Arxiv:2103.00313V2 [Math.AG] 3 Mar 2021

arXiv:2103.00313v2 [math.AG] 3 Mar 2021 aeas enpooe nvrostpc neueaiegeo enumerative in topics Gromov-Wit various in in conjectures proposed diﬃcult been most also the lite have of the one in as developments remains signiﬁcant Despite theory. Witten in [ Xiong .Vrsr osrit of constraints Virasoro results 1. Main pairs constraints LG 0.4. Virasoro admissible spaces for state operators 0.3. the Virasoro and pairs Landau-Ginzburg 0.2. Admissible 0.1. Introduction 0. ..Srn qainadteoperator the and equation String 1.1. ..Agaigeuto n h operator the and equation grading A 1.2. iaoocntanshv enpooe nGoo-itnt Gromov-Witten in proposed been have constraints Virasoro ..Clb-a oyoil ihlrecnrlcags24 formula trace super variables A References three of polynomials A. variables CY Appendix three Invertible of polynomials charges CY 4.3. central Fermat large with polynomials 4.2. c Calabi-Yau Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau vect and Euler constraints 4.1. quantum Virasoro via symmetry manifolds mirror Frobenius 4. LG Semisimple via manifolds Frobenius 3.3. Theorem Semisimple Givental and constrain manifolds 3.2. Virasoro Frobenius and manifolds Frobenius 3.1. Semi-simple relations 3. Virasoro Hamiltonians quadratic of 2.2. formalism Quantization Givental and relations 2.1. Virasoro 2. IAOOCNTANSI UNU IGLRT THEORIES SINGULARITY QUANTUM IN CONSTRAINTS VIRASORO 16 oes n aduGnbr/aaiYucorrespondence. m Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau constraints, and Virasoro Calabi- among models, certain connections (3) the group, discuss minimal also group the maximal with the polynomials with mat polynomials invertible poten (1) ancestor cluding: total the that conjecture ( a propose We tries. o-eeeaeqaihmgnosplnma and polynomial quasi-homogeneous non-degenerate a Abstract. ,G W, .I eoe n ftems udmna n acntn con fascinating and fundamental most the of one becomes It ]. sanhltdb hs iaoooeaos epoeteco the prove We operators. Virasoro these by annihilated is ) eitoueVrsr prtr o n aduGnbr pa Landau-Ginzburg any for operators Virasoro introduce We L EQAGH N EEGSHEN YEFENG AND HE WEIQIANG − 1 and 0. L 0 Introduction Contents L − 1 L 1 0 G sacrangopo ignlsymme- diagonal of group certain a is ro ymtyo Landau-Ginzburg of symmetry irror 2 w-aibehmgnosFer- homogeneous two-variable (2) , ilo h JWter ftepair the of theory FJRW the of tial a oyoil ihgop.We groups. with polynomials Yau aue[ rature er [ metry s15 ts e hoy iaooconstraints Virasoro theory. ten repnec 23 orrespondence jcuei aiu ae,in- cases, various in njecture r19 or er yEuh,Hr,and Hori, Eguchi, by heory 16 14 , r( ir 17 , 31 ,G W, , 45 , etrsi Gromov- in jectures 11 , where ) 24 , 48 , , 14 49 W , ]. 25 is , 50 ,it ], 35 33 32 25 18 15 12 11 10 6 5 4 2 1 7 7 8 2 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

In this paper, we propose Virasoro constraints for certain Landau-Ginzburg pairs (W, G), with W a certain quasi-homogeneous polynomial and G a certain group of symmetries of W . For such a LG pair (W, G), Fan, Jarvis, and Ruan constructed a Cohomological Field Theory1 in [21, 22], based on a proposal of Witten [58]. Originally it was called quantum singularity theory in [22]. Nowadays the theory constructed in [21, 22] are widely called Fan-Jarvis-Ruan-Witten theory (or FJRW for short). The construction used both algebraic and analytic tools. There are purely algebraic constructions of Cohomology ﬁeld theories for the same LG pair by Polishchuk- Vaintrob [51], and Kiem-Li [33]. The three constructions are conjectured to be equivalent. These theories are LG A-model theories in the study of mirror symmetry [30, 6, 5, 38, 9, 41, 28, 29].

0.1. Admissible Landau-Ginzburg pairs and the state spaces. Following the work of Fan, Jarvis, and Ruan [22], we let W : Cn C be a non-degenerate quasi-homogeneous polynomial of n variables. Here the non-degeneracy→ means the W has isolated critical points only at the origin and the weights (or degrees) of the variables are uniquely given by rational numbers. We write 1 wt(x ) := q 0, Q. i i ∈ 2 ∩ n Let GW G be the group of diagonal symmetries of W deﬁned by ≤ m G := (λ , , λ ) Gn W (λ x , , λ x )= W (x , ,x ) . W 1 · · · n ∈ m 1 1 · · · n n 1 · · · n

n o There exists the exponential grading element

J := (exp(2π√ 1q ), , exp(2π√ 1q )) G . W − 1 · · · − n ∈ W Deﬁnition 0.1 (Admissible LG pairs). A subgroup G G is called admissible if J G. ≤ W W ∈ We call the pair (W, G) an admissible LG pair if G is admissible. • We call JW the minimal group of W . • We call Gh thei maximal group of W and write G = G or G = Aut(W ) sometimes. • W W max W For an admissible LG pair (W, G), there exists a super vector space with a non-degenerate bilinear pairing and a bigrading [30, 6, 5, 38]. We call it the state space and denote it by W,G. Let us brieﬂy review the construction here. H

0.1.1. A state space . For each γ G Gn , we write HW,G ∈ ≤ m (0.1) γ := exp(2π√ 1θ ), , exp(2π√ 1θ ) , − 1 · · · − n where for all i such that 1 i n, θi [0, 1) Q are given uniquely. Deﬁne the degree shift number of γ to be ≤ ≤ ∈ ∩ n n (0.2) ι := age(γ) q := (θ q ). γ − i i − i Xi=1 Xi=1 The ﬁxed locus of γ in Cn is denoted by Fix(γ). It is a subspace of Cn of dimension

Nγ := dimC Fix(γ).

Let Wγ := W Fix(γ) be the restriction. We denote dxγ the standard top form on Fix(γ). Recall the Jacobian algebra| of W is given by ∂W ∂W Jac(W ) := C[x , ,x ] = = = 0 . 1 · · · n ∂x · · · ∂x 1 n 1in the sense of Kontsevich and Manin [35] VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 3

Deﬁnition 0.2 (A state space). For an LG pair (W, G), the state space W,G is deﬁned to be the direct sum of G-invariant spaces H

:= , := (Jac(W ) dx )G . HW,G Hγ Hγ γ · γ γ G M∈ Here γ = (λ1, , λn) G acts on xi and dxi both by multiplying λi. We call an element in the subspace · · ·narrow∈ if N = 0, otherwise it is broad. Hγ γ Following the notation of [38], the state space is spanned by elements of the form α γ , HW,G | i where γ G and α Jac(Wγ) dxγ . If xi is ﬁxed by γ, i.e. θi = 0, then we write i Wγ. Consider∈ a monomial∈ representative· ∈

m α = [x ] dx = xmi dx Jac(W ) dx . γ · γ  i  · γ ∈ γ · γ i Wγ ∈Y m  Let wt(α) be the weight of the form xγ dxγ , deﬁned by

wt(α) := (mi + 1)qi. i Wγ X∈ 0.1.2. A pairing on . We fix a homogeneous basis of , denoted by HW,G HW,G φ = [f ]dx γ γ G, [f ] Jac(W ) . a a γa | ai | a ∈ a ∈ γa n o Let ResWγa be the Grothendieck residue pairing on Jac(Wγa ). Then there is a natural nonde- generate bilinear pairing ( , ) on , defined by · · HW,G 1 0, if γa = γb− ; (0.3) ηab := (φa, φb) := 6 1  Res (f f dx ), if γ = γ− .  Wγa a b · γa a b 0.1.3. Bigrading and parity. We denote the central charge of the polynomial W by n (0.4) c := (1 2q ). W − i Xi=1 Following [30, 38], we introduce a bigradingb and a parity on . For an homogeneous element HW,G m φ := α γ = [x ] dx γ , a | i γ · γ | i∈HW,G + we assign a bigrading (µa ,µa−), b µ+ := wt(α)+ ι cW ; a γ − 2 (0.5) b  µ := N wt(α)+ ι cW .  a− γ − γ − 2 and a parity  (0.6) φ = ( 1)Nγ . | a| − We also define a complex degree

1 + (0.7) deg φ := µ + µ− + c . C a 2 a a W b 4 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

3 3 3 Example 0.3. For the Fermat cubic pair (W = x1 + x2 + x3, G = JW ), we have the following list for a basis of . This example will be discussed in Section h4.2 withi more details. HW,G

Table 1. The state space of a Fermat cubic φ 1 J 1 J 2 dx J 0 x x x dx J 0 a | i | i | i 1 2 3 | i (µ+,µ ) ( 1 , 1 ) ( 1 , 1 ) ( 1 , 1 ) ( 1 , 1 ) a a− − 2 − 2 2 2 − 2 2 2 − 2 φ 1 1 1 1 | a| − − 1 1 degC φa 0 1 2 2

0.2. Virasoro operators for admissible LG pairs. For ℓ R and n Z 0, we denote the Pochhammer symbol by ∈ ∈ ≥ ℓ(ℓ + 1) (ℓ + n 1), if n 1. (0.8) (ℓ) := · · · − ≥ n 1, if n = 0. We assign a variable ta to each φ zm [[z]]. m a ∈HW,G Deﬁnition 0.4 (Virasoro operators). For each integer k Z 1, we introduce a diﬀerential operator ∈ ≥− 3 c ∂ L := − W k − 2 ∂t0 k+1 k+1 b ∞ 1 ∂ + µ+ + m + ta a 2 m ∂ta m=0 k+1 m+k X 1 ~2 − 1 ∂ ∂ (0.9) + ( 1)m µ+ + m + ηab 2 − a 2 ∂ta ∂tb m= k k+1 m 1 m+k X− − − 1 a b + δ 1,kηabt0t0 2~2 −

δ0,k φa + 1 + 1 ( 1)| |(µ )(µ + ). − 4 − a − 2 a 2 a X ab Here η is the (a, b)-th entry of the inverse matrix of the pairing matrix (ηab). Following the work of Givental [25], these diﬀerential operators are related to quantization of quadratic Hamiltonians. This allows us to verify

Proposition 0.5. The diﬀerential operators Lk k 1 satisfy the relations: { } ≥− (0.10) [L ,L ] = (m n)L . m n − m+n In general, a set of operators Lk k Z are called Virasoro operators if { } ∈ m3 m [L ,L ] = (m n)L + − δ c, m n − m+n 12 · m+n,0 · with some constant c (which is called the central charge of the Virasoro algebra). The relations become (0.10) if we restrict to k 1. By abuse of the notations, we will call Lk k 1 in (0.9) the Virasoro operators for admissible≥− LG (A-model) pairs. { } ≥− VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 5

0.3. Virasoro constraints. The essential ingredients in each construction [21, 22, 51, 33] are moduli spaces of W -spin structures in [21, 22], or G-spin structures in [51] and [33], over genus-g orbifold curves decorated by the element

~γ = (γ , , γ ) Gk. 1 · · · k ∈ G We denote the moduli space by g,~γ. The moduli space carries a virtual fundamental classes, G virW, which will be denoted by [ g,~γ] ♣. W ,W,G Despite the diﬀerent nature of the techniques, each construction gives a CohFT Λ♣ { g,k } on the isomorphic underlying state space . Here g and k satisﬁes the stability condition HW,G 2g 2+ k > 0. We denote the CohFTs by Λ , where − ♣ = FJRW, PV, KL ♣ stands for the abbreviation of each theory. We will mainly consider FJRW theory in our paper, but the setting also applies to the other two. Choosing a set of elements φ , the linear maps { i ∈Hγi } ,W,G k Λ♣ : ⊗ H∗( , C) g,k HW,G → Mg,k produces intersection numbers, called ancestor invariants

k k ,(W,G) ♣ ,W,G ℓi (0.11) τℓi (φi) = Λg,k♣ (φ1 . . . φk) ψi , g,k ˆ g,k ⊗ ⊗ · D Yi=1 E M Yi=1 where φ , ψ ’s are the ﬁrst chern classes of cotangent line bundles on coarse moduli of i ∈ HW,G i spaces . Mg,n

