Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

The Bruhat-Tits stratification for basic unramified $GU(1,n-1)$ Rapoport-Zink spaces at arbitrary parahoric level

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The reduced special fiber of unitary Rapoport-Zink spaces at any parahoric level is completely stratified by closures of Deligne–Lusztig varieties.

desk verdict Completes the expected Bruhat-Tits stratification picture for unitary Rapoport-Zink spaces at arbitrary parahoric level, but the key isomorphism theorem has a gap that needs to be closed before the smoothness claims can be taken as proven. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.00580 v3 pith:POEPVBLI submitted 2025-10-01 math.NT math.AG

Joseph Muller This is my paper
classification math.NTmath.AG MSC 14G3511G1820G2514L05
keywords Bruhat-TitsstratificationRapoport-ZinkspacesunitaryShimuravarietiesDeligne-LusztigparahoriclevelvertexlatticesspecialfiberformalO-modules
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 that the reduced special fiber of the basic unramified unitary Rapoport–Zink space of signature (1,n−1), at arbitrary parahoric level, admits a stratification indexed by Bruhat–Tits indices—explicit chains of vertex lattices subject to type constraints. The closed strata are shown to be smooth, projective, and geometrically irreducible, and isomorphic to the closures of explicitly determined fine Deligne–Lusztig varieties for products of unitary and general linear groups. From this identification the paper derives the dimensions of all irreducible components of the special fiber and the number of orbits under the group of auto-quasi-isogenies. This gives a complete combinatorial description of the special fiber for every parahoric level, extending the previously known maximal-parahoric case.

What carries the argument

The central objects are Bruhat–Tits indices (I,Λ): I is a non-empty subset of {0,...,m} with endpoint constraints, and Λ is a compatible collection of vertex lattices Λ^i_0∈L_0 and Λ^j_1∈L_1 of prescribed types. Vertex lattices are lattices Λ in a hermitian space C satisfying π^{i+1}Λ^*⊂Λ⊂π^iΛ^*, with type t(Λ)=[Λ:π^{i+1}Λ^*]; via Vollaard's theorem these correspond to simplices of the Bruhat–Tits building of the underlying unitary group. The lattice model of Proposition 2.20 translates every geometric statement into linear algebra of lattices; the closure X^h_{I,Λ} of the fine Deligne–Lusztig variety—a product of DL varieties for unitary groups U(Λ/πΛ^*) and general linear groups GL(Λ/πΛ^*)

What would settle it

Take a small explicit case (e.g., n=3, m=2, h=(1,3) over F=Q_p) and enumerate all chains of lattices in C satisfying the conditions of Proposition 2.20; verify that each point's Bruhat–Tits type is non-empty (Lemma 2.30) and that the number of J(E)-orbits of maximal strata equals h_m−h_1−m+1+ε = 2. A single point whose type is empty, or a discrepancy in the orbit count, would refute the stratification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For a fixed tuple h=(h1<...<hm) of same-parity integers, the paper identifies the k-points of N^h_{E/F} with chains of lattices A_m⊂...⊂A_1⊂B_1⊂...⊂B_m satisfying πA_i^*⊂B_i⊂A_i^*, πB_i^*⊂A_i⊂B_i^*, and πB_i⊂A_i⊂B_i with [B_i:A_i]=h_i. To each point it attaches a Bruhat–Tits type I and vertex lattices Λ, giving a partition into locally closed substacks N^{h,0}_{I,Λ}. The closures N^h_{I,Λ} are proved to be isomorphic to X^h_{I,Λ}, the closure of a fine Deligne–Lusztig variety for a product of unitary groups and general linear groups (Theorem 3.36). Using He's decomposition of such closures, the paper proves smoothness, irreducibility, projectivity, and explicit dimension formulas for the str

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the bijective lattice description of the special fiber (Proposition 2.20), asserted as an easy consequence of relative Dieudonné theory following the maximal-parahoric case: every k-point corresponds to a chain of lattices satisfying the stated index and duality conditions, and every such chain arises from a point. If this description is missing a condition, or the building transitivity imported from the F=Q_p case fails for general F, the stratifi

