Surface invariants of finite type

Similar documents
Surface invariants of finite type

Knots and surfaces. Michael Eisermann. Universität Stuttgart 3. Juni 2014

Vassiliev Invariants, Chord Diagrams, and Jacobi Diagrams

Hyperbolic Knots and the Volume Conjecture II: Khov. II: Khovanov Homology

= A + A 1. = ( A 2 A 2 ) 2 n 2. n = ( A 2 A 2 ) n 1. = ( A 2 A 2 ) n 1. We start with the skein relation for one crossing of the trefoil, which gives:

Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 355 (2003), Preprint version available at

Polynomials in knot theory. Rama Mishra. January 10, 2012

Categorification and (virtual) knots

Quantum Groups and Link Invariants

A topological description of colored Alexander invariant

Do Super Cats Make Odd Knots?

Knot Theory from the Combinatorial Point of View Highlights of ideas/topics/results

MORE ON KHOVANOV HOMOLOGY

Generell Topologi. Richard Williamson. May 29, 2013

Knots and Physics. Louis H. Kauffman

Twist Numbers of Links from the Jones Polynomial

ON POSITIVITY OF KAUFFMAN BRACKET SKEIN ALGEBRAS OF SURFACES


Generalized Knot Polynomials and An Application

AN OVERVIEW OF KNOT INVARIANTS

RE-NORMALIZED LINK INVARIANTS FROM THE UNROLLED QUANTUM GROUP. 1. Introduction

A Survey of Quantum Enhancements

Quasi-Trees and Khovanov homology

MA3002 Generell Topologi Revision Checklist

ON CABLED KNOTS AND VASSILIEV INVARIANTS (NOT) CONTAINED IN KNOT POLYNOMIALS. A. Stoimenow

Figure 1 The term mutant was coined by Conway, and refers to the following general construction.

Knot Theory and Khovanov Homology

arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 2 Jun 2016

FILTERED RINGS AND MODULES. GRADINGS AND COMPLETIONS.

GRAPHS, LINKS, AND DUALITY ON SURFACES

Michel Boileau Profinite completion of groups and 3-manifolds III. Joint work with Stefan Friedl

A brief Incursion into Knot Theory. Trinity University

arxiv: v2 [math.gt] 29 Jun 2016

Generell Topologi. Richard Williamson. May 28, 2013

A SKEIN APPROACH TO BENNEQUIN TYPE INEQUALITIES

Knot Floer Homology and Categorification. Allison Leigh Gilmore

Temperley Lieb Algebra I

Delta link homotopy for two component links, III

Knot Floer Homology and the Genera of Torus Knots

Lecture 17: The Alexander Module II

Knots and Physics. Lifang Xia. Dec 12, 2012

Matrix factorizations and link homology II

A formula for the action of Dehn twists on the HOMFLY-PT type skein algebra and its application

Advancement to Candidacy. Patterns in the Coefficients of the Colored Jones Polynomial. Katie Walsh Advisor: Justin Roberts

SURGERY EQUIVALENCE AND FINITE TYPE INVARIANTS FOR HOMOLOGY 3-SPHERES L. FUNAR Abstract. One considers two equivalence relations on 3-manifolds relate

On a relation between the self-linking number and the braid index of closed braids in open books

Patterns and Stability in the Coefficients of the Colored Jones Polynomial. Katie Walsh Advisor: Justin Roberts

Some distance functions in knot theory

arxiv:q-alg/ v1 26 Aug 1997

From Tangle Fractions to DNA

1 The fundamental group Topology I

UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.gt] 16 Aug 2000

Virtual Crossing Number and the Arrow Polynomial

The Goodwillie-Weiss Tower and Knot Theory - Past and Present

arxiv: v2 [math.gt] 15 Mar 2017

CLASSICAL AND VIRTUAL PSEUDODIAGRAM THEORY AND NEW BOUNDS ON UNKNOTTING NUMBERS AND GENUS

QUASI-ALTERNATING LINKS AND POLYNOMIAL INVARIANTS

Introduction to knot theory

Knot Theory And Categorification

Endomorphism Rings of Abelian Varieties and their Representations

RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES RIMS The state sum invariant of 3-manifolds constructed from the E 6 linear skein.

