Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 29 references

$\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-finite modules and weight modules I: weighting functors, almost-coherent families and category $\mathfrak{A}^{\text{irr}}$

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 Simple infinite-dimensional U(h)-finite modules are U(h)-torsion free, and U(h)-free outside the integral regular central-character case.

desk verdict Conditional: the structural theorems are solid and worth publishing, but the type A classification and sl(3) corollary rest on Lemma 5.17, whose proof is deferred to the author's unpublished thesis. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.18390 v2 pith:SYAI3VCB submitted 2024-11-27 math.RT

Eduardo M. Mendonça This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RT MSC 17B1017B20
keywords U(h)-finitemodulesU(h)-freeweightingfunctoralmost-coherentfamiliesweighttranslationfunctorstorsion-freeexponentialtensor
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 heart of this paper is a bridge between two opposite kinds of representations of a simple Lie algebra: modules on which a Cartan subalgebra acts locally finitely, and weight modules whose weight spaces have bounded multiplicities. The bridge is the weighting functor, and the paper's first main claim is that every infinite-dimensional simple module in the finite category is torsion-free over the Cartan subalgebra, and actually free when its central character is non-integral or integral but singular. This turns the study of these modules into the study of a new kind of object, the almost-coherent family, which differs from a coherent family only on a finite set of weights. Using this language, the paper classifies all simple modules with irreducible almost-coherent weighting image for symplectic Lie algebras, and most of them for special linear algebras, leaving a conjecture that all remaining ones are subquotients of exponential tensor modules.

What carries the argument

The weighting functor W(M) = ⊕_λ M/m_λ M and its left derived functors W_k(M)_λ ≅ $Tor_k^{{U(h)}}$(M, C_λ) form the central machinery: they detect failure of freeness, with W_k vanishing or becoming finite-dimensional exactly where M is not locally free. The other main mechanism is the almost-coherent family, a weight module whose weight-space dimensions are constant and whose trace functions are polynomial on a cofinite subset of h^*, together with the notion of almost-equivalence, which identifies two such families up to finite-dimensional modules.

What would settle it

Compute the degree polynomials deg_k explicitly for sl(4) or sl(5) from the dimensions dim L_l(w_k·λ) using the dimension formula for finite-dimensional simple modules, and test whether their values at n generic weights give an invertible matrix; a singular matrix would falsify Lemma 5.17. A less direct check is to compute the ranks of the parabolic modules L_b(k,λ) at several λ and compare with the predicted multiplicities m_i,k = δ_i,k; any mismatch refutes Theorem 5.16.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the higher weighting functors W_k, defined through Tor over U(h), become finite-dimensional on simple U(h)-finite modules, and their support is precisely the finite set of maximal ideals where the module fails to be locally free. Consequently, every simple infinite-dimensional U(h)-finite module is U(h)-torsion free, and it is U(h)-free whenever its central character is non-integral or integral and singular (Theorem 3.9 and Corollary 3.12). The paper then proves that W(M) is an almost-coherent family whose degree equals the rank of M, and that almost-equivalent irreducible almost-coherent families reduce, up to finite-dimensional summands, to the classical coherent-family classification. For sp(2n), every simple module in A^irr — the category of U(h)-finite modules whose weighting image is an irreducible almost-coherent family — is a translation of a rank-one U(h)-free module; for sl(n+1), the same is obtained for non-integral and integral singular central characters, with exponential tensor modules as the models, and a conjecture extends this to all central characters.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is Lemma 5.17, which asserts that the polynomials deg_1,...,deg_n defined by equation (5.3) are linearly independent over C; the paper gives only a sketch and refers to a thesis listed as 'In preparation', so if this independence fails, the surjectivity theorem for type A and the sl(3) classification collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If a simple U(h)-finite module of infinite dimension has non-integral or integral singular central character, then it is free as a U(h)-module, so its classification reduces to the known classification of finite-rank U(h)-free modules and their translations.
  • Infinite-dimensional U(h)-torsion-free modules can only exist for Lie algebras of type A and C; for every other simple Lie algebra the category A contains only finite-dimensional simple modules.
  • For sp(2n), the complete list of simple modules in A^irr is obtained by applying automorphisms of (g,h) and translation functors to a single rank-one U(h)-free module.
  • For sl(n+1), every simple module in A^irr with non-integral or integral singular central character is isomorphic to an exponential tensor module or a twisting of one, and for sl(3) the classification is completed across all central characters.
  • The main open conjecture asserts that every simple sl(n+1)-module in A^irr is a simple subquotient of an exponential tensor module; the paper proves this for the first and last members of each relevant family of coherent families.

