2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.aim.2015.08.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Orthogonally spherical objects and spherical fibrations

Abstract: Abstract. We introduce a relative version of the spherical objects of Seidel and Thomas [ST01]. Define an object E in the derived category D(Z × X) to be spherical over Z if the corresponding functor from D(Z) to D(X) gives rise to autoequivalences of D(Z) and D(X) in a certain natural way. Most known examples come from subschemes of X fibred over Z. This categorifies to the notion of an object of D(Z × X) orthogonal over Z. We prove that such an object is spherical over Z if and only if it possesses certain c… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Dually, we find that another window shift autoequivalence, namely ω −1,0 , can be described in terms of a cotwist [AL10] around a spherical functor with source D b (X + ): we defer a precise statement until Section 3.2 (Theorem 3.13). As a pleasing corollary, we find that a twist and a cotwist on D b (X + ) are related (Corollary 3.14).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Dually, we find that another window shift autoequivalence, namely ω −1,0 , can be described in terms of a cotwist [AL10] around a spherical functor with source D b (X + ): we defer a precise statement until Section 3.2 (Theorem 3.13). As a pleasing corollary, we find that a twist and a cotwist on D b (X + ) are related (Corollary 3.14).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…. General theory [AL10] says that T F is an equivalence iff C F is an equivalence, given the fact that X + and Y + are Calabi-Yau.…”
Section: Consequently We Havementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same is true if A and B are admissible subcategories of these, because the projection functors are induced by kernels [25]. 3 It is also possible to do business with derived 2 Rouquier requires the triangle (1.2) to be split, but we do not. Both he and Anno require a certain natural map R → CL to be an isomorphism, but this is difficult to check in practice, and in our proof of Theorem 1 below we will see that any isomorphism R ∼ = CL will do.…”
Section: 1 Definitionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Part (1) is the key to establishing that the J-twist is an autoequivalence, and part (2) shows the link to spherical functors (see [AL1,AL2]). Both parts follow quite easily from the fact that R is a hypersurface singularity, using matrix factorisations.…”
Section: Amentioning
confidence: 99%