Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 32 references

Zippers

T0 review · 5 major / 4 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 The paper establishes that any zipper—two disjoint, path-connected, group-invariant subsets of the sphere at infinity of a hyperbolic 3-manifold—determines a canonical universal circle with a faithful group action and two invariant…

desk verdict Zippers is a genuinely new unifying framework for universal circles, but the main theorem hinges on a bridge-existence lemma whose proof has a real gap; the algebraic applications are sketchy but promising. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15610 v2 pith:TT6OM35L submitted 2024-11-23 math.GT math.DSmath.GR

Danny Calegari , Ino Loukidou This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GTmath.DSmath.GR MSC 57M5037D4020F67
keywords universalcirclezipperP-zipperhyperbolic3-manifoldlaminationsquasigeodesicflowsuniformquasimorphismleftorder
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

The paper proves that a very simple geometric condition is enough to build a universal circle. For a hyperbolic 3-manifold, take any two disjoint, nonempty, path-connected subsets of the sphere at infinity that are invariant under the fundamental group; the authors call such a pair a zipper. They show that every zipper has a canonical universal circle: a circle with a faithful action of the fundamental group preserving two invariant laminations. They then show that zippers arise from many known structures, including quasigeodesic flows and certain taut foliations, and from purely algebraic structures—uniform quasimorphisms and uniform left orders—on hyperbolic groups. The payoff is a unified and often more direct route from these structures to universal circles, with new connections to the L-space conjecture and to the construction of flows.

What carries the argument

The central object is the zipper: a pair $Z^\pm$ of disjoint, nonempty, path-connected, $\pi_1(M)$-invariant subsets of the sphere at infinity. The load-bearing mechanism is the path topology on each $Z^\pm$, which makes it a topological $\mathbb{R}$-tree (a dendrite): convex hulls of finite subsets are finite simplicial trees, and the inverse limit $\lim_{\leftarrow}\pi_0(Z^\pm-K)$ over interior subtrees $K$ defines an interior end space with a $G$-invariant circular order. Circular-order completion and gap blowing-down turn these end spaces into end circles $S^1(Z^\pm)$. Bridges (proper rays in one half landing on a point or end of the other, or embedded arcs crossing from one half to the other through the complement) then give a correspondence between the end circles that reverses their circular orders; for a minimal zipper this correspondence is a homeomorphism, yielding the universal circle $S^1_{\rm univ}$. The invariant laminations $\Lambda^\pm$ are assembled from the intervals in $S^1(Z^\pm)$ determined by the components of $Z^\pm-p$ as $p$ varies over $Z^\pm$.

What would settle it

Find a hyperbolic 3-manifold $M$ and a zipper $Z^\pm$ for which no bridge exists: no embedded arc has its left half in $Z^-$ and right half in $Z^+$, and no proper ray in either half lands on a point of the other half. The theorem predicts such a bridge always exists; the most natural place to search is a pair of invariant dendrites in $S^2_\infty$ on which every nontrivial element of $\pi_1(M)$ fixes exactly one point in each dendrite but no element leaves an invariant proper ray.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is Theorem 2.22: if $Z^\pm$ is a zipper for a hyperbolic 3-manifold $M$—that is, two disjoint, nonempty, path-connected, $\pi_1(M)$-invariant subsets of $S^2_\infty$—then there is a universal circle $S^1_{\rm univ}$ associated to $Z^\pm$ and a faithful action $\pi_1(M)\to\operatorname{Homeo}(S^1_{\rm univ})$ leaving invariant a pair of laminations $\Lambda^\pm$. The construction treats each $Z^\pm$ as a topological $\mathbb{R}$-tree in its path topology; the tree's ends carry a circular order, giving end circles, and bridges between the two halves identify the two end circles by an order-reversing homeomorphism. The paper further shows that quasigeodesic flows give P-zippers (and genuine zippers exactly when there are no perfect fits), and that uniform quasimorphisms and uniform left orders on hyperbolic groups give zippers in their Gromov boundaries.

