On definable groups in dp-minimal topological fields equipped with a generic derivation

Fran\c{c}oise Point

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 34 references

On definable groups in dp-minimal topological fields equipped with a generic derivation

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Every finite-dimensional group definable using a generic derivation embeds densely in a group definable without the derivation.

desk verdict Conditional but solid: the C1-cell decomposition and compatibility lemmas are real new ingredients, and the main theorems are honest about resting on an unproved model-companion existence. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.07044 v1 pith:KOQOTXMQ submitted 2025-05-11 math.LO

Françoise Point This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.LO MSC 03C4503C6012H0512L12

keywords dp-minimalfieldsgenericderivationmodelcompaniondefinablegroupsD-groupscelldecompositionpre-groupconstructionfinite-dimensionalsets

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

This paper proves a transfer theorem for fields equipped with a generic derivation. Working over a complete, model-complete, geometric field theory that is either dp-minimal and not strongly minimal or an open theory of topological fields containing a complete rank-1 valued field, it shows that every finite-dimensional group definable in the differential expansion embeds densely into a group definable in the original field language alone. Here 'embeds densely' means that the embedding is definable and every generic type of the target group is realized by a tuple of the form $(a,\partial a,\dots,\partial^N a)$ coming from the original group. In the topological cases it sharpens this to a D-group statement: the original group is exactly the set of sharp points of a definable section of the prolongation bundle. The upshot is that differential-algebraic group data in these fields is not genuinely new; it is dense definable data inside ordinary definable geometry, extending earlier results to a much broader tame class.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the finite jet map $\nabla_N(\Gamma)=\{(a,\partial a,\ldots,\partial^N a): a\in\Gamma\}$ together with the prolongation $\tau(Y)$ of an $\mathcal{L}$-definable set $Y$. Finite-dimensionality says that for some $N$, $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$ is model-theoretically algebraic over $\nabla_{N-1}(\Gamma)$. The proof uses a $C^1$-cell decomposition: definable correspondences are, almost everywhere, continuously differentiable, and the derivation is compatible with them, so $\partial$ can be pushed through the cells. A pre-group is built on $Y$ using the lifted operations $F_\times^{[N]}$ and $F_{-1}^{[N]}$, and the Weil pre-group construction converts generic data into a genuine $\mathcal{L}$-definable group $G$. For the D-group result, the prolongation $\tau(G)$ is given a group structure and the section $s$ is the one whose sharp points are exactly the $\nabla_N$-image.

What would settle it

A concrete check is to take a dp-minimal, not strongly minimal, geometric, model-complete topological field theory $T$ for which the existence of $T_\partial$ has not been established and try to construct it; if no model companion exists, the statement is vacuous. Alternatively, in any model of $T_\partial$, search for a finite-dimensional $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable group $\Gamma$ such that for every $N$ and every $\mathcal{L}$-definable group $G$, some $\mathcal{L}$-generic type of $G$ is not realized by any $\nabla_N(a)$; Theorem 6.2 says this never happens.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is that, under the paper's hypotheses, any finite-dimensional $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable group $\Gamma$ in a sufficiently saturated model of the model companion $T_\partial$ admits an integer $N$, an $\mathcal{L}$-definable group $G$, and an $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable embedding of $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$ into $G$ such that every $\mathcal{L}$-generic type of $G$ is realized by some $\nabla_N(a)$ with $a\in\Gamma$. Then, using the $C^1$-cell decomposition, the paper proves the sharper statement that there is an $\mathcal{L}$-definable D-group $(G,s)$ whose sharp points $\{g: s(g)=\nabla(g)\}$ are exactly the image of $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$. A group $\Gamma$ is finite-dimensional when, for some $N$, $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$ is contained in $\operatorname{acl}_{\mathcal{L}}(\nabla_{N-1}(\Gamma))$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the differential theory $T(\partial)$ has a model companion $T_\partial$; for dp-minimal $T$ this is assumed, not proved, and without it the theorem's statement is vacuous.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Finite-dimensional $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable groups can be studied with the structure theory of $\mathcal{L}$-definable groups: dimension, genericity, and Weil-group tools transfer across the dense embedding.
The dense embedding is witnessed by an actual embedding of $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$ into $G$, not merely an interpretable quotient, so group-theoretic information is preserved at the level of points.
The D-group statement supplies sharp points $\{g:s(g)=\nabla(g)\}$ equal to $\nabla_N(\Gamma)$, giving a definable analog of algebraic D-group and Manin-kernel presentations in this setting.
When $T$ is an open theory of topological fields with a complete rank-1 valued field model, $T(\partial)$ is just $T$ together with the derivation axioms, and the same conclusions hold for that class.
The theorem extends the dense-embedding and D-group results previously known for real closed and p-adically closed fields to all geometric dp-minimal or open topological fields satisfying the model-companion hypothesis.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial inference: the existence of a model companion is the genuine dividing line; the proof shows that wherever $T_\partial$ exists and satisfies the stated compatibility conditions, the dense-embedding transfer follows purely from the $C^1$-cell decomposition and the Weil pre-group construction.
Editorial inference: the sharp-points characterization suggests that finite-dimensional $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable subgroups of definable abelian varieties in these fields coincide with kernels of definable sections, giving a concrete differential-algebraic test of the theorem.
Editorial inference: the $C^1$-cell decomposition may extend to other geometric tame field theories with a definable V-topology, provided partial derivatives exist almost everywhere and the derivation is compatible with definable correspondences.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

