REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 34 references
Hyperspaces of countable compacta
T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read The paper classifies, up to homeomorphism, the hyperspaces of countable compact subsets of a metric space and their accumulation-point strata, showing that zero-dimensional dense-in-itself Polish spaces produce only the models $Q^\omega$…
desk verdict A substantial, mostly sound paper that settles open questions in hyperspace theory; the main caveat is a load-bearing theorem quoted from an unpublished preprint, plus a repairable false inclusion in Lemma 6.3. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The engine is the theory of absorbing sets in infinite-dimensional manifolds. An absorber for a Borel class $C$ is a space in $C$ that is strongly $C$-universal and is a countable union of Z-sets belonging to $C$; such spaces are unique up to homeomorphism. The paper builds two concrete absorbers inside the Hilbert cube $I^\omega$: $\Pi_3$, an $F_{\sigma\delta}$ set that is later identified with $c_0$, and $\Sigma_4$, an $F_{\sigma\delta\sigma}$ set, and proves the pairs $(I^\omega, \Pi_3)$ and $(I^\omega, \Sigma_4)$ are absorbing for the classes $\Pi^0_3$ and $\Sigma^0_4$. The bridge from hyperspaces to these absorbers uses the Vietoris hyperspace $K(X)$ as a Lawson semilattice under union; a cited theorem converts the easier-to-check everywhere preuniversality of a pair $(K(M), A(X))$ into strong universality, after which absorbing-pair uniqueness produces the homeomorphisms. The 0-dimensional results run through separate machinery: classical homeomorphism criteria for zero-dimensional first-category spaces in a given absolute Borel class.
What would settle it
Exhibit a Lawson semilattice $M$ and a dense coideal $X$ that is locally path-connected in $M$ for which the pair $(M,X)$ is everywhere preuniversal but not strongly universal for some $\Pi^0_2$-hereditary class $C$; that directly refutes the equivalence theorem used in Theorem 8.3 and would invalidate the absorbing-set route to Theorem 8.5. A less surgical test: find two nondegenerate connected locally connected Polish spaces, one locally compact and one nowhere locally compact, whose hyperspaces $H(X)$ and $H(Y)$ are not homeomorphic.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that the topological type of a hyperspace of countable compacta is determined by the descriptive class of the underlying space's derived-set structure, not by its local geometry. Theorem 3.5 identifies $A_n(X)$ with $Q^\omega$ for dense-in-itself 0-dimensional Polish $X$, $A_\omega(X)$ with $S_4$, and $A_{\omega+1}(X)$ and $H(X)$ with $H(Q)$; Theorem 3.7 gives the same models for pointed hyperspaces $A_n(X,F)$ and $A_\omega(X,F)$ over 0-dimensional $\sigma$-compact metric spaces. The infinite-dimensional half of the paper, Theorem 8.5, asserts that for nondegenerate connected locally connected Polish spaces $X$ that are locally compact or nowhere locally compact, $A_\omega(X)$ is homeomorphic to the absorber $\Sigma_4$ and $A_{\omega+1}(X)$ and $H(X)$ are homeomorphic to $H(I)$. Theorem 9.3 and Theorem 10.1 then give $A_n(I) \cong A_n((0,1)) \cong A_n(S^1) \cong \Pi_3 \cong c_0$ for every $n \in \mathbb{N}$, and Theorem 11.1 extends the $c_0$ model to $A_1(X,\{p\})$ at a point $p$ of order $\ge 2$ in a Peano continuum. Read sympathetically, these theorems fully settle the topological classification of the principal hyperspaces of countable compacta for the stated classes of underlying spaces.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing premise is a cited theorem for Lawson semilattices asserting that, for a dense coideal that is locally path-connected in the semilattice, everywhere preuniversality of the pair implies strong universality; if that implication is false or needs an extra hypothesis, the proofs of the main homeomorphisms $A_\omega(X) \cong \Sigma_4$ and $H(X) \cong H(I)$ lose their foundation.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- For intervals and the circle, $A_n(X)$ is homeomorphic to $c_0$ for every $n$, so the topological type carries no information about $n$ or about whether endpoints are included.
