--- abstract: 'We prove that the bigraded, colored Khovanov–Rozansky type A link and tangle invariants are functorial with respect to link and tangle cobordisms.' address: - 'M.E.: School of Mathematics & Statistics, Carslaw Building, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia' - 'D.T.: Mathematisches Institut, Universität Bonn, Endenicher Allee 60, Room 1.003, 53115 Bonn, Germany. Current Address: Institut für Mathematik, Universität Zürich, Winterthurerstrasse 190, Campus Irchel, Office Y27J32, CH-8057 Zürich, Switzerland, [www.dtubbenhauer.com](www.dtubbenhauer.com)' - 'P.W.: Imperial College London, Department of Mathematics, 6M50 Huxley Building, South Kensington Campus London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom. Current Address: Mathematical Sciences Institute, The Australian National University, John Dedman Building, Union Lane, Canberra ACT 2601, Australia, [paul.wedrich.at](http://paul.wedrich.at)' author: - Michael Ehrig - Daniel Tubbenhauer - Paul Wedrich bibliography: - 'functoriality.bib' title: Functoriality of colored link homologies --- =1 =10001 =10001 Introduction {#sec:intro} ============ Building on Khovanov's categorification of the Jones polynomial @Kho, Khovanov–Rozansky @KR introduced a link homology theory categorifying the ${\mathfrak{sl}_{N}}$ Reshetikhin–Turaev invariant. Their homology theory associates bigraded vector spaces to link diagrams, two of which are isomorphic whenever the diagrams differ only by Reidemeister moves. Hence, their homological link invariant takes values in isomorphism classes of bigraded vector spaces. The first question {#the-first-question .unnumbered} ------------------ posed by this construction is whether there is a natural choice of Reidemeister move isomorphisms, such that any isotopy of links in $\mathbb{R}^3$ gives rise to an explicit isomorphism between the Khovanov–Rozansky invariants, which only depends on the isotopy class of the isotopy. A positive answer to this question provides a functor: $$\begin{Bmatrix} \text{link embeddings in } {\mathbb{R}}^3 \\ \text{isotopies modulo isotopy} \end{Bmatrix} \longrightarrow \begin{Bmatrix} \text{bigraded vector spaces} \\ \text{isomorphisms} \end{Bmatrix}$$ The second question, {#the-second-question .unnumbered} -------------------- building on the first, is whether this functor can be extended to a functor: $$\begin{Bmatrix} \text{link embeddings in } {\mathbb{R}}^3 \\ \text{link cobordisms in } {\mathbb{R}}^3\times [0,1] \text{ modulo isotopy} \end{Bmatrix} \longrightarrow \begin{Bmatrix} \text{bigraded vector spaces} \\ \text{homogeneous linear maps} \end{Bmatrix}$$ The goal of this paper {#the-goal-of-this-paper .unnumbered} ---------------------- is to answer both questions affirmatively, i.e. to prove the functoriality of Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies for $N\geq 2$ under link cobordisms. This result is new to the best of our knowledge, except in low-rank cases. For $N=2$, functorial theories were obtained by Caprau @Cap, Clark–Morrison–Walker @CMW and Blanchet @Bla after Khovanov's original theory turned out to have a sign ambiguity, see Jacobsson @Jac and Bar-Natan @BN1. However, with a bit more care, functoriality can also be achieved in the original construction, see Vogel @Vog and joint work with Stroppel @EST2 [@EST1]. Functoriality for $N=3$ was proved by Clark @Cla. We prove the general functoriality statement in a framework that is different to and more general than Khovanov–Rozansky's construction in @KR, as we will now explain. Foams ----- Khovanov–Rozansky link homology theories can be defined, or at least described, in many different languages, ranging from those of algebraic geometry, (higher) representation theory and symplectic geometry to those of various incarnations of string theory. The construction most suitable for this paper is combinatorial and uses a graphical calculus of *webs* and *foams*. Foams play precisely the same role for Khovanov–Rozansky's link homologies that Bar-Natan's cobordisms @BN1 play for the original Khovanov homology. They can be seen—in a straightforward way—as a categorification of the Murakami–Ohtsuki–Yamada state-sum model @MOY for the Reshetikhin–Turaev link invariants of type A, or, equivalently, the graphical calculus for the corresponding representation category, see Cautis–Kamnitzer–Morrison @CKM. Foams were first used by Khovanov for the definition of an ${\mathfrak{sl}_{3}}$ homology @Kho3. Khovanov–Rozansky @KR made the observation that foams should be useful for understanding higher rank link homologies as well, and they extended foams accordingly @KR3. These were then used by Mackaay–Sto<span>š</span>i<span>ć</span>–Vaz @MSV in the construction of the corresponding link homologies. Later on, Queffelec–Rose @QR, building on joint work with Lauda @LQR and earlier work of Mackaay and his coauthors @Ma1 [@MPT] on low-rank cases, placed foams in the context of an instance of categorical skew Howe duality. This led to a better understanding of foams as well as a comparison of foam-based link homologies with those obtained via other constructions, see the introduction of Mackaay–Webster @MW for a summary. A disadvantage of the approach of @QR is that their 2-categories of foams only describe a certain part of the web and foam calculus envisioned by Khovanov–Rozansky and Mackaay–Sto<span>š</span>i<span>ć</span>–Vaz. However, Robert–Wagner @RoW have closed this gap while maintaining backward compatibility with @QR, and we will use their approach after explaining its essential features in . Tangles and canopolises ----------------------- Proving the functoriality of a link homology theory essentially amounts to checking coherence relations between various ways of composing maps associated to Reidemeister moves and other basic link cobordisms that represent isotopic cobordisms. These relations are the *movie moves* as presented by Carter–Saito @CSbook [Chapter 2]. As demonstrated by Bar-Natan @BN1, it is extremely useful to be able to perform the required computations locally, i.e. in a small portion of the link diagram. Fortunately, the construction of link homologies via foams immediately extends to the case of tangles and the invariants have essentially tautological planar composition properties. This is captured in Bar-Natan's notions of canopolises (a.k.a. planar algebras in categories) and canopolis morphisms, which we recall in . A key idea for our paper is Bar-Natan's insight @BN1 [Section 1.1.1] that the canopolis framework allows a low-effort proof of the fact that Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies are functorial up to scalars. This amounts to a significant proof shortcut, as it then only remains to ensure that these scalars are equal to one. However, this is still a formidable challenge. Colors ------ The Murakami–Ohtsuki–Yamada state-sum model in fact determines the ${\mathfrak{sl}_{N}}$ Reshetikhin–Turaev invariants of links whose components are colored by fundamental representations of quantum ${\mathfrak{sl}_{N}}$, i.e. the quantum exterior powers of the usual vector representation. One categorical level up, foams immediately provide an analogous extension of Khovanov–Rozansky's original *uncolored*—i.e. colored only with the vector representation—construction to the colored case. We will work in this generality and record the coloring of tangle components with exterior power representations by remembering only the exterior exponents and placing them as labels next to the respective strands. Colored Khovanov–Rozansky homologies have been first constructed by Wu @Wu1 and Yonezawa @Yon in a technically demanding generalization of the approach in @KR. That their homological invariants can be recovered via foams was proven in full generality by Queffelec–Rose @QR. Deformations ------------ Arguably the most important tool available for studying Khovanov homology is Lee's deformation @Lee. While producing uninteresting link invariants, this deformation naturally appears as the limit of a spectral sequence starting at Khovanov homology, which has been used to extract hidden topological information about knots, see e.g. Rasmussen @Ras. A key idea for our paper is Blanchet's use of a Lee-type deformation for proving the functoriality of a modified version of Khovanov homology. In @Bla he first proved functoriality up to scalars along Bar-Natan's strategy and then computed these scalars—and showed them to be equal to one—by working in the much simpler setting of the deformation. This approach draws on the combinatorial interpretation of Lee's deformation provided by Bar-Natan–Morrison @BNM. The Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies of higher rank are subject to an even richer deformation theory, the exploration of which started with the work of Gornik @Gor and Mackaay–Vaz @MV2 in the uncolored case, and Wu @Wu2 in the colored case. These deformations were classified in joint work with Rose @RW and used in the proof of a family of physical conjectures about link homologies @Wed3 by the third named author. In this paper we draw on the deformed foam technology as developed in @RW to provide a functoriality proof for colored Khovanov–Rozansky invariants following Blanchet's strategy. Equivariance ------------ A central feature in Blanchet's argument is that, if functoriality holds up to scalars, then these scalars can be computed in a Lee-type deformation. To avoid arguing that these scalars are preserved along Lee-type spectral sequences, we will let our invariants take values in a homotopy category of chain complexes and not take homology right away. One advantage of this is that the undeformed, colored