Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

Deformation cohomology of Nijenhuis algebras and applications to extensions, inducibility of automorphisms and homotopy algebras

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A new cohomology controls simultaneous deformations of Nijenhuis algebras.

desk verdict A useful mapping-cone cohomology for Nijenhuis algebras, with a load-bearing sign/coefficient error in the displayed 2-cocycle condition that invalidates the extension proof as written but looks repairable. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15569 v1 pith:XESZXZ7D submitted 2024-12-20 math.RA math.KTmath.QAmath.RT

Apurba Das This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RAmath.KTmath.QAmath.RT MSC 16E4016S8016D2016W2016W99
keywords NijenhuisoperatorsalgebrasCohomologyDeformationsAbelianextensionsWellsmapHomotopyNS-algebras
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 introduces a cohomology theory for Nijenhuis algebras — associative algebras equipped with a linear operator $N$ satisfying the Nijenhuis relation $N(a)\cdot N(b)=N(N(a)\cdot b+a\cdot N(b)-N(a\cdot b))$. Its central claim is that this cohomology, denoted $H^*_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$, controls simultaneous deformations of both the associative product and the operator $N$, so a first-order deformation is a 2-cocycle and equivalent infinitesimal deformations correspond to cohomology classes. The paper further proves that the second cohomology group with coefficients in a Nijenhuis bimodule is in bijection with isomorphism classes of abelian extensions, and that the inducibility of a pair of automorphisms in such an extension is governed by a Wells-type map into this second cohomology. For homotopy versions, skeletal 2-term homotopy Nijenhuis algebras are shown to be classified by third cocycles, strict ones by crossed modules, and strict homotopy Nijenhuis operators on $A_\infty$-algebras are shown to induce $\mathrm{NS}_\infty$-algebras.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the associative analogue of the Frölicher-Nijenhuis bracket on the graded space $\oplus_{n\ge 1}\mathrm{Hom}(A^{\otimes n}, A)$, for which a linear map $N:A\to A$ is a Nijenhuis operator exactly when it is a Maurer-Cartan element, i.e. $[N,N]_{\mathrm{FN}}=0$. This turns the operator $N$ into a differential $d_N=[N,-]_{\mathrm{FN}}$, giving a cochain complex attached to the operator. A map $\partial_N$ from the Hochschild complex of the associative algebra into this operator complex is then shown to commute with the differentials, and the reduced mapping cone of $\partial_N$ is the cochain complex whose cohomology is $H^*_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$. The Wells-type map $W$ sends a compatible pair of automorphisms of kernel and base to the cohomology class of a difference of 2-cocycles, and its vanishing is the obstruction to lifting the pair to an automorphism of the extension.

What would settle it

Work through the bracket in Theorem 2.9 for $m=n=2$ on a small associative algebra, say the $2\times2$ matrix algebra or $k[x]/(x^2)$, and check the graded Jacobi identity and the Maurer-Cartan equivalence directly; any failure there would invalidate the differential $d_N$ and, with it, the mapping-cone cohomology and Theorems 4.1–4.3 and 5.3.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the correct invariant for a Nijenhuis algebra is a single cochain complex built as the mapping cone from the Hochschild complex of the underlying associative algebra to the cochain complex induced by the Nijenhuis operator via the Frölicher-Nijenhuis bracket. With this complex, the infinitesimal of any formal deformation is a 2-cocycle, the cohomology class of the infinitesimal is invariant under equivalence, and the equivalence classes of infinitesimal deformations are in bijection with $H^2_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$. The same second cohomology, with coefficients in a Nijenhuis bimodule, parametrizes abelian extensions, and a pair of automorphisms of the base and kernel in an abelian extension is inducible exactly when it is compatible and its Wells-map image vanishes. In the homotopy setting, the paper establishes that skeletal 2-term homotopy Nijenhuis algebras correspond to 3-cocycles and strict ones to crossed modules, and that a strict homotopy Nijenhuis operator on an $A_\infty$-algebra produces an $\mathrm{NS}_\infty$-algebra.

