Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 37 references

Monoidal categorification of genus zero skein algebras

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that the Kauffman bracket skein algebra of any genus zero surface with boundary is isomorphic to a quantized K-theoretic Coulomb branch, yielding a monoidal categorification of the skein algebra.

desk verdict Proves the genus zero conjecture and gets a categorification, but the proof leans on a self-cited unpublished lemma that a referee should check. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13332 v1 pith:M7VB3SEQ submitted 2025-05-19 math.RT hep-thmath.GTmath.QA

Dylan G. L. Allegretti , Hyun Kyu Kim , Peng Shan This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RThep-thmath.GTmath.QA
keywords KauffmanbracketskeinalgebragenuszerosurfacequantizedCoulombbranchmonoidalcategorificationequivariantcoherentsheavesvarietyoftriplesquantumtracemapGrothendieckring
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 two seemingly unrelated algebraic objects are isomorphic: the relative Kauffman bracket skein algebra of a genus zero surface with boundary (an algebra of framed links modulo the Kauffman bracket skein relations, quantization of the $\mathrm{SL}_2$-character variety) and a quantized $K$-theoretic Coulomb branch (a noncommutative deformation of the coordinate ring of a physical moduli space). The main theorem establishes the isomorphism for every genus zero surface $S = S_{0,n+2}$ with $n+2$ boundary components. Since the quantized Coulomb branch is, essentially by definition, the Grothendieck ring of a derived category of equivariant coherent sheaves on the variety of triples with the convolution product, the theorem makes the skein algebra into the Grothendieck ring of a monoidal triangulated category. This gives a monoidal categorification of the skein algebra, partially answering a long-standing question about categorifying skein algebras. The result connects quantum topology to geometric representation theory and opens a new route to studying canonical bases and positivity in skein algebras.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a pair of explicit embeddings into one localized quantum torus $X_{q,t}$. On the skein side, a normalized quantum trace map sends the relative skein algebra into $X_{q,t}$; its values on the generating curves $\gamma_i$, $\sigma_{i,i+1}$, and their Dehn twists $\theta_{i,m}$ are computed using Jones-Wenzl idempotents and the fusion rules of the Temperley-Lieb category. On the Coulomb branch side, equivariant localization embeds the quantized Coulomb branch into an auxiliary algebra $D_{q,z}$ attached to a chain quiver, and dressed minuscule monopole operators (classes built from tautological line bundles over strata of the variety of triples) define a faithful representation. The load-bearing identity is that the images of the skein generators under the polynomial representation $\Phi$ coincide exactly with the images of the corresponding monopole operators under the Coulomb-branch representation $\Psi$ inside $X_{q,t}$; this equality forces an isomorphism of the localized algebras. A filtration by multicurve degree on the skein side and by dominant coweight on the Coulomb side is then compared on associated graded pieces, upgrading the localized isomorphism to the integral forms stated in the theorem.

What would settle it

For $S=S_{0,5}$ (the five-boundary genus zero surface, $n=3$), compute the associated graded of both algebras in degree $(2,2)$: on the skein side, count multicurves with Dehn-Thurston coordinate $l=(2,2)$ using Lemma 2.8; on the Coulomb side, count the basis elements $f r_\lambda$ of Proposition 4.5 for $\lambda=2\alpha_1+2\alpha_2$. If the two counts disagree, Theorem 1.1 is false; a simpler check is to verify Lemma 6.1 directly for $n=3$ by computing the invariant subalgebra of the quiver Coulomb branch and comparing its generators with the monopole operators.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem 1.1: for the group $\widetilde{G} = G \times F$ and representation $N$ constructed from a genus zero surface $S = S_{0,n+2}$, there is a $k$-algebra isomorphism $\mathrm{Sk}_{A,\lambda}(S) \cong K_{\widetilde{G}^{\mathcal{O}} \rtimes \mathbb{C}^*}(R_{G,N})$ from the relative Kauffman bracket skein algebra to the quantized $K$-theoretic Coulomb branch of the variety of triples, after identifying $A$ with $q^{-1/2}$ and each $\lambda_i$ with $t_i$. As a direct consequence, Corollary 1.2, the skein algebra is the Grothendieck ring of the bounded derived category of $\widetilde{G}^{\mathcal{O}} \rtimes \mathbb{C}^*$-equivariant coherent sheaves on the variety of triples, with the convolution product as monoidal structure. The paper further notes that the heart of a $t$-structure on this derived category is an abelian monoidal category whose simple objects supply a canonical basis, which the authors expect to be related to the known positive bases of the skein algebra. The proof builds a polynomial representation of the skein algebra from a normalized quantum trace map and a faithful monopole-operator representation of the Coulomb branch, compares them inside a common localized quantum torus, and then uses filtrations and associated graded algebras to lift the localized isomorphism to an isomorphism of the integral algebras.

