Pith. sign in

REVIEW 7 minor 49 references

On certain $C^0$-aspects of contactomorphism groups

T0 review · 0 major / 7 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read On $\mathbb{R}^{2n+1}$, contact squeezing produces a contact homeomorphism whose conjugacy class is $C^0$-dense, while on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$ contact non-squeezing prevents any such element; the paper also extends the spectral…

desk verdict A solid, genuinely new C0-contact topology paper; the Rokhlin dichotomy is real and the quantitative tools are reusable, with only minor expository gaps. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.11422 v1 pith:FARB5JS6 submitted 2024-11-18 math.SG math.DS

Baptiste Serraille , Vukašin Stojisavljević This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.SGmath.DS MSC 53D1053D3553D40
keywords C0contacttopologyRokhlinpropertycontactomorphismgroupconjugacyclassspectralnormnon-squeezingfragmentationprequantizationspaces
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

At the level of $C^0$ limits, this paper finds that a single geometric dichotomy governs how large the conjugacy classes of contactomorphism groups can be. It proves that the $C^0$-closure of compactly supported contactomorphisms of standard contact $\mathbb{R}^{2n+1}$ has the Rokhlin property — one element's conjugacy class is dense — while the same group on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$ does not. The split is exactly the split between contact squeezing (balls can be pushed into arbitrarily small balls, giving the dense conjugacy class) and contact non-squeezing (large balls resist being compressed, blocking any dense conjugacy class). The paper also shows that the integer-valued spectral norm is locally bounded in the $C^0$ topology and extends to a norm on the $C^0$-closure, which yields an unbounded distance measuring how far the group is from having the Rokhlin property. A reader should care because this turns smooth contact rigidity into a topological property of homeomorphism groups and provides quantitative $C^0$ invariants where none were available.

What carries the argument

The pair that carries the argument is squeezing versus non-squeezing. Squeezing is provided by explicit compactly supported contactomorphisms $\Psi_a$ that act as $(x,y,z)\mapsto(ax,ay,a^2z)$ on a ball; these let the Rokhlin construction place scaled copies of a dense family into disjoint tiny balls. Non-squeezing is provided by the theorem that $B(R)\times S^1$ cannot be mapped into $B(r)\times S^1$ by a compactly supported contactomorphism when $1\le\pi r^2<\pi R^2$, a statement that survives passage to the $C^0$-closure. The quantitative half is carried by the spectral norm $\gamma(\phi)=\lceil c_+(\phi)\rceil-\lfloor c_-(\phi)\rfloor$, defined from the integer parts of generating-function spectral invariants. The key new fact is that $\gamma$ is $C^0$-locally bounded: maps within $C^0$-distance less than $1/2$ have $\gamma$-values differing by at most $2$. This allows $\gamma$ to be extended by a limit-inferior formula to a lower semicontinuous, conjugation-invariant norm on the $C^0$-closure, which is then the engine for the unboundedness of $d_{cc}$.