0.3.1. The total ancestor potential. We write

a m t(z) := tmφaz . m 0 a X≥ X a a As in [23, Section 1.3], we assign parity for tm, which coincides with that of φa, and moving tm across φb will give a sign, i.e. a ta φ a t φ = ( 1)| m|·| b|φ t . m b − b m The total ancestor potential is given by

k ,(W,G) 2g 2 1 ♣ (0.12) W,G♣ := exp ~ − t(ψi) . A k! g,k g ! X Xk D Yi=1 E The three CohFTs constructed in the work of Fan-Jarvis-Ruan [21, 22], Polishchuk-Vaintrob [51], and Kiem-Li [33] are conjectured to be equivalent. In particular, the pairing in (0.3) matches the intersection pairing of Lefschetz thimbles in FJRW theory [22], the perfect pairing on intersection homology in KL theory [33], and the Mukai pairing on Hochchild homology of Γ-equivariant matrix factorizations of W [51]. In general, the equivalence is known when restricting to a subspace of narrow elements in W,G [8]. Numerically, if we consider the total ancestor potentials, the equivalence are veriﬁedH for more cases [27, 28, 29]. 6 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

0.3.2. Virasoro conjecture for admissible LG pairs. Now we propose a Virasoro conjecture for the admissible LG A-model pairs. Conjecture 0.6 (Virasoro conjecture for admissible LG A-model pairs). For any admissible LG pair (W, G), the total ancestor potentials ♣ in FJRW/PV/KL theory satisfy the Virasoro AW,G constraints L ♣ = 0, for all k 1. kAW,G ≥−

Remark 0.7. When k = 1, the constraint L 1 ♣ = 0 always holds true in each theory − − AW,G [22, 51, 33] as it is equivalent to the string equations. When k = 0, the last term in (0.9) can be rewritten in terms of the central charge and Euler characteristic of the LG pair by a supertrace 2 1 formula (1.6). If cW = 3, the supertrace term Str(θ 4 ) still vanishes and the constraints by L0 is equivalent to a grading equation (1.12), which is determined− by an Euler vector that arises in the quantum singularityb theory. By the dilaton equation (1.10), such an equivalence still holds when c = 3. W 6 0.4. Main results. In this paper, we study Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 in various situations. We will mostlyb focus on the FJRW theory. Part (2) of Theorem 0.8 is stated for PV theory. The result is slightly stronger there than in the FJRW theory, due to some technique advantages. 0.4.1. Virasoro constraints for semi-simple Frobenius manifolds. The genus zero invariants in (0.11) gives a Frobenius manifold in the sense of Dubrovin [13]. If the Frobenius manifold is generically semi-simple, i.e., the Frobenius algebra is semi-simple at a generic point of the Frobenius manifold, the total ancestor potential is uniquely constructed from the Frobenius manifold by the famous Givental-Teleman formula in (3.5) [26, 56]. By writing the Virasoro operators using quantization operators of certain quadratic Hamiltonians, Givental proved the formula (3.5) after a modiﬁcation is annihilated by Virasoro operators [25, Theorem 7.7]. By applying Givental’s result, we show the LG A-models of two types of admissible LG pairs have generically semisimple Frobenius manifolds and thus Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 hold for them. n n aij Both types are from invertible polynomials, which are of the form i=1 j=1 xj , with a matrix (aij)n n GL(n, Q). × ∈ P Q Theorem 0.8. Consider an admissible pair (W, GW ) with an invertible polynomial W . 1 =FJRW (1) If W has no weight- chain variable, then L ♣ = 0 for all k 1. 2 k W,GW =PV A ≥− (2) The equation Lk ♣ = 0 holds for all k 1. AW,GW ≥− According to the mirror theorems in [28, 29], the LG A-models in Theorem 0.8 are equivalent to Saito-Givental B-models of their mirror polynomials. The mirror LG B models are generically semi-simple as the deformed polynomials are of Morse type in general. Semisimple Frobenius manifolds also exists for admissible LG A-model pairs even if G = GW , such as pairs 6 (W = xd + xd, G = J ), d 2. 1 2 h W i ≥ By computing the determinant of its quantum Euler vector, we obtain the underlying Frobenius manifolds are generically semisimple. Theorem 0.9. Conjecture 0.6 is true for the FJRW theory of the pairs (W = xd + xd, J ). 1 2 h W i 0.4.2. LG pairs of Calabi-Yau type. If a polynomial W (x , ,x ) is of Calabi-Yau type, i.e., 1 · · · n cW = n 2, the hypersurface (W = 0) and the quotient space induced by the G-action are Calabi- Yau varieties.− In Witten’s work of Gauge linear sigma models (GLSM) [59], the Gromov-Witten btheory of the quotient Calabi-Yau variety has a deep connection to the LG A-model of the VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 7 pair (W, G). This is called the Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correpsondence. By comparing the FJRW theory with the Gromov-Witten theory of the Calabi-Yau counterpart, we obtain Theorem 0.10. Let W be an invertible polynomial of Calabi-Yau type. For all k 1, the =FJRW ≥ − Virasoro constraints L ♣ = 0 hold for the following admissible LG pairs (W, G): kAW,G (1) cW 3 and G SL(C); (2) or W≥ is a Fermat≤ CY polynomial of three variables, and G = J . h W i The Frobeniusb manifolds in these LG models are no longer generically semi-simple. Part (1) of Theorem 0.10 follows from a simple degree calculation, which is an analog of [23, Theorem 7.1]. For part (2), we ﬁrst recall the LG/CY correspondence proved in [42, 43]. The authors there relates the LG theory of the pair and the GW theory of the elliptic curve by a holomorphic Cayley transformation, which is induced from the theory of quasi-modular forms. The Virasoro operators in LG/CY theories commutes with the holomorphic Cayley transformation. Thus Part (2) follows from the Virasoro constraints for the Gromov-Witten theory of the elliptic curve [50].

Plan of the paper. In Section 1, we brieﬂy review some properties of the CohFTs for the admissible LG pairs and discuss their inﬂuence on Virasoro constraints of L 1 and L0. In Sec- tion 2, we follow Givental’s work to express the Virasoro operators as quantization− operators of certain quadratic Hamiltonians and prove the Virasoro relations (0.10) in Proposition 0.5. In Section 3, we provide two types of semisimple Frobenius manifolds. Theorem 0.8 will follow from the mirror symmetry statements and Givental’s proof of Virasoro constraints for semi-simple Frobenius manifolds. We prove Theorem 0.9 by calculating the quantum multiplication of the quantum Euler vector. In Section 4, we discuss the connection between Virasro constraints and LG/CY correspondence, and prove Theorem 0.10.

Acknowledgement. We would like to thank Huijun Fan, Todor Milanov, Alexander Pol- ishchuk, Yongbin Ruan, and Arkady Vaintrob for helpful discussions. The ﬁrst author would like to thank Jianxun Hu, Huazhong Ke, Xiaowen Hu and Yifan Li. The second author would like to thank Takashi Kimura, Y-P Lee, Hsian-Hua Tseng, and Jie Zhou. We thank the hospitality of Institute for Advanced Study in Mathematics, Zhejiang University. Part of the work was done there during the authors’ visit in September 2019. The second author is partially supported by Simons Collaboration Grant 587119.

1. Virasoro constraints of L 1 and L0 − In this section, we discuss some properties of the cohomology field theories and the connections to Virasoro operators L 1 and L0. − 1.1. String equation and the operator L 1. According to [22, Theorem 4.2.2], [51, Theorem − ,W,G 5.1.2], and [33, Theorem 4.6], each of the three CohFTs Λ♣ has an element { g,k } 1 := φ := 1 J , 0 | i called a flat identity, which satisfies the following two conditions: The CohFT is compatible with the pairing • ,W,G Λ0♣,3 (φa, φb, 1) = (φa, φb). ˆ 0,3 M If 2g 2+ k > 0, let p : g,k+1 g,k be the morphism forgetting the last marking • and contracting− all the unstableM components,→ M then ,W,G ,W,G Λ♣ (φ , , φ , 1)= p∗Λ♣ (φ , , φ ). g,k+1 1 · · · k g,k 1 · · · k 8 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

Using the geometry of psi-classes, these two conditions imply:

,W,G ♣ (1.1) τ0(φa)τ0(φb)τ0(1) = ηab; 0,3 D k E k k ,W,G ,W,G ♣ ♣ (1.2) τ (φ )τ (1) = τ j (φ ) . ℓi i 0 ℓi δ i g,k+1 − i g,k D Yi=1 E Xj=1 D Yi=1 E

These equations are called string equations. The Virasoro operator L 1 in (0.9) is given by −

∂ a ∂ 1 a b L 1 = + tm+1 + ηbat0t0. − −∂t0 ∂ta 2~2 0 a,m m X Xa,b The peculiar ordering of the variables here reﬂects the potential presence of odd classes. Imme- diately, we see the string equations (1.2) and (1.1) is equivalent to the Virasoro constraint

L 1 ♣ = 0. − AW,G

1.2. A grading equation and the operator L0. Now we consider the Virasoro constraint of L0. We need some preparations. Recall the parity φa defined in Definition 0.6, we define the Euler characteristic of the admissible LG pair (W, G|) to| be

(1.3) χ := φ . W,G | a| φa W,G ∈HX Remark 1.1. In FJRW theory, the parity is induced by the cohomological degree of Lefschetz thimbles; in PV theory, the parity is induced by the Hochschild degree of Hochschild homology class.

Next we deﬁne a Hodge grading operator θ by

(1.4) θ(φ zm) := µ+ φ zm. a a · a

Now we rewrite the last term in the Virasoro operator Lk in (0.9) using a supertrace

2 1 φa + 1 + 1 (1.5) Str(θ ) := ( 1)| |(µ )(µ + ). − 4 − a − 2 a 2 a X Similar to [23, Proposition 2.6], the super trace term Str(θ2 1 ) is related to the Euler charac- − 4 teristic χW,G.

Proposition 1.2 (A supertrace formula). Let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair, then

1 c 3 (1.6) Str(θ2 )= W − χ . − 4 12 W,G b This formula will be discussed in Section A. As a consequence, the Virasoro operator L0 has the following expression:

3 c ∂ ∞ 1 ∂ c 3 (1.7) L := − W + µ+ + m + ta W − χ . 0 − 2 ∂t0 a 2 m ∂ta − 48 W,G 1 m=0 m b X b VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 9

1.2.1. Dilaton equations. The dilaton equations are: ,W,G ♣ χW,G (1.8) τ1(1) = . 1,1 24 k D E k ,W,G ,W,G ♣ ♣ (1.9) τℓi (φi)τ1(1) = (2g 2+ k) τℓi (φi) . g,k+1 − g,k D Yi=1 E D Yi=1 E These equations are obtained by using the geometry of psi-classes and the virtual fundamental cycles. For example, the ﬁrst equation can be deduced from the tautological relation 1 ψ = δ H2( ), 1 24 · irr ∈ M1,1 where δirr is the boundary divisor of 1,1, parametrizing all stable genus one curves with one node and one marking. M Similar to the string equations, the dilaton equations (1.8) and (1.9) can be rewritten as diﬀerential equations

∂ a ∂ ∂ χW,G ,W,G (1.10) + t + ~ + ♣ = 0. −∂t0 m ∂ta ∂~ 24 A 1 a,m m ! X Again, the super trace formula (1.6) allows us to replace the scalar multiplication by the Euler characteristic χ in (1.10) by a term related to the super trace Str(θ2 1 ). W,G − 4 1.2.2. A grading equation. We deﬁne a grading operator c ∂ (1.11) E := m 1+ µ+ + W ta . − a 2 m ∂ta m,a m X e b Proposition 1.3. The Virasoro constraint L ♣ = 0 is equivalent to the grading equation 0AW,G 3 cW ∂ (1.12) E ♣ = − ~ ♣ . AW,G 2 ∂~AW,G b Proof. There are two situations.e If cW = 3, we compare (1.7) and (1.11). The grading equation

E( W,G♣ ) = 0 is exactly the Virasoro constraint L0 W,G♣ = 0. A A ∂ If cW = 3, then we can cancel theb diﬀerential operator ~ ∂~ by taking a linear combination of thee dilaton6 equation (1.10) and the grading equation (1.12), and get the Virasoro constraint b cW 3 ∂ + 1 a ∂ (3 cW )χ (1.13) − + (m + µ + )t + − ♣ = 0. 2 ∂t0 a 2 m ∂ta 48 AW,G 1 m,a m ! X b b

1.2.3. A suﬃcient condition. We provide a suﬃcient condition for the grading equation (1.12). Assumption 1.4. The quantum invariant k ,W,G ♣ τℓi (φi) = 0 g,k 6 D Yi=1 E only if k cW µ± + + ℓ = (3 c )(g 1) + k. i 2 i − W − i=1 X b b 10 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

One can check directly that for all the examples in Theorem 0.8, Theorem 0.9, and Theorem 0.10, Assumption 1.4 holds true. In fact, using the bigrading in (0.5), we obtain

,W,G Proposition 1.5. If Assumption 1.4 is satisﬁed for Λ♣ of an admissible LG pair (W, G), { g,k } then L ♣ = 0. 0AW,G Remark 1.6. The FJRW invariants satisﬁes a degree constraint [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (1)]

n (1.14) deg [ G ]vir,FJRW = (3 c )(g 1) + n ι . C Wg,γ − W − − γi Xi=1 The KL theory satisﬁes the same constraint, whichb is induced by [7, (3.20)]. Such a constraint is conjectural in PV theory, called the Homogeneity Conjecture [51, Section 5.6]. We see As- sumption 1.4 is stronger than (1.14).

