Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 85 references

The $\mathcal{D}$-Geometric Hilbert Scheme -- Part I: Involutivity and Stability

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the differential ideal of a flat connection is Spencer-polystable precisely when the bundle admits a Hermitian–Yang–Mills metric, and that involutive PDE ideals with fixed D-Hilbert polynomial form a representable…

desk verdict New D-Hilbert/Spencer-stability formalism, but the advertised flat-connection application is undercut by a false slope identification and the representability theorem is only sketched. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.07937 v1 pith:W2COIPO5 submitted 2025-07-10 math.AG math.DG

Jacob Kryczka , Artan Sheshmani This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.DG MSC 14C0514D2035A3053C07
keywords D-HilbertschemeSpencerstabilityinvolutivePDEsystemsHermitian-Yang-MillsmetricflatconnectionsmodulispacesformalintegrabilityD-modules
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 tries to build a moduli space for partial differential equations themselves, treating a system of PDEs as an ideal sheaf in the infinite jet algebra and asking when such ideals can be classified by a scheme. The authors introduce the D-Hilbert and D-Quot functors for formally integrable, involutive ideal sheaves with a fixed D-Hilbert polynomial, and claim these are representable by a finite-type ind-scheme. The engine of the classification is Spencer (semi)stability, a slope condition defined through Spencer cohomology of the equation's symbol. As the main application, they claim that the differential ideal encoding a flat connection on a compact Kähler manifold is Spencer-polystable exactly when the underlying bundle admits a Hermitian–Yang–Mills metric, giving a PDE-theoretic restatement of the Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau correspondence. If true, this puts flat-bundle stability and canonical-metric existence under one cohomological umbrella.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the Spencer $\delta$-complex attached to the symbol of a D-ideal, together with the resulting Spencer regularity degree $\mathrm{reg}_{\mathrm{Sp}}(I)$ and the Spencer slope $\mu_{\mathrm{Sp}}(I) = \deg H^0(\mathrm{Sp}(I))/\mathrm{rank}(I)$. The D-Hilbert polynomial packages the Spencer cohomology of the symbol as a numerical invariant, and Spencer (semi)stability compares reduced D-Hilbert polynomials of involutive subideals. Involutivity and formal integrability ensure that the D-Hilbert polynomial is polynomial and that Spencer regularity is bounded across families, which is what carries the representability proof.

What would settle it

Take a rank-two flat bundle with nontrivial monodromy on a compact Riemann surface, compute the Spencer slope $\mu_{\mathrm{Sp}}(I_\nabla)$ from $\ker(d_\nabla)$ inside $\mathrm{End}(E)$, and compare it with the ordinary slope $\mu(E)$; if the two slopes differ, or if a Spencer-stable $I_\nabla$ corresponds to a destabilized bundle, the claimed equivalence fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the formal theory of PDEs can be organised into a moduli problem whose numerical invariant is the D-Hilbert polynomial and whose stability condition is Spencer stability. For the flat-connection equation (curvature zero), the associated D-ideal $I_\nabla$ has a Spencer complex whose zeroth cohomology is $\ker(d_\nabla \colon \mathrm{End}(E) \to \Omega^1 \mathrm{End}(E))$, and the paper argues that Spencer stability of $I_\nabla$ matches Gieseker stability of the Higgs bundle attached to $\nabla$ by a harmonic metric, with Spencer slopes comparing through the ordinary slopes of invariant subbundles. Theorem 6.2 then states that $I_\nabla$ is Spencer-polystable if and only if $E$ admits a Hermitian–Yang–Mills metric, while Theorem 5.1 states that the functor of formally integrable, involutive D-ideal sheaves with fixed D-Hilbert polynomial is representable by a finite-type ind-scheme with a compatible D-action.

