Diagonal supersymmetry for coinvariant rings

John Lentfer

Diagonal supersymmetry for coinvariant rings

T0 review · 0 major / 5 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 The paper proves that bosonic-fermionic coinvariant rings decompose into super Schur functions times irreducible group characters, with universal coefficients independent of the numbers of commuting and anticommuting variable sets.

desk verdict Proves Bergeron's diagonal supersymmetry conjecture with a clean, correct use of Howe duality and a universal character decomposition; the main theorems hold up, and only cosmetic issues remain. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14885 v2 pith:QPFHXXFZ submitted 2025-05-20 math.CO math.RT

John Lentfer This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.COmath.RT MSC 05E1005E0517B1020C30

keywords coinvariantringsbosonic-fermionicvariablessuperSchurfunctionsHowedualityDiagonalSupersymmetryconjecturemultigradedFrobeniusseriesLiesuperalgebra

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 establishes that, for any finite group $G \subset GL(n)$, the bosonic-fermionic coinvariant ring $R_G^{(k,j)}$ carries commuting actions of the Lie superalgebra $\mathfrak{gl}(k|j)$ and of $G$. As a consequence, its multigraded character series is a sum of super Schur functions $s_\lambda(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u})$ times irreducible $G$-characters, with nonnegative integer coefficients that do not depend on the numbers $k$ of commuting and $j$ of anticommuting variable sets. When $G$ is the symmetric group acting diagonally, this proves the Diagonal Supersymmetry conjecture. The result matters because it replaces a family of hard, case-by-case character computations with one universal series, and it shows that the super-Lie-algebra structure is the natural organizing principle for these rings.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing identity is the $(\mathfrak{gl}(k|j), GL(n))$ Howe duality for symmetric powers: $$\operatorname{Sym}^d(\mathbb{C}^{k|j}\otimes V) \cong \bigoplus_{\$\lambda$ \in P(k,j,n),\, \$\lambda$\vdash d} U^\lambda_{k|j}\otimes U^\lambda_n,$$ where $U^\lambda_{k|j}$ is the simple $\mathfrak{gl}(k|j)$-module whose character is the super Schur function $s_\lambda(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u})$ and $U^\lambda_n$ is a simple $GL(n)$-module. This decomposition supplies the $U(\mathfrak{gl}(k|j))\otimes \mathbb{C}[G]$-module structure on the polynomial superring, with $\mathfrak{gl}(k|j)$ acting by left superderivations and $G$ acting diagonally. The argument then passes to the coinvariant quotient and uses the restriction and cancellation rules for super Schur functions to show the coefficients $c_{\lambda\mu}$ are independent of $k$ and $j$.

What would settle it

Compute the coefficient of $s_{(2,1)}(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u})s_{(1^3)}(z)$ in the bigraded Frobenius series of $R_3^{(1,1)}$ by direct expansion; the theorem forces this coefficient to equal $1$, the value Corollary 4.6 assigns to $c_{(2,1),(1^3)}$, and any other value would disprove the universality claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is Theorem 1.2: for fixed $n$ and a finite group $G \subset GL(n)$, there exist universal nonnegative integers $c_{\lambda\mu}$ such that for every pair $(k,j)$, $$\operatorname{Char}($R_G^{{(k,j)}}$;\mathbf{q};\mathbf{u}) = \sum_{\$\lambda$ \in P(k,j,n)} \sum_{\chi_\mu \in \operatorname{IrrChar}(G)} c_{\$\lambda$\mu} s_\$\lambda$(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u}) \chi_\mu,$$ where $P(k,j,n)$ is the set of partitions of length at most $n$ with $\lambda_{k+1} \le j$. The same coefficients work for all $(k,j)$; only the set of partitions that can appear changes. For the symmetric group, applying the Frobenius characteristic map turns this into $\operatorname{Frob}(R_n^{(k,j)};\mathbf{q};\mathbf{u}) = \sum c_{\lambda\mu} s_\lambda(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u}) s_\mu(z)$, proving the Diagonal Supersymmetry conjecture. The proof builds the module structure by decomposing $\operatorname{Sym}(\mathbb{C}^{k|j}\otimes V)$ through $(\mathfrak{gl}(k|j), GL(n))$ Howe duality, then restricts from $GL(n)$ to $G$ and uses the Jordan–Hölder lemma to control multiplicities in the quotient.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rests on the externally supplied theorem of $(\mathfrak{gl}(k|j), GL(n))$ Howe duality, which asserts that every symmetric power of $\mathbb{C}^{k|j}\otimes\mathbb{C}^n$ decomposes into simple $\mathfrak{gl}(k|j)$-modules paired with the same simple $GL(n)$-modules; the construction of the infinite-alphabet universal series also relies on previously proved coefficient stability for these Frobenius series, and if either external input fails, the central claims do not follow from the paper's own arguments.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

