Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 50 references

Uniformization as Tannakian Reconstruction

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Classical hyperbolic uniformization is upgraded to a categorical reconstruction: each hyperbolic log-orbi curve C yields its uniformizing Fuchsian lattice Γ_C as the Betti realization of a canonical maximal PSL2-Higgs object, quasi-invertin

desk verdict The PSL2 construction is a good idea, but Theorem 5.1's proof assumes the global SL2-lift it was meant to avoid, so the main equivalence is unproven as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.25468 v2 pith:G7GCWWE2 submitted 2026-05-25 math.AG math.GT

Xiaojin Lin , Mao Sheng This is my paper
classification math.AGmath.GT MSC 14A2014A2114C3014D0714F3014H3014H57
keywords uniformizationnon-abelianHodgetheoryorbifoldsFuchsiangroupsTannakianreconstructionparahoricbundlesGaloisfundamental
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

Classical hyperbolic uniformization says every hyperbolic log-orbi curve — a compact curve with finitely many orbifold points and marked logarithmic points — is a compactified quotient of the upper half-plane by a cofinite Fuchsian lattice, unique up to conjugation. This paper claims the lattice can be found intrinsically: each such curve carries a canonical maximal principal PSL2-Higgs object, and the image of its Betti realization is precisely the uniformizing lattice. The step from SL2 to PSL2 removes the square-root ambiguity that had limited earlier reconstructions to curves admitting an SL2-lift. If the claim is right, uniformization becomes an equivalence of categories between Fuchsian lattices and hyperbolic log-orbi curves, with direct consequences for finite etale covers and for the absolute Galois groups of complex function fields.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the canonical maximal principal PSL2-Higgs object (U_C, ϑ_C). Locally it is the image of (Θ⊕Θ^{-1}, [[0,0],[1,0]]) under SL2→PSL2, with Θ^{⊗2}≃ω_C; the local structure is recorded by rational parahoric local types θ_{C,x}=κ_x ϖ^∨, where κ_x=1−1/m_x at an orbifold point of order m_x and κ_x=1 at a logarithmic point. At logarithmic points the fractional type is trivial, but the positive Moy–Prasad (strictly filtration-raising) piece survives and encodes the unipotent cusp direction. The transport mechanism is the Tannakian parahoric NAH/RH realization theorem, which gives tensor equivalences among polystable degree-zero principal parahoric Higgs objects, reductive pr

What would settle it

Take C = P^1 with one orbifold point of order 2 and three logarithmic points (so deg ω_C = -2 + 1/2 + 3 = 3/2). On P^1 no line bundle L satisfies L^{⊗2}=ω_C, so the proof's assumed global form E=L⊕L^{-1} fails. Compute the Betti realization of the canonical maximal PSL2-Higgs object on this curve and check whether it is conjugate into PSL2(R) with discrete faithful finite-covolume image; if the construction requires a non-existent SL2-lift, or if the resulting monodromy is not the classical Fuchsian lattice, the theorem fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the classical uniformizing lattice of a hyperbolic log-orbi curve is not an extra datum but a reconstruction. It constructs, for every such curve C, a canonical maximal principal PSL2-Higgs object (U_C, ϑ_C), characterized etale-locally as the pushout along SL2→PSL2 of the standard rank-two model with Θ^{⊗2}≃ω_C. Because the μ2 ambiguity in choosing Θ is killed by passage to PSL2, this object exists even when no square root of the orbifold canonical bundle exists globally. A Tannakian parahoric non-abelian Hodge–Riemann–Hilbert correspondence transports the object through de Rham to a Betti representation ρ_C: π_1^orb(C)→PSL2(C), and maximality forces ρ_C to