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The Bruhat–Tits strata give a set-theoretic partition of N^h_{E/F,red} into locally closed subschemes indexed by explicit combinatorial data.
  • Every closed stratum is smooth, projective, and geometrically irreducible, with an explicit dimension formula obtained by summing the dimensions of its unitary and general-linear factors.
  • The irreducible components of the special fiber are exactly the maximal closed Bruhat–Tits strata; their dimensions are n−1−Δh_i for the interior types and simple formulas for the boundary types.
  • The number of J(E)-orbits of irreducible components is h_m−h_1−m+1+ε, refining the known maximal-parahoric count.
  • Via p-adic uniformization, the same stratification describes the basic locus of the corresponding unitary Shimura variety of signature (1,n−1) over an inert prime.
  • The equivariant isomorphism identifies the action of the parahoric stabilizer on each closed stratum with the natural action on the fine Deligne–Lusztig variety through its reductive quotient.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The stratification completes the picture for all parahoric levels in the signature (1,n−1) unitary case and provides a concrete non-Coxeter, fully Hodge–Newton decomposable example where the indexing poset of the GHN stratification is made completely explicit.
  • The explicit orbit count and stratum dimensions suggest that the irreducible components admit an affine Deligne–Lusztig description that could be compared with group-theoretic counting formulas in the affine Grassmannian.
  • Because the closed strata are closures of fine Deligne–Lusztig varieties, intersection-theoretic quantities such as special-cycle indices (relevant to Kudla–Rapoport conjectures) may be computable on these strata in future work.
  • The method plausibly extends to ramified unitary settings, provided the building-theoretic input (vertex lattices and transitivity) is adapted to the ramified hermitian spaces.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper generalizes the Vollaard–Wedhorn and Cho descriptions of the reduced special fiber of the basic unramified unitary Rapoport–Zink space of signature (1,n−1) from maximal parahoric level to arbitrary parahoric level. The level is encoded by a tuple h=(h_1,...,h_m). The author introduces Bruhat–Tits indices (I,Λ), consisting of a subset I⊆{0,...,m} and compatible vertex lattices, defines closed subschemes N^h_{I,Λ} of N^h_{E/F,red}, and proves that these are isomorphic to closures X^h_{I,Λ} of explicitly determined fine Deligne–Lusztig varieties for products of unitary and general linear groups. From this identification the paper derives smoothness, projectiveness, geometric irreducibility, dimensions of closed strata, the Bruhat–Tits stratification, a description of irreducible components, and the number of J(E)-orbits of components. The announced results are precise and extend a well-established line of work.

Significance. If the missing foundational steps are supplied, this is a valuable and significant contribution. The paper explicitly computes the indexing poset of the Bruhat–Tits stratification in a nontrivial non-Coxeter situation, gives explicit DL-closures for each closed stratum, and proves concrete dimension and orbit-count formulas. Its combinatorial core—Lemma 2.30, Propositions 3.17/3.21/3.25, and the pointwise stratum description in Lemma 4.2—is largely proven in the text using external results such as [He09] and [BL00]. The authors are also careful to compare their strata with Cho's earlier definition. The main weakness is not the strategy but two load-bearing assertions that are deferred: the arbitrary-parahoric lattice bijection of Proposition 2.20 and the OF-window step needed to upgrade a bijection on geometric points to an isomorphism in Theorem 3.36.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.4, Theorem 3.36] The proof of the central isomorphism N^h_{I,Λ} ≅ X^h_{I,Λ} is incomplete in a load-bearing way. The morphism f is shown to be a universal homeomorphism, and the author then writes: “By using the theory of OF-windows as in [ACZ16], one may prove that f actually defines a bijection on k-rational points for every arbitrary field k… (we omit the details…).” This omitted step is exactly what upgrades a universal homeomorphism to a birational, hence finite birational, morphism; without it the Zariski Main Theorem conclusion that f is an isomorphism does not follow. A universal homeomorphism that is not birational would not transfer smoothness or irreducibility from X^h_{I,Λ} to N^h_{I,Λ}. Since Corollary 3.37, the dimension formulas, and the entire component analysis rely on this isomorphism, the gap must be repaired. I would accept a complete argument or a precise reference that covers the pr
  2. [§2.3, Proposition 2.20] The bijective lattice model of the special fiber is the foundation of every later statement in the paper, but its proof is only described as “easy to see” from relative Dieudonné theory following Cho. The statement involves m interlocking lattice pairs (A_i,B_i) together with isogeny-compatibility data between the levels h_i, and the duals are taken with respect to one fixed pairing. A missing or misstated lattice condition, or a subtle failure of compatibility under the isogenies α_{h_i,h_1}, would shift the stratification itself. The author should either prove the bijection carefully or give a precise reduction to [Cho18, Theorem 2.5] for each maximal-parahoric factor and prove that the chain conditions are exactly equivalent to the existence of the compatible isogenies in the moduli problem.
  3. [§4.2, Proposition 4.10] The orbit-counting argument uses the identification of the vertex-lattice set L_0 with the Bruhat–Tits building of SU(C), citing [Vol10, Theorem 3.5]. That theorem is stated and proved for F=Q_p, and the author asserts that it adapts to a general p-adic field “without difficulty.” This identification and the resulting transitivity of H(F) on alcoves are load-bearing for the transitivity step in Proposition 4.10, hence for Theorem 4.15. The adaptation is probably standard, but it should be either proved or replaced by a reference covering general F. As written, the orbit count rests on an unverified extension of a cited theorem.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.4 and §3.1] The commutative diagrams defining N^h_{I,Λ}(k) are essentially impossible to read in the current preprint formatting. The numerical labels and inclusion arrows should be typeset as actual commutative diagrams, or replaced by a clear list of lattice inclusions with indices. This is not a mathematical issue but is important for usability.
  2. [§2.2, Remark 2.16] The remark that the type of a vertex lattice is not well-defined because of overlap L_i∩L_{i+1} is useful, but later notation such as t(Λ^j_1) is used freely. Please add a blanket convention about which rank is used whenever a vertex lattice lies in the overlap.
  3. [§3.3, Remark 3.30] The statement says there are open immersions Y^h_{I,Λ} ↪ X^{h,0}_{I,Λ} ↪ X^h_{I,Λ}. The first inclusion is not obviously open from the definition of X^{h,0}_{I,Λ} as a union of DL strata. If “open immersion” is meant in the sense that Y is a dense open stratum, this should be stated and proved, or weakened to locally closed.
  4. [Throughout] There are several minor typographical issues: in §3.1 the phrase “coincide with the isogenies” appears to be missing a subject; in Definition 3.23 the displayed inequalities contain subscripts such as “h_{i_j+i}” and “h_{is+i}” whose ranges should be stated more clearly; in the proof of Lemma 2.30 the notation “A_i+1” is sometimes written “A_i`1”, which is confusing in plain text. These do not affect the mathematics.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reduction found; the main isomorphism proof has an acknowledged omitted OF-window step, which is a gap in exposition rather than a circularity.