What you should know: this is a serious, careful paper that extends the Peterzil–Pillay–Point results on definable groups in differential expansions from real-closed and p-adically closed fields to a broader class of geometric dp-minimal topological fields. The new technical core is Sections 2–3: a C1-cell decomposition for definable correspondences in dp-minimal not strongly minimal fields, and compatibility results showing that a generic derivation respects these correspondences. Those are genuine new ingredients, not routine adaptations. The Weil pre-group construction is also done cleanly in the abstract setting, and it recovers a definable group rather than just an interpretable one; that is worth something.

The soft spot is exactly what the stress-test says: the main theorems (6.2 and 6.9) for the dp-minimal case are conditional on T(∂) having a model companion T∂. The abstract says this, so the paper is not misleading, and for open theories of large topological fields existence is supplied by Tressl and earlier work. But for dp-minimal non-strongly-minimal fields the paper proves only that if T∂ exists then it has the needed properties (Lemma 3.18). How many dp-minimal fields actually satisfy the hypothesis is not addressed. That leaves the headline result vacuous for any dp-minimal T without a companion, and the paper does not offer a reason to believe there are interesting new examples beyond the already-known open-field cases. This is a limitation, not an internal contradiction; the proof structure is coherent and the dependence is explicitly flagged.

I did not machine-check the dense technical lemmas, but the strategy is sound: Section 4's prolongation and Section 5's pre-group construction follow the established pattern, and the new cell decomposition is used where it is needed. The citation pattern is reasonable; the previous papers [20] and [21] are infrastructure, and the author says as much. I did not find equations that are both input and output.

Who gets value: anyone working on definable groups in differential fields, or on dp-minimal field theories. The C1-cell decomposition alone makes it a useful reference. It deserves a serious referee; my recommendation is to accept it with revisions, asking the author to add an explicit remark on which known dp-minimal fields satisfy the model-companion assumption, and ideally to state the open-field cases as unconditional corollaries.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite-dimensional L∂-definable groups in models of T∂, where T is a complete, model-complete, geometric dp-minimal (not strongly minimal) theory of topological fields of characteristic 0, or an open theory of topological fields, and T∂ is assumed to be a model companion of the theory T(∂) of models of T expanded by a derivation. The main contribution is an axiomatic framework in which a C1-cell decomposition with ∂-compatibility is proved (Propositions 3.15 and 3.19), a Weil pregroup construction is adapted, and Theorems 6.2 and 6.9 show that every finite-dimensional L∂-definable group Γ densely and definably embeds in an L-definable group G, and further in an L-definable D-group whose sharp points recover ∇N(Γ). The proof is explicitly conditional on the existence of T∂ and on hypotheses (A1)–(A2); for open topological fields these are supplied by earlier work, while for dp-minimal fields the paper only proves that if T∂ exists then it has the needed properties.

