Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 2 minor 45 references

Smooth functions that split a Klein bottle into two M\"obius bands

T0 review · 2 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A Klein-bottle function split by a regular contour has an orbit homotopy equivalent to the product of its two Möbius-band restrictions.

desk verdict Genuine first Klein bottle orbit computation in an established program, but the proof leans on an unpublished linearization theorem that needs a real reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.19636 v1 pith:DPS67A2S submitted 2025-08-27 math.GT math.ATmath.DG

Bohdan Mazhar , Sergiy Maksymenko This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.GTmath.ATmath.DG MSC 57S0557R4537C05
keywords KleinbottleMöbiusbandorbitoffunctionhomotopytypediffeomorphismgroupKronrod-ReebgraphMorsefunctionsstabilizer
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 computes the homotopy type of the orbit of a smooth function on a Klein bottle under the surface's diffeomorphism group, for the class of functions that have a regular contour cutting the bottle into two Möbius bands. The central result is that this orbit is homotopy equivalent to the product of the orbits of the two restricted functions on the Möbius bands. Since the orbit types on Möbius bands were computed earlier, the theorem turns an open case—the Klein bottle—into a known one, and describes the fundamental group of the orbit explicitly as a product of wreath-product groups. The proof works by showing that restricting to diffeomorphisms that preserve the cutting contour and the two bands loses no homotopical information, and that projecting to the two bands is a homotopy equivalence.

What carries the argument

The central mechanism is a pair of maps between orbit spaces: j, the inclusion of the orbit under diffeomorphisms that fix the cutting contour α and preserve the two Möbius bands, and ρ, which restricts such a deformed function to each band. The argument reduces the homotopy comparison to diffeomorphism groups. Theorem 3.1.1 states that on a surface, diffeomorphisms fixed near a two-sided codimension-1 submanifold are homotopy equivalent to those fixed on it and preserving its two sides; this (given only a proof sketch, with the key linearization result cited to an unpublished preprint) is used to prove that D_+(K,α)—diffeomorphisms of the Klein bottle fixed on α and preserving both bands—is

What would settle it

Take a Möbius band and a two-sided circle X in its interior; compute the homotopy groups of the quotient D_+(M,X)/D_nb(M,X). If any are nonzero, Theorem 3.1.1 is false and the contractibility of D_+(K,α) would not follow, breaking the proof of the main theorem. A simpler check: verify whether the inclusion D_nb(M,X) → D_+(M,X) induces an isomorphism on π0 for X a circle in a disk.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Let f be a smooth function on the Klein bottle whose critical points are locally equivalent to homogeneous polynomials, and suppose a regular contour α splits K into two open Möbius bands M1, M2. Theorem 1.1.2 states that the path component O_f(f) of the orbit of f is homotopy equivalent to O_{f1}(f1) × O_{f2}(f2), where fi is the restriction of f to the closed band Mi. The proof factorizes through the orbit O_f^+(f, α) of f under diffeomorphisms fixing α and leaving the two bands invariant: the inclusion j: O_f^+(f,α) → O_f(f) is a homotopy equivalence (Lemma 5.2), and the restriction map ρ: O_f^+(f,α) → O_{f1}(f1) × O_{f2}(f2) is a homotopy equivalence (Lemma 5.3). Because both orbits are

Load-bearing premise

The proof leans on the claim—for which the paper gives only a sketch and cites an unpublished preprint—that on a surface, diffeomorphisms fixed in a neighborhood of a two-sided circle are homotopy equivalent to diffeomorphisms fixed on the circle and preserving its two sides.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The orbit O_f(f) is an aspherical space, so its homotopy type is captured by its fundamental group, which now has an explicit description as a product of one group from class B and two Möbius-band wreath-product factors.
  • For the class of functions in case (a), the previously computed orbit types on Möbius bands in [25] become directly applicable to the Klein bottle.
  • Diffeomorphisms that fix the splitting contour and preserve the two bands already capture the full deformational symmetry of f up to homotopy; no homotopical information is lost by restricting to them.
  • The remaining two classes of Klein-bottle functions—those with a unique critical contour bounding a disk, and those whose Kronrod–Reeb graph contains a unique cycle—are left to a sequel, so this paper establishes the first of three cases.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The same 'split along a regular contour and multiply the pieces' strategy could be tested on other surfaces admitting a similar one-sided decomposition, for instance higher-genus non-orientable surfaces with a separating two-sided curve.
  • Because the proof depends on a linearization theorem that is only sketched, a fully checkable version of the paper would need a published proof of Theorem 3.1.1; until then, the main theorem should be read as conditional on that statement.
  • The geometric generator loop—a symmetry that turns once around α—suggests a hands-on way to compute generators of π1 of stabilizers for any function with a circle family of contours, possibly giving a direct route to the fundamental group without passing through the full orbit computation.
  • If the product decomposition holds at the level of fundamental groups, the homotopy equivalence likely descends to the whole aspherical space, so homological invariants of the orbit would combine multiplicatively via the Künneth theorem.
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

