Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 39 references

Homogeneous hypergraph regularity lemmas via $k$-strong honest definitions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read In NIP strongly k-distal structures, every definable (k+1)-uniform hypergraph admits a homogeneous regularity lemma with uniformly definable parts and polynomial bounds.

desk verdict The main equivalence theorem (4.12) rests on a (p,q)-theorem that is false as stated, so the paper's central bridge is unproven; the regularity lemma itself also has a refinement gap in §5.4. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.19202 v1 pith:AWGHYY7N submitted 2026-07-21 math.LO math.CO

Mervyn Tong This is my paper
classification math.LOmath.CO MSC 03C4503C9805C3505C6505C75
keywords homogeneousregularitylemmak-stronghonestdefinitionsstrongk-distalityNIPtheorieshypergraphsimplicialcomplexesKeislermeasureshigher-aritydistality
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

The paper proves that (k+1)-uniform hypergraphs definable in an NIP (bounded VC-dimension) strongly k-distal structure — a higher-arity generalization of distality — satisfy a homogeneous regularity lemma: their vertex-power can be partitioned into boundedly many definable simplicial complexes, almost all of which restrict the hypergraph to either the complete or the empty relation, with the number of parts polynomial in the reciprocal of the error. The engine is a new notion, k-strong honest definition, which packages the (k+1)-ary interaction of a formula into k-ary pieces. The main structural theorem states that, among NIP theories, strong k-distality is exactly the condition that every formula φ(x1,...,xk;y) has such a definition. A sympathetic reader would care because this supplies a higher-arity analogue of the distal homogeneous regularity lemma and a model-theoretic route to polynomial-size decompositions for definable hypergraphs.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the k-strong honest definition: a tuple of formulas (ψ_1,...,ψ_k,ψ_{k+1}) where each ψ_i depends on all x-variables except x_i plus the external parameter y, and ψ_{k+1} depends on all of x. For every finite parameter set B and tuple a, N choices of parameters from B ensure that for every b in B one of the N cells ψ_{k+1}(x,c_{k+1}) ∧ ⋀_i ψ_i(x_{≠i},b,c_i) decides φ(x;b) relative to φ(a;b). This translates strong k-distality, a statement about indiscernibility with respect to k-sized subtuples, into a formula-level tool. The proof of Theorem 4.12 uses the (p,q)-theorem to uniformize non-uniform definitions, and the regularity lemma is built from a cutting lemma and

What would settle it

Find an NIP strongly k-distal structure in which some formula φ(x1,...,xk;y) does not have a k-strong honest definition, contradicting Theorem 4.12; alternatively, exhibit a formula with such a definition for which Corollary 5.18 fails, for instance by producing arbitrarily large finite sets V where every partition into o(poly(δ^{-1})) parts leaves more than δ|V|^{k+1} non-homogeneous measure. A direct check would be to test the conclusion of Lemma 4.6 on a proposed strongly k-distal example.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is the equivalence (Theorem 4.12): if T is NIP, then T is strongly k-distal if and only if every formula φ(x1,...,xk;y) admits a k-strong honest definition. From that equivalence, Theorem 5.15 and Corollary 5.18 derive the regularity lemma: for any formula with a k-strong honest definition, and any error δ>0, there is a fixed formula and a number K ≤ poly(δ^{-1}) such that every finite set V in a model can be partitioned into K definable subsets of V^k, the induced simplicial complexes partition V^{k+1}, and the total measure of the φ-homogeneous parts is at least 1-δ. Uniform definability means the same formula partitions every finite V after choo

Load-bearing premise

The proof depends on Lemma 4.6, an imported result from a PhD thesis that is not proved here, which asserts that strong k-distality preserves finite satisfiability in a specific tensor-product form; if that lemma is false or requires an unstated hypothesis, the equivalence theorem and the regularity lemma for strongly k-distal structures collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any finite (k+1)-uniform hypergraph definable by a formula with a k-strong honest definition in an NIP theory, there is a partition of V^k into K ≤ poly(δ^{-1}) definable sets whose induced simplicial complexes are φ-homogeneous on at least (1-δ)|V|^{k+1} of V^{k+1}.
  • The analogous statement holds for Keisler measures: if ν is generically stable, the homogeneous parts have measure at least (1-δ)ν(V)^{k+1}.
  • A definable strong Erdős–Hajnal property follows directly from the regularity lemma: a hypergraph of positive measure contains a definable cell of non-negligible measure contained entirely in the relation.
  • The partitions can be refined a posteriori so that the lower-dimensional faces of the simplicial complexes are themselves quasirandom in the NIP sense, yielding a tetrahedron counting lemma in the k=2 case.
  • The equivalence provides a characterization of strong k-distality in NIP theories purely in terms of uniform existence of k-strong honest definitions, giving a concrete tool for higher-arity distality.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the equivalence is robust, k-strong honest definitions are likely to become the standard working formulation of strong k-distality, in the way strong honest definitions became the standard tool for distality; the paper hints at this but develops no applications beyond the regularity lemma.
  • The NIP assumption enters through the (p,q)-theorem and ε-approximation; an NIP_k version of sampling would plausibly remove it, giving homogeneous regularity lemmas for NIP_k theories — a testable extension the paper itself poses as a problem.
  • The author's backward question — whether any relation satisfying the regularity lemma is definable in an expansion that is NIP strongly k-distal — if answered positively would turn the regularity lemma into a combinatorial characterization of strong k-distality.
  • The open degree-N issue suggests that k-strong honest definitions may carry a hidden integer-valued invariant; showing degree 1 always suffices would simplify all statements, while a counterexample would reveal new structure.
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 introduces k-strong honest definitions for (k+1)-ary formulas and proves (Theorem 4.12) that, in NIP theories, strong k-distality is equivalent to every formula admitting such a definition. It then derives a homogeneous hypergraph regularity lemma (Theorems 5.8/5.15, Corollaries 5.17/5.18): if a formula defining a (k+1)-uniform hypergraph has a k-strong honest definition in an NIP theory, then V^{k+1} can be partitioned into cylinder sets over a partition of V^k, most of which are φ-homogeneous, with uniformly definable parts and polynomial bounds in 1/δ. Section 5.4 refines this to a version suitable for counting, and the introduction discusses the intended application to NIP strongly k-distal structures.

Significance. The notion of k-strong honest definitions is a natural higher-arity extension of strong honest definitions, and the regularity statement—uniform definability plus polynomial bounds without Skolem functions—would be a valuable strengthening of the Chernikov–Starchenko and Chernikov–Westhead results. The proof of the regularity lemma in Section 5.2 is concrete and, conditional on the existence of the honest definitions, mostly convincing. However, the central equivalence Theorem 4.12 rests on a false (p,q)-theorem, and the advertised applicability to strongly k-distal structures is therefore not established. The significance of the paper cannot be assessed until this gap is repaired.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4, Fact 4.13 and proof of Theorem 4.12] Fact 4.13 is false as stated. Let X be an n-element set and F={{x}: x∈X}. Then F is finite, VC*(F)=1, and the (1,1)-property holds (every member is nonempty), but any piercing set has size n. Finite projective planes give a (2,2) obstruction with dual VC-dimension 2 and unbounded blocking number. The proof of Theorem 4.12 applies Fact 4.13 with p=q=m_{Ψ,N}/d; nothing in the text excludes p=1 or p=2. Consequently the step producing a fixed Y⊆B^{eN} is unjustified. Since Theorem 4.12 is the bridge from strong k-distality to k-strong honest definitions, the main equivalence and the regularity lemma for strongly k-distal structures are not proved by this manuscript.
  2. [§5.4, proof of Theorem 5.22] The step after the construction of Q asserts that, for each P∈P, the total measure of pairs (Q1,Q2)∈Q^2 that are not δ′-almost P-homogeneous is at most δ′|V|^2. This does not follow from Theorem 5.19, whose guarantee concerns pairs from Q_P, not from its refinement Q. δ-almost homogeneity is not hereditary under refinement: a box on which P is complete except for one point is δ′-almost homogeneous for large boxes, but a refined atom containing the missing point has density 0. Thus the bound on I2 is not established. A different argument is needed to retain Theorem 5.22.
  3. [§4, Lemma 4.6] Lemma 4.6 is the main imported engine in the proof of Theorem 4.4 and is quoted from a PhD thesis without proof. It is exactly what converts strong k-distality into the non-uniform honest-definition condition, and Theorem 4.12 inherits this dependency. The paper should either prove the lemma in an appendix or cite a peer-reviewed statement. This concern is secondary to the false Fact 4.13, but it makes the verification of the central equivalence conditional on an unexamined external result.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§1] The word 'regulairty' appears in the introduction; a spelling pass is needed.
  2. [§4, proof of Theorem 4.12] The phrase 'By standard coding tricks, we may apply Lemma 4.14 under the assumption H=1' is not fully detailed. The parenthetical sketch is plausible, but given how much weight the uniformization step carries, a formal construction should be supplied.
  3. [§5.2, Definition 5.9] The notation P_1 ∧ ⋯ ∧ P_{k+1}, and the identification of definable sets with formulas, should be flagged more explicitly to avoid confusion in the measure computations.
  4. [§5.4] The term 'δ-almost homogeneous' in Definition 5.21 is a density condition (9), not homogeneity; overloading 'homogeneous' is a potential source of confusion and should be renamed, e.g. 'δ-almost dense or sparse'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the main equivalence and regularity lemma rest on external results, and self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