Remark 1.7. A similar condition as Assumption 1.4 exists in Gromov-Witten theory of smooth algebraic varieties. It is closely related to the motive axiom of cohomological ﬁeld theory [35]. The motive axiom states that Gromov-Witten theory is induce by some algebraic cycle via Fourier-Mukai transform, which is proved by Li-Tian [44] and Behrend-Fantechi [3, 4]. More explicitly, for V is a smooth algebraic variety, the GW CoFT

GW n Λ : H∗(V )⊗ H∗( ) g,n,β → Mg,n n is induced by some cocycle Cg,n,β in the Chow ring A∗(V g,n) via the following Fourier- Mukai transform: × M

GW (1.15) Λg,n,β(φ1 φn) = (pr2) [pr1∗(φ1 φn) Cg,n,β], ⊗···⊗ ∗ ∧···∧ ∧ where pr : V n V n, pr : V n are the projections. Now consider the 1 × Mg,n → 2 × Mg,n → Mg,n Hodge decomposition H (V n )= Hp,q. Since C is an algebraic cycle, we know ∗ × Mg,n p,q g,n,β C Hd,d , where 2d is the cohomological degree of C . Furthermore, GW invariant is g,n,β L g,n,β obtained∈ via the following integration:

GW GW φ1, , φn g,n,β = Λg,n,β(φ1 φn). h · · · i ˆ g,n ⊗···⊗ M The invariant does not vanish means that ΛGW (φ φ ) lies in H3g 3+n,3g 3+n( ). g,n,β 1 ⊗···⊗ n − − Mg,n Suppose φ Hpi,qi (V ), then (1.15) and the.above argument will induce the following constrains: i ∈ n n pi = qi. Xi=1 Xi=1 Assumption 1.4 in GW theory is a consequence of the above equality and dimension axiom of GW theory.

2. Virasoro relations and Givental formalism In this section, we recall Givental’s work on quantization of quadratic Hamiltonians [25]. It implies the Virasoro relation (0.10) in Proposition 0.5. VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 11

2.1. Quantization of quadratic Hamiltonians. This section is mainly based on [25]. See also [12] for an exposition. Fix a Z -graded state space , set 2 H 1 H := ((z− )). H A choice of basis φa for yields a symplectic basis for H, in which the expression for an arbitrary element in{ Darboux} H coordinates is a ℓ 1 b m (2.1) f(z)= p φ ( z)− − + q φ (z) H. ℓ,a − m b ∈ a ℓ 0 b m 0 X X≥ X X≥ b a Here the parity of pℓ,a, qm coincides that of φ and φb respectively. The pairing (, ) on induces a symplectic form on H, denoted by H Ω(f(z), g(z)) := Res f( z), g(z) . z=0 − Definition 2.1. An operator A : H H is called an infinitesimal symplectic transformation if → Ω(Af, g)+Ω(f, Ag) = 0. An operator T : H H is called a symplectic transformation if → Ω(Tf,Tg)=Ω(f, g). Now define the quantization of quadratic terms by q q q q := i j , i j ~ (2.2) p p := ~∂ ∂ ,  i j qi qj d qipj := qi∂qj .  d The quantization of quadratic Hamitonians forms a projective representation of the Poisson (Lie) algebra. d For an infinitesimal symplectic transformation A, define the quadratic Hamiltonian by 1 (2.3) h := Ω(AΦ, Φ), A 2 and the quantization of A is defined to be the quantization of hA via (2.2):

(2.4) A := hA. For a symplectic transformation T = exp A, deﬁne its quantization as b c (2.5) T := exp A. Lemma 2.2. [25] Let A , A be two inﬁnitesimal symplectic transformations, then 1 2 b b

[A1, A2] = [A1, A2]∧ + C(hA1 , hA2 ), where C(, ) is a cocycle deﬁned by c c p qa (2.6) C(p p ,q q ) = ( 1)| b|| | + δ , a b a b − a,b and C = 0 on any other pair of quadratic Darboux monomials. Here cocycle means C is a closed 2-form in the Hochschild cochain of the Lie algebra of quadratic Hamiltonian. For simplicity, we denote

C(A1, A2) := C(hA1 , hA2 ). 12 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

Corollary 2.3. Let A be an inﬁnitesimal symplectic transformation and T be a symplectic transformation, we have

1 \1 (2.7) T A T − = T AT + C (A). ◦ ◦ − T Here CT (A) is the constant defined to be b b b 1 n CT (A)= C log T, Adlog T (A) . (n + 1)! ! nX=0 Proof. Let T = exp B, then (2.7) is just 1 T A T − = exp(Ad b)(A) ◦ ◦ B 1 b b b = exp(Ad\)(Ab)+ C B, Adn (A) , B (n + 1)! B n=0 ! X where AdB(A) := [B, A] . In this paper, we mainly consider operators on H of following two types, lower triangular b operators of the form 1 2 (2.8) S(z)= S + S z− + S z− + , S End( ), 0 1 2 · · · i ∈ H and upper triangular operators of the form R(z)= R + R z + R z2 + ,R End( ). 0 1 2 · · · i ∈ H When we consider pair or Lie bracket between positive sum and negative sum, we always assume one of them is finite, such that the pair or Lie bracket is well-defined.

+ 2.2. Virasoro relations. Now we return to an admissible LG pair (W, G). Recall that (µa ,µa−) is the bigrading of the element φa = [fa]dxγa W,G defined in (0.5). Using (0.5) and (0.3), it is easy to check that ∈H Lemma 2.4. Let φ = f γ [f ] Jac(W ) { a a| ai | a ∈ γa } be a basis of . If the pairing η := (φ , φ ) = 0, then µ+ + µ+ = 0. HW,G ab a b 6 a b The Hodge grading operator θ defined in (1.4) is an operator on H. We introduce an auxiliary operator 1 2 (2.9) D := z(∂z + z− θ)z = z ∂z + z(θ + 1). It satisfies 1 (2.10) [D, z− ]= 1. − We will consider a sequence of differential operators 1/2 k+1 1/2 (2.11) := z− D z− , k 1. Lk ≥− Using Lemma 2.4 and (2.10), we obtain Lemma 2.5. For all integers k 1, is infinitesimal symplectic, and ≥− Lk (2.12) [ , ] = (m n) . Lm Ln − Lm+n ab Recall η is the (a, b)-th entry of the inverse matrix of (ηab) and f(z) is the Darbourx coordinate defined in (2.1). VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 13

Lemma 2.6. The diﬀerential operator induces a quadratic Hamiltonian Lk a b Ω( kf,f)= δk, 1 q0 q0ηab L − − Xa,b k+1 1 (2.13) 2 (µ+ + m + j)p qa − a − 2 m+k,a m a m 0 j=1 X mX≥ k Y ≥− k 1 k+1 − ℓ + 3 b,a (2.14) + ( 1) (µa ℓ + i)pk ℓ 1,bpℓ,aη . − − − 2 − − Xa,b Xℓ=0 Yi=1 Proof. The proof follows from direction calculations. Using (2.11), we have k+1 + 3 a ℓ 1 k f(z) = (µ ℓ + i)p φ ( z)− − z Lk a − − 2 ℓ,a − a ℓ 0 i=1 X X≥ Y k+1 1 + (µ+ + m + j)qb φ zm+k. b − 2 m b b m 0 j=1 X X≥ Y Here if k = 1, we have the convention − k+1 3 (µ+ ℓ + i) = 1. a − − 2 Yi=1 The quadratic Hamiltonian Ω( f,f) contains at most three types of terms: q q -term, q p - Lk i j i j term, and pipj-term. We discuss each type in details using the formula Ω( f,f)= Ω(f, f). Lk − Lk (1) The q q -terms appear in Ω(f, f) only if k = 1. They are i j − Lk − a b 1 a b Res q φ ,q φ z− = q q η . − z=0 0 a 0 b − 0 0 ab Xa,b (2) The qipj-terms appear in two situations. The term appears in (2.13) is a combination of the contributions from the two situations. In the ﬁrst situation, we have • k+1 a ℓ 1 + 1 b m k p φ (z)− − , (µ + m + j)q φ z z − ℓ,a b − 2 m b a ℓ 0 m 0 b j=1 X X≥ X≥ X Y k+1 1 = (µ+ + m + j)p qb (φa, φ ). − b − 2 m+k,a m b a,b m 0 j=1 X mX≥ k Y ≥− In the second situation, we have • k+1 b m + 3 a ℓ 1 k q φ ( z) , (µ ℓ + i)p φ ( z)− − z − m b − a − − 2 ℓ,a − b m 0 ℓ 0 a i=1 X X≥ X≥ X Y k+1 3 = ( 1)k (µ+ ℓ + i)qb p (φ , φa). − a − − 2 m m+k,a b a,b m 0 i=1 X mX≥ k Y ≥− 14 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

b b Recall in Lemma 2.4, we have (φa, φ )= δa. Now taking ℓ = m + k, we obtain k+1 k+1 1 1 (µ+ + m + j)= ( µ+ + m + j) b − 2 − a − 2 jY=1 jY=1 k+1 1 = ( 1)k+1 (µ+ ℓ + k + j). − a − 2 − jY=1 So the terms from two situations are equal. So we obtain the total contribution is the term in (2.13). (3) Finally, the p p -terms are (by taking m = k ℓ 1) i j − − k+1 b m 1 + 3 a ℓ 1 k p φ (z)− − , (µ ℓ + i)p φ ( z)− − z − m,b a − − 2 ℓ,a − b m 0 a ℓ 0 i=1 X X≥ X X≥ Y k 1 k+1 − ℓ + 3 b ba = ( 1) (µa ℓ + i)pk ℓ 1pℓ,aη . − − − 2 − − Xa,b Xℓ=0 Yi=1 This is the contribution in (2.14).

Definition 2.7. Let k be the quantization operator of the differential operator k in (2.11), defined by the formulasL (2.4) and (2.2). L c Using Lemma 2.6, we can calculate these quantization operators explicitly. Lemma 2.8. For k 1, the quantization operator has the form ≥− Lk δk, 1 a b k(q) = − q0 q0ηa,b c L − 2~ Xa,b c k+1 1 ∂ (µ+ + m + j)qa − a − 2 m ∂qa a m 0 j=1 m+k X mX≥ k Y ≥− k 1 k+1 ~ − 3 ∂ ∂ + ( 1)ℓ (µ+ ℓ + i) ηba. 2 − a − − 2 ∂qb ∂qa i=1 k ℓ 1 ℓ Xa,b Xℓ=0 Y − − Proposition 2.9. Consider the dilaton shift qa := ta δ δ . We have m m − m,1 a,0 1 1 1 (2.15) L = δ (µ+ )(µ+ + ), k 1. k Lk − k,0 · 4 a − 2 a 2 ≥− a X Proof. Since µ+ = c /2,c using the dilaton shift q0 = t0 1, we have a=0 − W 1 1 − k+1 k+1 1 c 1 ∂ (2.16) ( 1) b (µ+ + 1 + j)p = ( W − + j) . − − a=0 − 2 1+k,a=0 − 2 ∂t0 j=1 j=1 k+1 Y Y b Thus k+1 cW 1 ∂ k(t)= ( − + j) 0 L − 2 ∂tk+1 jY=1 c b VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 15

δk, 1 a b − t t η − 2~ 0 0 a,b Xa,b k+1 1 ∂ (µ+ + m + j)ta − a − 2 m ∂ta a m 0 j=1 m+k X mX≥ k Y ≥− k 1 k+1 ~ − 3 ∂ ∂ + ( 1)ℓ (µ+ ℓ + i) ηba 2 − a − − 2 ∂tb ∂ta i=1 k ℓ 1 ℓ Xa,b Xℓ=0 Y − − 1 1 1 =L (t)+ δ (µ+ )(µ+ + ). k k,0 · 4 a − 2 a 2 a X

A proof of Proposition 0.10. If m,n = 1, 1 , by Lemma 2.2 and (2.12), we have { } 6 { − } [L ,L ] = [ , ]= [ \, ] = (m n)\ = (m n)L . m n Lm Ln Lm Ln − Lm+n − m+n Otherwise, assume m = 1 and n = 1, we have c c − [L1,L 1] = [ 1, 1] − L L− \ = 1, 1 + C(h1, h 1) {Lc dL− } − 1 1 1 = 2 (µ+ )(µ+ + ) L0 − 2 a − 2 a 2 a X = 2Lc0. Notice that here we use (2.6).