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. Let D(M) act on C^∞(M,R) by (f,h) ↦ f∘h. For f ∈ F(M), O_f(f) is the path-component of the orbit containing f. This paper treats functions on the Klein bottle K that satisfy case (a) of Lemma 1.1.1: a regular contour α splits K into two open Möbius bands with closures M1, M2. The main result, Theorem 1.1.2, asserts that O_f(f) is homotopy equivalent to O_{f1}(f1) × O_{f2}(f2), where fi = f|Mi, and that this equivalence is obtained through the orbit O^+(f,α) of f under diffeomorphisms fixed on α and preserving both M1 and M2. The proof in Section 5 has two parts: Lemma 5.2 proves the inclusion O_α ⊂ O is a homotopy equivalence by a diagram chase over exact sequences of pairs and by explicitly constructing a generator of π1(S,Sα) that maps to a generator of π1Did(K); Lemma 5.3 proves the restriction map to the two Möbius-band orbits is a homotopy equivalence by reducing to diffeomorphisms supported near α. Corollary 2.7 translates the result into an algebraic description of π1O_f(f).

Significance. If the missing input is supplied, the paper would close one of the remaining open cases in the long-standing program of computing homotopy types of orbits of smooth functions on surfaces. The reduction to previously computed Möbius-band orbits is natural, and the geometric construction in Lemma 5.2 is explicit and convincing. The paper is transparent about its main unproved input, Theorem 3.1.1, and about its dependence on the authors' unpublished preprint [15]; that transparency is helpful in assessing the result, but it is not a substitute for a proof. Apart from this dependency, I found no circularity in the main derivation.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3.1, Theorem 3.1.1; used in Theorem 3.2.3 and Lemmas 5.1–5.3] Theorem 3.1.1 is load-bearing for Theorem 1.1.2. The authors explicitly state that no formal proof exists in the literature, and the proof they give depends on an unpublished 'linearization theorem' from [15] for two essential assertions: (i) D(M,X,p) ⊂ D(M,X) is a homotopy equivalence, and (ii) Tfib has local sections and is a locally trivial fibration over a union of path components of GL(E,X). Theorem 3.2.3 then uses Theorem 3.1.1 for (K,α) and (M_i,∂M_i) to conclude D_+(K,α) is contractible. This contractibility is used in Lemma 5.1(4) to identify S′(f,α) with S(f,α), in Lemma 5.2 to obtain (5.2) and the isomorphism ∂_{Dα,Sα}, and in Lemma 5.3 through the contractibility of D_α and D_i. If any of these unproved ingredients fails for X=α or X=∂M_i, the proof of Theorem 1.1.2 collapses. The manuscript itself supplies no proof of Theorem 3.1.1, and [15] is unpublished. This is not a mer
  2. [§3.2 and §5.3, notation D vs Did] Table 2.1 states contractibility for Did(M,X), not for the full group D(M,X). In the proof of Theorem 3.2.3, the authors write 'by Table 2.1 (first line) the groups D(M_i, α) are contractible'; taken literally this is false, since the full diffeomorphism group of a Möbius band with fixed boundary has nontrivial path components. What is needed is Did(M_i, α). The same ambiguity occurs in Lemma 5.3, where D_i := D(f_i, ∂M_i) is introduced and then asserted to be contractible; it must mean Did(M_i, ∂M_i). Because the contractibility of these groups is essential to Lemmas 5.2 and 5.3, the notation should be corrected and a consistent convention stated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [§3.1, proof of Theorem 3.1.1] The notation D(M,X,p) is defined twice in the same paragraph, and the phrase 'assumption that X is one-sided' should read 'two-sided' (or 'codimension-one') to agree with the theorem's hypotheses.
  2. [§5.2, diagram in Lemma 5.2] Relative homotopy groups such as π1(S,Sα) and π1(D,S) are treated as groups in the Five Lemma argument. In general π1(X,A) is only a pointed set; the identifications with π1D+(α) and π1O coming from (5.2) and the fibration exact sequences should be stated explicitly so that the group structure is unambiguous.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Main proof is not circular in the fit/prediction sense, but the key contractibility theorem rests on the authors' own unpublished preprint [15], making Theorem 3.1.1 a load-bearing self-citation.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 3.1, Theorem 3.1.1 and its proof; used in Theorem 3.2.3, Lemmas 5.1-5.3]
    "This statement might be deduced from ambient isotopy extension theorem for smooth submanifolds and contractibility of the space of tubular neighborhoods of a submanifold, see [12, Chapter A, Proposition 31]. A formal proof can be obtained as well from “linearization theorem” proved in the preprint [15], see also discussions in [39, Theorem 2.2.5]."

