Representation stability for moduli spaces of admissible covers

Megan Chang-Lee; Philip Tosteson; Siddarth Kannan

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 17 references

Representation stability for moduli spaces of admissible covers

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 fixed abelian group A, the rational homology of moduli spaces of pointed admissible A-covers is a finitely generated module over a combinatorial category, generated in degree at most g+5i.

desk verdict The paper's main theorem rests on a false component classification for genus-zero admissible covers; the module action is not well-defined, though the inductive strategy is promising. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.22640 v1 pith:QTDH2IRZ submitted 2025-06-27 math.AG math.GT

Megan Chang-Lee , Siddarth Kannan , Philip Tosteson This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.AGmath.GT MSC 14H1014H3014D2320C30

keywords representationstabilityadmissiblecoversmodulispacescombinatorialcategoriesfinitegenerationrationalgeneratingfunctionsmappingclassgroupalgebraicstacks

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 representation stability result for the rational homology of moduli spaces of pointed admissible $A$-covers, where $A$ is a finite abelian group and the number of marked points grows. The main theorem gives the sequence of homology groups $H_i(M^A_{g,X}(\ell_X); \mathbb{Q})$ the structure of a finitely generated module over a combinatorial category of finite sets labelled by $A$, with generators living on sets of size at most $g+5i$. A direct consequence is that the generating function recording the dimensions of these homology groups is rational, with poles constrained to the set $\{-1, -\frac12, \ldots, -\frac{1}{|A|^2(g+5i)}\}$. The result also covers unpointed admissible covers, and in the trivial-group case it improves previous stability bounds for the Deligne–Mumford compactification $\overline{M}_{g,n}$ from quadratic to linear in genus and homology degree. If correct, it shows that the homology of these moduli spaces in each degree is determined by a finite amount of data on small marking sets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing device is the combinatorial category $\widehat{FWS}_A$, a generalization of the category of finite sets and surjections: objects are $A$-labelled finite sets, and a morphism from $(X,\ell_X)$ to $(Y,\ell_Y)$ is a surjection $f: X \to Y$ with the sum-of-labels condition $\sum_{x\in f^{-1}(y)} \ell_X(x) = \ell_Y(y)$, together with an arbitrary pointing function $g: X \to A$ that twists the induced map. The homology groups form a functor on the opposite category via gluing maps that attach a canonical genus-zero admissible cover to the fibres of a surjection; the connected component of that genus-zero cover is fixed by transition data (Lemma 5.2), which makes the action well-defined. Finite generation is proved by induction on $(i,g)$ using a surjective gluing map $\tau_{i,g}$ built from suspension operations and convolution tensor products on the category; the degrees at which $\tau_{i,g}$ is surjective are controlled by the known bound on the virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group, and purity of the weight filtration turns the geometric surjection into a homology surjection. This mechanism converts a geometric stabilization statement into a combinatorial finite-generation statement whose Hilbert-series consequences come from the representation theory of categories of finite sets and surjections.