3. Semi-simple Frobenius manifolds and Virasoro constraints In this section, we ﬁrst review Givental Theorem on the Virasoro constraints for semi-simple Frobenius manifolds, Theorem 3.2. Then we search semisimple Frobenius manifolds and apply the Givental Theorem to prove Theorem 0.8 and Theorem 0.9.

3.1. Frobenius manifolds and Givental Theorem.

3.1.1. Conformal Frobenius manifold, quantum connection, and calibration. Dubrovin [13] introduced the concepts of Frobenius manifold to study the geometry of 2D topological field theories. Briefly speaking, a Frobenius manifold M consists of a quadruple M, , , F, 1 with h· ·i a flat metric , on the tangent bundle TtM for t M; • a prepotentialh·F·i(t), whose 3-rd covariant derivative∈ gives an associative multiplication ⋆ • t F = a ⋆ b, c = a, b ⋆ c ; abc h t i h t i a flat vector field 1, which is an identity of the multiplication ⋆ . • t A Frobenius manifold is called conformal if there exists an Euler vector field. See [13] for the definitions and details of these concepts. Examples of conformal Frobenius manifolds exist in Gromov-Witten theory, Fan-Jarvis-Ruan-Witten theory, and Saito’s construction of primitive forms for miniversal deformations of isolated critical points of holomorphic functions [52]. 16 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

Remark 3.1. Dubrovin’s notion of Frobenius manifolds can be generalized to Frobenius super- manifolds, where the quantum multiplication ⋆t becomes super-commutative. The examples appear in this section are all Frobenius manifolds, while some examples in Section 4 are Frobenius super-manifolds, see Example 0.3. Let φ be a homogeneous flat basis of the Frobenius manifold and ta be the coordinate of { a} 0 φa. There exists a quantum connection 1 a (3.1) := d z− (φ ⋆ )dt . ∇z − a t 0 ∧ a X Following [13, 25], one can construct a fundamental solution St(z), called calibration, which is upper-triangular as in (2.8). Such a calibration is unique up to right multiplication by a constant lower upper-triangular operator C(z) which does not depend on the choice of t. 3.1.2. Givental Theorem. A Frobenius manifold is called semi-simple at t M if the Frobenius ∈ algebra ⋆t is semi-simple. Let M be a Frobenius manifold of (complex) dimension r. If M is semi-simple at t M, then there exist a canonical coordinate system: u = (u1, . . . , ur) near t M, such that ∈ ∈ ∂ ∂ ∂ ⋆t = δi,j . ∂ui ∂uj ∂ui ∂ ∂ Let U := diag(u1, . . . , ur) and Ψt be the base change from to √∆i , where { ∂ui } { ∂ui } ∂ ∂ δ , = i,j . h∂ui ∂uj i ∆i According to [13, 26, 56], we consider a Frobenius manifold of conformal dimension K with an Euler vector field ∂ ∂ E = (1 d ) ta + ρ , − a 0 ∂ta a ∂ta a 0 0 X a;Xda=1 there exists a unique lower triangular symplectic transformation Rt(z) such that 1 (3.2) [Rt(z), z− E⋆] = (z∂z + θ)Rt(z), and e (3.3) S (z) Ψ R (z) eU/z. t ∼ t t Here θ := diag(d1 K/2,...,dr K/2). Let (~; q) be− the Witten-Kontsevich− τ-function. For semisimple Frobenius manifolds, Dpt Giventale [26] constructed the (abstract) total descendent potential N d F 1(t) 1 U/z i (3.4) (~; q) := e S− Ψ R e (~∆ ; ∆ q ). D t t t Dpt i i i=1 Y p and the (abstract) total ancestor potentialb cc N d (3.5) (~; q)= Ψ R eU/z (~∆ ; ∆ qi). At t t Dpt i i i=1 Y p a a cc 1 Here qm = tm δm,1δa,0 is the dilaton shift, and F (t) is the genus one potential. According to− Kontsevich Theorem [34] on the Witten conjecture [57], the Witten-Kontsevich τ-function (~; q) is annihilated by differential operators Dpt 1/2 k+1 1/2 b δ0,k (z− (z∂ z) z− ) + , k 1. z 16 ≥− VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 17

∂ For a conformal semisimple Frobenius manifold, let ρ = ρa a in the Euler vector field a;da=1 ∂t0 1 E. Replacing the auxiliary operator in (2.9) by z(∂z +Pz− θ)z + ρ, and defining differential Giv operators by (2.15), which we denote by Lk here, Givental proved an equality between two operators in [25, Theorem 8.1] and deduced the following resulte from Kontsevich Theorem. Giv Theorem 3.2. [25, Proposition 7.7] The Virasoro operators Lk k 1 annihilate the total descendant potential (~; q) of a semi-simple Frobenius manifold.{ That} ≥− is, D LGiv (~; q) = 0, k 1. k D ≥− We call it Givental Theorem on the Virasoro constraints for semi-simple Frobenius manifolds, or simply Givental Theorem in this paper. 3.1.3. Givental-Teleman Theorem. A CohFT is called semisimple if the underlying Frobenius manifold is semisimple. The following result is a consequence of the famous Givental-Teleman Theorem [56], which says the semisimple CohFT is uniquely reconstructed from the underlying Frobenius manifold. Theorem 3.3. [56] For a semi-simple CohFT, the abstract total ancestor potential is the same as the formal total ancestor potential defined from the CohFT. See (3.8) and (4.5) for examples of formal total ancestor potentials. 3.1.4. Frobenius manifolds in LG A-models. In LG A-models, there is a conformal formal Frobe- nius (super)-manifolds (see [22, Corollary 4.2.8] for example) ,(W,G) ♣ , ( , ), F ♣ , 1 J , E . HW,G · · 0 | i Here the metric is given by the pairing ( , ) in (0.3); • · · the homogeneous basis φa = [fa]dxγa of W,G is a flat basis; • the prepotential is given{ by the genus} zeroH potential • ,(W,G) ,(W,G) 1 ♣ a F0♣ (t)= t, ,t , t = t0φa. n! · · · 0,n n 3 a X≥ D E X the Euler vector field E is of the form • ∂ (3.6) E = (1 deg φ ) ta . − C a 0 ∂ta a 0 X the conformal dimension K is the central charge c . • W The quantum product ⋆t is giving by genus-zero three-point correlators 3 ∂ ,(W,G) b ♣ ♣ (3.7) (φa ⋆t φb, φc)= a b c F0 (t) := φa, φb, φc 0,3(t). ∂t0∂t0∂t0 For arbitrary t, one can construct a formal total ancestor potential from the CohFT k 2g 2 1 ,(W,G) (3.8) ♣ (t) := exp ~ − t(ψ ) ♣ (t) . AW,G k! i g,k g k i=1 ! X X Y The quantum invariants in the definition of the formula (0.12) are replaced by the double brackets, which are formal power series of t, k k ,(W,G) ,(W,G) 1 ♣ t(ψi) ♣ (t) := t(ψi), t, ,t . g,k m! · · · g,k+m i=1 m 0 i=1 Y X≥ D Y E 18 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

Remark 3.4. We make a few remarks when applying the results in Section 3.1 to the LG A- models in Section 3.2 and Section 3.3. (1) According to Givental-Teleman Theorem 3.3, if the Frobenius manifold is generically semisimple at t, then the abstract total ancestor potential (~; q) in (3.5) is the same At as the geometric total ancestor potential ♣ (t) in (3.8). AW,G (2) According to [46], the potential ♣ in (0.12) is the limit of the geometric total ancestor AW,G potential ♣ (t) in (3.8) at t = 0. AW,G (3) We can choose the calibration operator St(z) by φ (S (z)(φ ), φ ) := (φ , φ )+ a , φ (t). t a b a b z ψ b 0,2 − 1

Taking the limit t 0, we see the total descendent potential (~; q) in (3.4) in LG → D A-model theories is the same as the potential ♣ , up to a constant. AW,G (4) In Section 3.2 and Section 3.3, the LG A-model theories we consider satisfies the following condition, + (3.9) µ = µ−, φ . a a ∀ a ∈HW,G See Lemma 3.6 and Lemma 3.8. + (5) If (3.9) holds, then µa = degC φa cW /2. Since the term ρ in the Euler vector field Giv− vanishes, the Virasoro operator Lk in Theorem 3.2 matches the Virasoro operator Lk defined in (0.9). b ,(W,G) Thus if the Frobenius manifold ( ♣ , ( , ), F ♣ , 1 J , E) is generically semisimple, Con- HW,G · · 0 | i jecture 0.6 is a consequence of Theorem 3.2. Next we will give some examples.

3.2. Semisimple Frobenius manifolds via LG mirror symmetry. According to the mirror symmetry statements proved in [29] and [28], we obtain a large class of semisimple Frobenius manifolds in LG A-model theories from admissible LG pairs with an invertible polynomial and the maximal group. Deﬁnition 3.5 (Invertible polynomials). A polynomial W is called invertible if up to a rescaling of the variables, W can be written in the form n n aij (3.10) W = xj Xi=1 jY=1 and its exponent matrix EW := (aij)n n is an invertible matrix in GL(n, Q). × According to the classiﬁcation by Kreuzer and Skarke [39], an invertible polynomial must be a direct sum of atomic types (a 2, a 2): ≥ i ≥ (1) Fermat atomic type: xa. a1 a2 ak−1 ak (2) Chain atomic type: x1 x2 + x2 x3 + . . . + xk 1 xk + xk . a1 a2 ak − (3) Loop atomic type: x1 x2 + x2 x3 + . . . + xk x1. We slightly abuse the notation and still call W is of Fermat type if (3.11) W = xa1 + + xan . 1 · · · n Lemma 3.6. Let (W, GW ) be an admissible LG pair and W be an invertible polynomial. For any φ , we have µ+ = µ . a ∈HW,GW a a− VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 19

Proof. If W is a direct sum of W1,...,WN , then GW = GW1 GWN . Now it suﬃces to prove this lemma in the case W is of atomic type. By (0.5),×···× for φ = α γ , we only need to a | i consider the case φa is broad, and prove that Nγ = 2wt(α). For φa is broad, by [38, Lemma 1.7], we have (1) If W is Fermat type, then there is no broad element. even k δi (ai 1) (2) If W is loop type with k variables, then γ = Id, k is even, and α = i=1 xi − dxi odd k δi (ai 1) or i=1 xi − dxi. Q odd δ (ai 1) k k−i − (3) If WQ is chain type with k variables, then Nγ is even, and α = k Nγ +1 xi dxi. − Keeping in mind W is of weight 1, one can check wt(α)= Nγ/2 easily.Q If W is an invertible polynomial of the form (3.10), Berglund-H¨ubsch [6] constructed a mirror polynomial n n T aji W = xj . Xi=1 jY=1 T So the exponent matrix EW T of W is the transpose matrix of EW . Now we recall two mirror symmetry statements proved in [28] and [29].

Theorem 3.7 (All genus mirror symmetry for invertible polynomials). [28, 29] Let (W, GW ) be an admissible LG pair and W be an invertible polynomial. There exists a primitive form ζ and a bigrading preserving mirror map A Jac(W T ). Under the mirror map, there are : HW,GW → (1) (Polishchuk-Vaintrob to Saito-Givental mirror theorem [29, Theorem 1.3]) APV ASG W,GW = W T ,ζ . (2) (Fan-Jarvis-Ruan-Witten to Saito-Givental mirror theorem [28, Theorem 1.2]) If W has 1 no weight- 2 chain variable, AFJRW ASG W,GW = W T ,ζ . ASG T Here W T ,ζ is the Saito-Givental limit potential for W , see [28] for the details. The main ingredients in the proof in [28] and [29] are the identiﬁcation between the Frobenius manifold of the admissible LG A-model (W, GW ) and the Saito’s Frobenius manifold of the isolated singularity W T [52], with an appropriate choice of a primitive form ζ [40, 41].. The condition in Part (2) is not essential. It is caused by the lack of enough computation tools for the analytic part of FJRW theory. The condition can be removed in some cases of exceptional singularities, when W = x2 + xy2 + yz4 and W = x2 + xy3 + yz3 [41, Section 2.3].

3.2.1. A proof of Theorem 0.8. It is well known that Saito’s Frobenius manifold of W T is generically semisimple. Now Theorem 0.8 follows from Theorem 3.7 and Givental Theorem 3.2.

