Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Some remarks on singular capillary cones with free boundary

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

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that in dimension n=4, a minimizing capillary cone whose free-boundary mean curvature has constant sign must be flat, and that the singular set of graphical capillary minimizers has Hausdorff dimension at most n−5.

desk verdict A serious contribution to capillary free-boundary regularity with a load-bearing strictness gap in the proof of Theorem 1.1, Case 2. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07697 v1 pith:2IXAH7RO submitted 2025-02-11 math.DG math.AP

Alberto Pacati , Giorgio Tortone , Bozhidar Velichkov This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.DGmath.AP MSC 49Q0549Q1035R3535B0735B65
keywords capillarysurfacessingularityglobalstablesolutionsone-phaseBernoulliproblemfreeboundaryregularityminimizingconesSimons-typeinequalityHausdorffdimension
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 is trying to show that singularities of minimizing capillary surfaces with free boundary can be ruled out in low dimensions once the mean curvature of the free boundary does not change sign. The main theorem says that in dimension four every minimizing capillary cone with one-signed free-boundary mean curvature is flat. If true, this lowers the expected dimension threshold for the singular set of graphical capillary minimizers to n−5, improving the previous n−4 bound, and it parallels the one-phase Bernoulli problem, where a similar stability criterion already forces rigidity. The paper also establishes the instability of non-trivial axially symmetric capillary cones in dimensions up to six. A sympathetic reader should care because these cones are the blow-up profiles that govern the regularity of capillary droplets, and the result excludes the low-dimensional singular behavior under a mild geometric sign condition.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a stability criterion (Proposition 2.4): if a $k$-homogeneous nonnegative function $w$, smooth on its positivity set, satisfies an interior inequality $\frac12\Delta_M w^2-|\nabla_M w|^2+|A|^2w^2\ge\Lambda|x|^{-2}w^2$ and a boundary inequality $\cos(\theta)H_{\partial M}w^2-\frac12(\nabla_M w^2\cdot\eta)\ge0$, with $\Lambda\ge(n/2+k-1)^2$, and at least one of these is strict, then $w\equiv0$. The paper produces such $w$ as a power $w=c^\alpha$ of a convex, one-homogeneous, symmetric function $c=F(A)$ of the principal curvatures, for which Lemma 4.1 proves a Simons-type inequality. The decisive competitor in dimension four is $w=c^{1/3}$ with $c=(\sum_{\lambda_i\ge0}\lambda_i^2+4\sum_{\lambda_s<0}\lambda_s^2)^{1/2}$; the coefficient $4$ is chosen so that the boundary quotient $L(x)$ stays on the correct side of $\alpha=1/3$, and at the extremal free-boundary configuration the argument needs a strict improvement of the curvature estimate (4.7).

What would settle it

Perform the omitted computation in Section 4.3, Case 2: at a free-boundary point with $\lambda_1=0$, $\lambda_2=-2\lambda_4$, $\lambda_3=\lambda_4$, decide whether $c_4^2<3(\sum_{i\neq1,4}\partial^2_{a_{i4}}F(A)\,u^2_{ii4})c$ holds with a positive margin; if the inequality is only an equality, Proposition 2.4 cannot be applied. Alternatively, exhibit a non-flat minimizing capillary cone in $\mathbb{R}^5$ with $H_{\partial M}$ of one sign: Theorem 1.1 says that none exists.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: if $M$ is a minimizing capillary cone with contact angle $\theta\in(0,\pi)$ and the mean curvature $H_{\partial M}$ of its free boundary has constant sign on $\{x_{n+1}=0\}$, then in dimension $n=4$ the cone is flat, so the singularity at the origin is ruled out. The proof feeds a weighted quadratic function of the principal curvatures into a stability criterion: the competitor $w=c^{1/3}$ with $c=(\sum_{\lambda_i\ge0}\lambda_i^2+4\sum_{\lambda_s<0}\lambda_s^2)^{1/2}$ satisfies a Simons-type interior inequality and a boundary inequality governed by the sign of $H_{\partial M}$; when one of the inequalities is strict, the criterion forces $w\equiv0$, hence the second fundamental form vanishes and the cone is flat. Because graphical capillary cones automatically have $H_{\partial M}$ of one sign, the same argument gives $n_*^G(\theta)\ge5$ and, by Federer's dimension reduction, Hausdorff dimension at most $n-5$ for the free-boundary singular set of graphical capillary minimizers (Corollary 1.4). A separate power-of-$|A|$ argument shows that axially symmetric capillary cones are flat in dimensions $n<7$ (Theorem 1.2).