SIMPLE WHITNEY TOWERS, HALF-GROPES AND THE ARF INVARIANT OF A KNOT. Rob Schneiderman

sl 3 -web bases, categorification and link invariants

Surface-links and marked graph diagrams

Homological representation formula of some quantum sl 2 invariants

KHOVANOV HOMOLOGY, ITS DEFINITIONS AND RAMIFICATIONS OLEG VIRO. Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden POMI, St. Petersburg, Russia

Algebraic and topological perspectives on the Khovanov homology

arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 23 Apr 2014

DENSITY SPECTRA FOR KNOTS. In celebration of Józef Przytycki s 60th birthday

KNOT INVARIANTS AND THE BOLLOBÁS-RIORDAN POLYNOMIAL OF EMBEDDED GRAPHS

arxiv: v2 [math.gt] 10 Sep 2014

Smith theory. Andrew Putman. Abstract

An Introduction to Mathematical Knots

THE SHIMURA-TANIYAMA FORMULA AND p-divisible GROUPS

A CHARACTERIZATION OF FOUR-GENUS OF KNOTS

Families of non-alternating knots

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.gt] 23 May 2006

On Constructions of Generalized Skein Modules

Categorification of quantum groups and quantum knot invariants

LECTURE 28: VECTOR BUNDLES AND FIBER BUNDLES

A sheaf-theoretic description of Khovanov s knot homology

COMPOSITE KNOT DETERMINANTS

SJÄLVSTÄNDIGA ARBETEN I MATEMATIK

arxiv: v2 [math.gt] 26 Aug 2017

Chern Classes and the Chern Character

arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 30 Jul 2015

The V -filtration and vanishing and nearby cycles

arxiv:math/ v1 [math.gt] 13 Jun 2005

Some examples related to knot sliceness

arxiv: v5 [math.gt] 4 Mar 2018

A computer search for ribbon alternating knots

Gauss Diagram Invariants for Knots and Links

STEENROD OPERATIONS IN ALGEBRAIC GEOMETRY

PSEUDO DIAGRAMS OF KNOTS, LINKS AND SPATIAL GRAPHS

Shunsuke TSUJI. Skein algebras and mapping class groups on oriented surfaces. The University of Tokyo

Knot Theory and the Alexander Polynomial

Topics in linear algebra

3. Signatures Problem 27. Show that if K` and K differ by a crossing change, then σpk`q

arxiv: v1 [math.gt] 7 Nov 2017

Transcription:

Surface invariants of finite type Michael Eisermann Institut Fourier, UJF Grenoble 17 September 2008 i f INSTITUT FOURIER Michael Eisermann www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/ eiserm

Summary 1 Definitions and obvious examples Embedded and immersed surfaces Surface invariants of finite type The Alexander polynomial 2 The Jones polynomial of ribbon links Skein relations The Jones nullity Expansion into finite type invariants 3 Finite type theory of surfaces in R 3 Chord diagrams on surfaces Towards a universal invariant Open questions

Motivation Finite-type theory of knots and links: Common framework Beautiful structure

Motivation Finite-type theory of knots and links: Common framework Beautiful structure But difficult to interpret in terms of classical topology.

Motivation Finite-type theory of knots and links: Common framework Beautiful structure But difficult to interpret in terms of classical topology. Naïve but natural idea: bring surfaces into play. Study surface invariants of finite type Analyze their interplay with links

Motivation Finite-type theory of knots and links: Common framework Beautiful structure But difficult to interpret in terms of classical topology. Naïve but natural idea: bring surfaces into play. Study surface invariants of finite type Analyze their interplay with links First modest results indicate that this is successful.