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction rests on the unpublished theorem that the explicit Frölicher-Nijenhuis bracket in Theorem 2.9 is a graded Lie bracket and that its Maurer-Cartan elements are exactly Nijenhuis operators; if that bracket fails to satisfy the Jacobi identity or has different signs, the cochain complex and all classifications built on it would need revision.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the cohomology is as claimed, formal deformations of a Nijenhuis algebra have an invariant in $H^2_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$, and two infinitesimal deformations are equivalent exactly when their 2-cocycles are cohomologous.
  • Abelian extensions of a Nijenhuis algebra by a Nijenhuis bimodule are classified by $H^2_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$, so extension problems reduce to computing this cohomology.
  • The Wells exact sequence gives a concrete obstruction: an automorphism pair lifts if and only if it is compatible and its Wells class is zero, yielding a short exact sequence connecting automorphism groups, compatible pairs, and $H^2_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$.
  • Skeletal 2-term homotopy Nijenhuis algebras are equivalent data to third cocycles of Nijenhuis algebras, while strict 2-term ones are equivalent to crossed modules of Nijenhuis algebras.
  • Every strict homotopy Nijenhuis operator on an $A_\infty$-algebra produces an $\mathrm{NS}_\infty$-algebra and a deformed $A_\infty$-algebra, generalizing the classical Nijenhuis-to-NS construction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One testable consequence not drawn in the paper: when $N$ is the identity operator, the operator-side complex is trivial, so $H^*_{\mathrm{NAlg}}$ should reduce to the Hochschild cohomology of the associative algebra; verifying this would give a cheap check of the mapping-cone construction.
  • The paper leaves the full $L_\infty$-structure on the mapping cone as an open question (Remark 3.15); if the cup-product and Frölicher-Nijenhuis brackets can be combined into higher operations, the resulting $L_\infty$-algebra would provide a complete obstruction theory for higher-order deformations.
  • A generic (non-strict) homotopy Nijenhuis operator on an arbitrary $A_\infty$-algebra is not defined here; defining it via homotopy Maurer-Cartan elements of a suitable $L_\infty$-algebra of multiderivations would be a direct continuation, with the strict case as the zero-higher-bracket limit.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a cohomology theory for Nijenhuis algebras, built as the mapping cone of a chain map from the Hochschild complex of the underlying associative algebra to a complex associated with the Nijenhuis operator. It claims that this cohomology controls simultaneous deformations of the algebra structure and the Nijenhuis operator (Theorems 4.1 and 4.2), classifies abelian extensions of Nijenhuis algebras (Theorem 4.3), and yields a Wells-type obstruction to the inducibility of pairs of automorphisms (Theorems 5.3 and 5.4). The final sections define 2-term homotopy Nijenhuis algebras, characterize skeletal and strict examples via 3-cocycles and crossed modules, introduce strict homotopy Nijenhuis operators on A-infinity algebras, and prove that they induce NS-infinity algebras.

Significance. If the results are correct, this is a substantial and useful contribution: it provides a single cohomological invariant for Nijenhuis algebras that packages deformation, extension, automorphism-obstruction, and homotopy-algebra data in one framework. The mapping-cone construction is natural and the scope is broad, including applications to crossed modules and NS-infinity algebras. The paper is also honest about several lengthy computations being left to the reader. However, because at least one displayed 2-cocycle condition is incorrect and several load-bearing verifications are omitted, the claims are not yet fully supported as written.

