Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Tesler identities for wreath Macdonald polynomials

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read An explicit operator identity turns wreath Macdonald polynomials into delta functions of the wreath Macdonald pairing, making reciprocity and evaluation results follow from formal manipulations.

desk verdict Genuinely new wreath Tesler identity with many consequences, but the main theorem has a load-bearing 'It should then be possible' step that leaves it short of a proof. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01732 v2 pith:BFIHBV7E submitted 2025-05-03 math.QA math.COmath.RT

Marino Romero , Joshua Jeishing Wen This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.QAmath.COmath.RT MSC 05E0581R1033D5281R12
keywords wreathMacdonaldpolynomialsTesleridentitydeltafunctionMacdonald–KoornwinderdualityplethysticKostkacoefficientsquantumtoroidalalgebrashufflebispectralproblem
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 a wreath analogue of the Tesler identity: for $r > 2$, an explicit operator $V_{\operatorname{core}(\lambda)}$ sends each wreath Macdonald polynomial, after a normalisation by a scalar evaluation, to the delta function $E_\lambda$ of its own partition in the wreath Macdonald pairing. Because a delta function paired with any test function performs a plethystic evaluation at that partition's character data, the identity converts statements about duality and evaluations into formal bookkeeping with the pairing and the operator $V$. From this single mechanism the paper derives Macdonald–Koornwinder duality, evaluation formulas, shifted reciprocity, wreath interpolation polynomials, a plethystic formula for wreath $(q,t)$-Kostka coefficients, and series solutions of the bispectral problem. A sympathetic reader should care because it shows that the classical reciprocity story for ordinary Macdonald polynomials has a uniform, explicit analogue in the wreath setting.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the explicit operator $V_\alpha$: a product of the wreath nabla $\nabla_\alpha$, the plethystic exponential $\Omega[X^{(0)}/((1-q\sigma^{-1})(t\sigma-1))]$, and the translation $T[X^{(0)}]$. The nabla acts diagonally on $H_\lambda$ with eigenvalues given by products of characters of colour-$0$ boxes, the exponential attaches the partition's character data, and the translation shifts the colour-$0$ variables by $1$; together they reproduce the operator that was used in the $r=1$ Tesler identity, with the core $\alpha$ encoding the colouring information. The proof's main structural device is a uniqueness statement: $V$ is determined by its commutation with the wreath $\Delta$ operators and by the base case $V(1\otimes e_\alpha)=E_\alpha\otimes e_\alpha$. This uniqueness lets the paper avoid Pieri rules, because the action of higher $\Delta$ operators on the delta functions can be analysed combinatorially instead.

What would settle it

Take $r=3$ and a small partition $\lambda$ such as $(2,1)$ or $(3,1)$, expand both sides of (1.6) in the multi-Schur basis to finite degree, and check the coefficient of every intermediate partition $\mu$ in the expansions (4.32)–(4.33): a single $\mu$ with $\operatorname{core}(\mu)=\operatorname{core}(\lambda)$ that violates $\mu\le_r\lambda$ in the row-strict case or $\mu\ge_r\lambda$ in the column-strict case would falsify Theorem 4.15 and the explicit identity.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is the identity (1.6): for $r > 2$, with $\alpha=\operatorname{core}(\lambda)$, $$E_\$\lambda$ = V_\$\alpha$\!\left(\frac{H_\$\lambda$}{H_\$\lambda$[\iota D^\bullet_{w_0\$\alpha$}]}\right), \qquad V_\$\alpha$ := \nabla_\$\alpha$\,\$\Omega$\!\left[\frac{$X^{{(0)}}$}{(1-q\$sigma^{{-1}}$)(t\$\sigma$-1)}\right] T[$X^{{(0)}}$]\,\nabla_\$\alpha$,$$ where $E_\lambda$ is the exponential delta function $\Omega[\sum_i X^{(i)}(D^\bullet_\lambda/((1-q)(t-1)))^{(i)}]$, $\nabla_\alpha$ is the wreath nabla operator, and $H_\lambda[\iota D^\bullet_{w_0\alpha}]$ is the scalar evaluation that also appears as the eigenvalue of $\nabla_{\operatorname{core}(\lambda)}$ at $H_\lambda$. The appearance of $w_0\alpha$ reflects the paper's observation that $\nabla_\alpha$ is not self-adjoint for the wreath Macdonald pairing—its adjoint is $\nabla_{w_0\alpha}$—which is also responsible for the dual basis $H^\dagger_\lambda$. The paper proves the identity by first characterising $V$ through its commutation with wreath $\Delta$ operators and its base case, then computing the base case by induction, and finally showing $V(H_\lambda)$ is a scalar multiple of $E_\lambda$. With (1.6) in hand, the paper obtains the duality, evaluation, interpolation, Kostka, and bispectral results as consequences of formal properties of the pairing.