    Theorem 1.1.2 is proved via Lemma 5.2 and Lemma 5.3, both of which rely on the contractibility of D_+(K, α) established in Theorem 3.2.3. Theorem 3.2.3 proves this contractibility by invoking Theorem 3.1.1. However, Theorem 3.1.1 is not proved in the paper: the authors state that no formal proof exists in the literature and delegate the key 'linearization theorem' to their own unpublished preprint [15], with the proof sketch further attributing the fibration property to [15] and [39, Corollary 7.1.3] by the same author. Thus a load-bearing step of the derivation chain is justified by a self-citation that is itself unverified inside the paper. This is not a reduction of the final product formula to an input by construction, but it is a genuine load-bearing self-citation gap: the central cla

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain. Theorem 1.1.2 reduces to Lemma 5.2 (the inclusion j is a homotopy equivalence) and Lemma 5.3 (the restriction map ρ is a homotopy equivalence). Lemma 5.2 uses asphericity of O and O_α, which uses contractibility of D_α and D_+(K, α). Lemma 5.3 uses the same contractibility plus homotopy equivalences from Lemma 2.1.1 (published [34]) and Theorem 2.4.1. The contractibility of D_+(K, α) is Theorem 3.2.3, proved by applying Theorem 3.1.1. Theorem 3.1.1 is not proved in the paper; the authors explicitly say no formal proof exists in the literature and refer to their own unpublished preprint [15] for the 'linearization theorem,' with a proof sketch whose key ingredients are also attributed to [15] and [39]. This is a load-bearing self-citation, but it is not a circular reduction: [15] is a general statement about diffeomorphisms fixed near two-sided submanifolds, not the Klein-bottle product formula, and the final claim O_f(f) ≃ O_{f1}(f1) × O_{f2}(f2) is not assumed anywhere. There are no fitted parameters, no prediction from a subset of data, and no renaming of a known result. Hence the appropriate circularity score is 4, not higher.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The proof rests on the established orbit-stabilizer fibration framework and on a few background theorems, the most fragile being Theorem 3.1.1 whose formal proof is not given and which depends on the authors' unpublished preprint.

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Theorem 2.4.1: the orbit O(f,X) is a Fréchet submanifold and the action map is a locally trivial principal fibration
    Foundation for comparing homotopy groups of stabilizer and orbit; invoked in Lemmas 5.2 and 5.3.
  • domain assumption Theorem 2.4.2: homotopy types of stabilizers, S_id(f,X) is contractible except for three exceptional cases
    Used to establish asphericity of orbits via Corollary 2.4.3.
  • domain assumption Lemma 2.1.1 ([34, Cor 7.2]): inclusions S(f,U) ⊂ S_nb(f,X) ⊂ S(f,X) are homotopy equivalences
    Used in Lemma 5.3 to replace stabilizers by small-support stabilizers.
  • domain assumption Theorem 3.2.3: D(K) is homotopy equivalent to O(2)×Z2, and D_+(K,α) is contractible
    Provides the homotopy type of the diffeomorphism group of the Klein bottle; contractibility of D_+(K,α) is key for Lemma 5.2.
  • ad hoc to paper Theorem 3.1.1: D_nb(M,X) ⊂ D_+(M,X) is a homotopy equivalence for two-sided codimension-1 submanifolds; proof sketch relies on unpublished 'linearization theorem' from [15]
    Load-bearing for contractibility of D_+(K,α); the authors note no formal proof found in the literature.
  • standard math Remark 3.2.2, Epstein's classification of simple closed curves on the Klein bottle
    Used in Lemma 1.1.1 to distinguish cases (a) and (b).
  • standard math Lemma 2.2.1: the induced homomorphism on first homology from M to the Kronrod-Reeb graph is surjective
    Used to show the Kronrod-Reeb graph of the Klein bottle has at most one cycle.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Smooth functions that split a Klein bottle into two M\"obius bands." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DPS67A2S