Load-bearing premise

The construction rests on the claim that every zipper admits at least one bridge, and the proof of that claim is a case analysis whose hardest case assumes every nontrivial group element fixes exactly one point in each half and then needs that element to leave a proper ray invariant; if some action defeats that lemma, the bridge correspondence can be empty and the universal-circle theorem does not follow from this proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every quasigeodesic flow on a hyperbolic 3-manifold gives a P-zipper; if the flow has no perfect fits, the P-zipper is a genuine zipper and hence produces a universal circle (Theorem 3.3).
  • A uniform quasimorphism on a hyperbolic group constructs a zipper in the group's Gromov boundary, so every such algebraic structure yields a universal circle and invariant laminations (Theorem 4.10).
  • A uniform left order on a hyperbolic group constructs a zipper in the boundary, giving the same universal-circle conclusion for orderability (Theorem 5.10).
  • For fibrations over the circle, suspension flows have no perfect fits, so surface bundles give zippers directly; the same reasoning applies to some noncompact and higher-dimensional examples (Examples 3.4–3.6).
  • R-covered and one-sided-branching taut foliations admit regulating quasigeodesic flows with no perfect fits, so they produce zippers; finite-depth foliations produce P-zippers when the cited flow construction is available (Section 3.4).

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the zipper definition makes sense for arbitrary hyperbolic groups (Remark 2.2), a natural extension is to read Theorem 2.22 as a conjecture for any hyperbolic group whose Gromov boundary carries such a pair of sets; the bridge lemma is the first test case.
  • If the paper's Conjecture 5.5 holds—every left-orderable 3-manifold group admits a uniform order with up elements—then the uniform-order theorem would furnish universal circles for all left-orderable hyperbolic 3-manifold groups, threading a path between the orderability and foliation legs of the L-space conjecture.
  • Conversely, if Conjecture 3.10 holds, a zipper should be realisable as the endpoint image of a quasigeodesic pseudo-Anosov flow; that would turn the zipper formalism into a device for constructing flows, not only circles.
  • A testable consequence of the bridge construction is that any pair of disjoint, invariant, path-connected sets in $S^2_\infty$ must have matching gaps between their end circles, so actively searching for unbridgeable pairs is a concrete way to probe the limits of the theorem.
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

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces 'zippers': a pair of disjoint, nonempty, path-connected, π1(M)-invariant subsets Z± of the sphere at infinity of a hyperbolic 3-manifold (or, more generally, of the Gromov boundary of a hyperbolic group). The main claim is Theorem 2.22: every zipper gives rise to a universal circle with a faithful π1(M)-action preserving a pair of invariant laminations. The construction proceeds by forming end circles S1(Z±), comparing them via 'bridges' (landing rays connecting the two zipper halves), and using the resulting orientation-reversing homeomorphism to amalgamate the two circles. The paper then applies this framework to quasigeodesic flows (Theorem 3.3, giving P-zippers and zippers depending on absence of perfect fits), to uniform quasimorphisms on hyperbolic groups (Theorem 4.10), and to uniform left orders (Theorem 5.10). It also formulates several conjectures connecting zippers to Peano curves, pseudo-Anosov flows, and the L-space conjecture.

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, this is a valuable unifying framework: it gives a single, direct mechanism for constructing universal circles from many existing and new dynamical structures, and it adds a bridge between quasimorphisms/left orders and the geometric circle actions that are central to the L-space conjecture. The paper is genuinely synthetic: it assembles end spaces, circular orders, and bridges in a way that is not present in the prior work on universal circles. The examples (surface bundles, slitherings, quasigeodesic flows) are well chosen and illustrate the scope. The weaknesses are that several load-bearing arguments are presented only as sketches, in particular the existence of bridges in the fixed-point case (Lemma 2.18), the minimal subzipper extraction (Proposition 2.10), the nondegeneracy of the bridge correspondence (Proposition 2.20), and the path-connectivity proofs in Theorems 4.10 and 5.10. These gaps make the central theorem conditional as written, though the overall strategy appears plausible and the gaps are localized.