A single set of universal coefficients $c_{\lambda\mu}$ describes every bosonic-fermionic coinvariant ring for fixed $n$ and $G$, so the character series for any $(k,j)$ determines the series for all smaller pairs by setting variables to zero.
For the symmetric group, the Diagonal Supersymmetry conjecture follows, and the multigraded Frobenius series of all $R_n^{(k,j)}$ become specializations of one infinite-alphabet super-Schur series.
The same universal coefficients appear in the Hilbert series, giving $\operatorname{Hilb}(R_n^{(k,j)};\mathbf{q};\mathbf{u}) = \sum c_\lambda s_\lambda(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u})$ with $c_\lambda$ independent of $(k,j)$.
The cancellation rule for super Schur functions yields evaluation identities such as setting $q_k=-u_j$, which recover known Hilbert-series facts and would, conditional on Zabrocki's and Theta-operator conjectures, imply further identities for $R_n^{(2,1)}$ and $R_n^{(2,2)}$.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural next step the author does not take is to use the known formulas for $R_n^{(1,0)}$, $R_n^{(2,0)}$, $R_n^{(0,1)}$, and $R_n^{(0,2)}$ to tabulate the first rows of the universal matrix $c_{\lambda\mu}$, turning Conjecture 4.1 into a finite check for small $n$.
The same Howe-duality mechanism should work for any reductive subgroup $H \subset GL(n)$ whose restriction multiplicities from $GL(n)$ are stable, suggesting analogues of the conjecture for other reflection groups and complex reflection groups.
Because super Schur functions vanish when $k$ or $j$ is too small, the universal series contains information invisible to any finite $(k,j)$ truncation; this supports reading the infinite-alphabet series, rather than any finite case, as the fundamental object.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

I read Lentfer's paper on diagonal supersymmetry for coinvariant rings, and the short version is: it does what it claims. It proves Bergeron's 2020 conjecture (Corollary 1.3) and, more generally, establishes that R_G^{(k,j)} is a U(gl(k|j)) ⊗ C[G]-module with a character series given by super Schur functions times irreducible G-characters with coefficients independent of (k,j). Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are the real content, and they are correct. The argument is a clean structural derivation: (gl(k|j), GL(n)) Howe duality gives the decomposition of Sym(C^{k|j} ⊗ V), semisimplicity for finite G gives the quotient module structure, and the restriction to x^{(k)}=0 gives the coefficient independence. No fitted parameters, no post-hoc adjustment; the logic is transparent.

The paper is honest about its external inputs. It quotes Howe duality as Theorem 2.1 and leans on Bergeron's coefficient stability for the well-definedness of the universal series in Proposition 1.5. Those are standard and separately proved results; I would not call them soft spots. The proof of Proposition 1.5 is a little terse—it is essentially a restatement of the stability result plus the basis property of super Schur functions—but it is fine. There are minor typos: equation (31) writes q_{k+1} where q_{k-1} is intended, and a few similar slips, but none affect the argument. The section on the symmetric group (Section 4) uses known Frobenius series for small (k,j) to verify the conjecture in low-dimensional cases; this is careful and appropriately cited.

My only hesitation is that the paper's novelties are largely confined to diagonal coinvariant theory and supersymmetric algebra. The impact outside that area is modest, but that is not a flaw in a paper aimed at this community. The proofs are rigorous, the conjecture is genuinely resolved, and the universal coefficient perspective is a real new viewpoint.