What would settle it

Take the explicit map $g$ built in Section 3.1 and test whether its conjugacy class is $C^0$-dense in $\operatorname{Cont}_{0,c}(\mathbb{R}^{2n+1})$: a single open $C^0$ ball containing no conjugate of $g$ would disprove the Rokhlin claim. For the negative half, find a $C^0$-limit contact homeomorphism $f$ on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$ and radii with $\pi r^2\ge 1<\pi R^2$ such that $f(B(R)\times S^1)\subset B(r)\times S^1$; that would break the non-squeezing theorem and with it the no-Rokhlin conclusion.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is stated as Theorem 1.3: $(\operatorname{Cont}_{0,c}(\mathbb{R}^{2n+1}),\tau_{C^0})$ has the Rokhlin property, while $(\operatorname{Cont}_{0,c}(\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1),\tau_{C^0})$ does not. Here $\operatorname{Cont}_{0,c}$ denotes the $C^0$-closure of the identity component of compactly supported contactomorphisms. For the positive half the paper constructs, from a countable $C^0$-dense sequence of contactomorphisms, a single contact homeomorphism $g$ whose conjugates approximate every element of the group; the construction works because any piece of support can be squeezed into a tiny ball, translated to a prescribed location, and later enlarged to approximate the target while the remaining pieces are collapsed. For the negative half, contact non-squeezing implies that some large ball must meet the support of every conjugate, and so no conjugate of a map supported in a small ball can approximate a half-rotation that moves every point. The same obstruction, upgraded by spectral invariants, proves that the conjugation metric $d_{cc}$ is unbounded on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is contact non-squeezing in the $C^0$-closure: once a ball $B(R)\times S^1$ has cross-sectional area $\pi R^2$ exceeding $\pi r^2\ge 1$, no compactly supported contactomorphism — and no $C^0$ limit of such maps — can move it inside $B(r)\times S^1$; if that fails, the obstructions on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$ and on prequantization spaces collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the dichotomy is correct, the two $C^0$-closed contactomorphism groups are topologically different: one has a dense conjugacy class and the other does not, so they cannot be isomorphic as topological groups.
  • The spectral norm $\gamma$ is locally bounded in the $C^0$ topology, so its extension $\widetilde{\gamma}$ is a genuine conjugation-invariant norm on contact homeomorphisms of $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$, giving a quantitative $C^0$ invariant.
  • Because $\widetilde{\gamma}$ is unbounded, the conjugation-connectedness metric $d_{cc}$ is an unbounded extended metric, which is a stronger obstruction than the mere failure of the Rokhlin property.
  • For prequantization spaces $W\times S^1$ whose symplectic homology vanishes, and for $W\times\mathbb{R}^{2m}\times S^1$ when the relevant symplectic capacity of the Liouville domain is finite, the same non-squeezing argument rules out the Rokhlin property.
  • A spectral invariant from Floer-theoretic methods is $C^0$-continuous near the identity, giving a route toward spectral norms on more general contact manifolds.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The explicit construction suggests a recipe: on any separable $C^0$-contact group where compactly supported squeezing is available for arbitrarily small balls, the same disjoint-copies argument should produce a Rokhlin element.
  • The metric $d_{cc}$ is a new invariant of the topological group structure; if it is unbounded on other manifolds, it can distinguish conjugation dynamics even where continuous conjugation-invariant observables are constant.
  • If a triangle inequality could be established for the spectral invariants used on prequantization spaces, the results on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}\times S^1$ would transfer to that setting; the paper's local boundedness result is the missing ingredient, and its Conjecture 1.23 predicts the same unboundedness of $d_{cc}$ there.
  • The positive half relies on separability of the $C^0$ group; on non-separable contact manifolds the construction yields only density in a separable subgroup, so whether the Rokhlin property holds in full generality is left open by this method.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 7 minor

Summary. The paper studies the C^0 topology on the identity component of compactly supported contactomorphism groups and on its C^0 closure. The main result is Theorem 1.3: the C^0 closure on R^{2n+1} has the Rokhlin property, while the C^0 closure on R^{2n}×S^1 does not, and the dichotomy is tied to contact squeezing versus contact non-squeezing. The paper also proves that Sandon's spectral norm γ is C^0-locally bounded (Theorem 1.7), extends γ to a conjugation-invariant norm eγ on the C^0 closure (Theorem 1.11), introduces a conjugation norm bounded above by the fragmentation norm (Theorem 1.13), proves that the conjugation-connectedness distance d_cc is unbounded (Theorem 1.17), and obtains non-Rokhlin results for prequantization spaces (Theorems 1.19 and 1.20). A further result on the C^0-continuity of Albers-Merry spectral invariants is proved in Theorem 1.22.