Load-bearing premise

The proof rests on a structural identification, quoted from the authors' earlier preprint, that the Coulomb branch attached to the surface is exactly the part of a larger Coulomb branch that is unchanged by a certain torus action, after setting pairs of auxiliary variables equal to inverse pairs ($w_{i,-}w_{i,+}=1$ and $z_{k,-}z_{k,+}=1$); if that identification fails, the argument showing the two algebras are the same collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every genus zero surface $S_{0,n+2}$, the relative Kauffman bracket skein algebra $\mathrm{Sk}_{A,\lambda}(S)$ is isomorphic to the quantized $K$-theoretic Coulomb branch attached to the surface's gauge group, flavor torus, and representation.
  • The skein algebra is the Grothendieck ring of the bounded derived category of equivariant coherent sheaves on the variety of triples with convolution product, giving a monoidal categorification that partially answers the categorification question raised in the skein-algebra literature.
  • The heart of the $t$-structure on this derived category is an abelian monoidal category whose Grothendieck ring is the skein algebra; the classes of simple objects form a canonical basis expected to relate to known positive skein-algebra bases.
  • For $S_{0,4}$, the skein algebra is closely related to the spherical double affine Hecke algebra, so the isomorphism gives a new perspective on that algebra and its polynomial representation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The isomorphism can be used in reverse: manifestly positive canonical bases constructed on the Coulomb-branch side would transfer to the skein algebra, giving new proofs of positivity that avoid case-by-case skein combinatorics.
  • The same generator-comparison strategy may apply to the $\mathfrak{gl}_2$-skein algebra, which is related to the Kauffman bracket skein algebra by a natural surjection; a Coulomb-branch realization of that algebra could provide a monoidal categorification in a broader setting.
  • Because Kauffman bracket skein algebras quantize cluster algebras on surfaces, the monoidal category constructed here is a natural candidate for a monoidal categorification of the associated surface cluster algebras.
  • The paper's treatment of the genus-one case suggests that enlarging the flavor symmetry group would make the full genus-one skein algebra isomorphic to a Coulomb branch, and the filtrations used here might then extend the categorification past genus zero.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proves Theorem 1.1, an isomorphism between the relative Kauffman bracket skein algebra Sk_{A,λ}(S_{0,n+2}) of a genus-zero surface with n+2 boundary components and the quantized K-theoretic Coulomb branch K_{eG O ⋊ C*}(R_{G,N}) associated to a group and representation determined by the surface. The proof constructs a polynomial representation of the skein algebra via a quantum trace map (following Detcherry–Santharoubane [13]) and compares it with the representation of the Coulomb branch by dressed minuscule monopole operators in a localized quantum torus. The comparison yields an isomorphism after localization to rational functions; a filtered/associated-graded argument upgrades it to an integral isomorphism. Corollary 1.2 identifies the skein algebra with the Grothendieck ring of the bounded derived category of equivariant coherent sheaves on the BFN variety of triples with the convolution product, giving a monoidal categorification and partially answering a question of D. Thurston.