Load-bearing premise

In the case $H_{\partial M}\ge0$, the proof needs a strict quantitative improvement of the Simons-type inequality (4.7) for the component $k=4$ near free-boundary points where the boundary inequality is an equality; the authors state that the improvement follows because $\lambda_2\neq\lambda_3$ and $\lambda_4\neq0$, but the computation is not carried out, and the borderline constant $4/9$ leaves no room for a non-strict version.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For graphical capillary drops, the free-boundary singular set has Hausdorff dimension at most $n-5$, so the free boundary is smooth in dimensions up to four.
  • In dimensions $n<7$, every minimizing capillary cone with axially symmetric free boundary is flat; non-trivial axially symmetric cones are therefore unstable.
  • The stability criterion extends the one-phase Bernoulli rigidity picture to capillary cones, giving a unified way to turn curvature inequalities into vanishing of the second fundamental form.
  • Within the quadratic class of curvature competitors, the coefficient $a=4$ is the only choice that makes the stability argument close in dimension four (Remark 4.5).

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the strict-improvement step in Section 4.3, Case 2 can be made fully rigorous, the borderline constant suggests that the sign assumption on $H_{\partial M}$ may be removable in dimension four; searching for non-graphical minimizing cones with changing-sign $H_{\partial M}$ would test this.
  • The parallel with the one-phase Bernoulli problem suggests the optimal critical dimension for general capillary cones may be $n=5$, matching the graphical threshold; proving flatness of all minimizing cones in dimension four without the sign condition would settle it.
  • A concrete extension is to replace the quadratic competitor by higher-degree symmetric functions of the principal curvatures; the extremal-configuration computation in (4.17) would show whether the dimension-four cutoff is an artifact of the quadratic ansatz.
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

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies minimizing capillary cones with free boundary, i.e. homogeneous minimizers of the capillary energy in a half-space. The main theorem (Theorem 1.1) asserts that in dimension n=4, a minimizing capillary cone with contact angle θ∈(0,π) is flat whenever the mean curvature H∂M of the free boundary has constant sign. As applications, the authors deduce that graphical capillary minimizers have free boundary singular set of Hausdorff dimension at most n−5 (Corollary 1.4), and they prove instability of non-trivial axially symmetric capillary cones in dimensions up to 6 (Theorem 1.2). The technical core is a stability criterion à la Jerison–Savin (Proposition 2.4), a generalized Simons-type inequality for convex homogeneous symmetric functions of the second fundamental form (Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2), and a boundary identity for a carefully chosen quadratic competitor (Lemma 4.3 and Section 4.3).

Significance. If the main results are correct, they give the first contact-angle-independent improvement of the free boundary singularity dimension for capillary hypersurfaces, in the graphical case exceeding the previously known threshold in dimension 4. The paper is methodologically valuable: it transfers the Jerison–Savin one-phase strategy to capillary cones, introduces an explicit quadratic competitor that is claimed to be optimal in a natural class, and provides self-contained boundary identities. The derivations are not circular: the rigidity conclusions follow from stability inequalities and geometric competitors, with no parameter fitted to the conclusion. However, the proof of the central theorem currently contains a sign error in Case 1 and an unproved strict-improvement assertion in Case 2; these issues are load-bearing and must be resolved before the results can be accepted.

