Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 56 references

Structure theory of $BV$ functions and finite perimeter sets on Riemannian manifolds

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that the Euclidean theory of bounded-variation functions and finite-perimeter sets—including De Giorgi's and Federer's structure theorems, Gauss–Green formulas, and strict interior approximation with Dirichlet boundary con

desk verdict The paper plausibly delivers the full Euclidean BV/finite-perimeter toolbox on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds; the load-bearing Vitali-relation premise is asserted rather than proved, but the non-compact-ball worry is weaker than it looks. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.21031 v1 pith:NWBWPAIY submitted 2026-07-23 math.DG math.MG

Péter Koltai , Kathrin Völkner This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DGmath.MG MSC 49Q1526B3028A7558J32
keywords BVfunctionsfiniteperimetersetsRiemannianmanifoldsDeGiorgistructuretheoremFedererreducedboundarycovectormeasuresGamma-convergencecapillarity
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 aims to transfer the full Euclidean BV and finite-perimeter structure theory to arbitrary smooth Riemannian manifolds, dropping the usual crutches of global curvature bounds or completeness. It does so by replacing the Besicovitch covering lemma (which fails on general manifolds) with a Vitali-relation argument for closed Riemannian balls, and by introducing covector measures as the intrinsic analog of vector-valued measures. The payoff is that De Giorgi's theorem (reduced boundaries are rectifiable, perimeter equals codimension-1 Hausdorff measure), Federer's theorem (measure-theoretic boundary points have density 1/2 almost everywhere), trace and Gauss–Green theorems, and a strict interior approximation result all hold in this generality. The authors demonstrate the power by proving Gamma-convergence of mixed-boundary capillarity functionals on rough domains in manifolds. A careful reader will see that the whole edifice rests on one key analytic premise: closed balls form a Vitali relation for every Radon measure.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the Vitali relation of closed Riemannian balls: following Federer's general differentiation theory, the paper shows that for every Radon measure on an arbitrary manifold, the family of closed balls (x, ¯B(x,r)) is a Vitali relation, because the Riemannian distance is directionally limited on relatively compact sets. This substitutes for the Besicovitch covering lemma, which is generally false on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds. Around this, the paper builds covector measures (pairs of a Radon measure and a Borel section of the cotangent bundle, with polar decomposition) as the Riemannian analog of vector-valued measures, and a chartwise localization lemma (Lemma

What would settle it

Take a specific non-complete or curvature-unbounded Riemannian manifold and a Radon measure; compute the limsup and liminf of ball averages of a covector measure. If they differ on a set of positive measure, the Vitali relation fails and Theorems 4.2–4.3 collapse. Alternatively, construct two finite-perimeter sets on a manifold where P(E∪F)+P(E∩F) > P(E)+P(F), which would falsify the verbatim transfer of the Euclidean intersection-perimeter identity used in Theorem 6.12 and break the approximation theorem.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the classical analytic machinery of BV functions transfers to arbitrary Riemannian manifolds. Concretely, Theorem 4.2 establishes Lebesgue–Besicovitch–Federer differentiation for Radon measures and Theorem 4.3 for covector measures, using only that closed metric balls form a Vitali relation. Theorem 5.15 (De Giorgi) states that the reduced boundary of a finite-perimeter set is H^{m-1}-rectifiable, the perimeter measure equals H^{m-1} restricted to the reduced boundary, and blow-ups converge to half-spaces orthogonal to the measure-theoretic inner normal. Theorem 5.19 (Federer) shows that H^{m-1}-almost every point of the measure-theoretic boundary has density 1/2 an