major comments (5)
  1. [Lemma 2.18] The assertion that 'gh−1 has an axis composed of translates of this interval' is not proved. To make the contradiction rigorous, the author must show that h(σ) and g(σ) are disjoint from σ and from each other in the claimed pattern, and that the union of the translates of σ under powers of gh−1 is a simple bi-infinite arc on which gh−1 acts by translation, with no backtracking or accumulation. The freely-permuting-component property is invoked only informally ('Evidently g(σ) and h(σ) are intervals...'), but this is exactly the point that needs proof. Since Lemma 2.18 is the only mechanism in Proposition 2.16 for constructing bridges in the unique-fixed-point regime, Theorem 2.22 is conditional on this gap.
  2. [Proposition 2.10] The minimal subzipper extraction is not justified at the level of point-set topology. The proof takes closures X(q) and extracts a point q′ by compactness of nested compact sets, but Z+ is not closed in S2∞ and the path topology on Z+ is not the subspace topology, so the compactness of the sets X(q) and the passage to limits inside Z+ require a careful statement. The claim 'by taking limits, all of the interior of σ is in Y(q)' also needs a precise argument. As written, the proof does not establish the existence of a minimal G-invariant subtree of Z+.
  3. [Proposition 2.20] The proof that the bridge correspondence is nondegenerate is incomplete. It says 'By an elementary analysis of cases the only possibility is...' and then analyzes only the case of two type 2 bridges between two rays r1,r2 in Z− and a point p in Z+. The remaining cases, including combinations of type 1 and type 2 bridges, are not discussed. Since the identification of S1(Z+) with S1(Z−) and hence the construction of S1univ depends on this nondegeneracy, a complete case analysis is required.
  4. [Theorem 4.10] The path-connectivity proof for Z+ is a sketch. The inductive 'filling in blocks' produces a family of (C,k)-staircases interpolating between two given staircases, but the paper does not prove that the endpoints of these staircases form a continuous path in ∂∞G. One must show that the interpolation can be made uniformly in the initial staircases and that the resulting map from the parameter interval to ∂∞G is continuous. Without this, the conclusion that Z+ is path-connected does not follow from the construction as written.
  5. [Theorem 5.10] The final step of the proof asserts that the 'obvious planar structure' defines a partial order on infinite directed ascending paths, that a maximal ordered subset is a Cantor set, and that gaps correspond to pairs of paths with a common endpoint at infinity, so that the endpoint map factors through an interval. These are exactly the technical points needed to prove path-connectedness of Z+, and they are not demonstrated. In particular, the continuity of the map from the Cantor set of paths to ∂∞G and the identification of its image with an interval require a rigorous argument.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Remark 2.21] Remark 2.21 explicitly leaves open possible configurations of fixed points of group elements in the zipper halves. Since Lemma 2.18 and hence Proposition 2.16 depend on the dichotomy of fixed-point behavior, resolving these cases should be part of the proof rather than a remark.
  2. [Figure 2] The caption 'gh−1 has an axis' states a conclusion rather than describing the figure; a caption that explains the geometric configuration would help the reader follow the intended argument.
  3. [Definition 2.15] In the definition of a type 1 bridge, the two conditions are written as one long line; splitting them into two displayed cases would improve readability.
  4. [Section 2.4] The phrase 'blowing down gaps' in the construction of S1(Z±) is informal; a precise reference to the construction in [19], Construction 7.3 is given, but a sentence explaining what 'blowing down' means here would be helpful for the non-specialist.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the universal circle is constructed from the zipper definition via end spaces and bridges, and the cited self-results are background rather than built-in inputs.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, Theorem 2.22, is a construction: from a zipper Z± (Definition 2.1) it builds end spaces E(Z±), end circles S1(Z±), a bridge correspondence (Definition 2.15 through Proposition 2.20), and then invariant laminations (Section 2.6). Nowhere is the universal circle used as an input to the definition of a zipper, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The bridge existence proof is a case analysis on fixed points of Mobius transformations; it does not assume the theorem's conclusion. The proof gap in Lemma 2.18, where the sentence 'gh−1 has an axis composed of translates of this interval' is supported only by Figure 2, is flagged here as an omitted justification that makes the second case of Proposition 2.16 conditional; it is not circularity, because the asserted axis is not the theorem's conclusion and is not assumed by the zipper hypotheses. Remark 2.21 explicitly notes that fixed-point configurations are not fully understood, again a fragility of the proof rather than a reduction of the result to its input. Self-citations ([5], [6], [7], [10]) occur as background in the quasigeodesic-flow and foliation sections; they are used to show that certain dynamical structures give zippers, not to define the universal circle, and they are externally published results that do not include Theorem 2.22. The uniform-quasimorphism and uniform-order theorems are independent constructions from their respective hypotheses. Thus no step in the derivation chain reduces by construction to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted. The central construction uses standard background theorems in hyperbolic geometry and dynamics, listed as axioms. The new objects are defined explicitly, and their existence is either proven or deferred; they are not hidden assumptions.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption A hyperbolic 3-manifold group G acts minimally on S^2_infinity and has no global fixed point.
    Used in Lemma 2.3 and Proposition 2.10 to show zipper halves are dense and to obtain minimal subzippers; standard for cocompact Kleinian groups.
  • standard math Deroin's theorem: every finitely generated left-orderable group admits a faithful almost periodic action on R.
    Invoked as Proposition 5.2 and forms the metric framework for the definition of uniform left orders.
  • domain assumption Fenley's ideal boundary theorems for pseudo-Anosov flows and his quasigeodesicity criterion.
    Used in Sections 3.3 and 3.4 to convert pseudo-Anosov flows and taut foliations into zippers or P-zippers.
  • domain assumption Frankel's Continuous Extension Theorem compactifying two copies of the leaf space by a universal circle.
    Used in Section 3.1 and in the proof of Theorem 3.3 to describe endpoint maps and perfect fits.
  • standard math Moore's decomposition theorem and Bowditch's convergence action characterization.
    Used in Section 2.9 to discuss when the quotient of the universal circle is the sphere at infinity.
invented entities (2)
  • Zipper (mathematical object)
    purpose: Core new object: a pair of disjoint, path-connected, G-invariant subsets of the boundary of a hyperbolic 3-manifold or hyperbolic group.
    Definition 2.1; the paper proves existence in several settings such as flows and algebraic structures, but it is a formal definition, not an empirical entity with an outside-paper observable.
  • P-zipper
    purpose: Weaker variant allowing parametrized paths and non-disjoint images, interpolating between zippers and Peano circles.
    Definition 2.23; the universal circle theorem for P-zippers is deferred to a future paper, so the entity is introduced but its main consequence is not yet established.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Zippers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TT6OM35L