major comments (4)
  1. [§4.3, Case 1] The boundary inequality for the case H∂M≤0 is not established by the displayed argument. The text states that H∂M(1−αL) ≥ H∂M/2 > 0 on {H∂M<0}, but when H∂M<0 the right-hand side is negative, so this inequality does not imply the required boundary inequality H∂M(1−αL)≥0. In fact, at a free-boundary point with λ1=0 and λ2=λ3=−λ4/2, λ4>0 (which corresponds to H∂M<0), one computes L=3/2, and with α=1/3 one has 1−αL=1/2, so H∂M(1−αL)<0. Thus the chosen α=1/3 is not admissible for H∂M<0. A correct treatment of Case 1 should choose α=2/3 instead, since then the boundary condition holds (because L≥3/2 gives 1−αL≤0) and the interior inequality gives Λ=10/9, which is strictly larger than (n/2−α−1)^2=1/9, so Proposition 2.4 applies without needing strictness. The authors should correct this sign error and revise the proof accordingly.
  2. [§4.3, Case 2] The strict interior improvement that is needed to apply Proposition 2.4 is asserted but not proved. The paragraph after (4.19) claims that because λ2≠λ3 and λ4≠0 at points where the boundary condition is an equality, there exists δ>0 such that c4² ≤ (3/2+δ)(Σ_{i≠{1,4}} ∂²_{a_i4}F(A)u²_{ii4}) c in a neighborhood, and that 'continuing the proof as in Lemma 4.1' yields a strict interior inequality. This is the load-bearing step: with Λ=4/9 exactly equal to the Hardy constant in (4.19), Proposition 2.4 can be applied only if the inequality is strict. The manuscript does not provide the continuity argument producing a uniform δ>0, does not show how the improved estimate for c propagates to w=c^{1/3} through the ε-regularization in Lemma 4.2, and does not check that strictness survives in the distributional sense required by Proposition 2.4. The authors must supply a complete proof of this strict improvement, or replace it with another argument that yields the strictness.
  3. [Lemma 4.2] Lemma 4.2, which is central to both Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.2, states that its proof is omitted and refers to 'repeating the same computations as in the proof of Lemma 3.1'. This is not adequate for a lemma whose strict version is used in the borderline Case 2 of Theorem 1.1. The regularization argument for a general convex homogeneous f, the behavior of the strict inequality under the limit ε→0+, and the precise hypotheses on f (for example, whether the f in (4.10) is strictly convex) need to be written out. In particular, the strictness assertion in the last sentence of Lemma 4.2 requires a proof; it is not a formal consequence of the displayed computation in Lemma 3.1 without additional assumptions on the nodal set of c.
  4. [Theorem 1.2, n=6 case] In the proof of Theorem 1.2 for n=6, the assertion that (∇_M(log|A|)·η)^2>0 on ∂M is stated without justification. This strictness is what upgrades the interior inequality from the critical constant to a strict one in the borderline dimension. The claim is plausible and can be derived from Lemma 3.3 together with the axial symmetry relations λ_j=−λ_n/(n−2); however, the derivation is not given. Since this step is needed for the n=6 case of Theorem 1.2, the authors should include the computation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§2.2, proof of Proposition 2.4] The notation in the proof is confusing: the test function is first called φ and then ϕ:=wφ is used with the same letter, and the boundary term contains (∇_M w²·φ) where it should presumably be (∇_M w²·η). Please clarify the notation and correct the typo.
  2. [§3.3, Theorem 1.2] The phrase 'all the principal curvatures are equal' is imprecise, because the radial principal curvature of ∂M is zero; the intended statement is that the n−2 non-radial principal curvatures are equal. Please rephrase.
  3. [§3.3, Theorem 1.2] For n=2, the chosen exponent α=(n−2)/(n−1) is 0, which is outside the admissible range α∈(0,1) used in Lemma 3.4. If Theorem 1.2 is intended to include n=2, this case should be treated separately; otherwise the statement should explicitly assume n≥3.
  4. [§4.1, Lemma 4.1] In the proof, the notation ∂_{a_{ij}}²F²(A) is used before F is defined, and the line '∂_{a_{ij}}²F²(A)=...' would be clearer if written as 2∂_{a_{ij}}²[F(A)²] or an explicitly defined symbol. This is a readability issue only.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the rigidity results are derived from the stability inequality and explicit geometric competitors; the only flagged issue is a sketched strictness step, which is a proof gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained. Proposition 2.4 is a stability criterion proved directly from the stability inequality (2.7), not imported from the authors' prior work. The competitors w = |A|^alpha and w = F(A)^{1/3} are explicitly constructed, and the interior and boundary inequalities are derived in Lemmas 3.1-3.4 and 4.1-4.3. Theorem 1.1 combines the Simons-type inequality (4.14) with the algebraic estimates (4.17)-(4.18) for the boundary functional L, then applies Proposition 2.4. The borderline constant Lambda = 4/9 equals (n/2 + k - 1)^2 for n = 4 and k = -1/3, so strictness is genuinely necessary; the Case-2 strict-improvement paragraph is only sketched, but that is a potential gap in the proof, not a circularity. The only self-citation, [32] (Velichkov), appears in a routine literature list for the one-phase Bernoulli problem and is not load-bearing. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is invoked from the authors' own prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via self-citation. Therefore there is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard free-boundary regularity and stability theory plus a handful of hand-chosen proof constants (a=4, alpha exponents). No new entities are postulated. The main risk is not a faulty input but the unresolved strictness of some inequalities at borderline constants.