Summary 1 Definitions and obvious examples Embedded and immersed surfaces Surface invariants of finite type The Alexander polynomial 2 The Jones polynomial of ribbon links Skein relations The Jones nullity Expansion into finite type invariants 3 Finite type theory of surfaces in R 3 Chord diagrams on surfaces Towards a universal invariant Open questions

Embedded and immersed surfaces in R 3 Embedded surfaces bounding knots or links: SeifertView, Jarke van Wijk, TUE (a) trivial knot, (b) trefoil knot, 3 1 (c) figure eight, 4 1

Embedded and immersed surfaces in R 3 Embedded surfaces bounding knots or links: SeifertView, Jarke van Wijk, TUE (a) trivial knot, (b) trefoil knot, 3 1 (c) figure eight, 4 1 Immersed surfaces having only ribbon singularities: (d) ribbon singularity (e) 3 1 3 1 (f) 6 1

Relationship with surfaces in R 4 + abstract surface maximum surface embedded in R 4 + maximum isotopy saddle point h = 0 R 3 0

Relationship with surfaces in R 4 + abstract surface maximum surface embedded in R 4 + maximum isotopy saddle point h = 0 R 3 0 Proposition (Fox 1962) A link L R 3 bounds an immersed ribbon surface Σ R 3 iff it bounds a smoothly embedded surface Σ R 4 + without local minima.

Band diagrams Let Σ be a compact oriented surface without closed components. Definition A ribbon immersion F : Σ R 3 has only ribbon singularities. A ribbon surface S = F (Σ) is the image of a ribbon immersion F.

Band diagrams Let Σ be a compact oriented surface without closed components. Definition A ribbon immersion F : Σ R 3 has only ribbon singularities. A ribbon surface S = F (Σ) is the image of a ribbon immersion F. A band diagram is a planar diagram formed by the following pieces:

Band diagrams Let Σ be a compact oriented surface without closed components. Definition A ribbon immersion F : Σ R 3 has only ribbon singularities. A ribbon surface S = F (Σ) is the image of a ribbon immersion F. A band diagram is a planar diagram formed by the following pieces: Proposition Every ribbon surface S in R 3 can be presented by a band diagram.

Band crossing changes We consider band crossing changes: or.

Band crossing changes We consider band crossing changes: or.! It is important to respect the surface: we are dealing with links with extra structure!

Band crossing changes We consider band crossing changes: or.! It is important to respect the surface: we are dealing with links with extra structure! Forgetting the surface would lead to a coarser theory: Kauffman s band pass moves ordinary crossing changes

Surface invariants of finite type Let D be a band diagram and let X be a set of band crossings. Given Y X we obtain D Y by changing the crossings in Y : or.

Surface invariants of finite type Let D be a band diagram and let X be a set of band crossings. Given Y X we obtain D Y by changing the crossings in Y : or. Definition An invariant v : S A is of degree m if ( 1) Y v(d Y ) = 0 for all X with X > m. Y X We say that v is of finite type if v is of degree m for some m N.

Surface invariants of finite type Let D be a band diagram and let X be a set of band crossings. Given Y X we obtain D Y by changing the crossings in Y : or. Definition An invariant v : S A is of degree m if ( 1) Y v(d Y ) = 0 for all X with X > m. Y X We say that v is of finite type if v is of degree m for some m N. v is of degree < 0 v = 0, v is of degree 0 v is constant, v is of degree 1 v is at most linear, v is of degree 2 v is at most quadratic, etc.

Invariants of finite type Example The Euler characteristic S χ(σ) is a surface invariant of degree 0. (The universal invariant of degree 0 is the abstract surface Σ.)

Invariants of finite type Example The Euler characteristic S χ(σ) is a surface invariant of degree 0. (The universal invariant of degree 0 is the abstract surface Σ.) Proposition If L v A, L v(l), is a link invariant of degree m, then S L v A, S v( S), is a surface invariant of degree m.

Invariants of finite type Example The Euler characteristic S χ(σ) is a surface invariant of degree 0. (The universal invariant of degree 0 is the abstract surface Σ.) Proposition If L v A, L v(l), is a link invariant of degree m, then S L v A, S v( S), is a surface invariant of degree m. Proof. If we forget the surfaces in the band crossings and, then we obtain (telescopic sums of) crossing changes of links.

Seifert matrix and determinant Assume the surface Σ to be compact, oriented and connected. We have χ(σ) = 1 rk H 1 (Σ) because H 0 (Σ) = 1 and H 2 (Σ) = 0. The module H 1 (Σ) = Z m is free of rank m = 1 χ(σ).