- For any nondegenerate connected locally connected Polish space $X$ that is locally compact or nowhere locally compact, $A_{\omega+1}(X)$ and $H(X)$ are homeomorphic to $H(I)$, the hyperspace of countable compact subsets of the interval.
- For dense-in-itself 0-dimensional Polish $X$, $A_n(X) \cong Q^\omega$ and $A_\omega(X) \cong S_4$; in particular, the rationals, the irrationals, and the Cantor set all give the same hyperspace types at these levels.
- The $c_0$ model for $A_1(X,\{p\})$ says the space of compacta converging to a specified point in a Peano continuum has a universal type, independent of the continuum, once the point has order at least 2.
- The paper explicitly answers open questions about whether the hyperspace of convergent sequences on the closed interval is homeomorphic to that on the open interval, and whether the corresponding hyperspaces on the circle are contractible.
Reading between the lines
- A natural test the paper does not run: take a connected locally connected Polish space that is neither locally compact nor nowhere locally compact, such as a space with one compact component and one noncompact component, and check whether $A_\omega(X)$ is still $\Sigma_4$ or whether the two-regime hypotheses in Theorem 8.5 are essential.
- The paper reduces the longstanding $A_1(\mathbb{R}\setminus\mathbb{Q})$ versus $A_1(\mathbb{Q})$ question to whether $A_1(\mathbb{Q})$ is an absolute $F_{\sigma\delta}$ set; computing that absoluteness is a concrete next experiment that would either extend the 0-dimensional classification or expose its boundary.
- The Section 11 technique is tied to arcs by a continuous selection of a point from a finite set, and the paper notes this selection is characteristic of arcs; a companion conjecture suggested by the results is that for Peano continua with no point of order 2, the $c_0$ model survives only under the order $\ge 2$ hypothesis.
- If the underlying equivalence theorem for Lawson semilattices were weakened, the main homeomorphism claims would likely still hold for the zero-dimensional cases, since those rely on different classical criteria; this separation could be used to isolate which results actually depend on the cited preprint theorem.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper studies hyperspaces of countable compact subsets of metric spaces: the spaces H(X) of all countable compacta, A_n(X) of infinite compacta with at most n accumulation points, A_omega(X) with finitely many, and A_{omega+1}(X) with countably many accumulation points. The main contributions are: (i) Borel complexity estimates for these hyperspaces, including sharpness results via the standard sets P_3 and S_4; (ii) topological characterizations in the zero-dimensional case, e.g., A_n(X) is homeomorphic to Q^omega and A_omega(X) to S_4 for dense-in-themselves 0-dimensional Polish or sigma-compact spaces; and (iii) absorbing-set classifications for connected locally connected spaces: A_omega(X) is homeomorphic to Sigma_4, while A_{omega+1}(X) and H(X) are homeomorphic to H(I); additionally A_n(I) and A_n(S^1) are homeomorphic to c_0. The proofs combine descriptive set theory with the theory of strongly universal and absorbing sets in infinite-dimensional topology.
Significance. If the results are correct, the paper gives a nearly complete topological classification of the principal hyperspaces of countable compacta for large natural classes of spaces. The main theorems extend Cauty's characterization of H(I), answer questions from the literature about convergent-sequence hyperspaces, and introduce explicit Sigma_4 and Pi_3 absorbers in the Hilbert cube that are likely to be of independent use. The zero-dimensional characterizations in Sections 3 and 7 rest on classical theorems and appear solid. The paper is carefully structured, with detailed constructions for the interval and circle cases. The debt to the first author's unpublished preprint [2] for the key bridge from preuniversality to strong universality is the principal weakness; the false inclusion in Lemma 6.3 is a local error whose conclusion is nevertheless repairable. Overall, the architecture of the proof is compelling, but the load-bearing external theorem needs to be made fully verifiable.
