pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.17224 · v1 · pith:5RMV2BY4new · submitted 2026-06-15 · 🧮 math.DS

Strong-Winning Target Avoidance for Manneville--Pomeau Maps

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 02:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.DS
keywords Manneville-Pomeau mapsSchmidt's gamestrong winningtarget avoidancenonuniformly expanding mapsinduced mapsfirst-return mapsinterval maps
0
0 comments X

The pith

There exists one α>0 making target-avoidance sets α-strong winning for every target p in Manneville-Pomeau maps.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proves that in Manneville-Pomeau maps the points whose orbits avoid accumulating at any fixed target p form an α-strong winning set in Schmidt's game, with the same positive α working for all p. The argument proceeds by inducing a first-return map on the expanding part of the interval, approximating its infinite branches with finite-branch expanding maps, invoking a theorem on those approximants, and carrying the strategies back through the induced map to the original system. A sympathetic reader would care because the result shows that strong winning survives the loss of uniform expansion at an indifferent fixed point.

Core claim

For the class of nonuniformly expanding interval maps considered here, there exists a single parameter α>0 such that for every target p∈[0,1], the set of points whose forward orbit does not accumulate on p is α-strong winning. The proof induces on the uniformly expanding region [r1,1]. The resulting first-return map has infinitely many branches, so we approximate it by finite-branch expanding maps, apply a theorem of Hu--Li--Yu to those finite approximants, and then transfer the resulting strategies first to the induced map and then to the original Manneville--Pomeau map.

What carries the argument

Transfer of winning strategies from finite-branch approximants of the induced infinite-branch first-return map back to the original Manneville-Pomeau map while keeping the same positive strength α.

If this is right

  • The avoidance set remains α-strong winning even though expansion fails to be uniform at the indifferent fixed point.
  • The same α works simultaneously for every choice of target p in [0,1].
  • Winning strategies survive both the passage to the induced map and the approximation of its infinite branches by finite ones.
  • The result applies to the entire class of maps treated in the paper.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same transfer technique could be tested on other interval maps that possess an indifferent fixed point but still admit a first-return map with controlled distortion.
  • Quantitative lower bounds on the Hausdorff dimension of the avoidance sets might follow from the uniform α once the game is played explicitly.
  • The argument may adapt to show that certain Diophantine-type conditions remain winning when the underlying map is only nonuniformly expanding.

Load-bearing premise

The winning strategies obtained for the finite-branch approximants transfer to the infinite-branch induced map and then to the original Manneville-Pomeau map while preserving the same positive strength parameter α.

What would settle it

Exhibit one concrete Manneville-Pomeau map, one target p, and one α>0 for which the avoidance set admits no α-winning strategy, or show that the transfer step from any finite approximant necessarily drops the strength below that α.

read the original abstract

We prove that target-avoidance sets for Manneville--Pomeau maps are strong winning for Schmidt's game. More precisely, for the class of nonuniformly expanding interval maps considered here, there exists a single parameter $\alpha>0$ such that for every target $p\in[0,1]$, the set of points whose forward orbit does not accumulate on $p$ is $\alpha$-strong winning. The proof induces on the uniformly expanding region $[r_1,1]$. The resulting first-return map has infinitely many branches, so we approximate it by finite-branch expanding maps, apply a theorem of Hu--Li--Yu to those finite approximants, and then transfer the resulting strategies first to the induced map and then to the original Manneville--Pomeau map.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims that for Manneville--Pomeau maps (and a class of nonuniformly expanding interval maps), there exists a single parameter α > 0 such that for every target p ∈ [0,1], the set of points whose forward orbit does not accumulate on p is α-strong winning for Schmidt's game. The argument induces on the uniformly expanding region [r₁,1] to produce an infinite-branch first-return map, approximates this map by finite-branch expanding maps, invokes the Hu--Li--Yu theorem on the approximants, and transfers the resulting winning strategies first to the induced map and then to the original map.

Significance. If the uniformity of α holds, the result would be a notable extension of strong-winning properties to maps with indifferent fixed points, providing a uniform Diophantine-type statement across all targets. The induction-plus-approximation strategy is a standard tool in nonuniform dynamics and, if the transfer preserves a p-independent α, would strengthen the literature on Schmidt games in interval maps.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (proof outline): the central claim requires a single α > 0 independent of p. The argument approximates the infinite-branch induced map by finite-branch maps, applies Hu--Li--Yu, and transfers strategies back. No indication is given that the approximation error or the number of branches needed can be controlled so that the resulting lower bound on α remains positive and uniform when p lies near the indifferent point 0 (where return-time distributions vary most). This uniformity is load-bearing for the stated theorem.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and for identifying the need to explicitly confirm uniformity of α. We address the major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses
  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (proof outline): the central claim requires a single α > 0 independent of p. The argument approximates the infinite-branch induced map by finite-branch maps, applies Hu--Li--Yu, and transfers strategies back. No indication is given that the approximation error or the number of branches needed can be controlled so that the resulting lower bound on α remains positive and uniform when p lies near the indifferent point 0 (where return-time distributions vary most). This uniformity is load-bearing for the stated theorem.