Load-bearing premise

The proof rests on a combinatorial control assertion: the partitions produced when $V$ acts on the modified elementary and complete symmetric functions are exactly the strongly row-strict and column-strict tabloidisable ones, and the crucial existence step is marked in the paper by the phrase 'It should then be possible'; if that classification has a gap, the conclusion that $V(H_\lambda)$ is a scalar multiple of $E_\lambda$—and with it the Tesler identity—does not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Macdonald–Koornwinder duality holds in the wreath setting: for $k\in\mathbb{Z}/r\mathbb{Z}$ and $\operatorname{core}(\mu)=w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\lambda)$, the ratio $H_\lambda[1+u\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_\mu]/\prod_{\square\in\lambda\setminus\operatorname{core}(\lambda),\ \bar c_\square=k}(1-u\chi_\square)$ is symmetric in $\lambda,\mu$.
  • Evaluation formulas follow at the specialisation $\mu=w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\lambda)$, giving $H_\lambda[\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_{w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\lambda)}]$ as the product of $(-\chi_\square)$ over colour-$k$ boxes, confirming the evaluation conjecture used in [AD24].
  • Taking $u\to\infty$ in the duality gives shifted reciprocity: for $\operatorname{core}(\mu)=w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\lambda)$, $H_\lambda[\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_\mu]/H_\lambda[\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_{w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\lambda)}]=H_\mu[\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_\lambda]/H_\mu[\sigma^k\iota D^\bullet_{w_0\sigma^{-k}\operatorname{core}(\mu)}]$.
  • The wreath $(q,t)$-Kostka coefficients have a plethystic formula $K_{\vec\gamma,\mu}=k^\alpha_{\vec\gamma_{>1}}[\iota D^\bullet_\mu]$, giving a Pieri-free route to these coefficients.
  • Wreath interpolation Macdonald polynomials exist, and the global series $F_\alpha[X^\bullet,Y^\bullet]$ is symmetric under interchange of the two alphabets (with appropriate shifted cores) and satisfies the bispectral eigenfunction equations.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves the $r=2$ case open, noting that the quantum toroidal presentation differs; the same commutation–uniqueness strategy looks portable there once the $r=2$ analogues are established, and a direct test would be whether the adjoint relation $\nabla_\alpha^\dagger=\nabla_{w_0\alpha}$ survives in that setting.
  • Because the proof avoids Pieri rules, the identity suggests a template for other eigenoperator-driven families: whenever there is a delta-function pairing and a handful of eigenoperators with the right commutation relations, a Tesler-type identity should yield reciprocity statements even without an explicit Pieri calculus.
  • The plethystic Kostka formula is effectively an algorithm: the quantity $k^\alpha_{\vec\gamma_{>1}}[\iota D^\bullet_\mu]$ can be computed by commuting operators, so comparing its output with direct multi-Schur expansions for small $r=3$, $n\le 4$ cases would test both the Kostka formula and the underlying combinatorial lemma at once.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper develops a wreath analogue of the Tesler identity for modified Macdonald polynomials. For r>2 and an r-core α, the authors define an explicit operator Vα = ∇α Ω[X^(0)/((1-qσ^{-1})(tσ-1))] T[X^(0)] ∇α and claim (Theorem 1.1, Eq. (1.6)) that Eλ = V_core(λ)(Hλ / Hλ[ιD•_{w0 core(λ)}]), where Eλ is a delta function for the wreath Macdonald pairing. The proof passes through an abstract map V (Definition 4.14), a formula for V (Theorem 4.18) obtained by commutation relations and a long constant-term computation, and a theorem (Theorem 4.15) identifying V(Hλ) with a scalar multiple of Eλ. The final sections derive consequences: Macdonald–Koornwinder duality, evaluation formulas, shifted reciprocity, interpolation polynomials, plethystic Kostka coefficients, and a bispectral series. The paper is explicit that the main theorem is proved only for r>2 and that the r=2 case is left to future work.