Seifert matrix and determinant Assume the surface Σ to be compact, oriented and connected. We have χ(σ) = 1 rk H 1 (Σ) because H 0 (Σ) = 1 and H 2 (Σ) = 0. The module H 1 (Σ) = Z m is free of rank m = 1 χ(σ). To each embedding F : Σ R 3 we associate its Seifert form θ F : H 1 (Σ) H 1 (Σ) Z, θ F (a, b) = lk(f (a), F (b)). Observation The coefficients of θ F are of degree 1.

Seifert matrix and determinant Assume the surface Σ to be compact, oriented and connected. We have χ(σ) = 1 rk H 1 (Σ) because H 0 (Σ) = 1 and H 2 (Σ) = 0. The module H 1 (Σ) = Z m is free of rank m = 1 χ(σ). To each embedding F : Σ R 3 we associate its Seifert form θ F : H 1 (Σ) H 1 (Σ) Z, θ F (a, b) = lk(f (a), F (b)). Observation The coefficients of θ F are of degree 1. The determinant of F is defined by det(f ) := det [ i(θ F + θf )]. It is a homogeneous polynomial of degree m in the coefficients of θ F. Conclusion The surface invariant F det(f ) is of degree m = 1 χ(σ).

Seifert matrix and determinant Assume the surface Σ to be compact, oriented and connected. We have χ(σ) = 1 rk H 1 (Σ) because H 0 (Σ) = 1 and H 2 (Σ) = 0. The module H 1 (Σ) = Z m is free of rank m = 1 χ(σ). To each embedding F : Σ R 3 we associate its Seifert form θ F : H 1 (Σ) H 1 (Σ) Z, θ F (a, b) = lk(f (a), F (b)). Observation The coefficients of θ F are of degree 1. The determinant of F is defined by det(f ) := det [ i(θ F + θ F )]. It is a homogeneous polynomial of degree m in the coefficients of θ F. Conclusion The surface invariant F det(f ) is of degree m = 1 χ(σ).! The invariant det(f ) depends only on the link L = F ( Σ), but L det(l) is not of finite type in the sense of Vassiliev Goussarov.

Alexander polynomial The same arguments hold for (F ) = det(q θf q+ θ F ). (We recover the determinant det(f ) = (F ) q i as a specialization.) Proposition (F ) is a surface invariant of degree m = 1 χ(σ).

Alexander polynomial The same arguments hold for (F ) = det(q θf q+ θ F ). (We recover the determinant det(f ) = (F ) q i as a specialization.) Proposition (F ) is a surface invariant of degree m = 1 χ(σ). Theorem (Seifert 1934) The invariant (F ) depends only on the link L = F ( Σ):

Alexander polynomial The same arguments hold for (F ) = det(q θf q+ θ F ). (We recover the determinant det(f ) = (F ) q i as a specialization.) Proposition (F ) is a surface invariant of degree m = 1 χ(σ). Theorem (Seifert 1934) The invariant (F ) depends only on the link L = F ( Σ): Question (cf. Murakami Ohtsuki 2001) Which polynomials in θ F are invariants of L = F ( Σ)?

Summary 1 Definitions and obvious examples Embedded and immersed surfaces Surface invariants of finite type The Alexander polynomial 2 The Jones polynomial of ribbon links Skein relations The Jones nullity Expansion into finite type invariants 3 Finite type theory of surfaces in R 3 Chord diagrams on surfaces Towards a universal invariant Open questions

Skein relations Theorem (HOMFLY-PT) For each N N there exists a unique invariant V N : L Z[q ± ] satisfying V N ( ) = 1 and the skein relation ( ) ( ) ( q N V N q +N V N = (q 1 q +1 ) V N ). N = 0 : Alexander 1928, Conway 1969 N = 1 : trivial invariant, V 1 = 1 N = 2 : Jones 1984, V := V 2 N > 2 : HOMFLY-PT 1985-1987

Skein relations Theorem (HOMFLY-PT) For each N N there exists a unique invariant V N : L Z[q ± ] satisfying V N ( ) = 1 and the skein relation ( ) ( ) ( q N V N q +N V N = (q 1 q +1 ) V N ). N = 0 : Alexander 1928, Conway 1969 N = 1 : trivial invariant, V 1 = 1 N = 2 : Jones 1984, V := V 2 N > 2 : HOMFLY-PT 1985-1987 Remark V ( n ) = (q 1 + q +1 ) n 1 and q 1 + q +1 is the minimal polynomial of i. The situation is similar for V N if N is prime.