Reading between the lines

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

  • One consequence not spelled out in the paper: the finite set Supp W_1(M) is a new numerical invariant of a U(h)-finite module, measuring the obstruction to being locally free, and it could be computed explicitly in examples as a check on proposed classifications.
  • The rank-one reduction used for non-integral and singular characters suggests an extension path for the integral regular case: if every irreducible almost-coherent family can be translated, after a finite-dimensional correction, to degree one, then the same machinery applies; the paper realizes this for the two extreme members of each family.
  • A testable extension would be to run the same weighting-functor analysis in other settings where a Cartan-like subalgebra acts locally finitely but not freely; the almost-coherent family formalism appears to transfer whenever local freeness holds on a cofinite set.
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

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a theory of U(h)-finite modules for a simple finite-dimensional Lie algebra g. It introduces left-derived functors W_k of Nilsson's weighting functor W, proves that simple infinite-dimensional U(h)-finite modules are U(h)-torsion free (Cor. 3.12) and locally U(h)-free outside finitely many points, and are U(h)-free when the central character is non-integral or integral singular (Thm. 3.9). It defines almost-coherent families as a cofinite-set analogue of Mathieu's coherent families, shows that W(M) is almost-coherent for U(h)-torsion-free M (Thm. 4.4, Cor. 4.7), and proves that a semi-simple almost-coherent family is almost-equivalent to a genuine coherent family (Thm. 4.18). For the category Airr, the paper gives a complete classification for type C (Thm. 5.1), a classification for type A with non-integral or singular central character (Thm. 5.10), a surjectivity statement for the weighting functor in type A (Thm. 5.16), and supporting evidence for a conjectural full classification, including the sl(3) case (Cor. 6.12).

