Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 2 cited by

Holomorphic 1-forms without zeros on K\"ahler threefolds

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For compact Kähler threefolds, a holomorphic one-form without zeros exists exactly when a real closed one-form without zeros does; the resulting classification proves Kotschick's conjecture in dimension three.

desk verdict Pietig's Kähler threefold classification is a real advance and likely correct, but the main theorem's proof currently depends on an unproved induction that the author himself flags as crucial. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.22067 v1 pith:GDTBW44B submitted 2025-06-27 math.AG math.CVmath.GT

Simon Pietig This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.AGmath.CVmath.GT MSC 32Q1514J3014E3032J27
keywords holomorphicone-formswithoutzerosKählerthreefoldsKotschickconjecturetorusfiberbundlesIitakafibrationWeierstraßmodelsoverthecircleKodairadimension
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 Kotschick's conjecture in dimension three: a compact Kähler threefold admits a holomorphic one-form without zeros exactly when it admits a real closed one-form without zeros (equivalently, by Tischler's theorem, when it is a $C^\infty$-fiber bundle over the circle), and both are equivalent to the cohomological exactness condition (C) introduced in [Sch20]. The proof proceeds by classification. Extending the projective threefold case of [HS21b], the paper shows that any Kähler threefold carrying such a form has a finite étale cover which, after blowing down elliptic curves, becomes a locally trivial fiber bundle whose fibers are positive-dimensional tori, with base a Kähler manifold that itself carries no such form; when the Kodaira dimension is negative, the fibers are instead $\mathbb{P}^1$, $\mathbb{P}^2$, or Hirzebruch surfaces. The decisive difference from the projective case is that a smooth morphism to a positive-dimensional torus need not exist: the product splitting used in [HS21b] has to be replaced by the more flexible notion of a twisted torus fiber bundle $(Y\times A)^\eta\to Y$. The theorem settles the conjecture in dimension three and gives a complete structural description of every Kähler threefold that fibers over the circle.

What carries the argument

The central object is the torus fiber bundle with its twisted Jacobian fibration. A torus fiber bundle $f:X\to Y$ of fiber dimension $g$ is encoded by a variation of Hodge structures $H$ (the local system $R^{2g-1}f_*\mathbb{Z}$ together with its Hodge filtration) and a cohomology class $\eta\in H^1(Y,J_H)$; the total space is the torsor $J^\eta_H$ (Proposition 2.4), and it is Kähler precisely when the Chern class $c(\eta)$ is torsion (Proposition 2.7). The classification feeds the Iitaka fibration of $X$ into the theory of Weierstraß models [Nak87], twisted equivariant Weierstraß models [CHL19], and tautological models [Lin20]: once a finite étale cover has trivialized the monodromy, an elliptic fibration with local meromorphic sections is bimeromorphic to a twisted product $(Y\times E)^\eta$ with diagonal group action by translations (Proposition 2.22). Kollár's flop theorem [Kol89] then upgrades bimeromorphic equivalence to isomorphism of minimal models, so the constructed bundle is literally the minimal model of $X$ rather than merely birational to it. The minimal model program and abundance theorem for Kähler threefolds [HP16], [CHP16] supply the Iitaka fibration, and the Beauville–Bogomolov decomposition [Bea83] handles the $\kappa=0$ case.

