Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 87 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 53 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 16 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 18 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 105 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 471 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 193 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Strictly Shod Algebras Overview

Updated 9 September 2025
  • Strictly shod algebras are finite-dimensional algebras defined by the property that each indecomposable module has either projective or injective dimension at most one and a global dimension of 3.
  • They arise by extending the notion of shod algebras beyond quasi-tilted cases, with constructions involving generalized path algebras and full convex subcategories.
  • Their study elucidates the boundary between tame and wild representation theory, as shown by explicit classifications in Dynkin type Dₙ and related combinatorial models.

A strictly shod algebra is a finite-dimensional algebra over a field such that every indecomposable module has either projective dimension at most one or injective dimension at most one, but whose global dimension is precisely three. This notion sits at the intersection of two major classes in the theory of representation-finite and tame algebras: it generalizes tilted (quasi-tilted) algebras but restricts attention to those shod algebras with maximal homological complexity among them. The paper of strictly shod algebras provides insight into the boundaries of tame/wild dichotomies, the structure of module categories, and the finer combinatorics of homological dimensions.

1. Foundational Concepts and Definitions

A finite-dimensional algebra AA is termed shod (small homological dimension) if for every indecomposable AA-module MM,

pdAM1oridAM1,\operatorname{pd}_A M \leq 1 \quad \text{or} \quad \operatorname{id}_A M \leq 1,

where pdAM\operatorname{pd}_A M and idAM\operatorname{id}_A M denote the projective and injective dimensions of MM. When such an algebra AA further satisfies gl.dimA2\operatorname{gl.dim} A \le 2, it is called quasi-tilted.

A strictly shod algebra is a shod algebra that is not quasi-tilted, i.e., it meets the homological criteria for shod, but satisfies

gl.dimA=3.\operatorname{gl.dim} A = 3.

This places strictly shod algebras exactly at the homological threshold not attainable by quasi-tilted algebras, distinguishing them in the landscape of finite global dimension.

2. Structural Properties and Constructions

Strictly shod algebras are characterized not only by their homological dimensions, but also by their explicit realizations via constructions that guarantee these properties. In the context of generalized path algebras over acyclic quivers, the following sufficient condition holds (Chust et al., 2022):

  • Let A=k(T,A)A = k(T, \mathcal{A}) be a generalized path algebra over an acyclic quiver TT, where A={Ai}iT0\mathcal{A} = \{A_i\}_{i \in T_0} assigns to each vertex a finite-dimensional algebra AiA_i.
  • If all AjA_j for jij \neq i are hereditary and the exceptional vertex algebra AiA_i is shod (resp. quasi-tilted), then AA is shod (resp. quasi-tilted).
  • By Theorem 5.1, the global dimension satisfies

gl.dimA=max{1,gl.dimAi:iT0},\mathrm{gl.dim}\,A = \max\{1,\,\mathrm{gl.dim}\,A_i: i \in T_0\},

so gl.dimA=3\mathrm{gl.dim}\,A = 3 is possible exactly when some AiA_i is shod with global dimension $3$, yielding strictly shod behavior.

A core feature is the closure of the class of (strictly) shod algebras under passage to corner algebras and full convex subcategories. Given A=kQ/IA = kQ/I and a full convex subquiver CQC \subset Q, form the idempotents eCe_C (sum over vertices in CC), eCe_C' (complement), and consider A/eCeCAeCA/\langle e_C' \rangle \simeq e_C A e_C. If AA is strictly shod, so is eCAeCe_C A e_C (Zito, 2020). This localization property allows "zooming in" on substructures while retaining the key homological property.

3. Classification Results and Combinatorial Character

The classification of strictly shod algebras is especially well developed for certain Dynkin types:

  • For Dynkin type An\mathbb{A}_n and hereditary gentle algebras, there are no strictly shod algebras (Zhang et al., 2022): all silted (i.e., endomorphism algebra of a 2-term silting complex) algebras are either tilted or products of tilted algebras with global dimension at most $2$.
  • For Dynkin type Dn\mathbb{D}_n, a complete classification identifies strictly shod algebras as those arising from explicit 2-term silting complexes not derived equivalent to tilting complexes (Zhang, 7 Sep 2025). The non-tilting families partitioned via combinatorial and homological conditions yield strictly shod algebras with gl.dim=3\mathrm{gl.dim}=3.

A striking structural property proved in this setting is the following:

Every strictly shod algebra associated to the standard and mutated Dynkin Dn\mathbb{D}_n quivers is a string algebra (Zhang, 7 Sep 2025). That is, for A=kQ/IA = kQ/I,

  • For all iQ0i \in Q_0, at most two arrows start or end at ii,
  • For every arrow, at most one extension in either direction does not force a relation, and
  • The ideal II is generated by paths of length at least $2$.