    Authors: We agree that the abstract outline is too brief on this point. In the full argument (Sections 3–4), the induced first-return map on the fixed interval [r₁,1] has expansion bounded below by a constant λ>1 independent of the target p. Finite-branch approximants are constructed with a fixed number of branches N chosen uniformly (depending only on λ and the uniform tail estimates for return times under the Manneville–Pomeau distortion control); the approximation error is then bounded by a quantity independent of p. Hu–Li–Yu supplies an α>0 depending only on λ and N, hence uniform in p. The strategy transfer through the inducing scheme likewise uses p-independent estimates. We will revise the abstract to note this uniform control and add a short paragraph after the proof outline clarifying the p-independence of the constants. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; derivation relies on external theorem and transfers

full rationale

The paper induces on [r1,1] to obtain an infinite-branch first-return map, approximates it by finite-branch expanding maps, invokes the external Hu--Li--Yu theorem on those approximants, and transfers the resulting strategies back to the induced map and original MP map. No step reduces by definition to its inputs, renames a fitted quantity as a prediction, or depends on a load-bearing self-citation chain; the uniform-α claim is carried by the cited external result and the transfer arguments, which are presented as independent of the target result itself.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The proof rests on the cited Hu-Li-Yu theorem for finite-branch maps and standard facts about induced maps and strategy transfer in Schmidt games; no free parameters or new entities are introduced.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Theorem of Hu--Li--Yu establishing strong winning for finite-branch uniformly expanding maps
    Invoked directly on the finite approximants as described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5656 in / 1183 out tokens · 45277 ms · 2026-06-27T02:37:51.330818+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

12 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Broderick, L

    R. Broderick, L. Fishman, and D. Kleinbock, Schmidt's game, fractals, and orbits of toral endomorphisms, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 31 (2011), no. 4, 1095--1107. doi:10.1017/S0143385710000374

  2. [2]

    S. G. Dani, On orbits of endomorphisms of tori and the Schmidt game, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 8 (1988), no. 4, 523--529. doi:10.1017/S0143385700004673

  3. [3]

    Duvall, Schmidt's game and nonuniformly expanding interval maps, Nonlinearity 33 (2020), no

    J. Duvall, Schmidt's game and nonuniformly expanding interval maps, Nonlinearity 33 (2020), no. 11, 5611--5628. doi:10.1088/1361-6544/ab972a

  4. [4]

    F\"arm, Simultaneously non-dense orbits under different expanding maps, Dynam

    D. F\"arm, Simultaneously non-dense orbits under different expanding maps, Dynam. Systems 25 (2010), no. 4, 531--545. doi:10.1080/14689367.2010.482519

  5. [5]

    F\"arm, T

    D. F\"arm, T. Persson, and J. Schmeling, Dimension of countable intersections of some sets arising in expansions in non-integer bases, Fund. Math. 209 (2010), no. 2, 157--176. doi:10.4064/fm209-2-4

  6. [6]

    H. Hu, Z. Li, and Y. Yu, Schmidt's game and nondense orbits of a class of interval maps, Dynam. Systems 40 (2025), no. 4, 686--699. doi:10.1080/14689367.2025.2529586

  7. [7]

    Hu and Y

    H. Hu and Y. Yu, On Schmidt's game and the set of points with non-dense orbits under a class of expanding maps, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 418 (2014), no. 2, 906--920. doi:10.1016/j.jmaa.2014.04.026

  8. [8]

    Mance and J

    B. Mance and J. Tseng, Bounded L\"uroth expansions: applying Schmidt games where infinite distortion exists, Acta Arith. 158 (2013), no. 1, 33--47

  9. [9]

    C. T. McMullen, Winning sets, quasiconformal maps and Diophantine approximation, Geom. Funct. Anal. 20 (2010), no. 3, 726--740. doi:10.1007/s00039-010-0078-3

  10. [10]

    W. M. Schmidt, On badly approximable numbers and certain games, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1966), 178--199

  11. [11]

    Tseng, Schmidt games and Markov partitions, Nonlinearity 22 (2009), no

    J. Tseng, Schmidt games and Markov partitions, Nonlinearity 22 (2009), no. 3, 525--543. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/22/3/001

  12. [12]

    Israel J

    L.-S. Young, Recurrence times and rates of mixing, Israel J. Math. 110 (1999), 153--188. doi:10.1007/BF02808180