free parameters (2)
  • a in the competitor (4.10)/(4.13) = 4
    Chosen by hand to make the boundary inequality (4.11) work in dimension n=4; the proof does not establish uniqueness or necessity.
  • Exponent alpha in the competitor = 1/3 in Theorem 1.1; (n-2)/(n-1) in Theorem 1.2
    Chosen so that the interior inequality hits the borderline constant in (2.9); other exponents would not give the rigidity conclusion. This is a proof parameter, not an empirically fitted constant.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Stability inequality (2.7) for stable capillary surfaces with isolated singularity
    Taken from [27, Section 1] and used in Definition 2.2; the entire Jerison-Savin criterion is built on it.
  • standard math Simons-type inequality for the second fundamental form of a minimizing cone
    Adapted from [30] and [28]; Lemma 4.1 states the generalized version used here.
  • domain assumption Epsilon-regularity for capillary free boundaries, giving C^{1,alpha} graphs near regular boundary points
    Cited to [10,12,31]; the coordinate computations in Sections 2 and 4 require this regularity.
  • standard math Federer dimension reduction for minimizing capillary surfaces
    Used implicitly to pass from cone rigidity to the singular-set bound in Corollary 1.4.
  • domain assumption H_dM has constant sign (assumption (1.6))
    This is a hypothesis of Theorem 1.1; for graphical cones it is derived in Theorem 1.3 via a maximum principle.
  • standard math Maximum principle and Hopf lemma on the cone section Sigma
    Used in the proof of Theorem 1.3 to show that v=|nabla_M x_{n+1}| attains its maximum on the boundary and to identify the sign of H_dM.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Some remarks on singular capillary cones with free boundary." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/2IXAH7RO

@misc{pith2026250207697,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Some remarks on singular capillary cones with free boundary},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/2IXAH7RO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07697}
}
abstract