No circularity found. The paper's central claim, Theorem 4.12, is an equivalence theorem proved by importing Walker's Lemma 4.6 and Theorem 4.3 [39] and Matoušek's (p,q)-theorem [22], all external to the present paper; these are not the paper's own target and are not used in a way that presupposes k-strong honest definitions or the regularity lemma. Definition 4.9 is a definition, not an output derived from itself; Theorem 5.8 derives partitions from the honest-definition hypothesis via an epsilon-approximation/cutting argument (Proposition 5.11), not by assuming the partition. The self-references to the author's PhD thesis [35] and prior papers [36,37] occur as provenance/context (Section 1.1, Fact 3.6, Section 5.5) and are not load-bearing for the regularity theorems. No fitted parameters or empirical data are relabeled as predictions. The possible difficulty flagged by a skeptic—that Fact 4.13 is asserted in a form that may be false (e.g., p=q=1 or p=q=2 counterexamples with arbitrary set families)—would be a correctness problem if sustained, not a circularity: it would invalidate a premise, not show that the conclusion was assumed. Similarly, the paper explicitly leaves open Problems 4.11, 4.15, 5.16, 5.24, and 5.25, so no unsupported step is disguised as a proven consequence. Therefore the derivation chain is self-contained relative to its stated external hypotheses, and the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numbers are fitted to data; the dependence poly_φ(δ^{-1}) is a syntactic bound, not a fitted constant. The central new definition, k-strong honest definitions, is a definition rather than an empirical entity, so no invented entities are introduced. The load-bearing external inputs are Walker's Lemma 4.6 and Theorem 4.3, Matousek's (p,q)-theorem, Simon's ε-approximation/generic-stability machinery, and the Chernikov-Starchenko NIP graph regularity lemma. Of these, Walker's Lemma 4.6 is the most exposed because it is imported from a thesis and carries the strong-k-distality-to-type-extension implication.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Walker's Lemma 4.6: in a strongly k-distal theory, p|B' ∪ ⋃_i (p_{≠i}⊗q)|B' ⊢ (p⊗q)|B' for q finitely satisfiable over B.
    Imported from [39, Lemma 9.12]; used in the proof of Theorem 4.4 to pass from strong k-distality to non-uniform k-strong honest definitions, hence underpins Theorem 4.12 and the regularity lemma.
  • domain assumption Walker's Theorem 4.3: strong k-distality is equivalent to the existence of non-uniform ψ(x;z) satisfying equation (2).
    Used in Theorem 4.4, direction (ii) implies (i); from [39, Theorem 9.18].
  • standard math Matousek (p,q)-theorem, Fact 4.13.
    Used in Theorem 4.12 to turn many approximate honest definitions into one uniform one; standard combinatorial theorem.
  • domain assumption Simon's ε-approximation theorem for generically stable measures in NIP theories, Theorem 5.5, together with product-measure machinery, Definition 5.2 and Fact 5.3.
    Used in Proposition 5.11 and Theorem 5.8; imported from [28].
  • domain assumption Chernikov-Starchenko NIP graph regularity lemma with definable parts, Theorem 5.19.
    Used in the auxiliary refinement Theorem 5.22; imported from [8].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Homogeneous hypergraph regularity lemmas via $k$-strong honest definitions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AWGHYY7N