major comments (4)
  1. [Remark 3.14(i), Theorem 4.3] Equation (12) misstates the 2-cocycle condition for a pair (χ,F). From the definitions (8) and (9), δ_{NAlg}(χ,F)=0 for n=2 is equivalent to N(a)⊲F(b)+F(a)⊳N(b)−F(N(a)·b+a·N(b)−N(a·b))−N_M(F(a)⊳b+a⊲F(b)−F(a·b)) + χ(N(a),N(b)) − N_M(χ(N(a),b)) − N_M(χ(a,N(b))) + N_M^2(χ(a,b)) = 0. The printed equation ends with −N_M(χ(a·b)); reading χ(a·b) as χ(a,b), this gives +N_M(χ(a,b)) rather than the required +N_M^2(χ(a,b)). Since the proof of Theorem 4.3 and the cocycle-invariance statement in Proposition 5.2 explicitly use this condition, the extension bijection and the Wells obstruction are not proved as written. The fix is local, but it must be applied consistently in the proofs and in Remark 3.14(i).
  2. [Proposition 3.11] The identity (d_{N,N_M}∘∂)(f)=(∂∘δ_Hoch)(f) is asserted with the proof omitted, described only as 'only lengthy calculations'. This identity is the reason that δ_{NAlg}^2=0 for both the unreduced and reduced complexes, and therefore underlies the well-definedness of H^*_{NAlg}, the deformation classification in Theorems 4.1–4.2, and the extension bijection in Theorem 4.3. The paper should provide a complete proof or a detailed computational appendix; without it, the main differential is not self-contained.
  3. [Theorem 2.9] The foundational theorem, that the Frölicher–Nijenhuis bracket makes ⊕_n Hom(A^{⊗n},A) a graded Lie algebra and that Nijenhuis operators are its Maurer–Cartan elements, is cited to an unpublished manuscript [3] ('In preparation'). The cochain complex of a Nijenhuis operator, the mapping-cone cohomology, and all subsequent applications are built on this theorem. The paper should include a proof of this theorem or provide a reference to a publicly available source; otherwise the central construction is not independently verifiable.
  4. [Theorem 6.14] The proof verifies the NS∞ identities for [r]=[1],...,[k] and then states that the remaining case [r]=[k+1] follows by 'a straightforward but tedious computation'. As this theorem is the main result of the homotopy section and the basis for the subsequent claim that strict homotopy Nijenhuis operators induce deformed A∞-algebras, the computation should be written out or the key cancellations should be indicated in enough detail to be checked.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 3, definition of C^1_{NAlg}] In the definition of the reduced complex, the notation 'C^1_{NAlg}((A,M);(M,N_M))' appears to contain a typo; the first argument should presumably be (A,N).
  2. [Remark 3.14(i)] The symbol χ(a·b) in equation (12) is not defined; it should be χ(a,b).
  3. [Throughout] The title and several headings contain 'Nij enhuis' with an unintended space; please fix the spacing.
  4. [Example 2.10] The statement that d_{Id}=0 follows directly from (4) and (5); the example is correct, but the sentence 'the cohomology groups are simply Hom(A^{⊗n},A)' is slightly informal because the differential vanishes, so the cohomology is exactly the space of cochains.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The cohomology construction is founded on an unpublished self-cited Frölicher–Nijenhuis bracket theorem, but the deformation and extension classifications are derived from the complex rather than assumed.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 2, Theorem 2.9 and the paragraph immediately before it]
    "With all the above notations, the main result of [3] can be stated as follows. 2.9. Theorem. Let (A, ·) be an associative algebra. (i) ... define a bracket [ , ]FN ... Then (⊕∞ n=1 Hom(A⊗n,A), [ , ]FN) is a graded Lie algebra. (ii) A linear map N : A → A is a Nijenhuis operator ... if and only if N ... is a Maurer-Cartan element. As N is a Nijenhuis operator (i.e. [N,N]FN = 0), it turns out that (dN )2 = 0."

    The differential of the Nijenhuis-operator complex is defined by d_N(f)=[N,f]_FN, and the claim (d_N)^2=0 is justified by the graded-Lie/Maurer-Cartan statement of Theorem 2.9. The paper does not prove this theorem; it presents it as 'the main result of [3]', an unpublished companion paper by Baishya and Das. Every later construction — the relative complex d_{N,N_M}, the map ∂_{N,N_M}, and the Nijenhuis-algebra mapping-cone complex — is built on this cited result. Thus the central cohomology machine is load-bearing on a self-citation that is not independently verified in the manuscript. The deformation and extension bijections are nevertheless genuine theorems about that complex, not restatements of [3], so the circularity is partial.

full rationale

There are no fitted parameters, data-derived predictions, or renamed empirical patterns in this paper; it is a pure algebraic construction. The infinitesimal-deformation bijection (Theorem 4.2) is obtained by reading off the first-order deformation equations as the 2-cocycle condition and equivalence as the 2-coboundary condition; the abelian-extension bijection (Theorem 4.3) is proved by passing from an extension to a cocycle via a section and back by building the semidirect-style product from any cocycle. These are direct cohomology-classification arguments, not circular reductions. The one genuine circularity concern is Theorem 2.9: the graded Lie bracket and Maurer-Cartan characterization of Nijenhuis operators is imported from reference [3], an unpublished paper by the same author, and it is load-bearing for the entire cochain complex. This raises the score to 4 rather than 0-2. The additional self-citations ([7], [8]) support peripheral comparisons with NS-algebras and Dend-infinity algebras and do not carry the main deformation/extension claims. The apparent mismatch in Remark 3.14(i)/equation (12) between the displayed 2-cocycle condition and the formal differential (8)-(9) is a possible mathematical error, but it is a correctness issue, not a circularity, and does not affect this score.

