Paper detail

Crossing number of an alternating knot and canonical genus of its Whitehead double

A conjecture proposed by J. Tripp in 2002 states that the crossing number of any knot coincides with the canonical genus of its Whitehead double. In the meantime, it has been established that this conjecture is true for a large class of alternating knots including $(2, n)$ torus knots, $2$-bridge knots, algebraic alternating knots, and alternating pretzel knots. In this paper, we prove that the conjecture is not true for any alternating $3$-braid knot which is the connected sum of two torus knots of type $(2, m)$ and $(2, n)$. This results in a new modified conjecture that the crossing number of any prime knot coincides with the canonical genus of its Whitehead double. We also give a new large class of prime alternating knots satisfying the conjecture, including all prime alternating $3$-braid knots.

preprint2015arXivOpen 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.