@misc{pith2026250819636,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Smooth functions that split a Klein bottle into two M\"obius bands},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DPS67A2S}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.19636}
}
abstract

Given a compact surface $M$, consider the right action $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(M)\times\mathcal{D}(M)\to\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(M)$, $(f, h) \mapsto f\circ h$, of the group $\mathcal{D}(M)$ of $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}$ diffeomorphisms of $M$ on the space $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(M)$ of $\mathcal{C}^{\infty}$ functions on $M$. For $f\in\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(M)$ denote by $\mathcal{O}(f)$ its orbit, and by $\mathcal{O}_f(f)$ the path component of $\mathcal{O}(f)$ containing $f$. The paper continues a series of computations by many authors of homotopy types of orbits $\mathcal{O}_f(f)$ of smooth functions on compact surfaces. We provide here the computations of $\mathcal{O}_f(f)$ for a special class of functions $f\in\mathcal{C}^{\infty}(K)$ on the Klein bottle $K$ having the following properties: (i) at each critical point $f$ is smoothly equivalent to some homogeneous polynomial (e.g. $f$ is Morse), and (ii) there is a regular connected component $\alpha$ of a level set of $f$ such that $K\setminus\alpha$ is a disjoint union of two open M\"obius bands, with closures $M_1$ and $M_2$. Let $f_i = f|_{M_i}$ be the restriction of $f$ to the M\"{o}bius band $M_i$, $i=1,2$, and $\mathcal{O}_{f_i}(f_i)$ be the path component of $f_i$ in its orbit with respect to the above action of $\mathcal{D}(M_i)$. The possible homotopy types of $\mathcal{O}_{f_i}(f_i)$ are explicitly computed earlier. We prove that $\mathcal{O}_f(f)$ is homotopy equivalent to $\mathcal{O}_{f_1}(f_1) \times \mathcal{O}_{f_2}(f_2)$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.19636 by the authors.

Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. Case (a): splitting of K into M¨obius bands f, it follows that fi ∈ F(Mi), and thus we can consider the orbit Ofi (fi) of fi with respect to the action of D(Mi). Note that the possible homotopy types of orbits of functions on a M¨obius band are explicitly described in [25], see Section 2.6 for more details. The following Theorem 1.1.2 claim that Of (f) is homotopy equivalent to Of1 (f1) × Of2 (f2). Let D+(K, α) be t… view at source ↗
Figure 5.1
Figure 5.1. Geometrical meaning of η: η(σ) = δ#σ −1 3) First let us describe the geometrical meaning of homomorphism η, see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_5_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

  1. [15]

    Khokhliuk and S

    O. Khokhliuk and S. Maksymenko. Foliated and compactly supported isotopies of regular neighborhoods,

    work page

  2. [1]

    Auslander and M

    L. Auslander and M. Kuranishi. On the holonomy group of locally Euclidean spaces. Ann. of Math. (2) , 65:411–415, 1957. doi:10.2307/1970053

    work page doi:10.2307/1970053 1957

  3. [2]

    Leonard S. Charlap. Bieberbach groups and flat manifolds . Universitext. Springer-Verlag, New York,

    work page

  4. [3]

    C. J. Earle and J. Eells. A fibre bundle description of teichm¨ uller theory. J. Differential Geometry , 3:19–43, 1969. doi:10.4310/jdg/1214428816

    arXiv 1969

  5. [5]

    D. B. A. Epstein. Curves on 2-manifolds and isotopies. Acta Math. , 115:83–107, 1966. doi:10.1007/ BF02392203

    work page 1966

  6. [6]

    Feshchenko

    B. Feshchenko. Deformation of smooth functions on 2-torus whose Kronrod-Reeb graphs is a tree. 12(6):204–219, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Deformations of smooth function on $2$-torus whose KR-graph is a tree

    B. Feshchenko. Deformations of smooth function on 2-torus whose KR-graph is a tree. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine , 12(6):22–40, 2015. doi:10.48550/arXiv.1804.08966