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that closed balls form a Vitali relation for every Radon measure on an arbitrary Riemannian manifold, since the usual Besicovitch covering lemma is false there; the intersection-perimeter identity used in the approximation theorem is also assumed to transfer verbatim from Euclidean space.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • De Giorgi's and Federer's structure theorems hold on any smooth Riemannian manifold, so perimeter measures are always H^{m-1} on the reduced boundary and the measure-theoretic boundary is rectifiable up to null sets.
  • Trace and Gauss–Green theorems hold for BV functions on finite-perimeter strong extension domains, providing the toolset for boundary value problems in manifolds.
  • Finite-perimeter sets in rough domains can be strictly approximated from the interior while keeping a prescribed Dirichlet boundary portion untouched, enabling relaxation and Gamma-convergence for mixed-boundary variational problems.
  • Capillarity functionals with mixed boundary conditions admit minimizers and Gamma-converge as adhesion parameters vary, on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the Vitali-relation argument is sound, the same structure theorems should extend to any metric space whose closed balls form a Vitali relation for every Radon measure, such as certain sub-Riemannian or Alexandrov spaces; the paper does not assert this, but the machinery appears transferable.
  • The strict interior approximation theorem may serve as a general template for constructing recovery sequences in Gamma-convergence problems beyond capillarity, including generalized Cheeger or free-boundary problems on manifolds.
  • The paper's metric-independence results (essential boundary is topological, while the density-1/2 set is Riemannian) suggest that any purely metric definition of reduced boundary must handle this dependence explicitly.
  • A direct testable extension: check whether the Euclidean intersection-perimeter identity P(E∪F)+P(E∩F)≤P(E)+P(F) used in Theorem 6.12 remains valid with the same constants on manifolds with non-negative Ricci curvature, where geodesic boundaries may deform intersections and unions.
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 develops an intrinsic theory of BV functions and finite-perimeter sets on arbitrary smooth Riemannian manifolds, without assuming completeness or global curvature bounds. The framework combines the covector-measure characterization of BV from [30] with Federer's metric-space differentiation theory and Euclidean geometric measure theory in charts. The main results are: a Lebesgue–Besicovitch–Federer differentiation theorem for Radon and covector measures (Theorems 4.2 and 4.3); a Riemannian reduced boundary defined by weak-* blow-up limits (Definition 5.1); De Giorgi's structure theorem giving rectifiability of the reduced boundary, the identity |D1_E| = H^{m-1} restricted to ∂*E, and half-space blow-ups (Theorem 5.15); Federer's characterization of the measure-theoretic boundary (Theorem 5.19); trace and Gauss–Green theorems on domains (Theorem 6.4, Corollary 6.6); a strict interior approximation result for finite-perimeter sets respecting a Dirichlet boundary portion (Theorem 6.12); and a Γ-convergence result for capillarity functionals with mixed boundary conditions (Theorem 6.14). The proof strategy is to reduce to Euclidean theorems chartwise and to use local doubling and Poincaré properties on relatively compact sets.

Significance. If the technical foundations hold, this paper makes a substantial portion of Euclidean BV theory available on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds, filling a gap between the Euclidean setting and the more restrictive metric-measure-space framework. The localization approach is natural, and the paper has several strengths: it explicitly preserves Riemannian objects such as polar vector fields, normal vectors, blow-ups via the exponential map, and Hausdorff measures; it gives intrinsic statements rather than relying on an ambient Euclidean embedding; and the main chain of deductions — from differentiation to De Giorgi/Federer structure theorems and then to boundary-value applications — is coherent and largely explicit. The paper also correctly identifies a genuinely Riemannian subtlety: pointwise densities are not invariant under general charts (Example 5.17), only under normal charts (Corollary 5.18). However, two load-bearing transfer points are not fully demonstrated in the manuscript: the Vitali-relation premise for closed Riemannian balls on arbitrary non-complete manifolds, and the verbatim Riemannian transfer of the intersection-perimeter identity from [43, Thm 16.3]. These need to

