Relationship between Gromov-Witten and Taubes' Gromov invariant The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InNegative Gromov-Witten invariantsGromov-Witten invariants counting curves passing through two pointsQuestion on Ionel and Parker's paper: Relative Gromov Witten InvariantsAre genus zero Gromov Witten Invariants on Del-Pezzo surfaces enumerative?How does one define Moduli spaces in Symplectic Geometry and naively interpret higher genus GW Invariants?Is the complex structure on a del-Pezzo surface a regular complex structure?How to understand Taubes' moduli space of holomorphic curves?What is the mirror of symplectic field theory?Is there any known relationship between sutured contact homology and Legendrian contact homology?Gromov-Witten invariants and the mod 2 spectral flow

Relationship between Gromov-Witten and Taubes' Gromov invariant



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InNegative Gromov-Witten invariantsGromov-Witten invariants counting curves passing through two pointsQuestion on Ionel and Parker's paper: Relative Gromov Witten InvariantsAre genus zero Gromov Witten Invariants on Del-Pezzo surfaces enumerative?How does one define Moduli spaces in Symplectic Geometry and naively interpret higher genus GW Invariants?Is the complex structure on a del-Pezzo surface a regular complex structure?How to understand Taubes' moduli space of holomorphic curves?What is the mirror of symplectic field theory?Is there any known relationship between sutured contact homology and Legendrian contact homology?Gromov-Witten invariants and the mod 2 spectral flow










5












$begingroup$


Fix a compact, symplectic four-manifold ($X$, $omega$).



Recall Taubes' Gromov invariant is a certain integer-valued function on $H^2(X; mathbbZ)$ defined by weighted counts of pseudoholomorphic curves in $X$. In particular, this count combines curves of any genus.



On the other hand, the Gromov-Witten invariants for a fixed genus $g$ and homology class $A in H_2(X; mathbbZ)$ are (very roughly) integers derived from the "fundamental class" of the moduli space $mathcalM_g^A(X)$ of pseudoholomorphic maps from a surface of genus $g$ into $X$ representing the class $A$.



Is there any sort of relationship, conjectural or otherwise, between these two invariants that is stronger than "they both count holomorphic curves"? Of course, this would require looking at Gromov-Witten invariants for any genus $g$. I personally don't understand the best way to define these for genus $g > 0$. I do understand that Zinger has a construction for $g = 1$ that is a bit more refined than looking at the entire moduli space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Gerig
    29 mins ago
















5












$begingroup$


Fix a compact, symplectic four-manifold ($X$, $omega$).



Recall Taubes' Gromov invariant is a certain integer-valued function on $H^2(X; mathbbZ)$ defined by weighted counts of pseudoholomorphic curves in $X$. In particular, this count combines curves of any genus.



On the other hand, the Gromov-Witten invariants for a fixed genus $g$ and homology class $A in H_2(X; mathbbZ)$ are (very roughly) integers derived from the "fundamental class" of the moduli space $mathcalM_g^A(X)$ of pseudoholomorphic maps from a surface of genus $g$ into $X$ representing the class $A$.



Is there any sort of relationship, conjectural or otherwise, between these two invariants that is stronger than "they both count holomorphic curves"? Of course, this would require looking at Gromov-Witten invariants for any genus $g$. I personally don't understand the best way to define these for genus $g > 0$. I do understand that Zinger has a construction for $g = 1$ that is a bit more refined than looking at the entire moduli space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Gerig
    29 mins ago














5












5








5


1



$begingroup$


Fix a compact, symplectic four-manifold ($X$, $omega$).



Recall Taubes' Gromov invariant is a certain integer-valued function on $H^2(X; mathbbZ)$ defined by weighted counts of pseudoholomorphic curves in $X$. In particular, this count combines curves of any genus.



On the other hand, the Gromov-Witten invariants for a fixed genus $g$ and homology class $A in H_2(X; mathbbZ)$ are (very roughly) integers derived from the "fundamental class" of the moduli space $mathcalM_g^A(X)$ of pseudoholomorphic maps from a surface of genus $g$ into $X$ representing the class $A$.



Is there any sort of relationship, conjectural or otherwise, between these two invariants that is stronger than "they both count holomorphic curves"? Of course, this would require looking at Gromov-Witten invariants for any genus $g$. I personally don't understand the best way to define these for genus $g > 0$. I do understand that Zinger has a construction for $g = 1$ that is a bit more refined than looking at the entire moduli space.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




Fix a compact, symplectic four-manifold ($X$, $omega$).



Recall Taubes' Gromov invariant is a certain integer-valued function on $H^2(X; mathbbZ)$ defined by weighted counts of pseudoholomorphic curves in $X$. In particular, this count combines curves of any genus.



On the other hand, the Gromov-Witten invariants for a fixed genus $g$ and homology class $A in H_2(X; mathbbZ)$ are (very roughly) integers derived from the "fundamental class" of the moduli space $mathcalM_g^A(X)$ of pseudoholomorphic maps from a surface of genus $g$ into $X$ representing the class $A$.



Is there any sort of relationship, conjectural or otherwise, between these two invariants that is stronger than "they both count holomorphic curves"? Of course, this would require looking at Gromov-Witten invariants for any genus $g$. I personally don't understand the best way to define these for genus $g > 0$. I do understand that Zinger has a construction for $g = 1$ that is a bit more refined than looking at the entire moduli space.







sg.symplectic-geometry symplectic-topology






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 6 hours ago









Ali Taghavi

23852085




23852085










asked 6 hours ago









Rohil PrasadRohil Prasad

445411




445411











  • $begingroup$
    With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Gerig
    29 mins ago

















  • $begingroup$
    With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
    $endgroup$
    – Chris Gerig
    29 mins ago
















$begingroup$
With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
$endgroup$
– Chris Gerig
29 mins ago





$begingroup$
With respect to Ionel-Parker's paper (which is the answer), note that GT allows a single curve to be disconnected with "whatever" genus whereas GW considers a connected curve of fixed genus, so you should expect that their generating series are the same (roughly speaking).
$endgroup$
– Chris Gerig
29 mins ago











1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

Ionel and Parker worked out the relationship between Taubes' Gromov invariant and the usual Gromov--Witten invariants (which they refer to as "Ruan--Tian invariants") in this paper:
https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9702008






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "504"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f327802%2frelationship-between-gromov-witten-and-taubes-gromov-invariant%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes








    1 Answer
    1






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5












    $begingroup$

    Ionel and Parker worked out the relationship between Taubes' Gromov invariant and the usual Gromov--Witten invariants (which they refer to as "Ruan--Tian invariants") in this paper:
    https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9702008






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$

















      5












      $begingroup$

      Ionel and Parker worked out the relationship between Taubes' Gromov invariant and the usual Gromov--Witten invariants (which they refer to as "Ruan--Tian invariants") in this paper:
      https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9702008






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$















        5












        5








        5





        $begingroup$

        Ionel and Parker worked out the relationship between Taubes' Gromov invariant and the usual Gromov--Witten invariants (which they refer to as "Ruan--Tian invariants") in this paper:
        https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9702008






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Ionel and Parker worked out the relationship between Taubes' Gromov invariant and the usual Gromov--Witten invariants (which they refer to as "Ruan--Tian invariants") in this paper:
        https://arxiv.org/abs/alg-geom/9702008







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 5 hours ago









        John PardonJohn Pardon

        9,361331106




        9,361331106



























            draft saved

            draft discarded
















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f327802%2frelationship-between-gromov-witten-and-taubes-gromov-invariant%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown