Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 45 references

Explicit evaluation of the $q$-Stokes matrices for certain confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference equations

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The authors prove a connection formula for confluent basic hypergeometric series and use it to compute the q-Stokes matrices of an irregular q-difference system explicitly.

desk verdict Genuinely new connection formula, but Theorem 1.1's q-Stokes formula has a misplaced minor that must be corrected before the paper can be used as stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.02281 v1 pith:DYVQQADQ submitted 2024-12-03 math.CA

Jinghong Lin , Yiming Ma , Xiaomeng Xu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.CA MSC 39A1333D1534M40
keywords q-Stokesmatricesq-Borelresummationbasichypergeometricseriesconfluentq-differenceequationsconnectionformulaq-thetafunctionsStokesphenomenonqto1limit
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 a connection formula for the confluent basic hypergeometric series ${}_n\phi_{n-1}(a_1,\ldots,a_{n-1},0;b_1,\ldots,b_{n-1};q,z)$, a solution of the confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference equation, by $q$-Borel resummation. The main application is an explicit evaluation of the $q$-Stokes matrix, the transition matrix between two meromorphic solutions that share one formal asymptotic expansion but are summed along different $q$-spiral directions, for the irregular system $D_qF_q(z)=(E_{nn}+A/z)F_q(z)$. Under nonresonance conditions on the eigenvalues of $A$, the matrix is lower block triangular and its last row is given by a closed formula in $q$-Pochhammer symbols, $q$-$\theta$ functions, and minors of $A$. This supplies complete explicit Stokes data for this family of irregular confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference systems. As $q\to1$, the formula recovers the known Stokes matrices of the corresponding confluent hypergeometric differential system, so the result is a genuine $q$-deformation of the classical Stokes phenomenon.

What carries the argument

The carrier of the argument is $q$-Borel resummation: the $[\,\lambda;q\,]$-sum of a divergent formal power series $\sum a_n z^{-n}$ is obtained by applying the $q$-Borel transform $\widehat B_{q;1}$ and then the $q$-Laplace summation $L_{q;1}^{[\lambda;q]}$, producing a meromorphic solution whose poles lie on the $q$-spiral $[-\lambda^{-1};q]$. The notation ${}_n f_{n-2}(a;b;\lambda;q,z)$ denotes the resulting sum of a divergent ${}_n\phi_{n-2}$, and the key confluence lemmas (Proposition 2.25 and Theorem 2.26) pass from ${}_n\phi_{n-1}$ with a parameter $-\lambda q^m$ to the confluent series with a zero upper parameter by taking $m\to\infty$ along the $q$-spiral. The delicate step is the identification $\psi(z)=h_q(z)_n$ in (28): the function $\psi(z)$ produced by the confluence is shown to satisfy the same $q$-difference equation and to have a power-series expansion in $1/z$ with constant term $1$, which matches the recursion (12) defining $h_q(z)_n$; the comparison is what transfers the explicit coefficients to the final formula.

What would settle it

Take $n=2$ and a concrete $2\times2$ matrix $A$ satisfying the hypotheses, choose $q=1/2$, and compute the single nontrivial entry $(b_q)_1$ from Theorem 1.1. Independently evaluate both sides of $F_q^{(\infty)}(z,\mu;E_{22},A)=F_q^{(\infty)}(z,\lambda;E_{22},A)S_q(z,\lambda,\mu;E_{22},A)$ at a point off the relevant $q$-spirals by truncating the $q$-Borel sums; any disagreement disproves the formula. A more structural check is to prove or disprove the uniqueness used in (28): if the equation (5) admits a second formal solution $\sum c_k z^{-k}$ with $c_0=1$ distinct from $h_q(z)_n$, then the connection formula's coefficient identification fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is Theorem 1.1. For $A\in\mathfrak{gl}_n$ with $\mu_i-\mu_j\notin\mathbb{Z}$, $\nu_i-\nu_j\notin\mathbb{Z}$, and $\lambda^{(n-1)}_j\neq\lambda^{(n-2)}_\ell$, the $q$-Stokes matrix of $D_qF_q(z)=(E_{nn}+A/z)F_q(z)$ is $\begin{pmatrix}\mathrm{Id}_{n-1}&0\\ b_q&1\end{pmatrix}$, where the row vector $b_q$ is a double sum over products of $q$-Pochhammer symbols $(a;q)_\infty$, ratios of $q$-$\theta$ functions $\theta_q$ evaluated at $\lambda z$ and $\mu z$, powers $z^{\nu_j}/z^{\nu_n+1}$, and minors $\Delta^{1,\ldots,n-2,n}_{1,\ldots,n-1}(A-\lambda^{(n-1)}_j\mathrm{Id}_n)$ of $A$. The route is a confluence limit that converts the classical non-confluent connection formula for ${}_n\phi_{n-1}$ into a connection formula (Theorem 1.2) for the confluent series with an upper parameter equal to $0$; this connection formula is then fed into the diagonalized system (33), yielding the connection matrix and then the $q$-Stokes matrix. The paper further proves in Proposition 4.16 that, after the factor $e^{-2\pi i\delta_q^{(n-1)}(A_{n-1})}$, the $q$-Stokes matrix tends as $q\to1$ to the classical Stokes matrix $S_-(E_{nn},A_{n-1})$ of the differential system $F'=(E_{nn}+A/z)F$.

Load-bearing premise

The proof hinges on the unproved uniqueness of a solution of the confluent $q$-difference equation with a prescribed asymptotic expansion in powers of $1/z$ and constant term $1$: the confluence limit $\psi(z)$ is identified with the recursively defined series $h_q(z)_n$ purely by comparing their asymptotic forms at the step marked 'Comparing with (11) and (12)', and if that identification is not forced, the connection formula and the $q$-Stokes matrices would not be established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The connection matrix $U_q(z,\lambda;E_{nn},A)$ for the same system is explicit (Theorem 3.8), and its inverse is explicit as well (Theorem 3.9), so the full transition data between solutions around $0$ and around $\infty$ is available.
  • Taking $q\to1$ in Theorem 1.1 via Proposition 4.16 reproduces the classical Stokes matrices of $F'=(E_{nn}+A/z)F$ once the diagonal factor $e^{-2\pi i\delta_q^{(n-1)}(A_{n-1})}$ is removed; the $q$-Stokes matrix is therefore a genuine $q$-analogue of the differential Stokes matrix.
  • For $n=2$, Theorem 1.2 reduces to the known confluent connection formula for ${}_2\phi_1(a_1,0;b_1;q,z)$, recovering a previously established case and validating the confluence procedure.
  • The explicit formulas give the $q$-Stokes data needed for Riemann-Hilbert and isomonodromy problems attached to this irregular confluent family, in the direction the paper's introduction points.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same confluence route should give explicit connection matrices for other degenerate basic hypergeometric series, such as ${}_n\phi_n$ with a zero parameter or ${}_n\phi_m$ with a denominator parameter tending to zero; the paper's Remarks 2.28 and 3.13 point at some of these but leave them to later work.
  • The explicit $b_q$ formula is numerically checkable for small $n$: every ingredient is a computable $q$-series or $q$-theta function, so one can compare the two sides of the $q$-Stokes definition at a point away from the $q$-spirals.
  • If the missing uniqueness step in (28) were to fail, the formulas would still be natural candidates but would need a different proof; a formal uniqueness theorem for solutions of (5) with prescribed asymptotic constant term would close the gap.
  • Reading the $q\to1$ limit backwards suggests that the $q$-Stokes matrix interpolates the classical Stokes matrix along the $q$-deformation, which could be used to transport isomonodromic data between the $q$-world and the differential world.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the confluent hypergeometric q-difference system D_q F_q(z) = (E_nn + A/z) F_q(z) and claims an explicit formula for its q-Stokes matrix. The main technical tool is a connection formula, proved via q-Borel resummation and a confluence limit from Thomae-type formulas, for the basic hypergeometric series nphi_{n-1}(a_1,...,a_{n-1},0;b_1,...,b_{n-1};q,z). The paper also shows that, as q tends to 1, the q-Stokes matrix and the connection matrix recover the known Stokes matrices and connection matrices of the corresponding differential system. The central result is Theorem 1.1 (restated as Theorem 3.12), giving the lower block b_q in the q-Stokes matrix.

Significance. If correct, the result would be a substantial contribution: it provides complete explicit Stokes data for a family of irregular confluent hypergeometric q-difference equations, going beyond previously known low-dimensional cases. The connection formula for nphi_{n-1} with one zero numerator parameter is also of independent interest, and the q-to-1 limit connects the new formulas to the classical differential Stokes phenomenon. The paper is transparent about the ingredients: it uses q-Borel summability results from the literature and derives the Stokes matrix by multiplying connection matrices rather than by imposing the answer. However, the main theorem as printed contains an algebraic error in the placement of a minor, and one identification step in the proof of the connection formula rests on an unstated uniqueness argument. These issues must be addressed before the central claim can be accepted.

major comments (2)
  1. [Theorem 1.1 / §3.6, Theorem 3.12] The displayed formula for (b_q)_k is not algebraically equivalent to the formula derived in the proof. In the proof, equation (50) gives (b_q)_k = -\sum_j b_j^{(n-1)} (P^{-1})_{jk} [inner sum]. By Proposition 3.4, b_j^{(n-1)} is proportional to \Delta_{1,...,n-2,n}^{1,...,n-1}(A-\lambda_j^{(n-1)} I) and (P^{-1})_{jk} is proportional to \Delta_{1,...,\hat{k},...,n-1}^{1,...,n-2}(A-\lambda_j^{(n-1)} I). Their product therefore contains the second minor in the numerator. The theorem as printed places \Delta_{1,...,\hat{k},...,n-1}^{1,...,n-2} in the denominator. These two expressions differ for a generic 3x3 matrix, so the statement of Theorem 1.1 is incorrect as written. Since this is the paper's main claim, the display must be corrected (the proof's equation (50) appears to contain the correct formula).
  2. [§2.4, equation (28)] The identification \psi(z) = h_q(z)_n is asserted by 'Comparing with (11) and (12)' without proving the needed uniqueness. The function \psi(z) is shown to be a power series in 1/z with constant term 1, and \psi(z) z^{\sum \log_q(a_l/b_l)}/(z;q)_\infty is shown to satisfy equation (5). To conclude \psi = h_q(z)_n, one must prove that the equation (5) has at most one solution of this precise asymptotic form with constant term 1. This uniqueness is plausible and follows from the recursive determination of the coefficients in (12), but the paper does not isolate or prove it. Since Theorem 1.2 and hence the q-Stokes computation depend on this identification, the gap should be filled explicitly.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The word 'hypergeomtric' should be 'hypergeometric'.
  2. [§2.4, proof of Theorem 2.26] In the sentence 'from (6) and Lemma 2.22, we get (here for convenience, we denote b_n = q)', the notation b_n = q is introduced but the subsequent displayed formula would be clearer if the special role of b_n were stated before the limit is taken.
  3. [§2.4, Corollary 2.27] The phrase 'note that we denote b_n = q here' is easy to miss; since b_n plays a different role from the parameters b_1,...,b_{n-1}, it would help to define this convention in a displayed line.
  4. [§4.2, proof of Proposition 4.16] The sentence 'To prove Proposition 4.6, we need the following lemma' should refer to Proposition 4.16, not Proposition 4.6.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the q-Stokes matrix is derived by multiplying connection matrices built from external confluence and resummation results; the lone self-citation to [15] is auxiliary, and the 'Comparing with (11) and (12)' step is a proof gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The central connection formula (Theorem 2.26 / Theorem 1.2) is obtained by a confluence limit of Thomae's classical connection formula (Lemma 2.22, cited to [8,37]) combined with external q-Borel summation results (Lemma 2.23 from Adachi [1]; Lemma 2.24 from Zhang [45]) and the in-paper Proposition 2.25. The one fragile step, identifying the confluence limit ψ(z) with the recursively defined formal solution h_q(z)_n via 'Comparing with (11) and (12)' (equation (28) in Section 2.4), is an omitted uniqueness justification: the paper only states in Proposition 2.5 that the coefficients c_k 'can be uniquely determined recursively', and never isolates or proves that ψ(z) is the unique normalized formal solution. This is a proof gap, not a circular reduction—ψ(z) is not defined in terms of h_q(z)_n, and the identification is a substantive assertion that could fail. The q-Stokes matrix is then computed honestly: Theorem 3.8 and 3.9 determine the connection matrix U_q(z,λ) by substituting parameters of the scalar connection formula into Theorem 1.2 and verifying the defining identity F^(0) = F^(∞) U (equation (45)); Theorem 3.10 obtains the Stokes matrix as S_q = U_q(z,λ) U_q(z,μ)^{-1} from Definition 3.3; Theorem 3.12 conjugates by diag(P_{n-1},1) (equation (50)). No parameter is fitted, and no 'prediction' is an input renamed as an output. The only self-citation, [15] (Lin–Xu), supplies the auxiliary diagonalizing matrix P_{n-1} in Proposition 3.4—stated in full in the paper and standard linear algebra—and the differential Stokes matrix used in Section 4 purely as a q→1 consistency benchmark; it does not carry the central claim. The skeptic's objection (the displayed minor placement in Theorem 3.12 differs from the proof's equation (50), which places both minors in the numerator) is a statement/correctness error, not a circularity pattern, and does not change this verdict.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted parameters appear; the inputs are generic complex parameters satisfying explicit nonresonance conditions. The central claims rest on standard q-calculus, the established q-Borel resummation framework, and prior connection formulas. The only notable self-citation is [15], used for the diagonalization matrix P and for comparison formulas; the q-Stokes computation itself is not reduced to [15]. No new particles, fields, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Standard q-calculus identities: q-Pochhammer products, q-theta function, Jacobi triple product identity (7), and convergence properties of basic hypergeometric series from [28].
    Used throughout Sections 2.1-2.2 and in the confluence proofs; these are unproved background results.
  • domain assumption Theory of q-Borel resummation: q-Laplace transform, q-summability, q-Gevrey asymptotics, and Propositions 2.12, 2.13, 2.17 from [1,6,30,42].
    The paper relies on this framework to define the meromorphic fundamental solutions f_q^(infty) and to justify summing divergent q-hypergeometric series.
  • standard math Thomae's connection formula for nondegenerate n-phi-(n-1), quoted as Lemma 2.22 from [8,37].
    This is the starting point for the confluence limit in the proof of Theorem 2.26.
  • standard math Zhang's theta-function limit lemma, quoted as Lemma 2.24 from [45].
    Used to evaluate the m-to-infinity limits of ratios of q-Pochhammer and theta products.
  • domain assumption Diagonalization of the upper-left submatrix A^(n-1) by the explicitly given matrix P_{n-1}, cited to the authors' own paper [15].
    Proposition 3.4 is taken from [15] and is used to pass from the original system (2) to the diagonalized system (33), and later to write the final b_q formula in terms of minors of A.
  • domain assumption Existence and standard properties of Borel-resummed solutions of the differential system (68), including Propositions 4.9, 4.14, and 4.15 from [4,12,16,39] and [15].
    These classical facts are the reference target for the q-to-1 limit in Section 4, and the paper does not reprove them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Explicit evaluation of the $q$-Stokes matrices for certain confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference equations." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DYVQQADQ