Load-bearing premise

The equivalence rests on identifying the Spencer slope of the flat-connection ideal with the ordinary slope of $E$, via the claim that $\deg(\ker d_\nabla)$ is determined by $\mathrm{rank}(E)$ and $\deg(E)$ through Hirzebruch–Riemann–Roch; if this identification fails, the two sides of Theorem 6.2 no longer match.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Theorem 5.1 is correct, the classical Hilbert scheme extends to differential-algebraic geometry: formally integrable, involutive PDE systems with fixed D-Hilbert polynomial form a finite-type ind-scheme with a compatible D-action.
  • If Theorem 6.2 is correct, the Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau correspondence becomes a special case of Spencer stability, so flat-bundle moduli can be described by stability of the connection ideal rather than by slope stability of the bundle alone.
  • The boundedness result, uniform Spencer regularity across families, would give a flattening stratification for PDE ideals analogous to Mumford's boundedness, with recursive bounds depending only on dimension, rank, and order.
  • The tangent-space computation identifies first-order deformations of a D-ideal with $\mathrm{Hom}_{D}(I, O(J^\infty E)/I)$ and obstructions with truncated Spencer cohomology, supplying the deformation theory needed for a derived analogue of the moduli space.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension would be to compute $\mu_{\mathrm{Sp}}(I_\nabla)$ directly for a flat bundle with nontrivial monodromy and compare it with the ordinary slope of $E$; if the two slopes do not agree, Theorem 6.2 would need a modified slope rather than the stated Hirzebruch–Riemann–Roch identification.
  • The D-Hilbert construction should be comparable numerically with known moduli of flat bundles: if its points correspond to sub-local systems of schemes, its connected components may match the coarse moduli of semistable flat bundles from non-abelian Hodge theory, giving a purely algebraic route to those moduli spaces.
  • The same Spencer-stability formalism could be applied to other geometric PDEs, such as the Monge–Ampère equation on a Fano manifold, replacing 'Hermitian–Yang–Mills metric exists' by 'Kähler–Einstein metric exists'; the paper states this as a conjecture, so any verification would be a genuinely new result.
  • Because Spencer regularity gives an effective bound on the order at which a differential ideal is determined, the moduli scheme may admit explicit charts at finite jet level, making the construction algorithmic in the spirit of Janet–Riquier theory.
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 moduli-theoretic framework for systems of PDEs in algebraic geometry. It defines D-ideal sheaves in infinite jet bundles, introduces Spencer regularity, D-Hilbert polynomials, and the notions of Spencer (semi)stability and Spencer slope, and claims that the corresponding D-Hilbert functor is representable by a finite-type ind-scheme (Theorem 5.1). The main application is Theorem 6.2: for a holomorphic flat bundle (E, ∇) on a compact Kähler manifold, the D-ideal I∇ encoding the flat-connection equation is Spencer-polystable if and only if E admits a Hermitian–Yang–Mills metric, which the authors present as a refinement of the Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau correspondence.

Significance. If the main claims were established, the paper would introduce a genuinely novel formalism connecting the formal theory of PDEs with moduli problems and stability conditions, with potential applications to flat connections, Higgs bundles, and possibly K-stability. The authors engage seriously with the Spencer–Goldschmidt–Vinogradov tradition and propose concrete moduli functors with numerical invariants. However, the advertised results are not proven as they stand: the identification of Spencer slope with ordinary slope in the flat-connection example is unjustified, the proof of Theorem 6.2 invokes the classical Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau and Simpson theorems rather than deriving a refinement, and the representability theorem rests on several proof sketches and omitted checks. The paper contains no machine-checked proofs, reproducible code, or parameter-free derivation; its central numerical comparison is exactly the point that needs independent verification and is not supplied.

major comments (4)
  1. [§6.2.1, Proposition 6.5] The proof identifies the Spencer slope μSp(I∇), defined in (4.7), with the ordinary slope μ(E) by asserting that deg(ker d∇) is determined by rank(E) and deg(E) via Hirzebruch–Riemann–Roch. For a holomorphic flat bundle, ker d∇ is the local system of flat sections of End(E), not a coherent OX-module, so its degree is not defined in the usual sense; if the local system is converted into a vector bundle with flat connection, its Chern classes vanish and the degree is 0 independently of deg(E). For the trivial connection on O^r, for example, H^0(Sp(I∇)) consists of constant matrices and the Spencer slope is 0, making the strict Spencer-stability inequality vacuous. Since this identification is the only step connecting Spencer stability to Gieseker stability of the associated Higgs bundle, Theorem 6.2 is not established.
  2. [§6.2.1, proof of Proposition 6.5] The comparison with Gieseker stability tests only ∇-invariant subbundles F with induced subconnections. The stability condition appearing in the Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau/Simpson correspondence is Higgs stability of (E, θ), which requires θ-invariant subbundles. The paper does not prove that ∇-invariant subbundles coincide with θ-invariant subbundles, and consequently the Spencer-stability inequalities are not shown to be equivalent to the Higgs-slope inequalities used in the invoked correspondence.
  3. [§6.2.1, proof of Theorem 6.2] The claimed refinement of the DUY correspondence is not derived from the Spencer formalism: the proof assumes the classical Donaldson–Uhlenbeck–Yau theorem and Simpson's non-abelian Hodge theory to pass from Spencer-polystability to a harmonic metric and conversely. This makes the theorem, as stated, a reformulation of known results rather than a refinement of them. In addition, Proposition 6.6, which is used to glue stable summands, is stated without proof.
  4. [§5.1–5.2, Theorem 5.1] The representability theorem rests on the uniform boundedness statement Proposition 5.3, whose proof cites Malgrange and Sweeney for the key bound, and on Proposition 5.4, whose proof contains the sentence 'It is a long check so we omit the details in full.' Proposition 3.14 is likewise justified by 'standard homological arguments.' Since the finite-type ind-scheme structure of Hilb^P_DX(J^∞_X E) is the first main result of the paper, these gaps leave the representability claim only partially documented.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§1.2, §6.2.1, §2.5] There are several typographical errors: 'Pesudogroups' in §1.2, 'conserve' for 'converse' in the introduction's statement of Theorem 6.2, 'unubstructedness' in §6.2.1, and 'Casetlnuovo-Mumford' before Definition 2.33.
  2. [§4.3, equation (4.6)] The quantity rank(I) is used in (4.6) before its precise definition as the leading functional rank is given in Proposition 4.23; the definition should be moved before (4.6) to avoid ambiguity.
  3. [References [NS], [Ni]] The references [NS] and [Ni] list the first author as 'Nitin, N.'; the correct name is Nitsure.
  4. [§4.3, Definition 4.22] Definition 4.22 compares the reduced D-Hilbert polynomials P̄_D(J) and P̄_D(I) without explicitly stating that the comparison is required for all sufficiently large n; this should be stated to make the definition unambiguous.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Theorem 6.2 reduces to the classical DUY/Simpson correspondence by an unproved identification of the new Spencer slope with the ordinary slope; the Spencer-stability content is effectively injected by construction.

