virtual knots and virtual links are a generalisation of classical knots and classical links . they were introduced by l.  kauffman . they can be seen as a combinatorial interpretation of copies of @xmath0 embedded in thickened surfaces with genus @xmath1 instead of copies of @xmath0 embedded in @xmath2 .
virtual link diagrams are four valent graph embedded into @xmath3 together with a decoration of every vertex .
the decorations are either _ overcrossings _ @xmath4 , _ undercrossings _ @xmath5 or _ virtual crossings _ , latter are marked with a circle .
a virtual link is an equivalence class of virtual link diagrams modulo the _ generalised reidemeister moves _ in figure [ figure0 - 1 ] and isotopies .
the notion of _ oriented _ virtual link diagrams and an _ oriented _ virtual links are equivalent , but latter modulo _ oriented _ generalised reidemeister moves and isotopies .
we call the moves rm1 , rm2 and rm3 the _ classical moves _ , the moves vrm1 , vrm2 and vrm3 the _ virtual moves _ and the move mrm the _ mixed move_.        in this paper we are also interested in _ virtual tangle diagrams _ and _ virtual tangles_. the first ones are graphs embedded in a disk @xmath6 such that every vertex is either one valent or four valent .
the four valent vertices are , like before , labeled with an _ overcrossing _
@xmath4 , an _ undercrossing _ @xmath5 or a _ virtual crossing_.
the one valent vertices are part of the boundary of @xmath6 and are called _
boundary points_. we call a virtual tangle diagram with
@xmath7 one valent vertices a virtual tangle diagram with _
@xmath7-boundary points_.    a virtual tangle with @xmath7-boundary points is an equivalence class of virtual tangle diagrams with @xmath7-boundary points modulo the generalised reidemeister moves and boundary preserving isotopies .
we note that every of the moves of figure [ figure0 - 1 ] can be seen as a virtual tangle diagram .
moreover , examples are pictured in section [ v - tangles ] , e.g. in figure [ figure1 - 1 ] .
the notions of _ oriented _ virtual tangle diagrams and an _ oriented _ virtual tangles can be defined analogous , but latter modulo _ oriented _ generalised reidemeister moves and boundary preserving isotopies .
we use the short hand notation c- and v- for everything that starts with classical or virtual , e.g. c - knot means classical knot and v - crossing means virtual crossing .    if the reader is unfamiliar with the notion v - link or v - tangle , we refer to some introduction papers of l.  kauffman and v.  manturov , e.g. @xcite and @xcite and the references therein .
a well - known invariant of v - links is the _ virtual jones polynomial _ , i.e. an extension of the jones polynomial from c - links to v - links .
moreover , m.  khovanov published in @xcite a _ categorification _ of the jones polynomial , i.e. a @xmath8-graded chain complex whose homotopy type is a c - link invariant and whose graded euler characteristic is the jones polynomial .
this categorification is called _ khovanov ( co-)homology_.    the khovanov complex is a highly studied invariant of c - links .
d.  bar - natan gave a cobordism based exposition of this categorification in @xcite .
d.  bar - natans picture has many nice properties , e.g. it can be done _ local _ , i.e. it works for c - tangles as well .
it is a natural question if the khovanov complex extents from c - links to v - links .
the answer is positive , i.e. there is more then one _ categorification of the virtual jones polynomial _
, one over @xmath9 given by v.  manturov in @xcite , one over @xmath10 given by v.  manturov in @xcite and one over @xmath10 using cobordisms in the spirit of d.  bar - natan in @xcite .
the case of v - links is more difficult ( combinatorial ) then the classical case .
that is a reason why in @xcite the d.  bar - natan approach was not extended to v - tangles .
this is the main goal of the paper .    in this paper
we will answer the question if the categorification extends from c - tangles to v - tangles positive , i.e. it is trivial to extend the notions over @xmath9 or in a trivial way ( by setting open saddles to be zero ) .
latter has an obvious disadvantage , i.e. it is neither a `` good '' invariant of v - tangles nor can it be used to calculate bigger complexes by `` tensoring '' smaller pieces .
but we give a local notion that is a strong invariant of v - tangles ( see section [ v - tangles ] ) and allows `` tensoring '' of smaller pieces ( see section [ circuit ] ) .    as an application of this construction we prove in section [ leedeg ] that the degenerations of lee s variant ( see her paper @xcite ) , i.e. that the homology in her case just `` counts '' the number of components , also extents to v - links . note that latter result is quite surprising
since the complex will contain lots of @xmath11-morphisms ( our main observation is that it will also contain many isomorphisms ) .
we note that , given the semi - local properties of our construction , it is possible to write a `` fast computation '' algorithm in the sense of d.  bar - natan in @xcite
before we give a brief summary we recall the main ideas of the cobordism based construction of virtual khovanov homology in @xcite .
we will assume that the reader is familiar with the notion of the classical khovanov complex , e.g. the construction of the khovanov cube based on so - called _ resolutions of the crossings_. there are many good introduction to classical khovanov homology , e.g. a nice exposition of the classical khovanov homology can be found in d.  bar - natan s paper @xcite .
moreover we assume that the reader is familiar with the cobordism based construction of the classical khovanonv complex of d.  bar - natan in @xcite .
recall that latter involves the _ local relation _ in figure [ figure0 - 2 ] .     should be zero , a cobordism that contains a torus @xmath12 should be two times the cobordism without the torus and the four tubes relation . ]    to maintain readability , we repress in this short summary the more technical points about the construction , e.g. the placement of the signs . for more details
see @xcite .
note that this technical points are a main reason for the length of the paper .
the following table shows the connection between the classical and the virtual case .    [ cols="^,^,^",options="header " , ]     hence , a main point in the construction of the virtual khovanov complex is to say which saddles , i.e. morphisms , are orientable and which are non - orientable , how to place the decorations and how to place the signs .
this is done in the following way .
* every saddle either split one circle in a resolution ( orientable , called _ comultiplication _ , denoted @xmath13 .
see figure [ figure1 - 2 ] - upper row , fourth morphism ) , glues two circles in a resolution ( orientable , called _ multiplication _ , denoted @xmath14 .
see figure [ figure1 - 2 ] - upper row , fifth morphism ) or does not change the number of circles at all ( non - orientable , called _ mbius cobordism _
, denoted @xmath15 .
see figure [ figure1 - 2 ] - upper row , last morphism ) .
* every saddle can be local denoted ( up to a rotation ) by a formal symbol @xmath16 ( both smoothings are neighbourhoods of the crossing ) . the _ glueing numbers _ ,
i.e. the decorations , are now spread by _ choosing a formal orientation _ for the resolution .
we note that the construction will not depend on the choice .
* after all resolutions have an orientation , a saddle could for example be of the form @xmath17@xmath18 .
this is the _ standard form _ ,
i.e. in this case every glueing number will be @xmath19 .
* now spread the decorations as follows .
every boundary component gets a @xmath19 iff the orientation is like in the standard case and a @xmath20 otherwise .
the _ degenerated _ cases ( everything non - alternating ) , e.g. @xmath21@xmath18 , are the non - orientable surfaces and do not get any decorations .
* there is a relation how the saddles behave if one changes the decorations .
see for example figure [ figure1 - 3 ] bottom row and figure [ figure1 - 4 ] right part . because of this relations we say that @xmath14 is of type @xmath22 , @xmath13 of type @xmath23 and @xmath15 of type @xmath11 . *
the signs are spread based on numbering of the circles in the resolutions and on a special x - marker for the crossings ( rather technical , see @xcite for details or definition [ defin - saddlestructure ] for a short introduction ) .
a x - marker is for example pictured in figure [ figure0-main ] .    to construct the virtual khovanov complex for v - tangles we need to extend the notions above in such a way that they still work for open cobordisms .
a first generalisation is easy , i.e. we will still use immersed possible non - orientable surfaces with boundary decorations , but we allow vertical boundary components , e.g. the three v - reidemeister cobordisms vrm1 , vrm2 and vrm3 cobordisms in figure [ figure0 - 3 ] .
one main point is the question what to do with the _
open saddles _ , i.e. saddles with no closed boundary .
see bottom row in figure [ figure1 - 2 ] . a possible solution is to define them to zero .
but this has two major problems .
first the loss of information is big and second we would not have local properties like in the classical case ( `` tensoring '' of smaller parts ) since an open saddle can , after closing some of his boundary circles , become either @xmath14 , @xmath13 or @xmath15 . see figure [ figure0 - 4 ] .
hence , an information mod 3 is missing .
we therefore consider morphisms with an _ indicator _ , i.e. an element of the set @xmath24 , e.g. see figure [ figure1 - 2 ] .
then , after taking care of some technical difficulties , the concept extens from c - tangles to v - tangles
.    the outline of the paper is as follows .    * in section [ v - tangles ]
we define the notions of a _ v - tangle ( diagram ) _ with @xmath7-boundary points .