Significance. If the results stand, they provide a broad abstract generalization of Buium's algebraic D-group construction and of earlier results for real closed, p-adically closed, and algebraically closed valued fields with generic derivations. The C1-cell decomposition with ∂-compatibility in dp-minimal fields (Proposition 3.15) is a genuine technical contribution, as is the clean separation of the pregroup construction from the eventual D-group statement. The paper is also honest about its main hypothesis: Theorem 6.2 and Theorem 6.9 are stated conditionally on the existence of a model companion. However, the advertised dp-minimal scope is materially weaker than the title suggests, because no proof of existence of T∂ for general dp-minimal T is supplied. The significance is therefore real but conditional on either a future companion-existence theorem or an explicit restriction to the known concrete classes.

major comments (3)

[§3.16, §6 (Theorems 6.2 and 6.9)] The central results for dp-minimal fields are conditional on the existence of a model companion T∂, and this existence is never proved. Lemma 3.18 only transfers conditions (A1)–(A2) from an already given T∂; it is not an existence proof. Since every statement in Section 6 and the D-group theorem, including the advertised scope for 'dp-minimal topological fields', inherits this hypothesis, the paper should either prove that such T∂ exists for the relevant dp-minimal theories (for instance via largeness and Tressl's uniform companion when applicable), or explicitly restrict the abstract and title to the classes for which existence is known. As written, the title overstates the proved scope.
[§3.18 (proof of Lemma 3.18)] The proof uses the step: 'Since T∂ is the model-companion of T(∂), we can embed (K,∂*) in a model of T∂, which we may assume to be an elementary extension of (K,∂)'. This is not automatic: (K,∂*) and (K,∂) are different derivations on the same underlying L-structure, and an embedding of (K,∂*) into some model of T∂ does not by itself produce an elementary extension of the original (K,∂). The argument needs a justification, for example via joint embedding or saturation properties of T∂; as it stands, this is a load-bearing gap in the proof that (A1) holds in every model of T∂.
[§6.9 (proof of Theorem 6.9)] The passage from the section s: Y → τ(Y) to a D-group structure on the group G obtained from the Weil pregroup construction is only sketched; the proof says that 'we simply have to extend s on Z to s on {∇N(a1)}×Z'. Theorem 6.9's conclusion is the sharp-points equality {g ∈ G : s(g)=∇(g)} = image of ∇N(Γ), so the construction of s on G and its compatibility with the group law and with the C1-group topology from Proposition 3.21 must be shown. Proposition 6.7 applies to an L-definable group G ⊂ Kn, not directly to the quotient-like group built from germs in the pregroup construction, so this compatibility is not automatic and needs a detailed argument.

minor comments (4)

[Title / Abstract] The typeset title contains the word 'Deriv A tion' with an internal space; this should be corrected to 'Derivation' in the final version.
[Introduction / References] The introduction attributes to 'M. Singer' the result on existentially closed ordered differential fields and cites it as [30], but reference [30] in the bibliography is Simon's 'A guide to NIP theories'. A correct Singer reference appears to be missing; please repair the citation.
[§2.3, proof of Proposition 2.11] In the display in the proof of Proposition 2.11, the equality |fh(x)−Thf(x)| = max{...} should be an inequality (≤) under the non-archimedean norm; as written the equality requires justification and is generally false before taking a suitable norm inequality.
[§3.1, Definition 3.14] The terminology '∂-compatible C1-correspondence' is introduced with a condition on the partial derivatives of f↾Ci∘hi, but the notation f↾Ci∘hi is used before the correspondence hi is explicitly defined as an object; clarifying the composition notation would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main theorems are conditional constructions whose key analytic and pregroup steps are proved in the paper, with self-citations used only as infrastructure.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The paper explicitly assumes that T(∂) has a model companion T∂, and the dp-minimal case is honestly conditional: Lemma 3.18 only shows that this T∂, if it exists, satisfies (A1)–(A2); neither the lemma nor later theorems assert existence without the hypothesis. The genuinely load-bearing new content is proved in the paper: the C^1-cell-decomposition results (Propositions 2.9, 2.11, 3.15), the ∂-compatibility lemmas (3.6, 3.7, 3.13), and the extension of these to cells and pregroups. The Weil pregroup construction in Section 5 is an external classical theorem that the paper reproves in detail. The main group theorem (Theorem 6.2) is obtained by applying this pregroup construction to a pre-group Y built from ∇N(Γ), and the property that L(k)-generic types of Y are realized by differential tuples from Γ is proved in Lemma 4.5 via the model-companion property and the derivation-extension condition (C2), not assumed as the conclusion. The D-group theorem (Theorem 6.9) likewise defines a section with prescribed sharp points by construction; it does not rename an input as an output. Citations to [4], [20], and [21] are used for infrastructure and proof strategy, and [4] is published external work supporting T∂ existence in the open-topological-field cases. No uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The only substantive limitation is that model-companion existence for arbitrary geometric dp-minimal T is not established here; that is a scope condition stated in the hypotheses, not a circular step.