link invariant, as well as all its deformations, can be obtained as specializations of a unifying *equivariant* theory. We then prove that the equivariant theory is functorial up to scalars and that all its specializations inherit this property with the same scalars. It then only remains to compute these scalars in the Lee-type deformation, which is significantly simpler. The first equivariant, or *universal*, link homology can be traced back to Bar-Natan @BN1 and Khovanov @Kho2 and it encapsulated both Khovanov homology and Lee's deformation. The case $N=3$ was treated by Mackaay–Vaz @MV2. The extension to higher rank is due to Krasner @Kra in the uncolored case, and due to Wu @Wu2 in the colored case. The adjective *equivariant* refers to the fact that these link homologies associate $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant cohomology rings of Grassmannians to colored unknots. Fortunately, the foam technology of Robert–Wagner @RoW is already formulated in the necessary generality to be compatible with the equivariant, colored Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies. Integrality ----------- The foam-based link invariants of Mackaay–Sto<span>š</span>i<span>ć</span>–Vaz @MSV can be defined integrally and they give rise to integral versions of Khovanov–Rozansky homologies. These invariants take values in bigraded abelian groups rather than in bigraded vector spaces. Similarly, in the colored case, Queffelec–Rose @QR [Proposition 4.10] have observed that their foam-based construction can also be defined over the integers. The same is true for the construction using Robert–Wagner's foams @RoW. We have decided to present the results of this paper using the ground ring ${\mathbb{C}}$. This is for notational convenience as it allows us to treat the canopolis of equivariant foams and all its specializations in the same framework and using the same language. However, with minimal adjustments our proof of functoriality also works over ${\mathbb{Z}}$, and we will comment on these variations when necessary. Module structure ---------------- The Khovanov–Rozansky homologies of links are modules over cohomology rings of Grassmannians that appear as the invariants of colored unknots. These actions have a natural interpretation using functoriality: Given a basepoint on a colored link, one can place a small unknot of matching color next to the basepoint. This has the effect of tensoring the link invariant with the corresponding cohomology ring. The action of this ring is then determined by the map associated to the cobordism that merges the unknot with the link at the basepoint. These module structures carry additional information. For example, Hedden–Ni @HN have shown that they enable Khovanov homology to detect unlinks (it was later proven that the module structure is determined by the bigraded vector space structure in the case of the unlink @BS) , see also Wu @Wu3 for a related result for the triply-graded homology. Module structures are also important for the comparison with Floer-theoretic link invariants, see e.g. Baldwin–Levine–Sarkar @BLS, and the construction of *reduced*, colored Khovanov–Rozansky homologies @Wed3. Outlook ------- We finish by commenting on some interesting topics that we will not investigate further in this paper. First, it is necessary to emphasize that we prove functoriality under link cobordisms modulo isotopies in ${\mathbb{R}}^3\times [0,1]$. It is tempting to view Khovanov–Rozansky homology as an invariant of links in $S^3={\mathbb{R}}^3\cup\{\infty\}$ and cobordisms in $S^3\times I$. Indeed, links generically miss the point $\infty$ and cobordisms between them generically miss $\infty\times [0,1]$. However, the same is no longer true for isotopies between link cobordisms. As we have learned from Scott Morrison, proving the functoriality of Khovanov–Rozansky homology in $S^3$ would require checking only a single type of additional movie move, which however is non-local. Functoriality in $S^3$ is also the only missing ingredient for upgrading Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies to invariants of 4-manifolds with links in their boundary: it should allow the Khovanov–Rozansky invariants to be assembled into a *disk-like 4-category* as in @MoW, which then gives rise to a $(4+\epsilon)$-dimensional TQFT. A second question concerns the functoriality properties of the extension of colored Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies to invariants of tangled webs, embedded in ${\mathbb{R}}^3$, under foams embedded in ${\mathbb{R}}^3\times [0,1]$ modulo isotopy. Tangled webs can naturally be accommodated in the framework that we use in this paper, and foams embedded in 4-space can be encoded as movies of tangled webs. Isotopies of foams are represented by a finite collection of movie moves, see e.g. Carter @Car. We expect that the question of functoriality under foams can be investigated similar as in . Next, Khovanov–Rozansky homologies can be extended to the case of colorings by other irreducible representations. Using the framework in the present paper, there are at least two distinct ways of doing this. One uses finite resolutions of these representations by fundamental representations and is analogous to Khovanov's construction for $N=2$ in @Kho4, see also Robert @Rob for the case $N=3$. In the other approach, the invariants for other colors are computed by inserting *infinite twists* into fundamentally colored cables of the original link, see Rozansky @Roz for the case of $N=2$ and Cautis @Cau2 for the general case. For both constructions it is an interesting question whether they satisfy functoriality properties and admit module structures. For another construction of symmetric link homologies, see Robert–Wagner @RoW2. Finally, it is tempting to speculate about foam-based constructions of link homology theories that categorify the Reshetikhin–Turaev invariants outside of type A. Our wish list for such constructions includes that they should allow deformations along splittings of the corresponding Dynkin diagram, as it is the case in type A @RW. This might eventually help to prove functoriality properties for link homologies in other types, but more importantly, it gives hints how to construct the necessary foam theories. Very preliminary results in this direction have been obtained in @ETW where a kind of type D foams were constructed using the foams that appear in the present paper for $N=2$. However, it is not clear whether these foams can be used to define type D link homologies. Even one categorical level down, there are different web calculi outside of type A @KUP [@MO; @ST], not all of which are compatible with Reshetikhin–Turaev invariants. Structure of the paper ---------------------- In we introduce the canopolis of $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant foams by first defining a free canopolis of foams in and then imposing additional relations in . In and \[subsec:special\] we collect a number of foam relations, which we need in the proof of functoriality. In we recall the construction of the categorical tangle invariant and study the chain maps induced by Reidemeister moves. Finally, the functoriality proof in is split into the up-to-scalar check in followed by the computation of the scalars in . \[remark:colors-in-this-paper\] For the figures in this paper we have chosen colors that can also be distinguished in grayscale print. An important role in calculations will be played by the colors purple ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3b,fill=somecolor3b] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$, golden ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3c,fill=somecolor3c] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$ and cyan ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3d,fill=somecolor3d] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$, which will appear differently shaded. **Acknowledgements:** We are indebted to Christian Blanchet for proposing this project to P.W. during his thesis defense, to Hoel Queffelec for encouraging us to pursue the question of functoriality over the integers, and to Louis-Hadrien Robert and Emmanuel Wagner for sharing and explaining a draft of their paper about a combinatorial formula for evaluating closed foams. The latter two exchanges took place at the Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences during the programme "Homology theories in low dimensional topology", which was supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council \[Grant Number EP/K032208/1\]. We would also like to thank Nils Carqueville, Marco Mackaay and Pedro Vaz for their explanations of signs appearing in $2$-categories of matrix factorizations, as well as Mikhail Khovanov, Skype, Catharina Stroppel and Joshua Sussan for many helpful conversation about foams and categorification, and an anonymous referee and Louis-Hadrien Robert for comments on a draft of this paper. D.T. also thanks a still nameless toilet paper roll for explaining the concept of a canopolis to him. M.E. was partially supported by the Australian Research Council Grant DP150103431. P.W. was supported by a Fortbildungsstipendium at the Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in Bonn and by the Leverhulme Research Grant RP2013-K-017 to Dorothy Buck, Imperial College London. GLN-equivariant foams {#sec:glnfoams} ===================== Symmetric polynomials {#subsec:sym-poly} --------------------- We start by briefly recalling several notions regarding symmetric polynomials which we will need in this paper. Throughout, we fix $N\in{\mathbb{Z}}_{\geq 1}$. Let ${\mathbb{A}}$ be an alphabet of size $|{\mathbb{A}}|=a$. We denote by ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}})$ the ${\mathbb{C}}$-algebra of symmetric polynomials in the alphabet ${\mathbb{A}}$. Similarly, for alphabets ${\mathbb{A}}_i$, we denote by ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}_1|\cdots|{\mathbb{A}}_r)$ the ${\mathbb{C}}$-algebra of polynomials which are symmetric in each alphabet separately. We view these symmetric polynomial rings as being graded by assigning each variable the degree $2$. We denote the $j^{\mathrm{th}}$ elementary symmetric polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}$ by ${\mathrm{e}_{j}}({\mathbb{A}})$, and the $j^{\mathrm{th}}$ complete symmetric polynomial in ${\mathbb{A}}$ by ${\mathrm{h}_{j}}({\mathbb{A}})$. Recall that the first $a$ of either give an algebraically independent set of generators for ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}})$, i.e. $${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}) \cong {\mathbb{C}}[{\mathrm{e}_{1}}({\mathbb{A}}),\dots,{\mathrm{e}_{a}}({\mathbb{A}})] \cong {\mathbb{C}}[{\mathrm{h}_{1}}({\mathbb{A}}),\dots,{\mathrm{h}_{a}}({\mathbb{A}})],$$ and that ${\mathrm{e}_{j}}({\mathbb{A}})=0$ for $j>a$. \[definition:schurdiff\] Let ${\mathbb{A}}$ and ${\mathbb{B}}$ be two disjoint alphabets of sizes $a$ and $b$. The complete symmetric polynomials in the difference of these two alphabets are elements of ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{B}})$ given by the generating function: $$\sum_{k\geq 0}\,{\mathrm{h}_{k}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}}) x^k = \frac{\prod_{B\in {\mathbb{B}}}(1-B x)}{\prod_{A\in {\mathbb{A}}}(1-A x)}.$$ The complete symmetric polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}$ are recovered in the special case ${\mathbb{B}}=\emptyset$, or under the homomorphism setting the variables in ${\mathbb{B}}$ to zero: $${\mathrm{h}_{k}}({\mathbb{A}})={\mathrm{h}_{k}}({\mathbb{A}}-\emptyset)= {\mathrm{h}_{k}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}})|_{{\mathbb{B}}\mapsto 0}.$$ \[example:polynomials\] For ${\mathbb{A}}=\{A_1,A_2\}$ and ${\mathbb{B}}=\{B\}$ we get the following generating function: $$\frac{(1-Bx)}{(1-A_1x)(1-A_2x)} = \underbrace{1}_{{\mathrm{h}_{0}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}})} + \underbrace{(A_1 + A_2 - B)}_{{\mathrm{h}_{1}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}})} x + \underbrace{(A_1^2 + A_1 A_2 +A_2^2 -(A_1 + A_2)B)}_{{\mathrm{h}_{2}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}})} x^2 + \mathfrak{O}(x^3)$$ For $B=0$ we get the generating function for the complete symmetric polynomials in $\{A_1,A_2\}$. \[convention:partitions\] Let ${\mathrm{P}}$ denote the set of all integer partitions. For $a,b\in{\mathbb{Z}}_{\geq 0}$ we write ${\mathrm{P}(a)}$ for the set of partitions with at most $a$ parts, and ${\mathrm{P}(a,b)}$ for the set of partitions with at most $a$ parts, all of which are of size at most $b$. Partitions $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_a)$ can be identified with Young diagrams with $\alpha_i$ specifying the numbers of boxes in the $i^{\mathrm{th}}$ row. Using this identification, let the total number of boxes be denoted by $|\alpha|$ and let ${\overline{\alpha}}$ denote the Young diagram obtained by reflecting $\alpha$ along its main diagonal. If it is understood that $\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,b)}$, we write ${{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}\in{\mathrm{P}(a,b)}$ for the Young diagram of the complement of $\alpha$, whose rows are given by ${{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}_{a+1-j} = b -\alpha_j$ and ${\mathrm{box}_{a,b}}={{\emptyset}^{\mathrm{c}}}$ for the full box Young diagram. Further, we write ${\widehat{\alpha}} = {\overline{{{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}}}$ for the transpose of the complement of $\alpha$. Here is an illustrative example for $a=3, b=4$: $${\mathrm{box}_{3,4}}= \xy (0,0)*{ \begin{Young} & & & \cr & & & \cr & & & \cr \end{Young} } \endxy \;,\quad \alpha= \xy (0,0)*{ \begin{Young} & & &\cr & \cr \cr \end{Young} } \endxy \;,\quad {{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}= \xy (0,0)*{ \begin{Young} & & \cr &\cr \end{Young} } \endxy \;,\quad {\widehat{\alpha}}= \xy (0,0)*{ \begin{Young} & \cr & \cr \cr \end{Young} } \endxy \hspace{1.55cm} \raisebox{-.55cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacktriangle}}} \hspace{-1.55cm}$$ \[definition:schur-poly\] Let $\alpha=(\alpha_1,\dots,\alpha_a)\in {\mathrm{P}(a)}$ be a partition. Then the Schur polynomial corresponding to $\alpha$ in the difference of alphabets ${\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}}$ is given by: $${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}}) = \det(({\mathrm{h}_{\alpha_i+j-i}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}}))_{1\leq i,j\leq a}).$$ The Schur polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}$ are recovered in the special case ${\mathbb{B}}=\emptyset$ or under the homomorphism setting the variables in ${\mathbb{B}}$ to zero: $${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}})={\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}-\emptyset)={\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}})|_{{\mathbb{B}}\mapsto 0}. \hspace{4.55cm} \raisebox{-.05cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacktriangle}}} \hspace{-4.55cm}$$ Recall that the Schur polynomials ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}$ for $\alpha\in{\mathrm{P}(a)}$ form a basis for the ${\mathbb{C}}$-algebra ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}})$ with structure constants for the multiplication given by the *Littlewood-Richardson coefficients* ${\mathrm{c}_{\alpha\beta}^{\gamma}}$, see e.g. @MD [Section I.5]. This means for $\alpha, \beta\in {\mathrm{P}(a)}$ that $${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}{\mathrm{s}_{\beta}}= {\textstyle\sum_{\gamma\in{\mathrm{P}(a)}}}\, {\mathrm{c}_{\alpha\beta}^{\gamma}} {\mathrm{s}_{\gamma}}.$$ \[example:unknot\](@Wu2 [Section 2.3], and also @Las.) Let ${\mathrm{Gr}}_a$ denote the Grassmannian of $a$-dimensional subspaces in ${\mathbb{C}}^N$. This carries an action of $\mathrm{GL}_N$ and its $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant cohomology can be presented as follows, see e.g. @Ful [Lectures 6 and 7]: $$H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a) \cong \frac{ {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{S}})} { \langle h_{N-a+i}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}})\mid i> 0 \rangle }.$$ In fact, $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a)$ is a graded, free module of rank $\binom{N}{a}$ over the equivariant cohomology of a point $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}(pt)$, which is isomorphic to the symmetric polynomial ring ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ in an alphabet ${\mathbb{S}}$ of size $N$. Moreover, $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a)$ has a homogeneous bases over ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ given by the Schur polynomials ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}})$ (or, alternatively, ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}})$) with $\alpha\in{\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}$. Let ${\mathrm{tr}}_a\colon H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a) \to {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ denote the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear projection onto the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-span of the Schur polynomial corresponding to ${\mathrm{box}_{a,N-a}}({\mathbb{A}})$, adjusted by a sign that we will explain in . Explicitly, this *trace* satisfies $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:trace-sign} {\mathrm{tr}}_a({\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}){\mathrm{s}_{\beta}}({\mathbb{A}}- {\mathbb{S}})) = (-1)^{\binom{a}{2}} \delta_{\alpha,{{\beta}^{\mathrm{c}}}}, \quad \text{ for any }\alpha,\beta\in{\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}.\end{gathered}$$ This means that it defines a non-degenerate ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-bilinear form and, thus, a Frobenius algebra structure on $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a)$. The corresponding (Poincaré) duality maps a basis element ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}})$ to $(-1)^{\binom{a}{2}} {\mathrm{s}_{{{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}})$. (@Wu2 [Section 2.3], and also @Las.)