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Remark 4.1(2)] The entire differentiation theory, and hence Definition 5.1 and all of Sections 5–6, rests on the claim that the family of closed Riemannian balls V={(x,\bar B(x,r))} is a Vitali relation for every Radon measure on an arbitrary smooth Riemannian manifold. The justification is a one-paragraph citation to [22, 2.8.9, 2.8.18] and [11, Def. 2.5], but the hypotheses of the cited theorem are not stated and the non-complete case is not addressed. In particular, if the manifold is not complete a closed ball may be non-compact, and a locally finite Radon measure can have infinite mass on it, so the quotients in Theorem 4.2 are not a priori defined for all r>0. The issue is likely repairable by restricting to radii below the local injectivity radius (where closed balls are compact) and proving the Vitali property for this subfamily, but this must be written out. This is the single most load-bearin
  2. [Section 6.2, Theorem 6.12, especially (6.9) and (6.13)] The proof of Theorem 6.12 transfers the Euclidean intersection-perimeter identity [43, Theorem 16.3] to Riemannian manifolds by saying 'the proof applies verbatim.' This identity involves density sets E^(1), normal-vector coincidence sets {n_E=n_F}, and H^{m-1}-null-set assertions, all of which need the fine structure theory from Section 5. Since the density of a set at a boundary point is not invariant under arbitrary charts (Example 5.17), the transfer is not completely automatic. The manuscript should provide a proof, or at least a precise Riemannian statement of the identity used in (6.9) and (6.13), with the necessary chart-invariance and null-set facts justified. This is load-bearing because Theorem 6.12 is the basis for the recovery sequence in the Γ-convergence result, Theorem 6.14.
  3. [Section 5, Lemma 5.2] The chartwise compatibility of the reduced boundary is central for transferring Euclidean results, but the proof relies on the claim that the limit is independent of the choice of Vitali relation and that images of Euclidean balls under a chart form a Vitali relation. This is plausible for small r, where charts are bi-Lipschitz, but the local-to-global passage is not detailed. In particular, the proof should specify that the limits are taken over r small enough for the Euclidean ball to lie inside the chart domain and for the chart to be bi-Lipschitz there, and should justify that the two normalization sequences give the same limit. This is not a fatal flaw, but it needs to be made explicit because the rest of Section 5 hinges on this lemma.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Remark 3.8(2)] The identity 'D^h u[X] = sqrt(det A) D^g u[X]' is a shorthand for the functional identity involving multiplication of covector measures by the scalar function sqrt(det A); as written it may be misread as a pointwise scalar action on X. Since the paper defines multiplication fν by (fν)[X]=ν[fX], this is consistent, but a parenthetical clarification would help.
  2. [Section 4, opening paragraph] The sentence 'The generalization ... presents itself with two major difficulties. Firstly ... Secondly ...' is clear, but Theorem 4.2 is stated as a 'summary' of [22, 2.9.5–2.9.10] without giving the statement of the Vitali-relation theorem used. Adding the explicit statement of the relevant Federer theorem would improve readability.
  3. [Corollary 5.18 proof] The constants C_v(r0) and the application of inequality (5.28) are somewhat terse. In particular, the expression C_v(r0)=(1/L(r0))^{2m} exp((m-1)K r0) is not clearly derived from (5.28). A short derivation would remove ambiguity.
  4. [Theorem 6.14 proof] The lower semicontinuity estimate uses a product formula for liminf of (1-β_n)P(E_n;Ω∪γ)+β_n P(E_n); this is correct but should be justified briefly, since liminf of a sum with converging coefficients is being split termwise.
  5. [Throughout] There are a few typographical issues visible in the text: unmatched parentheses in the definition of the total variation after (3.1), 'Annals de la Faculté des sciences de Toulouse' in the references, and some equation numbers referenced only by 'above' or 'as before'. A careful proofreading pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation reduces to external Euclidean and Federer theorems along charts, and the few self-citations are application context only.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the sense required by the circularity test: there are no fitted quantities, no data, and no parameter estimated from a subset of results that is then presented as a prediction. The central analytic engine is Theorem 4.2, which is explicitly presented as a summary of Federer's metric-space differentiation results [22, 2.9.5-2.9.10] applied to the Vitali relation of closed Riemannian balls. The claim that these balls form a Vitali relation is asserted in Remark 4.1(2) with citations to [22, 2.8.9, 2.8.18] and [11, Def. 2.5]; even if this assertion were incomplete or incorrect, that would be a correctness or verification gap, not a circular reduction, because it is not derived from the paper's own conclusions. Theorem 4.3 is then a corollary of Theorem 4.2 together with the polar-decomposition definitions, and no step in its proof re-uses the statement it is meant to establish. The structure theorems for finite-perimeter sets (Theorems 5.15 and 5.19) are proved by chartwise reduction to the Euclidean theorems of De Giorgi and Federer, cited to [43] and [4], after Lemma 5.2 and Corollary 5.3 establish compatibility of the intrinsic reduced boundary with chart images; this is a legitimate transfer argument, not a renaming of a known result, since the intrinsic Riemannian statement is new and its proof relies on external Euclidean facts. The perimeter identity (6.9) is similarly imported from [43, Thm. 16.3] and transferred verbatim once the preceding structure theory is available; this is an appeal to an external theorem, not to the paper's own assumptions. The only self-citations, [7] and [24], appear in the introduction as examples of applications (coherent sets in dynamical systems) and play no role in the proofs or in any load-bearing premise. No uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, no ansatz is smuggled in by self-citation, and no definition is circularly tied to the result it is used to prove. Accordingly, the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 9 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Free parameters: none — this is pure mathematics with no data fitting, no adjustable constants, and no parameters chosen to force conclusions; the only inputs are external theorems and stated hypotheses (smooth manifold; local Assumptions (A)/(B)/(C) in Section 6). Invented entities: none — the covector-measure formalism is inherited from [30]; reduced boundary and approximate tangent spaces are definitions in the new setting, not newly postulated objects lacking independent evidence. The axioms listed are the load-bearing external inputs and domain assumptions the central claims rest on.