Significance. If the main results are correct, this is a substantial contribution: it removes Nilsson's rank restriction, introduces a workable notion of almost-coherent family, and connects U(h)-finite modules to Mathieu's classification of coherent families. The structural results in Sections 3 and 4 are argued carefully and use standard commutative algebra in a convincing way; the type C classification in Theorem 5.1 is a clear advance. The paper is honest about what is proved and what is conjectural, and the statements of the conjectures are precise. However, the submitted version has two load-bearing problems: Definition 4.19 is vacuous as written, and Lemma 5.17's proof is deferred to an unpublished thesis. Both appear fixable, but they must be addressed before the type A surjectivity theorem and the sl(3) classification can be fully accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Definition 4.19; Corollary 4.20] For every cofinite subset U⊆h*, the saturation U+Z∆ is all of h*: given x∈h*, the set x-Z∆ is infinite, while h*\U is finite, so some x-q lies in U. Hence the set h*\(U+Z∆) in Definition 4.19 is empty, and no module satisfies the stated definition of an irreducible U-coherent family. Consequently the category Airr, defined as those M for which W(M) is an irreducible almost-coherent family, is empty by definition, and Corollary 4.20, which chooses λ∈h*\(U+Z∆), is vacuous. Since Theorems 5.1 and 5.10 both invoke Corollary 4.20 to replace W(M) by an irreducible semi-simple coherent family, the classification arguments lose their stated foundation until the definition is repaired (for example by requiring M_λ to be a simple A-module for some λ in U, or by imposing Q-invariance on U with an appropriate exceptional set).
  2. [Section 5.3, Lemma 5.17] Lemma 5.17 asserts linear independence over C of the degree polynomials deg_1,...,deg_n defined by equation (5.3). The proof consists of a single sentence plus a pointer to the author's thesis [25], which is listed as 'In preparation'. This is not a cosmetic gap: in Theorem 5.16 the equality rank_k(λ)=deg_k(λ) only yields the desired conclusion W(L_b(k,λ)) ∼ EXT(L(w_k·λ)) after combining rank_k(λ)=Σ_i m_{i,k} deg_i(λ) with linear independence to force m_{i,k}=δ_{i,k}. Proposition 6.6 uses the same lemma to identify the U(h)-free hull of a simple module, and therefore Theorem 6.11 and Corollary 6.12 also rest on it. The proof must be included in the manuscript, or replaced by a citation to a publicly available published source, before the type A surjectivity theorem and the sl(3) classification can be accepted.
  3. [Section 4.2, proof of Lemma 4.17] In the proof of Lemma 4.17, the text claims that p_α(λ)=det(e_α f_α|_{M_λ}) is a non-zero polynomial in U, but the justification that follows (expressing determinants through traces of powers) establishes only that p_α is a polynomial. The non-vanishing is then used to conclude that Ω_α=p_α^{-1}(C\{0})∩U is non-empty open for every α, which is necessary to show that Sing M is a proper closed subset of T*. A separate argument for non-vanishing is needed; without it, Lemma 4.17 and its consequences (Theorem 4.18 and Corollary 4.20) are not fully proved. Note also that without an infinite-dimensionality or positive-degree hypothesis the lemma is false: a finite-dimensional module is a U-coherent family of degree 0 and has Sing M=T*.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Theorem 5.16] The statement parametrizes the list P_{k,λ} by b∈C^n, but the modules L_b(k,λ) and L^τ_b(k,λ) are constructed for b∈(C\{0})^n; the domain should be corrected for consistency.
  2. [Throughout] There are numerous typographical errors and infelicities, including 'expend' for 'extend', 'a priory' for 'a priori', 'subjectivity' for 'surjectivity', 'fallowing' for 'following', 'dimention' for 'dimension', and 'Beck' for 'Back'; the manuscript would benefit from a careful copyedit.
  3. [Equation (4.2)] In the sentence preceding equation (4.2), 'for all h∈h*' should read 'for all h∈h'.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Theorems 5.16, 6.11 and Corollary 6.12 rest on Lemma 5.17, whose proof is deferred to the author's own in-preparation thesis; otherwise the derivation chain is anchored to external classifications and shows no definitional circularity.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 5.3, Lemma 5.17 and its use in Theorem 5.16, Proposition 6.6, Theorem 6.11, Corollary 6.12]
    "The lemma follows by open the formulas and finding elements λ(1),...,λ(n) ∈ h∗ such that dk(λ(k)) ≠ 0 and dℓ(λ(k)) = 0, ∀k < ℓ ≤ n. For more details in the computation, see the author’s thesis [25]."

    Lemma 5.17, the linear independence of deg_1,...,deg_n, is not proved in the paper; the proof is a sketch plus a pointer to the author's own thesis [25], which the bibliography lists as 'In preparation'. The lemma is load-bearing: in Theorem 5.16 the paper derives rank_k(λ)=Σ_i m_{i,k} deg_i(λ) with m_{i,k} constant, and then concludes 'the linear independence of deg_1,...,deg_n (Lemma 5.17) implies m_{i,k}=δ_{i,k}', which forces W(L_b(k,λ))∼EX T(L(w_k·λ)). Proposition 6.6 and Theorem 6.11, hence the sl(3) classification, use the same lemma to identify which U(h)-free hull a simple module belongs to. Thus a central part of the type-A classification is justified only by an unverified same-author citation.

