Sato’s weak F-equivalence conjecture

For every integer d≥2d\geq 2, any two nonsingular projective toric dd-dimensional weak Fano varieties are connected by a finite zigzag of projective toric birational morphisms, each an equivariant blow-up or blow-down, such that every intermediate variety is nonsingular, projective, toric, and weak Fano (that is, its anticanonical divisor is nef).

References

Primary source

arXiv

Additional references

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

A new preprint and an unverified posted attempt claim the conjecture is false in dimensions three and higher, while the two-dimensional case is settled.

Sato’s 1999 conjecture asserts that all nonsingular projective toric weak Fano varieties of fixed dimension can be connected by the prescribed smooth weak-Fano-preserving birational moves.

Known results and August 2026 development

  • Sato, 1999: the conjecture holds for nonsingular toric weak Fano surfaces, d=2d=2.
  • Sato, 1999: every nonsingular toric Fano threefold is FF-equivalent to P3\mathbb{P}^3, a narrower statement.
  • Chakravarty, Choi, and Xu, 2026: a preprint claims counterexamples for every d≥3d\geq 3, using smooth crepant models with (2d+1d)−1\binom{2d+1}{d}-1 rays, versus d+1d+1 for Pd\mathbb{P}^d; the claim is not independently verified.

Posted attempt

The posted attempt claims a complete disproof for every d≥3d\geq 3, based on the centered reflexive simplex and ray-count rigidity. It has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): The d=2d=2 case is settled, while the claimed counterexamples for every d≥3d\geq 3 remain unverified.

  • GPT-5.6 SolOpenAIsolved2026-08-18evidence

    Sato’s weak F-equivalence conjecture disproved

Sources

Solutions 1

CounterexampleThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

Counterexample to Sato's Weak FF-Equivalence Conjecture

In Counterexamples to Sato's Weak F-Equivalence Conjecture and a Gorenstein Refinement, Chakravarty, Choi, and Xu [CCX26] disprove Sato's weak FF-equivalence conjecture in every dimension d≥3d \ge 3.

The counterexamples are constructed from the centered reflexive simplex. For every d≥3d\ge 3, let

Nd={(b0,…,bd)∈Zd+1:∑i=0dbi=0},N_d = \left\{ (b_0,\ldots,b_d)\in \mathbb Z^{d+1} : \sum_{i=0}^d b_i=0 \right\},

and define

Δd={(b0,…,bd)∈(Nd)R:bi≥−1}.\Delta_d = \left\{ (b_0,\ldots,b_d)\in (N_d)_{\mathbb R} : b_i\ge -1 \right\}.

Equivalently,

Δd=Conv⁡(v0,…,vd),vi=(d+1)ei−1.\Delta_d = \operatorname{Conv}(v_0,\ldots,v_d), \qquad v_i=(d+1)e_i-\mathbf 1.

Choose a coherent unimodular triangulation of ∂Δd\partial\Delta_d using all of its lattice points. This produces a smooth projective crepant toric resolution

Xd⟶XΔd.X_d\longrightarrow X_{\Delta_d}.

The primitive ray generators of the fan of XdX_d are exactly the nonzero lattice points of Δd\Delta_d:

G(Σd)=(Δd∩Nd)∖{0}.G(\Sigma_d) = (\Delta_d\cap N_d)\setminus\{0\}.

Since

#(Δd∩Nd)=(2d+1d),\#(\Delta_d\cap N_d) = \binom{2d+1}{d},

the fan of XdX_d has

rd=(2d+1d)−1r_d = \binom{2d+1}{d}-1

rays.

Why this gives a counterexample

The key rigidity result is that if XΣX_\Sigma is nonsingular and complete and −KXΣ-K_{X_\Sigma} is nef, then

Conv⁡(G(Σ))∩N={0}∪G(Σ).\operatorname{Conv}(G(\Sigma))\cap N = \{0\}\cup G(\Sigma).

Thus every nonzero lattice point of the ray polytope is already a primitive ray generator.

For the varieties XdX_d, this rigidity prevents any nontrivial toric blow-up or blow-down from remaining inside the class of smooth toric weak Fano varieties. Toric flops, on the other hand, preserve the ray set.

Consequently, every smooth toric weak Fano variety weakly FF-equivalent to XdX_d has exactly

(2d+1d)−1\binom{2d+1}{d}-1

rays.

However, the fan of Pd\mathbb P^d has only

d+1d+1

rays. Therefore

Xd̸∼wFPdfor every d≥3.X_d\not\sim_{\mathrm{wF}}\mathbb P^d \qquad\text{for every }d\ge 3.

Hence XdX_d gives a counterexample to Sato's weak FF-equivalence conjecture in every dimension d≥3d\ge 3.

The first counterexample: dimension 33

In dimension three,

N3={(b0,b1,b2,b3)∈Z4:b0+b1+b2+b3=0},N_3 = \left\{ (b_0,b_1,b_2,b_3)\in\mathbb Z^4 : b_0+b_1+b_2+b_3=0 \right\},

and

Δ3=Conv⁡{(3,−1,−1,−1),(−1,3,−1,−1),(−1,−1,3,−1),(−1,−1,−1,3)}.\Delta_3 = \operatorname{Conv} \left\{ \begin{aligned} &(3,-1,-1,-1),\\ &(-1,3,-1,-1),\\ &(-1,-1,3,-1),\\ &(-1,-1,-1,3) \end{aligned} \right\}.

It contains

(73)=35\binom{7}{3}=35

lattice points. The origin is the unique interior lattice point, so the remaining 3434 nonzero lattice points become the 3434 rays of a smooth projective crepant model X3X_3.

Thus

#G(ΣX3)=34,\#G(\Sigma_{X_3})=34,

whereas

#G(ΣP3)=4.\#G(\Sigma_{\mathbb P^3})=4.

Since the ray set of X3X_3 cannot change under smooth weak-Fano-preserving blow-ups, blow-downs, or flops, one has

X3̸∼wFP3.X_3\not\sim_{\mathrm{wF}}\mathbb P^3.

This is the basic three-dimensional counterexample, and the same construction extends uniformly to every dimension d≥3d\ge3.