full rationale

The derivation is driven by the lattice model of Proposition 2.20, imported from relative Dieudonné theory, and the Deligne-Lusztig descriptions are computed via external theorems ([He09], [BL00], [Vol10], [Cho18]); the strata are defined from lattice geometry, not from the closures they are later proved isomorphic to. The only passage needing explicit flagging is Theorem 3.36: 'By using the theory of OF -windows as in [ACZ16], one may prove that f actually defines on bijection on k-rational points for every arbitrary field k containing κ˘E (we omit the details but we refer to [Cho18] Section 3.5 ...).' This is a load-bearing omitted proof—it upgrades the universal homeomorphism to birationality—but it invokes an external theory and does not reduce the conclusion to its own input. Similarly, Proposition 4.10 imports the identification of L0 with the Bruhat-Tits building from [Vol10, Theorem 3.5], noting it was written for F = Q_p and 'adapts to the general case without difficulty'; this is again an unverified extension of an external result, not a circular step. No fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction, and no load-bearing claim is justified only by self-citation. Hence there is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No numbers are fitted to data: pure mathematics; none of the hypotheses depend on numerical inputs chosen after the fact. The level tuple h and the lattice data are inputs of the theorems. The combinatorial thresholds defining X^{h,0} (Defs 3.19, 3.23, 3.27) are hand-chosen limits on the t_i's, but they are subsequently proven (Theorem 4.3) to match the open strata by an independent τ-stability analysis, so they are not load-bearing free choices. The load consists of imported domain facts (representability, framing data, isogenies, Dieudonné lattice models, the building identification) and two external theorems ([He09], [BL00]).

assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption Representability of N^h_{E/F} ⊗ O_Ê by a formal scheme, locally formally of finite type and regular (Theorem 2.2)
    Imported from [Mih22] and [Cho18]; the whole construction operates on this formal scheme and its reduced special fiber.
  • domain assumption Existence and uniqueness of framing data X[h]: strict formal O_F-modules, supersingular, with OE-action of signature (1,n−1) and polarization of degree q^{2h}
    Cited to [Cho18] Remark 3.32; the k-point description (Prop 2.20) and all lattice computations depend on it.
  • domain assumption The bijective lattice model of k-points of N^h_{E/F} as chains of W_{O_F}(k)-lattices with duality conditions (Proposition 2.20)
    Asserted as 'easy to see' from relative Dieudonné theory following [Cho18]'s arguments; this lattice model is the substrate of the entire stratification, incidence, and dimension analysis.
  • domain assumption Existence of isogenies α_{h',h}: X[h'] → X[h] with Ker ⊂ X[π] of degree q^{h'−h} iff h ≡ h' mod 2
    Imported from [LRZ24] Section 3.4 (arXiv:2404.02214); the chain structure of the moduli problem at arbitrary level requires it.
  • domain assumption Identification of the vertex-lattice set L_0 with the simplicial complex of the Bruhat-Tits building of SU(C), with transitivity of SU(C)(F) on alcoves
    Uses [Vol10] Theorem 3.5, written for F = Q_p, asserted to adapt to general F 'without difficulty' in the proof of Proposition 4.10; load-bearing for the orbit count (Theorem 4.15).
  • standard math Closure decomposition of fine Deligne-Lusztig varieties: X_I{w} = ⊔_{w' ≤_{I,F} w} X_I{w'} ([He09] Theorem 3.1, restated as Theorem 3.11)
    External theorem; the decompositions of closures X^h_{I,Λ} into fine DL pieces (Props 3.18, 3.22, 3.26) are direct applications.
  • standard math Smoothness criterion for Schubert varieties via pattern avoidance: permutations avoiding (3412) and (4231) give smooth Schubert varieties ([BL00] Theorem 8.1.1)
    Used in Props 3.17, 3.21, 3.25 to prove smoothness and irreducibility of the closed strata, combined with the isomorphism of Theorem 3.36.
invented entities (2)
  • Bruhat-Tits indices (I, Λ): nonempty subset I ⊆ {0,...,m} plus vertex lattices Λ^i_0 ∈ L^{≥h_i+1}_0, Λ^j_1 ∈ L^{≥n−h_{j+1}+1}_1 with a chain condition (Definition 2.31); and the Bruhat-Tits type of a
    purpose: Index the closed strata N^h_{I,Λ}, the open strata N^{h,0}_{I,Λ}, and their incidence relations; generalize Cho's single-vertex-lattice index
    New combinatorial scaffolding introduced in this paper. Its support is internal — the covering lemma (2.30), nonemptiness (Cor 2.38), the consistency of Proposition 4.1 — plus the external anchor that the constituent vertex lattices are facets of the Bruhat-Tits building of the unitary group. There is no independent falsifiable prediction outside the paper that tests the specific definition.
  • Open pieces X^{h,0}_{Λ0}, X^{h,j,0}_{Λj}, X^{h,s,0}_{Λs} of DL-closures defined by thresholds such as t_i + t_{r0+1−i} ≥ Δh_{i1−i} and 2t_{i1} ≥ h_1 (Definitions 3.19, 3.23, 3.27)
    purpose: Targets for the open strata under the main isomorphism (Theorem 4.3)
    Defined by hand-tuned inequalities so that the image of N^{h,0}_{I,Λ} lands exactly there; justified a posteriori by the τ-stability analysis in the proof of Theorem 4.3 rather than by external evidence.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Bruhat-Tits stratification for basic unramified $GU(1,n-1)$ Rapoport-Zink spaces at arbitrary parahoric level." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/POEPVBLI

