Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 34 references

Large-genus asymptotics of saddle connection Siegel-Veech constants

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims a single large-genus asymptotic formula for Siegel–Veech constants in every stratum and every odd, even, or non-hyperelliptic component, with higher multiplicities suppressed by powers of $2g+\ell-3$.

desk verdict Main p>=2 asymptotics rest on a false lemma, but the hyperelliptic component results are likely solid and worth referee time. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.23711 v2 pith:2JMD25KB submitted 2025-05-29 math.GT

Anja Randecker This is my paper
classification math.GT MSC 32G1537E3530F30
keywords Siegel–VeechconstantstranslationsurfacesstrataofAbeliandifferentialslargegenusasymptoticssaddleconnectionsloopsMasur–Veechvolumeshyperellipticcomponents
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 claims that the Siegel–Veech constant counting saddle connections of multiplicity $p$ between two fixed zeros in a stratum of translation surfaces has a single closed asymptotic form for large genus, valid in every stratum and every odd, even, or non-hyperelliptic component. The formula is $(m_1+1)(m_2+1)(\pi^2/6)^{p-1}/(2g+\ell-3)^{2p-2}$ up to relative error $O(1/g)\cdot O(1)^p$, where $m_1,m_2$ are the zero orders, $g$ the genus, and $\ell$ the number of zeros. The paper also proves that at a fixed zero of order $m$, loops of any multiplicity have Siegel–Veech constant $(m+1)^2/2$ up to $O(1/g)$, so the multiplicity-1 contribution dominates. The interest is that these constants are usually obtained from intricate recursion or intersection theory, while the claimed asymptotics are universal and depend only on the elementary data of the zeros. The hyperelliptic components of the strata $\mathcal H(2g-2)$ and $\mathcal H(g-1,g-1)$ are exceptions and are computed separately, with multiplicity 2 of the same order as multiplicity 1.

What carries the argument

The engine is the recursive gluing description of saddle-connection configurations (Theorems 5 and 6): every configuration of multiplicity $p$ is obtained by cutting along the $p$ homologous saddle connections and gluing $p$ lower-dimensional strata, with possible cylinders for loops, so each configuration contributes a factor $\prod_i \mu(\mathcal H_i)/\mu(\mathcal H)$ times a factorial dimension term $\prod_i(d_i/2-1)!/(d/2-2)!$ and symmetry factors $1/(|\Gamma||\Gamma_-|)$. The volume asymptotic of Equation (1), $\mu(\mathcal H)\sim 4/\prod_n(m_n+1)$, is combined with the volume $\pi^2/3$ of the trivial stratum $\mathcal H(0)$ to evaluate the dominant configuration (all but one subsurface equal to $\mathcal H(0)$), producing the factor $(\pi^2/6)^{p-1}$ and the factorial ratio that becomes $(2g+\ell-3)^{2-2p}$ via the Stirling-type estimate of Lemma 5.9. The argument then proves that every non-dominant configuration contributes at most $(\prod(m_i+1))/(2g+\ell-3)^{2p-2}\cdot O(1)^p$, so the dominant term survives; this last step is where the combinatorial Lemma 5.5 is used.