@misc{pith2026241115610,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Zippers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TT6OM35L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15610}
}
abstract

If $M$ is a hyperbolic 3-manifold fibering over the circle, the fundamental group of $M$ acts faithfully by homeomorphisms on a circle (the circle at infinity of the universal cover of the fiber), preserving a pair of invariant (stable and unstable) laminations. Many different kinds of dynamical structures (e.g. taut foliations, quasigeodesic or pseudo-Anosov flows) are known to give rise to universal circles -- a circle with a faithful $\pi_1(M)$ action preserving a pair of invariant laminations -- and these universal circles play a key role in relating the dynamical structure to the geometry of $M$. In this paper we introduce the idea of zippers, which give a new and direct way to construct universal circles, streamlining the known constructions in many cases, and giving a host of new constructions in others. In particular, zippers (and their associated universal circles) may be constructed directly from uniform quasimorphisms or from uniform left orders.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15610 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A zipper associated to the (0, 2) orbifold filling on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. gh−1 has an axis. But now let g, h be elements with distinct fixed points p, q that cobound an embedded interval σ. Evidently g(σ) and h(σ) are intervals disjoint from each other and sharing endpoints only with σ. Then h(σ) and g(σ) are disjoint and both contained in an embedded oriented interval in an orientation compatible way (see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The staircases a and b may be interpolated by successively filling in blocks. The staircases on the left and right of the figure (in black) are a and b respectively. Group elements at the same height have the same ϕ value, and every segment has length [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Γ is built inductively from W by successively capping every ∨ with a ∧. The obvious planar structure defines a partial order on the set of infinite directed as￾cending paths, where γ1 ≥ γ2 if γ1 is nowhere to the left of γ2. A maximal ordered subset of such paths is a …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [28]