@misc{pith2026251000580,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Bruhat-Tits stratification for basic unramified $GU(1,n-1)$ Rapoport-Zink spaces at arbitrary parahoric level},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/POEPVBLI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.00580}
}
abstract

In this paper, we describe a stratification on the reduced special fiber of the basic unramified unitary Rapoport-Zink space of signature $(1,n-1)$ and at arbitrary parahoric level. We prove the smoothness, irreducibility and compute the dimensions of the closed strata, which are isomorphic to the closure of certain fine Deligne-Lusztig varieties for a product of unitary and general linear groups. We also describe the incidence relations of the stratification by using Bruhat-Tits indices, which are related to the Bruhat-Tits building of an underlying $p$-adic unitary group.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. EKOR and BT stratifications for basic unramified $\mathrm{GU}(1,n-1)$ Rapoport-Zink spaces

    math.NT 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Proves every basic EKOR stratum in the unramified GU(1,n-1) Rapoport-Zink space with arbitrary parahoric level is a disjoint union of copies of an explicitly defined fine Deligne-Lusztig variety, determining KR strata...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

13 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    O-Displays and π-Divisible Formal O-modules

    [ACZ16] T. Ahsendorf, C. Cheng, and T. Zink. “O-Displays and π-Divisible Formal O-modules”. In: J. Algebra 457 (2016), pp. 129–193. doi: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2016.03.002. [B´ ed85] R. B´ edard. “On the Brauer Liftings for Modular Representa- tions”. In: J. Algebra 93.2 (1985), pp. 332–353. doi: 10.1016/ 0021-8693(85)90164-4. [BL00] S. Billey and V. Lakshmib...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jalgebra.2016.03.002 2016

  2. [4]

    The Supersingular Locus of the Shimura Variety for GU(1, s)

    over a Ramified Prime”. In: J. Reine Angew. Math. 2025.826 (2025), pp. 143–223. doi: 10.1515/crelle-2025-0045. [Vol10] I. Vollaard. “The Supersingular Locus of the Shimura Variety for GU(1, s)”. In: Can. J. Math. 62.3 (2010). doi: 10.4153/CJM- 2010-031-2. 74 [VW11] I. Vollaard and T. Wedhorn. “The supersingular locus of the Shimura variety of GU(1,n-1) II...

    work page doi:10.1515/crelle-2025-0045 2025

  3. [8]

    An Alternative Description of the Drinfeld p-Adic Half-Plane

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv. 2505.08911. [KR14] S. Kudla and M. Rapoport. “An Alternative Description of the Drinfeld p-Adic Half-Plane”. In: Ann. Inst. Fourier 64.3 (2014), pp. 1203–1228. doi: 10.5802/aif.2878. [LRZ24] C. Li, M. Rapoport, and W. Zhang. Quasi-Canonical AFL and Arithmetic Transfer Conjectures at Parahoric Levels

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.08911 2014

  4. [9]