What would settle it

Exhibit two genus-zero admissible $A$-covers of the same labelled set $(X,\ell_X)$ whose transition data $b_{x_1,x_2}$ agree for every pair but that lie in different connected components of $M^A_{0,X}(\ell_X)$; such a pair would invalidate Lemma 5.2 and with it the well-definedness of the $\widehat{FWS}_A^{op}$ action. A direct check for a small group such as $A=\mathbb{Z}/2$ with four marked points would settle the foundation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is Theorem B: for fixed homology degree $i$ and genus $g$, the assignment $(X, \ell_X) \mapsto H_i(M^A_{g,X}(\ell_X); \mathbb{Q})$ is a finitely generated module over the opposite of the combinatorial category $\widehat{FWS}_A$, generated in degree at most $g+5i$ (and in degree 1 when $(i,g)=(0,0)$). Objects of $\widehat{FWS}_A$ are finite sets $X$ with a labelling $\ell_X: X \to A$; morphisms are compatible surjections with an additional pointing twist, and the action on homology comes from gluing a fixed genus-zero admissible cover onto a given cover. The paper derives Theorem A: the rank generating function $\sum_n \dim H_i(M^A_{g,n}; \mathbb{Q})\, t^n$ is rational of the form $P(t)/\prod_{j=1}^{(g+5i)|A|^2} (1+jt)^{d_j}$, and Corollaries C and D give finite generation and rational multivariate generating functions for the unpointed spaces $\mathrm{Adm}^A_{g,X}(\ell_X)$. The authors emphasize that the degree bound $g+5i$ is linear, improving the earlier quadratic bound for the moduli space of curves $\overline{M}_{g,n}$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction depends on the claim, cited from a companion paper rather than proved here, that a genus-zero admissible cover is determined up to connected component by the pairwise transition data among its marked points; if that classification were wrong, the gluing maps defining the module action would not be well-defined.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For any fixed $A$, $g$, and $i$, all but finitely many of the vector spaces $H_i(M^A_{g,X}(\ell_X); \mathbb{Q})$ are spanned by pullbacks from smaller labelling sets, so the whole sequence is determined by data in degree at most $g+5i$.
The rank generating function of $H_i(M^A_{g,n}; \mathbb{Q})$ is rational with poles in the set $\{-1, -\frac12, \ldots, -\frac{1}{|A|^2(g+5i)}\}$.
The same finite generation, with degree multiplied by $|A|$, holds for the unpointed admissible-cover spaces $\mathrm{Adm}^A_{g,X}(\ell_X)$, giving rational multivariate generating functions with explicit denominator structure.
In the trivial-group case $A=1$, the result recovers $\overline{M}_{g,n}$ and improves the known generation-degree bound for its homology as a module over the category of finite sets and surjections from quadratic to linear in $g$ and $i$.
The module structure also carries representation-theoretic information: after summing over labelings, the homology yields a sequence of $S_n$-representations governed by the theory of finitely generated modules over the category of finite sets and surjections.

Reading between the lines

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

A direct verification of the cited component classification for genus-zero admissible covers would settle the foundation of the main theorem; the inductive argument itself is otherwise self-contained, so the $g+5i$ bound would survive refinements elsewhere.
The linear bound suggests that the homology of $M^A_{g,X}(\ell_X)$ can be presented by generators of a topological nature (for instance, decorated stable graphs) numbering at most about $g+5i$; finding such presentations could yield closed formulas for the rank generating functions for small $g$ and $i$.
The construction of $\widehat{FWS}_A$ is specific to abelian $A$; a stability statement for non-abelian groups $G$ would need a classification of connected components of $M^G_{0,n}$, which the paper identifies as the natural next step. Testing the machinery on cyclic groups, where transition data can be made explicit, would be the cheapest check of the approach's scope.
Because the proof uses purity of the weight filtration, a parallel statement for compactly supported or intersection cohomology, where a different weight property governs the surjection, would test how much of the method is specific to ordinary rational homology.

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

The headline is simple: the central construction looks unsound. Theorem B rests on Lemma 5.2, which claims the connected component of a point in M^A_{0,X}(ℓ_X) is determined by the pairwise transition data b_{x1,x2} in A/⟨ℓ_X(x)⟩. That quotient is too coarse. Take A=V4, X={1,2,3}, ℓ=(e1,e2,e1+e2). The labels generate A, so the quotient is trivial and every cover has the same b-data. But a genus-zero V4-cover branched at three points is a conic; over each branch point the fiber has two points, so there are 8 choices of one lift per branch point, and the diagonal V4 action on these triples is free. Hence there are two non-isomorphic pointed covers, i.e., two connected components. Lemma 5.2 puts them in one. Definition 6.1 then gives V_{0,0}(X)=Q for this object while H_0 is Q^2. Since the gluing maps φ_{(f,g)*} are only well-defined if the connected component Ty is uniquely determined by (f,g), the ^FWS^op_A-module structure is not well-defined. The authors cite [BCK24, Prop 2.4] for the lemma, but either the citation is wrong or the proposition is being applied outside its hypotheses.