@misc{pith2026241202281,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Explicit evaluation of the $q$-Stokes matrices for certain confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference equations},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DYVQQADQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.02281}
}
abstract

We prove a connection formula for the basic hypergeomtric function ${}_n\varphi_{n-1}\left( a_1,...,a_{n-1},0; b_1,...,b_{n-1} ; q, z\right)$ by using the $q$-Borel resummation. As an application, we compute $q$-Stokes matrices of a special confluent hypergeometric $q$-difference system with an irregular singularity. We show that by letting $q\rightarrow 1$, the $q$-Stokes matrices recover the known expressions of the Stokes matrices of the corresponding confluent hypergeometric differential system.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. Adachi. The q-Borel sum of divergent basic hypergeometric series rϕs(a;b;q,x ). SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. , 15:Paper No. 016, 12, 2019

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    C. Adams. On the linear ordinary q-difference equation. Ann. of Math. (2) , 30(1-4):195–205, 1928/29

    work page 1928

  3. [3]

    R. Askey. The q-gamma and q-beta functions. Applicable Anal. , 8(2):125–141, 1978/79

    work page 1978

  4. [4]

    W. Balser. Formal power series and linear systems of meromorphic ordin ary differential equations . Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000

    work page 2000

  5. [5]

    G. Birkhoff. The generalized Riemann problem for linear d ifferential equations and the allied problems for linear difference and q-difference equations. In Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, volume 49, pages 521–568, 1913

    work page 1913

  6. [6]

    T. Dreyfus. Confluence of meromorphic solutions of q-difference equations. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 65(2):431–507, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Dreyfus and A

    T. Dreyfus and A. Eloy. q-Borel-Laplace summation for q-difference equations with two slopes. J. Difference Equ. Appl. , 22(10):1501–1511, 2016

    work page 2016

  8. [8]

    Gasper and M

    G. Gasper and M. Rahman. Basic hypergeometric series . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004

    work page 2004

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    E. Heine. ¨Uber die Reihe 1+ ... . (Aus einem Schreiben an Lejeune Dirich let). J. Reine Angew. Math. , 32:210–212, 1846

  2. [10]

    E. Heine. Untersuchungen ¨ uber die Reihe 1 + ... . J. Reine Angew. Math. , 34:285–328, 1847

  3. [11]

    E. Heine. Handbuch der Kugelfunctionen. Theorie und Anwendungen. Ba nd I, II , volume No. 1 of The- saurus Mathematicae . Physica-Verlag, W¨ urzburg, 1961. Zweite umgearbeitete u nd vermehrte Auflage

    1961

  4. [12]

    Ichinobe

    K. Ichinobe. The Borel sum of divergent Barnes hypergeo metric series and its application to a partial differential equation. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. , 37(1):91–117, 2001

    2001

  5. [13]

    M. Jimbo. Monodromy problem and the boundary condition for some Painlev´ e equations. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. , 18(3):1137–1161, 1982

    1982

  6. [14]

    Jimbo and H

    M. Jimbo and H. Sakai. A q-analog of the sixth Painlev´ e equation. Lett. Math. Phys. , 38(2):145–154, 1996

    1996

  7. [15]

    Lin and X

    J. Lin and X. Xu. Explicit evaluation of the Stokes matri ces for certain quantum confluent hypergeometric equations. arXiv:2401.13911, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Loday-Richaud

    M. Loday-Richaud. Divergent series, summability and resurgence. II . Springer-Verlag, [Cham], 2016

    2016

  9. [17]

    T. Mano. Asymptotic behaviour around a boundary point o f theq-Painlev´ e VI equation and its connection problem. Nonlinearity, 23(7):1585–1608, 2010

    2010

  10. [18]

    Marotte and C

    F. Marotte and C. Zhang. Multisommabilit´ e des s´ eries enti` eres solutions formelles d’une ´ equation aux q-diff´ erences lin´ eaire analytique.Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 50(6):1859–1890, 2000. 26

    2000

  11. [19]

    T. Morita. A connection formula of the Hahn-Exton q-Bessel function. SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. , 7:Paper 115, 11, 2011

    2011

  12. [20]

    T. Morita. A connection formula for the q-confluent hypergeometric function. SIGMA Symmetry Inte- grability Geom. Methods Appl. , 9:Paper No. 050, 13, 2013

    2013

  13. [21]

    T. Morita. The Stokes phenomenon for the q-difference equation satisfied by the basic hypergeometric series 3ϕ 1(a1,a 2,a 3;b1;q,x ). In Novel development of nonlinear discrete integrable system s, volume B47 of RIMS Kˆ okyˆ uroku Bessatsu, pages 117–126. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (...

    2014

  14. [22]

    T. Morita. The Stokes phenomenon for the q-difference equation satisfied by the Ramanujan entire function. Ramanujan J. , 34(3):329–346, 2014

    2014

  15. [23]

    Y. Ohyama. Analytic solutions to the sixth q-Painlev´ e equation around the origin. In Expansion of integrable systems, volume B13 of RIMS Kˆ okyˆ uroku Bessatsu, pages 45–52. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2009

    2009

  16. [24]

    Y. Ohyama. q-Stokes phenomenon of a basic hypergeometric series 1φ 1(0;a;q,x ). J. Math. Tokushima Univ., 50:49–60, 2016

    2016

  17. [25]