What would settle it

A direct test is to take a non-algebraic compact Kähler threefold of Kodaira dimension 2 satisfying condition (C) — for instance a twisted product built from the examples of Remark 2.10 — and compute the local monodromies of its Iitaka elliptic fibration along the discriminant divisor. If some local monodromy fails to be finite, or if no finite étale cover of a log-desingularized base trivializes the monodromy of $R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}$, then the asserted Kähler version of [HS21b, Prop. 5.8] fails and the classification, together with the implication (C)$\Rightarrow$(A), collapses; checking finiteness and the étale trivialization on such an example would confirm the load-bearing step.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.2: for a compact Kähler manifold of dimension 3, the three conditions (A) a holomorphic one-form without zeros, (B) a real closed one-form without zeros, and (C) the existence of a holomorphic one-form $\omega$ such that the cup-product maps $\wedge\tau^*\omega$ are exact on the cohomology of every finite étale cover, are equivalent. The implications (A)$\Rightarrow$(B) and (B)$\Rightarrow$(C) were known, so the new content is (C)$\Rightarrow$(A), obtained through the structure theorem Theorem 1.4: a threefold satisfying (C) has a finite étale cover which, after a sequence of blow-downs along elliptic curves not contracted by the Albanese map, is either a locally trivial fiber bundle over a compact Kähler base with all fibers isomorphic to a positive-dimensional torus (when $\kappa(X)\ge 0$), or a smooth bundle over an elliptic curve with fibers $\mathbb{P}^2$ or a Hirzebruch surface, or a $\mathbb{P}^1$-bundle over a torus-fiber-bundle surface (when $\kappa(X)=-\infty$); in the torus-bundle cases the base does not itself satisfy (C). The induced one-form restricts non-trivially on the torus fibers, which is why it has no zeros. In contrast to the projective case treated in [HS21b], the morphism to a positive-dimensional torus need not exist: the product splitting $X'\simeq S'\times A'$ is replaced by a twisted torus fiber bundle $(Y\times A)^\eta\to Y$, whose Kählerity is governed by the torsion of the Chern class of $\eta$.

Load-bearing premise

The classification rests on the assertion, repeated in Sections 5 and 6, that several technical lemmas proved for projective threefolds in [HS21b] (notably Lem. 2.5, Prop. 5.3, Prop. 5.8, and Lem. 6.1 there) also hold for Kähler threefolds because their proofs allegedly do not use projectivity; if any of them secretly depends on projectivity, the reduction of the Iitaka fibration to a locally trivial torus fiber bundle would break.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Kotschick's conjecture holds for all compact Kähler threefolds: conditions (A), (B), and (C) are equivalent, so a holomorphic one-form without zeros exists exactly when the manifold is a $C^\infty$-fiber bundle over the circle.
  • Every Kähler threefold with a non-vanishing holomorphic one-form is, after a finite étale cover and blow-downs along elliptic curves, a $\mathbb{P}^1$-, $\mathbb{P}^2$-, or Hirzebruch-surface bundle over a locally trivial torus fiber bundle over a Kähler base that itself carries no such form (Theorem 1.4).
  • The structure is refined by Kodaira dimension (Corollary 1.5): for $\kappa=2$ one gets an elliptic fiber bundle over a general-type Kähler surface, for $\kappa=1$ a 2-torus bundle over a curve of genus at least 2 or an elliptic bundle over a Kähler surface of Kodaira dimension 1, and for $\kappa=0$ a product of a torus with a Kähler manifold after a finite étale cover.
  • The non-vanishing form is produced structurally: the form restricts non-trivially on each torus fiber of the constructed bundle and on the elliptic centers of the blow-downs, which is exactly why it has no zeros (Theorem 1.4(iv) and the proof of Theorem 1.2).
  • The obstruction to the projective-style splitting is explicit: twisted products $(Y\times E)^\eta$ with non-torsion class $\eta$ are Kähler and carry a zero-free one-form but admit no smooth morphism to a positive-dimensional torus (Remark 2.10).