Who is this for? Anyone working on diagonal coinvariants, super Schur functions, or Howe dualities in combinatorics will want to read it. It deserves a serious referee: I did not see a load-bearing error, and the result is significant. I would send it to review and expect it to be accepted after minor cleanups.

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a U(gl(k|j)) ⊗ C[G]-module structure on the bosonic-fermionic coinvariant ring R_G^{(k,j)} for a finite group G ⊂ GL(n). Theorem 1.1 states that R_G^{(k,j)} decomposes as a direct sum of simple modules U^λ_{k|j} ⊗ N^μ with nonnegative integer multiplicities, using (gl(k|j), GL(n)) Howe duality and semisimplicity of finite-dimensional G-representations. Theorem 1.2 shows by a variable-restriction argument that the multiplicities c_{λμ} are independent of (k,j). Corollary 1.3 derives Bergeron's Diagonal Supersymmetry conjecture for the symmetric group, and Proposition 1.5 formulates a corresponding universal series. The final sections study the universal series for the symmetric group, give formulas for some coefficients, and derive Hilbert-series and cancellation consequences.

Significance. The paper proves a structural conjecture of Bergeron by exhibiting a clean conceptual mechanism: Howe duality for gl(k|j) together with the semisimplicity of finite group representations. The central derivation is parameter-free, the coefficient universality result is obtained by a restriction argument rather than by data fitting, and the proofs are transparent and modular. The paper also strengthens the existing GL(k)×GL(j)×S_n decomposition by showing that the super Schur function refinement holds, which is a genuinely stronger statement. The use of standard external theorems (Howe duality, Bergeron's coefficient stability) is clearly identified, and the results for the symmetric group provide explicit evidence of the scope and limits of the coefficient universality.

minor comments (5)

[§3, Eq. (31)] In the proof of Theorem 1.2, the notation q_{k+1} appears in two places where q_{k-1} is clearly intended; the displayed equation should read s_λ(q_1,...,q_{k-1},q_k/u)|_{q_k=0} and s_λ(q_1,...,q_{k-1},0/u), respectively.
[§4, Proposition 4.3(iii)] The notation "µ = (n − k), 1^k" should be written as a single partition, e.g., µ = (n−k,1^k), to match the convention used elsewhere.
[§4, Proposition 1.5 proof] The proof of Proposition 1.5 is essentially a reference to the preceding discussion and does not explicitly invoke Bergeron's coefficient stability result [3], which is the external input needed for well-definedness of the infinite-alphabet series. Since this proposition is not used in the proof of the main theorem, the issue is local, but the proof should be expanded or the proposition should be explicitly labeled as a consequence of [3].
[§3, proof of Theorem 1.2] The coefficient comparison between equations (31) and (32) relies on the linear independence of the super Schur functions s_λ(q_1,...,q_{k-1}/u) for λ ∈ P(k−1,j,n). This is standard since these are characters of non-isomorphic simple gl(k−1|j)-modules, but it should be stated explicitly for completeness.
[§4, proof of Proposition 4.2(8)] The proof of the last case only establishes the claim for sufficiently large n and does not specify a lower bound or quantify the statement; the proposition should either state this quantifier or give the range of n for which the cited result of [25] applies.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: main theorems follow from Howe duality and structural restriction, not from fitted inputs or self-referential definitions.

full rationale

The derivation chain for the two main claims is non-circular. Theorem 1.1 is proven from the quoted Howe duality (Theorem 2.1) together with standard semisimplicity of finite-group representations and Jordan–Hölder multiplicity bounds (Lemma 2.2). The coefficients c_{\lambda\mu} are multiplicities in a direct-sum decomposition, not fitted parameters. Theorem 1.2 derives (k,j)-independence by the structural identification R^{(k-1,j)}_G = R^{(k,j)}_G|_{x^{(k)}=0} (eqs. 28–30), comparing the two resulting character series (eqs. 31–32) in a basis of super Schur functions, so universality is a consequence of the module structure rather than an assumed input. Proposition 1.5 follows from this universality; its 'above discussion' proof is terse about infinite-alphabet well-definedness, which is a rigor gap but not circularity. The only self-citation ([26]) is used in Section 4 to compute auxiliary coefficients in Proposition 4.3(iv)–(v) for verifying small cases of Conjecture 4.1; it is not load-bearing for Theorems 1.1–1.2, Corollary 1.3, or the universal-series mechanism. External inputs (Howe duality [22], Bergeron's coefficient stability [3]) are standard results that are not the target claim. No fitted input is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters: all coefficients are determined by representation theory. The paper depends on standard external theorems, chiefly Howe duality for Lie superalgebras, plus Bergeron's coefficient stability result. No new entities are introduced.