assumptions (9)
  • standard math Closed Riemannian balls form a Vitali relation for every Radon measure on M (Remark 4.1(2), citing [22, 2.8.9, 2.8.18] and [11, Def. 2.5]).
    Load-bearing for Theorems 4.2–4.3 and hence for Definition 5.1 of the reduced boundary and all of Sections 5–6; it replaces the Besicovitch covering lemma, which the paper notes is 'generally false on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds' (Section 4 opening).
  • standard math Every relatively compact domain satisfies local doubling and a local 1-Poincaré inequality via embedding into a compact double (Remark 2.2, citing [40, Example 9.32, Lemma 10.12] and [54]).
    Bridges the metric-measure-space results to the manifold setting; the extension of the smooth metric from the closure of Ω to the double is asserted via [40, Lemma 10.12] and is standard.
  • standard math Riesz–Markov representation for finite covector measures (Theorem 3.2, cited from [30, Theorem 1]).
    Foundation for the BV characterization (Theorem 3.4) and the whole covector-measure formalism; independent external result.
  • standard math Euclidean De Giorgi and Federer structure theorems and blow-up theorems (from [4, 43]).
    External benchmarks: Theorems 5.15 and 5.19 reduce to these via chart localization (Lemma 5.2, Corollaries 5.3 and 5.18).
  • standard math Euclidean intersection/perimeter decomposition identity [43, Theorem 16.3] transfers 'verbatim' to Riemannian manifolds (Section 6.2, eqs. (6.9), (6.13)).
    Load-bearing for Theorem 6.12 and the Γ-convergence recovery sequence; the transfer is asserted, not proved — the main flagged gap of this review.
  • standard math Density comparison estimate (5.28) requiring a local lower Ricci bound on shrinking balls (from [53]).
    Used in Corollary 5.18 to show point densities are preserved by normal charts; local lower bound exists by continuity of Ricci on compact balls, with K(r)·r → 0 implicitly used.
  • standard math Blow-up characterizations and approximate-tangent-space characterizations of rectifiable sets in R^m (from [43, Thm 15.5, Cor 16.1] and [56]).
    Used in the proofs of Theorem 5.15(ii),(iv) and Lemma 5.7.
  • domain assumption M is a smooth, connected, oriented Riemannian m-manifold; all chart domains are taken relatively compact; 'measurable' means Borel measurable (Section 2).
    Standard setting for the subject; orientation is used for divergence and Gauss–Green; the relative-compact chart convention underpins the localization arguments.
  • domain assumption Assumptions (A), (B), (C) in Section 6: finite-perimeter strong BV-extension domain with bounded trace operator; H^{m-1}(Ω^{(1)}∩∂Ω)=0; Dirichlet portion γ realized as ∂*A∩∂*Ω for a finite-perimeter A⊂Ω.
    Legitimate regularity hypotheses for the approximation and capillarity results, standard for the mixed-boundary setting and honestly stated; not ad hoc to force the conclusions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Structure theory of $BV$ functions and finite perimeter sets on Riemannian manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NWBWPAIY