What is genuinely good: the inductive framework is novel and attractive. The categories FWSA and ^FWSA are a natural extension of Sam–Snowden, and the argument via τ_{i,g} using Harer's vcd and Deligne purity is a real idea that would explain a linear bound. The algebra sections (3,4) are carefully written. The claimed improvement from O(gi+i^2) to g+5i is the kind of result people want.

The soft spots beyond Lemma 5.2: Proposition 6.4 has a compressed step identifying the pure part of boundary homology; it may be fixable but needs unpacking. The paper also relies on several cited results without proof, which is normal but becomes a problem when one of them is wrong.

Bottom line: this paper should go to peer review because the error is specific and the approach may be salvageable, but as it stands the main theorem is not established. A serious referee should catch this counterexample or an equivalent one. The authors need to either fix the classification of components (perhaps adding the actual lift data to the invariant) or change the construction of the module action.

For a reading group, it is a useful case study in how a beautiful framework can hinge on a small but false structural lemma.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper introduces combinatorial categories FWSA and ^FWSA whose objects are A-labelled finite sets, and proposes to make the rational homology groups H_i(M^A_{g,X}(ℓ_X);Q) into a ^FWS^op_A-module by gluing genus-zero admissible covers. The main structural result, Theorem B, asserts finite generation of this module in degree at most g+5i; Theorem A and Corollaries C and D then derive rationality and pole bounds for the associated rank generating functions. The proof is inductive: the suspension map of Proposition 4.4 is compared with geometric gluing maps, Harer's vcd bound supplies surjectivity in high degree, and the component classification of genus-zero admissible covers quoted as Lemma 5.2 is used to make the gluing maps well-defined.

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a substantial strengthening of the effective representation stability results for M_{g,n} and the first effective finite-generation theorem for homology of moduli spaces of pointed admissible A-covers, with an appealing and conceptually simple inductive strategy. The category-theoretic framework is natural, the algebraic sections are developed in detail, and the paper is transparent about its reliance on [BCK24] for the component classification. However, the central construction of the module structure depends on a component classification that I believe is false; the main theorems are therefore not established in the present form.

major comments (3)

[§5, Lemma 5.2] Lemma 5.2 is false. Let A=V4, X={1,2,3}, and ℓ_X=(e1,e2,e1+e2). Since the labels generate A, the quotient A/⟨ℓ_X(x)|x∈X⟩ is trivial, so every genus-zero cover has the same transition data b_{x1,x2}=0. The underlying unpointed V4-cover of P1 branched at three points is unique and connected; a pointed cover is a choice of one of the two lifts over each of the three branch points. There are 8 such choices, and the diagonal V4-action on them is free because ⋂_x⟨ℓ_X(x)⟩=0, so there are exactly two isomorphism classes. Since M_{0,3} is a point, these two classes are two distinct connected components of M^A_{0,3}(ℓ_X). Thus condition (2) of Lemma 5.2 holds for covers lying in different components, contradicting condition (1).
[§5, Definition 5.3 and equation (7)] Because Lemma 5.2 is false, the connected component T_y of M^A_{0,f^{-1}(y)⊔y}(ℓ_X|f^{-1}(y), -ℓ_Y(y)) is not determined by the transition datum g|_{f^{-1}(y)}. This failure is load-bearing for the module action. Concretely, let X={1,2,3,4}, Y={y,z}, ℓ_X(1)=e1, ℓ_X(2)=e2, ℓ_X(3)=ℓ_X(4)=0, ℓ_Y(y)=e1+e2, ℓ_Y(z)=0, and let f:X→Y be the surjection with f^{-1}(y)={1,2} and f^{-1}(z)={3,4}. For any pointing g, the space T_y is M^A_{0,3}(e1,e2,e1+e2), which has two connected components, although all transition data are trivial. Hence the gluing map φ_{(f,g)*}, and therefore the homology map (f,g)_*, is not well-defined independently of the omitted choices. This invalidates the construction of the ^FWS^op_A-module structure on which Theorem B, Theorem A, and Corollaries C and D rest.
[§6.1, Definition 6.1] The claimed identification of V0,0 with H_0(M^A_{0,X}(ℓ_X);Q) for |X|≥3 is also false. For the example A=V4, X={1,2,3}, ℓ_X=(e1,e2,e1+e2), the set S0,0(X,ℓ_X)=(A/⟨ℓ_X(x)|x∈X⟩)^X/A is a single point, so V0,0(X,ℓ_X)=Q. But M^A_{0,3}(ℓ_X) has two connected components, so H_0(M^A_{0,3}(ℓ_X);Q)=Q^2. Since the quotient map q: eV0→V0,0 and the base case of the induction in Theorem 6.6 depend on this identification, the inductive proof of finite generation is not geometrically justified.