Significance. If the main identity is correct, this is a substantial contribution: it extends the Garsia–Haiman–Tesler framework to wreath Macdonald polynomials, provides a closed-form operator identity, and yields a long list of new reciprocity and evaluation results. The paper is unusually explicit: the operator V is given in closed form, the statements are concrete and checkable, and the applications are formulated in a falsifiable way. I also credit the authors for clearly stating the r>2 restriction and for openly flagging the unresolved step in Theorem 4.15. On the other hand, the main theorem depends on unpublished work [Wen19] by the second author for the key combinatorial control, and no machine-checked proof or code is supplied; a reader cannot verify the long constant-term computations without substantial effort.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4.2.2, proof of Theorem 4.15] The proof of Theorem 4.15 rests on an unproved nesting assertion. After Lemma 4.12 is used to describe the coefficients in (4.32)–(4.33), the text says: 'It should then be possible to produce such a µ′ that has nonzero coefficient in the expansion for ê_quot(λ′).' This sentence is the exact point where the paper must show that the relevant tableaux are strongly row-strict and strongly column-strict λ-tabloidizable. Without a proof of this nesting step, the containments displayed after it do not follow, Proposition 2.9 cannot be applied, and the conclusion that V(Hλ ⊗ e_core(λ)) is a scalar multiple of Eλ ⊗ e_core(λ) is unsupported. Because Theorem 1.1 and all of Section 6 depend on this scalar-multiple statement, this is a load-bearing gap. The authors should either supply the missing argument or replace the appeal to [Wen19, Section 5] with a precise, verifiable statement of the exact combinatorial lemma needed, together with a proof or a citation to a published source.
  2. [§4.3.4, base case of Theorem 4.18] The base-case computation establishing (4.43) is central but is written in the style of a 'strategy' rather than a complete proof. In particular, the paragraphs following (4.52)–(4.56) assert that the only surviving terms come from a single long t^{-1}-chain or q^{-1}-chain, and that the other L-shaped terms vanish because α is an r-core; the vanishing argument is described in prose and with Figure 3 rather than as a formal induction on colors. Since this computation proves the base case that determines V(1⊗eα) = Eα⊗eα, I ask the authors to turn this into a complete argument, or to give a precise reference to a published proof. The same request applies to the final cancellation leading to (4.59), where the claim that 'nothing is lost if we expand the poles in positive powers' needs justification.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§1 and §6] The main theorem is stated only for r>2, but this restriction is not repeated in the statements of the applications in Section 6, such as Theorem 6.1 and Corollary 6.2. A standing hypothesis at the beginning of Section 6 would remove the ambiguity.
  2. [Footnote 1, §1.2] The paper explicitly says that the r=2 case is expected to hold but requires analogues of [Tsy19] and [Wen19]. Since the title and abstract do not mention the restriction, I recommend stating prominently in the abstract that the results are proved for r>2 and that r=2 remains open.
  3. [Title and Corollary 4.19] There are several typographical slips: the title contains 'WREA TH' and the abstract contains 'wreat h', and Corollary 4.19 has an unmatched parenthesis in the product condition '¯c□=0)'. These should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The central Tesler identity rests on a load-bearing self-citation: Theorem 4.15 imports the decisive combinatorial control from the second author's unpublished [Wen19], where the key nesting step is left as 'It should then be possible.'

