Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 47 references

Involutive Khovanov homology and equivariant knots II

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper extends involutive Khovanov homology to tangles and uses the resulting speedup to prove that the Whitehead doubles of the pretzel knots P(-3,3,-3) and P(-5,5,-5) admit exotic pairs of slice disks.

desk verdict A genuinely useful tangle extension of involutive Khovanov homology, but the new P(-5,5,-5) exotic slice disk pair rests on an unarchived 17-hour computational run that needs reproducible artifacts before I'd take it as established. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.07114 v1 pith:42EVGAB7 submitted 2026-08-07 math.GT

Taketo Sano This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GT MSC 57K1857K10
keywords involutiveKhovanovhomologyequivariantRasmusseninvariantstronglyinvertibleknotsslicedisksexoticpairstanglepretzelWhiteheaddoubles
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 aims to make involutive Khovanov homology and the associated equivariant Rasmussen invariant computable on large knots by extending the tangle-and-cobordism formulation of Khovanov homology to involutive tangles and reducing the computation piecewise. The payoff is a concrete 4-dimensional result: for the strongly invertible slice pretzel knots $K=P(-3,3,-3)$ and $K=P(-5,5,-5)$, no slice disk is smoothly isotopic rel boundary to its symmetric counterpart, and after Whitehead doubling the two slice disks $\mathrm{Wh}(D)$ and $\tau\mathrm{Wh}(D)$ are topologically isotopic but not smoothly isotopic, forming an exotic pair. A sympathetic reader should care because this is the first computation of such invariants at a 72-crossing scale, it gives a new example not previously known, and it turns a proposed method for detecting equivariant sliceness into a practical algorithmic tool.

What carries the argument

The central object is the $\tau$-equivariant Khovanov complex $[T]_\tau$ of an involutive tangle $T$, namely the formal tangle Khovanov complex $[T]$ together with a canonical isomorphism $i:[T]\to\tau[T]$ encoding the symmetry. Invariance is proved under the involutive Reidemeister moves and the $I$-move, a non-local move required when the ambient space is $S^3$ rather than $\mathbb{R}^3$, and taking the cone of $I-I_\tau$ recovers the earlier involutive Khovanov complex. The computational engine is a reduction pipeline: a symmetric tangle decomposition $L=D(T_s,T_a,\tau T_a)$, equivariant delooping and Gaussian elimination on the on-axis piece, ordinary delooping and Gaussian elimination on the off-axis piece, assembly, cone formation, symmetry-breaking elimination, and finally a Rees-correspondence linear system that reads off the $h$-divisibility of equivariant Lee cycles without computing full homology over $\mathbb{F}_2[h]$. This pipeline is what carries both the hand computation for pretzel knots and the 72-crossing machine computation.