    Mosher,Laminations and flows transverse to finite depth foliations, Part I: branched surfaces and dynamics, preprint (1996), available athttp://newark.rutgers.edu:80/~mosher

    L. Mosher,Laminations and flows transverse to finite depth foliations, Part I: branched surfaces and dynamics, preprint (1996), available athttp://newark.rutgers.edu:80/~mosher

    work page 1996

  2. [21]

    Frankel,From quasigeodesic to pseudo-Anosov flows, preprint in preparation

    S. Frankel,From quasigeodesic to pseudo-Anosov flows, preprint in preparation

    work page

  3. [1]

    Completing Prelaminations

    T. Barthelmé, C. Bonatti and K. Mann,Completing prelaminations, preprint, https://arxiv.org/ pdf/2406.18917

    work page Pith review arXiv

  4. [2]

    Bowditch,A topological characterisation of hyperbolic groups, JAMS 11 (1998), no

    B. Bowditch,A topological characterisation of hyperbolic groups, JAMS 11 (1998), no. 3, 643–667

    work page 1998

  5. [3]

    Boyer, C

    S. Boyer, C. Gordon and L. Watson,On L-spaces and left-orderable fundamental groups, Math. Ann. 356 (2013), 1213–1245

    work page 2013

  6. [4]

    Calegari, R-covered foliations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, Geom

    D. Calegari, R-covered foliations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, Geom. Topol3 (1999), 137–153

    work page 1999

  7. [5]

    Calegari,The geometry ofR-covered foliations, Geom

    D. Calegari,The geometry ofR-covered foliations, Geom. Topol.4 (2000), 457–515

    work page 2000

  8. [6]

    Calegari,Foliations with one-sided branching, Geom

    D. Calegari,Foliations with one-sided branching, Geom. Dedicata96 (2003), 1–53

    work page 2003

Show all 32 references
  1. [7]

    Calegari,Universal circles for quasigeodesic flows, Geom

    D. Calegari,Universal circles for quasigeodesic flows, Geom. Top.10, (2006), 2271–2298

    2006

  2. [8]

    Calegari, Foliations and the Geometry of 3-Manifolds, Oxford Math

    D. Calegari, Foliations and the Geometry of 3-Manifolds, Oxford Math. Monogr. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007

    2007

  3. [9]

    Calegari,scl, MSJ Memoirs20 Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2009

    D. Calegari,scl, MSJ Memoirs20 Mathematical Society of Japan, Tokyo, 2009

    2009

  4. [10]

    Calegari and N

    D. Calegari and N. Dunfield,Laminations and groups of homeomorphisms of the circle, Invent. Math. 152 (1) (2003), 149–204

    2003

  5. [11]

    Cannon and W

    J. Cannon and W. Thurston,Group invariant Peano curves, Geom. Top.11 (2007), 1315–1355

    2007

  6. [12]

    Deroin,Almost-periodic actions on the real line, L’Ens

    B. Deroin,Almost-periodic actions on the real line, L’Ens. Math. (2)59 (2013), 183–194

    2013

  7. [13]

    Dunfield,Floer homology, group orderability, and taut foliations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, Geom

    N. Dunfield,Floer homology, group orderability, and taut foliations of hyperbolic 3-manifolds, Geom. Top. 24 (2020), 2075–2125

    2020

  8. [14]

    Fenley,Foliations with good geometry, JAMS 12, (1999), no

    S. Fenley,Foliations with good geometry, JAMS 12, (1999), no. 3, 619–676

    1999

  9. [15]