Load-bearing premise

The proof that ρ_C is real, discrete, faithful, and of finite covolume assumes the harmonic bundle attached to the PSL2 local system is a global rank-2 vector bundle E=L⊕L^{-1} with L^{⊗2}=ω_C — a global SL2-lift that the paper's own construction says can fail, and which is exactly the obstruction PSL2 was introduced to remove.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every hyperbolic log-orbi curve has a canonically attached cofinite Fuchsian lattice, so uniformizing data is no longer an external choice.
  • Finite etale morphisms between curves correspond exactly to finite-index inclusions of the corresponding lattices, with degree equal to the index; the two categories are equivalent.
  • Finite etale covers of a hyperbolic log-orbi curve are classified by finite continuous sets for the profinite completion of its reconstructed lattice; in particular π_1^ét(C) ≅ Γ̂_C.
  • The absolute Galois group of the function field of a complex curve is the inverse limit of etale fundamental groups of orbifold models over the curve, and the hyperbolic stages of this limit are profinite completions of Fuchsian lattices.
  • Curves whose orbifold canonical bundle has no square root — the case that blocked previous SL2-based uniformization constructions — are covered by the PSL2 construction.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the categorical equivalence holds, every hyperbolic log-orbi curve acquires a canonical projective structure (the de Rham realization of the PSL2 object); I would expect it to match the classical Schwarzian uniformization and to provide a curve invariant that varies holomorphically in moduli.
  • The triangle-orbifold case makes a concrete numerical test available: the reconstructed lattice should be the classical (p,q,r) triangle group, recoverable from the hypergeometric exponent differences — a comparison that could be run for higher-genus or many-marked examples where the answer is not known a priori.
  • Independent of uniformization, the principal parahoric realization theorem is a tensor-compatible, principal-bundle-level counterpart to parabolic non-abelian Hodge theory; I infer it can be imported into other moduli problems where principal objects with prescribed local types are needed.
  • For rational and elliptic base curves the sector bookkeeping shows that only part of the orbifold approximation is hyperbolic; I infer that the non-hyperbolic stages contribute non-Fuchsian components to the Galois limit, so the full absolute Galois group is not itself a profinite Fuchsian lattice but a mixed inverse limit.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes to reconstruct the cofinite Fuchsian lattice uniformizing a hyperbolic log-orbi curve intrinsically, by attaching to the curve a canonical maximal principal PSL2-Higgs object and transporting it through a Tannakian parahoric non-abelian Hodge / Riemann-Hilbert package. The main theorems are: existence of the canonical PSL2 object (Thm. 3.1); a tensor-functorial parahoric NAH/RH realization theorem (Thm. 4.2); the claim that its Betti realization is conjugate into PSL2(R), discrete, faithful, and of finite covolume (Thm. 5.1); categorical uniformization, i.e. quasi-inverseness of the compactified quotient functor Qc : FL -> HypLO (Thm. 5.2); the Galois-category consequence (Thm. 5.3); and an orbifold approximation of absolute Galois groups of function fields (Thm. 7.2). The paper is clearly organized and the categorical formalism is developed carefully, but the central analytic step in the proof of Theorem 5.1 is not supported by the preceding parahoric machinery.

Significance. If the main claims hold, the paper would give a genuinely intrinsic, functorial reconstruction of hyperbolic uniformization and would explain the classical mu2/square-root obstruction through passage from SL2 to PSL2. The construction of the canonical maximal PSL2-Higgs object in Section 3.3 is elegant and parameter-free, and the Tannakian/parahoric framework is a valuable organizing principle. The paper also makes clear and testable categorical statements. However, the proof of the key analytic theorem (Thm. 5.1) assumes a global SL2-lift precisely where the paper's own construction says such a lift may fail; until a parahoric or root-stack substitute is supplied, the uniformizing-representation theorem and its categorical consequences are not established. I do not see a circularity problem: the paper uses external theorems (Simpson, Deligne, Hitchin-Simpson) as input rather than assuming its conclusion; the issue is missing support for a load-bearing step.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.1, proof of Theorem 5.1] The proof introduces a global rank-2 harmonic bundle (E, Phi, h) and a global line bundle L with L^{⊗2} ≃ omega_C, and concludes pardon degree relation pardeg(L)=1/2 deg omega_C. But the object being realized is a principal PSL2-Higgs object, and Section 3.3 explicitly states that a global SL2-lift may fail due to the mu2-gerbe obstruction. The proof gives no parahoric or root-stack replacement: no definition of pardeg for a square root existing only on the mu2-gerbe or as a section of a P^1-bundle, and no Arakelov-type inequality in that setting. This equality case is what forces the period map to be a holomorphic isometry and hence yields reality, discreteness, faithfulness, and finite covolume. Theorems 5.2 and 5.3 inherit the gap.
  2. [§5.1, Proposition 5.1 proof] The proof asserts that "(U_C, theta_C) is a degree zero stable Higgs bundle" and therefore lies in Higgs_{PSL2}(C, theta_C)^{poly,0}. No proof of polystability (or stability) in the parahoric Ramanathan sense is given. Maximality and the local model in Proposition 3.7 do not by themselves establish the slope inequalities required to apply Theorem 4.2. Without this, the Betti realization rho_C is not well-defined as a reductive PSL2(C)-representation.
  3. [§4.1–4.3, Theorem 4.2] Theorem 4.2 is the engine of the paper, but its proof is largely a reduction to the vector-valued Theorem 4.1, which is itself asserted as a consequence of Simpson's tame NAH, Deligne's regular-singular RH, and Iyer-Simpson's local analysis. The needed statement includes rational parahoric weights at orbifold points and, in the principal case, tensor-compatible reconstruction for arbitrary reductive G. The paper does not supply a precise reference covering this exact orbifold/parahoric vector correspondence, nor a proof of the tensor compatibility that Proposition 4.3 uses to pass from vector objects to principal objects. This is load-bearing: if Theorem 4.1 is not available in the stated generality, the realization theorem and hence the uniformization results fail.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1] The sentence "Semisimplicity here is a global condition on the representation of pi_1^orb(C,x); it does not require local monodromy around logarithmic points to be semisimple" is repeated verbatim twice in the same subsection. Please remove the duplication.
  2. [§5.1] The paragraph beginning "The de Rham object (P_C, grad_C) may be viewed as the uniformizing projective connection..." is repeated almost verbatim later in the subsection. Please consolidate.
  3. [§1.4 and throughout] The notation for the orbifold fundamental group appears inconsistently as pi_1^orb and pi^orb_1; the conventions list even includes a typographical variant. Please standardize.
  4. [References] Reference [16] is cited to an encyclopedia web page; for a standard presentation of Fuchsian groups, please cite a primary textbook (e.g., Beardon or Katok) instead.
  5. [§3.3, proof of Theorem 3.1] The construction of the root stack "by shifting the local isotropy groups at x to Z/2m_x" is vague. Please define the root stack precisely, in particular how it relates to a root of the line bundle omega_C or to the inertia stack.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; only a minor non-load-bearing self-citation. The central derivation is independent, though Theorem 5.1 contains a non-circular global-SL2-lift gap.