What would settle it

A direct check: with $p=2$, $r=0$, $A=6$, $A_1=A_2=3$, Lemma 5.3 asserts $(6!)(6!)\le 3!\cdot 6!$, which is false. Since Lemma 5.5 uses Lemma 5.3 in Case 5 of its proof to bound the contribution of partitions whose largest parts stay away from the extremes, the proof of the bound on non-dominant configurations has a concrete unsupported step; a corrected Lemma 5.3 (or a different proof of Lemma 5.5) is therefore needed for Theorem 10.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 10: in any stratum, or any odd, even, or non-hyperelliptic component of a stratum, a saddle connection of multiplicity $p$ between fixed zeros of orders $m_1$ and $m_2$ can exist only for $p\le \min\{m_1,m_2\}+1$, and its Siegel–Veech constant is $$c = (m_1+1)(m_2+1)\left(\frac{\$pi^{2}$}{6}\right)^{p-1}\frac{1}{(2g+\ell-3)^{2p-2}}\left(1+O\left(\frac{1}{g}\right)O(1)^p\right).$$ For loops at a fixed zero of order $m$, Proposition 7.2 and Theorem 11 give the bound $c = (m+1)(m-2p+1)(2g+\ell-3)^{2-2p}O(1)^p$ for multiplicity $p\le m/2$, and Corollary 7.4 sums over multiplicities to obtain $c = (m+1)^2/2\cdot(1+O(1/g))$ for loops of any multiplicity. The hyperelliptic components of $\mathcal H(2g-2)$ and $\mathcal H(g-1,g-1)$ behave differently: generic surfaces there have no configurations of multiplicity greater than two, and Propositions 8.1, 9.1, and 9.2 give exact leading constants of order $g^2$ with numerical coefficients built from $1/\pi$, so the multiplicity-2 term is comparable to the multiplicity-1 term.

Load-bearing premise

The central estimate that the sum of all non-dominant configurations is negligible is carried by a bound (Lemma 5.5) whose proof applies a subsidiary inequality (Lemma 5.3) that is not true as stated; if that bound cannot be repaired, the leading-order closed formula in Theorem 10 is not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any stratum with $\ell$ zeros and large genus, the number of saddle connections of multiplicity 1 between fixed zeros of orders $m_1,m_2$ is $(m_1+1)(m_2+1)$ times the universal factor $\pi L^2$, so the geometry of the zero set alone sets the leading count.
  • Multiplicity $p\ge 2$ contributes only a fraction $(\pi^2/6)^{p-1}/(2g+\ell-3)^{2p-2}$ of the multiplicity-1 count, so counting individual saddle connections and counting homology classes become asymptotically identical in large genus for distinct zeros.
  • At a fixed zero, loops of all multiplicities fuse into $(m+1)^2/2$, meaning the quadratic growth of loop counts is governed by the multiplicity-1 constant even when higher-multiplicity configurations exist.
  • The hyperelliptic components are the only exceptions: there multiplicity 2 is comparable to multiplicity 1, with constants like $(2/\pi+2/\pi^2)g^2$ and $(3/2-2/\pi-2/\pi^2)g^2$ in the minimal stratum, so any application that needs all components must treat these separately.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: if Theorem 10 is right, the same dominant-configuration mechanism suggests a calculable next-order correction, proportional to $(\pi^2/6)^{p-1}/(2g+\ell-3)^{2p-1}$ times a polynomial in $\ell,m_1,m_2$; the paper does not compute this term, but a direct expansion of the factorial ratios would test it.
  • Editorial inference: the error term $O(1)^p$ makes the formula reliable for multiplicities up to about $\log g$, which could matter in random-surface models where rare high-multiplicity connections influence homological or spectral statistics.
  • Editorial inference: the same dominant-configuration scheme, with the volume of the trivial stratum replaced by the relevant quadratic-differential volume, would produce conjectural large-genus asymptotics for saddle-connection constants of quadratic differentials, a setting the paper explicitly leaves to future work.
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 derives large-genus asymptotics for saddle connection Siegel–Veech constants, extending known results for connected strata to all strata and to odd/even/non-hyperelliptic components, and to higher multiplicities for saddle connections between distinct zeros and for loops. The main tool is the Eskin–Masur–Zorich recursive formula, combined with known Masur–Veech volume asymptotics. Section 5 collects combinatorial estimates, Sections 6 and 7 state the main asymptotics for distinct zeros and loops, and Sections 8 and 9 give explicit large-genus constants for the hyperelliptic components of the minimal stratum and of H(g−1,g−1). The paper contains a lookup table of the resulting constants in Section 10.