Kauffman s bracket Definition There exists a unique map D Z[A ± ], denoted D D, such that = 1, D = D ( A +2 A 2 ), = A + A 1.

Kauffman s bracket Definition There exists a unique map D Z[A ± ], denoted D D, such that = 1, D = D ( A +2 A 2 ), = A + A 1. = and = but = A 3

Kauffman s bracket Definition There exists a unique map D Z[A ± ], denoted D D, such that = 1, D = D ( A +2 A 2 ), = A + A 1. = and = but = A 3 Theorem (Kauffman 1987) We have V (L) (q A 2 ) = D ( A 3 ) writhe(d).

Kauffman s bracket Definition There exists a unique map D Z[A ± ], denoted D D, such that = 1, D = D ( A +2 A 2 ), = A + A 1. = and = but = A 3 Theorem (Kauffman 1987) We have V (L) (q A 2 ) = D ( A 3 ) writhe(d). Similar construction for V N by Murakami Ohtsuki Yamada 1998

Jones nullity Definition The Jones nullity null V (L) is the order of the zero at q = i.

Jones nullity Definition The Jones nullity null V (L) is the order of the zero at q = i. Lemma Every n-component link L satisfies 0 null V (L) n 1. This corresponds to the Seifert nullity null(l) = null(θ + θ ).

Jones nullity Definition The Jones nullity null V (L) is the order of the zero at q = i. Lemma Every n-component link L satisfies 0 null V (L) n 1. This corresponds to the Seifert nullity null(l) = null(θ + θ ). Question Do we have null V (L) = null(l) for all links L?

Jones nullity Definition The Jones nullity null V (L) is the order of the zero at q = i. Lemma Every n-component link L satisfies 0 null V (L) n 1. This corresponds to the Seifert nullity null(l) = null(θ + θ ). Question Do we have null V (L) = null(l) for all links L? Partial answer: Theorem (E 2007) For every n-component ribbon link we have null V (L) = n 1.

Jones nullity (lower bound) Proposition (E 2007) If a link L R 3 bounds a ribbon surface S R 3 of positive Euler characteristic n, then V (L) is divisible by V ( n ) = (q + + q ) n 1. More succinctly: V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1.

Jones nullity (lower bound) Proposition (E 2007) If a link L R 3 bounds a ribbon surface S R 3 of positive Euler characteristic n, then V (L) is divisible by V ( n ) = (q + + q ) n 1. More succinctly: V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. Proof. By hypothesis each component S i has a boundary. Thus χ(s i ) > 0 S i = χ(s i ) = 1.

Jones nullity (lower bound) Proposition (E 2007) If a link L R 3 bounds a ribbon surface S R 3 of positive Euler characteristic n, then V (L) is divisible by V ( n ) = (q + + q ) n 1. More succinctly: V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. Proof. By hypothesis each component S i has a boundary. Thus χ(s i ) > 0 S i = χ(s i ) = 1. Induction on the number r(s) of ribbon singularities.

Jones nullity (lower bound) Proposition (E 2007) If a link L R 3 bounds a ribbon surface S R 3 of positive Euler characteristic n, then V (L) is divisible by V ( n ) = (q + + q ) n 1. More succinctly: V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. Proof. By hypothesis each component S i has a boundary. Thus χ(s i ) > 0 S i = χ(s i ) = 1. Induction on the number r(s) of ribbon singularities. If r(s) = 0 then S is embedded and L = L 0 n.

Jones nullity (lower bound) Proposition (E 2007) If a link L R 3 bounds a ribbon surface S R 3 of positive Euler characteristic n, then V (L) is divisible by V ( n ) = (q + + q ) n 1. More succinctly: V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. Proof. By hypothesis each component S i has a boundary. Thus χ(s i ) > 0 S i = χ(s i ) = 1. Induction on the number r(s) of ribbon singularities. If r(s) = 0 then S is embedded and L = L 0 n. If r(s) 1 then we consider the Kauffman bracket: [ ] = (A +2 A 2 ) +(A +4 1) [ ] +(A 4 1) [ ]. We conclude by induction using χ ( ) = χ ( ) + 1.