Significance. If the proof is completed, this is a substantial result. It establishes a conjecture from [1] for all genus-zero surfaces, connecting skein algebras to Coulomb-branch algebras and providing a categorification of the skein algebra in terms of equivariant coherent sheaves with convolution. The paper contains a number of explicit and useful computations, including the quantum trace of the generators σ_{i,i+1} and γ_i (Propositions 3.4–3.5), the polynomial representation (Proposition 3.7), and the comparison with monopole operators (Lemma 7.3). The associated-graded comparison is detailed and appears coherent; the deduction of the integral isomorphism from the graded surjectivity via Lemma 7.6 is standard and well executed. The main reservation is that two key inputs (Lemma 6.1 and the commutator formula in Proposition 7.4) are quoted from the authors' own unpublished preprint [1]; these are not internal inconsistencies, but they make the central claim conditional. The paper also contains a significant number of imported results from [13], [27], and [26], but these are published and quoted precisely.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 6.4, Lemma 6.1] The identification A ≅ A^{(C*)^{n-1}}/(w_{i,-}w_{i,+}-1, z_{k,-}z_{k,+}-1) is quoted from [1, Lemma 3.3] and is used in Proposition 7.4 to assert M_{q,z}⊂A(G,F,N) and to identify the generators. This is load-bearing: without it, the containment of the image of the skein algebra in A(G,F,N) is unproved, and the surjectivity argument does not go through. Please provide a complete proof of this lemma (or include the result with full details as an appendix).
  2. [Section 7.3, Proposition 7.4 (odd i)] The conclusion that E_{i,1}[1]F_{i,1}[1] lies in the image relies on the commutator identity [E_{i,1}[1], F_{i,1}[1]]=(q-q^{-1})h, quoted as equation (12) of [1]. This identity is not proved or even stated in the present paper, and it is needed to handle all odd indices. Please include a proof or a direct computation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5.3, Eq. (8) and Lemma 7.9] The entry denoted δ0 in the displayed matrix appears to be the scalar δ = -t_j - t_j^{-1}, which conflicts with the curve δ0 of Figure 4. Use a different symbol (e.g., Δ) for the scalar.
  2. [Section 3.4, Proposition 3.5] The constant term H0 is taken from [26] with a different normalization, and the phrase 'this is immaterial for computing the constant term' is terse; please add a few sentences explaining why the constant term is independent of the normalization changes.
  3. [Section 7.1] The notation M_{q,z} is used both for the subalgebra before localization and (in Section 7.3) for its localization by rational functions, which may confuse readers. Please use different symbols (e.g., M_{q,z}^{loc}) for the localized algebra.
  4. [Section 2.4, Lemma 2.8] The proof of the second statement refers to 'Figure 1.2.2 of [29]' but does not reproduce the gluing; it would be helpful to include a short explanation of how the union of σ_{i,j} is constructed.
  5. [Section 1 and throughout] The paper frequently cites [1] for background and proofs; given that Lemma 6.1 and the commutator formula are load-bearing, consider marking these citations explicitly in the introduction and stating which parts of [1] are assumed.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Self-cited Lemma 6.1 and the [1, Eq. (12)] commutation relation are load-bearing inputs, but the Φ/Ψ comparison is independent.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 6.4, Lemma 6.1; used in Section 7.3, Proposition 7.4]
    "The isomorphism is proved in Lemma 3.3 of [1], and the proof given there shows that Xi+X−1i maps to wi,+ + wi,− for i = 1,...,n− 1."

    Proposition 7.4 uses this lemma to conclude M_{q,z} ⊂ A(G,F,N), and then uses Proposition 5.5 together with Lemma 6.1 to reduce surjectivity to showing that w_{i,+}+w_{i,-} and E_{i,1}[1]F_{i,1}[1] lie in the image. The containment and the final identification of the Coulomb-branch generators therefore depend on an isomorphism that is quoted from the authors' own earlier preprint [1] and not proved in the present paper. This is load-bearing: if Lemma 3.3 of [1] were unavailable or false, the comparison of the skein algebra with the Coulomb branch would collapse at this step. It is not a definitional reduction, but it is a central premise imported from a self-citation.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 7.3, Proposition 7.4 (odd i case)]
    "As noted in equation (12) of [ 1], the monopole operators obey a commutation relation of the form [Ei,1[1],Fi,1[1]] = (q−q −1)h where h is some symmetric polynomial in the wj,±."