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's insistence that the base of the torus bundle fails condition (C) — which Remark 1.6 shows is essential to the no-zeros conclusion — suggests a possible inductive strategy for Kotschick's conjecture in higher dimensions: turn the relevant fibration into a torus fiber bundle over a smaller base that fails (C), then the no-zeros property would follow dimension by dimension.
  • The examples of Remark 2.10 (a general-type Kähler surface with nontrivial $H^1(Y,\mathcal{O}_Y)$, twisted by a non-torsion class) are the minimal demonstrations that the projective splitting must fail; one could test the classification directly on them, checking that they fall into the torus-fiber-bundle case with base failing (C).
  • The load-bearing external input — that the key lemmas of [HS21b] extend verbatim to the Kähler setting — invites a proof audit: tracing each cited lemma (for instance the monodromy trivialization of $R^1f_*\mathbb{Z}$ over a log-desingularized base) would determine whether the classification rests on a genuinely Kähler argument or on an unstated projectivity assumption.
  • Because the classification enumerates all $C^\infty$ circle-bundles among Kähler threefolds, it also answers the purely topological question of which Kähler threefolds admit a real closed 1-form without zeros; pairing the list with characteristic-number obstructions of the kind used in [Kot22] could show which of these bundles are realized by holomorphic forms and which by smooth forms only.
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 studies compact Kähler threefolds satisfying condition (C) from Kotschick's conjecture, i.e. carrying a holomorphic 1-form whose cup product is exact on every finite étale cover. The main Theorem 1.2 asserts that (A), (B), and (C) are equivalent in dimension 3, which would prove Kotschick's conjecture there. The structural Theorem 1.4/7.1 claims that after a finite étale cover and blow-downs, such a threefold admits a smooth morphism to a locally trivial torus fiber bundle over a base that does not satisfy condition (C), with fibers P1, P2, or Hirzebruch surfaces. The proof combines the MMP for Kähler threefolds, abundance, the Beauville–Bogomolov decomposition, and the twisted equivariant Weierstraß/tautological model machinery, extending earlier work of Hao and Schreieder from the projective case.

Significance. If the main theorem is correct, it resolves Kotschick's conjecture in dimension 3 and gives a concrete classification of the threefolds admitting nowhere-vanishing holomorphic 1-forms. The paper engages seriously with the genuinely new Kähler phenomena: unlike the projective case, a smooth morphism to a positive-dimensional torus need not exist, and the author identifies this obstruction explicitly. The manuscript is transparent about several delicate points, notably Remark 1.6 and Remark 6.23, and it builds on substantial established machinery rather than introducing ad hoc assumptions. No circularity or fitted parameters are apparent. The main concerns are not about the overall strategy but about unproved load-bearing assertions concerning the behavior of the holomorphic 1-form under the constructed fibrations and about the claimed Kähler versions of projective results.

major comments (3)
  1. [§7, Theorem 7.1 (and proof of Theorem 1.2)] The final assertion of Theorem 7.1, that the induced form ω_n restricts non-trivially on the fibers of (Y × A)^η → Y, is not proved. The proof of Theorem 1.2 reduces the implication (C) ⇒ (A) to exactly this property, and the proofs of Theorems 5.1 and 6.1 likewise state 'Moreover' clauses asserting non-trivial restriction of the induced form, but the proofs construct the finite étale covers and fibrations without tracing the holomorphic 1-form through the Weierstraß/tautological model constructions. Since Remark 1.6 shows the property is not automatic, this is a load-bearing gap, not a cosmetic one.
  2. [Introduction, Remark 1.6 and Theorem 1.4(ii)–(iii)] The assertion that the base B can be arranged not to satisfy condition (C) 'by an induction argument' is not carried out anywhere in the paper. This arrangement is essential: it is what makes item (iv)—and hence the proof of Theorem 1.2—work. The underlying descent statement, that a pulled-back form with condition (C) on the total space forces condition (C) on the base, is neither stated nor proved. The example X = E^3 in Remark 1.6 shows that without this step the argument fails. A complete induction with base case and descent step should be written out.
  3. [Sections 5–6, Kähler extension of [HS21b]] Several load-bearing results are invoked with the explanation that their proofs 'do not require projectivity of X', but no details are given. This applies to [HS21b, Lem. 2.5, Prop. 5.3, Prop. 5.8] in the proof of Theorem 5.1, to Lemma 6.2, and to parts of Section 6.2 and Section 6.4. These results control the singular fibers, the j-invariants, and the monodromy of the Iitaka fibration, so they are central to the classification. The paper should either reproduce the arguments in the Kähler setting or identify explicitly which steps in [HS21b] use projectivity and why they can be omitted here.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Throughout] The typesetting of arrows and maps is corrupted in the supplied text (for example '/∫hortrightarrow' appears in place of arrows); this should be cleaned up in the final version.
  2. [Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 7.1] The notation for the torus fiber bundle is inconsistent: Theorem 1.4 uses Z := X_min → B, while Theorem 7.1 expresses the same structure as X'_n → (Y × A)^η → Y. The correspondence should be stated explicitly.
  3. [Remark 6.23] The dependence on the external correction [HS25] should be integrated into the main text more clearly, since the remark indicates that a step in the projective predecessor paper was incomplete.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the proof reduces Theorem 1.2 to the asserted restriction property of Theorem 1.4(iv), but the missing arguments are unproved lemmas and an omitted induction (Remark 1.6), i.e., completeness gaps, not self-referential reductions.