  1. self definitional [§6.2.1, proof of Proposition 6.5, using the Spencer slope definition (4.7)]
    "One may also verify deg(ker∇) is determined by rank(E) and deg(E) by Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch theorem. Spencer-stability implies deg(ker(d∇F ))/rank(F )2 ≤ deg(ker(d∇))/rank(E)2, which for stable sheaves is trivially satisfied, but for∇-invariant sub-bundles reduces to µ(F ) ≤ µ(E), µ(F ) = deg(F )/rank(F )."

    This is the only bridge from the new Spencer invariant to the old slope invariant. By the paper's own identification, H^0(Sp(I∇)) is ker(d∇), the sheaf of flat sections of End(E); for a flat bundle this is a local system, not a coherent O_X-module, so the 'degree' appearing in (4.7) is not the usual algebraic degree. The assertion that Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch determines deg(ker d∇) from rank(E) and deg(E) replaces the new slope by the ordinary slope by fiat, since a flat bundle's associated local system has vanishing rational Chern classes and its flat-section sheaf has no coherent Chern degree. After this replacement, Spencer stability is ordinary slope stability by construction, and Proposition 6.5 cannot be an independent derivation of the equivalence.

  2. renaming known result [§6.2.1, final paragraph of the proof of Theorem 6.2]
    "Now we prove that I∇ is Spencer polystable if and only if there exists a harmonic metric h solving F∇ + [θ, θ∗] = 0. To this end, assume I∇ is Spencer polystable. Then there exists a harmonic metric since (E, ∇) decomposes into stable summands of equal slope. ... By the classic DUY correspondence, each summand (Fi, ∇Fi), i= 1, . . . , k admits a Hermitian-Yang-Mills metric βi, which glues to h. Conversely, suppose that h is harmonic, this implies Spencer polystability since h splits the flat bundle (E, ∇) into stable summands (Ei, ∇i) of equal slope."

    Once Proposition 6.5 has identified Spencer polystability with slope polystability, the proof of Theorem 6.2 no longer uses Spencer cohomology, D-Hilbert polynomials, or the D-geometric moduli theory developed earlier. The forward direction is obtained by invoking the classical Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau theorem, and the converse by invoking the harmonic-metric splitting from non-abelian Hodge theory. The advertised result, presented as 'a refinement of the classical Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau correspondence,' is therefore the classical correspondence restated in D-geometric notation rather than a consequence derived from the new Spencer-stability formalism.

full rationale

The moduli-theoretic core of the paper, especially the representability of the D-Hilbert functor (Theorem 5.1) and the tangent-space computation (Theorem 5.13), is a self-contained construction that does not depend on the flat-connection application; no significant circularity was found there. The circularity is concentrated in the advertised application, Section 6. The paper explicitly says the proof 'implicitly invokes Simpson's non-abelian Hodge theory and the classical DUY-correspondence,' and the only new ingredient, Spencer stability, is equated to ordinary slope stability through the unproved and likely false claim that deg(ker d∇) is determined by rank(E) and deg(E) via Hirzebruch-Riemann-Roch. For a flat bundle, ker d∇ is a local system, so the Spencer slope computation in (4.7) is not a coherent-sheaf degree calculation, and the identification of Spencer-stable sub-ideals with ∇-invariant subbundles is asserted rather than proved. Thus Theorem 6.2 is not so much derived as relabeled: the central claim reduces by construction to the very DUY/Simpson correspondence it purports to refine. Self-citations to prior work of the authors are present but are background/foundational and not the load-bearing circular step; the decisive reduction is internal to Section 6.2.1.