What would settle it

Recompute the equivariant Rasmussen invariant of $\mathrm{Wh}(P(-5,5,-5))$ with an independent implementation or with released logs from the program and obtain a value other than $(0,2)$, or exhibit a smooth isotopy rel boundary between $\mathrm{Wh}(D)$ and $\tau\mathrm{Wh}(D)$ for some slice disk $D$ of $P(-5,5,-5)$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the equivariant Rasmussen invariant $(\underline{s},\bar{s})$ of a strongly invertible link can be obtained from a tangle-by-tangle decomposition of the involutive Khovanov complex, and that this makes the invariant strong enough to separate smoothly non-isotopic slice disks that are topologically isotopic. For $K=P(-3,3,-3)$ and $P(-5,5,-5)$, the paper computes $(\underline{s},\bar{s})=(0,2)$ for $K$ itself, and reports the same value $(0,2)$ for the Whitehead doubles, the latter for a 72-crossing diagram. Because a non-trivial equivariant Rasmussen invariant obstructs isotopy-equivariant sliceness, $K$ and $\mathrm{Wh}(K)$ are not isotopy-equivariantly slice; combining this with the fact that any two $\mathbb{Z}$-slice disks are topologically isotopic rel boundary yields the exotic pair of slice disks for the two Whitehead doubles. The $P(-3,3,-3)$ statement was already known by other means, while the $P(-5,5,-5)$ statement is presented as new.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the correctness of the reported 72-crossing computation of $\mathrm{Wh}(P(-5,5,-5))$ and the obstruction theorem that a non-trivial equivariant Rasmussen invariant forbids isotopy-equivariant sliceness; if either gives way, the $P(-5,5,-5)$ conclusion collapses.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same pipeline should make involutive Khovanov homology and the equivariant Rasmussen invariant routinely computable for strongly invertible knots well beyond the 10-crossing dataset previously screened.
  • For every odd $p\ge 3$, the pretzel knot $P(-p,p,-p)$ has invariant $(\underline{s},\bar{s})=(0,2)$, so none of these slice pretzel knots is isotopy-equivariantly slice.
  • The Whitehead doubles of $P(-3,3,-3)$ and $P(-5,5,-5)$ have invariant $(0,2)$ as well, so their slice disks provide explicit exotic pairs in the 4-ball.
  • These examples give the first positive evidence for the paper's Question 1.9 that a non-trivial equivariant Rasmussen invariant of a strongly invertible slice knot should persist under Whitehead doubling.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves implicit that the same divide-and-conquer scheme should work for other equivariant Lee-class or slice-torus invariants, not just the pair $(\underline{s},\bar{s})$.
  • One could test the method's reach by applying it to the strongly invertible knots with anomalous invariants listed in the paper and looking for further exotic pairs after satellites other than Whitehead doubling.
  • The only load-bearing computational datum is the reported 17-hour run on $\mathrm{Wh}(P(-5,5,-5))$; an independent implementation or a released run log would convert that computational evidence into a checkable proof ingredient.
  • If Question 1.9 holds broadly, the paper's list of knots with anomalous equivariant Rasmussen invariant would generate additional families of exotic slice-disk pairs after Whitehead doubling.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper extends Bar-Natan's tangle-categorical framework to an involutive setting, defining τ-equivariant Khovanov complexes for involutive tangles and a formal involutive complex Q(L) for involutive links. It proves invariance under involutive Reidemeister moves and the I-move, develops equivariant versions of delooping and Gaussian elimination, and packages these into a divide-and-conquer algorithm (Algorithm 4.12) with a linear-system criterion for the equivariant Rasmussen invariant (Corollary 5.3). The paper then states two main computational results: Theorem 4 asserts (s, s) = (0,2) for all odd p ≥ 3 pretzel knots P(−p, p, −p), with a detailed proof only for p=3; Proposition 1.7 asserts that the Whitehead doubles of P(−3,3,−3) and P(−5,5,−5) have equivariant Rasmussen invariant (0,2), the second obtained from a single 17-hour run of the program yui on a 72-crossing diagram. Combining these with known results yields Theorem 1: those knots and their Whitehead doubles are not isotopy-equivariantly slice, and the Whitehead doubles admit exotic pairs of slice disks. The P(−3,3,−3) case is already covered by prior work, so the novel content is the P(−5,5,−5) case.

Significance. If the computational claims are correct, the paper provides a substantial algorithmic advance: the tangle-based reduction appears to convert previously infeasible involutive Khovanov computations into fast ones, and the method for extracting h-divisibilities from linear systems is clearly useful. The paper also explicitly repairs the missing I-move in the author's earlier [San25], which is a genuine foundational correction. The hand computation for p=3 in Section 6 is a valuable demonstration of the equivariant diagrammatic method. However, the significance is tempered by the fact that the only new example, the P(−5,5,−5) Whitehehead double, rests entirely on an unarchived computational run, and the general-p statement of Theorem 4 is not actually proved beyond p=3. The paper does not ship machine-checked proofs or reproducible computational artifacts; the code is mentioned but no version, logs, or output data are supplied.

