Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 76 references

Parabolic skein modules

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A knot's quantum A-polynomial is the joint elimination ideal of tetrahedron skein relations.

desk verdict A genuinely new framework for quantum A-polynomials with real computational payoff, but the central cluster-chart proof has a rank-count gap that needs to be fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14836 v1 pith:H277PK3I submitted 2025-05-20 math.QA math.GTmath.RT

Jennifer Brown , David Jordan This is my paper
classification math.QAmath.GTmath.RT MSC 57K1657K3181R5018M15
keywords parabolicskeinmodulesdefecttheoryquantumA-polynomialA-idealidealtriangulationclusterchartsinductiondecoratedcharacterstacks
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

Parabolic skein modules extend skein theory to 3-manifolds with a codimension-one defect separating a quantum-group region from a torus region, modelling quantum parabolic induction and restriction. The paper's main claim is that for any ideal triangulation of a knot complement, the localised quantum A-ideal of the knot equals the intersection of the algebra $\mathbb{C}_q[M^{\pm1},L^{\pm1}]$ with the sum of two explicit ideals: one generated by tetrahedron skein relations and one by thread monodromies. This turns a knot invariant previously approached through physics-inspired gluing equations into a finite, manifestly topological elimination problem in a quantum torus. If correct, it gives an invariant definition of the quantum A-polynomial and an algorithm that recovers the classical A-polynomial at $q^{1/2}=-1$ while also producing genuinely quantum factors such as $(q^{11/2}M^4+L)$ for the trefoil.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the parabolic defect skein category: a bipartite 3-manifold with a surface defect separating a $\mathrm{Rep}_q SL_2$ region from a $\mathrm{Rep}_q T$ region, coloured at the defect by the redecoration $\widehat{\mathrm{Rep}}_q B$ obtained by monadic reconstruction from quantum parabolic induction and restriction. On the triangulated surface $\Sigma_\triangle$, the paper constructs quantum cluster charts $W_\triangle$, presenting the localised internal skein algebra as a quantum torus whose generators are short edges, long edges, and threads; the key identity Theorem 4.7 then arises by closing gates, taking $T$-invariants, and eliminating the skeletal variables $Y_i$ and thread monodromies $r_i$ from the bulk and thread ideals.

What would settle it

For the figure-eight knot, run the algorithm on the two triangulations of Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2 and check that the eliminated ideals in $\mathbb{C}_q[M,L]$ coincide after the prescribed specialisations; any discrepancy would refute the claimed triangulation independence. A sharper test is to find any knot complement and triangulation where the localised internal skein algebra has rank strictly below $18t$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is Theorem 4.7: fixing an ideal triangulation $\triangle$ of the knot complement $S^3\setminus K$, the localised quantum A-ideal satisfies $I_\triangle(K) = \mathbb{C}_q[M^{\pm1},L^{\pm1}]\cap (I_{\mathrm{thr}}+I_{\mathrm{bulk}})$, where $I_{\mathrm{bulk}}$ is generated by one Kauffman-type relation per tetrahedron and $I_{\mathrm{thr}}$ by the thread monodromies running parallel to the defect. The construction passes through a surface $\Sigma_\triangle$ of genus $t+1$ whose internal skein algebra, after localising long-edge skeins, is identified with a rank-$18t$ quantum torus $W_\triangle$; gluing relations, tetrahedron relations, and thread relations are then explicit. The left-hand side is defined skein-theoretically without choosing a triangulation, so the theorem identifies the triangulation-dependent computation with a triangulation-independent invariant. The paper verifies the identity in worked examples including the unknot, trefoil, figure-eight, $5_1$, $5_2$, and $8_9$ knots, and at $q^{1/2}=-1$ recovers the classical A-ideal.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that after localising the long-edge skeins, the internal skein algebra of the triangulated surface is exactly a rank-$18t$ quantum torus with no additional skein relations beyond the gluing relations; if extra relations exist, the cluster chart and the elimination computation collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The quantum A-ideal is independent of the chosen ideal triangulation, so the triangulation dependence seen in earlier gluing-equation computations is controlled: triangulations related by Pachner moves must give the same eliminated ideal.
  • Computation becomes finite noncommutative elimination, and the paper reports that bulk and thread ideals for triangulations with up to 11 tetrahedra are computed in minutes.
  • Setting $q^{1/2}=-1$ recovers the classical A-ideal, and Abelian factors such as $(L-q)(L-q^{-1})$ for the unknot appear naturally through skein-theoretic relations.
  • The defect skein formalism provides a 3-manifold extension of quantum decorated character stacks, so surface defects can be treated as domain walls between 3D TQFTs.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One extension the authors leave implicit is that the same elimination setup is a natural testing ground for the AJ-conjecture, since the quantum A-ideal should cut out the same $q$-difference module as the coloured Jones recursion.
  • The cluster-chart structure suggests that Pachner moves could be reinterpreted as quantum cluster mutations on the localised quantum A-ideal; this is not shown in the paper.
  • The method should transplant to other reductive groups or ribbon categories admitting analogous Kauffman relations, yielding higher-rank quantum A-ideals from the same thread-and-bulk elimination pattern.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a skein theory for 3-manifolds with codimension-one defects, specializing to parabolic defects coming from quantum group parabolic induction/restriction. For G=SL_2 the authors give a Kauffman-Müller-type presentation of the parabolic defect skein algebra and use monadic reconstruction to replace Rep_qB by an affinized category gRep_qB. They define a quantum A-ideal I(K) as an annihilator of a localized internal skein module, and, after choosing an ideal triangulation ∆ of the knot complement, formulate the main theorem (Theorem 4.7): the localized quantum A-ideal I_∆(K) equals the joint elimination ideal C_q[M^{±1},L^{±1}] ∩ (I_thr + I_bulk), with I_bulk generated by tetrahedron relations (4.9) and I_thr by thread monodromies. The paper provides worked computations for the trefoil, figure-eight, 5_1, 5_2, and 8_9 knots, together with computational code.