\[example:digon\] Let again ${\mathbb{A}}$ and ${\mathbb{B}}$ denote alphabets of size $a$ and $b$. Note that ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{B}})$ is a free ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}})$-module of rank $\binom{a{+}b}{a}$ with homogeneous bases given by the Schur polynomials ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}})$ (or, alternatively, ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{B}}))$ with $\alpha\in{\mathrm{P}(a,b)}$. Let $\zeta\colon {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{B}})\to{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}})$ denote the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}})$-linear projection onto the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}})$-span of the Schur polynomial corresponding to ${\mathrm{box}_{a,b}}({\mathbb{A}})$. This map, which is known as the Sylvester operator, is of degree $-2 a b$ and satisfies $$\zeta({\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}){\mathrm{s}_{\beta}}({\mathbb{B}})) = (-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|} \delta_{\alpha,{\widehat{\beta}}}, \quad \text{ for any }\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,b)}\text{ and }\beta\in {\mathrm{P}(b,a)}. \hspace{2.18cm} \raisebox{-.00cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacktriangle}}} \hspace{-2.18cm}$$ Canopolises of webs and foams {#subsection:canopolis} ----------------------------- One main toolkit used in this paper is the canopolis formalism introduced by Bar-Natan @BN1 [Section 8.2], which can be seen as a categorification of Jones' planar algebra formalism @Jon. We will now describe a canopolis of webs and foams between them. Throughout this section, let $S$ be a compact, planar surface, i.e. a surface with a fixed embedding into ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. \[definition:web\] A web in $S$ is a finite, oriented, trivalent graph, properly embedded in $S$, together with a labeling of edges by elements of ${\mathbb{Z}}_{>0}$ satisfying a flow condition at every trivalent vertex. Vertices with incoming labels $a,b$ and outgoing label $a+b$ are called merge vertices, the others split vertices. We illustrate them, and a trivial web, in the case where $S$ is a disk: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:mergesplit} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-17}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-18}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-19}}; \endxy \hspace{4.25cm} \raisebox{-.5cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacktriangle}}} \hspace{-4.25cm}\end{gathered}$$ For the following definition, let $V$ and $W$ be two webs in $S$ with identical boundary data, i.e. they agree in a collar neighborhood of $\partial S$. \[definition:foam\] A foam $F$ from $V$ to $W$ is a compact, two-dimensional CW-complex (the particular CW structure on $F$ is irrelevant in the following) with finitely many cells, properly embedded in $S \times [0,1]$, such that every interior point $x\in F$ has a neighborhood of one of the following three types, which are also illustrated in . 1. A smoothly embedded two-dimensional manifold. The connected components of the set of such points are called the *facets* of $F$. Each facet is required to be oriented, and we label it with an element of ${\mathbb{Z}}_{>0}$. 2. The letter $\mathrm{Y}$ (the union of three distinct rays in ${\mathbb{R}}^2$, meeting in the origin) times $[0,1]$. The connected components of the set of such singular points are called the *seams* of $F$. Every seam carries an orientation, which agrees with the orientation induced by two of the adjacents facets, say of label $a$ and $b$. Then we also require that the third adjacent facet is labeled by $a+b$ and that it induces the opposite orientation on the seam. 3. The cone on the one-skeleton of a tetrahedron. We call the cone points *singular vertices*, and they are contained in the boundary of precisely four seams and six facets. $$\text{(I)}\colon \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-1}}; \endxy \quad , \quad \text{(II)}\colon \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-2}}; \endxy \quad , \quad \text{(III)}\colon \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-3}}; \endxy$$ Furthermore, $F\colon V\to W$ is required to satisfy the following conditions: - The (bottom) boundary of $F$ in $S\times\{0\}$ agrees with $V$ with matching labels and reversed orientations on the edges. The (top) boundary of $F$ in $S\times\{1\}$ agrees with $W$ with labels and induced orientations. In particular, singular seams are oriented down through merge vertices and up through split vertices in the boundary webs. - $F$ restricted to $S \times [0,1]$ over a collar neighborhood of $\partial S$ is cylindrical, i.e. it agrees with the restriction of $V\times [0,1]$ to the same set. We identify foams which differ by an ambient isotopy relative to the boundary in $S\times [0,1]$. Then the set of webs in $S$ with fixed boundary data assemble into a category with morphisms given by foams mapping from their bottom boundary web to their top boundary web. If $S$ is a disk, we call these *disk categories*. \[remark:general-position\] Using classical Morse theory inductively on the skeletons of foams, one can show that one can isotope foams $F$ into generic position so that seams and facets have finitely many non-degenerate critical points for the height function. Then the slices $F\cap S\times \{z\}$ are webs for all but finitely many $z\in [0,1]$. See for the local foams around these singularities. Webs in disks can be glued in a planar way reminiscent of Jones' planar algebras @Jon. These *planar algebra* operations are given by gluing disks with embedded webs into holed disks with embedded arcs, such that web boundaries are glued in a way that respects the labelings and orientations. An example of a holed disk is given in . $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-4}}; \endxy \quad \longrightarrow \quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-5}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ These planar algebra operations are associative, but there are no identity operations because we consider webs as embedded and not up to isotopy. Note that every web in a disk is generated, via planar algebra operations, by trivial, merge and split webs as in . More generally, we will call any collection of sets parametrized by boundary data of planar disks, together with associative composition operations given by gluing disks into decorated holed disks, a *planar algebra*. If the collection of sets is replaced by a collection of categories and the planar algebra operations are multi-place functors, then we call this structure a *canopolis*, c.f. Bar-Natan @BN1 [Section 8.2]. The planar algebra operations for webs via holed disks immediately extend to planar algebra operations on foams via holed cylindrical foams. These operations are functors since they commute with the categorical composition of stacking foams (see e.g. ), and they are strictly associative, so the disk categories assemble into a canopolis. $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,.75)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-0-6}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ \[definition:foamcan\] We denote by ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ the canopolis assembled from the categories of foams over disks, as described above. \[rem:can-gen\] For a foam in general position, the critical points for the height function have neighborhoods modeled on the following foams. If the critical point is contained in the interior of a facet, then we get Morse-type handle attachments $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:foamgen1} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-1}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-2}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-3}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ each with two possible orientations. If the critical point is contained in the interior of a seam, then we get the digon creation and annihilation, and zip and unzip foams $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:foamgen2} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-4}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-5}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-6}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-7}}; \endxy \\ \label{eq:foamgen2b} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-8}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-9}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-10}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-11}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ each of which admits two orientations. Finally, singular vertices of the following types appear: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:foamgen3} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-12}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-13}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ For the rightmost foam we assume that $a>c$. These foams furthermore exist in upside-down versions, and each one admits two orientations. We let ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ denote the ${\mathbb{Z}}$-linear extension of ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ where, additionally, every facet of foams may be decorated by a partition. If gluing two foams results in a foam having two partitions on one facet, it is to be replaced by a ${\mathbb{Z}}$-linear combination of decorated foams according to a rule modeled on the multiplication of Schur polynomials: $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,.8)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-14}}; \endxy = \sum_{\gamma\in{\mathrm{P}(a)}} {\mathrm{c}_{\alpha\beta}^{\gamma}} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-15}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ Here ${\mathrm{c}_{\alpha\beta}^{\gamma}}$ are the Littlewood-Richardson coefficients. Using this rule, we will abuse notation and place ${\mathbb{Z}}$-linear combinations of partitions on foam facets. We also use the interpretation of such linear combinations as symmetric polynomials in an $a$-element alphabet associated to the facet. This is especially useful when several facets are involved, in which case decorations can be encoded as partially symmetric polynomials. \[definition:bidegree\] The morphisms in ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ admit a ${\mathbb{Z}}\times{\mathbb{Z}}$-grading. The bidegrees of the foam generators in are as