assumptions (4)

standard math (gl(k|j), GL(n)) Howe duality: Sym^d(C^{k|j} tensor V) is isomorphic to the direct sum over lambda in P(k,j,n), lambda proves d of U^lambda_{k|j} tensor U^lambda_n.
Invoked as Theorem 2.1; not proved in the paper. All subsequent decompositions depend on it.
standard math Finite-dimensional representations of a finite group G over C are semisimple.
Used in equation (20) to restrict GL(n)-modules to G and decompose into simples.
standard math For finite-dimensional simple modules over C-algebras, the tensor product over C is a simple module of the tensor product algebra.
Used after equation (24) to conclude U^lambda_{k|j} tensor N^mu is simple, citing Bourbaki [10, Section 12.1].
standard math The multigraded Frobenius series of R^{(k,0)}_n is coefficient stable for k at least n (Bergeron [3]).
Used in Corollary 3.1 and Proposition 1.5 to define the universal series.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Diagonal supersymmetry for coinvariant rings." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QPFHXXFZ

@misc{pith2026250514885,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Diagonal supersymmetry for coinvariant rings},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QPFHXXFZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14885}
}

abstract

For finite groups $G$, we show that bosonic-fermionic coinvariant rings have a natural $U(\mathfrak{gl}(k|j)) \otimes \mathbb{C}[G]$-module structure. In particular, we show that their character series are sums of super Schur functions $s_\lambda(\mathbf{q}/\mathbf{u})$ times irreducible characters of $G$ with universal coefficients, which do not depend on $k,j$. In the case where $G$ is the symmetric group with diagonal action, this proves the "Diagonal Supersymmetry" conjecture of F. Bergeron (2020).

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

Superspace coinvariants for wreath products
math.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

Proves Sagan-Swanson conjecture on monomial basis for SR_G of G = Z_r wr S_n and gives combinatorial model for its ungraded and exterior-graded G-module structure.
Superspace coinvariants and inverse systems for $GL_n(\mathbb{F}_q)$
math.CO 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

Calculates the bigraded Hilbert series of the GL_n(F_q)-superspace coinvariant ring SR = Omega/SI and gives an operator-theoretic characterization of SI^perp, extending to subgroups containing SL_n(F_q).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

[1]

Emil Artin, Galois theory. 2nd ed. Edited and supplemented with a section on applications by Arthur N. Milgram , Notre Dame Math. Lect., vol. 2, Univ. of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, 1944 (English)

work page 1944
[2]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron, Jim Haglund, Alessandro Iraci, and Marino Romero,Bosonic-fermionic diagonal coinvariants and Theta operators , preprint (2023), https://www2.math.upenn.edu/~jhaglund/preprints/BF2.pdf

work page 2023
[3]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron,Multivariate diagonal coinvariant spaces for complex reflection groups , Adv. Math. 239 (2013), 97–108 (English)

work page 2013
[4]

, The bosonic-fermionic diagonal coinvariant modules conjecture , preprint (2020), https://arxiv.org/ abs/2005.00924

arXiv 2020
[5]

, (GLk × Sn)-modules of multivariate diagonal harmonics , Open Problems in Algebraic Combinatorics (Christine Berkesch, Benjamin Brubaker, Gregg Musiker, Pavlo Pylyavskyy, and Victor Reiner, eds.), Proc. Symp. Pure Math., vol. 110, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2024, pp. 1–22

work page 2024
[6]

Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler,Identities and positivity conjectures for some remarkable operators in the theory of symmetric functions , Methods Appl