Significance. If correct, the paper would fill a genuine gap by giving a uniform statement for non-connected strata and for all multiplicities, including the assertion that loop Siegel–Veech constants of any multiplicity agree with the multiplicity-1 constant to leading order. The paper is written as a derivation from established external results: no parameters are fitted and no circular use of the target constants occurs. The treatment of the hyperelliptic components, in particular the explicit constants in Propositions 8.1, 9.1 and 9.2, is a concrete strength. However, the central combinatorial estimates used to control non-dominant configurations are defective, so the main asymptotic formulas for multiplicity p≥2 are not established as written.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5, Lemma 5.3] Lemma 5.3 is false as stated. For p=2, r=0, A=6, A_1=A_2=3, the hypothesis A_i≤A−3 holds but the claimed inequality gives (6!)^2 ≤ 3!·6!, which is false. The induction step is invalid: applying the induction hypothesis to the first p−1 terms leaves A_p controlled only by A_p≤A−3, not by A_p≤3, so the final line of the proof does not follow. This lemma is used in Case 5 of the proof of Lemma 5.5, where the inequality ∏(e_i+3)! ≤ 4!^{s−1}(D−s+1)! is invoked; the same counterexample with D=10, s=3, e=(4,3,3) violates that Case 5 bound. Since Lemma 5.5 is the tool that bounds non-dominant configurations, Theorem 10 and the loop results that depend on it are not supported.
  2. [Section 5, Lemma 5.2] Lemma 5.2 is also false as stated. For p=2, r=0, ℓ=(1,1), a=(1,1), the left side equals 3!·3!·(1/1!)(1/1!) = 36, while the right side equals (6/2)·2!·2! = 12. The same discrepancy persists for r=1, the value used in Theorem 10. The proof does not establish the displayed inequality: the binomial estimate gives ∏ C(2ℓ_i+a_i,ℓ_i) ≤ C(Σ(2ℓ_i+a_i),Σℓ_i), and multiplying by ∏(ℓ_i+a_i+r)! yields a factor of the binomial coefficient, not the ratio (Σ(2ℓ_i+a_i))/Σℓ_i that appears in the statement. The missing factor is used in the subsequent simplification in the proofs of Theorem 10 and Proposition 7.2, so the dimension-term bounds there are not justified.
  3. [Sections 6 and 7, Theorem 10 and Proposition 7.2] Because Lemmas 5.2 and 5.3 are false, the bound on the sum over non-dominant configurations is unproven. In Theorem 10 the non-dominant contribution is claimed to be smaller than the dominant term by a factor of order 1/g; the proof achieves this exactly through Lemma 5.5, whose Case 5 relies on the false Lemma 5.3, and through the dimension simplification based on the false Lemma 5.2. Consequently the main formula for multiplicity p≥2, the subsequent corollary for all multiplicities, Proposition 7.2, and Corollary 7.4 are not established as written. The p=1 case and the hyperelliptic component results that use Lemmas 5.6 and 5.7 may still be correct, but the central claim for higher multiplicities requires a repaired combinatorial estimate.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 7, Proposition 7.1] The text contains a typo: “non-conneted” should be “non-connected”.
  2. [Section 5, Lemma 5.5 proof] In the final summation of the five cases, the constant is written as C^s_1 on one line and C^s_1 in the next; the definition of C_1 and its independence from s and D should be made explicit.
  3. [Section 6, Equation (14)] The summation over p includes the factor p, which is fine for the asymptotic, but the displayed expression for p=1 in the preceding line already contains a factor (m_1+1)(m_2+1); the reader would benefit from a sentence explaining that the factor p is absorbed into the error term of order O(1/g).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation chains use external volume asymptotics and EMZ03 recursive formulas, with no fitted parameters or self-referential definitions.