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

The central claims depend on a network of classical results (Cartan-Kuranishi, Ritt-Radenbush, delta-Poincare lemma, Malgrange/Sweeney bounds, DUY and non-abelian Hodge theory) that are cited rather than derived, plus new definitions whose well-posedness is not fully established. The Spencer-slope identification with the usual slope is a chosen normalization that carries the weight of the DUY comparison.

free parameters (3)
  • D-Hilbert polynomial P = fixed input
    The moduli functor and D-Hilbert scheme are defined relative to a fixed numerical polynomial P; it is a chosen invariant used to stratify the moduli problem, not fitted to data.
  • Spencer slope normalization rank(I) = generic functional rank (first Cartan character)
    The reduced D-Hilbert polynomial divides by rank(I), a normalization chosen so that Spencer stability resembles classical slope stability; this choice is ad hoc and not derived from external principles.
  • Uniform bound rho(n,m,Ord(P)) = recursive bound in Appendix C
    Boundedness relies on a uniform degree of involutivity bound rho, estimated recursively; the estimate is cited and not verified in the paper.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Cartan-Kuranishi prolongation theorem: any analytic system can be completed to an involutive one
    Used in Remark 1.7 to restrict to involutive systems; foundational in the formal theory of PDEs.
  • standard math Ritt-Radenbush: finitely generated differential algebras over char 0 are radically Noetherian
    Stated as Theorem 2.29; used to control stabilization of prolongations.
  • domain assumption Malgrange's uniform bound on prolongation/involutivity degrees
    Used in the boundedness proof (Prop 5.3) and cited from [Ma2, Ma3]; not proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption Sweeney's bounds on D-regularity
    Used in Prop 5.3 and Appendix C; cited from [Sw].
  • domain assumption Classical Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau correspondence and Simpson's non-abelian Hodge theory
    Explicitly invoked in the proof of Theorem 6.2; the claimed refinement reduces to these external theorems.
  • standard math D-affineness of the base scheme X
    Theorem 5.1 assumes X is D-affine; used to obtain global generation in Prop 5.2.
invented entities (3)
  • D-Hilbert scheme Hilb^P_DX(J^infinity_X E)
    purpose: moduli space of formally integrable, involutive D-ideal sheaves with fixed D-Hilbert polynomial
    The central constructed object; no external verification is provided beyond the paper's own arguments.
  • Spencer (semi)stability and Spencer slope
    purpose: stability condition on D-ideal sheaves, proposed as a refinement of Gieseker and slope stability
    The claimed equivalence to HYM existence is internal to the paper and reduces to DUY; no independent handle is given.
  • D-geometric characteristic variety Char_D(Z)
    purpose: analog of the characteristic variety for nonlinear PDEs, used to define Spencer regularity and boundedness
    Introduced in Section 2.3.2; its key properties are derived internally.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The $\mathcal{D}$-Geometric Hilbert Scheme -- Part I: Involutivity and Stability." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W2COIPO5

@misc{pith2026250707937,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The $\mathcalD$-Geometric Hilbert Scheme -- Part I: Involutivity and Stability},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W2COIPO5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.07937}
}
abstract

We construct a moduli space of formally integrable and involutive ideal sheaves arising from systems of partial differential equations (PDEs) in the algebro-geometric setting, by introducing the $\mathcal{D}$-Hilbert and $\mathcal{D}$-Quot functors in the sense of Grothendieck and establishing their representability. Central to this construction is the notion of Spencer (semi-)stability, which presents an extension of classical stability conditions from gauge theory and complex geometry, and which provides the boundedness needed for our moduli problem. As an application, we show that for flat connections on compact K\"ahler manifolds, Spencer poly-stability of the associated PDE ideal is equivalent to the existence of a Hermitian-Yang-Mills metric. This result provides a refinement of the classical Donaldson-Uhlenbeck-Yau correspondence, and identifies Spencer cohomology and stability as a unifying framework for geometric PDEs.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