  1. self citation load bearing [Theorem 4.15 proof, Section 4.2.2 (around equations (4.32)-(4.33))]
    "This theorem follows from the combinatorial results of Section 5 from [Wen19]. ... It should then be possible to produce such a µ′ that has nonzero coefficient in the expansion for ˆequot(λ′)."

    The theorem that makes V(Hλ) a scalar multiple of Eλ, and thereby converts the abstract map V into the Tesler identity (1.6), is justified entirely by [Wen19]'s classification of strongly row-strict and column-strict λ-tabloidizable partitions. The required inclusions V(span{ê_quot(µ) : µ ≤_r λ}) ⊂ span{E_µ : µ ≤_r λ} and the column-strict analogue depend on the nested-tableau construction, and at the exact point where a nonzero µ′ must be produced the proof says only that it 'should then be possible.' Since [Wen19] is the second author's unpublished preprint and the nesting step is not reproved here, the scalar-multiple conclusion is carried by a load-bearing self-citation with an explicitly unfinished argument.

full rationale

The paper's main operator identity (1.6) is not a fit or a definitional equivalence. The explicit formula for V in Theorem 4.18 is derived from commutation relations and a base-case computation, and the Section 6 applications (duality, evaluation formulas, interpolation, Kostka coefficients, bispectral series) are formal consequences of the identity once it is established. The circularity burden is concentrated in Theorem 4.15, where the conclusion that V(Hλ ⊗ e_core(λ)) is a scalar multiple of Eλ ⊗ e_core(λ) is imported from [Wen19, Section 5] and Proposition 2.9, both due to the second author. The paper itself flags the unproved nesting step with 'It should then be possible,' so the derivation is not self-contained at its load-bearing point. Because the explicit operator formula and the surrounding algebraic structure provide independent content beyond the self-cited combinatorial classification, the appropriate finding is moderate self-citation load-bearing rather than full circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted: q, t, d, and the r-core α are inputs. The central proof imports substantial results from earlier preprints, including the same authors' [Wen19] and [OSW22]; these are treated as axioms here. No new physical or algebraic entities are introduced beyond new families of functions (interpolation polynomials) and operators.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Wreath Macdonald polynomials exist and form a triangular basis of Λ⊗r_{q,t} for each fixed r-core (Bezrukavnikov-Finkelberg; Wen).
    Definition 2.8 and Proposition 2.9 assume these results from [BF14, Wen19]; the whole basis of wreath Macdonald theory rests on them.
  • domain assumption The vertex and Fock representations of U_{q,d}(sl_r) are related by Tsymbaliuk's isomorphism, and Hλ ⊗ e_core(λ) diagonalize the image of the horizontal Heisenberg algebra in W.
    Theorem 3.8 from [Wen19] is imported wholesale; it is needed for Corollaries 3.22 and 3.24 that give the eigenvalues of Delta operators.
  • domain assumption Explicit shuffle-algebra formulas for Delta operators in [OSW22] are correct (Theorems 3.27, 3.28, Lemma 3.29).
    The column, row, and Feigin-Tsymbaliuk operator expressions in Section 3.5 are quoted from [OSW22] and are used to prove the Tesler identity.
  • domain assumption The combinatorial characterization of coefficients in V(ê_quot(λ)) by strongly row-strict and column-strict r-tabloidizable tableaux from [Wen19, Section 5] holds.
    The proof of Theorem 4.15 uses this to conclude that V(Hλ) is a scalar multiple of Eλ; the paper itself flags a loose step with 'It should then be possible'.
  • domain assumption The quantum toroidal algebra presentation and Miki automorphism as described by Miki and Tsymbaliuk hold for r>2; for r=2 the presentation differs and is not covered.
    Section 3 assumes r>2 for U_{q,d}(sl_r) with (q,t)=(qd,d^{-1}), so the main theorem excludes r=2.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tesler identities for wreath Macdonald polynomials." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BFIHBV7E

@misc{pith2026250501732,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tesler identities for wreath Macdonald polynomials},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BFIHBV7E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01732}
}
abstract