follows. - Cups and caps with label $a$ are of bidegree $(a^2,-a)$. - Saddles with label $a$ are of bidegree $(-a^2,a)$. - Digon creation and annihilation foams of label $a$ and $b$ as in are of bidegree $(-a b,0)$; the ones in are of bidegree $(b(a+b),-b)$. - Zip and unzip foams of label $a$ and $b$ as in are of bidegree $(a b,0)$; the ones in are of bidegree $(-b(a+b),b)$. - The first foam in is of bidegree $(0,0)$, the other one of bidegree $(a b,0)$. - A decoration by a partition $\alpha$ is of bidegree $(2|\alpha|,0)$. We define the degree $\deg{F}$ of a foam $F$ in ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ to be the integer obtained by collapsing its bidegree from $(k,l)$ to $k+N l$. Alternatively, the bidegree of a foam can be defined as a weighted Euler characteristic, compare e.g. with @RoW [Definition 2.3]. For the following definition we consider $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}(pt)\cong{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ as our ground ring. Recall that this ring acts on $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant cohomology in the natural way, see also . \[definition:eq-alph\] Let ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ be the additive closure of the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear, ${\mathbb{Z}}$-graded canopolis determined by the following data. - Objects are formal $q$-degree shifts of webs $q^s {V}$, where ${V}$ ranges over the objects of ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$, and $s\in{\mathbb{Z}}$. - Morphisms are ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear combinations of foams in ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ such that $$F\colon q^l V \to q^k W \Rightarrow \deg{F}=k-l.$$ Hereby we consider the variables of ${\mathbb{S}}$ to be of degree two. - Categorical composition is given by the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-bilinear extension of the composition in ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$. - Planar composition is given by the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-multilinear extension of the planar composition in ${{\mathbb{Z}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$.<span>$\blacktriangle$</span> The process of taking the additive closure of a canopolis amounts to allowing formal direct sums of objects as well as matrices of morphisms between them, with composition given by matrix multiplication. The canopolis of GLN-equivariant foams {#subsec:main-player} -------------------------------------- In this section we will describe how to take a quotient of ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ that allows the construction of equivariant type A link homologies. The construction uses the foam evaluation of Robert–Wagner @RoW to run the *universal construction* as presented by Blanchet–Habegger–Masbaum–Vogel @BHMV for categories of closed webs and foams between them. Finally, this is extended to the canopolis framework. ### Closed foam evaluation and the universal construction {#sec:univconstr} The main ingredient that we need is a way of evaluating closed foams. This gives a ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear *evaluation* $${\mathrm{ev}}\colon {\mathrm{End}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(\emptyset)\to {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}}).$$ As our evaluation we choose the $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant version of the explicit and combinatorial evaluation described by Robert–Wagner in @RoW [Section 2.2] where the reader can find the details. Actually, Robert–Wagner work with torus-equivariant cohomology and thus, with ${\mathbb{C}}[{\mathbb{S}}]$ as the ground ring. But this simply amounts to an extension of scalars from ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$. \[remark:foam-evaluation\] We believe that Robert–Wagner's evaluation coincides (up to minor renormalization details) with the evaluation provided by the Kapustin–Li formula as formulated by Khovanov–Rozansky @KR3 and used by Mackaay–Sto<span>š</span>i<span>ć</span>–Vaz @MSV in the construction of foam categories and link homologies. We choose to refer to Robert–Wagner because their evaluation is explicit, combinatorial and is already formulated in the equivariant setting. First, we focus on the disk category with empty boundary in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$, i.e. the category of closed webs in the disk and foams between them, which we denote by ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}$. Since this category is ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear, we can consider the following representable functor to the monoidal category ${{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})\text{-}\mathrm{mod}}$ of free ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-modules: $$\begin{aligned} \overline{\mathcal{F}} \colon {{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}&\to {{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})\text{-}\mathrm{mod}},\\ {V}&\mapsto {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(\emptyset,{V}),\\ \left(V\xrightarrow{F} W\right) &\mapsto \left({\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(\emptyset,V) \xrightarrow{F\circ -} {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(\emptyset,W)\right).\end{aligned}$$ The ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-modules $\overline{\mathcal{F}}({V})$ associated to webs ${V}$ are too large to be useful. However, given any $G\in {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}({V},\emptyset)$, one considers the map $$\phi_G\colon \overline{\mathcal{F}}({V}) \to {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}}), \quad \phi_G(\emptyset\xrightarrow{F}{V})={\mathrm{ev}}(G\circ F).$$ This map is well-defined since the evaluation depends only on the combinatorial data of the foams and is, thus, invariant under isotopy. The intersection $\mathcal{I}({V})=\bigcap_G \ker(\phi_G)$ taken over all $G\in {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}({V},\emptyset)$ gives a submodule of $\overline{\mathcal{F}}({V})$. One then sets $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:q-space} \mathcal{F}({V})=\overline{\mathcal{F}}({V})/\mathcal{I}({V}).\end{gathered}$$ We think of $\mathcal{F}({V})$ as the space of all embedded foams with boundary ${V}$ modulo such ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear combinations that evaluate to zero under arbitrary closures. The functor $\mathcal{F}$ extends to a ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear functor $$\mathcal{F} \colon {{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}\to {{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})\text{-}\mathrm{mod}}.$$ This might be regarded as a (singular) TQFT for the category of closed webs and foams between them. In the following we collect some useful properties, which are implicit in @RoW [Section 3]: - $\mathcal{F}(\emptyset) \cong {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$. - $\mathcal{F}(V\sqcup W) \cong \mathcal{F}(V)\otimes_{{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})}\mathcal{F}(W)$. - The modules $\mathcal{F}({V})$ are free over ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ with graded rank computed by the MOY-evaluation of webs as in @MOY. - $\mathcal{F}$ restricts to a $1{+}1$-dimensional TQFT with values in ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-mod on the subcategory of ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}$ consisting of $a$-labeled $1$-manifolds and $a$-labeled cobordisms between them. This TQFT is determined by the Frobenius algebra given by the $\mathrm{GL}_N$-equivariant cohomology of the Grassmannian ${\mathrm{Gr}}_a$ from . - The decorations on foam facets are related to basis elements of $H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a)$ via the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear composite isomorphism $$\begin{gathered} \begin{aligned} H^*_{\mathrm{GL}_N}({\mathrm{Gr}}_a) \cong \frac{{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{S}})}{\langle h_{N-a+i}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}})\mid i> 0 \rangle} &\xrightarrow{\cong} \mathcal{F}(\bigcirc_a), \\ {\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}})&\mapsto \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-99}}; \endxy, \quad \alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}, \end{aligned}\end{gathered}$$ where $\bigcirc_a$ denotes the $a$-labeled circle object and $\mathcal{F}(\bigcirc_a)$ denotes the corresponding quotient space as in , in which the illustrated cup foam lives. ### Foams modulo relations {#sec:foamsmodrel} Instead of continuing to work with the functor $\mathcal{F}$, one can form a quotient category of webs and foams, by identifying foams that are sent to equal ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear maps under $\mathcal{F}$. To this end, we define ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}(\mathrm{cl})}$ to be the category with the same objects as ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}$, but with morphism spaces $${\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}(\mathrm{cl})}}(V,W) = {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}}(V,W)/ \ker(\mathcal{F}).