major comments (2)
  1. [§1, Proposition 1.7] The P(−5,5,−5) case of Theorem 1 is supported only by a one-sentence description of a 17-hour run of yui on a 72-crossing diagram, with no commit hash, input file, logs, or output data. The reported invariant (0,2) is produced by the new Algorithm 4.12 and the linear-system readout of Corollary 5.3, so an implementation error in the equivariant Gaussian elimination of Proposition 4.9, the symmetry-breaking reduction of Proposition 4.11, or the extraction of h-divisibilities would directly corrupt the result. Since the P(−3,3,−3) case is already covered by [DMT26], the entire novelty of Theorem 1 depends on this unverified run. The authors should provide an auditable record, including the exact yui version, the input diagram in machine-readable form, the computed output, and ideally an independent verification, before the P(−5,5,−5) conclusion can be accepted.
  2. [§6, Theorem 4] The proof of Theorem 4 is carried out in detail only for p=3, with the final sentence stating that the general case proceeds similarly. This is not adequate for the theorem as stated, and Theorem 1 specifically needs p=5. The reduction in Section 6 uses complexes E^+−3, E^−3 with specific length and differential; for p=5 these complexes have more summands and potentially different cancellation patterns, so the claim that the same obstruction produces an h-factor of exactly one requires argument. The paper should either present an explicit p=5 computation, prove a uniformity lemma showing that the reductions and cancellations are identical in form for all odd p, or restrict Theorem 4 to p=3 and state the remaining cases as a conjecture.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.3, Remark 3.14] Remark 3.14 concedes that [·]τ is not shown to descend to the equivariant movie-move quotient; the introduction and Theorem 2 are worded as if full functoriality on involutive tangles is established, so the paper should either prove this or clearly state which claims are provisional.
  2. [§3.3, Remark 3.17] Remark 3.17 states that the τ-equivariant lift [S]τ is defined only after choosing an isotopy from S to τS and that uniqueness up to homotopy is not established. The text should explicitly say whether any of the main results, in particular the computations of Section 6, depend on this choice; if they do not, that should be stated.
  3. [Footnote 4] The correction of the published [San25, Proposition 3.3] is mathematically important, since the τ-invariance of the equivariant Lee cycle is used in the definition of the equivariant Rasmussen invariant; the corrected statement and its proof should appear in the main text rather than only in a footnote.
  4. [§6, displayed complexes] The notation for the sequential complexes E^+−3 and E^−3 is garbled in the displayed text (the lines ending in '= a b s' and '= s b a' do not render the intended arrows); please provide a properly typeset version of these complexes.
  5. [§6, Claim 6.1] The equality e − Iτe′ = e(I − Iτ) = 0 in the proof of Claim 6.1 would be easier to verify if the action of Iτ on the relevant A-end objects were shown in a small diagram, since this is a key step in establishing the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: Theorem 1 is assembled from a hand computation (Theorem 4), a direct program computation (Proposition 1.7), and external topological results; none of the steps is equivalent to its input by construction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 4 is a diagrammatic computation: starting from the Bar-Natan bracket of the pretzel diagram, the paper applies equivariant delooping and Gaussian elimination (Propositions 4.8 and 4.9) and computes h-divisibilities of the equivariant Lee cycles. The only sliceness input is used to pin down d_h(K)=2 via s(K)=0, which is a standard fact for slice knots, not a fitted value. Proposition 1.7 is a computational application of Algorithm 4.12 and Corollary 5.3 to Wh(P(-5,5,-5)); the reported invariant (0,2) is an output of solving an F2-linear system, and no parameter in the algorithm is adjusted to force this value. The obstruction step from non-trivial (s,s) to non-isotopy-equivariant sliceness is cited from [San25, Corollary 1.11]; although this is a self-citation and is load-bearing, it is a theorem proved in the earlier paper and does not assume the conclusion of Theorem 1. Similarly, the reduction steps quoted from [KS25] are proved there and are not restatements of the target result. The topological half of the exotic-pair conclusion comes from external results [Gut+23], [CP21], and [Hay21]. The unarchived 17-hour yui run and the phrase 'the proof for the general case proceeds similarly' are reproducibility and completeness concerns, not instances of a result equaling its input by construction. Hence no circular step is exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or fitted constants appear: all claims are derived from definitions, prior theorems, and computations. The main external inputs are the tangle and cobordism theorems of Bar-Natan, the involutive Reidemeister and I-move theorems, the author's earlier invariants, and the correctness of the author's software.