moreover , we define the geometric category we are working in and define _ two different _ versions of the virtual khovanov complex .
we show in theorem [ theo - geoinvarianz ] that both are invariants of v - tangles and we show in theorem [ theo - marker ] that both versions are equal for c - tangles and v - links . * in section [ circuit ]
we discuss the local properties of the construction .
we define the notion of a _ decorated circuit diagram _ ,
i.e. the virtual analogon of a planar diagram , and we show in theorem [ theo - semiloc ] that the construction has semi - local properties , i.e. the classical notion extents to a certain class of v - tangle diagrams .
a main tool is the _ dot - calculus _ which is sketched in figure [ figure0-main ] , i.e. change the decorations iff the orientations of the input diagram and the local piece mismatch ( red dot ) , do not change them iff they match ( green dot ) and add in a bolt symbol ( non - orientable ) iff at the top and the bottom one gets a green and a red dot . * in section [ leedeg ]
we show that the extension of lee s variant of khovanov homology still has the same `` degeneration '' as in the classical case , i.e. the homology just `` counts '' the number of v - link components .
see theorem [ theo - leedeg ] . note that this is rather surprising since the map @xmath15 will be a @xmath11-morphism if @xmath25 is invertible .
our main observation why the degeneration still holds is explained in example [ beisp - leedeg ] . in order to prove theorem [ theo - leedeg ] we use a special trick ,
i.e. we define two idempotents called _ down _ and _ up _ , go to the _ karoubi envelope _ and prove that there , using the semi - local construction of section [ circuit ] , the question simplifies to the case of counting _ non - alternating resolutions_. see figure [ figure4 - 2 ] .
for a v - tangle diagram @xmath26 we call @xmath27 the _ @xmath11- _ and @xmath28 the _ @xmath29-resolution _ of the crossing @xmath4 . for an oriented v - tangle diagram @xmath26
we call @xmath30 a _ positive _ and @xmath31 a _ negative _ crossing
. the _ number of positive crossings _ is called @xmath32 and the _ number of negative crossings _ is called @xmath33 .    for a given v - tangle diagram @xmath26 with @xmath34-numbered crossings
we define a collection of closed curves and open strings @xmath35 in the following way : let @xmath36 be a word of length @xmath34 in the alphabet @xmath37 .
then @xmath35 is the collection of closed curves and open strings which arise when one performs a @xmath38-resolution at the @xmath39-th crossing of @xmath26 for all @xmath40 .
we call such a collection @xmath35 the _ @xmath36-th resolution _ of @xmath26
.    we can choose an orientation for the different components of @xmath35 .
we call such a @xmath35 an _ orientated resolution_.    if we ignore orientations , then there are @xmath41 different resolutions @xmath35 of @xmath26 .
we say a resolution has length @xmath14 if it contains exactly @xmath14 1-letters .
that is @xmath42 .    for two resolutions
@xmath35 and @xmath43 with @xmath44 and @xmath45 for one fixed @xmath46 and @xmath47 for @xmath48 we define a _ saddle between the resolutions @xmath49_. this means : choose a small ( no other crossing , classical and virtual , should be involved ) neighbourhood @xmath50 of the @xmath46-th crossing and define a cobordism between @xmath35 and @xmath43 to be the identity outside of @xmath50 and a saddle inside of @xmath50 .
sometimes we need a so - called _ spanning tree argument _
, i.e. choose a spanning tree of a cube ( like in figure [ figure0 - 5 ] ) and change e.g. orientations such that the edges of the tree change in a suitable way , starting at leafs and remove them and repeat .
note that any v - tangle diagram should be oriented in the usual sense .
but with a slight abuse of notation , we will repress this orientation throughout the whole paper .
recall that these orientations are needed for the shifts in homology gradings , see for example @xcite .
i wish to thank v.  manturov for corrections and many helpful comments .
moreover i wish to thank a.  kaestner and l.  kauffman for suggestions and helpful comments helping me to write a computer program for calculations in the future .
in this section we describe how the virtual khovanov complex can be extended in such a way that it also works for v - tangles and not just for v - links .
our extension follows the ideas of d.  bar - natan in @xcite .
first we define the notion of a _ virtual tangle ( diagram ) _ , called _ v - tangle ( diagram)_.    [ defin - vtangle ] a _ virtual tangle diagram with @xmath51 boundary points _ @xmath26 is a planar graph embedded in a disk @xmath6 .
this planar graph is a collection of _ usual vertices _ and @xmath7-_boundary vertices_. we also allow circles , i.e. closed edges without any vertices .
the usual vertices are all of valency four .
any of these vertices is either an overcrossing @xmath4 or an undercrossing @xmath5 or a virtual crossing .
latter is marked with a circle .
the boundary vertices are of valency one and are part of the boundary of @xmath6 .
we call the crossings @xmath4 and @xmath5 _ classical crossings _ or just _ crossings _ and a virtual tangle diagram without virtual crossings a _ classical tangle diagram_.    a _ virtual tangle with @xmath51 boundary points _ @xmath52 is an equivalence class of virtual tangle diagrams @xmath26 module boundary preserving isotopies and _ generalised reidemeister moves _ ( see figure [ figure0 - 1 ] ) .
we call a virtual tangle @xmath52 _ classical _ if the set @xmath52 contains a classical tangle diagram .
a v - circle is a circle without classical crossings and a v - string is a string starting and ending at the boundary without classical crossings .
we call a v - circle / v - string without virtual crossings a _
c - circle / c - string_.    the _ closure of a v - tangle diagram with * -marker _ @xmath53 is a v - link diagram which is constructed by capping of neighbouring boundary points ( starting from a fixed point marked with the * -marker and going counter - clockwise ) without creating new virtual crossings .
for an example see figure [ figure1 - 1 ] .
there are exactly two , maybe non equivalent , closures of any v - tangle diagram . in the figure below the two closures
are pictured using green edges .
the notions of an _ oriented _ virtual tangle diagram and of an _ oriented _ virtual tangle are defined analogue .
the latter modulo _ oriented _ generalised reidemeister moves and boundary preserving isotopies . from now on every v - tangle ( diagram ) should be oriented .
but we repress this notion to avoid confusion with the ( more important ) notions of oriented resolutions and orientations for circuit diagrams ( see section [ circuit ] ) .
moreover , a _ decorated _ v - tangle diagram is a v - tangle diagram with orientations for all of its circles / strings .
we discuss the category of _ open cobordisms with boundary decorations_. it is almost the same as in @xcite , but the corresponding cobordisms could be open , i.e. they could have vertical boundary components , and are decorated with an extra information , i.e. a number in the set @xmath24 .
we picture the number @xmath11 as a bolt .    if the reader is unfamiliar with the notions and relations of cobordisms we suggest to check for example the book of j.  kock @xcite .
[ defin - category ] let @xmath51 and let @xmath54 be a commutative and unital ring
.    our category should be @xmath55pre - additive .
the symbol @xmath56 should denote the disjoint union ( the coproduct in our category ) .    * the objects : *    the _ objects _ _ @xmath57 _ ) are numbered v - tangles diagrams with @xmath7 boundary points without classical crossings .
we denote the objects as @xmath58 . here
@xmath59 are the v - circles or v - strings and @xmath60 is a finite , ordered index set .
the objects of the category should be unique up to _ boundary preserving planar isotopies _ of planar graphs .    * the generators : *    the _ generators _ of @xmath61 are the cobordisms from figure [ figure1 - 2 ] .
the cobordisms pictured are all between c - circles or c - strings .
every generator has a decoration from the set @xmath24 .
we call this decoration the _ indicator _ of the cobordisms . if no indicator is pictures it should be @xmath22 .
every generator with a decoration @xmath62 has extra decorations from the set @xmath63 at every horizontal boundary component .
we call these decorations the _ gluing numbers _ of the cobordism .
we consider these cobordisms up to boundary preserving homeomorphisms ( as abstract surfaces ) .
hence , between circles or strings with v - crossings the generators are the same up to boundary preserving homeomorphisms immersed into @xmath64 $ ] .
the vertical boundary components are pictured in red .
we denote the different generators ( from left to right ; top row first ) @xmath65 and @xmath66 , @xmath67 and @xmath68 , @xmath69 , @xmath70 and @xmath15 , @xmath71 and @xmath72 , @xmath73 and @xmath74 , @xmath75 , @xmath15 and @xmath76 .    *
the morphisms : *    the _ morphisms _ _ @xmath61 _ are cobordisms between the objects in the following way .
first we identify the collection of numbered v - circles or v - strings with circles or strings immersed into @xmath6 .    given two objects @xmath77 with @xmath78 numbered v - circles or v - strings , then a morphism @xmath79 is a surface immersed in @xmath64 $ ] whose non vertical boundary lies only in @xmath80 and is the disjoint union of the @xmath81 numbered v - circles or v - strings from @xmath82 in @xmath83 and the disjoint union of the @xmath84 numbered v - circles or v - strings from @xmath85 in @xmath86 .
the morphisms should be generated ( as abstract surfaces ) by the generators from above ( see figure [ figure1 - 2 ] ) .