Significance. The paper makes a substantial contribution to C^0-contact topology. The Rokhlin dichotomy is a new and natural rigidity/flexibility statement: the positive half is proved by an explicit ball-squeezing construction of a Rokhlin element, and the negative half is reduced, via a correct C^0-approximation argument, to the Eliashberg-Kim-Polterovich contact non-squeezing theorem. The spectral-norm results give a new quantitative rigidity phenomenon: γ is not continuous, but it is locally bounded with an explicit constant on the 1/2-ball, and it extends to the C^0 closure. The proofs are detailed and largely self-contained, and the main claims are derived from independent published results (contact non-squeezing, Sandon's invariants) rather than from circular reasoning. The paper is careful to state and prove the auxiliary continuity and local-boundedness facts it relies on, and its constructions are explicit and falsifiable.

minor comments (7)
  1. [§5.2 (Theorem 1.11)] The proof does not explicitly verify the conjugation-invariance of eγ, although this is asserted in the theorem statement. The claim follows from the fact that conjugation by a fixed element is a τ_C0-homeomorphism of Cont0,c and from the conjugation-invariance of γ, but the argument should be written out.
  2. [§2.7 (Lemma 2.19)] The assertion that the inclusion W×S^1 → W×P induces an injection on free-loop homotopy classes is only sketched. Please spell out the reduction to conjugacy classes in π1 and the group-theoretic fact that in the free group powers of a commutator are conjugate only when the exponents agree; as written, this is too terse for a lemma on which Theorem 1.22 depends.
  3. [§3.1 (proof of Theorem 1.3, positive half)] It should be stated explicitly why the infinite product g is a well-defined continuous homeomorphism: each factor moves points by at most the diameter of its support, the supports are disjoint with diameters tending to zero, and the supports accumulate only at a single boundary point where the displacement tends to zero.
  4. [Notation] The symbol Conj(g) is used both for the conjugacy class in Definition 1.2 and for its closure in Section 1.3 and in the proof of Theorem 1.3. This should be made consistent, for example by writing \overline{\mathrm{Conj}(g)} for the closure.
  5. [§3.2 (proof of the second part of Theorem 1.3)] In the observation that non-squeezing passes to the C^0 closure, the inequalities 1 ≤ πr^2 < πR^2 are assumed; later in the contradiction one should explicitly say that r can be enlarged so that πr^2 ≥ 1 before applying Theorem 2.7.
  6. [§5.2 (proof of Theorem 1.11)] The proof of lower semicontinuity of eγ is unnecessarily indirect and implicitly relies on the maximum in the definition of eγ being attained. A direct proof is shorter: if a < eγ(φ), some neighbourhood U of φ has min_{U'} γ > a, and then every ψ ∈ U satisfies eγ(ψ) > a, which gives lower semicontinuity. The current argument should be replaced or clarified.
  7. [Throughout] There are a few typos that should be corrected, including 'insted' in §2.6, 'mix-max' for 'min-max', and 'Be the definition' in the proof of Theorem 1.11.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central dichotomy and norm-theoretic results rest on explicit constructions plus independent external theorems, not on self-referential inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 1.3 is the central claim: the positive half is an explicit construction of a Rokhlin element from a dense sequence, squeezing maps (Lemma 2.5), cut-off translations, and a Reeb-flow displacement that moves one factor far from the rest of the support; the conclusion that fi lies in the closure of the conjugacy class is obtained by letting epsilon shrink to zero, not by defining anything in terms of the conclusion. The negative half of Theorem 1.3 is proved by reducing to the Eliashberg-Kim-Polterovich contact non-squeezing theorem (Theorem 2.7), an external result from [16,8], and the paper's C0-approximation argument in Section 3.2 is a genuine extension: a C0-limit that squeezes B(R)xS1 into B(r)xS1 would be C0-close to a smooth contactomorphism squeezing into B(r+epsilon)xS1, contradicting non-squeezing when epsilon<R-r. Theorem 1.7 derives C0-local boundedness of Sandon's spectral norm from a spectral-window statement (Proposition 4.1) whose proof is self-contained and uses only the definition of action of translated points plus connectedness of the manifold. Theorem 1.11 defines egamma as a limit-inferior regularization of gamma, not as a fitted quantity, and its proof is an explicit verification of symmetry, triangle inequality, non-degeneracy, local boundedness, and lower semicontinuity from the corresponding properties of gamma. The only self-citation, [42] in Remark 1.15 pointing to the first author's work on Hamiltonian fragmentation, is contextual and not load-bearing. Generalizations in Theorems 1.19 and 1.20 similarly rely on the independent Albers-Merry non-squeezing results (Theorems 2.9 and 2.10) and on [4], not on the present paper's own assumptions. No definition is chosen so that a stated conclusion holds by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper builds on standard theorems in contact and symplectic topology, including non-squeezing and generating-function spectral invariants. No free parameters or invented entities appear. The main internal new content is the proof of C^0-local boundedness, the construction of the Rokhlin element, and the conjugation norm and d_cc.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Contact non-squeezing for R^{2n}×S^1 (Theorem 2.7, Eliashberg-Kim-Polterovich)
    Used in proof of Theorem 1.3 (second part) and generalized in Theorems 1.19 and 1.20.
  • domain assumption Albers-Merry non-squeezing and spectral invariants (Theorems 2.9, 2.10, and c_AM)
    Used for prequantization space generalizations (Theorems 1.19, 1.20) and for Theorem 1.22.
  • domain assumption Sandon's spectral invariants c± and their properties, including unboundedness of γ (Propositions 2.14, 2.15, Theorem 2.17)
    Underpins γ-local boundedness, the extension ẽγ, and the unboundedness of d_cc.
  • domain assumption Contact fragmentation lemma (Banyaga)
    Used to define the fragmentation norm and prove Theorem 1.13.
  • standard math Topological group structure of (Homeo_c(X), τ_C0) (Lemma 2.3)
    Needed for continuity of composition and inversion in proofs of extension and in examples.
  • standard math Reeb flow and contact Hamiltonian formalism
    Standard background used throughout the paper for constructing contactomorphisms and translated points.
  • domain assumption The homotopy injection in Lemma 2.19
    Asserted with a sketch; needed to show c_AM values lie in the contact action spectrum (Theorem 1.22).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On certain $C^0$-aspects of contactomorphism groups." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/FARB5JS6