assumptions (7)
  • standard math Bar-Natan's theorem: the formal Khovanov bracket [T] is invariant under Reidemeister moves up to chain homotopy, and the bracket functor is functorial up to sign.
    Basis of the whole tangle framework, quoted from [Bar05, Theorem 5] and used in Section 2 and Proposition 3.1.
  • standard math Involutive Reidemeister theorem for involutive tangles with fixed boundary.
    Invoked before Definition 3.3 via [LW21, Theorem 2.3].
  • standard math For involutive links in S^3, equivalence requires the I-move in addition to involutive Reidemeister moves; equivariant movie moves provide equivalence of involutive movies.
    Used in Proposition 3.10, Remark 3.11, and Definition 3.12; quoted from [Bor+26b, Theorems 1.1 and 1.4].
  • domain assumption The equivariant Rasmussen invariant (s,s) is a well-defined pair of invariants whose non-vanishing obstructs isotopy-equivariant sliceness, with s(K) <= s(K) and mirror reversal behavior.
    Central geometric conclusions depend on [San25, Corollary 1.11, Corollary 3.25, Proposition 1.3]; the paper depends on this despite errors in the published [San25] noted in Remark 3.11 and the Section 5.2 footnote.
  • standard math The reduced complex calculations for pretzel tangles in [KS25, Propositions 4.3 and 4.4 and Lemma 4.2] are correct.
    Used verbatim in Section 6 to reduce [K] to the complex Omega for P(-p,p,-p).
  • domain assumption The software yui correctly implements Algorithm 4.12 and the F2-linear system method for h-divisibility.
    Proposition 1.7 is a computational claim from the program; no independent test suite or logs are given.
  • domain assumption For a slice disk D of K, Wh(D) is a Z-slice disk of Wh(K), and any two Z-slice disks are topologically isotopic rel boundary.
    Used to conclude topological isotopy of the disk pair in Theorem 1, citing [Gut+23, Proposition 2.1], [CP21, Theorem 1.2], and [Hay21, Theorem 2.2].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Involutive Khovanov homology and equivariant knots II." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/42EVGAB7

@misc{pith2026260807114,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Involutive Khovanov homology and equivariant knots II},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/42EVGAB7}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.07114}
}
abstract

In the spirit of Bar-Natan's formulation of Khovanov homology for tangles, we extend the framework of involutive Khovanov homology to involutive tangles. This enables a divide-and-conquer computation of involutive Khovanov homology and the equivariant Rasmussen invariant, which results in a significant speedup for the algorithmic computation. With this, we obtain new examples of strongly invertible knots for which no slice disk is smoothly isotopic rel boundary to its symmetric counterpart. In particular, we show that the Whitehead doubles of the pretzel knots $P(-3, 3, -3)$ and $P(-5, 5, -5)$ admit exotic pairs of slice disks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.07114 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. DMS construction 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The formal Khovanov bracket [T] recovers the U(2)-equivariant Khovanov complex CKhh,t(T) = Hom•/l([∅], [T]), from which the original Khovanov homology [Kho00] and its deformations [Lee05; Bar05; Kho06] can be fully recovered by substituting h and t. Furthermore, [Bar05, Theorem 5] states that [·] descends to a functor, well￾defined up to sign, [·]: Diag/i(B) → h Kob•/l(B) where Diag/i(B) denotes the quotient categor… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Explicit identification between [T] and τ [T]. The isomorphism i of Proposition 3.4 is called the isomorphism associated with the involutive tangle diagram T [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Involutive Reidemeister moves Proposition 3.9. Let T, T′ be involutive tangle diagrams with ∂T = ∂T ′ = B that are related by one of the involutive Reidemeister moves. Then there is a τ -equivariant homotopy equivalence f τ : [T] τ → [T ′ ] τ that lifts the standard ho…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The I-move Remark 3.11. [San25, Theorem 2] lacked the observation for the I-move, and Proposition 3.10 fills the gap. Moreover, the equivariant Lee cycles of L and L ′ correspond under σφ, hence their behavior under cobordisms [San25, Proposi￾tion 4.29] remains valid. …
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: A symmetric planar arc diagram. The input disks of a symmetric planar arc diagram can be separated into two types: those that intersect the y-axis, called the on-axis input disks, and those that do not, called the off-axis input disks. Each on-axis input disk Di satisf…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Reduction of the involutive complex. Such a modification must be applied for each pair (Y, Z) forming a non-trivial square with (X, τX) in Ω as above. This process may be repeated for each pair {X, τX} of non-τ -invariant summands of Ω. Proof. Immediate from Propositio…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The Lee cycle α(K) regarded as a dotted cobordism. The corresponding Frobenius extension is R = Z[h], A = R[X]/(X2 − hX), and with Y = X − h, we have equations X2 = hX, XY = 0, Y 2 = −hY, ∆X = X ⊗ X, ∆Y = Y ⊗ Y. The link homology theory obtained from the corresponding …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: A tangle decomposition of the Lee cycle. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Resolved diagrams -1 0 1 A(0, −1, 0) A(1, −2, 0) A(0, −2, 1) B(2, −3, 0) B(1, −3, 1) B(0, −3, 2) A(0, 0, 0) A(1, −1, 0) A(0, −1, 1) A(2, −2, 0) A(1, −2, 1) A(0, −2, 2) C(3, −3, 0) B(2, −3, 1) B(1, −3, 2) C ′ (0, −3, 3) A(1, 0, 0) A(0, 0, 1) A(2, −1, 0) A(1, −1, 1) A(0…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Structure of Ω -1 0 1 A(0, −1, 0) A(1, −2, 0) A(0, −2, 1) B(2, −3, 0) B(1, −3, 1) B(0, −3, 2) A(0, 0, 0) A(1, −1, 0) A(0, −1, 1) A(2, −2, 0) A(1, −2, 1) A(0, −2, 2) C0(3, −3, 0) B(2, −3, 1) B(1, −3, 2) C ′ 0 (0, −3, 3) A(1, 0, 0) A(0, 0, 1) A(2, −1, 0) A(1, −1, 1) A(0…
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Structure of Ω0 43 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p043_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2023 , eprint =

    Antonio Alfieri and Irving Dai and Abhishek Mallick and Masaki Taniguchi , title =. 2023 , eprint =

    work page 2023

  2. [2]

    Michigan Math

    Alfieri, Antonio and Boyle, Keegan , title =. Michigan Math. J. , fjournal =. 2024 , doi =

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    and Hedden, Matthew and Lobb, Andrew , title =

    Baldwin, John A. and Hedden, Matthew and Lobb, Andrew , title =. Adv. Math. , fjournal =. 2019 , doi =

    work page 2019

  4. [4]

    Bar-Natan, Dror , title =. Geom. Topol. , fjournal =. 2005 , doi =

    work page 2005

  5. [5]

    Bar-Natan, Dror , title =. J. Knot Theory Ramifications , fjournal =. 2007 , doi =

    work page 2007

  6. [6]

    \.Inan c

    Baykur, R. \.Inan c. Knotted surfaces in 4-manifolds and stabilizations , journal =. 2016 , doi =

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    Advances in Mathematics , volume =

    Maciej Borodzik and Irving Dai and Abhishek Mallick and Matthew Stoffregen , title =. Advances in Mathematics , volume =. 2026 , doi =

    work page 2026

  8. [8]

    2026 , eprint =

    Maciej Borodzik and Irving Dai and Abhishek Mallick and Matthew Stoffregen , title =. 2026 , eprint =

    work page 2026

Show all 47 references
  1. [9]

    Boyle, Keegan and Issa, Ahmad , title =. J. Topol. , fjournal =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  2. [10]

    Journal of the London Mathematical Society , volume =

    Keegan Boyle and Wenzhao Chen , title =. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , volume =. 2026 , doi =

    2026

  3. [11]

    Scott and Saito, Masahico , title =

    Carter, J. Scott and Saito, Masahico , title =. J. Knot Theory Ramifications , fjournal =. 1993 , doi =

    1993

  4. [12]

    Conway, Anthony and Powell, Mark , title =. Adv. Math. , fjournal =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  5. [13]

    Dai, Irving and Mallick, Abhishek and Stoffregen, Matthew , title =. J. Topol. , fjournal =. 2023 , doi =

    2023

  6. [14]

    2026 , eprint =

    Irving Dai and Abhishek Mallick and Masaki Taniguchi , title =. 2026 , eprint =

    2026

  7. [15]

    2026 , eprint =

    Giovanni Framba , title =. 2026 , eprint =

    2026

  8. [16]

    2023 , eprint =

    Guth, Gary and Hayden, Kyle and Kang, Sungkyung and Park, JungHwan , title =. 2023 , eprint =

    2023

  9. [17]