@misc{pith2026260719202,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Homogeneous hypergraph regularity lemmas via $k$-strong honest definitions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AWGHYY7N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.19202}
}
abstract

We prove that $(k+1)$-uniform hypergraphs definable in an NIP strongly $k$-distal structure satisfy a homogeneous regularity lemma -- they can be partitioned into a bounded number of simplicial complexes, most of which are homogeneous (meaning that the restriction of the hypergraph to the simplicial complex is either complete or empty). Furthermore, the parts of the partition can be chosen uniformly definably, and the size of the partition is polynomial in the reciprocal of the error parameter. This extends the homogeneous regularity lemma proven by Chernikov and Starchenko for hypergraphs definable in a distal structure. We prove this by introducing $k$-strong honest definitions and showing that an NIP structure is strongly $k$-distal if and only if every formula $\varphi(x_1, ..., x_k; y)$ has a $k$-strong honest definition. This extends the theory of strong honest definitions in distal structures to the higher-arity setting.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [11]

    Onn-distality,n-triviality and hypergraph regularity in NIP the- ories, 2026.arXiv:2605.04714

    Artem Chernikov and Francis Westhead. Onn-distality,n-triviality and hypergraph regularity in NIP the- ories, 2026.arXiv:2605.04714

    arXiv 2026

  2. [1]

    Efficient testing of bipartite graphs for forbidden induced subgraphs.SIAM Journal on Computing, 37(3):959–976, 2007.doi:10.1137/050627915

    Noga Alon, Eldar Fischer, and Ilan Newman. Efficient testing of bipartite graphs for forbidden induced subgraphs.SIAM Journal on Computing, 37(3):959–976, 2007.doi:10.1137/050627915

    doi:10.1137/050627915 2007

  3. [2]

    Combinatorial bounds in distal structures.The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 90(4):1377–1409, 2025.doi:10.1017/jsl.2023.74

    Aaron Anderson. Combinatorial bounds in distal structures.The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 90(4):1377–1409, 2025.doi:10.1017/jsl.2023.74

    work page doi:10.1017/jsl.2023.74 2025

  4. [3]

    Distality in valued fields and related structures.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 375(7):4641–4710, 2022.doi: 10.1090/tran/8661

    Matthias Aschenbrenner, Artem Chernikov, Allen Gehret, and Martin Ziegler. Distality in valued fields and related structures.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 375(7):4641–4710, 2022.doi: 10.1090/tran/8661

    doi:10.1090/tran/8661 2022

  5. [4]

    The definable (p, q)-theorem for distal theories.The Journal of Sym- bolic Logic, 83(1):123–127, 2018.doi:10.1017/jsl.2016.72

    Gareth Boxall and Charlotte Kestner. The definable (p, q)-theorem for distal theories.The Journal of Sym- bolic Logic, 83(1):123–127, 2018.doi:10.1017/jsl.2016.72

    work page doi:10.1017/jsl.2016.72 2018

  6. [5]

    Cutting lemma and Zarankiewicz’s problem in distal structures.Selecta Mathematica, 26(25):471–508, 2020.doi:10.1007/s00029-020-0551-2

    Artem Chernikov, David Galvin, and Sergei Starchenko. Cutting lemma and Zarankiewicz’s problem in distal structures.Selecta Mathematica, 26(25):471–508, 2020.doi:10.1007/s00029-020-0551-2

    doi:10.1007/s00029-020-0551-2 2020

  7. [6]

    Externally definable sets and dependent pairs II.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 367(7):5217–5235, 2015.doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-2015-06210-2

    Artem Chernikov and Pierre Simon. Externally definable sets and dependent pairs II.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 367(7):5217–5235, 2015.doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-2015-06210-2

    work page doi:10.1090/s0002-9947-2015-06210-2 2015

  8. [7]

    Regularity lemma for distal structures.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 20(10):2437–2466, 2018.doi:10.4171/JEMS/816

    Artem Chernikov and Sergei Starchenko. Regularity lemma for distal structures.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 20(10):2437–2466, 2018.doi:10.4171/JEMS/816

    doi:10.4171/jems/816 2018

Show all 39 references
  1. [8]

    Definable regularity lemmas for NIP hypergraphs.The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, 72(4):1401–1433, Mar 2021.doi:10.1093/qmath/haab011

