TITLE: Which part of physical B model is not rigorous?
QUESTION [5 upvotes]: Which part of physical B model is not rigorous? the physical theory of B model,if it is not mathematical rigorous just because the Feynman integral,but it looks like for me the space is finite dimensional, what the problem is causing that it still not rigorous?

REPLY [3 votes]: To define (as Kevin Lin does above) the B-model purely as the derived category of coherent sheaves is fine and rigorous, but it ignores the higher-genus aspects of mirror symmetry -- which was the original question.  As I wrote above, Kevin Costello gives a rigorous description of the higher-genus amplitudes, but it is still conjectural whether this agrees with the physics.  The issue is that higher-genus string amplitudes depend on an integration over the moduli space of Riemann surfaces (or a space of maps from them, depending on the model), and this demands compactification.  The full, non-topological theory is of course an ordinary two-dimensional quantum field theory, with all the usual difficulties in making the path integral rigorous.