Significance. If Theorem 4.7 is established, the paper would supply a manifestly topological definition of the quantum A-ideal, an elementary finite-time elimination algorithm, and a rigorous bridge between skein-theoretic invariants and Dimofte-style gluing equations. A notable strength is that the quantum A-ideal is not defined as an elimination ideal, so the main equality is a genuine theorem rather than a tautology. The authors also provide explicit, reproducible computations and publicly available code, which is valuable for testing the framework. However, the proof of the main theorem rests on the cluster chart statement Theorem 4.2, whose proof currently leaves a load-bearing gap; the significance is therefore conditional on filling that gap.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.1, proof of Theorem 4.2] The proof defines a map φ from the rank-30t quantum torus W_Λ′ to SkAlgint(Σ_∆)[S_∆^{-1}], shows that the gluing ideal I_gluing lies in the kernel, and then asserts equality by counting generators: (6t+1)+(4t−1)+8t = 18t. This count only shows that the target has the expected rank if one already knows it is a quantum torus with one independent generator per gate; it does not rule out additional skein relations that could survive localization. If ker φ is strictly larger than I_gluing, then W_∆ is not a cluster chart, Lemma 4.3's description of the internal skein module as W_∆/I_bulk collapses, and Theorem 4.7's elimination computation need not compute the annihilator of the long-edge skeins. The sentence 'The only potential obstruction to surjectivity is the G-monodromy... A direct computation shows...' is also not demonstrated and should be replaced by an explicit argument.
  2. [§1.3 and §4.1] The paper asserts that the long-edge skeins form an Ore set in the internal skein algebra (stated in §1.3 as 'The skeins running parallel to the long edges of the triangulation define an Ore set'), but no proof or reference is supplied. Without the Ore condition, the localized algebra SkAlgint(Σ_∆)[S_∆^{-1}] is not known to exist as a ring, and both Theorem 4.2 and the definition of W_∆ are conditional on this point. This needs to be proved or explicitly referenced from previous work.
  3. [§3.4.4, Lemma 3.15] The proof begins 'By assumption the module is cyclic', but cyclicity is not established anywhere in the paper. This is not a harmless assumption: it is exactly what is needed to conclude that the internal skein module of the ideal tetrahedron is a quotient W_tet/I of the quantum torus by a single left ideal. This statement is then extended to the bulk module in Lemma 4.3 and is used in Theorem 4.7. If the localized module is not cyclic, the quotient description and the elimination formula do not follow. The authors should either prove cyclicity or identify a prior result that implies it.
  4. [§4.3.5] The worked example for the 5_2 knot reproduces verbatim the gluing data, generators M and L, thread monodromies r_1,r_2, skeletal variables Y_1,Y_2, commutation relations, and bulk relations B_1,B_2,B_3 of the 5_1 example in §4.3.4. Since 5_1 and 5_2 are distinct knots, this cannot be the correct output for I_∆(5_2). The section needs to be replaced with the actual triangulation data and corresponding computation, or the text must explain why the outputs coincide.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§1.4, Definition 1.4] The statement that 'at q = 1 the quantum A-ideal is precisely the classical A-ideal' is asserted without proof; a proof or a precise reference would help the reader trust the specialization.
  2. [§1.4, Example 1.11] The text writes 'L + L^{-1} = q + q^{-1}/2', but the subsequent conclusion uses 'q + q^{-1}'; this appears to be a typo and should be corrected.
  3. [§1.4, equation (1.9)] In the displayed polynomial g_1, the term '−q35/2M^4' appears after a plus sign in a way that is syntactically confusing; please clarify the intended expression.
  4. [Throughout] The classical specialization is repeatedly described as 'q^{1/2} = −1', but the paper works over C(q^{1/2}); the precise ring homomorphism used for the classical limit should be stated explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the localised quantum A-ideal is defined invariantly from skein modules, and the elimination ideal is an independently defined computation; Theorem 4.7 is a substantive equality rather than a tautology.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.7, equates the localised quantum A-ideal I△(K) with the joint elimination ideal C_q[M^{±1}, L^{±1}] ∩ (I_thr + I_bulk). This is not circular: I△(K) is defined in Definition 1.5 as the sum of annihilator ideals of long-edge skeins, with no reference to I_bulk or I_thr. The bulk ideal I_bulk is independently defined from the Kauffman-type tetrahedron relation (4.9), which is computed from the skein module of an ideal tetrahedron in Lemma 3.15, and the thread ideal I_thr is generated by thread monodromies described in Lemma 4.5. Neither definition presupposes the annihilator being computed. The phrase in the proof of Theorem 4.7 that the result 'follows by construction and from excision of internal skein modules' refers to the fact that the auxiliary module SkMod^loc is assembled from the same triangulation data; it is not a definitional identification of the two ideals. The paper does rely on the authors' prior works [JLSS21] and [GJS21] for cluster charts, internal skein algebras, and monadic reconstruction. These are independent published results with stated assumptions that do not include the quantum A-ideal equality, and Lemma 3.14 also cites Muller's theorem [Mul16, Thm 6.14] as independent support. The rank-count step in the proof of Theorem 4.2, which the skeptic highlights, is a potential correctness gap concerning possible extra skein relations in the localised internal skein algebra; it is not a circularity, because the asserted isomorphism is not used to define the skein algebra or the A-ideal. Overall, the derivation chain is not circular: the invariant definition and the elimination computation are genuinely different objects, and the paper's main theorem is a substantive computational claim rather than a restatement of its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central construction rests on a network of categorical and skein-theoretic assumptions imported from prior literature, plus several normalization choices specific to this paper. The main fragile point is the rank count in the cluster chart proof, which is asserted rather than fully derived.