* the decorations : *    every morphisms has an _ indicator _ from the set @xmath24 .
moreover , every morphism @xmath79 in @xmath61 is a cobordism between the numbered v - circles or v - strings of @xmath82 and @xmath85 .
let us say that the v - circles or v - strings of @xmath82 are numbered @xmath87 and the v - circles or v - strings from @xmath85 are numbered for @xmath88 .
every cobordism with @xmath89 as an indicator should have a decoration on the @xmath39-th boundary circle .
this decoration is an element of the set @xmath63 .
we call this decoration of the @xmath39-th boundary component the _ @xmath39-th gluing number _ of the cobordism .    hence , the morphisms of the category are pairs @xmath90 . here
@xmath79 is a cobordism from @xmath82 to @xmath85 immersed in @xmath64 $ ] and @xmath91 is a string of length @xmath92 in such a way that the @xmath39-th letter of @xmath91 is the @xmath39-th gluing number of the cobordism and the last latter is the indicator or @xmath93 if the cobordism has @xmath11 as indicator .
* short hand notation : *    we denote a morphism @xmath94 which is a connected surfaces as @xmath95 . here
@xmath96 are words in the alphabet @xmath63 in such a way that the @xmath97th character of @xmath98 ( of @xmath99 ) is the gluing number of the @xmath97th circle of the upper ( of the lower ) boundary .
the number @xmath100 should be the indicator .
the construction above ensures that this notation is always possible .
therefore we denote an arbitrary morphism @xmath90 as @xmath101 here @xmath102 are its connected components and @xmath103 are words in @xmath63 .    for a morphism with @xmath11 as indicator we do not need any boundary decorations . with a slight abuse of notation ,
we denote all these cobordisms like the non orientable cobordisms as @xmath15 .    * the relations : *     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]     and just the product otherwise . ]
there are different relations for the cobordisms , namely _ topological relations _ and _ combinatorial relations_. the latter relations are describe by the gluing numbers and indicators of the cobordisms and the gluing of the cobordisms .
the topological relations are not pictured but it should be clear how they should work .
see for example j.  kock in @xcite and our paper in @xcite .
the monoidal structure should be induced by the disjoint union @xmath56 .
the category is a semi - strict monoidal category .
moreover the category is symmetric .
hence , by mac lane s coherence theorem ( see @xcite ) we can assume that the category is a strict , symmetric , monoidal category .
we define the full category @xmath104 to be the category whose objects are @xmath105 and whose morphisms are @xmath106 .
note the following collection of formulas that follow from the relations . recall that @xmath68 and @xmath72 change the decorations and that @xmath15 and @xmath76 change the indicators . with
a slight abuse of notation we repress to write tensors if it is not neccessary , i.e. for the indicator changes .
moreover , since @xmath68 and @xmath72 satiesfy similar formulas , we only write down the equations for @xmath68 .
[ lemm - calc ] let @xmath107 be two objects in @xmath108 .
let @xmath109 be a morphism that is connected , has @xmath110 as an indicator and @xmath98 and @xmath99 as decorated boundary strings .
then we have the following identities .
we write @xmath111 as a short hand notation if the indicators and gluing numbers do not matter .
* @xmath112 ( indicator changes commute ) . * @xmath113 ( @xmath15 commutes ) . *
@xmath114 ( first decoration commutation relation ) .
* let @xmath115 denote the decoration change at the corresponding positions of the words @xmath96 .
then we have @xmath116(second decoration commutation relation ) .
everything follows by a straightforeward usage of the relations in definition [ defin - category ] above .
next we define some short hand notations for the different categories we use . for any pre - additive category
@xmath117 we define @xmath118 as the _ category of formal matrices _ and @xmath119 as the _ category of formal chain complexes _ over @xmath117 . if the reader is unfamiliar with the notations we refer to @xcite .
[ defin - category2 ] we call @xmath120 the category @xmath121 .
here our objects are formal chain complexes of formal direct sums in the category of ( possible non orientable ) open cobordisms with boundary decorations .
then we define @xmath122 as the category @xmath120 modulo formal chain homotopy .
moreover , we define @xmath123 , which has the same objects as the category @xmath108 , but the morphisms are all modulo the local relations from figure [ figure0 - 2 ] .    furthermore we define @xmath124 and @xmath125 in the obvious sense .
the notations @xmath126 or @xmath127 mean that we consider all possible cases , namely with or without a @xmath128 and with or without a @xmath99 .
moreover , we use the same notions if @xmath129 .
we are now able to define the _ geometric complex of a v - tangle diagram _ @xmath26 .
for this construction we use our notations for the _ saddle decorations _ and _ saddle signs _ of v - link diagrams @xmath130 from section two in @xcite .
the reader unfamiliar with the notations may check the corresponding definitions .
we only repeat these two important constructions in a very brief summary .
the only new notion in the definition below is the spreading of the _ indicator of the saddle_.    [ defin - saddlestructure ] let @xmath130 be a v - link diagram
. moreover , let @xmath131 be a saddle between the numbered , orientated resolutions @xmath132 .
every saddle can be viewed as an formal symbol @xmath16 together with a formal local orientation of these strings which is equal to the orientations of @xmath132 .
we say the saddle of the form @xmath17@xmath18 is of _ standard form_.    moreover , choose a position for the _ x - marker _ at any crossing and a numbering of the v - circles in the resolutions .
recall that the x - marker is just a choice in which direction one rotates a saddle @xmath133 until one can compare it to the saddle in standard form
. the complex will be well - defined for any choice and different choices give chain isomorphic complexes ( section two in @xcite ) .    for every orientable saddle the _ saddle sign _
is the product of two numbers , both either @xmath29 or @xmath23 .
if the x - marker is on the lower numbered saddle , then the first number should be @xmath29 and @xmath23 otherwise .
moreover , if the number of v - circles with a higher number then the x - marked v - circle is odd , then the second number should be @xmath29 and @xmath23 otherwise .
the reader should check that this definition corresponds to the one in section two of @xcite .
now we spread the _ saddle decorations _ as follows :    * if the saddle is non orientable , then we do not need any decorations .
* if the saddle is orientable , then we compose the standard saddles @xmath70 or @xmath69 with @xmath68 for every not standard oriented string .
the saddle should have a formal minus sign iff the saddle sign is negative .
every orientable surface should carry an indicator @xmath22 iff the number of upper boundary components of the saddle is two and a @xmath23 iff the number is one .
every non orientable saddle gets a zero as indicator .
everything together , i.e. boundary decorations , saddle sign and indicator , is denoted as the _ saddle decoration _ of @xmath49 .
beware that many choices are involved .
but the do not change the complex up to chain isotopies ( lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] ) .
now let @xmath26 be a tangle diagram with a * -marker on the boundary and let @xmath53 be the closure of the diagram .
the _ saddle decoration _ of the saddles of @xmath26 should be the ones induced by the saddle decorations of the closure .
[ defin - geocomplex ] for a v - tangle diagram @xmath26 with a * -marker on the boundary and with @xmath34 ordered crossings we define _ the geometric complex _ @xmath134 as follows :    * for @xmath135 the @xmath136 _ chain module _ is the formal direct sum of all oriented resolutions @xmath35 of length @xmath39 .
* there are only morphisms between the chain modules of length @xmath39 and @xmath137 . *
if two words @xmath138 differ only in exactly one letter and @xmath44 and @xmath45 , then there is a morphism between @xmath35 and @xmath43 .
otherwise all morphisms between components of length @xmath39 and @xmath137 are zero . *
this morphism is a _ saddle _ between @xmath35 and @xmath43 .
* the saddles should carry the _ saddle decorations _ from definition [ defin - saddlestructure ] .
note that it is not clear at this point why we can choose the numbering of the crossings , the numbering of the v - circles and the orientation of the resolutions of the closure .
furthermore it is not clear why this complex is a well - defined chain complex .
we show in lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] that the complex is independent of these choices , i.e. if @xmath139 and @xmath140 are well - defined chain complexes with different choices , then they are equal up to chain isomorphisms .
the same lemma ensures that the complex is a well - defined chain complex .    beware that the position of the * -marker is important for v - tangle diagrams .
but theorem [ theo - marker ] ensures that the position is not important for classical v - tangles and v - links .
if it does not matter which of the possible two different chain complexes is which , i.e. it is just important that they could be different , then we denote them as @xmath141 and @xmath142 for a v - tangle diagram @xmath26 without a chosen marker position .    for an example
see figure [ figure1 - 10 ] .
this figure shows the virtual khovanov complex of a v - tangle diagram with two different * -marker positions .
the vertical arrow between them indicates that they are chain isomorphic .