@misc{pith2026241111422,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On certain $C^0$-aspects of contactomorphism groups},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/FARB5JS6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.11422}
}
abstract

We study a number of questions related to the $C^0$-topology of contactomorphisms and contact homeomorphisms. In particular, we show a connection between Rokhlin property of contact homeomorphisms and contact non-squeezing, we define a new conjugation-invariant norm on contactomorphisms and explore its relation to the contact fragmentation norm and we introduce a measure of the size of conjugacy classes which is related to weak conjugacy equivalence. We also show that Sandon's spectral norm is $C^0$-locally bounded and extend its definition to contact homeomorphisms.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.11422 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Supports of different conjugates [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Rokhlin element g The proof of Rokhlin property: We claim that Conj(g) = Cont0,c(R 2n+1). By the choice of {fi}, it is enough to prove that fi ∈ Conj(g) for all i ≥ 1. Let us fix i. Since φifiφ −1 i is compactly supported in the open strip 2 − 1 2 i−2 < xi < 2 − 1 2 i−1 , there exists an ε > 0 such that supp(φifiφ −1 i ) ⊂  2 − 1 2 i−2 + ε < xi < 2 − 1 2 i−1 − ε  . We wish to move the φifiφ −1 i -part of g far awa… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The support of Φ′ g(Φ′ ) −1 As a last step, we shrink all supp(φjfjφ −1 j ) for j ̸= i. More precisely, let Ψϵ be the contactomorphism given by Lemma 2.5, supported inside B(4) and such that Ψϵ(B(3)) ⊂ B(ϵ). Since Ψϵ and Φ′φifiφ −1 i (Φ′ ) −1 have disjoint supports, the support of ΨϵΦ ′ g(Φ′ ) −1Ψ−1 ϵ splits into two parts - supp(Φ′φifiφ −1 i (Φ′ ) −1 ) and the rest, which is contained inside B(ϵ), see [PITH_FULL_I… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The support of ΨϵΦ ′ g(Φ′ ) −1Ψ−1 ϵ Now, we argue by contradiction. Assume that g ∈ Cont0,c(R 2n×S 1 ) is such that Conj(g) = Cont0,c(R 2n × S 1 ) and supp(g) ⊂ B(r) × S 1 . Let f ∈ Cont0,c(R 2n × S 1 ) be such that f(x) ̸= x for all x ∈ B(r + 1)×S 1 . To construct suc…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Albers and W