free parameters (3)
  • gluing character chi on Gamma_gluing = chi(ei+thetai+fi+thetai)=q^{-2}, chi(Ei+thetaEi-Fi-thetaFi)=1
    Introduced in Section 4.1 to define W_Delta; the values are chosen to match the skein gluing relations and are normalization choices rather than independently predicted constants.
  • thread and puncture monodromy character chi_mon = epsilon_ij maps to q^{3/2}, r_{2k-1} maps to q^{1/2} q^{|r|/2}, r_{2k} maps to q^{-1/2} q^{|r|/2}
    Chosen in the proof of Proposition 4.4 to specialize to the final quantum torus W_inv_Delta; the powers of q are said to come from the G-monodromy relation, but they are hand-picked for the computation.
  • quantum cluster matrix Omega' entries = values in (4.3)-(4.5) plus Omega_{th,th}
    The entry values are 'chosen precisely so that' the cluster chart homomorphism is well defined (proof of Theorem 4.2); they are construction choices, not derived from independent data.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Factorization homology/stratified TFT identifications from [Coo19, BH24, BZFN10, AFT17] identify defect skein categories with (decorated) character stacks.
    Invoked in Section 1.2 and used to justify that parabolic defect skeins model quantum decorated character stacks; results are cited, not reproved.
  • domain assumption The central structure half-braiding of Rep_qG ⊠ Rep_qT acting on Rep_qB (Lemma 3.1): Hom spaces at the defect are one-dimensional when weights match.
    Says 'follows from a direct computation' in Section 3; this local computation underlies the Kauffman relations of Lemma 3.2 and all subsequent cluster charts.
  • standard math Monadic reconstruction (Beck/Ostrik) applies to give gRep_qB = O_q(G/N)-mod and Corollary 3.6 equivalence of transverse skein categories.
    Theorem 3.3 is quoted from [JLSS21, BZBJ18, Ost03]; used to replace Rep_qB by its affinization.
  • ad hoc to paper The module in Lemma 3.15 is cyclic.
    In the proof of Lemma 3.15, 'By assumption the module is cyclic'; the cyclicity of the localized internal skein module generated by the empty skein is asserted, not proven.
  • ad hoc to paper The localized long-edge skeins form an Ore set in the internal skein algebra.
    Section 4.1 assumes localizing at long edges is possible via Ore localization; stated without proof.
  • domain assumption The classical limit q^{1/2} = -1 recovers the classical A-ideal up to abelian factors and multiplicities.
    Used to validate examples; the unknot example gives (L-1)^2 at q=1 rather than L-1, so the precise statement needs qualification.
invented entities (2)
  • The parabolic defect (bipartite skein theory with Rep_qG / Rep_qB / Rep_qT local coefficients) independent evidence
    purpose: Models quantum decorated character stacks on 3-manifolds with surface defects; powers the quantum A-ideal construction.
    The defect is a geometric construction consistent with known skein theory and factorization homology; its defining relations are checked in examples against known A-polynomials.
  • gRep_qB (redecoration / affinization of Rep_qB) independent evidence
    purpose: Provides enough compact projectives and 2-dualizability so skein theory and TFT can be defined; implemented as O_q(G/N)-modules.
    Defined via monadic reconstruction from a known algebra O_q(G/N); also appeared implicitly in JLSS21, and is a categorical completion rather than a speculative physical entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Parabolic skein modules." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/H277PK3I

