Back to search
2504.17105

Conley-Morse persistence barcode: a homological signature of a combinatorial bifurcation

Tamal K. Dey, Michał Lipiński, Manuel Soriano-Trigueros

correctmedium confidence
Category
Not specified
Journal tier
Strong Field
Processed
Sep 28, 2025, 12:56 AM

Audit review

The paper proves that the Conley–Morse persistence module arising from the transition diagram TD is a finite-dimensional representation of a gentle bound quiver (Q, I), then uses the string/band classification for gentle algebras and a structural property of TD to exclude bands; hence the module decomposes uniquely into string modules (the barcode) as stated in Theorem 7.4 and supported by Proposition 7.3 and Remark 7.2. The candidate solution instead assumes the module is a zigzag over a type-A quiver A_{T+1} and invokes the interval-module classification for A-type quivers. That identification is generally false here because the indexing is a poset from TD (with relations from AR-splits), not a single fence; crucially, the model does not address the possibility of band indecomposables that must be ruled out in this setting. Therefore, its proof route is invalid even though the final conclusion matches the paper’s theorem. See Theorem 7.4 and Proposition 7.3 in the paper for the correct framework and argument, including the no-band argument tied to AR-splits and the gentle structure of (Q, I) ; background on the zigzag/interval case is recalled separately in Theorem 6.6 but is not the general setting for TD-based modules .

Referee report (LaTeX)

\textbf{Recommendation:} minor revisions

\textbf{Journal Tier:} strong field

\textbf{Justification:}

The paper introduces a coherent pipeline from combinatorial dynamics to a barcode invariant via transition diagrams and gentle-algebra representations. The main structural theorem (string-only decomposition) and the adapted algorithm are technically sound and well-motivated. Minor clarifications about the indexing quiver, uniqueness via Krull–Schmidt, and algorithmic details would strengthen readability and reproducibility, but do not affect correctness.