    For odd i, Lemma 7.3 places F_{i,1}[1]E_{i,1}[1] in the image of the embedding, not E_{i,1}[1]F_{i,1}[1]. To conclude that E_{i,1}[1]F_{i,1}[1] is also in the image, the proof invokes a commutation relation quoted from [1, Eq. (12)], again the authors' own prior preprint. This is the final missing step for odd i in the surjectivity argument, so the odd case of the isomorphism of localized algebras depends on another unproved-in-this-paper self-cited input.

full rationale

The main comparison is not circular in the construction sense. The polynomial representation Φ of the skein algebra is built from the quantum trace map of Detcherry–Santharoubane, while the Coulomb-branch representation Ψ is built from dressed minuscule monopole operators; both are embedded into a common localized quantum torus X_{q,t}. Lemma 7.3 compares the images of explicit generators term-by-term with explicit rational functions, and no parameter is fitted from the desired isomorphism. The associated-graded argument (Lemmas 7.7, 7.9, 7.10) is an independent computation from these embeddings. However, two load-bearing facts are imported from the authors' earlier preprint [1] rather than proved here: Lemma 6.1, which identifies A(G,F,N) with the invariant subalgebra of the quiver Coulomb branch modulo w_{i,-}w_{i,+}=1 and z_{k,-}z_{k,+}=1, and the commutation relation [E_{i,1}[1],F_{i,1}[1]]=(q-q^{-1})h used in the odd-i surjectivity case. These self-citations are not definitionally equivalent to the theorem, and the surrounding trace computations are substantial, so the paper is only partially dependent on its own prior results, not fully circular.

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

The central claim rests on standard geometric representation theory (Coulomb branches, equivariant K-theory) and on prior skein technology (quantum trace, fusion rules). No free parameters are fitted; the isomorphism is structural. The most fragile entry is Lemma 6.1, a self-cited identification of the relevant Coulomb branch from [1], which is load-bearing for the localized isomorphism.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Convolution product defines a monoidal structure on DbCoh_{eGO⋊C*}(R_{G,N}) whose Grothendieck ring is the quantized Coulomb branch.
    Invoked in Section 4.3 and Corollary 1.2; associativity and unit constraints are not proved in this paper, and the K-theoretic version is cited from [6], with categorical refinements in [8].
  • domain assumption Skein algebra generation theorem of Chen (Theorem 2.3): Sk_A(S) is generated by the curves α_I.
    Used in Proposition 2.6 to prove generation by σ, γ, δ; cited from [11, Theorem 5.3].
  • domain assumption Quantum trace map of Detcherry-Santharoubane is an injective algebra homomorphism with matrix coefficients in the stated rational function fields.
    Used to construct the polynomial representation Φ in Section 3.5; injectivity is cited from [13, Lemmas 2.6 and 2.8] and Propositions 3.1 through 3.3.
  • standard math Fusion rules and Jones-Wenzl idempotents of [27] are valid.
    Used in the computations of the quantum trace in Section 3.4, specifically Propositions 3.4 and 3.5.
  • domain assumption Lemma 6.1 from [1], Lemma 3.3: the quantized Coulomb branch A for the groups of Section 5.1 is isomorphic to A^{(C*)^{n-1}}/(w_{i,-}w_{i,+}-1, z_{k,-}z_{k,+}-1), with the stated images of X_i+X_i^{-1} and r_{α_i}.
    Load-bearing for Proposition 7.4 and for the containment M_{q,z}⊂A(G,F,N). Quoted from the authors' prior work and not reproven.
  • domain assumption Braverman-Finkelberg-Nakajima constructions: variety of triples, convolution product, filtration of the K-theoretic Coulomb branch, and the associated graded basis of Proposition 4.5.
    Used throughout Sections 4 through 7; cited from [6] and [12].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Monoidal categorification of genus zero skein algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/M7VB3SEQ