@misc{pith2026250514836,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Parabolic skein modules},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/H277PK3I}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14836}
}
abstract

We develop skein theory for 3-manifolds in the presence of codimension-one defects, focusing especially on defects arising from parabolic induction/restriction for quantum groups. We use these defects as a model for the quantum decorated character stacks of arXiv:2102.12283, thus extending them to 3-manifolds with surface defects. As a special case we obtain knot invariants closely related to the ``quantum $A$-polynomial", and we give a concrete method for computation resembling the approach of Dimofte and collaborators based on ideal triangulations and gluing equations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.14836 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Coordinates defined by some typical loops in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. At left, a parabolic defect skein: here V and χ are objects of Repq G and Repq T, respectively, and f ∈ HomRepq B(IndB T (χ), ResG B(V )). At right, skeins in M◦ which quantize the functions from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Additional skein relations satisfied at the parabolic defect. The first relation is a consequence of stratified [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (18 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Two depictions of the same decorated surface Σ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Attaching T-coloured disks to the boundary of Mbulk . 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The skeins A, L, LG used in the computation of the quantum A-polynomial for the unknot, shown here in a cross section of the solid bipartite torus. Note that the Kauffman relations in the G region imply that LGA = (L + L −1 )A. The longitude in the G region LG equals q…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A thickened disk with the structure of a bipartite three manifold. Note that the defect (teal) meets the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: An isotopy induces the half braiding that gives Rib [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The functor RTB on objects of RibB. Here H comes from the central structure A ⊠ C → Z(B) and FB is the evaluation functor for the planar diagrammatics of B. f g V W η χ ≃ g f V W η χ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: A birds-eye view of isotopic tangles, demonstrating that crossings can move through defects. The coupons [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Left: Products of skein are read right to left – the leftmost skein is the lowest and is first according to the orientation at the gate. Right: Internal skeins are stated where they meet a gate, and coupons can be absorbed into gates due to the coend expression (2.27)…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Relations for the parabolic defect skein algebra which don’t involve gates or the defect. The blue disk [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_12.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: The vanishing dips in Figure [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_17.png]
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: T-region commutation relations for skeins meeting only at a single gate. A1 1 3 2 A13 A23 A12 A1 a b A01 A03 A02 A13 A23 A12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_18.png]
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: From left to right: The digon D2, the triangle D3, the annulus Ann g , and the four-punctured sphere Σtet. In each case the generators of a quantum cluster chart computed in Section 3.4 are shown in purple, the T-regions in orange, and the G-regions in blue. 3.4 Build…
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: The full set of short and long edges which generate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_20.png]
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: A portion of a surface with the gluing handle attachment shown. Long edges pass through [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p032_21.png]
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Left: The gluing relation identifying the pair ekij , aℓmn of short edges. Right: The gluing relation identifying the pair Ekij , Aℓmn of long edges. Both types of relation rely on the addition of threads, labelled by x, x′ , y, y′ in the figure. Both claims can be co…
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Left: Generators of the quantum torus SkAlgint Repq T (Σ△)[S −1 ], where S is the set of edges passing through the G-regions. There are 2t + 2 generators corresponding to meridians and longitudes, t of which pass through G￾regions. There are 4t − 1 generators correspo…
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Each G-region handle has an associated pair of thread monodromies crossed by the long edge skeins passing through that region. Multiplying by the long edge skein allows us to pass the monodromy from one side of the G-region to the other. Proof. Recall the pairs of ide…
Figure 25
Figure 25. Figure 25: An example of the various generators of WΛ′ incident to a single vertex. Shown here for the gate v001 in the triangulated 41 knot complement considered in Section 4.3.1, but the configuration of short edges, threads, and long edges is the same at each gate regardless …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Factorization homology of stratified spaces