full rationale

The paper's principal structural results (Theorems 3.9, 3.12, 3.13, and the type C classification in Theorem 5.1) are derived in detail from exact sequences, Tor/homology computations, translation functors, and the external classifications of Mathieu, Nilsson, and Grantcharov-Nguyen. There are no fitted parameters and no definitional identities that would make an output equal to its input by construction. The main circularity-burden signal is Lemma 5.17: its proof is deferred to the author's in-preparation thesis, and Theorem 5.16, Proposition 6.6, Theorem 6.11, and Corollary 6.12 all depend on it. This is a genuine citation gap and a load-bearing self-citation, but not a reduction of the claimed result to its own assumptions. The paper also flags, in Remark 5.4, a discrepancy with the exponential tensor modules of [13]; that is a reference-validity concern rather than a circular derivation. Weighing these, the central claim still has substantial independent mathematical content, so the circularity score is 4 rather than higher.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 2 invented entities

This pure mathematics paper introduces no fitted parameters. It relies on the standard external classifications of Mathieu and Nilsson, on the tensor module constructions of Grantcharov-Nguyen, and on standard commutative algebra. The only non-standard load-bearing input is Lemma 5.17, whose proof is deferred to the author's unpublished thesis, and potentially the definitional mismatch with [13] flagged in Remark 5.4.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Mathieu's classification of irreducible weight modules and coherent families, including the existence of infinite-dimensional admissible weight modules only for types A and C.
    Used throughout (Lemma 1.4, Props 1.7-1.12, Theorems 1.10-1.12) as the external benchmark for weight modules.
  • domain assumption Nilsson's classification of rank-one U(h)-free modules, including the structure of the module M0 and [27, Theorem 22].
    Central to Theorem 5.1 and Prop 5.9.
  • domain assumption Grantcharov and Nguyen's tensor module constructions and their properties, including [13, Cor 4.2, Prop 4.5, Cor 5.7, Cor 5.11].
    Exponential tensor modules are imported from [13]; Prop 5.5 and 5.9 rely on these, with a definitional caveat in Remark 5.4.
  • domain assumption Britten and Lemire's classification of degree-one coherent families [5, Prop 1.6].
    Used in proof of Theorem 5.10.
  • standard math Standard commutative algebra: Quillen-Suslin theorem, Nakayama's lemma, generic freeness, Nullstellensatz, and basic facts on torsion-free modules over polynomial rings.
    Used in Section 3 to pass from local freeness to freeness and to control torsion.
  • ad hoc to paper Lemma 5.17 on the linear independence of the degree polynomials deg_1,...,deg_n.
    Stated in the paper but proof deferred to the author's unpublished thesis [25], listed as In preparation.
  • standard math Harish-Chandra isomorphism, Duflo's parametrization of central characters, and translation functor properties.
    Used throughout for central characters and translation functors.
invented entities (2)
  • almost-coherent family
    purpose: Weight module that is coherent outside a finite subset of h*; captures W(M) for U(h)-torsion-free modules.
    Definition 4.5; a rigorous mathematical definition, not an empirical postulate.
  • category A^irr
    purpose: Subcategory of U(h)-finite modules whose weighting functor image is an irreducible almost-coherent family; its simple objects are classified in Section 5.
    Defined in Section 5; a mathematical object, not an empirical entity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-finite modules and weight modules I: weighting functors, almost-coherent families and category $\mathfrak{A}^{\text{irr}}$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SYAI3VCB

@misc{pith2026241118390,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: $\mathcalU(\mathfrakh)$-finite modules and weight modules I: weighting functors, almost-coherent families and category $\mathfrakA^\textirr$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SYAI3VCB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.18390}
}
abstract