$$ We denote the functor induced by $\mathcal{F}$ on ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}(\mathrm{cl})}$ by the same symbol. The category ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}(\mathrm{cl})}$ is obtained from ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}(\mathrm{cl})}$ by imposing the relations in $\ker(\mathcal{F})$. Many of these relations are of a local nature and some important ones are listed in the next section. Before that, however, we would like to extend this quotient to the canopolis framework. ### Canopolization Let $F\colon V \to W$ be an arbitrary foam in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ between webs with boundary. Abstractly, $F$ can be considered as a foam from the empty web to the closed web formed by its boundary $\partial F = W\cup_\phi\overline{V}$, which we consider as embedded in a disk. Here $\overline{V}$ denotes the web $V$ reflected in a line and $\cup_\phi$ stands for the planar algebra operation which connects the appropriate boundary points of the webs $W$ and $\overline{V}$. Accordingly, there exist invertible canopolis operations: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:bending-trick} \mathrm{bend}\colon {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(V,W) \xrightarrow{\cong} {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(\emptyset,W\cup_\phi\overline{V}).\end{gathered}$$ Informally, such an operation is given by *bending* (or *clapping*) the entire boundary of the foam to the top of the cylinder. In the canopolis, this can be achieved by planar composition with the identity foam on $\overline{V}$ and then pre-composing with a *cup foam* that is obtained by rotating $V$ along a half-circle. The inverse operation is given by bending the part of the boundary down again. These operations are inverse because their composites transform foams only by isotopies. Here is a prototypical example: $$\xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-100}}; \endxy \; \xrightarrow{\text{bend}} \; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-101}}; \endxy$$ We define $$\mathcal{I}(V,W)= \mathrm{bend}^{-1}(\mathcal{I}(W\cup_\phi\overline{V}))\subset {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(V,W).$$ It is easy to see that the collection of submodules $\mathcal{I}(V,W)$ is preserved under arbitrary canopolis operations in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$. \[definition:foam-canopolis-rels\] Let ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}$ denote the ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear, ${\mathbb{Z}}$-graded canopolis obtained as a quotient of the canopolis ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}$ by the canopolis ideal determined by the collection $\mathcal{I}(V,W)\subset {\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}}(V,W)$. The subcategory of webs and foams without boundary in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}$ is naturally identified with ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}(\mathrm{cl})}$ as introduced above. \[rem:gradhom\] The graded ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-rank of the morphism space ${\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}(V,W)$ can be computed via the *bending trick* as a rescaled MOY-evaluation of the closed web $W\cup_\phi\overline{V}$. The rescaling depends on the number and labels of critical points introduced in the bending. From this, one can deduce the complex dimensions of the graded components of the morphism spaces in ${\mathrm{Hom}}_{{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}(V,W)$. We give some examples that are used later: - The endomorphism space of a web without vertices, i.e. a trivial tangle, is one-dimensional in degree zero, spanned by the identity foam. - The morphism spaces between the empty web and a circle of label $a$ are one-dimensional in degree $-a(N-a)$, spanned by cup and cap foams respectively. - The morphism spaces between the two distinct webs that consist of two anti-parallel strands of label $a$ are one-dimensional in degree $a(N-a)$, spanned by the saddle foam.<span>$\blacktriangle$</span> \[remark:integrality-1\] (Integrality.) In fact, the closed foam evaluation of Robert–Wagner takes values in the ring of symmetric polynomials in ${\mathbb{S}}$ with integer coefficients ${\mathrm{Sym}_{{\mathbb{Z}}}}({\mathbb{S}})$, see @RoW [Main Theorem]. Accordingly, all constructions in this section can be performed over the integers as well, and all morphism spaces are free ${\mathrm{Sym}_{{\mathbb{Z}}}}({\mathbb{S}})$-modules. GLN-equivariant foam relations {#subsec:equi-rel} ------------------------------ Below we collect a number of relations that hold in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}$ and that we will need for our main result. In writing these relations we shall decorate foam facets by symmetric polynomials. These correspond to ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear combinations of Schur polynomials, which in turn correspond to partitions. We will switch freely between these conventions. We start with the following two lemmas, which follow directly from the discussion in and \[sec:foamsmodrel\]. \[lemma:neck-cut\] The *neck-cutting* and *sphere relations* hold in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}$: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:neckcut} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-39}}; \endxy \! = (-1)^{\binom{a}{2}} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \sum_{\alpha\in{\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-40}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-41}}; \endxy = \begin{cases} (-1)^{\binom{a}{2}}, \text{ if } \alpha={\mathrm{box}_{a,N-a}} ,\\ 0, \text{ otherwise.} \end{cases}\end{gathered}$$ In the neck-cutting relations we mean ${\mathrm{s}_{{{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}}}={\mathrm{s}_{{{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}}}({\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}})$, but ${\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}={\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{B}})$, where ${\mathbb{A}}$ and ${\mathbb{B}}$ are the alphabet on the cup and cap respectively. The sphere relations are true both for Schur polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}$ as well as those in ${\mathbb{A}}-{\mathbb{S}}$. We explain below in why the sign $(-1)^{\binom{a}{2}}$ is necessary. \[lem:neckcutsphere\] The following relations hold in ${{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}$. $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-42}}; \endxy\;= 0,\text{ if }\alpha\notin{\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)} \text{ or if } a>N. \hspace{3.4cm} \raisebox{-.9cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacksquare}}} \hspace{-3.4cm}\end{gathered}$$ \[proposition:QRholds\] The defining relations @QR [(3.8) to (3.20)] of the foam $2$-category considered by Queffelec–Rose hold in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$. See @RoW [Proof of Proposition 4.2]. \[example:QRholds\] We give three examples of relations from that we use later: $$\label{eq:zipoff} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-43}}; \endxy \;\; = \sum_{\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,b)}} (-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|} \;\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-44}}; \endxy$$ This relation is a special case of @QR [(3.14)] in which two facets carry the label zero. This means the corresponding facets are to be erased and their boundary seams to be smoothed out. The second example illustrates the family of Matveev–Piergallini (MP) relations @QR [(3.8)]: $$\label{eq:mp1} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-95}}; \endxy \;\; = \;\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-96}}; \endxy$$ Finally, the *decoration migration relations* @QR [(3.9)], which involve the Littlewood Richardson coefficients: $$\label{eq:dot-mig1} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-97}}; \endxy \; = \; \sum_{\alpha,\beta} {\mathrm{c}_{\alpha\beta}^{\gamma}} \; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-98}}; \endxy$$ If ${\mathbb{A}}$, ${\mathbb{B}}$ and ${\mathbb{X}}$ are the alphabets on the facets of label $a$, $b$ and $a+b$ respectively, then this relation identifies symmetric polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}}$ and ${\mathbb{X}}$. The Sylvester operator from allows a compact description of the blister removal relations @QR [(3.10)]: \[example:blister1\] Let $p\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{S}})$ and $q\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{B}}|{\mathbb{S}})$ be decorations on the front (rear) and rear (front) facets of the left (right) blister below. Then we have the following relations in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$: $$\label{eq:blister1} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-45}}; \endxy \;=\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-46}}; \endxy \;=(-1)^{a b} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-47}}; \endxy \hspace{3.0cm} \raisebox{-.8cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacktriangle}}} \hspace{-3.0cm}$$ \[corollary:blister\] Consider the theta foam obtained from the left-hand side of by quotienting the boundary of the square to a point. Suppose that this foam carries decorations $p\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}}|{\mathbb{S}})$, $q\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{B}}|{\mathbb{S}})$ and $r\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{X}}|{\mathbb{S}})$ on the facets of label $a$, $b$ and $a+b$. Then this theta foam evaluates to the scalar ${\mathrm{tr}}_{a+b}(r \zeta(p q))\in{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$ in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ if we identify symmetric polynomials in ${\mathbb{A}}\cup {\mathbb{B}}$ and ${\mathbb{X}}$ via . \[remark:weird-signs\] and explain why the sign in and is necessary. Using the notation from , we can evaluate a theta foam in two different ways: $$\sum_{\alpha \in {\mathrm{P}(a,b)}}(-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|}\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-91}}; \endxy \quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-92}}; \endxy \; \stackrel{\eqref{eq:zipoff}}{=} \; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-93}}; \endxy \; \stackrel{\eqref{eq:blister1}}{=} (-1)^{ab} \; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-94}}; \endxy$$ Thus, taking $p=\emptyset$ and $q={\mathrm{box}_{b,N-b}}$ gives $${\mathrm{tr}}_a({\mathrm{box}_{a,N-a}}){\mathrm{tr}}_b({\mathrm{box}_{b,N-b}})=(-1)^{ab}{\mathrm{tr}}_{a+b}({\mathrm{box}_{a+b,N-a-b}}).