    P. Albers and W. J. Merry, Orderability, contact non-squeezing, and Rabinowitz Floer ho- mology. J. Symplectic Geom. 16 (2018), no. 6, 1481-1547

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    Albers, E

    P. Albers, E. Shelukhin and F. Zapolsky, Spectral invariants for contactomorphisms of prequantization bundles and applications . In preparation, video available at https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=DWel-3BOQrI

    work page

  3. [3]

    Banyaga, The structure of classical diffeomorphism groups

    A. Banyaga, The structure of classical diffeomorphism groups . Mathematics and its Applica- tions, 400, Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht, 1997

    work page 1997

  4. [4]

    Benedetti and J

    G. Benedetti and J. Kang, Relative Hofer-Zehnder capacity and positive symplectic homology. J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 24 (2022), no.2, Paper No. 44, 32 pp

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Buhovsky, V

    L. Buhovsky, V. Humili` ere and S. Seyfaddini,The action spectrum and C0 symplectic topol- ogy. Math. Ann. 380 (2021), no. 1-2, 293-316

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    Burago, S

    D. Burago, S. Ivanov and L. Polterovich,Conjugation-invariant norms on groups of geometric origin. Groups of diffeomorphisms, 221-250. Adv. Stud. Pure Math. 52 Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [7]

    Cant, Remarks on eternal classes in symplectic cohomology

    D. Cant, Remarks on eternal classes in symplectic cohomology . arXiv:2410.03914. 26 BAPTISTE SERRAILLE AND VUKA ˇSIN STOJISA VLJEVI´C

    arXiv

  8. [8]

    Chiu, Nonsqueezing property of contact balls

    S.-F. Chiu, Nonsqueezing property of contact balls. Duke Math. J. 166 (2017), no. 4, 605-655

    work page 2017

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Colin and S

    V. Colin and S. Sandon, The discriminant and oscillation lengths for contact and Legendrian isotopies. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 17 (2015), no.7, 1657-1685

    2015

  2. [10]

    Cristofaro-Gardiner, V

    D. Cristofaro-Gardiner, V. Humili` ere and S. Seyfaddini, Proof of the simplicity conjecture . Ann. of Math. (2) 199 (2024), no. 1, 181-257

    2024

  3. [11]

    Dimitroglou Rizell and M

    G. Dimitroglou Rizell and M. G. Sullivan, C0-limits of Legendrians and positive loops . arXiv:2212.09190

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Dimitroglou Rizell and M

    G. Dimitroglou Rizell and M. G. Sullivan, The persistence of a relative Rabinowitz-Floer complex. Geom. Topol. 28 (2024), no. 5, 2145-2206

    2024

  5. [13]

    Dimitroglou Rizell and M

    G. Dimitroglou Rizell and M. G. Sullivan, C0-limits of Legendrian knots. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. Ser. B 11 (2024), 798-825

    2024

  6. [14]

    Djordjevi´ c, I

    D. Djordjevi´ c, I. Uljarevi´ c and J. Zhang,Quantitative characterization in contact Hamilton- ian dynamics – I . arXiv:2309.00527

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    Eliashberg, A theorem on the structure of wave fronts and its application in symplectic topology

    Y. Eliashberg, A theorem on the structure of wave fronts and its application in symplectic topology. Funktsional. Anal. i Prilozhen.21(1987), no.3, 65-72, 96

    1987

  8. [16]

    Eliashberg, S

    Y. Eliashberg, S. S. Kim and L. Polterovich, Geometry of contact transformations and do- mains: orderability versus squeezing . Geom. Topol.10 (2006), 1635-1747