This paper builds upon J. Nilsson's classification of rank one $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-free modules by extending the analysis to modules without rank restrictions, focusing on the category $\mathfrak{A}$ of $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-finite $\mathfrak{g}$-modules. A deeper investigation of the weighting functor $\mathcal{W}$ and its left derived functors, $\mathcal{W}_*$, led to the proof that simple $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-finite modules of infinite dimension are $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-torsion free. Furthermore, it is shown that these modules are $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-free if they possess non-integral or singular central characters. It is concluded that the existence of $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-torsion-free $\mathfrak{g}$-modules is restricted to Lie algebras of types A and C. The concept of an almost-coherent family, which generalizes O. Mathieu's definition of coherent families, is introduced. It is proved that $\mathcal{W}(M)$, for a $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-torsion-free module $M$, falls within this class of weight modules. Furthermore, a notion of almost-equivalence is defined to establish a connection between irreducible semi-simple almost-coherent families and O. Mathieu's original classification. Progress is also made in classifying simple modules within the category $\mathfrak{A}^{\text{irr}}$, which consists of $\mathcal{U}(\mathfrak{h})$-finite modules $M$ with the property that $\mathcal{W}(M)$ is an irreducible almost-coherent family. A complete classification is achieved for type C, with partial classification for type A. Finally, a conjecture is presented asserting that all simple $\mathfrak{sl}(n+1)$-modules in $\mathfrak{A}^{\text{irr}}$ are isomorphic to simple subquotients of exponential tensor modules, and supporting results are proved.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [25]

    Mendon¸ ca

    Eduardo M. Mendon¸ ca. U(h)-finitely generated g-modules and coherent famlies . PhD thesis, University of S˜ ao Paulo and Universit´ e Claude Bernard Lyon 1, In preparation. 43

    work page

  2. [13]

    Exponentiation and fou rier transform of tensor modules of sl(n + 1)

    Dimitar Grantcharov and Khoa Nguyen. Exponentiation and fou rier transform of tensor modules of sl(n + 1). Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 226(7):106972, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [1]

    J. N. Bernstein and S. I. Gelfand. Tensor products of finite and infinite dimensional representations of semisimple Lie algebras. Compositio Mathematica, 41(2):245–285, 1980

    work page 1980

  4. [2]

    Richard E. Block. The irreducible representations of the lie algebr a sl(2) and of the weyl algebra. Advances in Mathematics , 39(1):69–110, 1981

    work page 1981

  5. [3]

    Recent advances in enveloping algebras of semi-sim ple Lie-algebras

    Walter Borho. Recent advances in enveloping algebras of semi-sim ple Lie-algebras. In S´ eminaire Bour- baki : vol. 1976/77, expos´ es 489-506, number 19 in S´ eminaire Bourbaki. Springer-Verlag, 1978. talk:489

    work page 1976

  6. [4]

    Lie Groups and Lie Algebras: Chapters 7-9 (Elements of Mathe matics)

    Nicolas Bourbaki. Lie Groups and Lie Algebras: Chapters 7-9 (Elements of Mathe matics). Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 2008

    work page 2008

  7. [5]

    D. J. Britten and F. W. Lemire. Tensor product realizations of sim ple torsion free modules. Canadian Journal of Mathematics , 53(2):225–243, 2001. 42

    work page 2001

  8. [6]

    E. Cartan. Les groupes projectifs qui ne laissent invariante au cune multiplicit´ e plane.Bull. Soc. Math. France, 41:53–96, 1913

    work page 1913

Show all 29 references
  1. [7]

    Alg` ebres enveloppantes

    Jacques Dixmier. Alg` ebres enveloppantes. Les Grands Classiques Gauthier-Villars. [Gauthier-Villars Great Classics]. ´Editions Jacques Gabay, Paris, 1996. Reprint of the 1974 original

    1996

  2. [8]

    Yu. A. Drozd, V. M. Futorny, and S. A. Ovsienko. Harish-Chandra Subalgebras and Gelfand-Zetlin Modules, pages 79–93. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 1994

    1994

  3. [9]

    Sur la classification des id´ eaux primitifs dans l’alg` ebr e enveloppante d’une alg` ebre de lie semi-simple

    Michel Duflo. Sur la classification des id´ eaux primitifs dans l’alg` ebr e enveloppante d’une alg` ebre de lie semi-simple. Annals of Mathematics , 105(1):107–120, 1977

    1977

  4. [10]