minor comments (4)

[§2, Definition 2.1(3)] The symbol P is used in condition (3) before a source curve P has been named; the condition should refer to the named source curve E or the source curve should be named P consistently.
[§5, before equation (7)] The text says "morphism in ^FWS^op_A" where the morphism is an arrow in ^FWS_A; this is harmless but should be corrected for clarity.
[§6, Proposition 6.4] The notation M^A_{g,X}(ℓ_X) is used for both the compact admissible-cover stack and for its interior in the Borel–Moore exact sequence. Please clarify the two uses and state explicitly why H_i of the compact stack is pure of weight 2i.
[§6, Theorem 6.6 proof, equation (11)] The index of summation in the definition of I_{i,g} is written as (i1,g1)+(i2,g2)=(g,i); this should be (i,g).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the finite-generation proof is an original induction; the only co-authored citations are independent published tools, not fitted inputs or renamed predictions.

full rationale

The central claim, Theorem B, is established by an original argument in Section 6: an induction on (i,g) using the categorical criteria of Section 4, Harer's virtual cohomological dimension theorem, purity of the weight filtration, and the gluing maps constructed in Section 5. The generation bound g + 5i is obtained from the numerical lemma 6.5, not from any fitted parameter or from the authors' earlier bounds. The only geometrically delicate step in the construction of the ^FWS^op_A-module structure is the well-definedness of the gluing maps, which is delegated to Lemma 5.2, quoted from [BCK24, Proposition 2.4]. That lemma is a classification/uniqueness statement about connected components of M^A_{0,X}(ℓ_X); it is load-bearing for the functoriality of (f,g)_* and for the identification of V0,0 with H_0 in Definition 6.1. However, [BCK24] is a published, parameter-free theorem in a separate paper whose assumptions do not include the present main theorem; it is therefore independent evidence under the rubric and does not make the derivation circular. The other self-citation, [Tos24], is used only to make Theorem 3.19 effective for Corollary D and the multivariate refinement; Theorem A itself follows from Theorem B together with Proposition 3.15 and [SS17, Corollary 8.1.4]. The skeptical objection that Lemma 5.2 may be false is a correctness concern, not a circularity: if the lemma were false the module action would be ill-defined, but that would be an error in an external cited theorem rather than a self-referential reduction of the paper's conclusion to its own premises. Accordingly, no circular step is identified, and the score of 2 reflects the presence of co-authored citations, not circular reasoning.