    Y. Ohyama. Connection formula of basic hypergeometric series rφr−1(0;b;q,x ). J. Math. Tokushima Univ., 51:29–36, 2017

    2017

  18. [26]

    Ohyama, J.-P

    Y. Ohyama, J.-P. Ramis, and J. Sauloy. The space of monod romy data for the Jimbo-Sakai family of q-difference equations. Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (6) , 29(5):1119–1250, 2020

    2020

  19. [27]

    Ohyama and C

    Y. Ohyama and C. Zhang. q-Stokes phenomenon of basic hypergeometric equations and t he painlev´ e equations. Talk given in the conference ”Analytic theory of differential and difference equations”. 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    Olver, D

    F. Olver, D. Lozier, R. Boisvert, and C. Clark, editors. NIST handbook of mathematical functions . U.S. Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards an d Technology, Washington, DC; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010

    2010

  21. [29]

    J.-P. Ramis. About the growth of entire functions solut ions of linear algebraic q-difference equations. Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. (6) , 1(1):53–94, 1992

    1992

  22. [30]

    Ramis, J

    J.-P. Ramis, J. Sauloy, and C. Zhang. Local analytic cla ssification of q-difference equations. Ast´ erisque, (355):vi+151, 2013

    2013

  23. [31]

    Ramis and C

    J.-P. Ramis and C. Zhang. D´ eveloppement asymptotique q-Gevrey et fonction thˆ eta de Jacobi. C. R. Math. Acad. Sci. Paris , 335(11):899–902, 2002

    2002

  24. [32]

    M. Sato, T. Miwa, and M. Jimbo. Holonomic quantum fields. II. The Riemann-Hilbert problem. Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. , 15(1):201–278, 1979

    1979

  25. [33]

    J. Sauloy. Syst` emes aux q-diff´ erences singuliers r´ eguliers: classification, matrice de connexion et mon- odromie. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) , 50(4):1021–1071, 2000

    2000

  26. [34]

    L. J. Slater. Generalized hypergeometric functions. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1966

    1966

  27. [35]

    Tang and X

    Q. Tang and X. Xu. The boundary condition for some isomon odromy equations. arXiv: 2402.07269 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    J. Thomae. Beitr¨ age zur Theorie der durch die Heinesch e Reihe: ... darstellbaren Functionen. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 70:258–281, 1869

  29. [37]

    J. Thomae. Les s´ eries Hein´ eennes sup´ erieures, ou les s´ eries de la forme ...Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. , 4:105–138, 1870

  30. [38]

    Turrittin

    H. Turrittin. Convergent solutions of ordinary linear homogeneous differential equations in the neighbor- hood of an irregular singular point. Acta Math. , 93:27–66, 1955

    1955

  31. [39]

    W. Wasow. Asymptotic expansions for ordinary differential equations . Dover Publications, Inc., New York, 1987

    1987

  32. [40]

    G. Watson. The continuation of functions defined by gene ralized hypergeometric series. Trans. Camb. Phil. Soc , 21:281–299, 1910

    1910

  33. [41]

    X. Xu. Regularized limits of Stokes matrices, isomonod romy deformation and crystal basis. arXiv:1912.07196v5, 2024

    1912 arXiv

  34. [42]

    C. Zhang. D´ eveloppements asymptotiques q-Gevrey et s´ eriesGq-sommables. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Greno- ble), 49(1):vi–vii, x, 227–261, 1999. 27

    1999

  35. [43]

    C. Zhang. Une sommation discr` ete pour des ´ equations a ux q-diff´ erences lin´ eaires et ` a coefficients analy- tiques: th´ eorie g´ en´ erale et exemples. InDifferential equations and the Stokes phenomenon , pages 309–329. World Sci. Publ., River Edge, NJ, 2002

    2002

  36. [44]

    C. Zhang. Sur les fonctions q-Bessel de Jackson. J. Approx. Theory , 122(2):208–223, 2003

    2003

  37. [45]

    C. Zhang. Remarks on some basic hypergeometric series. In Theory and applications of special functions , pages 479–491. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2005. School of Mathematical Sciences, Peking University, Beijin g 100871, China E-mail address : linjinghong@pku.edu.cn School of...

    2005

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.