@misc{pith2026260721031,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Structure theory of $BV$ functions and finite perimeter sets on Riemannian manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NWBWPAIY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.21031}
}
abstract

We develop the theory of functions of bounded variation and the structure theory of finite-perimeter sets on arbitrary Riemannian manifolds without relying on global curvature bounds or completeness of the manifold. To this end, we build a localization framework that permits a synthesis of techniques from Euclidean geometric measure theory and analysis on metric measure spaces while preserving genuinely Riemannian features, such as polar and normal vector fields, reduced boundaries, and approximate tangent spaces. As a consequence, we recover key results of the Euclidean theory, such as a differentiation theorem for a Riemannian generalization of vector-valued measures and the structure theorems by De Giorgi and Federer, formulated intrinsically on Riemannian manifolds. This makes a large portion of the classical Euclidean $BV$ theory available to the Riemannian setting. We demonstrate this by providing the theoretical background for boundary value problems on domains in manifolds, including trace and Gauss-Green theorems. Finally, we prove an approximation result for finite-perimeter sets in a strict sense that respects a prescribed Dirichlet boundary portion of a given ambient domain and apply this to prove Gamma-convergence of a family of energy functionals for capillarity problems with mixed boundary conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21031 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The density of E at the origin is not preserved under the linear transformation A. x1 x2 E r (a) The volume of E ∩Br(0) equals half the volume of Br(0). x1 x2 A(E) r (b) The volume of A(E)∩Br(0) is smaller than r 2 , the volume of the dark colored area. We remark that nevertheless, applying the transformation formula and exploiting smoothness of the Jacobian determinant, one finds that lim r↓0 λ(f(E ∩ Br(x)) λ(f(Br(… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

56 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

  1. [30]

    Güneysu and D

    B. Güneysu and D. Pallara. Functions with bounded variation on a class of Riemannian manifolds with Ricci curvature unbounded from below.Mathematische Annalen, 363(3-4):1307–1331, Dec. 2015

    2015

  2. [1]

    Alonso Ruíz and F

    P. Alonso Ruíz and F. Baudoin. Yet another heat semigroup characterization of BV functions on Riemannian manifolds.Annales de la Faculté des sciences de Toulouse : Mathématiques, 32(3):577–606, Aug. 2023

    2023

  3. [2]

    Ambrosio

    L. Ambrosio. Fine Properties of Sets of Finite Perimeter in Doubling Metric Measure Spaces.Set-Valued Analysis, 10(2/3):111–128, 2002

    2002

  4. [3]

    Ambrosio and S

    L. Ambrosio and S. Di Marino. Equivalent definitions of BV space and of total variation on metric measure spaces.Journal of Functional Analysis, 266(7):4150–4188, Apr. 2014

