alexander polynomials. Sections 5 and 6 introduce a definition of homological q-holonomicity and claim that the sequence (S^r CFK(K))_{r>=0} is holonomic for every knot K, which is Theorem 1.2 / 6.6.

Significance. If the proposed notion of homological q-holonomicity were substantive and the geometric construction were fully justified, the paper would provide an interesting categorified recurrence relation whose Euler characteristic specializes to q-holonomicity of colored Alexander polynomials. The paper has some genuine positive features: Section 2 gives explicit recurrence operators and a direct proof of q-holonomicity for the colored Alexander polynomials; the use of immersed-curve cabling and Rozansky's convergence criterion is a natural and promising strategy; and Proposition 4.7 identifies affine-linear grading behavior that would be useful in a completed theory. However, the central definition of holonomicity in Section 5 is vacuous, so the main theorem, as stated, carries no content. The major geometric lemma on which the construction of S^r CFK(K) rests is also not fully proved. As it stands, the paper cannot be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. The definition of homological q-holonomicity is vacuous. For any nonzero object E, take X0 = E, X1 = 0, and Y0 = E. The triangle 0 -> E -> E -> 0 is distinguished, so the condition X0 = E, X_{n+1} = 0, Y0 != 0, and Y0 in <A_+ * E> is satisfied (if the definition requires at least one further triangle, take X2 = 0 and Y1 = 0, giving the distinguished triangle 0 -> 0 -> 0 -> 0). Hence every nonzero object of Seq is holonomic, regardless of any recurrence structure. The nontriviality condition "Y0 != 0" excludes only the zero object and does not restore content. Consequently, Theorem 6.6 follows without any of the Koszul-type resolutions in Section 6, and Theorem 1.2, as stated, proves no nontrivial categorified recurrence. The definition must be strengthened, for example by requiring that the Y_i are proper quotients/subobjects or otherwise imposing a condition that rules out the trivial assembly above.
  2. The proof of Lemma 4.4 is not a complete argument. The "key structural observation" about the cabling algorithm is stated informally and justified by Figures 6 and 7; the head identification asserts that after step (3) of Theorem 3.16 the pairs of curves can be assumed equal and that "there can be no additional generators," but this is not proved. The ungraded isomorphism tau_{<= rn+1}_A C-hat(K_{r,rn+1}) = subdiv(Hd(K)) + subdiv(Delta_m) with m = n - g - tau(K) - 1 is load-bearing: it is used to define the inclusions iota_n in Corollary 4.6, to obtain the limit S^r CFK(K), and to derive the structure theorem Proposition 4.10. A complete proof controlling all generators, bigons, and grading arrows in the cabled intersection complex is needed before the construction of S^r CFK(K) can be regarded as established.
minor comments (4)
  1. The displayed relation (q^r - 1) sDelta_U(r) - (q^{r-1} - 1) sDelta_U(r-1) = 0 is not equivalent to the stated operator equation (M-1)(L-1)sDelta_U = 0 when L is defined by (Lf)(n) = f(n+1) in Eq. (2.11); the operator order, or the definition of L, should be corrected.
  2. The sentence "This statement wont be used here, so further discussion is omitted" is an informal aside; either prove the functoriality of subdiv or delete the sentence.
  3. The remark that computations "suggest" alternative choices of the functor M is vague and is not used later; if these variants are not needed, the remark should be removed or made precise.
  4. The symbol Seq is used both for the abstract dg category SeqpF*ChZq in Eq. (5.3) and for the module of sequences in Section 2.2; this overloaded notation should be disambiguated.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 10.0 of 10

Definition 5.5 makes holonomicity vacuous: every nonzero object is holonomic via the distinguished triangle 0→E→E→0, so Theorem 6.6 is true by definition.

  1. self definitional [Definition 5.5 (pp. 31-32); used as the conclusion of Theorem 6.6]
    "Such a sequence of distinguished triangles is non-trivial if Y0 fl 0. ... An object E P ObpSeqq is holonomic if E – 0 or E fl 0 and it can be assembled in a non-trivial way from the smallest thick pre-triangulated category xA`¨Ey containing orbit of the Weyl action on E."