85 extracted references · 79 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Bächtold, M: ``Fold-type solution singularities and characteristic varieties of nonlinear PDEs.'' PhD thesis, University of Zurich. (2009)

    2009

  2. [2]

    Borisov, D: ``Derived moduli spaces of Hermitian-Einstein connections.'' Talk at The Fields Institute, Geometry and Physics Seminar, available online: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0PBfBz0kQQ&t=5192s blue YouTube , (2024)

    2024

  3. [3]

    Bridgeland, T: ``Stability conditions on triangulated categories.'' Annals of Mathematics. Vol. 166, No.2, pp: 317--345, JSTOR, (2007)

    2007

  4. [4]

    Beilinson, A; Drinfeld, V: ``Chiral algebras.'' Vol. 51. American Mathematical Society. (2004)

    2004

  5. [5]

    403, 34 pages, (2022)

    Borisov, D; Katzarkov, L; Sheshmani, A: ``Shifted symplectic structures on derived Quot-stacks I – Differential graded manifolds,'' Advances in Mathematics, Vol. 403, 34 pages, (2022)

    2022

  6. [6]

    462, 10092, (2025)

    Borisov, D; Katzarkov, L; Sheshmani, A; Yau, S-T: ``Shifted symplectic structures on derived Quot-stacks II--Derived Quot-schemes as dg manifolds,'' Advances in Mathematics, Vol. 462, 10092, (2025)

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    Bloch, S: ``Lectures on periods,'' given at Tsinghua University (2016), available on author's webpage: https://www.math.uchicago.edu/ bloch/Beijing_lectures_hypergeometric_161028.pdf blue BeijingLectures

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Bloch, S: ``Semi-regularity and de Rham cohomology,'' Invent. Math. 17 (1972), pp. 51–66

    work page 1972

Show all 85 references
  1. [9]

    Cartan, E: ``Sur la théorie des systèmes en involution et ses applications à la relativité.'' Bulletin de la Société mathématique de France. 59: pp. 88–118, (1931)

    1931

  2. [10]

    II 2, 571–714, Gautier-Villars, Paris (1953)

    Cartan, E: ``Sur la structure des groupes infinis de transformations.'' Oeuvres completes, Vol. II 2, 571–714, Gautier-Villars, Paris (1953)

    1953

  3. [11]

    Cartan, E: ``Les systemes differentiels exterieurs et leurs applications geometriques'' (French),Actualites Sci. Ind. 994, Hermann, Paris (1945)

    1945

  4. [12]

    Elsevier, VoL

    Ciocan-Fontanine, I; Kapranov, M: ``Derived quot schemes.'' Annales scientifiques de l’École normale supérieure. Elsevier, VoL. 34, pp: 403–440, (2001)

    2001

  5. [13]

    15(4):787– 815, (2002)

    Ciocan-Fontanine, I; Kapranov, M: ``Derived hilbert schemes.'' Journal of the American Mathematical Society. 15(4):787– 815, (2002)

    2002

  6. [14]

    Deligne, P: `` Th\'eor\`eme de Lefschetz et crit\`eres de d\'eg\'en\'erescence de suites spectrales,'' Publ. Math. IHES, 35 (1968), 259–278

    1968

  7. [15]

    50, Issue 1 (1985), pp

    Donaldson, S.K: ``Anti self-dual Yang-Mills connections over complex algebraic surfaces and stable vector bundles.'' Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, Vol. 50, Issue 1 (1985), pp. 1–26

    1985

  8. [16]

    Volume 16 (1966) No

    Douady, A: ``Le problème des modules pour les sous-espaces analytiques compacts d'un espace analytique donné.'' Annales de l'Institut Fourier. Volume 16 (1966) No. 1, pp. 1-95

    1966

  9. [17]

    24 (2019), pp

    Esnault, H; Sabbah, C: ``Good Lattices of Algebraic Connections (with an Appendix by Claude Sabbah).'' Documenta Mathematica, Vol. 24 (2019), pp. 271-301

    2019

  10. [18]

    Ehresmann, C: ``Introduction a la theorie des structures infinitesimales et des pseu- dogroupes de Lie.'' Colloque de topologie et geometrie differentielle. No. 11, 16 pp. Strasbourg (1952)

    1952

  11. [19]

    269–307, (1967)

    Goldschmidt, H: ``Integrability criteria for systems of nonlinear partial differential equations,''Journal of Differential Geometry, 1(3- 4): pp. 269–307, (1967)

    1967

  12. [20]

    JSTOR, (1967): 246--270

    Goldschmidt, H: ``Existence theorems for analytic linear partial differential equations.'' Annals of Mathematics. JSTOR, (1967): 246--270