major comments (3)
- [Section 5, Theorem 5.3] Theorem 5.3 is the central bridge from everywhere preuniversality to strong universality for dense coideals in Lawson semilattices, and it is cited to the first author's unpublished preprint [2, Theorem 9]. This theorem is used in Theorem 8.3 to lift Lemma 8.2 to strong universality, and hence underpins Theorems 8.4, 8.5, and the absorbing-set classifications in Sections 9-11. Since [2] is not publicly available, the reader cannot check hypotheses such as the precise meaning of 'Pi^0_2-hereditary' for the classes Pi^0_3, Sigma^0_4, and Pi^1_1, nor whether the coideals considered (A_omega(X), A_{omega+1}(X), H(X), and An(X)) satisfy all conditions. This is a load-bearing point. I recommend that the authors either prove Theorem 5.3 in the paper or replace the citation by a precise statement of a published version; alternatively, they should verify directly, in the present paper, that the specific pairs used satisfy the needed strong universality.
- [Section 6, Lemma 6.3] The displayed inclusion in Lemma 6.3, Sigma_4 subset union_{i in omega} X_i with X_i = {(x_n) in I^omega : x_n = 0 for n <= i}, is false. For example, take x in I^omega with x_{2i+1}=1 for all i and x_{2i(2k+1)}=0 for all i,k large enough; then x belongs to Sigma_4 because the defining condition imposes zeros only on the sparse set {2i(2k+1)}, but x is not in any X_i since every X_i forces all coordinates up to i to be zero, while x has arbitrarily large odd coordinates equal to 1. The lemma's conclusion is nevertheless correct: every point of Sigma_4 has infinitely many zero coordinates, hence lies in the pseudo-boundary of I^omega, which is a sigmaZ-set. The proof should be corrected by using this pseudo-boundary argument rather than the false inclusion. As the lemma is used in Corollary 6.4 for the absorbing-pair conclusions, the correction must be made, but it does not undermine the main results.
- [Section 8, Theorem 8.3 and Section 9, Theorem 9.3] The step from the pair (K(M), A_omega(X)) being strongly universal to the space A_omega(X) being strongly universal is not automatic and depends on the second part of Theorem 5.3, which requires X to have SDAP. In Theorem 8.4 the authors do invoke Fact 4.3 and Fact 4.12, but in Theorem 9.3 the passage from the absorbing pair (K(I), A_n(I)) to the absorbing space A_n(I) is stated without explicitly verifying the hypotheses of Fact 4.12, namely that A_n(I) has SDAP and is homotopy dense in K(I). The latter does follow from Fact 4.7 once the pair is strongly universal and K(I) is an ANR, but this chain of implications should be spelled out for the reader, especially because A_n(X) is not a subsemilattice and is not covered by the earlier semilattice arguments.
minor comments (4)
- [Section 8, Lemma 8.2] The hypothesis says 'for any nonempty set U subset M' but the proof and usage require U to be open; replace 'set' by 'open set'.
- [Section 4, Fact 4.9] The statement 'U is an nonempty open subset of E' appears to contain a typo: E is not defined; it should presumably be 'of M' or 'of X'.
- [Section 8, Lemma 8.1] The citation [14] for Cauty's result that (K(I), H(I)) is Pi^1_1-absorbing seems to point to Curtis and Schori, not to Cauty's paper; reference [7] is the intended Cauty citation.
- [Throughout] There are several minor typos and OCR artifacts, e.g., 'den se-in-itself' in the abstract and 'characterzations' in the heading of Section 8; these should be corrected in a final pass.
Circularity Check
No by-construction circularity; the absorbing-set classifications are independent, but the key preuniversality-to-strong-universality bridge is imported from the first author's preprint [2].
-
self citation load bearing
[Section 5 (Theorem 5.3) and Section 8 (Theorem 8.3)]
"The next theorem is an important special case of a more general result recently proved by the first author [2, Theorem 9]. ... In view of Lemma 8.2, the conclusion follows from Theorem 5.3."