    David Ayala, John Francis, and Hiro Lee Tanaka. Factorization homology of stratified spaces. Selecta Mathematica , 23(1):293–362, Jan 2017

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    Local structures on stratified spaces

    David Ayala, John Francis, and Hiro Lee Tanaka. Local structures on stratified spaces. Advances in Mathematics , 307:903–1028, Feb 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Adamek and J

    J. Adamek and J. Rosicky. Locally Presentable and Accessible Categories . London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    Large N duality, mirror symmetry, and a Q -deformed A -polynomial for knots

    Mina Aganagic and Cumrun Vafa. Large N duality, mirror symmetry, and a Q -deformed A -polynomial for knots. arXiv , July 2012. arXiv:1204.4709 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    Reflexivity and dualizability in categorified linear algebra

    Martin Brandenburg, Alexandru Chirvasitu, and Theo Johnson-Freyd. Reflexivity and dualizability in categorified linear algebra. arXiv , 2014. arXiv:1409.5934

    arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    All order asymptotics of hyperbolic knot invariants from non-perturbative topological recursion of a-polynomials

    Ga \"e tan Borot and Bertrand Eynard. All order asymptotics of hyperbolic knot invariants from non-perturbative topological recursion of a-polynomials. Quantum Topology , 6(1):39--138, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Triples, algebras and cohomology

    Jonathan Mock Beck. Triples, algebras and cohomology. Reprints in Theory and Applications of Categories , 2:1–59, 2003

    work page 2003

  8. [8]

    Skein categories in non-semisimple settings

    Jennifer Brown and Benjamin Haïoun. Skein categories in non-semisimple settings. arXiv , June 2024. arXiv:2406.08956 [math]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 76 references
  1. [9]

    Quantum A polynomial

    Jennifer Brown and David Jordan. Quantum A polynomial. https://github.com/jmhbrown/quantum-A-polynomial/

  2. [10]

    On dualizability of braided tensor categories

    Adrien Brochier, David Jordan, and Noah Snyder. On dualizability of braided tensor categories. Compositio Mathematica , 157(3):435–483, Mar 2021. arXiv:1804.07538

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Kauffman brackets, character varieties, and triangulations of surfaces

    Francis Bonahon and Helen Wong. Kauffman brackets, character varieties, and triangulations of surfaces. arXiv:1009.0084 [math] , 560:179–194, 2011. arXiv: 1009.0084

    2011 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Quantum traces for representations of surface groups in SL2(C)

    Francis Bonahon and Helen Wong. Quantum traces for representations of surface groups in SL2(C) . Geometry & Topology , 15(3):1569–1615, September 2011

    2011

  5. [13]

    Representations of the K auffman bracket skein algebra I : invariants and miraculous cancellations

    Francis Bonahon and Helen Wong. Representations of the K auffman bracket skein algebra I : invariants and miraculous cancellations. Inventiones mathematicae , 204(1):195–243, April 2016

    2016

  6. [14]

    Representations of the K auffman bracket skein algebra II : punctured surfaces

    Francis Bonahon and Helen Wong. Representations of the K auffman bracket skein algebra II : punctured surfaces. Algebraic & Geometric Topology , 17(6):3399–3434, October 2017. arXiv:1206.1639 [math]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [15]

    On Culler-Shalen seminorms and dehn filling

    Steven Boyer and Xingru Zhang. On Culler-Shalen seminorms and dehn filling. Annals of mathematics , 148(3):737--801, 1998