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

No numerical free parameters are present. The central construction relies on standard homological algebra plus two external results from the author's prior work, one of which is unpublished. The paper introduces new algebraic definitions, such as the cohomology of Nijenhuis algebras and NS-infinity algebras, but these are explicitly defined structures rather than unsupported postulated entities.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Working over a field k of characteristic 0.
    Stated in Section 1. Standard setting for cohomology and tensor products; the paper uses characteristic 0 throughout.
  • domain assumption The Frolicher-Nijenhuis bracket theorem, Theorem 2.9: the direct sum of Hom(A tensor power n, A) with the Frolicher-Nijenhuis bracket is a graded Lie algebra, and Nijenhuis operators are Maurer-Cartan elements.
    Invoked in Section 2 to define the differential and the cochain complex of a Nijenhuis operator. Attributed to unpublished reference [3] by the same author.
  • domain assumption NS-algebra cohomology and its comparison to Hochschild cohomology from reference [7, Theorem 5.4].
    Used in Proposition 2.16 and Theorem 2.17 to map the cohomology of the Nijenhuis operator to the cohomology of the induced NS-algebra and then to Hochschild cohomology of the deformed algebra. Reference [7] is published and by the same author.
  • standard math Standard mapping cone construction for cochain complexes.
    Used in Section 3 to form the cochain complex C*_{NAlg} from the Hochschild complex and the Nijenhuis-operator complex. No proof is given because it is standard homological algebra.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Deformation cohomology of Nijenhuis algebras and applications to extensions, inducibility of automorphisms and homotopy algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XESZXZ7D

@misc{pith2026241215569,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Deformation cohomology of Nijenhuis algebras and applications to extensions, inducibility of automorphisms and homotopy algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XESZXZ7D}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15569}
}
abstract

Our primary aim in this paper is to introduce and study the cohomology of a Nijenhuis operator and of a Nijenhuis algebra. Our cohomology of a Nijenhuis algebra controls the simultaneous deformations of the underlying associative structure and the Nijenhuis operator. We interpret the second cohomology group as the space of all isomorphism classes of abelian extensions. Then we study the inducibility of a pair of Nijenhuis algebra automorphisms in a given abelian extension and show that the corresponding obstruction can be seen as the image of a suitable Wells-type map. We also consider skeletal and strict $2$-term homotopy Nijenhuis algebras and characterize them by third cocycles of Nijenhuis algebras and crossed modules of Nijenhuis algebras, respectively. Finally, we introduce strict homotopy Nijenhuis operators on $A_\infty$-algebras and show that they induce $NS_\infty$-algebras.

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

  1. Deformations theory and minimal model of operads for Nijenhuis algebras morphisms

    math.RA 2025-08 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new cohomology theory for Nijenhuis algebra morphisms is introduced, with deformation and operadic minimal model consequences.

  2. Nijenhuis modules and the ring of Nijenhuis operators

    math.RT 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Nijenhuis modules are shown to be the same as modules over a constructed ring U_N(A), and the category is claimed to have enough projective, injective, and flat objects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 39 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [3]

    Baishya and A

    A. Baishya and A. Das, Fr¨ olicher-Nijenhuis bracket and derived bracket associated to a nonsymmetric operad with multiplication, In preparation

    work page

  2. [1]

    M. J. Azimi, C. Laurent-Gengoux and J. M. Nunes da Costa, N ijenhuis forms on L∞ -algebras and Poisson geometry, Diff. Geom. Appl. 38 (2015), 69-113

    work page 2015

  3. [2]

    Baishya and A

    A. Baishya and A. Das, Nijenhuis deformations of Poisson algebras and F -manifold algebras, Online available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2403.18496

    arXiv

  4. [4]