[ lemma - everythingfine ] let @xmath26 be a v - tangle diagram with a * -marker and let @xmath143 be its geometric complex from definition [ defin - geocomplex ] with arbitrary orientations for the resolutions of the closure .
let @xmath144 be the complex with the same orientations for the resolutions except for one circle @xmath145 in one resolution @xmath35 .
if a face @xmath146 from @xmath143 is anti - commutative , then the corresponding face @xmath147 from @xmath144 is also anti - commutative .
moreover , if @xmath143 is a well - defined chain complex , then it is isomorphic to @xmath144 , which is also a well - defined chain complex .
the same statement is true if the difference between the two complexes is the numbering of the crossings , the choice of the rotation for the calculation of the saddle signs or the fixed numbering of the v - circles of the closure .
moreover , the same is true for any rotations / isotopies of the v - tangle diagram .
hence , we can speak of _ the _ geometric complex @xmath134 of the v - tangle diagram with a * -marker .
the complex is a well - defined chain complex .    for v - tangle diagrams @xmath26 with @xmath148
the statement is the same as the corresponding statement in section two in @xcite .
recall that the trick is to reduce all faces through a finite sequence of vrm1 , vrm2 , vrm3 and mrm moves ( see figure [ figure0 - 1 ] ) and virtualisations ( see figure [ figure1 - 11 ] ) to a finite number of different possible faces .
then one does a case - by - case check .
because the saddles in the two chain complexes are topological the same , we only have to worry about the decorations .
but the decorations are spread based on the closure of the v - tangle diagram and the relations from definition [ defin - category ] are build in such a way that the open cases behave like the closed ones .
hence , we can use the statement for @xmath148 to finish the proof .
the next theorem is very important but the proof itself is almost equal to the proof of d.  bar - natan in @xcite and our version in @xcite .
therefore we skip the details .
[ theo - geoinvarianz ] let @xmath149 be two v - tangle diagrams with the same * -marker position which differs only through a finite sequence of isotopies and generalised reidemeister moves .
then the complexes @xmath134 and @xmath150 are equal in @xmath151 .    because the proof of d.  bar - natan in @xcite and therefore the corresponding proof in @xcite is local we could copy the arguments from there .
the lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] guarantees that we can choose the numbering and orientations without changing anything up to chain isomorphisms .
furthermore we use the statements of the theorem [ theo - semiloc ] and the corollary [ koro - reidemeister ] to finish the proof .
beware that the chain homotopies in @xcite should all carry @xmath22 as indicator .
we need some notions now .
let @xmath26 denote a v - tangle diagram .
we call a part of @xmath26 a _ connected part _ if it is connected as the four - valent graph on a surface with boundary which is created by replacing every c - crossing with a four - valent vertex and eliminating v - crossings by adding handles to a sphere with boundary
. the genus of the surfaces should be high enough such that the graph has no v - crossings any more .
we call a connected part of a v - tangle diagram _ fully internal _ if it is not adjacent to the boundary
. see figure [ figure1 - 12 ] .
the left v - tangle diagram has one connected part , which is not fully internal , and the right v - tangle diagram has two connected parts , one fully internal and one not fully internal .        a virtual crossing
is called _
negligible _ if it is part of a fully internal part , e.g. all v - crossings of the right v - tangle diagram in figure [ figure1 - 12 ] are negligible .
we call a v - tangle diagram @xmath26 _ nice _ if there is a finite sequence of of vrm1 , vrm2 , vrm3 and mrm moves and virtualisations such that every v - circle is negligible , e.g. every v - link diagram is nice and every c - tangle diagram is nice .
an example of a not nice v - tangle diagram is pictured in figure [ figure2 - 4 ] .
we note that for a v - tangle diagram @xmath26 the chain complexes @xmath141 and @xmath142 are almost the same , i.e. they have the same vertices but possible different edges ( which are still in the same position ) . the next lemma concretise the observation .
the numbering in the lemma should be the same for the two complexes .
[ lemma - factorbyisos ] let @xmath26 be a v - tangle diagram .
let @xmath152 and @xmath153 denote the numbered saddles of @xmath141 and of @xmath142 .
then we have a factorisation of the form @xmath154 for invertible cobordisms @xmath155 for every @xmath39 if @xmath26 is a nice v - tangle diagram .    that the saddles are topological equivalent is clear . we only have take a look at the decorations .    the main point is the following observation : of the four outer ( two on both sides ) cobordisms in the bottom row of figure [ figure1 - 2 ] ,
i.e. @xmath71 , @xmath72 , @xmath156 and @xmath76 , only the third is not invertible .
the first is the identity , the second and fourth are their own inverses .
the third is not invertible because the @xmath11-indicator can not be changed to an @xmath157-indicator .
note that none of the vrm1 , vrm2 , vrm3 and mrm moves nor a virtualisations changes the indicator of a saddle cobordism .
hence , it is sufficient to show the statement for a v - tangle diagram with only negligible v - crossings . from the observation above it
is enough to show that every saddle gets an @xmath11-indicator in one closure iff it gets an @xmath11-indicator in the other closure .
the only possible way that a saddle gets an indicator from @xmath62 for one closure and an @xmath11-indicator for the other closure is the rightmost case in figure [ figure0 - 4 ] .
but for this case the existence of a non negligible v - crossing is necessary .
hence , we get the statement .
[ prop - nicechainiso ] let @xmath26 be a v - tangle diagram .
then @xmath141 and @xmath142 are chain isomorphic if @xmath26 is nice .
let @xmath26 be a nice v - tangle diagram .
then lemma [ lemma - factorbyisos ] ensures that every saddle is the same , up to isomorphisms , in @xmath141 and @xmath142 .
furthermore lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] ensures that both are well - defined chain complexes .
hence , the number of signs of every face is odd ( also counting the ones from the decorations ) .
hence , we can use a spanning tree argument to construct the chain isomorphism explicit , i.e. start at a leaf of a spanning tree of the khovanov cube and change the orientations of the vertex such that the unique outgoing edge of the tree has the same sign in both cases ( lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] ensures that nothing changes modulo chain isomorphisms ) . continue along the vertices of the spanning tree
remove already visited leafs .
this construction generates a chain isomorphism .
next repeat the whole process , but change the indicators now .
the lemma [ lemma - factorbyisos ] ensures that this will also generate a chain isomorphism .
the chain isomorphism that we need is the composition .
see for example figure [ figure1 - 10 ] .
the following theorem ensures that the choice of the position of the marker is not important for classical v - tangles or v - links .
hence , we can say that our notions extents both , the classical version and the version for v - tangle diagrams .
note that this is also an invariant for the question if a v - tangle diagram is classical or not .
[ theo - marker ] let @xmath26 be a v - tangle diagram with two different * -marker positions .
let @xmath141 and @xmath142 be the geometric complex from definition [ defin - geocomplex ] for the two positions
. then the two complexes are equal in @xmath151 if the v - tangle has @xmath148 or is a c - tangle .    for a v - tangle with @xmath148 we can use the proposition [ prop - nicechainiso ] above .    for a classical v - tangle
we can choose a diagram without virtual crossing without changing anything up to chain homotopies , because of theorem [ theo - geoinvarianz ] .
then we can use the proposition [ prop - nicechainiso ] again .
note that the whole construction can be done with an arbitrary _ non virtual closure _ of a v - tangle diagram , i.e. capping it of without creating new v - crossings .
one can repeat the arguments above to prove analogous statements like above for this construction , too .
[ rem - gradings ] we could use the euler characteristic to introduce the structure of a graded category ( see @xcite ) on @xmath108 ( and hence on @xmath158 ) .
the differentials in the geometric complex from definition [ defin - geocomplex ] have all @xmath159 ( after a grade shift ) , because their euler - characteristic is @xmath23 .
then it is easy to proof that the geometric complex is a v - tangle invariant under graded homotopy .
the proof of this statement is analogue to the one of d.  bar - natan from @xcite .
in the present section we describe the notion of a _
circuit algebra_. a circuit algebra is almost the same as a planar algebra , but we allow virtual crossings .
planar algebras were introduced by v.  jones ( see @xcite ) and were for example studied by d.  bar - natan in the case of classical khovanov homology ( see @xcite ) .
hence , we can use most of his constructions in our case , too .
a crucial difference is that we need to _ decorate _ our _ circuit diagrams_. this is necessary because our cobordisms are also decorated .
we start the section with the definition of a circuit diagram .
recall that we call v - tangle diagram _ decorated _ if all of its strings / circles are oriented .
we call a cobordisms _ decorated _ if it has gluing numbers at the boundary and indicators , see definitions [ defin - vtangle ] and [ defin - category ] .
moreover , in the whole section every v - tangle diagram should carry a * -marker .