full rationale

The claimed derivation is: construct the canonical principal PSL2-Higgs object intrinsically from the log-orbi canonical bundle (Thm 3.1), transport it by the Tannakian parahoric NAH/RH package built from external vector-valued correspondences (Simpson, Deligne) plus Tannakian reconstruction (Thm 4.2), and then use the external Hitchin-Simpson maximality/period-map argument to identify the Betti realization as Fuchsian (Thm 5.1). No step fits a parameter to the target or defines the uniformizing lattice into the input: the PSL2 object is built from omega_C, not from Gamma_C; the realization theorem is a transport of external equivalences; and the categorical equivalence is checked via standard covering theory and the period-map identifications. The only self-citation is [29] in Remark 3.4 (parabolic bases), which is not load-bearing for any main theorem. The genuine weakness is in the proof of Thm 5.1: after stating 'etale-locally the Hodge decomposition has the form E=L⊕L^{-1}' and 'Equivalently, L^{⊗2}≃ω_C', it immediately computes 'pardeg(L)=1/2 degω_C', which requires a global line bundle L, i.e. a global SL2-lift. But Thm 3.1 explicitly says such lifts can fail ('the residual ambiguity is a mu_2-gerbe, equivalently the obstruction to an SL2-lift') and that PSL2 was introduced to remove this obstruction. The proof supplies no parahoric/root-stack replacement for L, so the maximality/period-map conclusion is unsupported as written. This is an omitted justification, not a circular reduction: the uniformizing representation is not equivalent by construction to the paper's inputs. Hence no circular steps; score 2 reflects only the minor non-load-bearing self-citation.

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

The central claim rests on several external theorems, but no numerical free parameters are fitted and no speculative entities are introduced. The key issue is that the proof of Theorem 5.1 silently assumes the existence of a global SL2-lift (a global rank-2 bundle E=L direct-sum L^{-1}) in order to apply the standard maximality argument.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Vector-valued tame non-abelian Hodge correspondence for adjusted parahoric parabolic Higgs bundles (Theorem 4.1)
    Quoted as a black-box input; proof cites Simpson [41] and Iyer-Simpson [24] and does not supply the detailed verification in the log-orbi parahoric setting.
  • standard math Deligne's regular-singular Riemann-Hilbert correspondence
    Used as the de Rham-to-Betti correspondence in Theorems 4.1 and 4.2; cited to [14].
  • standard math Hitchin-Simpson maximality / period-map argument for maximal Higgs bundles
    Used in Theorem 5.1 to conclude reality, discreteness, faithfulness, and finite covolume; cited to [22, 23, 40, 41], but its hypotheses are not checked in the principal PSL2 setting without a global SL2-lift.
  • standard math Tannakian reconstruction for principal and parahoric objects from exact faithful tensor functors
    Relies on Bruhat-Tits/parahoric theory and filtered fiber functors; cited to [47, 50].
  • standard math Analytic-etale comparison for orbifold fundamental groups
    Used to identify profinite completions of discrete orbifold groups with etale fundamental groups; cited to Noohi [34] and Behrend-Noohi [7].
  • standard math Grothendieck Galois category formalism, including filtered colimits corresponding to inverse limits
    Used in Section 7 to derive the orbifold approximation of the absolute Galois group; cited to [19, Exp. V].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Uniformization as Tannakian Reconstruction." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G7GCWWE2