    V. G. Bardakov and M. Singh, Extensions and automorphism s of Lie algebras, J. Algebra Appl. 16 (2017), 1750162

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    J. F. Cari˜ nena, J. Grabowski and G. Marmo, Quantum Bi-Ha miltonian systems, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 15 (2000), 4797-4810

    work page 2000

  6. [6]

    Das, Deformations of associative Rota-Baxter operat ors, J

    A. Das, Deformations of associative Rota-Baxter operat ors, J. Algebra 560 (2020) 144-180

    work page 2020

  7. [7]

    Das, Cohomology and deformations of twisted Rota-Bax ter operators and NS-algebras, J

    A. Das, Cohomology and deformations of twisted Rota-Bax ter operators and NS-algebras, J. Homotopy Relat. Struct. 17 (2022) 233-262

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Das, Cohomology and deformations of dendriform algeb ras, and Dend∞ -algebras, Comm

    A. Das, Cohomology and deformations of dendriform algeb ras, and Dend∞ -algebras, Comm. Algebra 50 (2022), 1544-1567

    work page 2022

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Das and S

    A. Das and S. K. Mishra, The L∞ -deformations of associative Rota-Baxter algebras and hom otopy Rota-Baxter operators, J. Math. Phys. Vol. 63, Issue 5 (2022) 051703

    2022

  2. [10]

    Ebrahimi-Fard, Loday-type algebras and the Rota-Ba xter relation, Lett

    K. Ebrahimi-Fard, Loday-type algebras and the Rota-Ba xter relation, Lett. Math. Phys. 61, no. 2 (2002), 139-147

    2002

  3. [11]

    Ebrahimi-Fard, On the associative Nijenhuis relati on, Elec

    K. Ebrahimi-Fard, On the associative Nijenhuis relati on, Elec. J. Combin. 11 (2004), R38

    2004

  4. [12]

    Ebrahimi-Fard and P

    K. Ebrahimi-Fard and P. Leroux, Generalized shuffles rel ated to Nijenhuis and TD-algebras, Comm. Algebra 37 (2009), 3064-3094

    2009

  5. [13]

    Fiorenza and M

    D. Fiorenza and M. Manetti, L∞ -structures on mapping cones, Algebra Number Theory 1 (3) (2007), 301-330

    2007

  6. [14]

    Fr´ egier, M

    Y. Fr´ egier, M. Markl and D. Yau, The L∞ -deformation complex of diagrams of algebras, New York J. Math. 15 (2009), 353-392

    2009

  7. [15]

    Fr´ egier and M

    Y. Fr´ egier and M. Zambon, Simultaneous deformations o f algebras and morphisms via derived brackets, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 219 (2015), 5344-5362

    2015

  8. [16]

    Gerstenhaber, On the deformation of rings and algebr as, Ann

    M. Gerstenhaber, On the deformation of rings and algebr as, Ann. of Math. (2) 79 (1964), 59-103

    1964

  9. [17]

    Gerstenhaber and S

    M. Gerstenhaber and S. D. Schack, On the deformation of a lgebra morphisms and diagrams, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 279 (1983), no. 1, 1-50. 30 APURBA DAS

    1983

  10. [18]

    Guo, What is

    L. Guo, What is ... a Rota-Baxter algebra? Notices of the AMS 56 (2009), 1436-1437

    2009

  11. [19]

    Guo and Z

    L. Guo and Z. Lin, Representations and modules of Rota-B axter algebras, Asian J. Math. 25 (2021), 841-870

    2021

  12. [20]

    Hochschild, On the cohomology groups of an associati ve algebra, Ann

    G. Hochschild, On the cohomology groups of an associati ve algebra, Ann. Math. (2) 46 (1945), 58-67

    1945

  13. [21]

    Jin and H

    P. Jin and H. Liu, The W ells exact sequence for the automo rphism group of a group extension, J. Algebra 324 (2010), 1219-1228

    2010

  14. [22]

    Keller, Introduction to A∞ -algebras and modules, Homology Homotopy Appl

    B. Keller, Introduction to A∞ -algebras and modules, Homology Homotopy Appl. 3 (2001), 1-35

    2001

  15. [23]