3.3. Semisimple Frobenius manifolds via quantum Euler vector. Mirror symmetry can be formulated for invertible admissible LG pairs (W, G) even when then group G is not the maximal group. Berglund-Henningson [5] constructed a mirror pair (W T , GT ) and Krawitz[38] T proved the state spaces are isomorphic W,G ∼= W T ,GT . If G = GW , the mirror group G is H H T trivial and the situations are discussed in Section 3.2. If G = GW , then G is not trivial, and a Frobenius manifold has not been constructed for such LG B-mo6 del pair (W T , GT ) in general. 20 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

In this section, we provide some semisimple A-model LG pairs (W, G) while the group G is not the maximal group GW . We consider LG pairs W = xd + xd, G = J = Z . 1 2 h W i ∼ d The state space is of rank 2d 2, spanned by elements in the set HW,G − i j 1 d 1 j 0 (3.12) d := αi = 1 J , βj 1 = cjx1− x2− − dx1dx2 J 1 i, j d 1. B | i − | i | ≤ ≤ − We write n o d 1 d 1 − − (3.13) = = C α C β . HW,G Hnar Hbro · i · j M Mi=1 M Mj=1 The coeﬃcients cj in (3.12) are chosen appropriately so that the dual basis is given by i j α = αd i, β = βd j 1 i, j d 1. { − − | ≤ ≤ − } Using (0.5), we can easily check Lemma 3.8. Let W = xd + xd, G = J . For any φ , we have µ+ = µ . 1 2 h W i a ∈HW,G a a− Here is the main result of this section. d d Proposition 3.9. The FJRW theory of the admissible LG pair (W = x1 + x2, JW ) has the following properties: h i

(1) the underlying Frobenius manifold is generically semisimple near the origin of W,G; (2) the Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 holds true. H We see part (2) is Theorem 0.9. It follows from part (1) and Givental Theorem 3.2. In the remaining part of this section, we prove part (1) by computing the quantum multiplication of the quantum Euler vector ﬁeld d 1 d 1 − k − j (3.14) E(v) := αk ⋆v α + βj ⋆v β . Xk=1 Xj=1 According to [1, Theorem 3.4], the Frobenius manifold is semi-simple at v if and only if det E(v)⋆v = 0. 6 In fact, it will be enough to obtain the result by restricting the multiplication to v = tα2, see (3.24). 3.3.1. Nonvanishing FJRW invariants. If d = 2, only classical product exists,

α1 ⋆ α1 = β1 ⋆ β1 = α1, α1 ⋆ β1 = β1. Thus the basis α + β α β e = 1 1 , e = 1 − 1 1 2 2 2 is unipotent and the Frobenius manifold is semisimple. If d = 3, the FJRW theory of the pair is equivalent to the FJRW theory of D4-singularity, which is semisimple according to [19]. Thus it suﬃces to check for cases when d 4. We remark that if d = 4, the quantum product for this LG pair has been studied in [20]. ≥ By (0.6), the parity of the element is always even, thus the quantum product is commutative. By (0.7), we have 2(i 1) 2 deg α = − , deg β = 1 . C i d C j − d As a direct consequence of [22, Proposition 2.2.8] and [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (1)], we have VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 21

Lemma 3.10 (Nonvanishing criteria). If the FJRW invariant φ1, , φk 0,k does not vanish, then the following two conditions holds: h · · · i (1) (Selection rule:) the underlying moduli space is nonempty and we have k k 2 (3.15) − θ (φ ) Z. d − j i ∈ Xi=1 Here θj(φi) is given by (0.1) with φi γi . (2) (Degree constraint of virtual cycles:)∈H the virtual cycle has the expected degree and k 4 (3.16) deg φ = c 3+ k = k 1 . C i W − − − d Xi=1 Now we discuss some vanishing conditionsb of the FJRW invariants. We remark that all the elements of d in (3.12) have even parity. So the FJRW invariant φ1, , φk 0,k are invariant under permutations.B For the narrow insertions, we immediately haveh · · · i

Lemma 3.11. The nonvanishing FJRW invariants αi, αj, αk, α2, , α2 0,m+3 must be one of the following cases: h · · · i if m = 0, then i + j + k = d + 1 and • if m = 2, then i + j + k = 2d 1; • if m = 4, then i = j = k = d −1. • − Proof. If the FJRW invariants α , α , α , α , , α does not vanish, then by (3.16), h i j k 2 · · · 2i0,m+3 2(i + j + k + m 1) = (m + 2)d. − By (3.15), we have i + j + k + m 1= ℓd − for some ℓ Z. Thus m = 2ℓ 2. Using 1 i, j, k d 1 and d 3, we have ℓ = 1, 2, 3 and the result follows.∈ − ≤ ≤ − ≥ To compute the quantum product, we need to consider FJRW invariants with broad insertions. Lemma 3.12. For the FJRW invariants with at most three broad insertions, we have:

(1) If αij nar and β bro, the FJRW invariants β, αi1 , , αim 0,m+1 vanish. (2) The nonvanishing∈H FJRW∈H invariants β , β , α , α ,h , α · · · musti be h i j k 2 · · · 2i0,m+3 j j βj, β , α1 0,3 = 1, or βj, β , αd 1, α2, α2 0,5. h i h − i (3) The nonvanishing FJRW invariants β , β , β , α , , α must be of the form h i j k 2 · · · 2i0,m+3 β , β , β , α . h i j k 2i0,4 (4) The following invariants vanish: (3.17) β , βi, β , α = 0. h i j 2i0,4 Proof. Part (1) is a special case of [9, Proposition 3.2]. The proof uses the GW -invariance of the virtual cycle [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (10)]. Both Part (2) and Part (3) are direct consequence of Lemma 3.10. Part (4) is again a consequence of the GW -invariance of the virtual cycle [22, i Theorem 4.1.8 (10)]. Since both α2 and the pair (βi, β ) are GW -invariant, but βj is not. By these lemmas and the Concavity Axiom in [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (5)], we have Proposition 3.13. The classical product ⋆ of the LG pair (W = xd + xd, J ) is given by 1 2 h W i αi+j 1; if i + j d; 1 j j − ≤ αi ⋆ βj = δi βj; βi ⋆ β = δi αd 1; αi ⋆ αj = − 0. otherwise. 22 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

3.3.2. Quantum product. Now we compute the small quantum multiplication ⋆t. The following result can be obtained by the Concavity Axiom in [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (5)] and the methods used in [19, 20].

Lemma 3.14. For d 4, the FJRW invariant Cd := αd 1, αd 2, α2, α2, α2 0,5 is nonzero. ≥ h − − i By the deﬁnition of the quantum product (3.7), Lemma 3.11 and Lemma 3.12, we have a,b αd 1 ⋆t α2 = αd 1, α2, φa (t)η φb − − 0,3 a,b X 1 d 2,2 = αd 1, α2, αd 2, tα2, tα2 0,5η − α2 2!h − − i C t2 = d α . 2! 2 Proposition 3.15. For d 4, we have quantum relations ≥ (3.18) α1 ⋆t φ = φ, φ d; ∀ 2 ∈B j Cdt (3.19) βj ⋆t β = α1 + αd 1; − 2! − 2 i Cdt (3.20) αi ⋆t α = α1 + αd 1, 2 i d 2; 2! − ≤ ≤ − C t2 d α , 2 i d 2; 2! i ≤ ≤ − (3.21) αd 1 ⋆t αi =  2 4 − 4 C t  d α , i = d 1.  2 4! 1 − 2 Cdt (3.22) αd 1 ⋆ βj =  βj. − − 2! Proof. Equation (3.18) follows from the string equations (1.1) and (1.2). Next we consider a WDVV equation j j a βj, α2, φa (t) φa, β , αd 2 (t)= βj, β , φa (t) φ , α2, αd 2 (t). 0,3 · − 0,3 0,3 · − 0,3 a a X X By Lemma 3.12, the left hand side vanishes. So we obtain j a 0= βj, β , φa (t) φ , α2, αd 2 (t) 0,3 · − 0,3 a X j j = βj, β , αd 1 (t) α1, α2, αd 2 (t)+ βj, β , α1 (t) αd 1, α2, αd 2 (t) − 0,3 · − 0,3 0,3 · − − 0,3 2 t j = βj, β , αd 1, α2, α2 0,5 + αd 1, α2, αd 2, α2, α2 0,5 . 2! h − i h − − i Thus we obtain Equation (3.19) and j (3.23) βj, β , αd 1, α2, α2 0,5 = αd 1, αd 2, α2, α2, α2 0,5 = Cd. h − i −h − − i − Similarly, equation (3.20) follows from the WDVV equation a a αd 1, αd i, φa (t) φ , α2, αi 1 (t)= αd 1, α2, φa (t) φ , αd i, αi 1 (t). − − 0,3 · − 0,3 − 0,3 · − − 0,3 a a X X Equation (3.21) is a consequence of the WDVV equation a a αd 1, αd 1, φa (t) φ , α2, αd 2 (t)= αd 1, α2, φa (t) φ , αd 1, αd 2 (t). − − 0,3 · − 0,3 − 0,3 · − − 0,3 a a X X VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 23

The later implies 1 1 2 αd 1, αd 1, αd 1, α2, α2, α2, α2 0,7 = αd 1, αd 2, α2, α2, α2 0,5 . 4!h − − − i 2!h − − i Finally, equation (3.22) follows from Lemma 3.12 and equation (3.23). A proof of Proposition 3.9, Part (1): It suﬃces to consider the cases when d 4. Using (3.18), ≥ (3.20), and (3.19), we restrict the multiplication of the quantum Euler vector ﬁeld E(v)⋆v to v = tα2, and get 2 E(t)= Cdt α1 + (2d 2)αd 1. − − − Using (3.18), (3.21) and (3.22), the multiplication E(t)⋆t on the basis

α1, , αd 1, β1, , βd 1 { · · · − · · · − } is given by the matrix

4 C t2 (2d 2) 4 C2 t − d − 2 d 4!  2  (d 2)Cdt −  ..  2 M =  .  dCdt Id bro   − · H  2   (d 2)Cdt  M  −   2  (2d 2) Cdt   − −  Thus if t= 0, we have  6 d d 2 2d 2 4d 4 (3.24) det E(t)⋆ = det M = ( d) (d 2) − C − t − = 0. t − − d 6 Thus det E(v)⋆v = 0 in a small neighborhood of v = (0, t, 0, , 0) and the result follows from [1, Theorem 3.4]. 6 · · ·

4. Virasoro constraints and Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correspondence In this section, we consider the Virasoro constraints for admissible LG pairs (W, G) when W is of Calabi-Yau type.

Definition 4.1 (Calabi-Yau polynomials). A quasihomogeneous polynomial W (x1, ,xn) is called of Calabi-Yau type if · · · n (4.1) c := (1 2q )= n 2 Z . W − i − ∈ + Xi=1 Let T XW be the tangent bundleb of the hypersurface n 1 X := (W = 0) P − (w , , w ). W ⊂ 1 · · · n The condition (4.1) implies that c (T X ) = 0. On the other hand, the finite group G := G/ J 1 W h W i acts on the hypersurface XW and the global quotient e XW,G := XW /G also satisfies c1(T XW,G) = 0. We will abuse the notations to call these varieties XW,G of Calabi- Yau type. e Let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair of CY type. The LG A-model theories of (W, G) are closely related to the Gromov-Witten theory for the Calabi-Yau variety XW,G. Such connections are called Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correspondence in the literature [10], inspired by the work of physicists (see [59] for the references therein). 24 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

In general, LG pairs of CY type are not generically semi-simple so Givental’s Theorem is no longer applicable. However, the idea of LG/CY correspondence is very useful here. If the Calabi-Yau XW,G has complex dimension at least three, (or cW 3 equivalently), then Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 can be obtained by a simple degree calculation.≥ We show it in Section 4.1. When the Calabi-Yau side XW,G is an elliptic curve, we can proveb Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 using the Virasoro constraints for the elliptic curve in [50] and the Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correspondence studied in [42, 43]. In Section 4.3, we discuss the cases for all the pairs (W, G) when XW,G is one-dimensional Calabi-Yau. 4.1. Calabi-Yau polynomials with large central charges. For admissible LG pairs of CY type, if the central charge is at least three, as an analog of the Virasoro constraints for Calabi-Yau manifolds that has been proved in [23, Theorem 7.1], we have

Lemma 4.2. Let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair of Calabi-Yau type with cW 3. If for any nonzero φ = α γ with γ = J, we have deg φ 1, then for all k 1≥, a | i∈HW,G 6 C a ≥ ≥− L ♣ = 0. b kAW,G Now we deduce the second part of Theorem 0.10 from this Lemma.