Jones nullity (examples) Example We have χ(s) = 1 + 1 + 0 = 2 and V (L) = (q + + q ) (q 6 q 4 + 2q 2 + 2q 2 q 4 + q 6). Hence L bounds surfaces with χ 2 but not with χ 3. S =

Jones nullity (examples) Example We have χ(s) = 1 + 1 + 0 = 2 and V (L) = (q + + q ) (q 6 q 4 + 2q 2 + 2q 2 q 4 + q 6). Hence L bounds surfaces with χ 2 but not with χ 3. S = S = Example We have χ(s ) = 1 + 1 1 = 1. Notice that L = S is the connected sum H + H H + H of Hopf links, whence V (L) = (q +1 + q +5 ) 2 (q 1 + q 5 ) 2. Thus L bounds surfaces with χ 1 but not with χ 2.

Expansion into finite type invariants Expand V (L) = k=0 v k(l) h k in q = exp(h/2). Then L v k (L) is of degree k w.r.t. crossing changes:

Expansion into finite type invariants Expand V (L) = k=0 v k(l) h k in q = exp(h/2). Then L v k (L) is of degree k w.r.t. crossing changes: Expand V (L) = k=0 d k(l) h k in q = i exp(h/2). Then S d k ( S) is of finite type w.r.t. band crossing changes: or.

Expansion into finite type invariants Expand V (L) = k=0 v k(l) h k in q = exp(h/2). Then L v k (L) is of degree k w.r.t. crossing changes: Expand V (L) = k=0 d k(l) h k in q = i exp(h/2). Then S d k ( S) is of finite type w.r.t. band crossing changes: or.! d k (L) is not of finite type in the sense of Vassiliev Goussarov. In particular d 0 (L) = V (L) q i = (L) q i = det(l) = det [ i(θ + θ ) ].

Inductive proof Proposition (E 2007) The surface invariant S d k ( S) is of degree m := k + 1 χ(s). The case d 0 = det has already been derived from the Seifert matrix. Here we consider V (L) = k=0 d k(l) h k in q = i exp(h/2).

Inductive proof Proposition (E 2007) The surface invariant S d k ( S) is of degree m := k + 1 χ(s). The case d 0 = det has already been derived from the Seifert matrix. Here we consider V (L) = k=0 d k(l) h k in q = i exp(h/2). Proof. We know that V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. This means that d k ( S) = 0 for k < χ(s) 1, that is, m < 0.

Inductive proof Proposition (E 2007) The surface invariant S d k ( S) is of degree m := k + 1 χ(s). The case d 0 = det has already been derived from the Seifert matrix. Here we consider V (L) = k=0 d k(l) h k in q = i exp(h/2). Proof. We know that V ( S) is divisible by (q + + q ) χ(s) 1. This means that d k ( S) = 0 for k < χ(s) 1, that is, m < 0. Moreover, Y X ( 1) Y V ( D Y ) is divisible by (q + + q ) X +χ(s) 1 : [ ] = (A +4 A 4 ) [ ] +(A +2 A 2 ) +. We conclude by induction on X.

Summary 1 Definitions and obvious examples Embedded and immersed surfaces Surface invariants of finite type The Alexander polynomial 2 The Jones polynomial of ribbon links Skein relations The Jones nullity Expansion into finite type invariants 3 Finite type theory of surfaces in R 3 Chord diagrams on surfaces Towards a universal invariant Open questions

Tangled surfaces Consider the category generated by embedded surface pieces: (a) id (b) twists (c) crossings (d) junctions (e) ends

Tangled surfaces Consider the category generated by embedded surface pieces: (a) id (b) twists (c) crossings (d) junctions (e) ends

Tangled surfaces Consider the category generated by embedded surface pieces: (a) id (b) twists (c) crossings (d) junctions (e) ends For ribbon immersions Σ R 3 the construction is similar but longer.