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1804.08966 2015

  8. [8]

    Feshchenko

    B. Feshchenko. Actions of finite groups and smooth functions on surfaces.Methods Funct. Anal. Topology, 22(3):210–219, 2016

    work page 2016

Show all 45 references
  1. [9]

    Feshchenko

    B. Feshchenko. Deformations of smooth functions on 2-torus. Proc. Int. Geom. Cent., 12(3):30–50, 2019. doi:10.15673/tmgc.v12i3.1528

    2019 doi

  2. [10]

    Feshchenko

    B. Feshchenko. Deformations of circle-valued functions on 2-torus. Proc. Int. Geom. Cent. , 14(2):117– 136, 2021. doi:10.15673/tmgc.v14i2.2008

    2021 doi

  3. [11]

    Groups acting on the circle

    ´Etienne Ghys. Groups acting on the circle. Enseign. Math. (2) , 47(3-4):329–407, 2001

    2001

  4. [12]

    Higher string topology operations

    V´ eronique Godin. Higher string topology operations. 0711.4859v2

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Le type d’homotopie du groupe des diff´ eomorphismes d’une surface compacte

    Andr´ e Gramain. Le type d’homotopie du groupe des diff´ eomorphismes d’une surface compacte. Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) , 6:53–66, 1973. doi:10.24033/asens.1242

    1973 doi

  6. [14]

    Khokhliuk and S

    O. Khokhliuk and S. Maksymenko. Diffeomorphisms preserving Morse-Bott functions. Indag. Math. (N.S.), 31(2):185–203, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.indag.2019.12.004

    2020 doi

  7. [16]

    Kravchenko and B

    A. Kravchenko and B. Feshchenko. Automorphisms of Kronrob-Reeb graphs of Morse functions on 2- torus. Methods Funct. Anal. Topology, 26(1):88–96, 2020

    2020

  8. [17]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. Connected components of spaces of Morse functions with fixed critical points. Vestnik Moskov. Univ. Ser. I Mat. Mekh. , (1):3–12, 2012. doi:10.3103/S0027132212010019

    2012 doi

  9. [18]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. Special framed Morse functions on surfaces. Vestnik Moskov. Univ. Ser. I Mat. Mekh. , (4):14–20, 2012. doi:10.3103/S0027132212040031

    2012 doi

  10. [19]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. The topology of spaces of Morse functions on surfaces. Math. Notes, 92(1-2):219–236,

  11. [20]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. On the homotopy type of spaces of Morse functions on surfaces. Mat. Sb. , 204(1):79– 118, 2013. doi:10.1070/SM2013v204n01ABEH004292

    2013 doi

  12. [21]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. Topology of spaces of functions with prescribed singularities on the surfaces. Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 93(3):264–266, 2016

    2016

  13. [22]

    Kudryavtseva

    E. Kudryavtseva. Topology of spaces of smooth functions and gradient-like flows with prescribed singu- larities on surfaces. 2021. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2106.03017

    2021 doi arXiv

  14. [23]

    Kuznietsova and Yu

    I. Kuznietsova and Yu. Soroka. First Betti numbers of orbits of Morse functions on surfaces. Ukra ¨ ın. Mat. Zh. , 73(2):179–200, 2021. doi:10.37863/umzh.v73i2.2383

    2021 doi

  15. [24]

    Maksymenko

    Iryna Kuznietsova and S. Maksymenko. Reversing orientation homeomorphisms of surfaces. Proc. Int. Geom. Cent., 13(4):129–159, 2020. doi:10.15673/tmgc.v13i4.1953

    2020 doi

  16. [25]

    Deformational symmetries of smooth functions on non- orientable surfaces

    Iryna Kuznietsova and Sergiy Maksymenko. Deformational symmetries of smooth functions on non- orientable surfaces. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal., 65(1):35–77, 2025. doi:10.12775/TMNA.2024.022

    2025 doi

  17. [26]

    W. B. R. Lickorish. Homeomorphisms of non-orientable two-manifolds. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , 59(2):307–317, 1963. doi:10.1017/S0305004100036926

    1963 doi

  18. [27]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Homotopy types of stabilizers and orbits of Morse functions on surfaces. Ann. Global Anal. Geom., 29(3):241–285, 2006. doi:10.1007/s10455-005-9012-6 . SMOOTH FUNCTIONS ON KLEIN BOTTLE 23