Corollary 4.3. Let W be an invertible polynomial of Calabi-Yau type. If cW 3 and G SL (C), then Virasoro Conjecture 0.6 holds for FJRW. ≥ ≤ n AW,G Proof. For a ﬁxed homogeneous element φ = α γ with b a | i∈HW,G γ = exp(2π√ 1θ ), , exp(2π√ 1θ ) − 1 · · · − n n the group element given in (0.1). Recall that age(γ)= θi is deﬁned (0.2). Then G SLn(C) i=1 ≤ implies that age(γ) Z 0. Using the bigrading formulaP (0.5) and the CY condition (4.1), we have ∈ ≥ n N N deg φ = γ + age(γ) q = γ + age(γ) 1. C a 2 − i 2 − Xi=1 If γ = J 0, then age(γ)=0 and N = n =2+ c 5. So deg φ 1 holds. γ W ≥ C a ≥ If γ = J 0, then age(γ) 1. The condition deg φ 1 could fail if 6 ≥ C a ≥ (1) age(γ)=1 and Nγ = 0; b (2) age(γ)=1 and Nγ = 1.

For case (1), we claim that γ = J. In fact, Nγ = 0 implies for each i, we have 0 < θi < 1. Recall E is the exponent matrix of W , then γ G implies W ∈ W θ1 . n EW  .  Z . ∈ +   θn   T   T Let qi be the weight of xi in the mirror polynomial W , then we have θ 1 n T T . q q EW  .  = θi = 1. 1 · · · n   i=1 θn X     VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 25

T Since qi are positive numbers and n n T qi = qi = 1, Xi=1 Xi=1 we must have

θ1 1 . . EW  .  = . .     θn 1     This implies θi = qi for each i and γ = J.     On the other hand, case (2) is impossible. In fact, Wγ is still an invertible polynomial so we must have W = xai for some i. Then it is easy check that there is no J -invariant element in γ i h i Jac(Wγ )dxγ . In conclusion, if γ = J, condition degC φa 1 always holds and the result follows from Lemma 4.2. 6 ≥

4.2. Fermat CY polynomials of three variables. Fermat CY polynomials with three variables can be written in the form of

a1 a2 a3 1 1 1 (4.2) Wd := x1 + x2 + x3 , with + + = 1. a1 a2 a3 Here we assume d = a a a , then we have 1 ≥ 2 ≥ 3 (a1, a2, a3) = (3, 3, 3), (4, 4, 2), or (6, 3, 2). The FJRW theory of the admissible LG pairs

W := xa1 + xa2 + xa3 , J d 1 2 3 h i has been studied in [43]. When d= 3, 4, 6, we choose 2 2 4 h(Wd) := x1x2x3/27, x1x2/32, x1x2/36.

We form a homogeneous basis of W , J by H d h i 1 J , 1 J 2 , dx J 0 , h(W )dx J 0 . | i | i | i d | i 0 1n 1 0 o We parametrize them by t0,t0,s0, and s0 respectively. The choice of h(Wd) is made to match the Poincar´epairing on the GW side. According to (0.9), the Virasoro operators for the pair (W , J ) are d h i ∂ Lk := (k + 1)! 0 − ∂tk ∞ ∂ ∂ (4.3) + (m) t0 + (m + 1) t1 k+1 m ∂t0 k+1 m ∂t1 m 0 k+m k+m ! X≥ ∞ ∂ ∂ + (m + 1) s0 + (m) s1 . k+1 m ∂s0 k+1 m ∂s1 m 0 k+m k+m ! X≥ Recall FJRW is the ancestor FJRW potential for the LG pair (W, G) deﬁned in (0.12). In AW,G this section, we will prove Part (2) of Theorem 0.10, which is 26 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

Theorem 4.4. Let Wd be a Fermat CY polynomial in (4.2) and Lk be the Virasoro operators in (4.3). For all k 1, we have Virasoro constraints ≥− FJRW Lk W , J = 0. A d h i We will prove Theorem 4.4 in three steps: (1) We recall the Virasoro constraints for descendent Gromov-Witten potential in [50]. (2) We use the Ancestor/Descedant correspondence (Theorem 4.5) to write the Virasoro constraints for the ancestor Gromov-Witten potential of the elliptic curves. (3) We use the LG/CY correspondence proved in [43] to complete a proof for Theorem 4.4. 4.2.1. Ancestor and descendent. For a compact Kähler manifold X, there are two types of Gromov-Witten invariants, called ancestor invariants and descendent invariants, depends on the choice of psi-classes. Let αi H∗(X, C) be a set of cohomology classes of X. Let g,n(X, d) be the moduli stack of degree-{ d∈stable maps} from a connected genus g curve with n Mmarkings to the target X. The moduli stack has a virtual fundamental cycle, denoted by [ (X, d)]vir. Let π : (X, d) Mg,n Mg,k → g,k be the forgetful morphism and evi : g,k(X, d) X be the evaluation morphism given byM the i-th marking. M → The descendent GW invariants are defined by intersecting the virtual fundament cycles in GW theory with psi classes ψ¯ on moduli space of stable maps. Let α be a homogeneous { i} { a} basis of H∗(X, C). Define the total descendent GW potential of X by

d k X 2g 2 Q ∞ m m = exp ~ − t ev∗(α )ψ¯ . D  k! ˆ vir a i a i  g 0 k,d [ g,k(X,d)] i=1 m=0 X≥ X M Y X On the other hand, similar to the ancestor invariants (0.11)e in LG A-model theories, the ancestor GW invariants are deﬁned by intersecting the Gromov-Witten CohFT classes with psi classes on . We denote by the ancestor GW invariants Mg,k n ℓ1 ℓn X ℓk α1ψ1 , , αnψn g,n,d = evk∗(αk)π∗ψ . vir k h · · · i ˆ[ g,n(X,d)] M kY=1 Let a a m t := t α H∗(X, C), t(z) := t α z . a ∈ m a a m 0 a X X≥ X The ancestor GW correlation function e e d X ℓ1 ℓk X Q ℓ1 ℓk (4.4) α1ψ1 , , αkψ (t)= α1ψ1 , , αkψ , t, ,t . · · · k g,k m! · · · k · · · g,k+m,d d m 0 X X≥ D E Via the dilaton shift q(z)= t(z) 1 z, − · we denote the total GW ancestor potential of the target X by e e X 2g 2 1 X (4.5) (q) := exp ~ − t(ψ), , t(ψ) (t) . At k! · · · g,k g k ! X X The total ancestor potentiale depends on a choice of et while Xe does not. X D Using topological recursion relations, the operators St deﬁned by α (4.6) (SX (z)(α ), α ) := (α , α )+ 1 , α X (t) t 1 2 1 2 hhz ψ¯ 2ii0,2 − 1 VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 27

X is a calibration with respect to the quantum connection in (3.1). The operator St (z) is a symplectic transformation. Theorem 4.5. X X [36, 25] Let F1 (t) := 1,0(t) be the genus-one GW generating function, then

X 1 X (q)= eF1 (t)SX − X (q). D t At 4.2.2. Virasoro constraints for the descendents ofc elliptic curves. Let Wd be the Fermat CY e e a1 a2 a3 polynomial in (4.2). The hypersurface determined by the Wd = x1 + x2 + x3 in the weighted P2 d d d projective space a1 , a2 , a3 is an elliptic curve d d d E := X = (W = 0) P2 , , . d Wd d ⊂ a a a 1 2 3 The Gromov-Witten theory does not depend on the choice of the elliptic curves. So we drop the subscript in Ed and consider a basis of cohomology H∗(E, C), given by the identity class 1 H0(E, C), • the Poincar´edual of∈ the point ω H2(E, C), • the classes α, β H1(E, C), which∈ is a symplectic basis of H1(E, C). • ∈ We assign a bigrading and a parity for the basis 1,α,β,ω as below. The bigrading is the Hodge grading shifted by 1/2. { } −

Table 2. State space of the elliptic curve φ 1 ω α β + 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (µ ,µ−) ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) φ φ − 2 − 2 2 2 2 − 2 − 2 2 φ 1 1 1 1 | | − −

E Let Ψ : H∗( , C) W , J be a linear map deﬁned by →H d h i 1 (4.7) Ψ(1) = 1 J , Ψ(ω) = 1 J − , Ψ(α)= h(W )dx, Ψ(β)= dx. | i | i d Comparing Table 1 with Table 2, we see the isomorphism Ψ preserves bigrading and parity. 0 0 1 1 We use the ordered set of variables tk, sk, sk, tk to parametrize both the descendent insertions 1ψ¯k, αψ¯k, βψ¯k,ωψ¯k , and the ancestorn insertionso 1ψk, αψk, βψk, ωψk . Using our termi- { } E e e { E } nology, the Virasoro operators Lk k 1 fore thee target elliptic curve are given by { } ≥− E ∂ L = (k + 1)! k 0 − ∂tk+1 ∂ ∂ (4.8) + (ℓ) e t0 + (ℓ + 1) t1 k+1 ℓ 0 k+1 ℓ 1 ℓ 0 tk+ℓ ∂tk+ℓ ! X≥ e ∂ e ∂ + (ℓ + 1) e s0 + (ℓ) s1 e . k+1 ℓ s0 k+1 ℓ ∂s1 ℓ 0 k+ℓ k+ℓ ! X≥ Similar as Proposition 0.10, the operators satisfye e e e [L , L ] = (n m)L . n m − n+m e e e 28 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

E C In fact, under the linear isomorphism Ψ : H∗( , ) Wd, J deﬁned by (4.7), we can identify the two Virasoro operators →H h i E L (t)= L (t) e . k k |t=t The Virasoro constraints for the (descendent) Gromov-Witten theory of the elliptic curve are solved by Okounkov and Pandharipande [50].e The following result is a special case of [50, Theorem 3], which is deduced from [50, Theorem 3] by summing over all degree d in the absolute theory. Proposition 4.6. [50] The Virasoro constraints for the absolute descendent Gromov-Witten theory of the elliptic curve E hold: E E (4.9) L = 0, for all k 1. kD ≥− 4.2.3. Virasoro constraints for ancestor GW theory of elliptic curves. According to Theorem 4.5, E the descendent potential does not depend on the choice of t. We restrict to the slice t = t0ω, D E E where the genus one potential F1 (t0) and the operator S (t0) can be computed explicitly for the elliptic curve E. We make a coordinate change q := et0 . From now on, we write E E F1 (q) := F1 (t0) t0=log q, E E | (S (q) := S (t0) t0=log q. | Now we use Theorem 4.5 and Proposition 4.6 to prove Proposition 4.7. The Virasoro constraints E E (4.10) L = 0, k 1, kAq ∀ ≥− holds for the ancestor GW theory of the elliptic curves. Proof. We have

E ∞ n 1 (q)= log(q) = log (1 q ). F − ∞ − − nY=1 Thus exp( E(q)) commutes with the Virasoro operators F1 E E E E 1 (q) 1 (q) (4.11) Lk = e−F Lk eF . E X Next we consider the operator S (q). Using the formula of St in (4.6) and ﬁxing a basis (1, ω, α, β) H (E, C), we obtain that log SE(q) End(H (E, C)) is given by the matrix ∈ ∗ ∈ ∗ 0 000  q 0 0 0 (4.12) z .   0 000     0 000     Thus the quadratic Hamiltonian for log Sτ is given by (˜q0)2 (4.13) Ω(log S(q)f,f)= q 0 q q˜0 p˜0 . − 2 − · k+1 k k 0 X≥ Now we calculate 1 S(q) S(q)− ◦Lk ◦ VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 29 and the cocycle that appears in the conjugation. By (4.12), we have 1 1 1 S(q) (∂ + z− θ) S(q)− = ∂ + z− θ. ◦ z ◦ z Then (2.11) implies that, 1 S(q) S(q)− = . ◦Lk ◦ Lk Since the term (4.13) only contains (˜q0)2-term but does not have any p p -terms, all cocycles 0 Lk a b vanish by Lemma 2.2. We obtain that the quantization operator S(q) commutes with the Virasoro operators e E 1 E S(q)Lk S(q)− = Lk. b Combining (4.11), we obtain E E b E b 1 E L = S(q)L S(q)− kAτ k Aτ E(q) E E(q) 1 E = S(q)e−F1 L eF1 S(q)− b b k Aτ E(q) E E = S(q)e−F1 L b k D b = 0. b The last two equations follow from Theorem 4.5 and Proposition 4.6.