    Fenley, Foliations, topology and geometry of 3-manifolds: R-covered foliations and transverse pseudo-Anosov flows, Comment

    S. Fenley, Foliations, topology and geometry of 3-manifolds: R-covered foliations and transverse pseudo-Anosov flows, Comment. Math. Helv.77 (2002), no. 3, 415–490

    2002

  10. [16]

    Fenley,Ideal boundaries of pseudo-Anosov flows and uniform convergence groups with connections and applications to large scale geometry, Geom

    S. Fenley,Ideal boundaries of pseudo-Anosov flows and uniform convergence groups with connections and applications to large scale geometry, Geom. Top.16, (2012), 1–110

    2012

  11. [17]

    Fenley,Quasigeodesic pseudo-Anosov flows in hyperbolic 3-manifolds and connections with large scale geometry, Adv

    S. Fenley,Quasigeodesic pseudo-Anosov flows in hyperbolic 3-manifolds and connections with large scale geometry, Adv. Math.303 (2016), 192–278

    2016

  12. [18]

    Fenley and L

    S. Fenley and L. Mosher,Quasigeodesic flows in hyperbolic 3-manifolds, Topology40 (2001), 503–537

    2001

  13. [19]

    Frankel,Quasigeodesic flows and Möbius-like groups, J

    S. Frankel,Quasigeodesic flows and Möbius-like groups, J. Diff. Geom.93, (2013), 401–429

    2013

  14. [20]

    Frankel,Quasigeodesic flows and sphere-filling curves, Geom

    S. Frankel,Quasigeodesic flows and sphere-filling curves, Geom. Top.19, (2015), no. 3, 1249–1262 24 DANNY CALEGARI AND INO LOUKIDOU

    2015

  15. [22]

    Gromov,Hyperbolic groups, in: Essays in Group Theory; MSRI pub.8 Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987, 75–263

    M. Gromov,Hyperbolic groups, in: Essays in Group Theory; MSRI pub.8 Springer-Verlag, New York, 1987, 75–263

    1987

  16. [23]

    Hoffoss,Suspension flows are quasigeodesic, J

    D. Hoffoss,Suspension flows are quasigeodesic, J. Diff. Geom.76 (2007), no. 2, 215–248

    2007

  17. [24]

    Italiano, B

    G. Italiano, B. Martelli and M. Migliorini,Hyperbolic 5-manifolds that fiber overS1, Invent. Math. 231 (2023), no. 1, 1–38

    2023

  18. [25]

    New ideas in low dimensional topology

    A. Juhász,A survey of Heegaard Floer homology, from “New ideas in low dimensional topology” (L. Kauffman and V. Manturov, eds), Ser. Knots Everything56, World Scientific, Hackensack, NJ, 2015, 237–296

    2015

  19. [26]

    Landry and C

    M. Landry and C. C. Tsang,Endperiodic maps, splitting sequences, and branched surfaces, preprint, https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.14481

  20. [27]

    R. L. Moore,Concerning upper semi-continuous collections of continua, Trans. AMS27 (1925), 416– 428

    1925

  21. [29]

    Navas,Groups of circle diffeomorphisms, Chicago Lectures in Math

    A. Navas,Groups of circle diffeomorphisms, Chicago Lectures in Math. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 2011

    2011

  22. [30]

    Ozsváth and Z

    P. Ozsváth and Z. Szábo,Holomorphic disks and genus bounds, Geom. Top.8 (2004), 311–334

    2004

  23. [31]

    Thurston, Three-Manifolds, Foliations and Circles I, preprint, https://arxiv.org/abs/math/ 9712268

    W. Thurston, Three-Manifolds, Foliations and Circles I, preprint, https://arxiv.org/abs/math/ 9712268

  24. [32]

    W. Thurston,Three-Manifolds, Foliations and Circles II, unfinished manuscript University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill 60637 USA Email address: dannyc@uchicago.edu University of Chicago, Chicago, Ill 60637 USA Email address: thelouk@uchicago.edu

Pith tools

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