@misc{pith2026250513332,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Monoidal categorification of genus zero skein algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/M7VB3SEQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13332}
}
abstract

We prove a conjecture of the first and third named authors relating the Kauffman bracket skein algebra of a genus zero surface with boundary to a quantized $K$-theoretic Coulomb branch. As a consequence, we see that our skein algebra arises as the Grothendieck ring of the bounded derived category of equivariant coherent sheaves on the Braverman-Finkelberg-Nakajima variety of triples with monoidal structure defined by the convolution product. We thus give a monoidal categorification of the skein algebra, partially answering a question posed by D. Thurston.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.13332 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Kauffman bracket skein relations. Definition 2.1. The extended (Kauffman bracket) skein module SkcA(M) is the quotient of LbA(M) by the relations depicted in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Additional relation associated to a boundary component. The skein algebra SkA(S) defined above becomes the algebra of regular functions on the SL2- character variety of S when we specialize to A = −1. Similarly, the relative skein algebra SkA,λ(S) becomes the algebra of regular functions on the relative SL2-character variety when we specialize to A = −1 and specialize the λi to nonzero complex numbers [1]. In the pr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. a. Let us also consider a collection of simple, pairwise nonintersecting paths ci on S where, for each integer i considered modulo n + 2, the path ci connects the ith and (i + 1)st boundary components. 0 . . . 1 2 n n + 1 (a) . . . 0 1 2 n n + 1 (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (12 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Curves on a genus zero surface, 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n. Proof. For any i = 1, . . . , n + 1, we have α{i} = δi , and therefore the lemma is true when |I| = 1. On the other hand, for any 2 ≤ r ≤ n + 1, we have α{1,2,...,r} = σ1,r, α{2,3,...,r+1} = σ2,r+1, . . . α{n+2−r,...,n+1} =…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Curves in the proof of Proposition 2.7. This is true if k = 1, since in that case σ1,k = −λ1 − λ −1 1 by the relation in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Some Jones–Wenzl idempotents. 3.1.3. We can also consider a closed triangle Σ with sides e, f, and g. Suppose we are given integers c(e), c(f), c(g) ≥ 0 such that the sum c(e) +c(f) +c(g) is even and such that the triangle inequality c(r) ≤ c(s) + c(t) is satisfied whe…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Arcs on a triangle. 3.1.4. Recall that a ribbon graph is a graph with a cyclic ordering of the edges incident to each vertex. We let Γ be a ribbon graph with finitely many vertices and edges such that every vertex is either trivalent or univalent. We will write Γ0 and …
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Parallel strands rule. c + 1 1 c = A c c + 1 1 c (a) c − 1 1 c = −A −(c+2) c − 1 1 c (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Half twist rules. c c + 1 1 c = − [c + 2] [c + 1] c (a) c c − 1 1 c = c (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Biangle reducing rules [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Triangle reducing rules. 3.3. Definition of the quantum trace. We now use the ideas of the previous sections to construct an algebra homomorphism from the skein algebra of a surface into a localized quantum torus. Let Γ be a finite ribbon graph in R 3 such that every …
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: A ribbon graph. Let us assume that Γ is embedded in R 3 . As in Section 3.3, we let M ⊂ R 3 be the handlebody defined as the closure of a small tubular neighborhood of Γ, and we let S be the surface obtained from S¯ = ∂M by removing a small disk Dv ⊂ S¯ around each un…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: A calculation with fusion rules. It follows from Proposition 3.4 that the quantum trace map induces a well defined injective C[A±1 ]-algebra homomorphism SkA,λ(S) → ZA,C(Γ) mapping λj 7→ A−2C −2 j . Abusing notation, we denote this homomorphism also by Υ. Proposition …
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Form of the quiver Q. 6.2. Localization. We can construct a faithful polynomial representation of the quantized Coulomb branch associated to a quiver Q as above. Write z for a tuple consisting of a for￾mal variable zk,l for each framing node k ∈ F and each l ∈ Z/2Z an…
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: A family of curves on S0,n+2. Lemma 7.2. The polynomial representation Φ maps θi,m 7→ q mX m i Ti(Xi)(τi − 1) + q mX −m i Ti(X −1 i )(τ −1 i − 1) + fm where Ti and τi are the operators defined in Proposition 3.7 and fm ∈ C[q ± 1 2 , t±1 k , X±1 j ] is invariant under …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    and Shan, P