Theorem 8.3 is the exact bridge from everywhere preuniversality (Lemma 8.2) to the strong universality of the pairs (K(M), A_omega(X)), (K(M), A_{omega+1}(X)) and (K(M), H(X)). Its proof is one sentence: 'the conclusion follows from Theorem 5.3.' Theorem 5.3 is not proved in this paper; it is quoted as an important special case of the first author's unpublished preprint [2, Theorem 9]. Since Theorem 8.4 and Theorem 8.5 then use this strong universality to obtain absorbing-pair status and invoke uniqueness to get A_omega(X) ≅ Sigma4 and H(X) ≅ H(I), the classifications inherit their force from that same-author citation.
full rationale
The homeomorphism classifications are not circular in the strict sense: the benchmark sets Pi3, Sigma4, c0, H(I), and H(Q) are independently defined, and the hyperspaces are shown to be absorbing in those classes using descriptive-complexity computations and explicit embeddings (e.g., phi_n in Section 9) rather than by assuming the conclusion. There are no fitted parameters or data subsets, and no target homeomorphism is used as a hypothesis. The only load-bearing self-reference is Theorem 5.3, quoted from the first author's preprint [2]; Theorem 8.3's proof delegates the preuniversality-to-strong-universality implication to that citation. This makes the absorbing-set uniqueness chain dependent on an unproved, same-author result, but it is not a by-construction equivalence, and the rest of the derivation is self-contained. A separate, non-circular local error occurs in Lemma 6.3, where the displayed inclusion Sigma4 subset union_i X_i is false; the intended sigmaZ-cover conclusion is repairable via the pseudo-boundary of I^omega, so it is a correctness flaw, not a circularity.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (8)
- domain assumption Theorem 5.3 (Banakh [2]): for a dense coideal X in a Lawson semilattice M which is LC0 in M, strong C-universality of (M,X) is equivalent to everywhere C-preuniversality for every Pi^0_2-hereditary class C.
- standard math Lemma 3.3 (Steel-van Engelen): any two 0-dimensional metric separable first-category spaces in the same absolute Borel class Pi^0_alpha (or Sigma^0_alpha), nowhere in the complementary class, are homeomorphic.
- standard math Michalewski's characterization of H(Q) as a first-category, zero-dimensional, separable metrizable space whose nonempty clopen subsets are all Pi^1_1-complete.
- standard math Cauty's theorem that H(I) is a Pi^1_1-absorber in K(I).
- standard math Bestvina-Mogilski uniqueness theorem: C-absorbing absolute retracts are homeomorphic, and the pair version (Theorem 4.13) for absorbing pairs in I^omega- or R^omega-manifolds.
- standard math Curtis-Schori theorem: K(X) of a nondegenerate Peano continuum is homeomorphic to the Hilbert cube I^omega; the Curtis extension that K(M) is an R^omega-manifold for nowhere locally compact Polish LC spaces.
- domain assumption Existence of a deformation H : K(J) x I to K(J) through finite sets with Hausdorff distance bound dist(H(K,t),K) <= 2t and H(K,t) subset [-1+t, 1-t] (Gladdines-van Mill [21], Curtis-To Nhu).
- standard math Kuratowski-Cenzer-Mauldin theorem on the Borel complexity of the derived set operator D on K(X).
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Hyperspaces of countable compacta." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3TCYCP4P
@misc{pith2026190802845,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Hyperspaces of countable compacta},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3TCYCP4P}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.02845}
}
abstract
Hyperspaces $\mathcal H(X)$ of all countable compact subsets of a metric space $X$ and $\mathcal A_n(X)$ of infinite compact subsets which have at most $n$ ($n\in\mathbb N$), or finitely many ($n=\omega$) or countably many ($n=\omega+1$) accumulation points are studied. By descriptive set-theoretical methods, we fully characterize them for 0-dimensional, dense-in-itself, Polish spaces and partially for $\sigma$-compact spaces $X$. Using the theory of absorbing sets, we get characterizations of $\mathcal H(X)$, $\mathcal A_\omega(X)$ and $\mathcal A_{\omega+1}(X)$ for nondegenerate connected, locally connected Polish spaces $X$ which are either locally compact or nowhere locally compact. For every $n\in\mathbb N$, we show that if $X$ is an interval or a simple closed curve, $\mathcal A_n(X)$ is homeomorphic to the linear space $c_{0}=\{(x_{i}) \in\mathbb R^{\omega}: \lim x_{i}=0\}$ with the product topology; if $X$ is a Peano continuum and a point $p\in X$ is of order $\ge 2$, then the hyperspace $\mathcal A_1(X,\{p\})$ of all compacta with exactly one accumulation point $p$ also is homeomorphic to $c_{0}$.