[ defin - circuit diagram ] let @xmath160 denote a disk embedded into @xmath161 , the so - called _ outside
disk_. let @xmath162 denote @xmath163 disks @xmath6 embedded into @xmath161 such that for all @xmath163 the disk @xmath162 is also embedded into @xmath160 without touching the boundary of @xmath160 , i.e. @xmath164 and @xmath165 .
we denote @xmath166 .    a _ circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks _
@xmath167 is a planar graph embedded into @xmath168 with only vertices of valency one and four in such a way that every vertex of valency one is in @xmath169 and every vertex of valency four is in @xmath170 .
all vertices of valency four are marked with a virtual crossing .
again we allow circles , i.e. closed edges without any vertices .
see for example figure [ figure2 - 1 ] .
* -marked circuit diagram _ is the same with @xmath171 extra * -marker for every boundary of @xmath168 .
moreover , we call the vertices at @xmath172 the _ outer boundary points_.    a _ closure _ of a * -marked circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks @xmath173 is a circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks and without any outer boundary points which is constructed from @xmath167 by capping of neighbouring strings starting from the * -marker and proceeding counter - clockwise
.    note that we only cap of the outside disk and not the small inside disks .
a _ decoration _ for a * -marked circuit diagram is a tuple of a numbering and an orientation of the strings of the diagram in such a way that its also an numbering and orientation of the closure .
we call a circuit diagram together with a decoration a _ decorated circuit diagram_. see for example figure [ figure2 - 1 ]
. the decoration of the circuit diagram in this figure is also a decoration for the closure ( the diagram together with the green lines ) .        with this setting
we can implement the definition of a _ ( decorated ) circuit algebra_. we follow the definitions of d.  bar - natan and v.  jones ( see @xcite , @xcite ) . recall that our v - tangle diagrams should always be oriented .
[ defin - circuit algebra ] let @xmath174 be the set of ( decorated ) v - tangle diagrams with @xmath7 boundary points and a * -marker and let @xmath175 denote the quotient by boundary preserving isotopies and generalised reidemeister moves .
furthermore let @xmath167 denote a ( decorated ) circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks and @xmath176 outer boundary points in such a way that the @xmath177-th input disk has @xmath178 numbered boundary points .    because @xmath167 has no classical crossings , this induces operations @xmath179 by placing the @xmath39-th v - tangle diagram from @xmath180 in the @xmath39-th boundary component of @xmath167 , i.e. glue the v - tangle inside in such a way that the * -markers match .
see the right side of figure [ figure2 - 2 ] .
there is an identity operation on @xmath181 ( it is of the form @xmath182{figs / circuitid.pdf}}\end{array}\hspace{-3pt}}}$ ] ) and the operations are compatible in a natural way (  associative  ) .
we call a set of sets @xmath183 along with operations @xmath167 like above a _ circuit algebra _ , provided that the identity and associativity from above holds .
if the operators and elements are decorated , first with numbers and orientations and latter only with orientations , then we call a set of sets @xmath183 like above a _ decorated circuit algebra_. note that in this case we have to define how the decorations change after gueing , since we can run into ambiguities .
a necessary definition is the notion of a @xmath184-morphism . here
@xmath184 is a subset of a circuit algebra @xmath183 .
we need this notion because , in contrast to the classical case , the bracket is not a morphism of circuit algebras .
see ( c ) of theorem [ theo - semiloc ] below .
[ defin - cirmor ] a _ morphism @xmath185 of ( decorated ) circuit algebras _ @xmath183 and @xmath186 is a map @xmath187 which satisfies @xmath188 for every ( decorated ) operation @xmath167 .
let @xmath184 be a subset of @xmath183 .
a _ @xmath184-morphism @xmath185 of ( decorated ) circuit algebras _ @xmath183 and @xmath186 is a map @xmath187 which satisfies @xmath189 for every ( decorated ) operation @xmath167    here are some examples .
the reader may also check the corresponding section in the paper of d.  bar - natan from @xcite .
[ beisp - circuit ] the first example is the set @xmath190 from definition [ defin - category ] , i.e. v - tangles diagrams with @xmath51 boundary points without classical crossings and an extra * -marker .
this is a sub - circuit algebra of the circuit algebra that allows classical crossings .
this example gets more exciting if we want to view it as a decorated circuit algebra .
we have to define the operations , i.e. the gluing inside the input disks , in more detail now , since we can run into ambiguities , see top row of figure [ figure2 - 3 ]
.        we can run into ambiguities if the decorations of the operator get glued together do not match up . in this case
we define the new decoration based on the rule _ `` lower first '' _ , i.e. the new number should be the lower and the new orientation should be the one from the lower numbered string .
see lower row of figure [ figure2 - 3 ] .
not all four cases are pictured but it should be clear how the other two work .
furthermore if we glue a decorated v - tangle diagram in an input disk , then we run into ambiguities if the shared decorations , i.e. the orientations , does not match up . in this case
we change the decorations of the v - tangle diagram .
we add in a _ red dot _ if we have to change the orientation and a _ green dot _ otherwise .
this is pictured in the top row of figure [ figure2 - 3 ] .    the reader should check that this gives rise to a decorated circuit algebra .
another important example is the whole collection @xmath191 from definition [ defin - category ] , i.e. decorated cobordisms with @xmath51 vertical boundary lines and an extra * -marker .
we want to view this example as a decorated circuit algebra again .
hence , we have to define the operations .
the most interesting point are the decorations again , because it should be clear how to glue a cobordism with @xmath14 vertical boundary lines into @xmath192 $ ] .
this time we have to define the behaviour of three decorations , i.e. the gluing numbers and the signs and indicators .
the gluing numbers should be treated like the orientations before , i.e. if they do not match , then we use the gluing number of the lower numbered string . the indicators ( recall that they are just numbers in @xmath24 ) should be multiplied .
recall that a cobordism with an @xmath11-indicator does not get any gluing numbers .
we simply remove them in this case .
we get the following interaction of the operation of @xmath167 on @xmath190 and @xmath191 ( compare to figure [ figure2 - 3 ] ) :    * a saddle is composed with @xmath68 iff the v - tangle gets a red dot at the corresponding position . * a saddle is composed with an @xmath11-indicator surfaces iff the v - tangle gets a red and a green dot in both resolutions at the corresponding position . * a saddle is composed with an @xmath23-indicator surfaces iff the v - tangle numbers get identified at the top resolution at the corresponding position . *
a saddle gets an extra minus sign iff the v - tangle numbers change in such a way that the sign of @xmath193 is changed at the corresponding position .
these rules define a new decoration for the new cobordism .
the reader should check again that this gives rise to a decorated circuit algebra .
we summarise the notions in a definition .
recall that v - tangle diagrams are decorated with orientations and a * -marker and cobordisms are decorated with orientations on the boundary , an indicator and a * -marker .
[ defin - dotcalculus ] let @xmath167 denote a decorated circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks and @xmath176 outer boundary points in such a way that the @xmath177-th input disk has @xmath178 numbered boundary points .
then @xmath167 induces an associative and unital ( in the above sense ) operation on decorated v - tangles ( with a corresponding number of boundary points ) by the `` lower first''-rule , i.e. if the orientation does not match , then the lower number induces the new orientation .
put a red dot on every string that has its orientation changed and a green dot otherwise .
we call this the _ tangle dot - calculus_.    moreover , @xmath167 induces an associative and unital ( in the above sense ) operation on decorated cobordisms ( with a corresponding number of boundary lines ) by the `` lower first''-rule , i.e. if the orientation does not match , then the lower number induces the new orientation .
put a red dot on every string that has its orientation changed and a green dot otherwise and compose the corresponding boundary with @xmath68 iff the string has a red dot , multiply indicators via identity surfaces with corresponding indicators @xmath89 iff the v - tangle numbers get identified at the bottom / top resolution at the corresponding position , multiply with an @xmath11-identity iff in both resolutions the strings are identified and multiply with a formal sign iff the numbers change in such a way that the sign is changed at the corresponding position .
we call this the _ dot - calculus_.    if the crossings carries x - markers , then they should be in the same position as before after the operation .
the reader should compare the notions above with figure [ figure0-main ] .
we follow the notions of d.  bar - natan in the next theorem , i.e. we use the notions @xmath120 and @xmath122 from definition [ defin - category2 ] , but we also allow @xmath194 , i.e. * -marked v - tangles with a finite number of boundary points . we denote the collection of * -marked nice v - tangles as @xmath195 .
recall that every v - link diagram and every c - tangle diagram is nice .
[ theo - semiloc ]    * the whole collection @xmath196 has a natural structure of a decorated circuit algebra . * the operations on @xmath196 preserves homotopy equivalence .
thus we obtain that @xmath197 has a natural structure of a decorated circuit algebra . *
the bracket @xmath198 is not a morphism of decorated circuit algebras . *
the bracket @xmath198 is a @xmath199-morphism of decorated circuit algebras .
we follow the proof of the classical version in @xcite .
thus we start by extending the structure of a decorated circuit algebra of the set @xmath190 and the one of @xmath191 from example [ beisp - circuit ] to decorated circuit structures @xmath200 and @xmath201 multilinear .
let @xmath167 denote a decorated circuit diagram with @xmath14 input disks and @xmath202 outer boundary points in such a way that the @xmath177-th input disk has @xmath178 numbered boundary points .