    2014

  5. [4]

    Ambrosio, N

    L. Ambrosio, N. Fusco, and D. Pallara.Functions of Bounded Variation and Free Discontinuity Problems. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. Clarendon press, Oxford, 2000

    2000

  6. [5]

    Ambrosio, R

    L. Ambrosio, R. Ghezzi, and V. Magnani. BV functions and sets of finite perimeter in sub-Riemannian manifolds.Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincaré C, Analyse non linéaire, 32(3):489–517, June 2015

    2015

  7. [6]

    Ambrosio, M

    L. Ambrosio, M. Miranda, and D. Pallara. Special Functions of Bounded Variation in Doubling Metric MeasureSpaces.InCalculus of Variations: Topics from the Mathematical Heritage of E. De Giorgi, volume14 ofQuaderni Di Matematica, pages 1–45. Dipartimento di Matematica, Seconda Università di Napoli, 2004

    2004

  8. [7]

    J.Atnip, G.Froyland, andP.Koltai.AninflateddynamicLaplaciantotracktheemergenceanddisappearance of semi-material coherent sets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.10360, 2024

    arXiv 2024

Show all 56 references
  1. [8]

    T. Aubin. Espaces de Sobolev sur les variétés riemanniennes.Bulletin des Sciences Mathématiques. 2e Série, 100(2):149–173, 1976

    1976

  2. [9]

    Berline, E

    N. Berline, E. Getzler, and M. Vergne.Heat Kernels and Dirac Operators. Grundlehren Text Editions. Springer, Berlin ; New York, 2004

    2004

  3. [10]

    Brokman, M

    J. Brokman, M. Burger, and G. Gilboa. Spectral Total-variation Processing of Shapes—Theory and Appli- cations.ACM Transactions on Graphics, 43(2):1–20, Apr. 2024. 38

    2024

  4. [11]

    Buet and G

    B. Buet and G. P. Leonardi. Recovering measures from approximate values on balls.Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae Mathematica, 41:947–972, 2016

    2016

  5. [12]

    Bögelein, F

    V. Bögelein, F. Duzaar, and N. Fusco. A quantitative isoperimetric inequality on the sphere.Advances in Calculus of Variations, 10(3):223–265, July 2017

    2017

  6. [13]

    Bögelein, F

    V. Bögelein, F. Duzaar, and C. Scheven. A sharp quantitative isoperimetric inequality in hyperbolic n-space. Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 54(4):3967–4017, Dec. 2015

    2015

  7. [14]

    Caputo, J

    E. Caputo, J. Koivu, D. Lučić, and T. Rajala. Closed BV-extension andW1,1-extension sets. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.15716, Mar. 2025

    2025 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Caputo, J

    E. Caputo, J. Koivu, and T. Rajala. Sobolev, BV and perimeter extensions in metric measure spaces.Annales Fennici Mathematici, 49(1):135–165, Mar. 2024

    2024

  9. [16]

    Carbonaro and G

    A. Carbonaro and G. Mauceri. A note on bounded variation and heat semigroup on Riemannian manifolds. Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, 76(1):155–160, Aug. 2007

    2007

  10. [17]

    Chodosh, M

    O. Chodosh, M. Engelstein, and L. Spolaor. The Riemannian quantitative isoperimetric inequality.Journal of the European Mathematical Society, 25(5):1711–1741, Apr. 2022

    2022

  11. [18]

    C.-Y. Chou. Notes on the Separability ofC∗-Algebras.Taiwanese Journal of Mathematics, 16(2):555–559, Mar. 2012

    2012

  12. [19]

    De Philippis, N

    G. De Philippis, N. Fusco, and M. Morini. Regularity of capillarity droplets with obstacle.Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 377(8):5787–5835, Apr. 2024

    2024

  13. [20]