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[20]
S. Garc´ ıa-Ferreira and Y. F. Ortiz-Castillo, The hype rspace of con- vergent sequences. Topology Appl. 196 (2015), part B, 795-– 804. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2015.05.022
-
[6]
J. Camargo, D. Maya and P. Pellicer-Covarrubias, Path co nnectedness, local path connectedness and contractibility of Sc(X), Colloq. Math. 160 (2020), no. 2, 183–211. https://doi.org/10.4064/cm7516-1-2019
-
[2]
Banakh, The strong universality of ANRs with a suitabl e algebraic structure, preprint
T. Banakh, The strong universality of ANRs with a suitabl e algebraic structure, preprint
-
[1]
J. Baars, H. Gladdines and J. van Mill, Absorbing systems in infinite-dimensional manifolds, Topology Appl. 50 (1993), 147-–182. https://do i.org/10.1016/0166- 8641(93)90019-a
doi:10.1016/0166- 1993
-
[3]
T. Banakh and R. Cauty, Interplay between strongly unive rsal spaces and pairs, Dissertationes Math. (Rozprawy Mat.), 386 (2000 ), 38 pp. https://doi.org/10.4064/dm386-0-1
- [4]
-
[5]
M. Bestvina and J. Mogilski, Characterizing certain inc omplete infinite- dimensional absolute retracts, Michigan Math. J. 33 (1986) , 291–313. https://doi.org/10.1307/mmj/1029003410
arXiv 1986
-
[7]
Cauty, Caract´ erisation topologique de l’espace des fonctions d´ erivables, Fund
R. Cauty, Caract´ erisation topologique de l’espace des fonctions d´ erivables, Fund. Math. 138 (1991), 35-–58. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-13 8-1-35-58
Show all 34 references
-
[8]
Cauty, L’espace des arcs d’une surface, Trans
R. Cauty, L’espace des arcs d’une surface, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 332 (1992), 193—
1992
-
[9]
Cauty, T
R. Cauty, T. Dobrowolski, H. Gladdines and J. van Mill, Le s hyperespaces des r´ etractes absolus et des r´ etractes absolus de voisinage du plan, Fund. Math. 148 (1995), 257—282. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-148-3-257-282
1995 doi
-
[10]
Cenzer, and R
D. Cenzer, and R. D. Mauldin, On the Borel class of the der ived set operator, Bull. Soc. Math. France 110 (1982), no. 4, 357—380. https://doi.o rg/10.24033/bsmf.1994
1982 doi
-
[11]
D. W. Curtis, Hyperspaces of noncompact metric spaces, Compositio Math. 40 (1980), no. 2, 139–152
1980
-
[12]
Curtis, D. W. Hyperspaces homeomorphic to Hilbert spac e. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 75 (1979), no. 1, 126–130. https://doi.org/10.2307/20426 87
1979 doi
-
[13]
D. W. Curtis, Hyperspaces of finite subsets as boundary s ets, Topology Appl. 22 (1986), 97—107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-8641(86)90081-7 HYPERSPACES OF COUNTABLE COMPACTA 27
1986 doi
-
[14]
D. W. Curtis and R. M. Schori, Hyperspaces of Peano conti nua are Hilbert cubes. Fund. Math. 101 (1978), no. 1, 19-–38. https://doi.org/10. 4064/fm-101-1-19-38
1978
-
[15]
D. W. Curtis and N. To Nhu, Hyperspaces of finite subsets w hich are homeomorphic to α 0-dimensional linear metric spaces. Topology Appl. 19 (1985 ), no. 3, 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/0166-8641(85)90005-7
1985 doi
-
[16]
J. J. Dijkstra, J. van Mill and J. Mogilski, The space of i nfinite-dimensional com- pacta and other topological copies of ( l2 f)ω , Pacific J. Math. 152 (1992), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.2140/pjm.1992.152.255
1992 doi
-
[17]
Dobrowolski and L