    1998

  8. [16]

    Integrating quantum groups over surfaces

    David Ben-Zvi, Adrien Brochier, and David Jordan. Integrating quantum groups over surfaces. Journal of Topology , 11(4):874–917, Dec 2018. arXiv: 1501.04652

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Integral transforms and drinfeld centers in derived algebraic geometry

    David Ben-Zvi, John Francis, and David Nadler. Integral transforms and drinfeld centers in derived algebraic geometry. Journal of the American Mathematical Society , 23(4):909--966, 2010

    2010

  10. [18]

    Cooper, M

    D. Cooper, M. Culler, H. Gillet, D. D. Long, and P. B. Shalen. Plane curves associated to character varieties of 3-manifolds. Inventiones Mathematicae , 118(1):47–84, December 1994

    1994

  11. [19]

    Dunfield, Matthias Goerner, and Jeffrey R

    Marc Culler, Nathan M. Dunfield, Matthias Goerner, and Jeffrey R. Weeks. Snap P y, a computer program for studying the geometry and topology of 3 -manifolds. Available at http://snappy.computop.org

  12. [20]

    A guide to quantum groups

    Vyjayanthi Chari. A guide to quantum groups . New York, N.Y.: Cambridge University Press, 1994

    1994

  13. [21]

    A-polynomial and Bloch invariants of hyperbolic 3-manifolds

    Abhijit Ashok Champanerkar. A-polynomial and Bloch invariants of hyperbolic 3-manifolds . Columbia University, 2003

    2003

  14. [22]

    Cooper and D.D

    D. Cooper and D.D. Long. Remarks on the A -polynomial of a knot. Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications , 05(05):609–628, October 1996

    1996

  15. [23]

    Francesco Costantino and Thang T. Q. Lê. Stated skein algebras of surfaces. Journal of the European Mathematical Society , 24(12):4063–4142, July 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Excision of skein categories and factorisation homology

    Juliet Cooke. Excision of skein categories and factorisation homology. arXiv:1910.02630 [math] , Oct 2019. arXiv: 1910.02630

    1910 arXiv

  17. [25]

    M. Culler. Marc Culler -- A-polynommials . https://homepages.math.uic.edu/ culler/Apolynomials/

  18. [26]

    The volume conjecture and topological strings

    Robbert Dijkgraaf and Hiroyuki Fuji. The volume conjecture and topological strings. Fortschritte der Physik , 57(9):825--856, 2009

    2009

  19. [27]

    The quantum content of the gluing equations

    Tudor Dimofte and Stavros Garoufalidis. The quantum content of the gluing equations. Geometry & Topology , 17(3):1253–1315, May 2013

    2013

  20. [28]

    K-decompositions and 3d gauge theories

    Tudor Dimofte, Maxime Gabella, and Alexander B Goncharov. K-decompositions and 3d gauge theories. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2016(11):1--147, 2016

    2016

  21. [29]

    Quantum Riemann surfaces in Chern-Simons theory

    Tudor Dimofte. Quantum Riemann surfaces in Chern-Simons theory. arXiv , August 2011. arXiv:1102.4847 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Dualizable tensor categories, November 2020

    Christopher Douglas, Christopher Schommer-Pries, and Noah Snyder. Dualizable tensor categories, November 2020

    2020

  23. [31]

    A spectral perspective on neumann-zagier

    Tudor Dimofte and Roland van der Veen. A spectral perspective on neumann-zagier. arXiv , 2014. arXiv:1403.5215

    2014 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Quantization of classical spectral curves via topological recursion

    Bertrand Eynard, Elba Garcia-Failde, Olivier Marchal, and Nicolas Orantin. Quantization of classical spectral curves via topological recursion. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 405(5):116, April 2024

    2024

  25. [33]

    Higher genus knot contact homology and recursion for colored HOMFLY-PT polynomials

    Tobias Ekholm and Lenhard Ng. Higher genus knot contact homology and recursion for colored HOMFLY-PT polynomials. arXiv , January 2020. arXiv:1803.04011 [math]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [34]

    V. V. Fock and A. B. Goncharov. The quantum dilogarithm and representations quantum cluster varieties. Inventiones mathematicae , 175(2):223–286, February 2009. arXiv: math/0702397

    2009 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Cluster ensembles, quantization and the dilogarithm

