MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

It is well known that, after a change of variables, the quantum knot invariants (Jones, HOMFLY, Kauffman, etc.) can be written as power series whose coefficients are finite type (i.e., Vassiliev) invariants. But what about their categorifications?

Specifically, do the generating polynomials of dimensions of the Heegard-Floer, Khovanov/Khovanov-Rozansky, etc., homology theories admit a change of variable such that the coefficients of the resulting power series are finite type invariants?

share|cite|improve this question
This is perhaps relevant: – Kevin H. Lin Sep 13 '10 at 16:59
@Kevin: As far as I can tell, that paper says something like "categorified Jones invariants can be recovered from categorified finite type invariants". The question I was asking is: are the categorified Jones (and other quantum) invariants recoverable from the non-categorified finite type invariants. – Vivek Shende Sep 13 '10 at 17:12
Vivek -- excellent question! Although I think the relationship between finite type invariants and the generating functions for Khovanov homology may be trickier than just making a change of variables and taking the Taylor series. – algori Sep 13 '10 at 18:57
I suspect this is not known one way or the other. I don't think it's out of the question that the same ridiculously easy proof that works in the decategorified case (the R-matrix is congruent to its inverse mod h) works in cases like Khovanov-Rozansky, but I would have to think through the details before being sure. – Ben Webster Sep 13 '10 at 19:10
I was expecting the answer to be no, because otherwise you could show that finite type invariants distinguish the unknot by using facts about Heegaar-Floer homology. – Noah Snyder Sep 13 '10 at 20:46

If the answer were "yes" by just a change of variable, I think that would imply that the generating polynomials satisfy some kind of skein relation. That's surely false.

share|cite|improve this answer
Oops, I meant to just make a comment. – Ilya Kofman Sep 18 '10 at 4:27

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.