\(a ) for complexes @xmath203 with @xmath204 @xmath205^{d^{l-1}_{j } } & \mathrm{co}^l_j\ar[r]^{d^l_j } & \mathrm{co}^{l+1}_{j}\ar[r]^{\phantom{a}d^{l+1}_{j } } & \cdots    } \end{xy}\ ] ] of v - tangle diagrams with @xmath178 boundary points we define the new `` tensored '' complex @xmath206 as follows .
let @xmath207 denote the composition with the morphisms that we compose after applying the circuit diagram on cobordisms ( see example [ beisp - circuit ] and definition [ defin - dotcalculus ] above ) , i.e. the red dots induce a composition with @xmath68 ( or a composition with a @xmath11-identity surface in the degenerated case ) and a change in the numbering induces a composition with a cobordisms that changes signs and indicators .
therefore we denote the operation of @xmath167 on cobordisms , i.e. the dot - calculus , as @xmath208 to illustrate the difference to the classical case .
we skip this notion for the objects .    the @xmath39-th chain module should be @xmath209 and the chain maps should be @xmath210    beware that the needed minus signs are not missing .
they are already implied in the definition of the decorated circuit algebra structure of @xmath201 , i.e. the dot - calculus in particular adds or removes signs .
see example [ beisp - circuit ] and definition [ defin - dotcalculus ] .
we use lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] to see that we still get a chain complex .
moreover , we need to define the operation of @xmath167 on the morphisms of the category @xmath196 , i.e. on the chain maps .
so let @xmath211 be a chain map .
every chain map itself is a sequence of matrices of decorated cobordisms @xmath212 .
the operation on the chain map should just insert the cobordisms topological , i.e. without changing gluing numbers , indicators or signs .
note that we do not run into ambiguities since the decorations are defined for the closure for the fixed * -marker .
we denote an entry of the matrix @xmath213 with abuse of notation as @xmath213 and similar for @xmath214 .
hence , we have to check that the commutativity of the faces @xmath215 & \mathrm{co}_1^{i}\ar[r]^{d_1^{i}}\ar[d]^{f_i } & \mathrm{co}_1^{i+1}\ar[r]\ar[d]^{f_{i+1 } } & \cdots\\ \cdots\ar[r ] & \mathrm{co}_2^{i}\ar[r]^{d_2^{i } } & \mathrm{co}_2^{i+1}\ar[r ] & \cdots . } \ ] ] is preserved . the operation on the @xmath216 is defined as @xmath217 where @xmath218 are the decoration , indicator and signs changing morphisms .
the rest is a case - by - case check using the relations in lemma [ lemm - calc ] and the equation @xmath219 .    *
if one of the two sides of the equation @xmath219 has a @xmath11-indicator , then the other has also a @xmath11-indicator .
hence , in this case everything works out by the commutation relations in lemma [ lemm - calc ] . *
since everything works out topological and the indicator changes are spread if strings get glued together , we see that if @xmath218 are only indicator changes , then , by commutativity of the indicator changes , the equation is preserved . *
an analogous argument works if @xmath218 are only sign changes . *
hence , lets assume that @xmath218 are only decoration changes , i.e. tensors of @xmath68 and @xmath67 , and we do not have any @xmath11-indicators . then one has different cases to check , i.e. based on the indicators for @xmath220 and @xmath221 .
they all work analogous , so we only do one case , i.e. only @xmath222 and @xmath213 should have negative indicators
. then we have by the commutation relations @xmath223 where @xmath224 should denote a short hand notation for the one from lemma [ lemm - calc ] .
note that the equation @xmath219 also holds for indicators , i.e. not all combinations of indicators for @xmath220 and @xmath221 are possible .
\(b ) the proof of ( b ) is an analogous argument like in ( a ) , i.e. we define the operation on the homotopies @xmath225 like before and we get the statement with an argument like before and the corresponding statement for tensor products .
\(c ) this is true , because a surfaces with an @xmath11-indicator can not be changed to a surfaces with an @xmath157-indicator .
for an concrete example see figure [ figure2 - 4 ] .
the upper complex is not homotopy equivalent to the lower complex because we can not change the @xmath11-indicator .
\(d ) this follows because of lemma [ lemma - factorbyisos ] , i.e. if a surface with an @xmath11-indicator appears in the complex before the operation @xmath167 , then it will appear for both closures . otherwise the , i.e. if the indicators are @xmath89 , then we can use the factorisation of lemma [ lemma - factorbyisos ] . note that the proof of lemma [ lemma - factorbyisos ] does not depend on theorem [ theo - geoinvarianz ] .
then the equality is a consequence of the definition of the operation on the cobordisms and of an argument like in @xcite .
note that the next corollary finish the proof of theorem [ theo - geoinvarianz ] .
[ koro - reidemeister ] let @xmath226 be a v - tangle diagram that looks like a generalised reidemeister move ( see figure [ figure0 - 1 ] ) .
then @xmath227 for any operation @xmath167 if @xmath228 is either a classical tangle or a reidemeister - tangle @xmath226 for @xmath229 .
this is a direct consequence of point ( d ) of theorem [ theo - semiloc ] and the observation that the reidemeister - tangles , except the mrm - tangle , are all part of the set @xmath199 .    that the statement also works if one of the @xmath228 is a mrm - tangle is a case - by - case check for the two different closures of a mrm - tangle ( both sides ) , i.e. in all cases the appearing cobordisms have @xmath89 indicators .
[ rem - gradings2 ] like before and like in the paper of d.  bar - natan @xcite , the whole construction works with gradings , too .
but since this is a straightforward generalisations of the notions in @xcite , we skip the details here .
in the whole section let @xmath54 denote a commutative and unital ring such that @xmath25 is invertible , e.g. @xmath230 $ ] .
moreover , through the whole section we denote the geometric complex as @xmath231 and a corresponding algebraic version , i.e. an utqft ( see @xcite ) applied to the geometric complex , as @xmath232 or short as @xmath233 , e.g. we denote lee s version as @xmath234 note that , in order for the signs to work out correct , we have to fix a marker position . in the whole section
we , by convention , say that the marker for @xmath4 is at the left side and for @xmath5 is at the top .
recall ( see @xcite for the classical and @xcite for the virtual case ) that _ lee s variant _ , i.e. the algebraic version , for v - links is given by the following maps and the filtered module @xmath235/(x^2=1)$ ] .
@xmath236 and @xmath237 moreover , recall that the geometric picture of lee s variant is given by the _ dot - relations _ in figure [ figure3 - 1 ] with @xmath238 , while the graded case of the khovanov complex is @xmath239 .
note that @xmath240 allows us to use the _ dot - relation _ in figure [ figure3 - 1 ] instead of the local relations of figure [ figure0 - 2 ] .
we give an example of the lee complex of a v - knot in example [ beisp - leedeg ] .
lee s variant has a remarkable property in the classical case , i.e. e.s .
lee showed that her variant just `` counts '' the number of components of the c - link , i.e. she showed that ( for @xmath241 ) the homology of an @xmath34-component link @xmath242 is @xmath243 so on the first hand this seems to be a boring invariant .
but j.  rasmussen ( see @xcite ) used this degeneration in a masterfully way to define the _ rasmussen invariant _ of a c - knot .
note that this is a unexpected result since @xmath244 for @xmath245 ( see the relations in definition [ defin - category ] ) .
hence , there are `` tons '' of @xmath11-morphisms in the complex . but these @xmath11-morphisms also come with isomorphism `` in a lot '' cases .
the following example for the lee complex of a v - knot is a blueprint of this effect .
[ beisp - leedeg ] consider the diagram of the virtual trefoil @xmath130 given in figure [ figure4 - 1 ] . in this example
the number of negative crossings is zero , i.e. the leftmost object is the @xmath11-degree of the chain complex .
let us consider @xmath241 .
then @xmath244 and therefore the first two maps are @xmath11-morphisms . but note that the two right morphisms are not the same , i.e. one is @xmath246 and the other is @xmath247 .
so on the algebraic level we get , using the maps from before , the following complex if we fix @xmath248 as a basis for @xmath249 and @xmath250 for @xmath251 .