    Allegretti, D.G.L. and Shan, P. (2024). Skein algebras and quantized Coulomb branches. arXiv:2401.06737 [math.RT]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [13]

    and Santharoubane, R

    Detcherry, R. and Santharoubane, R. (2025). An embedding of skein algebras of surfaces into localized quantum tori from Dehn–Thurston coordinates.Geometry & Topology,29(1), 313–348

    work page 2025

  3. [27]

    and Vogel, P

    Masbaum, G. and Vogel, P. (1994). 3-valent graphs and the Kauffman bracket.Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 164(2), 361–381

    work page 1994

  4. [26]

    and Paul, T

    March´ e, J. and Paul, T. (2015). Toeplitz operators in TQFT via skein theory.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society,367(5), 3669–3704. 50 DYLAN G.L. ALLEGRETTI, HYUN KYU KIM, AND PENG SHAN

    work page 2015

  5. [2]

    Dualities of $K$-theoretic Coulomb branches from a once-punctured torus

    Allegretti, D.G.L. and Shan, P. (2024). Dualities of K-theoretic Coulomb branches from a once-punctured torus. arXiv:2411.17378 [math.RT]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  6. [3]

    Asaeda, M., Przytycki, J.H., and Sikora, A.S. (2004). Categorification of the Kauffman bracket skein module of I-bundles over surfaces.Algebraic & Geometric Topology,4(2), 1177–1210. MONOIDAL CATEGORIFICATION OF GENUS ZERO SKEIN ALGEBRAS 49

    work page 2004

  7. [4]

    and Wong, H

    Bonahon, F. and Wong, H. (2011). Quantum traces for representations of surface groups in SL 2(C).Geometry and Topology,15(3), 1569–1615

    work page 2011

  8. [5]

    Bousseau, P. (2023). Strong positivity for the skein algebras of the 4-punctured sphere and the 1-punctured torus.Communications in Mathematical Physics,398(1), 1–58

    work page 2023

Show all 37 references
  1. [6]

    Braverman, A., Finkelberg, M., and Nakajima, H. (2018). Towards a mathematical definition of Coulomb branches of 3-dimensionalN = 4 gauge theories, II.Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics,22(5), 1071–1147

    2018

  2. [7]

    Braverman, A., Finkelberg, M., and Nakajima, H. (2019). Ring objects in the equivariant derived Satake category arising from Coulomb branches.Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics,23(2), 253–344

    2019

  3. [8]

    and Williams, H

    Cautis, S. and Williams, H. (2023). Canonical bases for Coulomb branches of 4d N = 2 gauge theories. arXiv:2306.03023 [math.AG]

    2023 arXiv

  4. [9]

    and Williams, H

    Cautis, S. and Williams, H. (2023). Ind-geometric stacks.arXiv:2306.03043 [math.AG]

    2023 arXiv

  5. [10]

    and Williams, H

    Cautis, S. and Williams, H. (2023). Tamely presented morphisms and coherent pullback. arXiv:2306.03119 [math.AG]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [11]

    Chen, H. (2022). On skein algebras of planar surfaces.arXiv:2206.07856 [math.GT]

    2022 arXiv

  7. [12]

    and Ginzburg, V

    Chriss, N. and Ginzburg, V. (1997).Representation theory and complex geometry. Birkh¨ auser

    1997

  8. [14]

    and Tsymbaliuk, A

    Finkelberg, M. and Tsymbaliuk, A. (2019). Multiplicative slices, relativistic Toda and shifted quantum affine algebras. InRepresentations and nilpotent orbits of Lie algebraic systems, pp. 133–304