    2006

  9. [17]

    Entov, L

    M. Entov, L. Polterovich and P. Py, On continuity of quasimorphisms for symplec- tic maps . Perspectives in analysis, geometry, and topology, 169-197. Progr. Math. 296 Birkh¨ auser/Springer, New York, 2012. With an appendix by Michael Khanevsky

    2012

  10. [18]

    Fathi, Structure of the group of homeomorphisms preserving a good measure on a compact manifold

    A. Fathi, Structure of the group of homeomorphisms preserving a good measure on a compact manifold. Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) 13 (1980), no. 1, 45-93

    1980

  11. [19]

    Fraser, Contact non-squeezing at large scale in R2n × S1

    M. Fraser, Contact non-squeezing at large scale in R2n × S1. Internat. J. Math. 27 (2016), no. 13, 1650107, 25 pp

    2016

  12. [20]

    Fraser, L

    M. Fraser, L. Polterovich and D. Rosen, On Sandon-type metrics for contactomorphism groups. Ann. Math. Qu´ e. 42 (2018), no.2, 191-214

    2018

  13. [21]

    Fraser, S

    M. Fraser, S. Sandon and B. Zhang, Contact non-squeezing at large scale via generating functions. arXiv:2310.1199

  14. [22]

    Frauenfelder and F

    U. Frauenfelder and F. Schlenk, Hamiltonian dynamics on convex symplectic manifolds. Israel J. Math. 159 (2007), 1-56

    2007

  15. [23]

    Gambaudo and E

    J.-M. Gambaudo and E. Ghys, Commutators and diffeomorphisms of surfaces . Ergodic The- ory Dynam. Systems 24 (2004), no. 5, 1591-1617

    2004

  16. [24]

    Glasner and B

    E. Glasner and B. Weiss, The topological Rohlin property and topological entropy . Amer. J. Math. 123 (2001), no. 6, 1055-1070

    2001

  17. [25]

    Glasner and B

    E. Glasner and B. Weiss, Topological groups with Rokhlin properties . Colloq. Math. 110 (2008), no. 1, 51-80

    2008

  18. [26]

    Gromov, Partial differential relations

    M. Gromov, Partial differential relations . Ergeb. Math. Grenzgeb. (3), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986

    1986

  19. [27]

    Irie, Hofer-Zehnder capacity of unit disk cotangent bundles and the loop product

    K. Irie, Hofer-Zehnder capacity of unit disk cotangent bundles and the loop product . J. Eur. Math. Soc. (JEMS) 16 (2014), no.11, 2477-2497

    2014

  20. [28]

    Kawamoto, On C0-continuity of the spectral norm on non-symplectically aspherical man- ifolds

    Y. Kawamoto, On C0-continuity of the spectral norm on non-symplectically aspherical man- ifolds. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2022), no. 21, 17187-17230

    2022

  21. [29]

    Le Roux, S

    F. Le Roux, S. Seyfaddini and C. Viterbo, Barcodes and area-preserving homeomorphisms. Geom. Topol. 25 (2021), no. 6, 2713-2825

    2021

  22. [30]

    Mailhot, The spectral diameter of a Liouville domain

    P.-A. Mailhot, The spectral diameter of a Liouville domain . to appear in Algebraic and Geometric Topology

  23. [31]

    McDuff and D

    D. McDuff and D. Salamon, Introduction to symplectic topology . Third edition, Oxf. Grad. Texts Math. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2017

    2017

  24. [32]

    M¨ uller,C0-characterization of symplectic and contact embeddings and Lagrangian rigidity

    S. M¨ uller,C0-characterization of symplectic and contact embeddings and Lagrangian rigidity. Internat. J. Math. 30 (2019), no. 9, 1950035, 48 pp

    2019

  25. [33]

    M¨ uller and P

    S. M¨ uller and P. Spaeth,Gromov’s alternative, Eliashberg’s shape invariant, and C0-rigidity of contact diffeomorphisms . Internat. J. Math. 25 (2014), no. 14, 1450124, 13 pp