full rationale

No circularity. The central implication (C) ⇒ (A) in Theorem 1.2 is reduced to the restriction claim of Theorem 1.4(iv), which is strictly stronger than the conclusion and is not part of condition (C) by construction: a form that is pulled back from a base can satisfy (C) while restricting trivially (Remark 1.6's E³ example), so the route is a substantive geometric lemma rather than a definitional restatement. The supporting machinery (Propositions 2.7, 2.22, 3.3, 4.1 and the surface/threefold classifications) is proven in the paper from cited external work — [Sch20], [HS21b], [Nak87/02], [CHL19], [Lin20], [Cla18], [CP00], [HP16/15], [CHP16/23], [Bea83], [Kol89] — none of which presupposes Kotschick's conjecture, and none of which shares an author with this paper (the paper contains no self-citation at all). No parameter is fitted or renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the author's own prior work. The genuine weaknesses are completeness risks, not circularity: the 'Moreover, ... restricts non-trivially' clauses in Proposition 4.1 and Theorems 5.1, 6.1, and 7.1 are asserted in the statements but never verified in the proofs; Remark 1.6 admits that the crucial arrangement that the base B fails condition (C) rests on an induction argument that is not written out; the needed descent statement (exactness of ∧π*ω_B on the torus bundle forces exactness of ∧ω_B on the base) is nowhere stated; Sections 5–6 extend [HS21b, Lem. 2.5, Prop. 5.3, Prop. 5.8] to the Kähler case by the assertion that their proofs 'do not require projectivity'; and Remark 6.23 documents an independent gap in [HS21b] patched externally in [HS25]. Each of these is an omitted verification or an external-theorem-validity assumption; none exhibits a reduction of the target theorem to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 8 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim depends on a body of established results in the MMP for Kähler threefolds, the abundance theorem, and the classification/Weierstraß machinery for elliptic fibrations; no free parameters are fitted and no new entities are introduced.