    Kosmann-Schwarzbach and F

    Y. Kosmann-Schwarzbach and F. Magri, Poisson-Nijenhu is structures, Annales de l’I.H.P. Physique th´ eorique53, no. 1 (1990), 35-81

    1990

  16. [24]

    Lazarev, Y

    A. Lazarev, Y. Sheng and R. Tang, Deformations and homot opy theory of relative Rota–Baxter Lie algebras, Commun. Math. Phys. 383 (2021), 595-631

    2021

  17. [25]

    Lei and L

    P. Lei and L. Guo, Nijenhuis algebras, NS algebras, and N -dendriform algebras, Front. Math. China 7 (2012), 827–846

    2012

  18. [26]

    Leroux, Construction of Nijenhuis operators and den driform trialgebras, Int

    P. Leroux, Construction of Nijenhuis operators and den driform trialgebras, Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 49 (2004), 2595-2615

    2004

  19. [27]

    J. Liu, C. Bai and Y. Sheng, Compatible O-operators on bimodules over associative algebras, J. Algebra 532 (2019), 80-118

    2019

  20. [28]

    J. Liu, Y. Sheng, Y. Zhou and C. Bai, Nijenhuis operators on n-Lie algebras, Commun. Theor. Phys. 65 (2016), pp. 659

    2016

  21. [29]

    Loday, Dialgebras, Dialgebras and related operads , 7-66, Lecture Notes in Math., 1763, Springer, Berlin , 2001

    J.-L. Loday, Dialgebras, Dialgebras and related operads , 7-66, Lecture Notes in Math., 1763, Springer, Berlin , 2001

    2001

  22. [30]

    Loday, On the operad of associative algebras with derivation, Georgian Math

    J.-L. Loday, On the operad of associative algebras with derivation, Georgian Math. J. 17 (2010), 347-372

    2010

  23. [31]

    Ma and L

    T. Ma and L. Long, Nijenhuis operators and associative D-bialgebras, J. Algebra 639 (2024), 150-186

    2024

  24. [32]

    S. K. Mishra, A. Das and S. K. Hazra, Non-abelian extensi ons of Rota-Baxter Lie algebras and inducibility of automorphisms, Linear Alg. Appl. 669 (2023), 147-174

    2023

  25. [33]

    Mondal and R

    B. Mondal and R. Saha, Nijenhuis operators on Leibniz al gebras, J. Geom. Phys. 196 (2024), 105057

    2024

  26. [34]

    Nijenhuis and R

    A. Nijenhuis and R. W. Richardson, Cohomology and defor mations in graded Lie algebras, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 72 (1966), 1-29

    1966

  27. [35]

    X. S. Peng, Y. Zhang, X. Gao and Y. F. Luo, Dendriform-Nij enhuis bialgebras and DN-associative Yang-Baxter equations, J. Algebra 575 (2021), 78-126

    2021

  28. [36]

    R. Tang, C. Bai, L. Guo and Y. Sheng, Deformations and the ir controlling cohomologies of O-operators, Commun. Math. Phys. 368 (2019), 665-700

    2019

  29. [37]

    Uchino, Quantum analogy of Poisson geometry, relate d dendriform algebras and Rota-Baxter operators, Lett

    K. Uchino, Quantum analogy of Poisson geometry, relate d dendriform algebras and Rota-Baxter operators, Lett. Math. Phys. 85, no. 2-3 (2008), 91-109

    2008

  30. [38]

    W ang, Y

    Q. W ang, Y. Sheng, C. Bai and J. Liu, Nijenhuis operators on pre-Lie algebras, Commun. Contemp. Math. 21, No. 07 (2019), 1850050

    2019

  31. [39]

    W ells, Automorphisms of group extensions, Trans

    C. W ells, Automorphisms of group extensions, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 155 (1971), 189-194

    1971

  32. [40]

    Yuan, O-operators and Nijenhuis operators of associative conform al algebras, J

    L. Yuan, O-operators and Nijenhuis operators of associative conform al algebras, J. Algebra 609 (2022), 245-291. Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology , Kharagpur 721302, West Bengal, India Email address : apurbadas348@gmail.com, apurbadas348@maths.iitkgp.ac .in

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.