    2014

  26. [34]

    J. R. Munkres, Topology. Second edition, Prentice Hall Inc. Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2000

    2000

  27. [35]

    Nakamura, C0-limits of Legendrian Submanifolds

    L. Nakamura, C0-limits of Legendrian Submanifolds . arXiv:2008.00924

    2008 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Y. G. Oh, Construction of spectral invariants of Hamiltonian paths on closed symplectic manifolds. The breadth of symplectic and Poisson geometry, 525-570, Progr. Math., 232, Birkh¨ auser Boston, Boston, MA, 2005. ON CERTAIN C0-ASPECTS OF CONTACTOMORPHISM GROUPS 27

    2005

  29. [37]

    Rosen and J

    D. Rosen and J. Zhang, Chekanov’s dichotomy in contact topology . Math. Res. Lett. 27 (2020), no. 4, 1165-1193

    2020

  30. [38]

    Sandon, Contact homology, capacity and non-squeezing in R2n × S1 via generating func- tions

    S. Sandon, Contact homology, capacity and non-squeezing in R2n × S1 via generating func- tions. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 61 (2011), no. 1, 145-185

    2011

  31. [39]

    Sandon, An integer-valued bi-invariant metric on the group of contactomorphisms of R2n× S1

    S. Sandon, An integer-valued bi-invariant metric on the group of contactomorphisms of R2n× S1. J. Topol. Anal. 2 (2010), no. 3, 327-339

    2010

  32. [40]

    Sandon, Bi-invariant metrics on the contactomorphism groups

    S. Sandon, Bi-invariant metrics on the contactomorphism groups . S˜ ao Paulo J. Math. Sci. 9 (2015), no. 2, 195-228

    2015

  33. [41]

    Schwarz, On the action spectrum for closed symplectically aspherical manifolds

    M. Schwarz, On the action spectrum for closed symplectically aspherical manifolds . Pacific J. Math. 193 (2000), no. 2, 419-461

    2000

  34. [42]

    Serraille, The sharp C0-fragmentation property for Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms and homeomorphisms on surfaces

    B. Serraille, The sharp C0-fragmentation property for Hamiltonian diffeomorphisms and homeomorphisms on surfaces . arXiv:2403.15767

  35. [43]

    Seyfaddini, The displaced disks problem via symplectic topology

    S. Seyfaddini, The displaced disks problem via symplectic topology . C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris 351 (2013), no. 21-22, 841-843

    2013

  36. [44]

    Shelukhin, Viterbo conjecture for Zoll symmetric spaces

    E. Shelukhin, Viterbo conjecture for Zoll symmetric spaces . Invent. Math. 230 (2022), no. 1, 321-373

    2022

  37. [45]

    Stoki´ c, New steps in C0 symplectic and contact geometry of smooth submanifolds

    M. Stoki´ c, New steps in C0 symplectic and contact geometry of smooth submanifolds . arXiv:2202.07996

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Stoki´ c,C0-flexibility of Legendrian discs in R5

    M. Stoki´ c,C0-flexibility of Legendrian discs in R5. arXiv:2406.04194

  39. [47]

    Usher, Local rigidity, contact homeomorphisms, and conformal factors

    M. Usher, Local rigidity, contact homeomorphisms, and conformal factors . Math. Res. Lett. 28 (2021), no. 6, 1875-1939

    2021

  40. [48]

    Viterbo, Symplectic topology as the geometry of generating functions

    C. Viterbo, Symplectic topology as the geometry of generating functions . Math. Ann. 292 (1992), no. 4, 685-710

    1992

  41. [49]

    Zapolsky, Geometry of contactomorphism groups, contact rigidity, and contact dynamics in jet spaces

    F. Zapolsky, Geometry of contactomorphism groups, contact rigidity, and contact dynamics in jet spaces . Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN (2013), no.20, 4687-4711. Department of Mathematics, ETH-Z ¨urich, R ¨amistrasse 101, 8092 Z ¨urich, Switzer- land. Email address : baptiste.serra...

    2013

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.