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

The arguments rest on explicit model-theoretic hypotheses (geometric, model-complete, dp-minimal, existence of a model companion, compatibility conditions) and on cited cell-decomposition and implicit-function theorems. No constants are fitted and no new objects are postulated.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption T is a complete, model-complete, geometric theory of topological fields of characteristic 0 that is either dp-minimal and not strongly minimal, or open with a rank-1 complete valued field model.
Primary hypotheses in the abstract and Sections 1-2; the proof is built for exactly this class.
domain assumption T(∂) has a model companion T∂.
Assumed in the abstract and before Definition 3.16; not proved in the dp-minimal case; needed for Section 6.
domain assumption T(∂) satisfies compatibility conditions (C1)-(C3) and T∂ satisfies (A1)-(A2).
Used throughout Sections 4-6; (A1)-(A2) are shown to follow in the concrete classes under the model-companion assumption, but the axiomatic framework takes them as hypotheses.
standard math acl has the exchange property on the field sort (geometricity), giving a dimension function.
Used in Section 2.1 and throughout to define generic elements and pregroups; cited to Hrushovski-Pillay and Johnson-Ye.
standard math Cell decomposition theorems for dp-minimal geometric fields and for open topological fields producing continuous correspondences, together with the strengthened C1 version proved in this paper.
The C1 version is Proposition 3.15 and 3.19 in this paper; the base cell decomposition is from Simon-Walsberg [31] and Cubides Kovacsics-Point [4].
domain assumption The implicit function theorem for complete rank-1 nondiscrete valued fields and its first-order transfer yields C1 implicit functions.
Used in the open-field case in Corollary 2.16, following Abhyankar and Prestel-Ziegler.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of On definable groups in dp-minimal topological fields equipped with a generic derivation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KOQOTXMQ

@misc{pith2026250507044,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: On definable groups in dp-minimal topological fields equipped with a generic derivation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KOQOTXMQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.07044}
}

abstract

Let $T$ be a complete, model-complete, geometric dp-minimal $\mathcal{L}$-theory of topological fields of characteristic $0$ and let $T(\partial)$ be the theory of expansions of models of $T$ by a derivation $\partial$. We assume that $T(\partial)$ has a model-companion $T_{\partial}$. Let $\Gamma$ be a finite-dimensional $\mathcal{L}_\partial$-definable group in a model of $T_\partial$. Then we show that $\Gamma$ densely and definably embeds in an $\mathcal{L}$-definable group $G$. Further, using a $C^1$-cell decomposition result, we show that $\Gamma$ densely and definably embeds in a definable $D$-group, generalizing the classical construction of Buium of algebraic $D$-groups and extending for that class of fields, results obtained in arXiv:2208.08293, arXiv:2305.16747.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

[20]

Point F., On deﬁnable groups in r eal-closed ﬁelds with a generic derivation, and related structures: I, arXiv:2208.08293, submitted

Peterzil K., Pillay, A. Point F., On deﬁnable groups in r eal-closed ﬁelds with a generic derivation, and related structures: I, arXiv:2208.08293, submitted. 44 FRANC ¸ OISE POINT

arXiv
[21]