We study minimizing singular cones with free boundary associated with the capillarity problem. Precisely, we provide a stability criterion $\`a$ la Jerison-Savin for capillary hypersurfaces and show that, in dimensions up to $4$, minimizing cones with non-sign-changing mean curvature are flat. We apply this criterion to minimizing capillary drops and, additionally, establish the instability of non-trivial axially symmetric cones in dimensions up to $6$. The main results are based on a Simons-type inequality for a class of convex, homogeneous, symmetric functions of the principal curvatures, combined with a boundary condition specific to the capillary setting.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Weiss monotonicity and capillary hypersurfaces

    math.AP 2025-06 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    Renormalized capillary area density converges to the Weiss energy, giving angle-independent curvature estimates and a Bernstein theorem for capillary minimizers.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [7]

    Chodosh, N

    O. Chodosh, N. Edelen, C. Li. Improved regularity for minimizing capillary hypersurfac es. ArXiv:2401.08028 (2024), preprint

    arXiv 2024

  2. [22]

    Jerison, O

    D. Jerison, O. Savin. Some remarks on stability of cones for the one phase free boun dary problem. Geom. Funct. Anal. 25 (2015), 1240–1257

    work page 2015

  3. [1]

    F.J. Almgren. Existence and regularity almost everywhere of solutions to elliptic variational problems among surfaces of varying topological type and singularity struc ture. Ann. Math., 87:321-391, 1968

    work page 1968

  4. [2]

    Alt, L.A

    H.W. Alt, L.A. Caffarelli. Existence and regularity for a minimum problem with free bou ndary. J. Reine Angew. Math. 325 (1981), 105–144

    work page 1981

  5. [3]

    Bombieri, E

    E. Bombieri, E. De Giorgi, E. Giusti. Minimal cones and the Bernstein problem. Invent Math. 7 (1969) 243-268

    work page 1969

  6. [4]

    Caffarelli, A

    L.A. Caffarelli, A. Friedman. Regularity of the boundary of a capillary drop on an inhomoge neous plane and related variational problems. Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana. 1 (1) (1985), 61–84

    work page 1985

  7. [5]

    Caffarelli, D

    L.A. Caffarelli, D. Jerison, C.E. Kenig. Global energy minimizers for free boundary problems and ful l regularity in three dimensions. Contemp. Math. 350 Amer. Math. Soc., Providence RI (2004), 83–97

    work page 2004

  8. [6]

    Caffarelli, A

    L.A. Caffarelli, A. Mellet. Capillary drops: contact angle hysteresis and sticking dro ps. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 29 (2), 141-160, 2007

    work page 2007

Show all 35 references
  1. [8]

    De Giorgi

    E. De Giorgi. Frontiere orientate di misura minima. Seminario di Matematica della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. Editrice Tecnico Scientifica, Pisa, 1960

    1960

  2. [9]

    De Masi, G

    L. De Masi, G. De Philippis. Min-max construction of minimal surfaces with a fixed angle a t the boundary. ArXiv:2111.09913 (2021), preprint

    2021 arXiv

  3. [10]

    De Philippis, F

    G. De Philippis, F. Maggi. Regularity of free boundaries in anisotropic capillarity p roblems and the validity of Young’s law. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 216 (2) (2015), 473–568

    2015

  4. [11]

    De Philippis, N

    G. De Philippis, N. Fusco, M. Morini. Regularity of capillarity droplets with obstacle . Trans. Am. Math. Soc. (2024)

    2024

  5. [12]

    De Masi, N

    L. De Masi, N. Edelen, C. Gasparetto, C. Li. Regularity of minimal surfaces with capillary boundary con di- tions. ArXiv:2405.20796 (2024), preprint

    2024 arXiv

  6. [13]

    De Silva

    D. De Silva. Free boundary regularity for a problem with right hand side. Interfaces and Free Boundaries 13 (2) (2011), 223–238. SOME REMARKS ON SINGULAR CAPILLARY CONES WITH FREE BOUNDARY 28

    2011

  7. [14]

    De Silva, D

    D. De Silva, D. Jerison. A singular energy minimizing free boundary. J. Reine Angew. Math. 635 (2009), 1–21

    2009

  8. [15]