    2006 doi

  19. [28]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Homotopy dimension of orbits of Morse functions on surfaces. 18:39–44, 2008. arXiv: 0710.4437

    2008 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Functions on surfaces and incompressible subsurfaces. Methods Funct. Anal. Topology, 16(2):167–182, 2010

    2010

  21. [30]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Functions with isolated singularities on surfaces. Geometry and topology of functions on manifolds. Pr. Inst. Mat. Nats. Akad. Nauk Ukr. Mat. Zastos. , 7(4):7–66, 2010. arXiv:0806.4704

    2010 arXiv

  22. [31]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Local inverses of shift maps along orbits of flows. Osaka Journal of Mathematics , 48(2):415–455, 2011. arXiv:0806.1502

    2011 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Homotopy types of right stabilizers and orbits of smooth functions functions on surfaces. Ukrainian Math. Journal , 64(9):1186–1203, 2012. URL: https://rdcu.be/cRfWj, arXiv:1205.4196, doi:10.1007/s11253-013-0721-x

    2012 arXiv

  24. [33]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Deformations of functions on surfaces. Proceedings of Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine, 17(2):150–199, 2020

    2020

  25. [34]

    Maksymenko

    S. Maksymenko. Deformations of functions on surfaces by isotopic to the identity diffeomorphisms. Topology Appl., 282:107312, 48, 2020. doi:10.1016/j.topol.2020.107312

    2020

  26. [35]

    Maksymenko and B

    S. Maksymenko and B. Feshchenko. Orbits of smooth functions on 2-torus and their homotopy types. Matematychni Studii , 44(1):67–84, 2015. doi:10.15330/ms.44.1.67-83

    2015 doi

  27. [36]

    Maksymenko and B

    S. Maksymenko and B. Feshchenko. Smooth functions on 2-torus whose kronrod-reeb graph contains a cycle. Methods Funct. Anal. Topology, 21(1):22–40, 2015. URL: http://mfat.imath.kiev.ua/article/ ?id=764

    2015

  28. [37]

    S. I. Maksymenko and B. G. Feshchenko. Homotopic properties of the spaces of smooth functions on a 2-torus. Ukrainian Math. J. , 66(9):1346–1353, 2015. Translation of Ukra ¨ ın. Mat. Zh.66 (2014), no. 9, 1205–1212. doi:10.1007/s11253-015-1014-3

    2015 doi

  29. [38]

    Topological actions of wreath products

    Sergiy Maksymenko. Topological actions of wreath products. Eur. J. Math. , 10(2):Paper No. 21, 34,

  30. [39]

    Vector bundle automorphisms preserving Morse-Bott foliations

    Sergiy Maksymenko. Vector bundle automorphisms preserving Morse-Bott foliations. Differential Geom. Appl., 97:Paper No. 102189, 30, 2024. doi:10.1016/j.difgeo.2024.102189

    2024

  31. [40]

    The Sullivan conjecture on maps from classifying spaces

    Haynes Miller. The Sullivan conjecture on maps from classifying spaces. Ann. of Math. (2), 120(1):39–87,

  32. [41]

    Un th´ eor` eme de fonctions implicites sur certains espaces de Fr´ echet et quelques applications

    Francis Sergeraert. Un th´ eor` eme de fonctions implicites sur certains espaces de Fr´ echet et quelques applications. Ann. Sci. ´Ecole Norm. Sup. (4) , 5:599–660, 1972. doi:10.24033/asens.1239

    1972 doi

  33. [42]

    Diffeomorphisms of the 2-sphere

    Stephen Smale. Diffeomorphisms of the 2-sphere. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. , 10:621–626, 1959. doi:10. 1090/S0002-9939-1959-0112149-8

    1959

  34. [43]

    Alphonse T. Vasquez. Flat Riemannian manifolds. J. Differential Geometry , 4:367–382, 1970. URL: http://projecteuclid.org/euclid.jdg/1214429510. Department of Algebra and Topology, Institute of Mathematics of NAS of Ukraine, Tereshchenkivska str. 3, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine Email ...

    1970

  35. [1986]

    URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8687-2 , doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8687-2

    doi

  36. [2012]

    Zametki 92 (2012), no

    Translation of Mat. Zametki 92 (2012), no. 2, 241–261. doi:10.1134/S0001434612070243

    2012 doi

  37. [2024]

    URL: https://rdcu.be/dBHdT, doi:10.1007/s40879-024-00732-6

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.