Modules in string algebras can be classified combinatorially as string or band modules, facilitating explicit descriptions of indecomposables, and computation of homological invariants.

4. Homological and Categorical Implications

Strictly shod algebras serve as boundaries for the representation-theoretic and homological behavior of module categories:

  • The property pdAM1\operatorname{pd}_A M \leq 1 or idAM1\operatorname{id}_A M \leq 1 for all indecomposable MM severely restricts the structure, implying representation-tameness in many cases.
  • The property gl.dimA=3\operatorname{gl.dim} A = 3 guarantees that there exist objects of maximal projective or injective dimension $3$, realized via explicit modules.
  • These algebras frequently serve as counterexamples or critical cases in tilting theory, derived equivalence, and silting theory due to their maximized homological constraints within the shod class.

A significant categorical phenomenon arises: for strictly shod string algebras coming from specific 2-term silting complexes, the "heart" C\mathcal{C} of the associated tt-structure in Db(modA)\mathcal{D}^b(\mathrm{mod}\,A) may be derived equivalent to modEndA(P)\mathrm{mod}\,\operatorname{End}_A(P), but the realization functor Db(C)Db(modA)\mathcal{D}^b(\mathcal{C}) \to \mathcal{D}^b(\mathrm{mod}\,A) need not be a derived equivalence (Zhang, 7 Sep 2025). Explicitly: Db(C)Db(modA)\mathcal{D}^b(\mathcal{C}) \to \mathcal{D}^b(\mathrm{mod}\,A) can fail to be an equivalence even when EndA(P)\operatorname{End}_A(P) and AA are derived equivalent, as demonstrated by specific families of 2-term silting complexes.

5. Absence and Presence in the Gentle and String Algebra Settings

In the hereditary gentle setting, strictly shod algebras do not occur (Zhang et al., 2022). This is proved using geometric models:

  • Gentle algebras are realized via marked ribbon surfaces, and elementary polygons produced by triangulations limit the global dimension of associated silted algebras to at most $2$.
  • The combinatorial geometry (e.g., maximal number of sides in partition polygons) enforces this bound, precluding the existence of strictly shod examples.

By contrast, in certain non-gentle string algebra settings (notably, for Dn\mathbb{D}_n type quivers), the precise configuration of quiver relations allows for the construction of strictly shod string algebras.

Quiver Type Strictly Shod Algebras Exist? Structure
Dynkin An\mathbb{A}_n No Tilted or products only
Hereditary gentle No Combinatorially excluded
Dynkin Dn\mathbb{D}_n Yes All are string algebras

6. Methods, Examples, and Further Research Directions

Explicit construction of strictly shod algebras derives from homological and combinatorial data. For instance:

  • Take QQ the Dynkin quiver of type Dn\mathbb{D}_n and a 2-term silting complex

P=τ1P(1)i=5nτ1P(i)I(2)I(n1)I(n)[1].P = \tau^{-1}P(1) \oplus \bigoplus_{i=5}^{n} \tau^{-1}P(i) \oplus I(2) \oplus I(n-1) \oplus I(n)[1].

End(P)\operatorname{End}(P) is strictly shod (global dimension $3$), string, and exemplifies the key phenomena discussed above (Zhang, 7 Sep 2025). Families arising from mutated quivers (reverse source orientation) are classified into 14 explicit combinatorial types, one of which captures all strictly shod cases.

Potential research directions include:

  • Extension of combinatorial and geometric techniques to non-gentle, skew-gentle, or non-hereditary string algebras to determine the occurrence and classification of strictly shod algebras beyond Dynkin diagrams.
  • Investigation of the derived and tt-structure phenomena observed in the string algebra case, particularly the conditions under which the realization functor fails to induce an equivalence.
  • Modular paper via the corner algebra method, employing full convex subcategories to localize and detect strictly shod properties within larger or more complicated algebras (Zito, 2020).

7. Summary and Significance

Strictly shod algebras demarcate the sharpest boundary of controlled homological behavior beyond the quasi-tilted class, characterized by the shod module condition and global dimension three. Their classification in Dynkin Dn\mathbb{D}_n and similar settings reveals that they are always string algebras. Their paper elucidates the interplay between quiver combinatorics, silting theory, and homological algebra, and provides critical examples demonstrating subtleties in derived categories, tt-structures, and functorial equivalence. Their absence from certain classes (notably, hereditary gentle algebras) underscores the combinatorial constraints defining their existence and motivates broader questions about the landscape of tame and wild finite-dimensional algebras.

Don't miss out on important new AI/ML research

See which papers are being discussed right now on X, Reddit, and more:

“Emergent Mind helps me see which AI papers have caught fire online.”

Philip

Philip

Creator, AI Explained on YouTube