    R. Finn. Equilibrium capillary surfaces. Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, vol. 284, Springer- Verlag, New York, 1986

    1986

  9. [16]

    Fraser, R

    A. Fraser, R. Schoen. Uniqueness theorems for free boundary minimal disks in spac e forms. Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN 17 (2015), 8268–8274

    2015

  10. [17]

    Gr¨ uter.Optimal regularity for codimension one minimal surfaces wi th a free boundary

    M. Gr¨ uter.Optimal regularity for codimension one minimal surfaces wi th a free boundary. Manuscripta Math. 58 (3) (1987), 295–343

    1987

  11. [18]

    Gr¨ uter

    M. Gr¨ uter. Regularity results for minimizing currents with a free boun dary. J. Reine Angew. Math., 375/376:307–325, 1987

    1987

  12. [19]

    Gr¨ uter, J

    M. Gr¨ uter, J. Jost. Allard type regularity results for varifolds with free boun daries. Ann. Sc. Norm. Super. Pisa Cl. Sci. 13 (5) (1986), 129–169

    1986

  13. [20]

    G. Hong. Singular Homogeneous Solutions to One Phase Free Boundary P roblem. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 143 (9) (2015), 4009–4015

    2015

  14. [21]

    Hong, A.B

    H. Hong, A.B. Saturnino. Capillary surfaces: Stability, index and curvature estima tes. J. Reine Angew. Math. 803 (2023), 233–265

    2023

  15. [23]

    Karakhanyan

    A. Karakhanyan. Full and partial regularity for a class of nonlinear free bou ndary problems. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincar´ e, Anal. Non Lin´ eaire.38 (4), 981-999 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    C. Li. A polyhedron comparison theorem for 3-manifolds with posit ive scalar curvature. Invent. Math. 219 (1) (2020), 1–37

    2020

  17. [25]

    C. Li, X. Zhou, J.J. Zhu. Min-max theory for capillary surfaces . J. Reine Angew. Math. (2024), 10.1515/crelle- 2024-0075

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    F. Maggi. Sets of Finite Perimeter and Geometric Variational Problem s: An Introduction to Geometric Measure Theory. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge Univ ersity Press, 2012

    2012

  19. [27]

    A. Ros, R. Souam. On stability of capillary surfaces in a ball. Pacific J. Math. 178 (2) (1997), 345–361

    1997

  20. [28]

    Schoen, L

    R. Schoen, L. Simon, S.T. Yau. Curvature estimates for minimal hypersurfaces. Acta Math. 134 (1975), 275 – 288

    1975

  21. [29]

    L. Simon. Lectures on Geometric Measure Theory. Proceedings of the Center for Mathematical Analysis 3, Canberra, (1984), VII+272

    1984

  22. [30]

    J. Simons. Minimal varieties in riemannian manifolds. Ann. of Math. 88 (2) (1968), 62–105

    1968

  23. [31]

    J.E. Taylor. Boundary regularity for solutions to various capillarity a nd free boundary problems. Comm. Partial Differential Equations 2 (4) (1977), 323–357

    1977

  24. [32]

    Velichkov

    B. Velichkov. Regularity of the one-phase free boundaries. Lecture Notes of the Unione Matematica Italiana 28, Springer, 2023

    2023

  25. [33]

    G. Wang, C. Xia. Uniqueness of stable capillary hypersurfaces in a ball. Math. Ann. 374 (3) (2019), 1845– 1882

    2019

  26. [34]

    G. S. Weiss. Partial regularity for a minimum problem with free boundary . J. Geom. Anal. 9 (2) (1999), 317–326

    1999

  27. [35]

    T. Young. An essay on the cohesion of fluids. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. London 95 (1805), 65–87. Alberto P acati Department of Mathematics, ETH Zurich, Ramistrasse 101, 8092 Zurich, Switzerland Email address : alberto.pacati@math.ethz.ch Giorgio Tortone Dipartimento di Matematic...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.