@misc{pith2026260525468,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Uniformization as Tannakian Reconstruction},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/G7GCWWE2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.25468}
}
read the original abstract

Classical hyperbolic uniformization identifies every hyperbolic log-orbi curve with a compactified quotient of the upper half-plane by a cofinite Fuchsian lattice. The lattice is unique up to conjugacy. We reconstruct it intrinsically. For each hyperbolic log-orbi curve C we construct a canonical maximal principal PSL2-Higgs object. Etale-locally it comes from the standard square-root SL2-model. The central mu2 ambiguity disappears after passage to PSL2. Using vector tame non-abelian Hodge theory and regular-singular Riemann--Hilbert as input we assemble the required principal realizations Tannakianly. Parahoric structures encode the orbifold and cusp data on the coarse curve. After choosing a base point and conjugating the Betti realization is represented by a discrete faithful finite-covolume representation whose image is the uniformizing lattice. Compatibility with finite etale pullback makes the lattice construction a quasi-inverse to the compactified quotient functor. Thus classical uniformization is recast as an intrinsic Tannakian reconstruction theorem. We also identify finite etale covers with finite continuous sets for the profinite completion of the reconstructed lattice. After fixing a separable closure and the resulting geometric generic point we recover the absolute Galois group of the function field of C as the inverse limit of the based etale fundamental groups of orbifold models over C.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Pullback and direct image of parabolic connections and parabolic Higgs bundles.Int

    David Alfaya and Indranil Biswas. Pullback and direct image of parabolic connections and parabolic Higgs bundles.Int. Math. Res. Not., 2023(22):19546–19591, 2023

    2023

  2. [2]

    Dylan G. L. Allegretti and Tom Bridgeland. The monodromy of meromorphic projective structures.Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 373(9):6321–6367, 2020

    2020

  3. [3]

    Einstein–hermitian connections on polystable principal bundles over a compact k¨ ahler manifold.American Journal of Mathematics, 123(2):207–228, 2001

    Boudjemaa Anchouche and Indranil Biswas. Einstein–hermitian connections on polystable principal bundles over a compact k¨ ahler manifold.American Journal of Mathematics, 123(2):207–228, 2001

    2001

  4. [4]

    Balaji and C

    V. Balaji and C. S. Seshadri. Moduli of parahoricG-torsors on a compact Riemann surface. J. Algebr. Geom., 24(1):1–49, 2015

    2015

  5. [5]

    Connections on parahoric torsors over curves.Publ

    Vikraman Balaji, Indranil Biswas, and Yashonidhi Pandey. Connections on parahoric torsors over curves.Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 53(4):551–585, 2017

    2017

  6. [6]

    Beardon.The Geometry of Discrete Groups, volume 91 ofGraduate Texts in Mathe- matics

    Alan F. Beardon.The Geometry of Discrete Groups, volume 91 ofGraduate Texts in Mathe- matics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995

    1995

  7. [7]

    Uniformization of Deligne-Mumford curves.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 2006(599):111–153, 2006

    Kai Behrend and Behrang Noohi. Uniformization of Deligne-Mumford curves.Journal f¨ ur die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 2006(599):111–153, 2006

    2006

  8. [8]

    Parabolic bundles as orbifold bundles.Duke Mathematical Journal, 88(2):305–325, 1997

    Indranil Biswas. Parabolic bundles as orbifold bundles.Duke Mathematical Journal, 88(2):305–325, 1997

    1997

Show all 50 references
  1. [9]

    Hermitian–einstein connections on polystable parabolic principal higgs bundles.Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, 15(5):1503–1521, 2011

    Indranil Biswas and Matthias Stemmler. Hermitian–einstein connections on polystable parabolic principal higgs bundles.Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics, 15(5):1503–1521, 2011