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

The central claim rests primarily on standard results (Harer, Deligne purity, Sam-Snowden) plus two cited results with author overlap ([BCK24] and [Tos24]). No free parameters are fitted; the generation degree bound is proved, not tuned. The new categories ^FWSA and FWSA are constructions, not postulates, and are not listed as invented entities.

assumptions (6)

standard math Harer's theorem on the virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group (Theorem 2.6)
Used in Proposition 2.7 to get Borel-Moore homology vanishing, which is essential for the surjectivity of the gluing map τ in Proposition 6.4.
standard math Purity of Deligne's weight filtration on the rational cohomology of the smooth proper stack M^A_{g,X}
Invoked in the proof of Proposition 6.4 to identify the pure weight component of boundary homology that surjects onto H_i(M^A_{g,X}); this is standard for smooth proper varieties and stacks.
standard math Sam-Snowden Noetherianity and Hilbert series results for FWS^op_A-modules (Theorem 3.16, 3.18 from [SS19])
Provides the framework for proving rationality of Hilbert series for finitely generated modules; cited as a black box.
domain assumption Classification of connected components of M^A_{0,X} from [BCK24, Proposition 2.4], restated as Lemma 5.2
Used to define the unique connected component T_y in the gluing construction and to prove functoriality (Proposition 5.4); this is a cited result with overlapping authorship.
domain assumption Effective Hilbert series theorem [Tos24, Theorem 2.1] applied via Fourier duality in Theorem 3.19
Used to obtain the explicit denominator bound in Corollary D and the multivariate generalization; [Tos24] is an arXiv preprint by one of the authors.
standard math Fourier duality between FS^op_A and FWS^op_{A^∨} from [SS19, Lemma 6.6.4], stated as Proposition 3.13
Used to transfer generation degree bounds between categories of A-sets and A-labeled sets.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Representation stability for moduli spaces of admissible covers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QTDH2IRZ

@misc{pith2026250622640,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Representation stability for moduli spaces of admissible covers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QTDH2IRZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.22640}
}

abstract

We prove a representation stability result for the sequence of spaces $\overline M_{g, n}^A$ of pointed admissible $A$-covers of stable $n$-pointed genus-$g$ curves, for an abelian group $A$. For fixed genus $g$ and homology degree $i$, we give the sequence of rational homology groups $H_i(\overline{M}_{g, n}^A;\mathbb Q)$ the structure of a module over a combinatorial category, a la Sam--Snowden, and prove that this module is generated in degree at most $g + 5 i$. This implies that the generating function for the ranks of the homology groups is rational, with poles in the set $\left\{-1, -\frac{1}{2}, \ldots, -\frac{1}{|A|^2\cdot(g + 5i)}\right\}$. In the case where $A$ is the trivial group, our work significantly improves on previous representation stability results on the Deligne--Mumford compactification $\overline M_{g, n}$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages

[1]

Twisted bundles and admissible covers

Dan Abramovich, Alessio Corti, and Angelo Vistoli. Twisted bundles and admissible covers. volume 31, pages 3547--3618. 2003. Special issue in honor of Steven L. Kleiman

2003
[2]

Compactifying the space of stable maps

Dan Abramovich and Angelo Vistoli. Compactifying the space of stable maps. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 15(1):27--75, 2002

2002
[3]

On the weight zero compactly supported cohomology of $ H _ g, n $

Madeline Brandt, Melody Chan, and Siddarth Kannan. On the weight zero compactly supported cohomology of $ H _ g, n $ . Forum Math. Sigma , 12:37, 2024. Id/No e67

work page 2024
[4]

On the motivic class of the moduli stack of twisted $G$ -covers

Massimo Bagnarol and Fabio Perroni. On the motivic class of the moduli stack of twisted $G$ -covers. SIGMA, Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. , 19:paper 107, 31, 2023

work page 2023
[5]

John L. Harer. Stability of the homology of the mapping class groups of orientable surfaces. Ann. of Math. (2) , 121(2):215--249, 1985

1985
[6]

The virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group of an orientable surface

John L Harer. The virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group of an orientable surface. Inventiones mathematicae , 84(1):157--176, 1986

work page 1986
[7]

Jarvis, Ralph Kaufmann, and Takashi Kimura

Tyler J. Jarvis, Ralph Kaufmann, and Takashi Kimura. Pointed admissible G -covers and G -equivariant cohomological field theories. Compositio Mathematica , 141(4):926–978, 2005

work page 2005
[8]