    For any nonzero object E, take the length-zero assembly X0=E, X1=0, Y0=E. The triangle 0→E→E→0 is distinguished: it is the right rotation of the identity triangle E→E→0→E[1], equivalently the cone of the zero map 0→E. Y0=E≠0, and E belongs to ⟨A+·E⟩ by taking the identity action. Hence every nonzero object of Seq is homologically q-holonomic, with no dependence on any recurrence structure. If a positive length is insisted upon, append X2=0, Y1=0 and the zero triangle 0→0→0→0. Therefore Theorem 6.6's conclusion holds for every sequence of filtered chain complexes; the Koszul-type resolutions in Section 6 and Proposition 4.10 are superfluous for the stated theorem. The definition builds the conclusion into the premise.

full rationale

The central theorem (1.2/6.6) asserts that S^r-colored knot Floer complexes are homologically q-holonomic under the notion introduced in Definition 5.5. But Definition 5.5 defines holonomicity so that every nonzero object qualifies: the only nontriviality condition is Y0≠0, and the zero morphism 0→E produces the distinguished triangle 0→E→E→0 with Y0=E. No data about the object, the Weyl action, or any recurrence is used. Thus the theorem is true by definition, and the elaborate category-theoretic construction in Section 6 does not supply any additional content for the holonomicity claim. This is not a case of a self-citation or fitted parameter; it is a self-definitional vacuity. The paper's separate algebraic construction of S^r CFK(K) via limits of cables may be substantive, but the paper's headline holonomicity theorem is empty as stated. A strengthening requiring, for example, that the Y_i be proper subquotients or that the assembly be nontrivial in a size bound would be needed to give the theorem content.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard but substantial machinery from Heegaard Floer theory and bordered Floer theory. No free parameters are fitted to data. The main invented object, S^r-colored knot Floer homology, is well-defined and has independent content. The invented notion of homological q-holonomicity is vacuous as stated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Immersed curve invariant γ_K exists and is equivalent to bordered Floer type D structure.
    Invoked throughout Section 4 via [HRW22, HRW24] to represent knot Floer complexes as intersection Floer complexes of curves.
  • domain assumption Cabling algorithm for immersed curves (Theorem 3.16).
    Used to construct the complexes of (r, rn+1)-cables in Lemma 4.4 and Corollary 4.6, citing [HW23a].
  • domain assumption Rozansky's convergence criterion (Lemma 4.5).
    Used to prove existence of the limit defining S^r CFK(K), citing [Roz14].
  • domain assumption Hanselman's bounding chain construction to make C^- a chain complex.
    Invoked to justify that \hat C(K) computes knot Floer homology, citing [Han23b] and [HRW22].
  • domain assumption The spectral sequence from HOMFLY homology to knot Floer homology.
    Used in the introduction to motivate Conjecture 1.1 and Theorem 1.2; cited as [Hog18] and conjectural, not proven.
invented entities (2)
  • S^r-colored knot Floer homology S^r CFK(K) independent evidence
    purpose: Categorify the S^r-colored Alexander polynomials and provide a Heegaard-Floer analogue of colored HOMFLY homology.
    Its graded Euler characteristic is the defined colored Alexander polynomial, and it is a limit of known knot Floer complexes, so it has computable consequences that can be checked against the definition.
  • homological q-holonomicity
    purpose: A categorical notion intended to lift q-holonomicity of the Euler characteristics to the chain complex level.
    The definition is internal to the paper and, as written, is satisfied by every non-zero object, so it provides no falsifiable handle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Holonomicity from a Heegaard-Floer Perspective." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ANSA45AN

@misc{pith2026250101519,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Holonomicity from a Heegaard-Floer Perspective},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ANSA45AN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01519}
}
abstract

We construct $S^r$-colored knot Floer homologies and prove that they satisfy categorified recurrence relations. The associated Euler characteristic implies $q$-holonomicity of the corresponding sequence of colored Alexander polynomials, in analogy with the AJ conjecture for colored Jones polynomials.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01519 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The invariants for the unknot U and right-handed Tp2, 3q, lifted to T M . Integral heights between the marked points ‚ are indi￾cated underneath. Notation 3.4. For a 3-manifold M with torus boundary, a lift of the immersed curve invariant γM to the covering space T M typically depends on a spinc struc￾ture of M and so must be denoted by γpM,sq (or HFx pM, sq). However, there is a unique spinc structure s0 on knot co… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. To construct C ´ w-marked points are replaced with pz, wq-pairs of marked points 13 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Bigons from x to y and from y to x, see Ex. 3.8 Example 3.8. (Maslov gradings) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (8 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A cabling pattern. A minimal box is 2gpKq wide. ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ´6 ´5 ´4 ´3 ´2 ´1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The Tp3, 4q cabling applied to the pattern in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Subdividing a bigon when Apdq “ 2. For ˝-dot notation, see 3.18. Example 4.2. Let ∆m :“ Λpξq where dpξq “ 1 and |ξ|A “ m be the 2-term chain complex of Alexander degree m. Then the chain complex Dm :“ subdivp∆mq consists of m, A-degree 1, 2-term complexes: Dm “ ‘m i“1Λ…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A schematic for Lemma 4.4. The head consists of contri￾butions from the lowest box. The tail begins on the non-compact curve at χ0 and continues until reaching the penultimate box. 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The right-handed trefoil is γK placed into a box with dis￾tinguished generators. Each ‚ contains a z ϵ-above and a w ϵ-below. ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ ‚ 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ¨ ¨ ¨ χ0 b [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The limit of the right-handed trefoil cabling process applied to a pattern [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The stable curve associated to the unknot. The Poincaré polynomial of the S r -colored unknot S rCFK zpUq is PpUqSr pt, qq “ 1 ` tq 1 ´ t 2pr´1qq . As a vector space S rCFK zpUq – F2rus b Λpξq – F2xu n ξ k : n P Zě0, k P t0, 1uy. The grading is given by |u| “ t 2pr´1q…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Stable curve associated to the right-handed trefoil which can be identified with a shifted copy of the S r -colored unknot found in Exam￾ple 4.8. Pp31qSr pt, qq “ 1 ` tq ` t 4r´2 q 4rPpUqSr As a vector space S rCFK zp31q :“ Λpcq ‘ t 4r´2 q 4rS rCFK zpUq – Λpcq ‘ t 4r´…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Colored knot Floer homology: structures and examples