@xmath252^{\begin{pmatrix }        0 & 0 \\        0 & 0 \\        0 & 0 \\        0 & 0         \end{pmatrix } } &   & & a\oplus a\ar[rrr]^{\begin{pmatrix }        0 & 1 & 0 & -1\\        -1 & 0 & -1 & 0\\        -1 & 0 & 1 & 0\\        0 & 1 & 0 & 1        \end{pmatrix } } & & & a\otimes a.        } \end{xy}\ ] ] an easy calculations shows that the second matrix is an isomorphism .
hence , the homology of the virtual trefoil is only non - trivial for @xmath148 , i.e. @xmath253    another example is the v - knot in figure [ figure4 - 2 ] , e.g. with the pictured orientation and numbering of the circles from left to right , the three outgoing morphisms from resolution @xmath254 to @xmath255 , @xmath256 and @xmath257 are ( up to , in this case , not important signs ) the morphisms @xmath258 , @xmath259 and @xmath260 , i.e. one alternating and two non - alternating .
hence , the kernel is trivial .
the reader should check that the rest also works out in the same fashion .
the approach ( we follow d.  bar - natan and s.  morrison @xcite ) to show that the degeneration is still true is the following .
first we define two orthogonal idempotents in our category , which we call _ down and up_. we can look at the _ karoubi envelope _ of our category , denoted @xmath261 .
the idea of the karoubi envelope is to find a `` completion '' of a category such that every idempotent splits .
it is named after the french mathematician m.  karoubi , but it already appears in an earlier work by p.  freyd in @xcite .    then we show that the geometric complex of a simple crossing ( as a v - tangle ) , if considered in @xmath261 , is homotopy equivalent to a very simple complex with only @xmath11-morphisms . after that we use the local construction from section [ circuit ] to finish the proof .
moreover , we proof the following interesting result of the number of decorations of v - link resolution with the `` colours '' down and up .
note that we call an oriented resolution @xmath262 of a v - link diagram _ non - alternating _ if it is of the form @xmath263or @xmath21 at the corresponding positions of the saddles . recall that all the v - link diagrams should be oriented and that such a diagram with @xmath264 components has @xmath41 different orientations @xmath265 .
we note that one can also colour the resolutions with honest colours , say red and green , in such a way that the colour changes at every v - crossing .
we call this a _ colouring of a v - link resolution _ if at the corresponding saddle - position the colours are different , i.e. ( red , green ) or ( green , red )
. the reader should compare this with the coloured dots in figure [ figure0-main ] .
[ theo - nonalternating ] let @xmath130 denote a v - link diagram with @xmath264 components .
there are bijections of sets @xmath266 if @xmath130 is a v - knot , i.e. @xmath267 , then the two non - alternating resolutions are in homology degree @xmath11
.      given an orientation @xmath268 of the v - link diagram @xmath130 , the map @xmath221 should assign the resolution @xmath262 which is obtained by replacing every oriented crossing of the form @xmath30 and @xmath31 to @xmath263 .
this is clearly an injection .
now , given a non - alternating resolution @xmath262 , we assign to it an orientation of @xmath130 in the following way . at any non - alternating part of the form
@xmath263and @xmath21replace the non - alternating part with the corresponding oriented crossing @xmath30 and @xmath31 ( or a rotation in the @xmath21 case ) .
these two maps are clearly inverses and for a v - knot the corresponding non - alternating resolutions are in homology degree @xmath11 since all @xmath32-crossings are resolved @xmath11 and all @xmath33-crossings are resolved @xmath29 in this procedure .    to see the second bijection use a checker - board colouring of the v - link diagram .
then start at any point of the non - alternating resolution and use the right - hand rule , i.e. the index finger follows the orientation and the string should get the colour of the face on the side of the thumb .
[ beisp - nonalt ] let @xmath130 be the v - knot diagram in figure [ figure4 - 2 ] .
then only the @xmath270 resolution of the v - knot diagram allows a non - alternating resolution .
moreover , the orientation of the diagram induces this non - alternating resolution by replacing the three crossings with @xmath21,@xmath263and @xmath263 .
the other orientation induces the non - alternating resolution @xmath263,@xmath21and @xmath21 .
note that , by construction , these resolution are in homology degree @xmath11 . a computation like in example
[ beisp - leedeg ] shows that these two non - alternating resolutions give the only two generators of the homology , i.e. @xmath253          for any category the notion of an idempotent morphisms , i.e. an arrow with @xmath272 , makes sense .
moreover , in a pre - additive category the notion @xmath273 also makes sense .
a classical trick in modern algebra is to use an idempotent , e.g. in an algebra @xmath249 , to split the algebra into @xmath274 hence , it is a natural question to ask if on can `` split '' , given an idempotent @xmath275 , an object of a category @xmath276 in the same way , i.e. @xmath277 the main problem is that the notion of an image of an arrow could not exist in an arbitrary category .
the karoubi envelope is an extension of a category such that for a given idempotent @xmath275 the notions @xmath278 makes sense .
therefore one can `` split '' a given object in the karoubi envelope that could be indecomposable in the category itself .
* objects are ordered pairs @xmath281 of an object @xmath276 and an idempotent @xmath275 of @xmath94 .
* morphisms @xmath282 are all arrows @xmath283 of @xmath94 such that the equation @xmath284 holds .
* compositions are defined in the obvious sense .
the identity of an object is @xmath275 itself .
it is straightforward to check that this is indeed a category .
we denote an object @xmath281 as @xmath278 , the _ image _ of the idempotent @xmath275 .
moreover , we identify the objects of @xmath94 with their image via the embedding functor @xmath285    note that if @xmath94 is pre - additive , then @xmath286 is also an projection and , under the identification above , we can finally write @xmath277 the following proposition is well - known ( see e.g. @xcite ) . the propositions allows us to shift the problem if two chain complexes are homotopy equivalent to the karoubi envelope . recall that @xmath287 denotes the category of formal chain complexes .
[ prop - karoubi ] let @xmath288 be two objects , i.e. formal chain complexes , of @xmath287 .
if the two objects are homotopy equivalent in @xmath289 , then the two objects are also homotopy equivalent in @xmath287 .
we note that we call the idempotents _ `` down and up''_. the reader should be careful not to confuse them with the orientations on the resolutions or the colourings of theorem [ theo - nonalternating ] , i.e. latter colours change at v - crossings but `` down and up '' do not change .
note that ( e ) is very important in the following .            1 .
@xmath294 and @xmath295 ( idempotent ) .
2 .   @xmath296 ( orthogonal ) .
3 .   @xmath297 ( complete ) .
4 .   @xmath298 and @xmath299 ( eigenvalues ) .
@xmath300 and @xmath301 ( change of orientations )
@xmath302=\operatorname{id}(1)_{\mathrm{dot}}=-[\mathrm{u},\phi^-_+]$ ] ( commutator relation ) .
now we take a look at the karoubi envelope @xmath304 .
the discussion above shows that there is an isomorphism@xmath305{figs / none}}}}\simeq\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / down}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / up}}}}.\ ] ] with this notation we get @xmath305{figs / smoothing}}}}\simeq\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu}}}}\ ] ] and analogous @xmath306{figs / hsmoothing}}}}\simeq\text{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd1}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du1}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud1}}}}\oplus\text{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu1}}}}.\ ] ] recall that the standard orientation for the complex @xmath307 is ( see e.g. figure [ figure0-main ] ) @xmath308[r]{\raisebox{0.2cm}{$\lcurvearrowleft$}}}}}}.\ ] ] to avoid mixing the notions of the down and up - colours and the orientations we denote this complex simply as @xmath309 , i.e. standard orientations for all strings .
moreover , under the convention left = first top subscript , right = second top subscript , bottom = first bottom subscript and top = second bottom subscript , a notation like @xmath310 makes sense .
[ theo - karoubi ] let @xmath311 denote two homotopy equivalent complexes . then , in @xmath120 , there are sixteen chain homotopies ( only four are illustrated , but it should be clear how the rest look like ) @xmath312{figs / du}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud1 } } } } } , & { \llbracket \overcrossing \rrbracket}^{+-}_{-+}\simeq \text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu1}}}}},\\        { \llbracket \overcrossing \rrbracket}^{++}_{+-}\simeq \text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu1 } } } } } , & { \llbracket \overcrossing \rrbracket}^{+-}_{++}\simeq \text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud1}}}}}.        } \end{xy}\ ] ] moreover , similar formulas hold for @xmath313 .
we use the observations from above , i.e. in @xmath304 the differential of @xmath309 is a @xmath314-matrix of saddles .
hence , for @xmath309 we get ( for simplicity write @xmath315 and @xmath316 and @xmath317 for the saddle under the action of down and up ) @xmath318{figs / dd}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu}}}}}\ar[rrr]^{\begin{pmatrix }        s_{\mathrm{d } } & 0 & 0 & 0\\        0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\        0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\        0 & 0 & 0 & s_{\mathrm{u } }        \end{pmatrix } } & & & \text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu1}}}}}.        } \end{xy}\ ] ] this is true , because all other saddles are killed by the orthogonality relations of the colours down and up .
note that both non zero saddles are invertible , i.e. their inverses are the saddles @xmath319 with only @xmath19 as boundary decorations . to see this
one uses lemma [ lemm - idem ] and the neck cutting relation .
thus we get @xmath320{figs / du}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / du1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / ud1}}}}}.\ ] ] to prove the further statements one has to use the relation ( e ) of lemma [ lemm - idem ] , i.e. the only surviving saddles change according to the action of @xmath68 .
we note that this is a very important observation .