    1967

  13. [21]

    Gabber, O: ``The integrability of the characteristic variety.''Amer. J. Math. 103 (1981), 445-468

    1981

  14. [22]

    Gieseker, G: ``On the moduli of vector bundles on an algebraic surface.'' Ann. Math. 106: pp. 45-60, (1977)

    1977

  15. [23]

    Griffiths, P:``Periods of integrals on algebraic manifolds.'' American Journal of Mathematics, 90(2):568–626, (1968)

    1968

  16. [24]

    Grothendieck, A: ``On the de Rham cohomology of algebraic varieties,'' Publ. Math. IHES, 29 (1966), 95–103

    1966

  17. [25]

    Grothendieck, A: ``Techniques de constructions en g\'eom\'etrie analytique.''S\'eminaire H. Cartan. 13 (1960/61), expos\'es 7-17, Benjamin (1967)

    1967

  18. [26]

    Grothendieck, A: ``Techniques de construction et théoremes d’existence en géométrie algébrique. iv. les schémas de Hilbert.'' Séminaire Bourbaki. 6(221): 249--276, (1960)

    1960

  19. [27]

    Huybrechts, D; Lehn, L: ``The Geometry of Moduli Spaces of Sheaves.'' Cambridge University Press. (2010)

    2010

  20. [28]

    Springer Science and Business Media, (2007)

    Hotta, R; Tanisaki, T: `` -modules, perverse sheaves, and representation theory.'' Volume 236. Springer Science and Business Media, (2007)

    2007

  21. [29]

    Illusie, L:``Complexe cotangent et d\'eformations I.'' Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg. Vol. 239, (2006)

    2006

  22. [30]

    D’Agnolo and J-P

    Kashiwara, M: `` Algebraic study of systems of partial diffential equations,'' Thesis, Tokyo University (1970), translated by A. D’Agnolo and J-P. Schneiders, Memoires Soc. Math. France, 63 (1995)

    1970

  23. [31]

    IHES/M/07/04; in: Handbook of Global Analysis (Ed

    Kruglikov, B; Lychagin, V: ``Geometry of Differential equations.'' prepr. IHES/M/07/04; in: Handbook of Global Analysis (Ed. D.Krupka, D.Saunders). Elsevier (2008): 725-772

    2008

  24. [32]

    Krasil'shchik, J; Lychagin, V; Vinogradov, A: ``Geometry of jets spaces and non-linear partial differential equations,'' Advanced Studies in Contemporary Mathematics, Vol.1 , (1986), Gordon and Breach Science Publishers New York

    1986

  25. [33]

    Katz, N; Oda, T: ``On the differentiation of De Rham cohomology classes with respect to parameters,,'' J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 8 (1968), 199–213

    1968

  26. [34]

    Kowalzig, N; Posthuma, H: `` The cyclic theory of Hopf algebroids,'' Journal of Noncommutative Geometry, Vol. 5. No.3 (2011), pp: 423--476

    2011

  27. [35]

    Katzarkov, L; Pantev, T: ``Non-abelian (p,p) -classes.'' https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9903163 blue arXiv:9903163 , (1999)

    1999 arXiv

  28. [36]

    292, Springer-Verlag, (1990)

    Kashiwara, M; Schapira, P: ``Sheaves on manifolds,'' Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften. 292, Springer-Verlag, (1990)

    1990

  29. [37]

    Volume 1: General theory.'' Princeton University Press and University Tokyo Press (1972)

    Kumpera, A; Spencer, D: ``Lie equations. Volume 1: General theory.'' Princeton University Press and University Tokyo Press (1972)

    1972

  30. [38]

    Kryczka, J; Sheshmani, A: ``The -Geometric Hilbert Scheme -- Part II: Hilbert and Quot DG-Schemes.'' https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.02387 blue arXiv:2411.02387 , (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Kryczka, J; Sheshmani, A; Yau, S-T: ``Derived Moduli Spaces of Nonlinear PDEs I: Singular Propagations'', https://arxiv.org/abs/2312.05226 blue arXiv:2312.05226 , (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Kryczka, J; Sheshmani, A; Yau, S-T: ``Derived Moduli Spaces of Nonlinear PDEs II: Variational Tricomplex and BV Formalism'', https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.16825 blue arXiv:2406.16825 , (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Kryczka, J; Rubtsov, V: ``Spencer hypercohomologies in the geometric theory of partial differential equations.'' To appear in: Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics. (2025)

    2025

  34. [42]

    Cartan’s prolongation theorem of exterior differential systems.'' American Journal of Mathematics

