2015
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-13862-6_9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Surfaces Isogenous to a Product of Curves, Braid Groups and Mapping Class Groups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

4
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We also show that the families (37), (40) and (25) are not contained in the hyperelliptic locus (see 4.3, 4.5, 4.8), while (8), (22), (36) and (39) are hyperelliptic (see 4.6). We show that (25) and (38) have the same image in M 4 and in A 4 , see 4.7. We also note that in the case of family (25) every Jacobian is reducible and it is possible to identify explicitely a CM point, see 4.9.…”
Section: New Examplesmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…We also show that the families (37), (40) and (25) are not contained in the hyperelliptic locus (see 4.3, 4.5, 4.8), while (8), (22), (36) and (39) are hyperelliptic (see 4.6). We show that (25) and (38) have the same image in M 4 and in A 4 , see 4.7. We also note that in the case of family (25) every Jacobian is reducible and it is possible to identify explicitely a CM point, see 4.9.…”
Section: New Examplesmentioning
confidence: 61%
“…To conclude we have to prove that these are all the critical points of ϕ. But this is actually true, because none of the stabilizer subgroups of the critical points of ψ that are mapped to the first three critical values includes any subgroup of G. Concluding, by the unicity argument 4.2, the special variety given by the family (5) gives the same special variety obtained as the family (34) of Galois coverings of P 1 via (Z/4Z × Z/2Z) ⋊ (Z/2Z) found in [13]. This family is not contained in the hyperelliptic locus (see the proof of theorem 5.3 of [13]).…”
Section: Example (5)mentioning
confidence: 94%
“…(4) gives the same subvariety as family (32) of Table 2 in [13]. (5) gives the same subvariety as family (34) of Table 2 in [13].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…So the submanifold T(G, θ) is not well-defined, but the subvariety M(G, θ) is well-defined. For more details see [46,8,6].…”
Section: Special Subvarieties In the Unramified Prym Locusmentioning
confidence: 99%