Paper detail

A remark on our paper "Negative Holomorphic curvature and positive canonical bundle"

This is a continuation of our first paper in [WY16]. There are two purposes of this paper: One is to give a proof of the main result in [WY16] without going through the argument depending on numerical effectiveness. The other one is to provide a proof of our conjecture, mentioned in [TY], where the assumption of negative holomorphic sectional curvature is dropped to quasi-negative. We should note that a solution to our conjecture is also provided by Diverio-Trapani [DT]. Both proofs depend on our argument in [WY16]. But our argument here makes use of the argument given by the second author and Cheng in [CY75].

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.