We give an explicit formula for an operator that sends a wreath Macdonald polynomial to the delta function at a character associated to its partition. This allows us to prove many new results for wreath Macdonald polynomials, especially pertaining to reciprocity: Macdonald--Koornwinder duality, evaluation formulas, etc. Additionally, we initiate the study of wreath interpolation Macdonald polynomials, derive a plethystic formula for wreath $(q,t)$-Kostka coefficients, and present series solutions to the bispectral problem involving wreath Macdonald operators. Our approach is to use the eigenoperators for wreath Macdonald polynomials that have been produced from quantum toroidal and shuffle algebras.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.01732 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The Maya diagram for the partition (4, 2, 2). Proposition 2.1. The Young–Maya correspondence is a bijection between partitions and charge 0 Maya diagrams. 2.1.3. Cores and quotients. The decomposition of a partition into its r-core and r-quotient is a basic ingre￾dient in the definition of wreath Macdonald polynomials. We describe it here in terms of the Maya diagram. Given λ and 0 ≤ i ≤ r − 1, we take the following… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The quotient decomposition for λ = (4, 2, 2) when r = 3. m(λ): · · · 3 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 · · · ↓ · · · 2 1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 · · · We can obtain any r-core in this way, and so they are in bijection with the tuples of charges (c0, . . . , cr−1). Note that we have c0 + · · · + cr−1 = 0 due to m(λ) being charge zero. Thus, we naturally view (c0, . . . , cr−1) as an element of the Ar−1 root lattice Q. Proposition 2.2.… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Two L -shaped segments that avoid the addable boxes of α. The black squares are the χ-poles while the chains of t −1 - and q −1 -poles are indicated by the gray squares. If a segment starting at zi has χ-pole northwest of the segment ending at zi+1, then α has a removable ribbon of length nr for some n, as illustrated by the dashed line. First, it is impossible that all the variables are evaluated in one L shape tha… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Five-Term Relations for wreath Macdonald polynomials and tableau formulas for Pieri coefficients

    math.CO 2025-05 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    New five-term operator relations for wreath Macdonald polynomials give tableau-style recursions that compute all Pieri and dual Pieri coefficients from explicit degree-one rules.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Wreath M acdonald polynomials, quiver varieties, and quasimap counts

    Jeffrey Ayers and Hunter Dinkins. Wreath M acdonald polynomials, quiver varieties, and quasimap counts. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07399 , 2024

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Wreath M acdonald polynomials and the categorical M c K ay correspondence

    Roman Bezrukavnikov and Michael Finkelberg. Wreath M acdonald polynomials and the categorical M c K ay correspondence. Camb. J. Math. , 2(2):163--190, 2014. With an appendix by Vadim Vologodsky

    work page 2014

  3. [3]

    Macdonald's evaluation conjectures and difference F ourier transform

    Ivan Cherednik. Macdonald's evaluation conjectures and difference F ourier transform. Invent. Math. , 122(1):119--145, 1995

    work page 1995

  4. [4]

    Difference M acdonald- M ehta conjecture

    Ivan Cherednik. Difference M acdonald- M ehta conjecture. Internat. Math. Res. Notices , (10):449--467, 1997

    work page 1997

  5. [5]

    Five dimensional gauge theories and vertex operators

    Erik Carlsson, Nikita Nekrasov, and Andrei Okounkov. Five dimensional gauge theories and vertex operators. Mosc. Math. J. , 14(1):39--61, 170, 2014

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Feigin, M

    B. Feigin, M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, and E. Mukhin. Representations of quantum toroidal gl _n . J. Algebra , 380:78--108, 2013

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    Bethe subalgebras of U_q( gl _n) via shuffle algebras

    Boris Feigin and Alexander Tsymbaliuk. Bethe subalgebras of U_q( gl _n) via shuffle algebras. Selecta Math. (N.S.) , 22(2):979--1011, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    A. M. Garsia and M. Haiman. A remarkable q,t - C atalan sequence and q - L agrange inversion. J. Algebraic Combin. , 5(3):191--244, 1996

    1996

Show all 27 references
  1. [9]

    Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler

    Adriano M. Garsia, Mark Haiman, and Glenn Tesler. Explicit plethystic formulas for M acdonald q,t - K ostka coefficients. S\' e m. Lothar. Combin. , 42:Art. B42m, 45, 1999. The Andrews Festschrift (Maratea, 1998)