    Kuranishi, M: ``On E. Cartan’s prolongation theorem of exterior differential systems.'' American Journal of Mathematics. Vol. 79(1):1–47, (1957)

    1957

  35. [43]

    I-II.'' Nagoya Math

    Kuranishi, M: ``On the local theory of continuous infinite pseudogroups. I-II.'' Nagoya Math. J. 15 (1959), 225–260; 19 (1961), 55–91

    1959

  36. [44]

    I & II.'' Journal of Differential Geometry

    Kumpera, A: ``Invariants differentiels d’un pseudogroupe de Lie. I & II.'' Journal of Differential Geometry. Vol. 10, No. 2, pp: 289–-345 & No. 3, pp: 347–-416 (1975)

    1975

  37. [45]

    Krasil'shchik, J; Verbovetsky, A: `` Homological methods in equations of mathematical physics,'' https://arxiv.org/abs/math/9808130 blue arXiv:9808130 , (1998)

    1998 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Nauk, English Translation: Russian Mathematical Surveys, Vol

    Lychagin, V: ``Differential Operators on fiber bundles,'' Uspekhi Mat. Nauk, English Translation: Russian Mathematical Surveys, Vol. 40, No. 2 (1985): pp. 187–188

    1985

  39. [47]

    Teubner, Leipzig (1890)

    Lie, S: ``Theorie der Transformationsgruppen.''(Zweiter Abschnitt, unter Mitwirkung von Prof.Dr.Friederich Engel). Teubner, Leipzig (1890)

  40. [48]

    Lie, S: ``Ueber Differentialinvarianten.'' Math. Ann. Vol. 24, no. 4, 537–578 (1884)

  41. [49]

    Rubtsov, V; Lychagin, V: ``Topological Indices of Spencer Complexes associated with Geometric Structures,'' Mathematical notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, Vol. 45, No. 4 (1989), pp. 305-312

    1989

  42. [50]

    Zil'bergleit, L; Lychagin, V: ``Spencer cohomology of differential equations,'' Global Analysis, World Scientific Publications, (1994): pp. 215–252

    1994

  43. [51]

    Mumford, D: ``Geometric Invariant Theory.'' 1st ed: Ergebnisse der Mathematik, Springer, (1965) with Revised edition (Fogarty, J; Kirwan, F: 3rd ed., Springer,) (1994)

    1965

  44. [52]

    Malgrange, B: ``Systemes différentiels involutifs.'' Société math- ématique de France. (2005)

    2005

  45. [53]

    Malgrange, B: ``Sur le problème d’équivalence de Cartan.'' Annales de la Faculté des Sciences de Toulouse. Vol. 6, No.5: pp. 1087--1136, (2017)

    2017

  46. [54]

    331 (2003), pp

    Malgrange, B: ``Cartan involutiveness = Mumford regularity.'' Commutative Algebra (Grenoble/Lyon, 2001), Contemporary Mathematics, Vol. 331 (2003), pp. 193–205

    2003

  47. [55]

    Nitin, N; Sabbah, C: ``Moduli of pre- -modules, perverse sheaves and the Riemann–Hilbert morphism – I.'' Mathematische Annalen. Vol. 306, No. 1, pp:47--74, (1996)

    1996

  48. [56]

    Nitin, N: ``Moduli of regular holonomic -modules with normal crossing singularities.'' Duke Mathematical Journal. Vol. 99, No.1 pp:1--39, (1999)

    1999

  49. [57]

    Paugam, F: ``Towards the Mathematics of Quantum Field Theory,'' Springer Science & Business Media. 59. (2014)

    2014

  50. [58]

    Paugam, F: ``A note on the nonlinear derived Cauchy problem.'' https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.04860 blue arXiv:2211.04860 , (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Paugam, F:``Histories and observables in covariant field theory,'' Journal of Geometry and Physics, Vol. 61, No. 9 (2011): pp. 1675-1702

    2011

  52. [60]

    9(3): 266–310, (2022)

    Pantev, T; Toën, B: ``Moduli of flat connections on smooth varieties.'' Algebraic Geometry. 9(3): 266–310, (2022)

    2022

  53. [61]

    Quillen, D: ``Formal properties of over-determined systems of linear partial differential equations.'' PhD Thesis, Harvard University (1964)

    1964

  54. [62]

    Laumon, G: ``Sur la catégorie dérivée des -modules filtrés'', Algebraic geometry (Tokyo/Kyoto, 1982), Lecture Notes in Math, Vol. 1016,

    1982

  55. [63]

    35(4): 190, (1980)