    2011

  2. [10]

    P. P. Boalch. Riemann-Hilbert for tame complex parahoric connections.Transform. Groups, 16(1):27–50, 2011

    2011

  3. [11]

    Parabolic connections and stack of roots.Bull

    Niels Borne and Amine Laaroussi. Parabolic connections and stack of roots.Bull. Sci. Math., 187:33, 2023. Id/No 103294

    2023

  4. [12]

    Canary, David B

    Richard D. Canary, David B. A. Epstein, and Paul Green. Notes on notes of thurston. In Analytical and Geometric Aspects of Hyperbolic Space, volume 111 ofLondon Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series, pages 3–92. Cambridge University Press, 1987

    1987

  5. [13]

    Mathematical Society of Japan, 2012

    Suhyoung Choi.Geometric Structures on 2-Orbifolds: Exploration of Discrete Symmetry, volume 27 ofMSJ Memoirs. Mathematical Society of Japan, 2012

    2012

  6. [14]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1970

    Pierre Deligne.Equations Diff´ erentielles ` a Points Singuliers R´ eguliers, volume 163 ofLecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1970. iii+133 pp

    1970

  7. [15]

    Real projective structures on Riemann surfaces.Compos

    Gerd Faltings. Real projective structures on Riemann surfaces.Compos. Math., 48:223–269, 1983. 46

    1983

  8. [16]

    Encyclopedia of Mathematics

    Fuchsian group. Encyclopedia of Mathematics. Accessed: 2025-02-12

    2025

  9. [17]

    The monodromy groups of Schwarzian equations on closed Riemann surfaces.Ann

    Daniel Gallo, Michael Kapovich, and Albert Marden. The monodromy groups of Schwarzian equations on closed Riemann surfaces.Ann. Math. (2), 151(2):625–704, 2000

    2000

  10. [18]

    Gardiner

    Frederick P. Gardiner. Teichm¨ uller theory and quadratic differentials. InTeichm¨ uller Theory and Quadratic Differentials, New York, 1987. Wiley-Interscience

    1987

  11. [19]

    Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1971

    Alexandre Grothendieck.Revˆ etements ´ etales et groupe fondamental, volume 224 ofLecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1971

    1971

  12. [20]

    R. C. Gunning.Lectures on Riemann surfaces. Math. Notes (Princeton). Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1966

    1966

  13. [21]

    R. C. Gunning. Special coordinate coverings of Riemann surfaces.Mathematische Annalen, 170:67–86, 1967

    1967

  14. [22]

    Nigel J. Hitchin. The self-duality equations on a Riemann surface.Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 55:59–126, 1987

    1987

  15. [23]

    Nigel J. Hitchin. Lie groups and Teichm¨ uller space.Topology, 31(3):449–473, 1992

    1992

  16. [24]

    Jaya N. N. Iyer and Carlos T. Simpson. A relation between the parabolic Chern characters of the de Rham bundles.Math. Ann., 338(2):347–383, 2007

    2007

  17. [25]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2023

    Tasho Kaletha and Gopal Prasad.Bruhat–Tits Theory: A New Approach, volume 44 ofNew Mathematical Monographs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    On monodromy of complex projective structures.Inventiones mathemat- icae, 119:243–265, 1995

    Michael Kapovich. On monodromy of complex projective structures.Inventiones mathemat- icae, 119:243–265, 1995

    1995

  19. [27]

    University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1992

    Svetlana Katok.Fuchsian Groups. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1992

    1992

  20. [28]

    G´ erard Laumon and Laurent Moret-Bailly.Champs alg´ ebriques, volume 39 ofErgeb. Math. Grenzgeb., 3. Folge. Berlin: Springer, 2000

    2000

  21. [29]

    Constructing parabolic non-abelian Hodge correspondence in positive character- istic using parabolic bases.Sci

    Xiaojin Lin. Constructing parabolic non-abelian Hodge correspondence in positive character- istic using parabolic bases.Sci. China, Math., 68(11):2561–2592, 2025

    2025

  22. [30]

    Monodromy groups of projective structures on punctured surfaces.Invent

    Feng Luo. Monodromy groups of projective structures on punctured surfaces.Invent. Math., 111(3):541–555, 1993

    1993

  23. [31]

    Unrefined minimal k-types for p-adic groups.Inventiones Mathematicae, 116(1-3):393–408, 1994

    Allen Moy and Gopal Prasad. Unrefined minimal k-types for p-adic groups.Inventiones Mathematicae, 116(1-3):393–408, 1994