    2021 , eprint =

    Kyle Hayden , title =. 2021 , eprint =

    2021

  10. [18]

    2023 , eprint =

    Kyle Hayden , title =. 2023 , eprint =

    2023

  11. [19]

    Hayden, Kyle and Sundberg, Isaac , title =. J. Reine Angew. Math. , fjournal =. 2024 , doi =

    2024

  12. [20]

    Duke Math

    Hendricks, Kristen and Manolescu, Ciprian , title =. Duke Math. J. , fjournal =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  13. [21]

    Duke Math

    Khovanov, Mikhail , title =. Duke Math. J. , fjournal =. 2000 , doi =

    2000

  14. [22]

    Khovanov, Mikhail , title =. Fund. Math. , fjournal =. 2006 , doi =

    2006

  15. [23]

    Fundamenta Mathematicae , publisher =

    Mikhail Khovanov and Taketo Sano , title =. Fundamenta Mathematicae , publisher =. 2026 , doi =

    2026

  16. [24]

    2025 , eprint =

    KeeTaek Kim and Taketo Sano , title =. 2025 , eprint =

    2025

  17. [25]

    Problems in low-dimensional topology , booktitle =

    Kirby, Rob , editor =. Problems in low-dimensional topology , booktitle =

  18. [26]

    2025 , eprint =

    Christoph Lamm , title =. 2025 , eprint =

    2025

  19. [27]

    Lee, Eun Soo , title =. Adv. Math. , fjournal =. 2005 , doi =

    2005

  20. [28]

    Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal) , publisher =

    Lewark, Lukas and Zibrowius, Claudius , title =. Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal) , publisher =. 2024 , doi =

    2024

  21. [29]

    Lipshitz, Robert and Sarkar, Sucharit , title =. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , fjournal =. 2014 , doi =

    2014

  22. [30]

    Lipshitz, Robert and Sarkar, Sucharit , title =. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , fjournal =. 2022 , doi =

    2022

  23. [31]

    Lobb, Andrew and Watson, Liam , title =. Geom. Topol. , fjournal =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  24. [32]

    Journal of Topology , volume =

    Abhishek Mallick , title =. Journal of Topology , volume =. 2024 , doi =

    2024

  25. [33]

    Miller and Mark Powell , title =

    Allison N. Miller and Mark Powell , title =. Journal of the London Mathematical Society , volume =. 2023 , doi =

    2023

  26. [34]

    2024 , eprint =

    Aakash Parikh , title =. 2024 , eprint =

    2024

  27. [35]

    2022 , eprint =

    Alessio Di Prisa , title =. 2022 , eprint =

    2022

  28. [36]

    2023 , doi =

    Alessio Di Prisa and Giovanni Framba , title =. 2023 , doi =. 2303.08794 , archiveprefix=

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    2024 , eprint =

    Alessio Di Prisa , title =. 2024 , eprint =

    2024

  30. [38]

    Algebraic and topological theories (

    Sakuma, Makoto , title =. Algebraic and topological theories (. 1986 , isbn =

    1986

  31. [39]

    2020 , eprint =

    Taketo Sano and Kouki Sato , title =. 2020 , eprint =

    2020

  32. [40]

    Topology and its Applications , pages =

    Taketo Sano and Kouki Sato , title =. Topology and its Applications , pages =. 2024 , doi =

    2024

  33. [41]

    Algebraic & Geometric Topology , volume =

    Taketo Sano , title =. Algebraic & Geometric Topology , volume =. 2025 , doi =. 2404.08568v5 , archiveprefix=

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    2026 , month =

    Sano, Taketo , title =. 2026 , month =

    2026

  35. [43]

    A fast algorithm for calculating

    Sch\". A fast algorithm for calculating. Glasg. Math. J. , fjournal =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  36. [44]

    2018 , type =

    Snape, Michael , title =. 2018 , type =

    2018

  37. [45]

    Watson, Liam , title =. Adv. Math. , fjournal =. 2017 , doi =

    2017

  38. [46]

    Michigan Math

    Willis, Michael , title =. Michigan Math. J. , fjournal =. 2021 , doi =

    2021

  39. [47]

    2026 , eprint =

    Sarah Zampa , title =. 2026 , eprint =

    2026

Pith tools

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