    Vladimir V Fock and Alexander B Goncharov. Cluster ensembles, quantization and the dilogarithm. Annales Scientifiques de l’École Normale Supérieure , 42:865–930, 2009

    2009

  28. [36]

    The A -polynomial from the noncommutative viewpoint

    Charles Frohman, Răzvan Gelca, and Walter LoFaro. The A -polynomial from the noncommutative viewpoint. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society , 354(2):735–747, October 2001

    2001

  29. [37]

    Super- A -polynomial for knots and BPS states

    Hiroyuki Fuji, Sergei Gukov, and Piotr Su kowski. Super- A -polynomial for knots and BPS states. Nuclear Physics B , 867(2):506–546, 2013

    2013

  30. [38]

    Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT

    Jürgen Fuchs, Christoph Schweigert, and Alessandro Valentino. Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT . Communications in Mathematical Physics , 321(2):543–575, Jul 2013

    2013

  31. [39]

    Quantum holonomies from spectral networks and framed BPS states

    Maxime Gabella. Quantum holonomies from spectral networks and framed BPS states. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 351(2):563–598, April 2017. arXiv:1603.05258 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  32. [40]

    On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot

    Stavros Garoufalidis. On the characteristic and deformation varieties of a knot. In Proceedings of the Casson Fest , page 291–309, University of Texas at Austin, Texas, USA, September 2004. Mathematical Sciences Publishers

    2004

  33. [41]

    On the relation between the A -polynomial and the J ones polynomial

    Răzvan Gelca. On the relation between the A -polynomial and the J ones polynomial. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 130(4):1235–1241, September 2001

    2001

  34. [42]

    The finiteness conjecture for skein modules

    Sam Gunningham, David Jordan, and Pavel Safronov. The finiteness conjecture for skein modules. preprint , Sep 2021. arXiv: 1908.05233

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    The colored Jones function is q-holonomic

    Stavros Garoufalidis and Thang TQ L \^e . The colored Jones function is q-holonomic. Geometry & Topology , 9(3):1253--1293, 2005

    2005

  36. [44]

    Lauda, and Thang T

    Stavros Garoufalidis, Aaron D. Lauda, and Thang T. Q. Lê. The colored HOMFLYPT function is q-holonomic. Duke Mathematical Journal , 167(3):397–447, February 2018

    2018

  37. [45]

    Spectral networks

    Davide Gaiotto, Gregory W Moore, and Andrew Neitzke. Spectral networks. Annales Henri Poincar \'e , 14(7):1643--1731, 2013

    2013

  38. [46]

    Traces on ideals in pivotal categories

    Nathan Geer, Bertrand Patureau-Mirand, and Alexis Virelizier. Traces on ideals in pivotal categories. Quantum Topology , 4(1):91--124, Mar 2012. arXiv: 1103.1660

    2012 arXiv

  39. [47]

    A -polynomial, B -model, and quantization

    Sergei Gukov and Piotr Sułkowski. A -polynomial, B -model, and quantization. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2012(2):70, 2012

    2012

  40. [48]

    Volume conjecture: refined and categorified

    Sergei Gukov, Piotr Sułkowski, Hidetoshi Awata, and Hiroyuki Fuji. Volume conjecture: refined and categorified. Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics , 16(6):1669–1777, December 2012. Zbl: 1282.57016

    2012

  41. [49]

    Three-dimensional quantum gravity, Chern-Simons theory, and the A -polynomial

    Sergei Gukov. Three-dimensional quantum gravity, Chern-Simons theory, and the A -polynomial. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 255(3):577–627, April 2005. arXiv: hep-th/0306165

    2005 arXiv

  42. [50]

    A quantum trace map for 3-manifolds

    Stavros Garoufalidis and Tao Yu. A quantum trace map for 3-manifolds. arXiv , March 2024. arXiv:2403.12424

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Relating stated skein algebras and internal skein algebras

    Benjamin Haioun. Relating stated skein algebras and internal skein algebras. SIGMA. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications , 18:042, June 2022

    2022

  44. [52]

    Relating stated skein algebras and internal skein algebras

    Benjamin Ha \"i oun. Relating stated skein algebras and internal skein algebras. SIGMA. Symmetry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications , 18:042, June 2022. arXiv: 2104.13848

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Unit inclusion in a non-semisimple braided tensor category and non-compact relative tqfts

    Benjamin Haioun. Unit inclusion in a non-semisimple braided tensor category and non-compact relative tqfts. arXiv , October 2024. arXiv:2304.12167 [math]