    Rubtsov, V: ``The cohomology of the Der complex.'' Russian Mathematical Surveys. 35(4): 190, (1980)

    1980

  56. [64]

    Ritt, J: ``Differential algebra.'' American Mathematical Soc. Vol. 33. (1950)

    1950

  57. [65]

    Sabbah, C:``Introduction to the theory of -modules.'' Lecture Notes, Nankai. (2011)

    2011

  58. [66]

    Saito, M: ``Induced D -modules and differential complexes,'' Bull. Soc. Math. France, 117 (1989), pp. 361–387

    1989

  59. [67]

    Serre, J.P: ``Faisceaux algébriques cohérents.''Annals of Mathematics. Vol. 61, no. 2 (1955): 197–278

    1955

  60. [68]

    Simpson, C: `` Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety - I.'' Publ. Math. IHES. Vol. 79. pp: 47-129, (1994)

    1994

  61. [69]

    Simpson, C: `` Moduli of representations of the fundamental group of a smooth projective variety - II.'' Publ. Math. IHES. Vol. 80. pp: 5–79, (1995)

    1995

  62. [70]

    24, Springer, (2010)

    Seiler, M: ``Involution: The Formal Theory of Differential Equations and its Applications in Computer Algebra,'' Algorithms and Computation in Mathematics, Vol. 24, Springer, (2010)

    2010

  63. [71]

    Schneiders, J.P.: ``An Introduction to ‑Modules.'' Bulletin de la Société Royale des Sciences de Liège, 63, 223–295, (1994)

    1994

  64. [72]

    Relative finiteness and duality.'' Astérisque, 224 (1994)

    Schapira, P; Schneiders, J.P: ``Elliptic pairs I. Relative finiteness and duality.'' Astérisque, 224 (1994)

    1994

  65. [73]

    Euler class and relative index theorem.'' Astérisque, 224 (1994)

    Schapira, P; Schneiders, J.P: ``Elliptic pairs II. Euler class and relative index theorem.'' Astérisque, 224 (1994)

    1994

  66. [74]

    M; Sternberg, S: ``The infinite groups of Lie and Cartan, Part I, (The transitive groups).'' Journal d’Analyse Mathematique

    Singer, I. M; Sternberg, S: ``The infinite groups of Lie and Cartan, Part I, (The transitive groups).'' Journal d’Analyse Mathematique. 15 (1): 1–114, (1965)

    1965

  67. [75]

    (702):1– -40, (2015)

    Schürg, T; Toën, B; Vezzosi, G: ``Derived algebraic geometry, determinants of perfect complexes, and applications to obstruction theories for maps and complexes.''Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal). (702):1– -40, (2015)

    2015

  68. [76]

    Spencer, D.C: ``De Rham theorems and Neumann decompositions associated with linear partial differential equations.'' Annales de l'institut Fourier. Vol. 14. No. 1. (1964)

    1964

  69. [77]

    Spencer, D.C:`` Overdetermined systems of linear partial differential equations.'' Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 75(2):179–239, (1969)

    1969

  70. [78]

    120: 223–277 (261), (1968)

    Sweeney, W: ``The D-neumann problem.'' Acta Math. 120: 223–277 (261), (1968)

    1968

  71. [79]

    47 (1972), pp

    Takemoto, F: ``Stable vector bundles on algebraic surfaces.'' Nagoya Mathematical Journal. 47 (1972), pp. 29–48

    1972

  72. [80]

    Toën, B: ``Derived algebraic geometry.'' EMS Surv. Math. Sci. 1.2 (2014), 153–240

    2014

  73. [81]

    Tsujishita, T: ``Homological method of computing invariants of systems of differential equations.'' Differential Geometry and its Applications. Vol. 1(1): 3–34, (1991)

    1991

  74. [82]

    (208) no

    Toën, B; Vezzosi, G: ``Homotopical algebraic geometry II: Geometric stacks and applications,'' Memoires of American Mathematical Society, 193. (208) no. 902

  75. [83]

    Uhlenbeck, K; Yau, S.T: ``On the existence of Hermitian–Yang–Mills connections in stable vector bundles.'' Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics. Vol. 39, Issue S1 (1986), pp. S257–S293

    1986

  76. [84]

    Vinogradov, A; `` Cohomological analysis of partial differential equations and secondary calculus,'' American Mathematical Society, (2001)

    2001

  77. [85]

    II: The nonlinear theory, '' J

    Vinogradov, A: `` The C -spectral sequence, Lagrangian formalism, and conservation laws. II: The nonlinear theory, '' J. Math. Anal. Appl, Vol.100, No.1 (1984): pp. 41-129

    1984

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.