$$ Hence, fixing ${\mathrm{tr}}_1({\mathrm{box}_{1,N-1}})=1$ determines the rest to be as in . \[lemma:scalar-the-second\] The following relations hold in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ for $a\geq b$: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:idem-disc} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-48}}; \endxy \; = (-1)^{b(a-b)}\;\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-49}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ Here the middle annulus carries the label $a-b$. Similarly in case $b\geq a$, but with swapped orientation on the seams. We detach the middle facet from the rear facet via at the expense of a decoration $\sum_{\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a-b,b)}} (-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|}{\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{X}}){\mathrm{s}_{{\widehat{\alpha}}}}({\mathbb{B}})$, where ${\mathbb{X}}$ and ${\mathbb{B}}$ are the alphabets on the middle and rear facets. Removing the blister in the front facet gives zero, unless $\alpha={\mathrm{box}_{a-b,b}}$, see . Hence, only the coefficient $(-1)^{|{\widehat{\emptyset}}|}=(-1)^{b(a-b)}$ survives. Specializations and their relations {#subsec:special} ----------------------------------- From now on, we let ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}=\{{\lambda}_1,\dots,{\lambda}_N\}$ be a set of $N$ pairwise different complex numbers and consider the specialization homomorphism of ${\mathbb{C}}$-algebras $$\begin{gathered} {\mathrm{sp}^{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}}}\colon{\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})\to {\mathbb{C}},\quad p({\mathbb{S}})\mapsto p({\mathtt{\Sigma}}).\end{gathered}$$ Define the canopolis ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ as the ${\mathbb{C}}$-linear canopolis obtained from ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ by specializing variables via ${\mathrm{sp}^{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}}}$. The objects in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ still carry $q$-degree shifts, but on the level of morphism spaces, the grading is demoted to a filtration. In the following, we abuse notation by writing ${\mathrm{sp}^{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}}}$ for the induced ${\mathbb{C}}$-linear canopolis morphism from ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ to ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$, which respects the filtrations. It is clear that ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ satisfies the ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}$-specialized versions of the foam relations already listed for ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$. \[example:Blanchet\] In the case $N=2$ and ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}=\{1,-1\}$ the foams in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ have been used by Blanchet @Bla [Section 4]. They give rise to a deformed link homology theory that is analogous to Lee's deformation @Lee of Khovanov homology. \[remark:spez-to-zero\] Specializing all variables in ${\mathbb{S}}$ not to distinct numbers, but to zero instead, one recovers a canopolis of webs and foams that can be used for the definition of the (non-equivariant) colored Khovanov–Rozansky link homologies. The canopolis ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ can be seen as its *generic* deformation. Deformations obtained as other specializations of the variables in ${\mathbb{S}}$ have been studied in @RW. \[lemma:idem\] The algebra of decorations on an $a$-labeled foam facet is the direct sum of one-dimensional summands indexed by $a$-element subsets ${\mathtt{A}}\subset\Sigma$. We denote the corresponding idempotents by ${\boldsymbol{\mathbbm{1}}_{\!\mathtt{A}}}$ and display them as $$\xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-50}}; \endxy$$ Additionally, decorations $p\in {\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{A}})$ satisfy $$\label{eq:action-schur} p({\mathbb{A}})\cdot{\boldsymbol{\mathbbm{1}}_{\!\mathtt{A}}}=p({\mathtt{A}})\cdot{\boldsymbol{\mathbbm{1}}_{\!\mathtt{A}}},$$ i.e. they act on the ${\mathtt{A}}$-summand via evaluation at ${\mathtt{A}}$. Here we use that we work over ${\mathbb{C}}$. However, ${\mathbb{Q}}$ would suffice as ground ring if ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}\subset {\mathbb{Q}}$. In the following we use the idempotents ${\boldsymbol{\mathbbm{1}}_{\!\mathtt{A}}}$ in to label the facets of foams in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$. See @RW [Lemma 4.2] and also @RW [Proof of Theorem 3.11]. (@RW [Lemma 4.2].)\[lemma:admissibility\] Let ${\mathtt{A}}$, ${\mathtt{B}}$ and ${\mathtt{X}}$ be subsets of ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}$ with $|{\mathtt{A}}|=a$, $|{\mathtt{B}}|=a$ and $|{\mathtt{X}}|=a+b$ respectively. Then the following relation holds in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$: $$\xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-51}}; \endxy =0,\quad \text{unless } {\mathtt{A}} \cup {\mathtt{B}} = {\mathtt{X}}. \hspace{4.4cm} \raisebox{-.7cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\blacksquare}}} \hspace{-4.4cm}$$ \[lemma:scalars\] Let ${\mathbb{A}}$, ${\mathbb{B}}$ be alphabets of size $a$ and $b$ respectively. Then we have: $$r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{B}})= {\textstyle\sum_{\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,b)}}}\; (-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|} {\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathbb{A}}){\mathrm{s}_{{\widehat{\alpha}}}}({\mathbb{B}}) = {\textstyle\prod_{A\in {\mathbb{A}}, B\in {\mathbb{B}}}}\; (A-B).$$ From this we get $$r({\mathbb{B}},{\mathbb{A}})=(-1)^{a b} r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{B}}) \quad\text{and}\quad r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{B}})=0,\;\text{if }{\mathbb{A}}\cap{\mathbb{B}}\neq \emptyset.$$ If ${\mathbb{X}}$ is another alphabet, then $$r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{B}}\cup {\mathbb{X}})=r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{B}})r({\mathbb{A}},{\mathbb{X}}).$$ If ${\mathtt{A}}\subset {\mathtt{\Sigma}}$, then we also have $${r(\mathtt{A,{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\setminus A})}= {\textstyle\sum_{\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}}} \; {\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathtt{A}}){\mathrm{s}_{{{\alpha}^{\mathrm{c}}}}}({\mathtt{A}}-{\mathtt{\Sigma}}) = {\textstyle\sum_{\alpha\in {\mathrm{P}(a,N-a)}}}\; (-1)^{|{\widehat{\alpha}}|} {\mathrm{s}_{\alpha}}({\mathtt{A}}){\mathrm{s}_{{\widehat{\alpha}}}}({\mathtt{\Sigma}}\setminus {\mathtt{A}}),$$ which is always non-zero. For the first equation, see e.g. @MD [Section I.4, Example 5]. For the second equation we use ${\mathrm{s}_{\beta}}({\mathtt{A}}-{\mathtt{\Sigma}}) = (-1)^{|\beta|} {\mathrm{s}_{{\overline{\beta}}}}({\mathtt{\Sigma}}\setminus {\mathtt{A}})$. We need to know how idempotent-colored foams behave with respect to the relations found above. We let ${r(\mathtt{A})}=(-1)^{\binom{a}{2}}{r(\mathtt{A,{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\setminus A})}$. \[lemma:scalar-the-first\] The following relations hold in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:idem-bubble} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-52}}; \endxy \;= {r(\mathtt{A})}\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-53}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-54}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A})}^{-1}. \hspace{3.6cm} \raisebox{-1.0cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\square}}} \hspace{-3.6cm}\end{gathered}$$ The first relation follows from the ${\mathtt{\Sigma}}$-specialization of the neck-cutting relation combined with and . The relation for the sphere is obtained by composing both sides of the neck-cutting relation with a cap. \[lemma:scalar-the-third\] The following relation holds in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$: $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-55}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A,B})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-56}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-57}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A,B})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-58}}; \endxy \\ \label{eq:colblister} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-59}}; \endxy \;=\; {r(\mathtt{A,B})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-60}}; \endxy \hspace{4.35cm} \raisebox{-.8cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\square}}} \hspace{-4.35cm}\end{gathered}$$ These relations follow immediately from @QR [Relations (3.13) and (3.14)] as well as @RW [Relation (4-7)], imported via , and . \[remark:flow-chart\] To reduce the complexity of computations appearing in , we will use *<span>phase diagrams </span>* which show the interaction of foam facets with a chosen facet (or union of facets) in a foam, see . $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-61}}; \endxy \leftrightsquigarrow \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-62}}; \endxy = \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-63}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ Here we adopt the convention that the facets lying in the drawing surface all carry the standard orientation of ${\mathbb{R}}^2$. The facets in front of the drawing surface are colored purple ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3b,fill=somecolor3b] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$ and those behind golden ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3c,fill=somecolor3c] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$ (and later also: cyan ${\,\tikz[baseline=-.05,scale=0.25]{\draw[somecolor3d,fill=somecolor3d] (0,0) rectangle (1,1);}\,}$). For readers familiar with the relationship between foams and categorified quantum groups (as developed in @Ma1 [@MPT; @LQR; @QR]), we emphasize that the orientation conventions in phase diagrams are not identical to those used in the string diagrams of the skew Howe dual categorified quantum group. The first equations in are simply $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:idem-KLR} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-64}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A,B})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-65}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-66}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A,B})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-67}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ The following <span>phase diagrams </span> represent associativity and MP relations on foams, which hold in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ by : $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:MP-flow} \begin{aligned} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-68}}; \endxy &= \reflectbox{ \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-68}}; \endxy } \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-69}}; \endxy \;=\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-70}}; \endxy \end{aligned}\end{gathered}$$ The relations obtained be reversing the orientation on all seams in also hold. Similarly, the pitchfork moves hold for all possible orientations on seams in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$, see @QR [Relations (3.28) and (3.29)] (imported via ): $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:idem-pitchfork} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-71}}; \endxy = \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-72}}; \endxy \quad, \quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-73}}; \endxy = \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-74}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ We will use several other versions of pitchfork relations, e.g.:\ <span>0.99</span><span>XX</span> $$\hspace{-8cm}\label{eq:idem-pitchfork2} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-75}}; \endxy = \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-76}}; \endxy$$ & $$\hspace{-7cm} \label{eq:idem-pitchfork3} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-77}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{A,C})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-78}}; \endxy$$ \ The relations of type hold in ${{{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ and can be deduced from via . The relations of type hold in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$ and are obtained via . \[lemma:saddle-reverse\] With ${\mathtt{X}}\subset {\mathtt{A}}$, the following <span>phase diagram </span>relations hold in ${{{\mathtt{\Sigma}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}}}$: $$\begin{gathered} \label{eq:idem-disc2} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-79}}; \endxy \;=\frac{{r(\mathtt{X,B})}}{{r(\mathtt{A\setminus X, X})}} \quad, \quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-80}}; \endxy \;=\frac{{r(\mathtt{B,X})}}{{r(\mathtt{X,A\setminus X})}} \\ \label{eq:idem-KLR2} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-81}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{B,A})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-82}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-83}}; \endxy = {r(\mathtt{B,A})} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-84}}; \endxy \\ \label{eq:saddle-reverse} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-85}}; \endxy = \frac{{r(\mathtt{B,X})}}{{r(\mathtt{X,A\setminus X})}} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-86}}; \endxy \quad,\quad \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-87}}; \endxy = \frac{{r(\mathtt{X,B})}}{{r(\mathtt{A\setminus X, X})}} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-88}}; \endxy \hspace{1.0cm} \raisebox{-.7cm}{{\hfill\ensuremath{\square}}} \hspace{-1.0cm}\end{gathered}$$ Relation is the shorthand notation for $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-89}}; \endxy \;= \frac{{r(\mathtt{X,B})}}{{r(\mathtt{A\setminus X, X})}} \;\; \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-1-90}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ which can be checked by detaching the annulus from the rear facet via and collapsing the resulting blister in the front facet via . The relations in and follow analogously from the relations in and MP relations. Note that planar isotopies of <span>phase diagrams </span>relative to their boundary correspond to isotopies of foams. Thus, relations obtained by isotoping any of the above relations continue to hold. Equivariant, colored link homology via foams and its specializations {#sec:foam} ==================================================================== Colored link homology {#subsec:homology-stuff} --------------------- Given an additive, ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear canopolis $\mathcal C$, we obtain from it an additive, ${\mathrm{Sym}}({\mathbb{S}})$-linear canopolis of (bounded) complexes ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Kom}}}(\mathcal C)$ and chain maps between them. On chain complexes, the planar algebra operation is defined to take the planar composites of all chain groups, and the structure of differentials between them is modeled on the tensor product of chain complexes. More precisely, we require the inputs of all planar algebra operations to be ordered, which determines the order in which the formal tensor product is taken and thus, the *Koszul signs* in the differentials of the resulting tensor product complex. \[convention:Koszul\] The tensor product of two complexes $(A^*,d_A)$ and $(B^*,d_B)$ is defined to be: $$(A\otimes B)^* = {\textstyle\bigoplus_{a+b=*}} A^a \otimes B^b, \quad d_{(A\otimes B)^*}= {\textstyle\sum_{a+b =*}} (-1)^b d_{A^a} \otimes {\mathrm{id}}_{B^b} + {\mathrm{id}}_{A^a}\otimes d_{B^b}$$ The reordering isomorphism $A\otimes B \cong B\otimes A$ is defined to act as $(-1)^{a b}$ times the swap map $A^a \otimes B^b \to B^b\otimes A^a$. Note that in the setting of a canopolis of chain complexes, where the swap map is the identity, the reordering isomorphisms act as the identity, except on terms of doubly-odd homological degree. This convention agrees with @CMW [Appendix A.6.1]. Since null-homotopic chain maps form an ideal with respect to planar algebra operations, it also makes sense to consider the homotopy canopolis of (bounded) complexes ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{K}}}(\mathcal C)$ with morphisms given by chain maps up to homotopy. Forgetting the additional categorical structure in ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Kom}}}(\mathcal C)$ or ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{K}}}(\mathcal C)$, we can also view both as planar algebras. A detailed discussion of these constructions is given in e.g. @BN1 [Sections 3 and 4.1]. All these notions extend to the graded setup as well. \[convention:links\] All links and tangles, as well as their diagrams, are assumed to be labeled (or *colored*) and oriented. Recall that two such tangle diagrams represent the same tangle if and only if the diagrams can be obtained from each other via a finite number of planar isotopies and Reidemeister moves as in , i.e. the ones displayed therein as well as their orientation and crossing variations. The tangles and their diagrams form planar algebras as presented in . Henceforth, we consider the planar algebra of tangle diagrams ${\boldsymbol{\mathrm{TD}}}$, which is generated by single strands, positive and negative crossings, as in . $$\begin{gathered} \xy (0,.75)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-2-1}}; \endxy \quad,\quad +\colon \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-2-2}}; \endxy \quad,\quad -\colon \xy (0,0)*{\includegraphics[scale=1.15]{figs/fig-2-3}}; \endxy\end{gathered}$$ \[definition:basic-complexes\] Consider the map of planar algebras $$\label{eq:the-map-of-pas} {\left\llbracket \cdot \right\rrbracket}\colon{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{TD}}}\to{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Kom}}}({{\mathbb{S}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Foam}}^{\ast}}),$$ which is defined on
{'source': 'arXiv_out/1703'}