    S. Dweik. Weighted total variation minimization problem with mixed Dirichlet–Neumann boundary condi- tions.Pacific Journal of Mathematics, 335(1):53–79, Mar. 2025

    2025

  14. [21]

    Elstrodt.Maß- und Integrationstheorie

    J. Elstrodt.Maß- und Integrationstheorie. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2018

    2018

  15. [22]

    Federer.Geometric Measure Theory

    H. Federer.Geometric Measure Theory. Classics in Mathematics. Springer, Berlin; New York, 1996

    1996

  16. [23]

    G. B. Folland.Real Analysis: Modern Techniques and Their Applications. A Wiley-Interscience Publication. Wiley, New York Weinheim, 2. ed edition, 1999

    1999

  17. [24]

    Froyland and P

    G. Froyland and P. Koltai. Detecting the birth and death of finite-time coherent sets.Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics, 76(12):3642–3684, July 2023

    2023

  18. [25]

    Fusco, V

    N. Fusco, V. Julin, M. Morini, and A. Pratelli. The isoperimetric inequality for the capillary energy outside convex sets, Sept. 2025

    2025

  19. [26]

    Gennaioli

    L. Gennaioli. Sets of finite perimeter on Riemannian manifolds and stochastic completeness. arXiv preprint arXiv:2605.01979, May 2026

    2026 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Grigor’yan.Heat Kernel and Analysis on Manifolds, volume 47 ofAMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics

    A. Grigor’yan.Heat Kernel and Analysis on Manifolds, volume 47 ofAMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathe- matics. American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, Nov. 2012

    2012

  21. [28]

    C. Gui, Y. Hu, and Q. Li. On smooth interior approximation of sets of finite perimeter.Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 151(5):1949–1962, Feb. 2023

    1949

  22. [29]

    Guidetti, B

    D. Guidetti, B. Güneysu, and D. Pallara.L1-elliptic regularity andH=Won the wholeL p-scale on arbitrary manifolds.Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae Mathematica, 42:497–521, Feb. 2017

    2017

  23. [31]

    Hakkarainen, J

    H. Hakkarainen, J. Kinnunen, P. Lahti, and P. Lehtelä. Relaxation and Integral Representation for Functionals of Linear Growth on Metric Measure spaces.Analysis and Geometry in Metric Spaces, 4(1):000010151520160013, Nov. 2016

    2016

  24. [32]

    Hebey.Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds: Sobolev Spaces and Inequalities, volume 5 ofCourant Lecture Notes in Mathematics

    E. Hebey.Nonlinear Analysis on Manifolds: Sobolev Spaces and Inequalities, volume 5 ofCourant Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Courant Inst. of Math. Sciences ; Providence, RI, New York, NY, repr. edition, 2000

    2000

  25. [33]

    Hong and A

    H. Hong and A. B. Saturnino. Capillary surfaces: Stability, index and curvature estimates.Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal), 0(0), Aug. 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    I. R. Ionescu and T. Lachand-Robert. Generalized Cheeger sets related to landslides.Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 23(2):227–249, June 2005

    2005

  27. [35]

    Korte, P

    R. Korte, P. Lahti, X. Li, and N. Shanmugalingam. Notions of Dirichlet problem for functions of least gradient in metric measure spaces.Revista Matemática Iberoamericana, 35(6):1603–1648, July 2019

    2019

  28. [36]

    Kreuml and O

    A. Kreuml and O. Mordhorst. Fractional Sobolev norms and BV functions on manifolds.Nonlinear Analysis, 187:450–466, Oct. 2019

    2019

  29. [37]

    P. Lahti. Extensions and traces of functions of bounded variation on metric spaces.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 423(1):521–537, Mar. 2015

    2015

  30. [38]

    P. Lahti. Federer’s characterization of sets of finite perimeter in metric spaces.Analysis & PDE, 13(5):1501– 1519, July 2020

    2020

  31. [39]