    Artem Chernikov and Sergei Starchenko. Definable regularity lemmas for NIP hypergraphs.The Quarterly Journal of Mathematics, 72(4):1401–1433, Mar 2021.doi:10.1093/qmath/haab011

    2021 doi

  2. [9]

    Hypergraph regularity and higher arity VC-dimension, 2020.arXiv: 2010.00726

    Artem Chernikov and Henry Towsner. Hypergraph regularity and higher arity VC-dimension, 2020.arXiv: 2010.00726

    2020 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Averages of hypergraphs and higher arity stability, 2025.arXiv: 2508.05839

    Artem Chernikov and Henry Towsner. Averages of hypergraphs and higher arity stability, 2025.arXiv: 2508.05839

    2025 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Fan R. K. Chung. Regularity lemmas for hypergraphs and quasi-randomness.Random Structures & Al- gorithms, 2(2):241–252, 1991.doi:10.1002/rsa.3240020208

    1991 doi

  5. [13]

    Duke, Hanno Lefmann, and Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl

    Richard A. Duke, Hanno Lefmann, and Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl. A fast approximation algorithm for computing the frequencies of subgraphs in a given graph.SIAM Journal on Computing, 24(3):598–620, 1995.doi:10.1137/ S0097539793247634

    1995

  6. [14]

    A polynomial regularity lemma for semialgebraic hypergraphs and its applications in geometry and property testing.SIAM Journal on Computing, 45(6):2199–2223, 2016

    Jacob Fox, J´ anos Pach, and Andrew Suk. A polynomial regularity lemma for semialgebraic hypergraphs and its applications in geometry and property testing.SIAM Journal on Computing, 45(6):2199–2223, 2016. doi:10.1137/15M1007355

    2016 doi

  7. [15]

    Regularity for hypergraphs with bounded VC 2 di- mension, 2025.arXiv:2508.09969

    Lior Gishboliner, Asaf Shapira, and Yuval Wigderson. Regularity for hypergraphs with bounded VC 2 di- mension, 2025.arXiv:2508.09969

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    W. T. Gowers. Lower bounds of tower type for Szemer´ edi’s uniformity lemma.Geometric & Functional Analysis GAF A, 7:322–337, 1997.doi:10.1007/PL00001621

    1997 doi

  9. [17]

    W. T. Gowers. Quasirandomness, counting and regularity for 3-uniform hypergraphs.Combinatorics, Prob- ability and Computing, 15(1–2):143–184, 2006.doi:10.1017/S0963548305007236

    2006 doi

  10. [18]

    W. T. Gowers. Hypergraph regularity and the multidimensional Szemer´ edi theorem.Annals of Mathematics, 166:897–946, 2007.doi:10.4007/annals.2007.166.897. 26 MER VYN TONG

    2007 doi

  11. [19]

    Weak hypergraph regularity and linear hypergraphs.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 100(2):151–160, 2010.doi:10.1016/j

    Yoshiharu Kohayakawa, Brendan Nagle, Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl, and Mathias Schacht. Weak hypergraph regularity and linear hypergraphs.Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 100(2):151–160, 2010.doi:10.1016/j. jctb.2009.05.005

    2010 doi

  12. [20]

    Szemer´ edi’s lemma for the analyst.Geometric and Functional Analysis, 17:252–270, 2007.doi:10.1007/s00039-007-0599-6

    L´ aszl´ o Lov´ asz and Bal´ azs Szegedy. Szemer´ edi’s lemma for the analyst.Geometric and Functional Analysis, 17:252–270, 2007.doi:10.1007/s00039-007-0599-6

    2007 doi

  13. [21]

    Malliaris and S

    M. Malliaris and S. Shelah. Regularity lemmas for stable graphs.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 366(3):1551–1585, 2014.doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-2013-05820-5

    2014 doi

  14. [22]

    Bounded VC-dimension implies a fractional Helly theorem.Discrete & Computational Geo- metry, 31:251–255, 2004.doi:10.1007/s00454-003-2859-z

    Jiˇ r ´ ı Matouˇ sek. Bounded VC-dimension implies a fractional Helly theorem.Discrete & Computational Geo- metry, 31:251–255, 2004.doi:10.1007/s00454-003-2859-z

    2004 doi

  15. [23]