[ bem - importantsaddles ] we observe a very important fact .
the four complexes similar to @xmath322[r]{\raisebox{0.2cm}{$\rcurvearrowright$}}}}}},\ ] ] i.e. the ones for which we choose a non - alternating orientation of the resolutions , are the only ones that , due to the orthogonality relation for down and up , survive a closing with an even number of v - crossings , i.e. like @xmath323 in figure [ figure0 - 4 ] , in their source and target .
so if we only consider v - link diagrams , then any such saddle is a multiplication , i.e. one bottom component , or a comultiplication , i.e. one top component .
therefore such morphisms will always be killed at the bottom ( multiplication ) or at the top ( comultiplication ) .    and the only saddle that survives the closure of type @xmath11 in figure [ figure0 - 4 ] is the mbius cobordism .
latter one is a @xmath11-morphism if @xmath25 is invertible ( compare to the relations in definition [ defin - category ] ) .
hence , the dot - calculus of definition [ defin - dotcalculus ] ensures that all components will survive and the complex will be of the form @xmath324{figs / dd}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu}}}}}\xrightarrow{0}\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / dd1}}}}}\oplus\text{\raisebox{-0.1cm}{{\raisebox{-0.215cm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{figs / uu1}}}}}.\ ] ]      [ theo - leedeg ] let @xmath130 denote a @xmath34-component v - link diagram .
then @xmath325 is homotopy equivalent ( in @xmath326 ) to a chain complex with only zero differentials and @xmath41 generators given by the @xmath41 non - alternating resolutions .
we will repress the notion of the formal signs of the morphisms to maintain readability .
moreover , we will choose a specific orientation for the resolutions .
we can do both because of lemma [ lemma - everythingfine ] .
so the main part of the proof will be to choose the orientations in a good way and use theorem [ theo - semiloc ] ( the reader may think of tensors ) .
recall that the number of crossings is finite .
hence , we can choose an orientation of any resolution such that the number @xmath14 of alternating crossings is minimal .
we observe that theorem [ theo - semiloc ] can be used because every crossing itself is a nice v - tangle diagram . moreover , with theorem [ theo - karoubi ] , we see that the complex will be homotopy equivalent to a complex with only @xmath11-differentials . hence , the only remaining thing is to show that the number of generators will work out as claimed .
note that , if a resolution contains a lower part of a multiplication or a upper part of a comultiplication , then by remark [ bem - importantsaddles ] these resolution is killed .
moreover , we can ignore top and bottom parts of @xmath15 , since they will always be non - alternating .
now we define the _ dual graph of an resolution _
, denoted @xmath327 , as follows .
recall that a resolution is a four valent graph without any c - crossings .
any edges of this graph is a vertex of @xmath327 .
two vertices are connected with a labeled edge iff they are connected by a v - crossing or a top part of a resolution of a multiplication or a bottom part of a comultiplication .
first edges should be labeled @xmath328 , the second type of edges should get an labeling that s corresponds to the given orientation of the resolution .
we will work with the simple graph of that type , i.e. remove circles or parallel edges of the same type .
see figure [ figure4 - 6 ] , i.e. the figure shows two resolutions from figure [ figure4 - 2 ] and their dual graphs .
the advantage of this notation is that the question of surviving resolutions simplifies to the question of a colouring of the dual graph , i.e. a colouring of the dual graph is a colouring with two colours , say red and green , such that every @xmath328-labeled edge has two equally coloured adjacent vertices , every alternating crossing has also two different coloured adjacent vertices , but every non - alternating crossing has also two equal colours at adjacent vertices .      then ,
because of theorem [ theo - karoubi ] , a resolution will have surviving generators iff it does not contain lower parts of multiplication or upper parts of comultiplications and , given an orientation of the resolution , it allows such a colouring .        *
the dual graph of the resolution is a tree , i.e. no circles . *
all circles in the dual graph have an even number of v - labeled edges .
* there is one circle in the dual graph with an odd number of v - labeled edges .
if @xmath329 , i.e. the resolution is non - alternating , we get exactly the claimed number of generators , since there are , by construction , no lower parts of multiplication or upper parts of comultiplications and the dual graph is of type ( i ) or ( ii ) and in both cases the graph can be coloured .
so let @xmath330 and let @xmath331 be an alternating crossing in a resolution @xmath54 . as in remark [ bem - importantsaddles ] the whole resolution is killed if the @xmath331 is a lower part of a multiplication or an upper part of a comultiplication .
hence , we can assume that all alternating crossings of @xmath54 are either top components of multiplications or bottom components of comultiplications .
so we only have to check the three cases from above .
if the resolution is one of type ( i ) , then it is possible to choose the orientations in such a way that all crossings are non - alternating , i.e. this would be a contradiction to the minimality of @xmath14 .
if the resolution is of type ( ii ) , then the resolution only survives , i.e. the dual graph allows a colouring , iff the number of other alternating crossings in every circle is even .
but in this case one can also choose an orientation with only non - alternating crossings .
hence , we would get a contradiction to the minimality of @xmath14 again .
hence , only non - alternating resolutions generate non vanishing objects .
moreover , any non - alternating resolution will create exactly two of these generators .
thus , with theorem [ theo - nonalternating ] the statement follows .        * if @xmath334 , then their is an isomorphism @xmath335 where @xmath336 is all torsion . * if @xmath241 or @xmath230 $ ] , then their is an isomorphism @xmath337 * the only possible torsion is @xmath25-torsion .      for ( a)+(c ) recall the universal coefficients theorem .
i.e. their is a short exact sequence @xmath338 therefore ( a ) follows from ( b ) with @xmath241 , since the tor - functor will vanish in this case . and ( c ) follows from ( b ) with @xmath230 $ ] , since all non 2-torsion elements will exits for @xmath10 and @xmath339 $ ] .
d.  bar - natan , khovanov s homology for tangles and cobordisms , geom . topol . 9
( 2005 ) , 14431499 .
arxiv : math/0410495 d.  bar - natan , on khovanov s categorification of the jones polynomial , algebraic and geometric topology 2 ( 2002 ) , 337370 .
arxiv : math/0201043 d.  bar - natan , fast khovanov homology computations , journal of knot theory and its ramifications 16 - 3 ( 2007 ) , 243255 .
arxiv : math/0606318 d.  bar - natan and s.  morrison , the karoubi envelope and lee s degeneration of khovanov homology , algebraic and geometric topology 6 ( 2006 ) , 14591469 arxiv : math/0606542v3 p.  freyd , _ abelian categories .
an introduction to the theory of functors _
, new york : harper and row publishers , 1964 ( harpers series in modern mathematics ) . v.  jones , planar algebras i , eprint ( 1999 ) .
arxiv : math/9909027 l.  kauffman , introduction to virtual knot theory , j. knot theory ramifications 21,13 ( 2012 ) .
l.  kauffman and v.  manturov , virtual knots and links , proc .
steklov inst .
math . 1 ( 2006 ) , 104121 .
arxiv : math/0502014 m.  khovanov , a categorification of the jones polynomial , duke math . j. 101 ( 2000 ) , 359426 .
arxiv : math/9908171 j.  kock , _ frobenius algebras and 2d topological quantum field theories _ , cambridge : cambridge university press , 2003 .
lee , an endomorphism of the khovanov invariant , adv .
197(2 ) ( 2005 ) , 554586 .
arxiv : math/0210213 m.  mackaay , p.  turner and p.  vaz , a remark on rasmussen s invariant of knots , knot theory and its ramifications 16(3 ) ( 2007 ) , 333344 .
arxiv : math/0509692 v.  manturov , the khovanov complex for virtual links , fundam .
prikl . mat .
11:4 ( 2005 ) , 127152 .
arxiv : math/0501317 v.  manturov , khovanov homology for virtual knots with arbitrary coefficients , izv math 71 ( 2007 ) , 967999 .
arxiv : math/0601152 j.  rasmussen , khovanov homology and the slice genus , invent .
182(3 ) ( 2010 ) , 419447 .
arxiv : math/0509692 s.  mac lane , _ categories for the working mathematician _
, new york : springer - verlag , 1998 .
d.  tubbenhauer , khovanov homology for virtual links using cobordisms , preprint ( 2011 ) .
arxiv:1111.0609v2    d.t . : _ courant research center `` higher order structures '' , university of gttingen , gttingen , germany ; mathematisches
institut , georg - august - universitt gttingen , gttingen , germany _ email : dtubben@uni-math.gwdg.de