assumptions (8)
  • standard math Minimal Model Program for compact Kähler threefolds (Höring-Peternell): existence of minimal models, extremal contractions, Mori fiber spaces.
    Used in Corollary 3.2 and Section 7 to reduce to minimal models or Mori fiber spaces; also in Proposition 3.1. The paper cites [HP16] and [HP15].
  • standard math Abundance theorem for Kähler threefolds (Campana-Höring-Peternell): |mK_X| is base point free for m sufficiently large when K_X is nef.
    Used to construct Iitaka fibrations in Sections 5, 6, 7; cited [CHP16, Thm. 1.1], [CHP23].
  • standard math Beauville-Bogomolov decomposition theorem: a compact Kähler manifold with c1=0 has a finite étale cover that splits into a product of a torus and simply connected factors.
    Used in Corollary 1.5(ii) and in the κ(X)=0 case of Theorem 7.1; cited [Bea83, Thm. 2].
  • standard math Kollár's theorem on flops: bimeromorphic minimal models are connected by flops, and certain extremal contractions are projective.
    Used in Proposition 3.3 and Section 6 to identify minimal models; cited [Kol89, Thm. 4.9].
  • domain assumption Schreieder's classification of compact Kähler surfaces satisfying condition (C).
    Used in Proposition 4.1 to enumerate the possibilities for the base surface; cited [Sch20, Cor. 3.1].
  • domain assumption The theory of (equivariant) Weierstraß models and tautological models, including the classification of elliptic fibrations with meromorphic sections.
    Used heavily in Sections 2.3, 5 and 6 to represent elliptic fibrations by explicit models; cited [Nak87], [Nak02b], [CHL19], [Lin20].
  • standard math Tischler's theorem: a compact manifold admitting a closed real 1-form without zeros is a C-infinity fiber bundle over S^1.
    Used in the introduction to identify condition (B) with fibering over the circle; cited [Tis70].
  • standard math Campana-Peternell's theorem on holomorphic 2-forms on threefolds and quasi-smoothness of Iitaka fibrations.
    Used to establish Theorem 6.6, a key input in Section 6.1; cited [CP00, Thm. 4.2].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Holomorphic 1-forms without zeros on K\"ahler threefolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GDTBW44B

@misc{pith2026250622067,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Holomorphic 1-forms without zeros on K\"ahler threefolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GDTBW44B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.22067}
}
abstract

We classify all smooth compact connected K\"ahler threefolds that admit the structure of a $C^\infty$-fiber bundle over the circle. This generalizes the work of Hao and Schreieder in the projective case. In contrast to the projective case, there cannot always exist a smooth morphism to a positive-dimensional torus. Instead, we show that such a compact K\"ahler threefold admits a finite \'etale cover that is bimeromorphic to a $\mathbb{P}^1$-, $\mathbb{P}^2$-, or Hirzebruch surface-bundle over a locally trivial torus-fiber bundle over a smooth compact connected K\"ahler base. Our results prove Kotschick's conjecture in dimension 3.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Invisible singularities in complex algebraic geometry

    math.AG 2026-08 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

    Morphisms from smooth projective varieties to P^1 can have singular fibers that are topologically invisible, yielding counterexamples to the Fernandez de Bobadilla-Kollar, Kollar-Pardon, Kotschick, and Schreieder conjectures.

  2. Zeros of one-forms and the topology of algebraic maps

    math.AG 2026-07 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    New explicit projective varieties disprove Kotschick's conjecture, the remaining implication of the Bobadilla–Kollár conjecture, and Schreieder's conjecture on zeros of holomorphic one-forms.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

13 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    In: Duke Math. J. 169.14 (2020), pp. 2767–2826. [Mat02] Kenji Matsuki. Introduction to the Mori Program . Universitext. Springer,

    work page 2020

  2. [12]

    url: https://stacks.math.columbia. edu. [Tis70] David Tischler. On fibering certain foliated manifolds over S1. In: Topology 9.2 (1970), pp. 153–154. [Var89] Jean Varouchas. K¨ ahler spaces and proper open morphisms. In: Math. Ann. 283 (1989), pp. 13–52. [Voi02] Claire Voisin. Hodge Theory and Complex Algebraic Geometry . Ed. by Leila Schneps. Vol

    work page 1970

  3. [75]

    Smooth families of tori and linear K¨ ahler groups

    [Cla18] Beno ˆ ıt Claudon. Smooth families of tori and linear K¨ ahler groups. In:Ann. Fac. Sci. Toulouse Math. 27.3 (2018), pp. 477–496. [CHL19] Beno ˆ ıt Claudon, Andreas H¨ oring, and Hsueh-Yung Lin. The fundamental group of compact K¨ ahler threefolds. In:Geom. Topol. 23.7 (2019), pp. 3233–3271. [CHK00] Daryl Cooper, Craig D. Hodgson, and Steven P. Ke...

    work page 2018

  4. [76]

    Press, 2002

    Cambridge Univ. Press, 2002

    work page 2002

  5. [333]