    2019

  9. [15]

    and Goncharov, A.B

    Fock, V.V. and Goncharov, A.B. (2006). Moduli spaces of local systems and higher Teichm¨ uller theory.Publica- tions Math´ ematiques de l’Institut des Hautes ´Etudes Scientifiques,103(1), 1–211

    2006

  10. [16]

    Fomin, S., Shapiro, M., Thurston, D. (2008). Cluster algebras and triangulated surfaces. Part I: Cluster complexes. Acta Mathematica,201(1), 83–146

    2008

  11. [17]

    and Gelca, R

    Frohman, C. and Gelca, R. (2000). Skein modules and the noncommutative torus.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society,352(10), 4877–4888

    2000

  12. [18]

    (2012).N= 2 dualities.Journal of High Energy Physics,2012(8), 1–58

    Gaiotto, D. (2012).N= 2 dualities.Journal of High Energy Physics,2012(8), 1–58

    2012

  13. [19]

    Gaiotto, D., Moore, G.W., and Neitzke, A. (2013). Wall-crossing, Hitchin systems, and the WKB approximation. Advances in Mathematics,234(2013), 239–403

    2013

  14. [20]

    Gaiotto, D., Moore, G.W., and Neitzke, A. (2013). Framed BPS states.Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics,17(2), 241–397

    2013

  15. [21]

    and Leclerc, B

    Hernandez, D. and Leclerc, B. (2010). Cluster algebras and quantum affine algebras.Duke Mathematical Journal, 154(2), 265–341

    2010

  16. [22]

    Hikami, K. (2024). Skein algebra on 5-punctured sphere. Unpublished preprint

    2024

  17. [23]

    Kang, S.-J., Kashiwara, M., Kim, M., and Oh, S.-j. (2018). Monoidal categorification of cluster algebras.Journal of the American Mathematical Society,31(2), 349–426

    2018

  18. [24]

    Khovanov, M. (2000). A categorification of the Jones polynomial.Duke Mathematical Journal,104(1), 359–426

    2000

  19. [25]

    and Qin, F

    Mandel, T. and Qin, F. (2023). Bracelets bases are theta bases.arXiv:2301.11101 [math.QA]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Muller, G. (2016). Skein algebras and cluster algebras of marked surfaces.Quantum Topology,7(3), 435–503

    2016

  21. [29]

    and Harer, J.L

    Penner, R.C. and Harer, J.L. (1992).Combinatorics of Train Tracks. Annals of Mathematics Studies (No. 125). Princeton University Press

    1992

  22. [30]

    Przytycki, J.H. (1991). Skein modules of 3-manifolds.Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences,39(1–2), 91–100

    1991

  23. [31]

    (2022).gl 2 foam functoriality and skein positivity.arXiv:2209.08794 [math.QA]

    Queffelec, H. (2022).gl 2 foam functoriality and skein positivity.arXiv:2209.08794 [math.QA]

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    and Wedrich, P

    Queffelec, H. and Wedrich, P. (2021). Khovanov homology and categorification of skein modules.Quantum Topology,12(1), 129–209

    2021

  25. [33]

    and Shapiro, A

    Schrader, G. and Shapiro, A. (2019). K-theoretic Coulomb branches of quiver gauge theories and cluster varieties. arXiv:1910.03186 [math.QA]

    2019

  26. [34]

    Teleman, C. (2022). Coulomb branches for quaternionic representations.arXiv:2209.01088 [math.AT]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Thurston, D. (2014). Positive basis for surface skein algebras.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(27), 9725–9732

    2014

  28. [36]

    Turaev, V. (1991). Skein quantization of Poisson algebras of loops on surfaces.Annales Scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure,24(6), 635–704

    1991

  29. [37]

    and Vasserot, E

    Varagnolo, M. and Vasserot, E. (2010). Double affine Hecke algebras and affine flag manifolds, I. InAffine flag manifolds and principal bundles, pp. 233–289. Yau Mathematical Sciences Center, Department of Mathematical Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China Email...

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.