full rationale

The paper's central formulas (Theorem 10, Propositions 7.2, 7.5, 8.1, 9.1, 9.2) are obtained by algebraically combining independent external results: the Masur–Veech volume asymptotic μ(H)=4/(∏(m_n+1))(1+O(1/g)) (Aggarwal 2020, Equation (1)), the odd/even volume comparability (CMSZ20, Equation (2)), the hyperelliptic volume formulas (AEZ16, Equations (3)–(4)), and the Eskin–Masur–Zorich recursive formulas (Theorems 5 and 6). These inputs do not contain the target constants: the EMZ03 formulas express a Siegel–Veech constant as a ratio of volumes times combinatorial factors, and the volume asymptotics are for the strata themselves, not for the saddle-connection counts. Propositions 4.1 and 4.2 then supply error estimates for dominant and non-dominant configurations, and Theorem 10 and later results sum over finitely many configurations; no free parameter is fitted to any datum and no claimed asymptotic is assumed in its own proof. The paper does cite prior work heavily, including standard results in the field, but there is no load-bearing self-citation chain: the cited volume theorems are proven elsewhere and are not invoked to define the predicted constants. The false-seeming Lemma 5.3 is a correctness concern for the non-dominant error bound, not a circularity: a false lemma does not make the derivation equivalent to its input. Accordingly, the analysis finds no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new free parameters and no new entities. It develops the argument from established volume asymptotics and the EMZ03 recurrence. The only additional assumptions are standard analytic estimates (Stirling, binomial bounds) and the combinatorial lemmas proved in Section 5, which are supposed to be part of the derivation but contain an error.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Masur-Veech volume asymptotics for strata of Abelian differentials, Eq (1): mu(H(m1,...,ml)) = 4 / prod(m_i+1) * (1 + O(1/g)).
    Used throughout as the input volume estimate for the main stratum H, following Aggarwal (2020).
  • domain assumption Comparison of odd and even component volumes, Eq (2): mu(H_odd)/mu(H_even) = 1 + O(1/g).
    Used in Propositions 4.1 and 4.2 to handle spin-structure components, from CMSZ20 and CMZ24.
  • domain assumption Hyperelliptic component volume formulas for H_hyp(2g-2) and H_hyp(g-1,g-1), Eqs (3)-(6), from AEZ16.
    Used to compute explicit constants in Sections 8 and 9.
  • domain assumption Eskin-Masur-Zorich recursive formulas for Siegel-Veech constants, Theorems 5 and 6, and their hyperelliptic versions Theorems 7-9.
    The core machinery that expresses Siegel-Veech constants in terms of volumes of lower strata; the paper builds all its new formulas on these.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Large-genus asymptotics of saddle connection Siegel-Veech constants." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2JMD25KB

@misc{pith2026250523711,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Large-genus asymptotics of saddle connection Siegel-Veech constants},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2JMD25KB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.23711}
}
read the original abstract

Siegel-Veech constants are powerful tools for counting saddle connections on a translation surface. Their computation can be involved, most famously with recursive formulas that use intricate combinatorics or intersection theory. From these formulas, asymptotics of Siegel-Veech constants for growing genus can be extracted. We extend the known asymptotics to all strata and to all multiplicities of saddle-connections between distinct zeros and of loops.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.23711 by the authors.

Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. The three types of surfaces with boundary: obtained by a slit construction, by a figure-eight construction, and by a two-hole construction (from left to right). The boundaries of the surfaces that we obtain are then glued, either directly between two surfaces with boundary or with one of the 𝑞 cylinders in between. Note that slit constructions can only be combined with other slit constructions, whereas figure-eight … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

34 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    David Aulicino, Aaron Calderon, Carlos Matheus, Nick Salter, and Martin Schmoll, Siegel--Veech Constants for Cyclic Covers of Generic Translation Surfaces , arXiv:2409.06600, 2024

    work page arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    2, 149--161

    Amol Aggarwal, Vincent Delecroix, \'E lise Goujard, Peter Zograf, and Anton Zorich, Conjectural large genus asymptotics of Masur - Veech volumes and of area Siegel - Veech constants of strata of quadratic differentials , Arnold Mathematical Journal 6 (2020), no. 2, 149--161