    Coxeter Orbits and Eigenspaces of Frobenius

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2404.02214. [Lus76] G. Lusztig. “Coxeter Orbits and Eigenspaces of Frobenius”. In: Invent. Math. 38.2 (1976), pp. 101–159.doi: 10.1007/BF01408569. [Mih22] A. Mihatsch. “Relative unitary RZ-spaces and the arithmetic fun- damental lemma”. In: J. Inst. Math. Jussieu 21.1 (2022), pp. 241–

    arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.02214 1976

  5. [11]

    On the Supersingular Locus of the $\mathrm{GU}(2,n-2)$ Shimura Variety

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2410.05110. [Tre25] S. Trentin. “On the Rapoport–Zink Space for GU(2,

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2410.05110

  6. [182]

    On the irreducibility of Deligne–Lusztig varieties

    Boston, MA: Birkh¨ auser, 2000.doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-1324-6 . [BR06] C. Bonnaf´ e and R. Rouquier. “On the irreducibility of Deligne–Lusztig varieties”. In: Comptes Rendus Mathematique 343 (2006). [Cho18] S. Cho. The Basic Locus of the Unitary Shimura Variety with Parahoric Level Structure, and Special Cycles . July

    doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-1324-6 2006

  7. [301]

    On Supersingular Loci of Shimura Varieties for Quater- nionic Unitary Groups of Degree 2

    doi: 10.1017/S1474748020000079. [Oki22] Y. Oki. “On Supersingular Loci of Shimura Varieties for Quater- nionic Unitary Groups of Degree 2”. In: Manuscripta Math. 167.1 (2022), pp. 263–343. issn: 1432-1785. doi: 10 . 1007 / s00229 - 020-01265-4. [RTW14] M. Rapoport, U. Terstiege, and S. Wilson. “The Supersingular Locus of the Shimura Variety for GU(1, n-1)...

    work page doi:10.1017/s1474748020000079 2022

  8. [478]

    Providence, Rhode Island: Amer. Math. Soc., 2009, pp. 61–70. doi: 10.1090/conm/478/09319. [HLS25] Q. He, Y. Luo, and Y. Shi. The Basic Locus of Ramified Unitary Rapoport-Zink Space at Maximal Vertex Level

    work page doi:10.1090/conm/478/09319 2009

Show all 13 references
  1. [2010]

    On the Supersingular Locus of the GU(2,2) Shimura Variety

    [HP14] B. Howard and G. Pappas. “On the Supersingular Locus of the GU(2,2) Shimura Variety”. In: Algebra & Number Theory 8.7 (2014), pp. 1659–1699. doi: 10.2140/ant.2014.8.1659. [HP17] B. Howard and G. Pappas. “Rapoport–Zink Spaces for Spinor Groups”. In: Compos. Math. 153.5 (...

    2014 doi

  2. [2016]

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1609. 08775. 75

    doi

  3. [2018]

    Representations of Reductive Groups Over Finite Fields

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1807.09997. [DL76] P. Deligne and G. Lusztig. “Representations of Reductive Groups Over Finite Fields”. In: Annals of Mathematics 103 (1976). [DM14] F. Digne and J. Michel. “Parabolic Deligne–Lusztig varieties”. In: Advances in Mathematics 257 (2014). [DM20...

    1976 doi arXiv

  4. [2024]

    The Supersingular Locus of the Shimura Variety of GU(2,n-2)

    doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2308.03816. [FI25] M. Fox and N. Imai. “The Supersingular Locus of the Shimura Variety of GU(2,n-2)”. In:Peking Math. J. (2025). doi: 10.1007/ s42543-025-00102-5 . [Fox22] M. Fox. “The GL4 Rapoport–Zink Space”. In: Int. Math. Res. Not. 2022.3 (2022), pp. 18...

    2025 doi arXiv

  5. [2025]

    Stratifications on moduli spaces of abelian varieties and Deligne-Lusztig varieties

    doi: 10 . 48550/arXiv.2502.06218. [Hoe10] M. Hoeve. “Stratifications on moduli spaces of abelian varieties and Deligne-Lusztig varieties”. PhD thesis. Universiteit van Am- sterdam,

    doi arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.