    1999

  2. [10]

    Five-term relation and M acdonald polynomials

    Adriano Garsia and Anton Mellit. Five-term relation and M acdonald polynomials. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A , 163:182--194, 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    A. M. Garsia and G. Tesler. Plethystic formulas for M acdonald q,t - K ostka coefficients. Adv. Math. , 123(2):144--222, 1996

    1996

  4. [12]

    Combinatorics, symmetric functions, and H ilbert schemes

    Mark Haiman. Combinatorics, symmetric functions, and H ilbert schemes. In Current developments in mathematics, 2002 , pages 39--111. Int. Press, Somerville, MA, 2003

    2002

  5. [13]

    q -hypergeometric series and M acdonald functions

    Nai Huan Jing. q -hypergeometric series and M acdonald functions. J. Algebraic Combin. , 3(3):291--305, 1994

    1994

  6. [14]

    Integrality of two variable K ostka functions

    Friedrich Knop. Integrality of two variable K ostka functions. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 482:177--189, 1997

    1997

  7. [15]

    I. G. Macdonald. Symmetric functions and H all polynomials . Oxford Classic Texts in the Physical Sciences. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, second edition, 2015. With contribution by A. V. Zelevinsky and a foreword by Richard Stanley, Reprint of the 200...

    2015

  8. [16]

    Toroidal braid group action and an automorphism of toroidal algebra U_q( sl _ n+1, tor )\ (n 2)

    Kei Miki. Toroidal braid group action and an automorphism of toroidal algebra U_q( sl _ n+1, tor )\ (n 2) . Lett. Math. Phys. , 47(4):365--378, 1999

    1999

  9. [17]

    Quantum toroidal and shuffle algebras

    Andrei Negu t . Quantum toroidal and shuffle algebras. Adv. Math. , 372:107288, 60, 2020

    2020

  10. [18]

    Wreath M acdonald polynomials, a survey

    Daniel Orr and Mark Shimozono. Wreath M acdonald polynomials, a survey. arXiv preprint arXiv:2308.12166 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Wreath M acdonald operators

    Daniel Orr, Mark Shimozono, and Joshua Jeishing Wen. Wreath M acdonald operators. arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.03851 , 2022

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Interpolation, integrality, and a generalization of M acdonald's polynomials

    Siddhartha Sahi. Interpolation, integrality, and a generalization of M acdonald's polynomials. Internat. Math. Res. Notices , (10):457--471, 1996

    1996

  13. [21]

    Quantum toroidal algebras and their vertex representations

    Yoshihisa Saito. Quantum toroidal algebras and their vertex representations. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. , 34(2):155--177, 1998

    1998

  14. [22]

    J. V. Stokman. The c -function expansion of a basic hypergeometric function associated to root systems. Ann. of Math. (2) , 179(1):253--299, 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    The elliptic H all algebra and the K -theory of the H ilbert scheme of A^2

    Olivier Schiffmann and Eric Vasserot. The elliptic H all algebra and the K -theory of the H ilbert scheme of A^2 . Duke Math. J. , 162(2):279--366, 2013

    2013

  16. [24]

    Several realizations of F ock modules for toroidal U _ q,d ( sl _n)

    Alexander Tsymbaliuk. Several realizations of F ock modules for toroidal U _ q,d ( sl _n) . Algebr. Represent. Theory , 22(1):177--209, 2019

    2019

  17. [25]

    Varagnolo and E

    M. Varagnolo and E. Vasserot. On the K -theory of the cyclic quiver variety. Internat. Math. Res. Notices , (18):1005--1028, 1999

    1999

  18. [26]

    Wreath M acdonald polynomials as eigenstates

    Joshua Jeishing Wen. Wreath M acdonald polynomials as eigenstates. arXiv preprint arXiv:1904.05015 , 2019

    1904 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Shuffle approach to wreath P ieri operators

    Joshua Jeishing Wen. Shuffle approach to wreath P ieri operators. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.06007 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.