    Lie algebra modules with finite-d imensional weight spaces

    S Rupasiri Lakshman Fernando. Lie algebra modules with finite-d imensional weight spaces. i. Trans- actions of the American Mathematical Society , 322:757–781, 1990

    1990

  5. [11]

    V. Futorny. The Weight Representations of Semisimple Finite Dimension al Lie Algebras . PhD thesis, Kiev University, 1987

    1987

  6. [12]

    Lopes, and Eduardo M

    Vyacheslav Futorny, Samuel A. Lopes, and Eduardo M. Mendo n¸ ca. Representations of smith algebras which are free over the cartan subalgebra. Journal of Algebra, 655:405–423, 2024. Special Issue dedicated to the memory of Georgia Benkart

    2024

  7. [14]

    Cuspidal represen tations of sl(n + 1)

    Dimitar Grantcharov and Vera Serganova. Cuspidal represen tations of sl(n + 1). Advances in Mathe- matics, 224(4):1517–1547, 2010

    2010

  8. [15]

    On some applications of the universal envelop ing algebra of a semisimple Lie algebra

    Harish-Chandra. On some applications of the universal envelop ing algebra of a semisimple Lie algebra. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. , 70:28–96, 1951

    1951

  9. [16]

    Algebraic Geometry: A First Course

    Joe Harris. Algebraic Geometry: A First Course . Springer, New York, 1992

    1992

  10. [17]

    Stable reflexive sheaves

    Robin Hartshorne. Stable reflexive sheaves. Mathematische Annalen , 254:121–176, 1980

    1980

  11. [18]

    A class of new simple modules f or sl(n + 1) and the witt algebra

    Yan He, Yan an Cai, and Rencai L¨ u. A class of new simple modules f or sl(n + 1) and the witt algebra. Journal of Algebra , 541:415–435, 2020

    2020

  12. [19]

    A simple proof of the leverrier-faddeev charac teristic polynomial algorithm

    Shui-Hung Hou. A simple proof of the leverrier-faddeev charac teristic polynomial algorithm. SIAM Review, 40(3):706–709, 1998

    1998

  13. [20]

    Humphreys

    James E. Humphreys. Representations of semisimple Lie algebras in the BGG categ ory O

  14. [21]

    Jens C. Jantzen. Moduln mit einem h¨ ochsten Gewicht, pages 38–57. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1983

    1983

  15. [22]

    On whittaker vectors and representation theory

    Bertram Kostant. On whittaker vectors and representation theory. Inventiones mathematicae, 48:101– 184, 1978

    1978

  16. [23]

    Classification of irreducible weight modules

    Olivier Mathieu. Classification of irreducible weight modules. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 50(2):537– 592, 2000

    2000

  17. [24]

    Commutative algebra

    Hideyuki Matsumura. Commutative algebra. Mathematics lecture note series ; 56. Benjamin-Cummings Pub Co, 2nd edition edition, 1980

    1980

  18. [26]

    Simple sl(n + 1)-module structures on U(h)

    Jonathan Nilsson. Simple sl(n + 1)-module structures on U(h). Journal of Algebra , 424:294–329, 2015

    2015

  19. [27]

    U(h)-free modules and coherent families

    Jonathan Nilsson. U(h)-free modules and coherent families. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra , 220(4):1475–1488, 2016

    2016

  20. [28]

    Porjective modules over polynomial rings

    Daniel Quillen. Porjective modules over polynomial rings. Inventiones mathematicae, 36:167–172, 1976

    1976

  21. [29]

    W + n - and Wn-module structures on U(hn)

    Haijun Tan and Kaiming Zhao. W + n - and Wn-module structures on U(hn). Journal of Algebra , 424:357– 375, 2015. (E.M. Mendon¸ ca)Institute of Mathematics and Statistics, University of S ˜ao P aulo, Brazil and Institut Camille Jordan, Universit ´e Claude Bernanrd Lyon 1, Franc...

    2015

Pith tools

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