    Zeros of holomorphic one-forms and topology of K¨ ahler manifolds

    [Sch20] Stefan Schreieder. Zeros of holomorphic one-forms and topology of K¨ ahler manifolds. In: Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 2021.8 (2020), pp. 6169–6183. [Sta23] The Stacks project authors. The Stacks project

    work page 2020

  6. [1977]

    Minimal models for K¨ ahler threefolds

    [HP16] Andreas H¨ oring and Thomas Peternell. Minimal models for K¨ ahler threefolds. In: Invent. Math. 203 (2016), pp. 217–264. [HP15] Andreas H¨ oring and Thomas Peternell. Mori Fibre Spaces for K¨ ahler Threefolds. In: J. Math. Sci. Univ. Tokyo 22 (2015), pp. 219–246. [Kol89] J´ anos Koll´ ar. Flops. In: Nagoya Math. J. 113 (1989), pp. 15–36. [Kol86] J...

    work page 2016

  7. [1982]

    Abundance for Kaehler three- folds

    [CHP16] Fr´ ed´ eric Campana, Andreas H¨ oring, and Thomas Peternell. Abundance for Kaehler three- folds. In: Ann. Sci. ´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er.49.4 (2016), pp. 971–1025. [CHP23] Fr´ ed´ eric Campana, Andreas H¨ oring, and Thomas Peternell.Erratum and addendum to the paper: Abundance for K¨ ahler threefolds

    work page 2016

  8. [1999]

    Kodaira dimension and zeros of holomorphic one-forms

    [PS17] Mihnea Popa and Christian Schnell. Kodaira dimension and zeros of holomorphic one-forms. In: Ann. of Math. 179.3 (2017), pp. 1109–1120. [Sai90] Morihiko Saito. Mixed Hodge Modules. In: Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 26 (1990), pp. 221–

    work page 2017

Show all 13 references
  1. [2002]

    Threefolds whose canonical bundles are not numerically effective

    [Mor82] Shigefumi Mori. Threefolds whose canonical bundles are not numerically effective. In: Ann. of Math. 116.1 (1982), pp. 133–176. [Nak02a] Noboru Nakayama. Global Structure of an Elliptic Fibration. In: Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 38.3 (2002), pp. 451–649. [Nak02b] Noboru...

    1982

  2. [2004]

    Vari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes dont la premi` ere classe de Chern est nulle

    [Bea83] Arnaud Beauville. Vari´ et´ es K¨ ahleriennes dont la premi` ere classe de Chern est nulle. In:J. Differential Geom. 18 (1983), pp. 755–782. [Bro82] Kenneth S. Brown. Cohomology of Groups . Graduate Texts in Mathematics

    1983

  3. [2016]

    Finite quotients of three-dimensional complex tori

    [GK20] Patrick Graf and Tim Kirschner. Finite quotients of three-dimensional complex tori. In: Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 70 (2020), pp. 881–914. [Hao23] Feng Hao. Nowhere Vanishing Holomorphic One-Forms on Varieties of Kodaira Codimension One. In: Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN...

    2020

  4. [2023]

    url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2304.10161

    arXiv: 2304.10161 [math.AG]. url: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2304.10161. [CP00] Fr´ ed´ eric Campana and Thomas Peternell. Holomorphic 2-forms on complex threefolds. In: J. Algebraic Geom. 9.2 (2000), pp. 223–264. [Cat07] Fabrizio Catanese. Q.E.D. for algebraic varieties. In: J. D...

    2000 arXiv

  5. [2025]

    44 REFERENCES [HS21a] Feng Hao and Stefan Schreieder

    url: https://www.iag.uni-hannover.de/fileadmin/iag/homepages/ schreieder/publications/Correction_for_nowhere_vanishing_1-forms_on_3-folds_ 2.pdf. 44 REFERENCES [HS21a] Feng Hao and Stefan Schreieder. Equality in the Bogomolov–Miyaoka–Yau inequality in the non-general type case...

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.