Point F., On deﬁnable groups and D-groups in certain ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Canad

Peterzil K., Pillay, A. Point F., On deﬁnable groups and D-groups in certain ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Canad. J. Math. Vol. 77 (2), 2025 pp. 459–480

work page 2025
[1]

Abhyankar S.S., Local analytic geometry, Academic Pres s, 1964

work page 1964
[2]

14 (2022), no

Anscombe, S., Jahnke, F., The model theory of Cohen rings , Conﬂuentes Math. 14 (2022), no. 2, 1–28

work page 2022
[3]

Anscombe S., Dittmann P., Jahnke F., Ax-Kochen-Ershov p rinciples for ﬁnitely ramiﬁed henselian ﬁelds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 377 (2024), no. 12, 8963–8988

work page 2024
[4]

Cubides Kovacsics P., Point F., Topological ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Annals Pure and Applied Logic 174 (2023), paper No. 103211

work page 2023
[5]

van den Dries L., Weil’s group chunk theorem: a topologic al setting, Illinois J. Math. 34 (1990), no. 1, 127-139

work page 1990
[6]

Dolich, A., Miller, C., Steinhorn, C., Structures havin g o-minimal open core, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), no. 3, 1371–1411

work page 2010

Show all 34 references

[7]

London Math

Eleftheriou P.E., Pillay’s conjecture for groups deﬁna ble in weakly o-minimal non-valuational struc- tures, Bull. London Math. Soc. 53 (2021) 1205–1219

2021
[8]

Fornasiero A., Dimensions, matroids, and dense pairs of ﬁrst-order structures. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 162 (2011), no. 7, 514–543

2011
[9]

Fornasiero A., Kaplan E., Generic derivations on o-mini mal structures. J. Math. Log. 21 (2021), no. 2, Paper No. 2150007, 45 pp

2021
[10]

Pure Appl

Guzy N., Point F., Topological diﬀerential ﬁelds, Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 161 (2010), no. 4, 570-598

2010
[11]

Hrushovski E., Pillay A., Groups deﬁnable in local ﬁeld s and pseudoﬁnite ﬁelds, Israel Journal of Math., 85 (1994), 203 - 262

1994
[12]

1, 151-165

Jahnke F., Simon P., Walsberg E., Dp-minimal valued ﬁel ds, The Journal of Symbolic Logic 82 (2017), no. 1, 151-165

2017
[13]

Johnson W., The canonical topology on dp-minimal ﬁelds , J. Math. Log. 18 (2018), no. 2, 1850007, 23 pp

2018
[14]

Johnson W., The classiﬁcation of dp-minimal and dp-sma ll ﬁelds, J. Eur. Math. Soc. 25, 467–513 (2023)

2023
[15]

Johnson W., C-minimal ﬁelds have the exchange property , arXiv:2403.17478v2, 2024

2024 arXiv
[16]

Johnson W., Ye Jinhe, A note on geometric theories of ﬁel ds, Model Theory 2 (2023), no.1, 121–132

2023
[17]

499, Springer, Berlin (1975) 384–425

Kochen S., The model theory of local ﬁelds, Lecture Note s in Math., Vol. 499, Springer, Berlin (1975) 384–425

1975
[18]

Lang S., Algebra, Addison, Wesley, Reading, MA, 1965

1965
[19]

Marker D., Manin kernels in Connections between model t heory and algebraic and analytic geom- etry, Quaderni di matematica 6 (2001) 1–21

2001
[22]

Point F., Rideau-Kikuchi, S., On deﬁnable gr oups in geometric ﬁelds with generic deriva- tions, arXiv:2503.13242, 2025

Pillay, A. Point F., Rideau-Kikuchi, S., On deﬁnable gr oups in geometric ﬁelds with generic deriva- tions, arXiv:2503.13242, 2025

2025 arXiv
[23]

of Algebra 204, 108-115, 1998

Pierce D., Pillay A., A Note on the Axioms for Diﬀerentia lly Closed Fields of Characteristic Zero, J. of Algebra 204, 108-115, 1998

1998
[24]