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    A -polynomials, Ptolemy equations and Dehn filling

    Joshua A Howie, Daniel V Mathews, and Jessica S Purcell. A -polynomials, Ptolemy equations and Dehn filling. arXiv , 2020. arXiv:2002.10356

    2020 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Spectral networks and Fenchel–Nielsen coordinates

    Lotte Hollands and Andrew Neitzke. Spectral networks and Fenchel–Nielsen coordinates. Letters in Mathematical Physics , 106(6):811–877, June 2016

    2016

  48. [56]

    Lectures on Quantum Groups

    Jens Carsten Jantzen. Lectures on Quantum Groups . American Mathematical Soc., 1996. Google-Books-ID: eSAPCgAAQBAJ

    1996

  49. [57]

    H eisenberg-Picture Quantum Field Theory , page 371–409

    Theo Johnson-Freyd. H eisenberg-Picture Quantum Field Theory , page 371–409. Birkhäuser, Cham, 2021

    2021

  50. [58]

    Quantum decorated character stacks

    David Jordan, Ian Le, Gus Schrader, and Alexander Shapiro. Quantum decorated character stacks. preprint , Feb 2021. arXiv: 2102.12283

    2021 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Langlands duality for skein modules of 3-manifolds

    David Jordan. Langlands duality for skein modules of 3-manifolds. String-Math , 107(2024):127, 2022

    2024

  52. [60]

    Quantum Groups , volume 155 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    Christian Kassel. Quantum Groups , volume 155 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer New York, New York, NY, 1995

    1995

  53. [61]

    Quantum Groups and Their Representations

    Anatoli Klimyk and Konrad Schmüdgen. Quantum Groups and Their Representations . Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1997

    1997

  54. [62]

    On the classification of topological field theories

    Jacob Lurie. On the classification of topological field theories. Current developments in mathematics , 2008(1):129--280, 2008

    2008

  55. [63]

    Thang T.Q. Lê. The colored jones polynomial and the A -polynomial of knots. Advances in Mathematics , 207(2):782--804, 2006

    2006

  56. [64]

    State sum models with defects based on spherical fusion categories

    Catherine Meusburger. State sum models with defects based on spherical fusion categories. arXiv , Jun 2023. arXiv:2205.06874

    2023 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Categories for the Working Mathematician , volume 5 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    Saunders Mac Lane. Categories for the Working Mathematician , volume 5 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics . Springer New York, New York, NY, 1978

    1978

  58. [66]

    Bracelets bases are theta bases

    Travis Mandel and Fan Qin. Bracelets bases are theta bases. arXiv , April 2023. arXiv:2301.11101 [math]

    2023 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Skein and cluster algebras of marked surfaces

    Greg Muller. Skein and cluster algebras of marked surfaces. Quantum Topology , 7(3):435–503, 2016. arXiv: 1204.0020

    2016 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Triangulated categories , volume 148

    Amnon Neeman. Triangulated categories , volume 148. Princeton University Press, 2001

    2001

  61. [69]

    q-Nonabelianization for line defects

    Andrew Neitzke and Fei Yan. q-Nonabelianization for line defects. Journal of High Energy Physics , 2020(9):153, September 2020

    2020

  62. [70]

    Module categories, weak hopf algebras and modular invariants

    Victor Ostrik. Module categories, weak hopf algebras and modular invariants. Transformation Groups , 8(2):177–206, June 2003

    2003

  63. [71]

    3d quantum trace map

    Samuel Panitch and Sunghyuk Park. 3d quantum trace map. arXiv , March 2024. arXiv:2403.12850

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    N. Y. Reshetikhin and V. G. Turaev. Ribbon graphs and their invariants derived from quantum groups. Communications in Mathematical Physics , 127(1):1–26, Jan 1990

    1990

  65. [73]

    Selinger

    P. Selinger. A Survey of Graphical Languages for Monoidal Categories , page 289–355. Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011

    2011

  66. [74]

    The rising sea: Foundations of algebraic geometry, 2024

    Ravi Vakil. The rising sea: Foundations of algebraic geometry, 2024

    2024

  67. [75]

    TQFTs , May 2006

    Kevin Walker. TQFTs , May 2006. https://canyon23.net/math/tc.pdf

    2006

  68. [76]

    Ptolemy coordinates, dehn invariant and the a-polynomial

    Christian K Zickert. Ptolemy coordinates, dehn invariant and the a-polynomial. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 283:515--537, 2016

    2016

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.