    1994

  24. [32]

    Orbifold Riemann surfaces and the Yang-Mills-Higgs equations

    Ben Nasatyr and Brian Steer. Orbifold Riemann surfaces and the Yang-Mills-Higgs equations. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa, Cl. Sci., IV. Ser., 22(4):595–643, 1995

    1995

  25. [33]

    Hypergeometric function, 2026.https: //dlmf.nist.gov/15.17

    NIST Digital Library of Mathematical Functions. Hypergeometric function, 2026.https: //dlmf.nist.gov/15.17

    2026

  26. [34]

    B. Noohi. Fundamental groups of algebraic stacks.Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 3:69 – 103, 2002

    2002

  27. [35]

    Martin C. Olsson. Logarithmic geometry and algebraic stacks.Annales scientifiques de l’ ´Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure, 36(5):747–791, 2003

    2003

  28. [36]

    Olsson.Algebraic Spaces and Stacks, volume 62 ofAmerican Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications

    Martin C. Olsson.Algebraic Spaces and Stacks, volume 62 ofAmerican Mathematical Society Colloquium Publications. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 2016. 47

    2016

  29. [37]

    Ramanan and A

    S. Ramanan and A. Ramanathan. Some remarks on the instability flag.Tohoku Mathematical Journal. Second Series, 36(2):269–291, 1984

    1984

  30. [38]

    Schiffer

    M. Schiffer. Half-order differentials on Riemann surfaces.SIAM J. Appl. Math., 14:922–934, 1966

    1966

  31. [39]

    Local systems on proper algebraicV-manifolds.Pure Appl

    Carlos Simpson. Local systems on proper algebraicV-manifolds.Pure Appl. Math. Q., 7(4):1675–1759, 2011

    2011

  32. [40]

    Carlos T. Simpson. Constructing variations of Hodge structure using Yang-Mills theory and applications to uniformization.J. Am. Math. Soc., 1(4):867–918, 1988

    1988

  33. [41]

    Carlos T. Simpson. Harmonic bundles on noncompact curves.J. Am. Math. Soc., 3(3):713– 770, 1990

    1990

  34. [42]

    Quadratic differentials: A survey

    Kurt Strebel. Quadratic differentials: A survey. In Eberhard Knobloch, Ilppo Simo Louhivaara, and J¨ org Winkler, editors,Zum Werk Leonhard Eulers: Vortr¨ age des Euler- Kolloquiums im Mai 1983 in Berlin, pages 219–238. Birkh¨ auser Basel, Basel, 1984

    1983

  35. [43]

    Thurston

    William P. Thurston. The geometry and topology of three-manifolds. Princeton lecture notes, 1978/1980; see Chapter 5, Proposition 5.1

    1978

  36. [44]

    John Voight and David Zureick-Brown.The canonical ring of a stacky curve, volume 1362 of Mem. Am. Math. Soc.Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 2022

    2022

  37. [45]

    Opers with real monodromy and Eichler-Shimura isomorphism

    Yasuhiro Wakabayashi. Opers with real monodromy and Eichler-Shimura isomorphism. Preprint, arXiv:2309.12203 [math.CV] (2023), 2023

    2023 arXiv

  38. [46]

    G´ en´ eralisation des fonctions ab´ eliennes.J

    Andr´ e Weil. G´ en´ eralisation des fonctions ab´ eliennes.J. Math. Pures Appl. (9), 17:47–87, 1938

    1938

  39. [47]

    Wilson.A Tannakian Description for Parahoric Bruhat–Tits Group Schemes

    Kevin Michael Jr. Wilson.A Tannakian Description for Parahoric Bruhat–Tits Group Schemes. PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, 2010

    2010

  40. [48]

    Infinitesimal deformation of parabolic Higgs sheaves.Internat

    Kˆ oji Yokogawa. Infinitesimal deformation of parabolic Higgs sheaves.Internat. J. Math., 6(1):125–148, 1995

    1995

  41. [49]

    Vieweg, Wiesbaden, 1997

    Masaaki Yoshida.Hypergeometric Functions, My Love: Modular Interpretations of Configu- ration Spaces. Vieweg, Wiesbaden, 1997

    1997

  42. [50]

    Graded and filtered fiber functors on tannakian categories.Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 14(1):87–130, 2015

    Paul Ziegler. Graded and filtered fiber functors on tannakian categories.Journal of the Institute of Mathematics of Jussieu, 14(1):87–130, 2015. 48

    2015

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.