Fran¸ cois Bergeron, Adriano M. Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler,Identities and positivity conjectures for some remarkable operators in the theory of symmetric functions , Methods Appl. Anal. 6 (1999), no. 3, 363–420 (English)

work page 1999
[7]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron and Louis-Fran¸ cois Pr´ eville-Ratelle,Higher trivariate diagonal harmonics via generalized Tamari posets, J. Comb. 3 (2012), no. 3, 317–341

work page 2012
[8]

Seelinger, A proof of the extended delta conjecture, Forum Math

Jonah Blasiak, Mark Haiman, Jennifer Morse, Anna Pun, and George H. Seelinger, A proof of the extended delta conjecture, Forum Math. Pi 11 (2023), Paper No. e6, 28

work page 2023

Show all 36 references

[9]

Pi 11 (2023), Paper No

, A shuffle theorem for paths under any line , Forum Math. Pi 11 (2023), Paper No. e5, 38

2023
[10]

Nicolas Bourbaki, Elements of mathematics. Algebra. Chapter 8. Translated from the 2nd French edition by Reinie Ern´ e, Cham: Springer, 2023 (English). 13

2023
[11]

Erik Carlsson and Anton Mellit, A proof of the shuffle conjecture , J. Am. Math. Soc. 31 (2018), no. 3, 661–697

2018
[12]

Shun-Jen Cheng and Weiqiang Wang, Howe duality for Lie superalgebras , Compos. Math. 128 (2001), no. 1, 55–94 (English)

2001
[13]

144, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2012

, Dualities and representations of Lie superalgebras , Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 144, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2012

2012
[14]

4, 778–782

Claude Chevalley, Invariants of finite groups generated by reflections , American Journal of Mathematics 77 (1955), no. 4, 778–782

1955
[15]

Sylvie Corteel, Matthieu Josuat-Verg` es, and Anna Vanden Wyngaerd,Combinatorics of the Delta conjecture at q = −1, Algebr. Comb. 7 (2024), no. 1, 17–35 (English)

2024
[16]

Michele D’Adderio, Alessandro Iraci, and Anna Vanden Wyngaerd, The Delta square conjecture , Int. Math. Res. Not. 2021 (2021), no. 1, 38–84 (English)

2021
[17]

, Theta operators, refined Delta conjectures, and coinvariants , Adv. Math. 376 (2021), 60, Id/No 107447

2021
[18]

Michele D?Adderio and Anton Mellit, A proof of the compositional delta conjecture , Advances in Mathematics 402 (2022), 108342

2022
[19]

Haglund, J

J. Haglund, J. B. Remmel, and A. T. Wilson, The delta conjecture, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 370 (2018), no. 6, 4029–4057

2018
[20]

Mark Haiman, Conjectures on the quotient ring by diagonal invariants , J. Algebr. Comb. 3 (1994), no. 1, 17–76

1994
[21]

, Vanishing theorems and character formulas for the Hilbert scheme of points in the plane , Invent. Math. 149 (2002), no. 2, 371–407

2002
[22]

Roger Howe, Remarks on classical invariant theory , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 313 (1989), no. 2, 539–570

1989
[23]

1–182 (English)

, Perspectives on invariant theory: Schur duality, multiplicity-free actions and beyond , The Schur lectures (1992), Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University; Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (Distrib.), 1995, pp. 1–182 (English)

1992
[24]

Jongwon Kim and Brendon Rhoades, Lefschetz theory for exterior algebras and fermionic diagonal coinvariants , Int. Math. Res. Not. 2022 (2022), no. 4, 2906–2933

2022
[25]

Loehr, A combinatorial approach to the symmetry of q, t-Catalan numbers, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 32 (2018), no

Kyungyong Lee, Li Li, and Nicholas A. Loehr, A combinatorial approach to the symmetry of q, t-Catalan numbers, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 32 (2018), no. 1, 191–232

2018
[26]

org/abs/2501.09920

John Lentfer, The sign character of the triagonal fermionic coinvariant ring , preprint (2025), https://arxiv. org/abs/2501.09920

2025 arXiv
[27]