Representation stability for the cohomology of the moduli space M ^n_g

Rita Jimenez Rolland. Representation stability for the cohomology of the moduli space M ^n_g . Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 11(5):3011--3041, 2011

work page 2011

Show all 17 references

[9]

A survey of the Hodge conjecture , volume 10

James D Lewis and B Brent Gordon. A survey of the Hodge conjecture , volume 10. American Mathematical Soc., 1999

1999
[10]

The operad structure of admissible G -covers

Dan Petersen. The operad structure of admissible G -covers. Algebra Number Theory , 7(8):1953--1975, 2013

1953
[11]

Gr \"o bner methods for representations of combinatorial categories

Steven Sam and Andrew Snowden. Gr \"o bner methods for representations of combinatorial categories. Journal of the American Mathematical Society , 30(1):159--203, 2017

2017
[12]

Sam and Andrew Snowden

Steven V. Sam and Andrew Snowden. Representations of categories of $G$ -maps. J. Reine Angew. Math. , 750:197--226, 2019

2019
[13]

Intersections of loci of admissible covers with tautological classes

Johannes Schmitt and Jason van Zelm. Intersections of loci of admissible covers with tautological classes. Sel. Math., New Ser. , 26(5):69, 2020. Id/No 79

2020
[14]

Stability in the homology of D eligne-- M umford compactifications

Philip Tosteson. Stability in the homology of D eligne-- M umford compactifications. Compositio Mathematica , 157(12):2635--2656, 2021

2021
[15]

Categorifications of rational H ilbert series and characters of FS^ op modules

Philip Tosteson. Categorifications of rational H ilbert series and characters of FS^ op modules. Algebra & Number Theory , 16(10):2433--2491, 2022

2022
[16]

Hilbert series of representations of categories of G -sets

Philip Tosteson. Hilbert series of representations of categories of G -sets. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.19610 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[17]

Representation stability for the K ontsevich space of stable maps

Philip Tosteson. Representation stability for the K ontsevich space of stable maps. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, Series B , 12(22):831--850, 2025

2025

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

Twisted bundles and admissible covers

Dan Abramovich, Alessio Corti, and Angelo Vistoli. Twisted bundles and admissible covers. volume 31, pages 3547--3618. 2003. Special issue in honor of Steven L. Kleiman

2003

[2] [2]

Compactifying the space of stable maps

Dan Abramovich and Angelo Vistoli. Compactifying the space of stable maps. J. Amer. Math. Soc. , 15(1):27--75, 2002

2002

[3] [3]

On the weight zero compactly supported cohomology of \( H _ g, n \)

Madeline Brandt, Melody Chan, and Siddarth Kannan. On the weight zero compactly supported cohomology of \( H _ g, n \) . Forum Math. Sigma , 12:37, 2024. Id/No e67

work page 2024

[4] [4]

On the motivic class of the moduli stack of twisted \(G\) -covers

Massimo Bagnarol and Fabio Perroni. On the motivic class of the moduli stack of twisted \(G\) -covers. SIGMA, Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. , 19:paper 107, 31, 2023

work page 2023

[5] [5]

John L. Harer. Stability of the homology of the mapping class groups of orientable surfaces. Ann. of Math. (2) , 121(2):215--249, 1985

1985

[6] [6]

The virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group of an orientable surface

John L Harer. The virtual cohomological dimension of the mapping class group of an orientable surface. Inventiones mathematicae , 84(1):157--176, 1986

work page 1986

[7] [7]

Jarvis, Ralph Kaufmann, and Takashi Kimura

Tyler J. Jarvis, Ralph Kaufmann, and Takashi Kimura. Pointed admissible G -covers and G -equivariant cohomological field theories. Compositio Mathematica , 141(4):926–978, 2005

work page 2005

[8] [8]

Representation stability for the cohomology of the moduli space M ^n_g

Rita Jimenez Rolland. Representation stability for the cohomology of the moduli space M ^n_g . Algebr. Geom. Topol. , 11(5):3011--3041, 2011

work page 2011