4.2.4. Virasoro constraints for Fermat LG pairs (Wd, J ). Now we consider the last step in the proof of Thereom 4.4 using LG/CY correspondenceh i in [43]. We remark that the LG/CY correspondence does depend on the choice of the deﬁning polynomial. The approach in [43] relates the GW theory and LG theory by holomorphic Cayley transformations of quasi-modular forms. Let us recall the construction and quasi-modular forms brieﬂy [32, 60, 54]. Let τ be the coordinate of the upper half plane. Let Γ := PSL(2, Z) be the modular group. Let E2k(τ) be the weight-2k Eisenstein series, and

M(Γ) := C[E2(τ), E4(τ), E6(τ)] be the ring of quasi-modular forms [32]. There is a natural ring isomorphism, called modular f completion, from M(Γ) to M(Γ) := C[E (τ, τ¯), E (τ), E (τ)], f 2 4 6 the ring of almost holomorphic modular forms, by sending the ring generators E4(τ) and E6(τ) c b to themselves, and E2(τ) to its modular completion 3 6√ 1 E (τ, τ¯) := E (τ) = E (τ) − . 2 2 − πIm(τ) 2 − π(τ τ¯) − Fixing a complex multiplicationb point τ in the upper half plane, and a constant c C, there is a coordinate change, called Cayley transformation∗ , ∈ τ τ (4.14) s = c − ∗ . · τ τ¯ − ∗ C This coordinate change induces a linear operator on M(Γ), denoted by τ∗ , which sends a weight 2k almost holomorphic modular form f(τ, τ¯) M2k(Γ), to analytic function of s and its complex conjugates ¯, denoted by ∈ c b c 2k k τ(s) τ¯ C ∗ (f)(s, s¯) = (2π√ 1c)− − ∗ f(τ(s), τ¯(s)), τ − τ τ¯ ∗ − ∗ C Here τ(s) is the inverseb of (4.14), and the operator τ∗ is calledb the Cayley transformation on M(Γ). The modular completion M(Γ) M(Γ) has an inverse, called a holomorphic limit, by → c f c 30 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN taking limτ¯ , or equivalently q 0. A similar notion of holomorphic limit can be deﬁned for C →∞ → τ∗ (f)(s, s¯), and one obtain a holomorphic Cayley transformation on M(Γ) [60, 54], denoted by Chol τ∗ , via the commutative diagram b f

modular completion - M(Γ) M(Γ)

f c Chol C τ∗ τ∗ Chol C τ∗ (M(Γ)) m τ∗ (M(Γ)) holomorphic limit f c

For each d = 3, 4, 6, we make a coordinate change 2π√ 1τ q = exp − . d Recall that the ancestor GW functions are Fourier series of quasi-modular forms [50, 43] E α ψℓ1 α ψℓn d (q) M(Γ). 1 1 · · · n n g,n ∈

The following LG/CY correspondence is proved in [43] forf the Fermat cubic LG pair W = x3 + x3 + x3, J . 3 1 2 3 h i Theorem 4.8. [43, Theorem 1] Let E Ψ : H∗( 3, C) W3, J →H h i √ 1 2π√ 1 be the linear isomorphism deﬁned in (4.7). Let τ = − exp − . There exists a holo- ∗ − 3 3 Chol morphic Cayley transformations τ∗ , such that E Chol α ψℓ1 α ψℓn 3 (q) = Ψ(α )ψℓ1 Ψ(α )ψℓn FJRW(s). τ∗ 1 1 · · · n n g,n 1 1 · · · n n g,n 2 Here s is the parameter of 1 J W3, J . The holomorphic Cayley transformation sends the ancestor GW functions to| Taylori∈H seriesh ofi s, near s = 0, which is τ = τ . The resulting Taylor series are exactly the corresponding ancestor FJRW functions. We can∗ rewrite Theorem 4.8 in terms of ancestor potentials by

Chol E3 W3, J (4.15) τ ( q (q)) = s h i(q). ∗ A A A proof of Theorem 4.4: We deal with the Fermat cubic pair (W3, J ) ﬁrst. By the construction of the holomorphic Cayley transformation,e we see it commutes withh i the Virasoro operators

Chol Chol E3 Lk τ = τ Lk . ∗ ∗ Now applying (4.15) and (4.10), we have

E W3, J Chol E3 Chol 3 E3 Lk s h i(q) = Lk τ ( q (q)) = τ Lk ( q (q)) = 0. A ∗ A ∗ A e e VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 31

Next we discuss for the Fermat quartic and the Fermat sextic. In fact, for all three cases, let d 1 s be the parameter of 1 J − Wd, J . Then according to [43, Proposition 1], all the ancestor FJRW functions satisfy| i∈H h i k Wd, J τ (φ ) h i(s) C[f,f ′,f ′′], ℓi i g,k ∈ i=1 d Y where f ′(s)= ds f(s), and f(s) is the genus one FJRW function

d 1 Wd, J f(s) := 1 J − h i(s). | i 1,1 It satisfies a Chazy equation 2 2f ′′′ 2f f ′′ + 3(f ′) = 0 − · and therefor is completely determined by the first three coefficients, two of which vanish by the construction of the moduli space. The remaining coefficient of the cubic case (W3, J ) is calculated in [42], which completely hCholi determines the holomorphic Cayley transformation τ . Now for the Fermat quartic W4 and ∗ the Fermat sextic W6, the value of the remaining coefficient is not known due to the complexity of the computation. There are two situations: (1) if the coefficient is nonzero, then it determines a holomorphic Cayley transformation as in Theorem 4.8. (2) if the coefficient vanishes, then we have a trivial holomorphic Cayley transformation. In either case, Virasoro constraints hold. 4.2.5. Additional Virasoro constraints. Following the work of [50], we introduce additional differential operators for k 1: ≥− ∂ ∂ ∂ D = (k + 1)! + (ℓ) t0 + (ℓ + 1) s1 , k − ∂s0 k+1 ℓ ∂s0 k+1 ℓ ∂t1 k+1 ℓ 0 k+ℓ k+ℓ ! X≥ ∂ ∂ ∂ D¯ = (k + 1)! + (ℓ) t0 (ℓ + 1) s0 . k − ∂s1 k+1 ℓ ∂s1 − k+1 ℓ ∂t1 k+1 ℓ 0 k+ℓ k+ℓ ! X≥ It is proved that the descendent GW potential of the elliptic curves are annihilated by these differential operators [50, Theorem 4]. As an application, we show that the ancestor potential FJRW W , J are also annihilated by these operators. A d h i Theorem 4.9. For LG pairs (W , J ), we have additional constriants d h i FJRW ¯ FJRW Dk W , J = Dk W , J = 0, k 1. A d h i A d h i ≥− Proof. By (4.13), we have 0 2 (˜q0) 0 ∂ (4.16) (log S(q)))∧ = q q q˜ . − 2 − · k+1 ∂q˜1 k 0 k X≥ Via dilaton shift qi = ti δi,0δ , it is easy to check k k − k,1 [(log S(q))∧, Dk] = [(log S(q))∧, D¯k] = 0. Then E E 1 (q) 1 (q) 1 1 S(q)e−F Dk eF S(q)− = S(q)Dk S(q)− = exp(Ad(log S(q))∧ )(Dk)= Dk. The argument for D¯ is similar. The remaining proof is the same as that of Theorem 4.4. b k b b b 32 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

4.3. Invertible CY polynomials of three variables. In this section, we discuss invertible Calabi-Yau polynomials of three variables. According to [47], up to permutations of variables, such a Calabi-Yau polynomial W (x1,x2,x3) must be one of the forms listed below.

Table 3. Invertible CY polynomials of three variables

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 (q1,q2,q3) ( 3 , 3 , 3 ) ( 4 , 4 , 2 ) ( 6 , 3 , 2 ) (1,1) (1,1) (1,1) W E6 E7 E8 3 3 3 4 4 2 6 3 2 Fermat x1 + x2 + x3 x1 + x2 + x3 x1 + x2 + x3 2 2 3 3 2 2 Chain x1x2 + x2x3 + x3 x1x2 + x2x3 + x3 2 2 2 Loop x1x2 + x2x3 + x3x1 3 2 3 3 4 2 4 3 2 Mixed x1 + x2x3 + x3; x1x2 + x2 + x3; x1x2 + x2 + x3; 2 2 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 x1x2 + x1x2 + x3 x1 + x2x3 + x3; x1 + x2x3 + x3 3 3 2 x1x2 + x2x1 + x3

(1,1) Here (q1,q2,q3) are the weights of the variables. The notation Eµ 2 is introduced by Saito for the simple elliptic singularities [53], where µ is the Milnor number− of the singularity. In [2], they are denoted by P8, X9, and J10. For such a polynomial W (x ,x ,x ), and an arbitrary group G such that J

Conjecture 4.10. Let W be an invertible Calabi-Yau polynomial of three variables. The LG A-model theory of an admissible LG pair (W, G) is either generically semisimple, or equivalent to the LG A-model theory of a Fermat Calabi-Yau pair

(W = xa1 + xa2 + xa3 , J ). 1 2 3 h W i This conjecture can be checked case-by-case in two steps. (1) The bigraded superspace is isomorphic to one of the ﬁve cases: HW,G

3 3 3 W, JW , W = x1 + x2 + x3, H h i 4 4  W, JW , W = x1 + x2, H h i  , W = xa1 + xa2 + xa3 , (a , a , a ) = (3, 3, 3), (4, 4, 2), (6, 3, 2). HW,GW 1 2 3 1 2 3  (2) In these cases, the ranks of the state spaces are 4, 6, 8, 9, 10 respectively. The ﬁrst case is discussed in Theorem 4.4. The second case is a special case in Proposition 3.9. The last three cases are special cases in Theorem 0.8. So Conjecture 4.10 can be checked similarly. VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 33

4 4 2 Example 4.11. For the quartic polynomial W = x1 +x2 +x3, we consider the following choices of admissible groups

J 4 4 J 2 h x1+x2 i × h x3 i

J G h W i W

SL(3, C) Here are some observations: The state spaces are isomorphic if we choose G = J or G = SL(3, C). • HW,G h W i By [22, Theorem 4.1.8 (8)], the FJRW theory of the pair (W, G = J 4 4 J 2 ) x1+x2 x3 • 4 4 h i × h i is isomorphic to the FJRW theory of the pair (x + x , J 4 4 ). The later has been 1 2 h x1+x2 i studied in Section 3.3. We call (W, G) a pillowcase LG pair if the orbifold curve (W = 0)/G on the Calabi-Yau side 1 is the pillowcase P2,2,2,2 [18]. For example, the pair 4 4 2 e (W = x + x + x , G = J 4 4 J 2 ) 1 2 3 h x1+x2 i × h x3 i is a pillowcase LG pair. For pillowcase LG pairs, a stronger version of Conjecture 4.10 would be the LG A-model theories of all pillowcase LG pairs have isomorphic generically semisimple CohFTs.

Appendix A. A super trace formula In this section, we prove Proposition 1.2. Our proof is a minor modification of the elegant argument in [15], where the cases of G SL(n, C) is proved. The condition G SL(n, C) is ⊆ ⊆ 2 only used to define the “variance” Var(f,G). The variance is equivalent to the super trace Str(θ ) if G SL(n, C). If we use Str(θ2), the condition G SL(n, C) can be removed. We will explore their⊆ idea here. ⊆ Firstly, fix W , we define the Poincaréseries of Jac(W ) dx as following: · (A.1) P (y) := ( 1)n ywt(α) W − · α Jac(W ) Ω ∈ X · Recall qi is the weight of xi in W . The following is a standard formula due to A. G. Kouchnirenko [37] and J. Steenbrink [55], Lemma A.1. The Poincaréseries is n y yqi (A.2) PW (y)= − . 1 yqi Yi=1 − Proof. Let A := C[x1,...,xn], and K := A dx j · I I =j |M| be the A-module consist of j-differential form in Cn. We consider the following Koszul complex:

d1 d2 d π (A.3) 0 K K n K Jac(W ) dx 0 → 0 −→ 1 −→· · · −→ n −→ · → 34 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN where π is the projection, di is the differential defined by n ∂W di := dxi . ∂xi · ∧ Xi=1 Recall that W is a non-degenerate polynomial, with isolated critical points only at the origin, so the complex (A.3) is exact. Furthermore, assign qi as the degree of xi and dxi, we know dj is an operator of degree 1 for all j. Similar as (A.1), we define the Poincaréseries of A and Kj: n 1 PA(y)= , yqi 1 Yi=1 − P (y)= P (y) yqi . Kj A · I =j i I |X| Y∈ Via the exactness of (A.3) and the fact that di is degree 1, we have P (y)= P (y) y P (y)+ ( 1)nynP (y) W Kn − · Kn−1 · · · − K0 n y yqi = − . 1 yqi Yi=1 −