T. Dobrowolski and L. R. Rubin, The hyperspaces of infini te-dimensional compacta for covering and cohomological dimension are homeomorphic , Pacific J. Math. 164 (1994), 15-–39. https://doi.org/10.2140/pjm.1994.164.15
1994 doi
-
[18]
van Engelen, Characterizations of the countable infi nite product of rationals and some related problems
F. van Engelen, Characterizations of the countable infi nite product of rationals and some related problems. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl. N o. 11 (1985), 37–54 (1987). MR897969
1985
-
[19]
van Engelen, On the homogeneity of infinite products
F. van Engelen, On the homogeneity of infinite products. Topology Proc. 17 (1992), 303–315
1992
-
[21]
Gladdines and J
H. Gladdines and J. van Mill, Hyperspaces of Peano conti nua of Euclidean spaces, Fund. Math. 142 (1993), 173-–188
1993
-
[22]
Gladdines and J
H. Gladdines and J. van Mill, Hyperspaces of infinite-di mensional compacta, Com- positio Math. 88 (1993), 143–153
1993
-
[23]
Kechris, Classical descriptive set theory, Springe r, 1995
A. Kechris, Classical descriptive set theory, Springe r, 1995
1995
-
[24]
Kubi´ s, K
W. Kubi´ s, K. Sakai and M. Yaguchi, Hyperspaces of separ able Banach spaces with the Wijsman topology, Topology Appl. 148 (2005) , 7–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2004.07.009
2005 doi
-
[25]
Krupski and A
P. Krupski and A. Samulewicz, More absorbers in hypersp aces, Topology Appl. 221 (2017), 352–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2017.02.055
2017 doi
-
[26]
Kuratowski, Les fonctions semi-continues dans l’es pace des ensembles ferm´ es, Fund
K. Kuratowski, Les fonctions semi-continues dans l’es pace des ensembles ferm´ es, Fund. Math. 18 (1932), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.4064/ fm-18-1-148-159
1932
-
[27]
Kuratowski, Topology, vol
K. Kuratowski, Topology, vol. I, Academic Press and PWN , 1966
1966
-
[28]
Kuratowski, S
K. Kuratowski, S. B. Nadler, Jr. and S. G. Young, Continu ous selections on locally compact separable metric spaces, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. S´ er. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys. 18 (1970), 5-–11
1970
-
[29]
Michalewski, Homogeneity of K(Q), Tsukuba J
H. Michalewski, Homogeneity of K(Q), Tsukuba J. Math. 24 (2000), no. 2, 297–302. https://doi.org/10.21099/tkbjm/1496164151
2000
-
[30]
van Mill, The Infinite-Dimensional Topology of Funct ion Spaces, North-Holland, 2002
J. van Mill, The Infinite-Dimensional Topology of Funct ion Spaces, North-Holland, 2002
2002
-
[31]
Steel, Analytic sets and Borel isomorphisms
John R. Steel, Analytic sets and Borel isomorphisms. Fu nd. Math. 108 (1980), no. 2, 83–88. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-108-2-83-88
1980 doi
-
[32]
Toru´ nczyk, Concerning locally homotopy negligible sets and characterization of l2-manifolds, Fund
H. Toru´ nczyk, Concerning locally homotopy negligible sets and characterization of l2-manifolds, Fund. Math. 101, (1978), 93–110. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-101-2-93- 110
1978 doi
-
[33]
Toru´ nczyk, Characterizing Hilbert space topology
H. Toru´ nczyk, Characterizing Hilbert space topology. Fund. Math. 111 (1981), no. 3, 247-–262. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-111-3-247-262 Email address : t.o.banakh@gmail.com Ivan Franko National University of Lviv (Ukraine) and Jan Ko chanowski University in Kielce (Poland) Em...
1981 doi
-
[209]
https://doi.org/10.2307/2154028
Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.