    math.GT 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The authors construct an n-colored knot Floer homology as a colimit over cable links with increasing full twists and equip it with a module structure over an explicit algebra.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Mohammed Abouzaid, On the F ukaya categories of higher genus surfaces , Adv. Math. 217 (2008), no. 3, 1192--1235. 2383898

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    A. I. Bondal and M. M. Kapranov, Framed triangulated categories, Mat. Sb. 181 (1990), no. 5, 669--683. 1055981

    work page 1990

  3. [3]

    Anna Beliakova, Krzysztof Putyra, Robert Louis-Hadrien, and Emmanuel Wagner, A proof of D unfield- G ukov- R asmussen conjecture , arXiv:2210.00878 (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    Michel Brion, Lectures on the geometry of flag varieties, Topics in cohomological studies of algebraic varieties, Trends Math., Birkh\" a user, Basel, 2005, pp. 33--85. 2143072

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Sabin Cautis, Remarks on coloured triply graded link invariants, Algebr. Geom. Topol. 17 (2017), no. 6, 3811--3836. 3709661

    work page 2017

  6. [6]

    Cooper, M

    D. Cooper, M. Culler, H. Gillet, D. D. Long, and P. B. Shalen, Plane curves associated to character varieties of 3 -manifolds , Invent. Math. 118 (1994), no. 1, 47--84. 1288467

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    Daren Chen, Twistings of the A lexander polynomial , https://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.12489 (2022)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Dunfield, Sergei Gukov, and Jacob Rasmussen, The superpolynomial for knot homologies, Experiment

    Nathan M. Dunfield, Sergei Gukov, and Jacob Rasmussen, The superpolynomial for knot homologies, Experiment. Math. 15 (2006), no. 2, 129--159. 2253002

    2006

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Charles Frohman and R a zvan Gelca, Skein modules and the noncommutative torus, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 352 (2000), no. 10, 4877--4888. 1675190

    2000

  2. [10]

    Charles Frohman, R a zvan Gelca, and Walter Lofaro, The A -polynomial from the noncommutative viewpoint , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 354 (2002), no. 2, 735--747. 1862565

    2002

  3. [11]

    B 867 (2013), no

    Hiroyuki Fuji, Sergei Gukov, and Piotr Su kowski, Super- A -polynomial for knots and BPS states , Nuclear Phys. B 867 (2013), no. 2, 506--546. 2992793

    2013

  4. [12]

    Stavros Garoufalidis, On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot, Proceedings of the C asson F est, Geom. Topol. Monogr., vol. 7, Geom. Topol. Publ., Coventry, 2004, pp. 291--309. 2172488

    2004

  5. [13]

    Knot Theory Ramifications 17 (2008), no

    , Difference and differential equations for the colored J ones function , J. Knot Theory Ramifications 17 (2008), no. 4, 495--510. 2414452

    2008

  6. [14]

    Stavros Garoufalidis and Thang T. Q. L\^ e , The colored J ones function is q -holonomic , Geom. Topol. 9 (2005), 1253--1293. 2174266

    2005

  7. [15]

    , A survey of q -holonomic functions , Enseign. Math. 62 (2016), no. 3-4, 501--525. 3692896

    2016

  8. [16]

    Lauda, and Thang T

    Stavros Garoufalidis, Aaron D. Lauda, and Thang T. Q. L\^ e , The colored HOMFLYPT function is q -holonomic , Duke Math. J. 167 (2018), no. 3, 397--447. 3761103

    2018

  9. [17]

    Sergei Gukov, Three-dimensional quantum gravity, C hern- S imons theory, and the A -polynomial , Comm. Math. Phys. 255 (2005), no. 3, 577--627. 2134725

    2005

  10. [18]

    Jonathan Hanselman, Heegaard F loer homology and cosmetic surgeries in S^3 , J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 25 (2023), no. 5, 1627--1669. 4592856

    2023

  11. [19]