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Jayadev S. Athreya, Alex Eskin, and Anton Zorich, Right-angled billiards and volumes of moduli spaces of quadratic differentials on \( C P^1\) , Annales Scientifiques de l' \'E cole Normale Sup \'e rieure. Quatri \`e me S \'e rie 49 (2016), no. 6, 1311--1386

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    5, 1295--1324

    Amol Aggarwal, Large genus asymptotics for Siegel--Veech constants , Geometric and Functional Analysis 29 (2019), no. 5, 1295--1324

    work page 2019

  5. [5]

    4, 941--989, With an appendix by Anton Zorich

    , Large Genus Asymptotics for Volumes of Strata of Abelian Differentials , Journal of the American Mathematical Society 33 (2020), no. 4, 941--989, With an appendix by Anton Zorich

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    3, 897--1010

    , Large genus asymptotics for intersection numbers and principal strata volumes of quadratic differentials, Inventiones Mathematicae 226 (2021), no. 3, 897--1010

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    9, 1735--1779, With an appendix by Ga \"e tan Borot , Alessandro Giacchetto and Danilo Lewanski

    Dawei Chen, Martin Möller, and Adrien Sauvaget, Masur- Veech volumes and intersection theory: the principal strata of quadratic differentials , Duke Mathematical Journal 172 (2023), no. 9, 1735--1779, With an appendix by Ga \"e tan Borot , Alessandro Giacchetto and Danilo Lewanski

    work page 2023

  8. [8]

    1, 283--373

    Dawei Chen, Martin Möller, Adrien Sauvaget, and Don Zagier, Masur- Veech volumes and intersection theory on moduli spaces of abelian differentials , Inventiones Mathematicae 222 (2020), no. 1, 283--373

    work page 2020

Show all 34 references
  1. [9]

    4, 1059--1163

    Dawei Chen , Martin Möller , and Don Zagier , Quasimodularity and large genus limits of Siegel-Veech constants , Journal of the American Mathematical Society 31 (2018), no. 4, 1059--1163

    2018

  2. [10]

    3, 1017--1059

    Matteo Costantini, Martin M \"o ller, and Jonathan Zachhuber, The area is a good enough metric, Annales de l'Institut Fourier 74 (2024), no. 3, 1017--1059

    2024

  3. [11]

    Eduard Duryev, Elise Goujard, and Ivan Yakovlev, Volumes of odd strata of quadratic differentials, 2025, arXiv:2502.13121, pp. 1--49

    2025 arXiv

  4. [12]

    12, 2633--2718

    Vincent Delecroix, \'E lise Goujard, Peter Zograf, and Anton Zorich, Masur- Veech volumes, frequencies of simple closed geodesics, and intersection numbers of moduli spaces of curves , Duke Mathematical Journal 170 (2021), no. 12, 2633--2718

    2021

  5. [13]

    Alex Eskin, Maxim Kontsevich, and Anton Zorich, Sum of Lyapunov exponents of the Hodge bundle with respect to the Teichm \"u ller geodesic flow , Publications Math \'e matiques 120 (2014), 207--333

    2014

  6. [14]

    2, 443--478

    Alex Eskin and Howard Masur, Asymptotic formulas on flat surfaces, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 21 (2001), no. 2, 443--478

    2001

  7. [15]

    Alex Eskin , Howard Masur , and Anton Zorich , Moduli spaces of Abelian differentials: the principal boundary, counting problems, and the Siegel-Veech constants , Publications Math\'ematiques, Institut des Hautes \'Etudes Scientifiques 97 (2003), 61--179

    2003

  8. [16]

    1, 59--103

    Alex Eskin and Andrei Okounkov, Asymptotics of numbers of branched coverings of a torus and volumes of moduli spaces of holomorphic differentials, Inventiones Mathematicae 145 (2001), no. 1, 59--103

    2001

  9. [17]

    4, 481--488

    Alex Eskin and Anton Zorich, Volumes of strata of abelian differentials and Siegel -- Veech constants in large genera , Arnold Mathematical Journal 1 (2015), no. 4, 481--488