Isotopy relations := := = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Abstract surfaces Category generated by abstract surface pieces: (a) id (b) twist (c) crossing (d) junctions (e) ends Relations as before (but abstract = non-embedded)

Abstract surfaces Category generated by abstract surface pieces: (a) id (b) twist (c) crossing (d) junctions (e) ends Relations as before (but abstract = non-embedded) Forgetful functor:,,

Chord diagrams on surfaces I-adic filtration generated by band crossing changes: ( ) I =,

Chord diagrams on surfaces I-adic filtration generated by band crossing changes: ( ) I =, Encoded by abstract surfaces with chords:

Chord diagrams on surfaces I-adic filtration generated by band crossing changes: ( ) I =, Encoded by abstract surfaces with chords: Tensor functor resolving chord diagrams:. This maps abstract surfaces with m chords to I m /I m+1.

Chord diagrams on surfaces I-adic filtration generated by band crossing changes: ( ) I =, Encoded by abstract surfaces with chords: Tensor functor resolving chord diagrams:. This maps abstract surfaces with m chords to I m /I m+1. Quotient chord diagrams by the obvious relations induced by isotopy.

Chord diagrams on surfaces I-adic filtration generated by band crossing changes: ( ) I =, Encoded by abstract surfaces with chords: Tensor functor resolving chord diagrams:. This maps abstract surfaces with m chords to I m /I m+1. Quotient chord diagrams by the obvious relations induced by isotopy. Question Is the quotient finite dimensional in each degree?

Towards a universal invariant We wish to define a universal invariant Z as follows: Z ( ) = Exp (+ ) Z ( ) = Z ( ) = Exp ( ) Z ( ) = ( ) ( ) ( ) Z = Exp + Z = + h.o.t. ( ) ( Z = Exp ) ( ) Z = + h.o.t.

Towards a universal invariant We wish to define a universal invariant Z as follows: Z ( ) = Exp (+ ) Z ( ) = Z ( ) = Exp ( ) Z ( ) = ( ) ( ) ( ) Z = Exp + Z = + h.o.t. ( ) ( Z = Exp ) ( ) Z = + h.o.t. The naïve construction does not work (same problem as for tangles).

Towards a universal invariant We wish to define a universal invariant Z as follows: Z ( ) = Exp (+ ) Z ( ) = Z ( ) = Exp ( ) Z ( ) = ( ) ( ) ( ) Z = Exp + Z = + h.o.t. ( ) ( Z = Exp ) ( ) Z = + h.o.t. The naïve construction does not work (same problem as for tangles). Use non-associative tangles and introduce an associator Φ: Z = Φ, Z = Φ,

Towards a universal invariant We wish to define a universal invariant Z as follows: Z ( ) = Exp (+ ) Z ( ) = Z ( ) = Exp ( ) Z ( ) = ( ) ( ) ( ) Z = Exp + Z = + h.o.t. ( ) ( Z = Exp ) ( ) Z = + h.o.t. The naïve construction does not work (same problem as for tangles). Use non-associative tangles and introduce an associator Φ: Z = Φ, Z = Φ, Question Do all isotopy relations hold? Can we arrange this?

Open questions Alexander polynomial: Which polynomials in θ F are invariants of L = F ( Σ)?

Open questions Alexander polynomial: Which polynomials in θ F are invariants of L = F ( Σ)? Jones polynomial: Does the Jones nullity equal the Seifert nullity? Generalization from Jones to HOMFLYPT? to Kauffman? Is this approach really 3-dimensional? or rather 4-dimensional? Interpretation in terms of Khovanov homology?

Open questions Alexander polynomial: Which polynomials in θ F are invariants of L = F ( Σ)? Jones polynomial: Does the Jones nullity equal the Seifert nullity? Generalization from Jones to HOMFLYPT? to Kauffman? Is this approach really 3-dimensional? or rather 4-dimensional? Interpretation in terms of Khovanov homology? Surface invariants of finite type: Chord diagrams modulo relations = finite dimensional? Examine further examples: HOMFLYPT, Kauffman,... Understand invariants of low degree. Construct a universal invariant.

Open questions Alexander polynomial: Which polynomials in θ F are invariants of L = F ( Σ)? Jones polynomial: Does the Jones nullity equal the Seifert nullity? Generalization from Jones to HOMFLYPT? to Kauffman? Is this approach really 3-dimensional? or rather 4-dimensional? Interpretation in terms of Khovanov homology? Surface invariants of finite type: Chord diagrams modulo relations = finite dimensional? Examine further examples: HOMFLYPT, Kauffman,... Understand invariants of low degree. Construct a universal invariant. Thank you for your attention.