    , Knot F loer homology as immersed curves , https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16271 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Haiden, L

    F. Haiden, L. Katzarkov, and M. Kontsevich, Flat surfaces and stability structures, Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes \' E tudes Sci. 126 (2017), 247--318. 3735868

    2017

  13. [21]

    Matthew Hogancamp, Categorified Y oung symmetrizers and stable homology of torus links , Geom. Topol. 22 (2018), no. 5, 2943--3002. 3811775

    2018

  14. [22]

    Jennifer Hom, Lecture notes on H eegaard F loer homology , https://arxiv.org/abs/2008.01836 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Jonathan Hanselman, Jacob Rasmussen, and Liam Watson, Heegaard F loer homology for manifolds with torus boundary: properties and examples , Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 125 (2022), no. 4, 879--967. 4500201

    2022

  16. [24]

    , Bordered F loer homology for manifolds with torus boundary via immersed curves , J. Amer. Math. Soc. 37 (2024), no. 2, 391--498. 4695506

    2024

  17. [25]

    Jonathan Hanselman and Liam Watson, Cabling in terms of immersed curves, Geom. Topol. 27 (2023), no. 3, 925--952. 4599309

    2023

  18. [26]

    , A calculus for bordered F loer homology , Geom. Topol. 27 (2023), no. 3, 823--924. 4599308

    2023

  19. [27]

    Mikhail Khovanov, Volodymyr Mazorchuk, and Catharina Stroppel, A brief review of abelian categorifications, Theory Appl. Categ. 22 (2009), No. 19, 479--508. 2559652

    2009

  20. [28]

    Mikhail Khovanov and Lev Rozansky, Matrix factorizations and link homology, Fund. Math. 199 (2008), no. 1, 1--91. 2391017

    2008

  21. [29]

    Thang T. Q. L\^ e , The colored J ones polynomial and the A -polynomial of knots , Adv. Math. 207 (2006), no. 2, 782--804. 2271986

    2006

  22. [30]

    9 (2018), no

    Peter Lambert-Cole, Twisting, mutation and knot F loer homology , Quantum Topol. 9 (2018), no. 4, 749--774. 3874002

    2018

  23. [31]

    W. B. Raymond Lickorish, An introduction to knot theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 175, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1997. 1472978

    1997

  24. [32]

    Ozsvath, and Dylan P

    Robert Lipshitz, Peter S. Ozsvath, and Dylan P. Thurston, Bordered H eegaard F loer homology , Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 254 (2018), no. 1216, viii+279. 3827056

    2018

  25. [33]

    Peter Ozsv\' a th and Zolt\' a n Szab\' o , Holomorphic disks and knot invariants, Adv. Math. 186 (2004), no. 1, 58--116. 2065507

    2004

  26. [34]

    Peter Ozsv\'ath and Zolt\'an Szab\'o, Holomorphic disks and three-manifold invariants: properties and applications, Ann. of Math. (2) 159 (2004), no. 3, 1159--1245. 2113020

    2004

  27. [35]

    , Holomorphic disks and topological invariants for closed three-manifolds, Ann. of Math. (2) 159 (2004), no. 3, 1027--1158. 2113019

    2004

  28. [36]

    Jacob Rasmussen, Floer homology and knot complements, PhD thesis, Harvard University (2003)

    2003

  29. [37]

    Jacob Andrew Rasmussen, Floer homology and knot complements, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arbor, MI, 2003, Thesis (Ph.D.)--Harvard University. 2704683

    2003

  30. [38]

    Jacob Rasmussen, Some differentials on K hovanov- R ozansky homology , Geom. Topol. 19 (2015), no. 6, 3031--3104. 3447099

    2015

  31. [39]

    Lev Rozansky, An infinite torus braid yields a categorified J ones- W enzl projector , Fund. Math. 225 (2014), no. 1, 305--326. 3205575

    2014

  32. [40]

    125--147

    Claude Sabbah, Syst\`emes holonomes d'\' e quations aux q -diff\' e rences , D -modules and microlocal geometry ( L isbon, 1990), de Gruyter, Berlin, 1993, pp. 125--147. 1206016

    1990

  33. [41]

    Antonio Sartori, The A lexander polynomial as quantum invariant of links , Ark. Mat. 53 (2015), no. 1, 177--202. 3319619

    2015

  34. [42]

    O. Ya. Viro, Quantum relatives of the A lexander polynomial , Algebra i Analiz 18 (2006), no. 3, 63--157. 2255851

    2006

  35. [43]

    Ben Webster, Knot invariants and higher representation theory, Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 250 (2017), no. 1191, v+141. 3709726

    2017

  36. [44]

    Weibel, The K -book , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol

    Charles A. Weibel, The K -book , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 145, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2013, An introduction to algebraic K -theory. 3076731

    2013

Pith tools

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