    Hypergraph regularity and quasi- randomness

    Brendan Nagle, Annika Poerschket, Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl, and Mathias Schacht. Hypergraph regularity and quasi- randomness. InProceedings of the 2009 Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 227–235, 2009.doi:10.1137/1.9781611973068.26

    2009 doi

  16. [24]

    The counting lemma for regulark-uniform hypergraphs

    Brendan Nagle, Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl, and Mathias Schacht. The counting lemma for regulark-uniform hypergraphs. Random Structures & Algorithms, 28(2):113–179, 2006.doi:10.1002/rsa.20117

    2006 doi

  17. [25]

    Regularity lemma fork-uniform hypergraphs.Random Structures & Al- gorithms, 25(1):1–42, 2004.doi:10.1002/rsa.20017

    Vojtˇ ech R¨ odl and Jozef Skokan. Regularity lemma fork-uniform hypergraphs.Random Structures & Al- gorithms, 25(1):1–42, 2004.doi:10.1002/rsa.20017

    2004 doi

  18. [26]

    I. Z. Ruzsa and E. Szemer´ edi. Triple systems with no six points carrying three triangles. InCombinatorics, vol. II (Keszthely, 1976), volume 18 ofColl. Math. Soc. J. Bolyai, pages 939–945, 1978

    1976

  19. [27]

    Distal and non-distal NIP theories.Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 164(3):294–318, 2013

    Pierre Simon. Distal and non-distal NIP theories.Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 164(3):294–318, 2013. doi:10.1016/j.apal.2012.10.015

    2013 doi

  20. [28]

    Lecture Notes in Logic

    Pierre Simon.A Guide to NIP Theories. Lecture Notes in Logic. Cambridge University Press, 2015.doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415133

    2015 doi

  21. [29]

    2015.https://www.normalesup.org/ ~simon/NIP_guide .pdf

    Pierre Simon.A Guide to NIP Theories (online). 2015.https://www.normalesup.org/ ~simon/NIP_guide .pdf

    2015

  22. [30]

    Szemer´ edi

    E. Szemer´ edi. Regular partitions of graphs. InProbl` emes combinatoires et th´ eorie des graphes (Univ. Orsay, Orsay, 1976), volume 260 ofColloq. Internat. CNRS, pages 399–401, 1978

    1976

  23. [31]

    C. Terry. Growth of regular partitions 3: strong regularity and the vertex partition, 2025.arXiv:2404.02024

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    C. Terry. Growth of regular partitions 4: strong regularity and the pairs partition, 2025.arXiv:2404.02030

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Terry and J

    C. Terry and J. Wolf. Irregular triads in 3-uniform hypergraphs, 2025.arXiv:2111.01737

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    An improved bound for regular decompositions of 3-uniform hypergraphs of bounded VC 2- dimension.Model Theory, 2(2):325–356, 2023.doi:10.2140/mt.2023.2.325

    Caroline Terry. An improved bound for regular decompositions of 3-uniform hypergraphs of bounded VC 2- dimension.Model Theory, 2(2):325–356, 2023.doi:10.2140/mt.2023.2.325

    2023 doi

  27. [35]

    PhD thesis, University of Leeds, 2025

    Ho Wang Mervyn Tong.Distality to and from combinatorics. PhD thesis, University of Leeds, 2025. URL: https://etheses.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/37811/

    2025

  28. [36]

    Higher-arity distality and forking triviality, 2026.arXiv:2605.22314

    Mervyn Tong. Higher-arity distality and forking triviality, 2026.arXiv:2605.22314

    2026 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Zarankiewicz bounds from distal regularity lemma.Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, 58(3):e70310, 2026.doi:10.1112/blms.70310

    Mervyn Tong. Zarankiewicz bounds from distal regularity lemma.Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, 58(3):e70310, 2026.doi:10.1112/blms.70310

    2026 doi

  30. [38]

    Distality rank.The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 88(2):704–737, 2023.doi:10.1017/jsl.2022

    Roland Walker. Distality rank.The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 88(2):704–737, 2023.doi:10.1017/jsl.2022. 61

    2023 doi

  31. [39]

    PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2023

    Roland Walker.Distality Rank and Tree Dimension. PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2023. doi:10.25417/uic.23661723.v1. Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, Centre for Mathematical Sci- ences, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WB, United Kingd...

    2023 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.