    Lahti and N

    P. Lahti and N. Shanmugalingam. Trace theorems for functions of bounded variation in metric spaces.Journal of Functional Analysis, 274(10):2754–2791, May 2018

    2018

  32. [40]

    J. M. Lee.Introduction to Smooth Manifolds, volume 218 ofGraduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer New York, New York, NY, 2 edition, 2012

    2012

  33. [41]

    S. Lee, S. Park, and J. Pyo. Capillary Stable Minimal Hypersurfaces in a High Dimensional Riemannian Manifold.The Journal of Geometric Analysis, 35(5):157, May 2025

    2025

  34. [42]

    C. Li, X. Zhou, and J. J. Zhu. Min-max theory for capillary surfaces.Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik (Crelles Journal), 2025(818):215–262, 2025. 39

    2025

  35. [43]

    Maggi.Sets of Finite Perimeter and Geometric Variational Problems: An Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory

    F. Maggi.Sets of Finite Perimeter and Geometric Variational Problems: An Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory. Cambridge University Press, 1 edition, Aug. 2012

    2012

  36. [44]

    U. Menne. Sobolev functions on varifolds.Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society, 113(6):725–774, Nov. 2016

    2016

  37. [45]

    U. Menne. Weakly differentiable functions on varifolds.Indiana University Mathematics Journal, 65(3):977– 1088, 2016

    2016

  38. [46]

    M. Miranda. Functions of bounded variation on “good” metric spaces.Journal de Mathématiques Pures et Appliquées, 82(8):975–1004, Aug. 2003

    2003

  39. [47]

    Miranda, D

    M. Miranda, D. Pallara, F. Paronetto, and M. Preunkert. Heat semigroup and functions of bounded variation on Riemannian manifolds.Journal für die reine und angewandte Mathematik, 613:99–119, 2007

    2007

  40. [48]

    Müller and G

    W. Müller and G. Salomonsen. Scattering theory for the Laplacian on manifolds with bounded curvature. Journal of Functional Analysis, 253(1):158–206, Dec. 2007

    2007

  41. [49]

    Nardi, B

    G. Nardi, B. Charlier, and A. Trouvé. The matching problem between functional shapes via aBVpenalty term: Aγ-convergence result.Interfaces and Free Boundaries, Mathematical Analysis, Computation and Applications, 26(3):381–414, Apr. 2024

    2024

  42. [50]

    Pascale and M

    G. Pascale and M. Pozzetta. Quantitative isoperimetric inequalities for classical capillarity problems.Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations, 63(9):225, Dec. 2024

    2024

  43. [51]

    G. D. Philippis and F. Maggi. Regularity of free boundaries in anisotropic capillarity problems and the validity of Young’s law, Feb. 2014

    2014

  44. [52]

    Ritoré.Isoperimetric Inequalities in Riemannian Manifolds, volume 348 ofProgress in Mathematics

    M. Ritoré.Isoperimetric Inequalities in Riemannian Manifolds, volume 348 ofProgress in Mathematics. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2023

    2023

  45. [53]

    Saloff-Coste

    L. Saloff-Coste. Uniformly elliptic operators on Riemannian manifolds.Journal of Differential Geometry, 36(2):417–450, Jan. 1992

    1992

  46. [54]

    Saloff-Coste.Aspects of Sobolev-type Inequalities

    L. Saloff-Coste.Aspects of Sobolev-type Inequalities. Number 289 in London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge ; New York, 2002

    2002

  47. [55]

    T. Schmidt. Isoperimetric conditions, lower semicontinuity, and existence results for perimeter functionals with measure data.Mathematische Annalen, 391(4):5729–5807, Apr. 2025

    2025

  48. [56]

    L. Simon. Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory. Lecture notes, Stanford University,https://math.s tanford.edu/~lms/ntu-gmt-text.pdf(accessed 2026-02-10), 2018

    2026

Pith tools

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