Now let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair. For g G, we write its diagonal action on Cn by ∈ g : (x ,...,x ) (λ (g)x , . . . , λ (g)x ). 1 n 7→ 1 1 n n It induces a g-action on each α Jac(W ) dx, denoted by ∈ · g α = ρ (α) α. · g · We define the Poincaréseries of Jac(W ) dx coupled with g as · (A.4) P (y) := ( 1)nρ (α) ywt(α). W,g − g · α Jac(W ) dx ∈ X · Notice that g also acts on A and Kj naturally, and dj is g-invariants as W is g-invariant. Via a similar argument as above, we have n 1 PA,g(y)= q , λi(g)y i 1 Yi=1 − n qi y λi(g)y PW,g(y)= − q . 1 λi(g)y i Yi=1 − Then summing over all g G, the following formula for the Poincaréseries of the G-invariant part of Jac(W ) dx holds∈ [15, Theorem 6]: · n qi n wt(α) 1 y λi(g)y (A.5) PW,G(y) := ( 1) y = − q . − · G 1 λi(g)y i α (Jac(W ) dx)G g G i=1 ∈ X · | | X∈ Y − We define its Poincaréseries by + φa µa P (y) := ( 1)| | y . (W,G) − · φa W,G ∈HX VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 35

By deﬁnition of , the bigrading and parity, we have HW,G b cW ιγ (A.6) P (y)= y − 2 P (y) (W,G) · Wγ ,G γ G X∈ qi n 1 y λi(g)y age(γ) 2 (A.7) = y − − q · G 1 λi(g)y i γ G g G 1 i n, ∈ | | ∈ ≤ ≤ − X X λi(Yγ)=1 1 1 − qi n Nγ 1 y 2 λi(g)y − 2 age(γ) 2 = y − − q · G 1 λi(g)y i γ G g G 1 i n, ∈ | | ∈ ≤ ≤ − X X λi(Yγ)=1

Notice that in the above equation, we use (A.5) and the fact that for all γ G, Wγ is still a a non-degenerate quasi-homogeneous polynomial [22, Lemma 2.1.10] [15, Proposition∈ 5]. It is easily to see Lemma A.2. Let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair, we have

χW,G = lim P(W,G)(y), y 1 → 2 d d Str(θ ) = lim y P(W,G)(y) . y 1 dy dy → Now it suﬃces to prove: Proposition A.3. Let (W, G) be an admissible LG pair, we have

d d cW lim y P(W,G)(y) = lim P(W,G)(y). y 1 dy dy 12 · y 1 → → In fact, from (A.6), we know P (y) here coincidesb with ( 1)nχ(W, G)(y) deﬁned in [15], (W,G) − then the above Proposition is exactly [15, Theorem 19]. We omit the detail here, only mention that the proof there works for all G G . ⊆ W

References [1] L. Abrams, The quantum Euler class and the quantum cohomology of the Grassmannians, Israel J. Math. 117 (2000) 335–352. [2] V. I. Arnold, S. M. Gusein-Zade, A. N. Varchenko, Singularities of Differentiable Maps. Vol. I. Monogr. Math. 82, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA (1985) [3] K. Behrend, Gromov-Witten invariants in algebraic geometry. Invent. Math. 127, 601–617 (1997) [4] K. Behrend, B. Fantechi, The intrinsic normal cone. Invent. Math. 128, 45–88 (1997) [5] P. Berglund, M. Henningson, Landau-Ginzburg orbifolds, mirror symmetry and the elliptic genus. Nuclear Phys. B 433 (1995), no. 2, 311–332. [6] P. Berglund, T. Hübsch, A generalized construction of mirror manifolds. Nuclear Phys. B 393 (1993), no. 1-2, 377–391. [7] H-L. Chang, Y-H. Kiem, J. Li, Algebraic virtual cycles for quantum singularity theories. arXiv:1806.00216 [math.AG]. To appear in Comm. in Analysis and Geometry. [8] H-L. Chang, J. Li, W-P. Li, Witten’s top Chern class via cosection localization. Invent. Math. 200 (2015), no. 3, 1015–1063. [9] A. Chiodo, H. Iritani, Y. Ruan, Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correspondence, global mirror symmetry and Orlov equivalence. Publications mathématiques de l’IHES´ volume 119, 127–216(2014) [10] A. Chiodo, Y. Ruan, Landau-Ginzburg/Calabi-Yau correspondence for quintic three-folds via symplectic transformations, Invent. Math. 182 (2010), no. 1, 117–165. [11] T. Coates, A. Givental, H-H. Tseng, Virasoro Constraints for Toric Bundles. arXiv:1508.06282 [math.AG] 36 WEIQIANG HE AND YEFENG SHEN

[12] E. Clader, N. Priddis, M. Shoemaker, Geometric quantization with applications to Gromov-Witten theory. B-model Gromov-Witten theory, 399–462, Trends Math., Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham, 2018. [13] B. Dubrovin, Geometry of 2D topological field theories. Integrable systems and quantum groups (Montecatini Terme, 1993), 120–348, Lecture Notes in Math., 1620, Fond. CIME/CIME Found. Subser., Springer, Berlin, 1996. [14] B. Dubrovin, Y. Zhang, Frobenius manifolds and Virasoro constraints. Selecta Math. (N.S.) 5 (1999), no. 4, 423–466. [15] W. Ebeling, A. Takahashi, Variance of the exponents of orbifold Landau-Ginzburg models. Math. Res. Lett. 20 (2013), no. 1, 51–65. [16] T. Eguchi, K. Hori, C-S. Xiong, Quantum cohomology and Virasoro algebra. Phys. Lett. B 402 (1997), no. 1-2, 71–80. [17] T. Eguchi, M. Jinzenji, C-S. Xiong, Quantum cohomology and free-field representation. Nuclear Phys. B 510 (1998), no. 3, 608–622. [18] A. Eskin, A. Okounkov, Pillowcases and quasimodular forms, Algebraic geometry and number theory, 1–25, Progr. Math., 253, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 2006. [19] H. Fan, A. Francis, T. Jarvis, E. Merrell, Y. Ruan, Witten’s D4 integrable hierarchies conjecture. Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B 37 (2016), no. 2, 175–192. [20] A. Francis, Computational techniques in FJRW theory with applications to Landau-Ginzburg mirror symmetry. Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 19 (2015), no. 6, 1339–1383. [21] H. Fan, T. Jarvis, Y. Ruan, The Witten equation and its virtual fundamental cycle. arXiv:0712.4025 (2007). [22] H. Fan, T. Jarvis, Y. Ruan, The Witten equation, mirror symmetry and quantum singularity theory. Ann. of Math. (2) 178 (2013), no. 1, 1–106. [23] E. Getzler, The Virasoro conjecture for Gromov-Witten invariants. Algebraic geometry: Hirzebruch 70 (War- saw, 1998), 147–176, Contemp. Math., 241, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1999. [24] E. Getzler, R. Pandharipande, Virasoro constraints and the Chern classes of the Hodge bundle. Nuclear Phys. B 530 (1998), no. 3, 701–714. [25] A. Givental, Gromov-Witten invariants and quantization of quadratic Hamiltonians. Dedicated to the memory of I. G. Petrovskii on the occasion of his 100th anniversary. Mosc. Math. J. 1 (2001), no. 4, 551–568, 645. [26] A. Givental, semi-simple Frobenius structures at higher genus, Internat. Math. Res. Notices 23 (2001), 1265– 1286. [27] J. Guéré, A Landau-Ginzburg mirror theorem without concavity. Duke Math. J. 165 (2016), 2461–2527. [28] W. He, S. Li, Y. Shen, R. Webb, Landau-Ginzburg mirror symmetry conjecture, arXiv:1603.02660. [29] W. He, A. Polishchuk, Y. Shen, A. Vaintrob, A Landau-Ginzburg mirror theorem via matrix factorizations, arXiv:2001.00536 [math.AG] [30] K. Intriligator, C. Vafa, Landau-Ginzburg orbifolds. Nuclear Phys. B 339 (1990), no. 1, 95–120. [31] Y. Jiang, H-H. Tseng, On Virasoro constraints for orbifold Gromov-Witten theory. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2010, no. 4, 756–781. [32] M. Kaneko, D. Zagier, A generalized Jacobi theta function and quasimodular forms. The moduli space of curves (Texel Island, 1994), 165–172, Progr. Math., 129, Birkhäuser Boston, Boston, MA, 1995. [33] Y-H, Kiem, J. Li, Quantum singularity theory via cosection localization, arXiv:1806.00116 [math.AG] To appear in Crelle’s journal. [34] M. Kontsevich, Intersection theory on the moduli space of curves and the matrix Airy function. Comm. Math. Phys. 147 (1992), no. 1, 1–23. [35] M. Kontsevich, Y. Manin, Gromov-Witten classes, quantum cohomology, and enumerative geometry, Comm. Math. Phys. 164 (1994), 525–562. [36] M. Kontsevich, Y. Manin, Relations between the correlators of the topological sigma-model coupled to gravity. Comm. Math. Phys. 196 (1998), no. 2, 385–398. [37] A. G. Kouchnirenko, Polyedres de Newton et nombres de Milnor. Invent. Math. 32 (1976), no. 1, 1–31. [38] Marc Krawitz, FJRW rings and Landau-Ginzburg Mirror Symmetry, arXiv:0906.0796 [math.AG] [39] M. Kreuzer, H. Skarke, On the classification of quasihomogeneous functions, Comm. Math. Phys. 150 (1992), 137–147. [40] C. Li, S. Li, K. Saito, Primitive forms via polyvector fields, arXiv:1311.1659. [41] C. Li, S. Li, K. Saito, Y. Shen, Mirror symmetry for exceptional unimodular singularities. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 19 (2017), 1189–1229. [42] J. Li, W-P. Li, Y. Shen, J. Zhou, A genus-one FJRW invariant via two methods. arXiv:2006.16518 [math.AG] [43] J. Li, Y. Shen, J. Zhou, Higher Genus FJRW Invariants of a Fermat Cubic, arXiv:2001.00343 VIRASORO CONSTRAINTS IN QUANTUM SINGULARITY THEORIES 37

[44] J. Li, G. Tian Virtual moduli cycles and Gromov-Witten invariants of algebraic varieties, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 11, 119–174 (1998) [45] X. Liu, G. Tian, Virasoro constraints for quantum cohomology. J. Differential Geom. 50 (1998), no. 3, 537– 590. [46] T. Milanov, Analyticity of the total ancestor potential in singularity theory, Advances in Math. 255 (2014), 217–241. [47] T. Milanov, Y. Shen, Global mirror symmetry for invertible simple elliptic singularities, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 66 (2016), 271–330. [48] A. Oblomkov, A. Okounkov, R. Pandharipande, GW/PT descendent correspondence via vertex operators. Comm. Math. Phys. 374 (2020), no. 3, 1321–1359. [49] M. Moreira, A. Oblomkov, A. Okounkov, R. Pandharipande, Virasoro constraints for stable pairs on toric 3-folds. arXiv:2008.12514 [math.AG] [50] A. Okounkov, R. Pandharipande, Virasoro constraints for target curves. Invent. Math. 163 (2006), no. 1, 47–108. [51] A. Polishchuk, A. Vaintrob, Matrix factorizations and cohomological field theories. J. Reine Angew. Math. 714 (2016), 1–122. [52] K. Saito, Primitive forms for a universal unfolding of a function with an isolated critical point. J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. IA Math. 28 (1981), no. 3, 775–792 (1982). [53] K. Saito, Quasihomogene isolierte Singularitäten von Hyperflächen. Invent. Math. 14 (1971), 123–142. [54] Y. Shen, J. Zhou, LG/CY correspondence for elliptic orbifold curves via modularity. J. Differential Geom. 109 (2018), no. 2, 291–336. [55] J. H. M. Steenbrink, Mixed Hodge structure on the vanishing cohomology. Real and complex singularities (Proc. Ninth Nordic Summer School/NAVF Sympos. Math., Oslo, 1976), pp. 525–563. Sijthoff and Noordhoff, Alphen aan den Rijn, 1977. [56] C. Teleman, The structure of 2D semi-simple field theories, Invent. Math. 188 (2012), 525–588. [57] E. Witten, Two-dimensional gravity and intersection theory on moduli space. Surveys in differential geometry (Cambridge, MA, 1990), 243–310, Lehigh Univ., Bethlehem, PA, 1991. [58] Algebraic geometry associated with matrix models of two-dimensional gravity, Topological methods in modern mathematics (Stony Brook, NY, 1991), Publish or Perish, Houston, TX, 1993, 235–269. [59] E. Witten, Phases of N = 2 theories in two dimensions, Nuclear Physics B 403 (1993), 159–222. [60] D. Zagier, Elliptic modular forms and their applications, The 1-2-3 of modular forms, Universitext, Springer, Berlin, 2008, pp. 1–103.

Department of Mathematics, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China E-mail: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics, University of Oregon, USA E-mail: [email protected]