, 2nd ed

Ian Grant Macdonald, Symmetric functions and Hall polynomials. , 2nd ed. ed., Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995

1995
[28]

Anton Mellit, Toric braids and (m, n)-parking functions, Duke Math. J. 170 (2021), no. 18, 4123–4169

2021
[29]

Musson, Lie superalgebras and enveloping algebras , Grad

Ian M. Musson, Lie superalgebras and enveloping algebras , Grad. Stud. Math., vol. 131, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2012 (English)

2012
[30]

Pi 12 (2024), 35 (English), Id/No e16

Brendon Rhoades and Andrew Timothy Wilson, The Hilbert series of the superspace coinvariant ring , Forum Math. Pi 12 (2024), 35 (English), Id/No e16

2024
[31]

Sagan and Joshua P

Bruce E. Sagan and Joshua P. Swanson, q-Stirling numbers in type B, Eur. J. Comb. 118 (2024), 35, Id/No 103899

2024
[32]

Stanley,Enumerative combinatorics

Richard P. Stanley,Enumerative combinatorics. Volume 2, Camb. Stud. Adv. Math., vol. 62, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999

1999
[33]

Swanson and Nolan R

Joshua P. Swanson and Nolan R. Wallach, Harmonic differential forms for pseudo-reflection groups I. Semi- invariants, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 182 (2021), Paper no. 105474

2021
[34]

Bi-degree bounds , Combinatorial Theory 3 (2023), no

, Harmonic differential forms for pseudo-reflection groups II. Bi-degree bounds , Combinatorial Theory 3 (2023), no. 3, Paper no. 17

2023
[35]

Mike Zabrocki, A module for the Delta conjecture , preprint (2019), https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.08966

2019 arXiv
[36]

Department of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA Email address : jlentfer@berkeley.edu 14

, Coinvariants and harmonics , 2020, https://realopacblog.wordpress.com/2020/01/26/ coinvariants-and-harmonics/ . Department of Mathematics, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA Email address : jlentfer@berkeley.edu 14

2020

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Emil Artin, Galois theory. 2nd ed. Edited and supplemented with a section on applications by Arthur N. Milgram , Notre Dame Math. Lect., vol. 2, Univ. of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, 1944 (English)

work page 1944

[2] [2]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron, Jim Haglund, Alessandro Iraci, and Marino Romero,Bosonic-fermionic diagonal coinvariants and Theta operators , preprint (2023), https://www2.math.upenn.edu/~jhaglund/preprints/BF2.pdf

work page 2023

[3] [3]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron,Multivariate diagonal coinvariant spaces for complex reflection groups , Adv. Math. 239 (2013), 97–108 (English)

work page 2013

[4] [4]

, The bosonic-fermionic diagonal coinvariant modules conjecture , preprint (2020), https://arxiv.org/ abs/2005.00924

arXiv 2020

[5] [5]

, (GLk × Sn)-modules of multivariate diagonal harmonics , Open Problems in Algebraic Combinatorics (Christine Berkesch, Benjamin Brubaker, Gregg Musiker, Pavlo Pylyavskyy, and Victor Reiner, eds.), Proc. Symp. Pure Math., vol. 110, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2024, pp. 1–22

work page 2024

[6] [6]

Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler,Identities and positivity conjectures for some remarkable operators in the theory of symmetric functions , Methods Appl

Fran¸ cois Bergeron, Adriano M. Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler,Identities and positivity conjectures for some remarkable operators in the theory of symmetric functions , Methods Appl. Anal. 6 (1999), no. 3, 363–420 (English)

work page 1999

[7] [7]

Fran¸ cois Bergeron and Louis-Fran¸ cois Pr´ eville-Ratelle,Higher trivariate diagonal harmonics via generalized Tamari posets, J. Comb. 3 (2012), no. 3, 317–341

work page 2012

[8] [8]

Seelinger, A proof of the extended delta conjecture, Forum Math

Jonah Blasiak, Mark Haiman, Jennifer Morse, Anna Pun, and George H. Seelinger, A proof of the extended delta conjecture, Forum Math. Pi 11 (2023), Paper No. e6, 28

work page 2023