Pure and Applied Algebra 53 (1988) 239-255

Pillay A., On groups and ﬁelds deﬁnable in o-minimal str uctures, J. Pure and Applied Algebra 53 (1988) 239-255

1988
[25]

Pillay A., On ﬁelds deﬁnable in Qp, Arch. Math. Logic (1989)29: 1–7

1989
[26]

Poonen B., Maximally complete valued ﬁelds, Enseign. M ath. (2) 39 (1993), no1-2, 87-106

1993
[27]

Pop F., Embedding problems over large ﬁelds, Annals of M athematics 144 (1996) 1-34

1996
[28]

f¨ ur die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 299 (300) (1978) 318–341

Prestel A., Ziegler M., Model-theoretic methods in the theory of topological ﬁelds, J. f¨ ur die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik 299 (300) (1978) 318–341

1978
[29]

Robinson, A., Zakon, E., Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 96 (196 0), 222–236
[30]

44 of Lecture Note s in Logic, Association for Symbolic Logic, Chicago, IL; Cambridge Scientiﬁc Publishers, Cambr idge, 2015

Simon P., A guide to NIP theories, vol. 44 of Lecture Note s in Logic, Association for Symbolic Logic, Chicago, IL; Cambridge Scientiﬁc Publishers, Cambr idge, 2015

2015
[31]

Formal Logic 60 (2019) no.1, 61-76

Simon, P., Walsberg, E., Tame topology over dp-minimal structures, Notre-Dame J. Formal Logic 60 (2019) no.1, 61-76

2019
[32]

Tressl M., The uniform companion for large diﬀerential ﬁelds of characteristic 0, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 357 (2005) 3933-3951

2005
[33]

J., Model completeness results for expansio ns of the ordered ﬁeld of real numbers by restricted Pfaﬃan functions and the exponential function, J

Wilkie, A. J., Model completeness results for expansio ns of the ordered ﬁeld of real numbers by restricted Pfaﬃan functions and the exponential function, J. Amer. Math. Soc. 9 (1996), no. 4, 1051–1094

1996
[34]

J., Some local deﬁnability theory for holomo rphic functions, London Math

Wilkie, A. J., Some local deﬁnability theory for holomo rphic functions, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 349 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008 , 197–213. Department of Mathematics (De Vinci), UMons, 20, place du P a rc 7000 Mons, Belgium Email address : point@ma...

2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [20]

Point F., On deﬁnable groups in r eal-closed ﬁelds with a generic derivation, and related structures: I, arXiv:2208.08293, submitted

Peterzil K., Pillay, A. Point F., On deﬁnable groups in r eal-closed ﬁelds with a generic derivation, and related structures: I, arXiv:2208.08293, submitted. 44 FRANC ¸ OISE POINT

arXiv

[2] [21]

Point F., On deﬁnable groups and D-groups in certain ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Canad

Peterzil K., Pillay, A. Point F., On deﬁnable groups and D-groups in certain ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Canad. J. Math. Vol. 77 (2), 2025 pp. 459–480

work page 2025

[3] [1]

Abhyankar S.S., Local analytic geometry, Academic Pres s, 1964

work page 1964

[4] [2]

14 (2022), no

Anscombe, S., Jahnke, F., The model theory of Cohen rings , Conﬂuentes Math. 14 (2022), no. 2, 1–28

work page 2022

[5] [3]

Anscombe S., Dittmann P., Jahnke F., Ax-Kochen-Ershov p rinciples for ﬁnitely ramiﬁed henselian ﬁelds, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 377 (2024), no. 12, 8963–8988

work page 2024

[6] [4]

Cubides Kovacsics P., Point F., Topological ﬁelds with a generic derivation, Annals Pure and Applied Logic 174 (2023), paper No. 103211

work page 2023

[7] [5]

van den Dries L., Weil’s group chunk theorem: a topologic al setting, Illinois J. Math. 34 (1990), no. 1, 127-139

work page 1990

[8] [6]

Dolich, A., Miller, C., Steinhorn, C., Structures havin g o-minimal open core, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 362 (2010), no. 3, 1371–1411

work page 2010