    2015

  10. [18]

    Heinz Huber, Zur analytischen Theorie hyperbolischer Raumformen und Bewegungsgruppen , Mathematische Annalen 138 (1959), 1--26

    1959

  11. [19]

    II , Mathematische Annalen 142 (1961), 385--398

    , Zur analytischen Theorie hyperbolischer Raumformen und Bewegungsgruppen . II , Mathematische Annalen 142 (1961), 385--398

    1961

  12. [20]

    3, 631--678

    Maxim Kontsevich and Anton Zorich, Connected components of the moduli spaces of abelian differentials with prescribed singularities, Inventiones mathematicae 153 (2003), no. 3, 631--678

    2003

  13. [21]

    Second Series 115 (1982), 169--200

    Howard Masur, Interval exchange transformations and measured foliations, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 115 (1982), 169--200

    1982

  14. [22]

    Drasin, I

    , Lower bounds for the number of saddle connections and closed trajectories of a quadratic differential, Holomorphic Functions and Moduli I (D. Drasin, I. Kra, C. J. Earle, A. Marden, and F. W. Gehring, eds.), Springer New York, 1988, pp. 215--228

    1988

  15. [23]

    1, 151--176

    , The growth rate of trajectories of a quadratic differential, Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems 10 (1990), no. 1, 151--176

    1990

  16. [24]

    Second Series 168 (2008), no

    Maryam Mirzakhani, Growth of the number of simple closed geodesics on hyperbolic surfaces, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 168 (2008), no. 1, 97--125

    2008

  17. [25]

    thesis, Heidelberg University, https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/35709/, 2024

    Maurice Reichert, Geometric invariants and asymptotics of translation surfaces, Ph.D. thesis, Heidelberg University, https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/35709/, 2024

    2024

  18. [26]

    6, 1756--1779

    Adrien Sauvaget, Volumes and Siegel - Veech constants of \( H (2G - 2)\) and Hodge integrals , Geometric and Functional Analysis 28 (2018), no. 6, 1756--1779

    2018

  19. [27]

    20, 15894--15910

    , The large genus asymptotic expansion of Masur - Veech volumes , International Mathematics Research Notices 2021 (2021), no. 20, 15894--15910

    2021

  20. [28]

    Second Series 46 (1945), 340--347

    Carl Ludwig Siegel, A mean value theorem in geometry of numbers, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 46 (1945), 340--347

    1945

  21. [29]

    thesis, University of Texas at Austin, https://hunter-vallejos.com/s/Hunter\_Dissertation\_Final.pdf, 2024

    Hunter Vallejos, Random geometric structures on high genus surfaces, Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, https://hunter-vallejos.com/s/Hunter\_Dissertation\_Final.pdf, 2024

    2024

  22. [30]

    Veech, Gauss measures for transformations on the space of interval exchange maps, Annals of Mathematics

    William A. Veech, Gauss measures for transformations on the space of interval exchange maps, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 115 (1982), 201--242

    1982

  23. [31]

    Second Series 148 (1998), no

    , Siegel measures, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 148 (1998), no. 3, 895--944

    1998

  24. [32]

    Proceedings of the conference, Bonn, Germany, May 1--July 31, 2004, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2005, pp

    Yaroslav Vorobets, Periodic geodesics on generic translation surfaces, Algebraic and topological dynamics. Proceedings of the conference, Bonn, Germany, May 1--July 31, 2004, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2005, pp. 205--258

    2004

  25. [33]

    Di Yang, Don Zagier, and Youjin Zhang, Masur- Veech volumes of quadratic differentials and their asymptotics , Journal of Geometry and Physics 158 (2020), 12, Id/No 103870

    2020

  26. [34]

    Anton Zorich, Square tiled surfaces and Teichm \"u ller volumes of the moduli spaces of Abelian differentials , Rigidity in dynamics and geometry. Contributions from the programme Ergodic theory, geometric rigidity and number theory, Isaac Newton Institute for the Mathematical...

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.